Spacing of 19 coyotes (Canis latrans), representing 8 families, and their proximity to 2 turkey production sites (TPS) were studied during summer and fall 1976 and 1977 near Waverly, Nebraska. Sixteen of the 19 coyotes were radio-tagged and toe-clipped; 3 were ear-tagged and toe-clipped. Related pups remained closer together (average distance apart during day = 0.42 km, during night = 0.37 km) than related adults and pups (average distance apart during day = 1.15 km, during night = 1.59 km), or mated adults (average distance apart during day = 1.63 km, during night = 1.85 km). Family groups occupied nonoverlapping, contiguous home ranges. Three of 9 coyotes tracked during 1976 and 5 of 13 coyotes tracked in 1977 survived and remained on the area until the next denning season. Mortality due to hunting and trapping during the winter was 9 of 11 coyotes. Although 8 families ranged within 5 km of the TPS, only 3 tagged coyotes from 2 different families were responsible for losses. Pups were not responsible for increased turkey losses observed during late summer and fall. J. WILDL. MANAGE. 45(3):641-649 Understanding coyote spatial relationships requires consideration of their social structure and hunting behavior. The social unit among coyotes is the family, and revolves primarily around a reproductive female (Gier 1975). Coyotes are considered efficient, solitary hunters of small prey, but are known to hunt in pairs or as a family unit (Young and Jackson 1951, Dobie 1961, Ryden 1975, Camenzind 1978). Little is known about the postdenning relationships of adult coyotes and their pups, especially among coyotes damaging poultry and livestock. Ryden (1975), Hallett (1977), and Camenzind (1978) presented limited observations of family interactions and movements during the pup-rearing period. Andelt and Gipson (1979) reported on domestic turkey losses to radio-collared coyotes, but did not determine the impact on turkeys of pups of adults known to cause turkey losses. Our objectives were to identify (1) coyote intraand interfamily spatial relationships during the postdenning period and (2) the relationships of movements of damaging adult coyotes and their pups to turkey losses at turkey production sites. We are indebted to L. I. Bevans, R. M. Bevans, B. L. Bevans, W. B. Bevans, and E. V. Sheary of the Bevans Turkey Farm for supplying information regarding poultry losses; D. A. Baker, J. G. Bruner, E. S. Jochum, S. A. Kilpatrick, D. G. Luce, and B. R. Mahan for field assistance; R. K. Allen and W. G. Sheehan for pilot services; J. M. Inguanzo and K. C. Nelson for computer consulting; W. F. Andelt, R. M. Case, H. T. Gier, H. L. Gunderson, and W. M. Tzilkowski for manuscript review; and J. L. Andelt for typing earlier drafts of the manuscript.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Althoff et al. (1981) studied this question.