Ranchers in western Kansas are outraged when their cattle are preyed upon by predators. That includes coyotes in that part of the country.

According to High Plains Public Radio reporter David Condos, these attacks account for around 5% of calf mortality and cost millions of dollars.

Coyote hunting has been practiced in Kansas for more than a century, but the state’s coyote population has more than tripled since the 1980s.

“You’ll often hear the phrase ‘kill one coyote and two show up to her burial,'” Project Coyote’s Michelle Lute explains.

Lute, a carnivore conservation manager, explains that with less competition for food, female coyotes will have larger litters and can reach sexual maturity sooner — compensating for the loss from such hunts with higher reproduction rates.

More coyotes just move in from the surrounding areas.

Too bad they are just commercials semis

Not just moving, k9 is correct. Part of my studies @ SDSU was researching coyotes abilities to control their own populations by increasing or decreasing litter size to suit their needs. Truly an amazing and adaptable creature that consumes my thoughts most of the year.

That sounds like the most reliable renewable resource I've ever heard of....

If the ranchers will pay me enough. I will kill them. I am willing to stay as long as it takes. IF they pay me the right price ! LoL !

As a grad level educated canine guy myself, I was educated, but not formed, by the liberal canine study dudes during the 1980's.
Science too often follows the philosophy of the researcher and the Bekoff-ites are still among us. Big time.
In fact, the tenets of some researchers today is too often built on what the researchers want to find even as they say they "seek" to find.
Coyotes, like wolves should not be killed is the philosophy of MANY biologists and too many "scientists" have aimed to prove that worldview in their research. That by the way, is not pure truth in science.

Marc Bekoff's research was/still is the poppy doodle of much of this "we should learn to live among the animals" science referred to.
I am not a Bekoff-ite.

I have read canine researchers work since about 1976 and too many people have been a worshiper at the philosophical alter of Peter Sanger.
Not me.
But then, I no longer wish to research what has already been cemented in the minds of the animal advocates dressed as biologists, ecologists, or any other ists they call themselves.
I have trapped predation control since 1982 and the best way to thin coyotes out is reduce their numbers. Period. I use a three year time line, with 1-2 times intervals of two weeks to get very good results in fawn/calf survival ratios. My ranchers benefit each and every time.

Blessings,
Mark

given fewer coyotes = fewer coyotes

wouldn't removing's the season for coyote trapping make the most sense

along with ranchers forming a network for communicating issues and who is trapping , and their results we certainly have the technology

that would seem to make the most sense to me

if they want to believe their thoughts on coyotes that removing numbers can't change numbers that would be the perfect argument for you can't wipe out the population so take all you want , but allow real tracking of calf deaths and coyotes taken.

No season on coyotes in Ks. I'm in the middle of cow country and coyotes aren't normally a big issue. Once in awhile you will get a group that start regularly getting calves but not very often. Most ranchers have a hard time knowing whether coyotes killed calf or calf died then coyotes started eating it therefore most ranchers are in one of two groups. Either every calf died because of a coyote or coyotes never kill a calf. But with less trappers I think the problem could get worse.

Project coyote is an anti organization.

good to know , here hunting coyotes is year round trapping is only during season.

The best kind of renewable, fun to target, can be a profitable hobby/job, and a huge supply. We’ve been trying to wipe these yotes out since the early 20th century with guns, traps, poison, helicopters, and planes. Yet their territory only continues to grow. I’m not on the cooky side of science, many “biologists” today do not want any animals harvested from what I gather. They only allow it to make themselves and the states they work for $. Big part of the reason I got out of the programs and changed majors. I love trying to shackle as many as I can every fall and winter as my vacation time allows.

Googled her since I've never heard of this org. She is a Bekoff-ite.

The organization website reads;
"She dedicates her professional life to promoting human-wildlife coexistence through effective public engagement, equitable participatory processes, and evidence-based decision-making,"
tells me she worships at the alter of Marc Bekoff who still worships at the alter of Peter Sanger (father of animal rights - PETA movement).

In this organization statement, we see this is just another "scientist" who isn't seeking anything but to validate "her" view. She is not alone.
The Sciences are polluted with these philosophers.

Oh, and FYI, Australian Sanger is the "father" of much of the philosophy to elevate animal life above human life.
An age old philosophy in the hearts of those who oppose the Creator.

Sun Tzu >>>>> know the enemy. Know the terrain.


Blessings,
Mark

That sure doesn't sound good Mark

Dont kill too many though-you might trap yourself right out of a job.

The movement started 60 years ago. It is old newsprint but the offspring are like much in our nation >>>>> >liberalists. And they hold to no higher power than the one signing their paycheck.
Same ol same ol.

We're good Bruce T!

Read my Sun Tzu comment in the last post

I sign three year contracts and try to work myself outta a job BUT the word of mouth among the folks who make decisions on who to hire and who to fire has me unable to fill the need.
All is well Boco.

We have a couple full time plane gunners and around 20 State trappers the last I knew of they are focused heavily on yotes here, yotes are not included in the tail bounty but they get the attention from the state guys.

This is mal-information, which means it contains some truth, but is used out of context to steer a certain narrative. It's true that litter size can be effected by adult densities. The exact mechanisim is not known, with food competition one possible theory, but likely more complex than that. The "researchers", that Mark speaks so highly of ;), often use this to proclaim that predator management does not work. What they fail to report is the lag time between population reduction, reproduction and recruitment of new young into the adult population. Intensive predator control is effective by reduceing predator abundance to it's lowest point during the most critical time, spring calving and nesting seasons. If you understand that seasonal cycle in population abundance you also understand the effective predator management is not a one shot deal but a continuous process.

5% is not a big percentage especially when it's not clear of what is causing the other 95% and how that is being dealt with. No matter what you do there are going to be losses, but when there is a huge discrepancy of what the main cause of calve mortality, it just seems silly to focus on the thing that is causing the least amount of damage. Maybe we should send some of those ventilators to the farms and outfit them so they can put their calves on it such respiratory issues seem to be the leading cause of death.

The other thing is that this is the same dance and pony show used to eliminate wolves from the lower 48, and yet again here we are how many years later, how much money, how much time and effort are we going to waste on an issue that is solved more effectively by other means? Just ask yourself if how much time, effort and money is being spent to kill coyotes and the percentage of calves getting got GOES UP, are we really doing things the right way, or at a mere 5% of the total death rate, is it even really a problem?