[continued from previous message]

seem to be a relationship between size of pasture and predator losses,
with higher loss rates reported in larger pastures. In reality, loss
rates may not be related as much to pasture size as to other local
conditions such as slope, terrain, and human populations. Hilly or
rugged areas are typically sparsely populated by humans and are
characterized by large pastures. These conditions are ideal for
coyotes.

Sheep pastures that contain or are adjacent to streams, creeks, and
rivers tend to have more coyote problems than pastures without such
features. Water courses serve as hunting and travel lanes for coyotes.

Herders. Using herders with sheep or cattle in large pastures can help
reduce predation, but there has been a trend away from herders in
recent years because of increasing costs and a shortage of competent
help. Nevertheless, tended flocks or herds receive closer attention
than untended livestock, particularly in large pastures, and problems
can be solved before they become serious. We recommend two herders per
band of range sheep. If herders aren't used, daily or periodic checking
of the livestock is a good husbandry practice.

Frightening Devices and Repellents

Frightening devices are useful for reducing losses during short periods
or until predators are removed. The devices should not be used for long
periods of time when predation is not a problem. To avoid acclimation
you can increase both the degree and duration of effectiveness by
varying the position, appearance, duration, or frequency of the
frightening stimuli, or using them in various combinations. Many
frightening methods have been ridiculed in one way or another;
nevertheless, all of the techniques discussed here have helped
producers by saving livestock and/or buying some time to institute
other controls.

Lights. A study involving 100 Kansas sheep producers showed that using
lights above corrals at night had the most marked effect on losses to
coyotes of all the devices examined. Out of 79 sheep killed by coyotes
in corrals, only three were killed in corrals with lights. Nearly 40%
of the producers in the study used lights over corrals. There was some
indication in the study that sheep losses to dogs were higher in
lighted corrals, but the sample size for dog losses was small and the
results inconclusive. Most of the producers (80%) used mercury vapor
lights that automatically turned on at dusk and off at dawn.

Another advantage of lighted corrals is that coyotes are more
vulnerable when they enter the lighted area. Coyotes often establish a
fairly predictable pattern of killing. When this happens in a lighted
corral, it is possible for a producer to wait above or downwind of the
corral and to shoot the coyote as it enters. Red or blue lights may
make the ambush more successful since coyotes appear to be less
frightened by them than by white lights. Revolving or flashing the
lights may enhance their effectiveness in frightening away predators.
There is some speculation that the old oil lamps used in highway
construction repelled coyotes, presumably because of their flickering
effect.

Bells and Radios. Some sheep producers place bells on some or all of
their sheep to discourage predators. Where effects have been measured,
however, no difference in losses was detected. Some producers use a
radio tuned to an all-night station to temporarily deter coyotes, dogs,
and other predators.

Vehicles. Parking cars or pickups in the area where losses are
occurring often reduces predation temporarily. Effectiveness can be
improved or extended by frequently moving the vehicle to a new
location. Some producers place a replica of a person in the vehicle
when losses are occurring in the daylight. If predators continue to
kill with vehicles in place, the vehicle serves as a comfortable blind
in which to wait and shoot offending predators.

Propane Exploders. Propane exploders produce loud explosions at timed
intervals when a spark ignites a measured amount of propane gas. On
most models, the time between explosions can vary from about 1 minute
to 15 minutes. Their effectiveness at frightening coyotes is usually
only temporary, but it can be increased by moving exploders to
different locations and by varying the intervals between explosions. In
general, the timer on the exploder should be set to fire every 8 to 10
minutes, and the location should be changed every 3 or 4 days. In
cattle pastures, these devices should be placed on rigid stands above
the livestock. Normally, the exploder should be turned on just before
dark and off at daybreak, unless coyotes are killing livestock during
daylight hours. Motion sensors are now available and likely improve
their effectiveness, though it is still only temporary. Exploders are
best used to reduce losses until more permanent control or preventive
measures can be implemented. In about 24 coyote depredation complaints
over a 2-year period in North Dakota, propane exploders were judged to
be successful in stopping or reducing predation losses until offending
coyotes could be removed. "Success time" of the exploders appears to
depend a great deal on how well they are tended by the livestock
producer.

Strobe Lights and Sirens. The USDA's Denver Wildlife Research
electronic guard coyote frightening device

Fig. 6. Electronic Guard frightening device

Center developed a frightening device called the Electronic Guard (EG)
(Fig. 6). The EG consists of a strobe light and siren controlled by a
variable interval timer that is activated at night with a photoelectric
cell. In tests conducted in fenced pastures, predation was reduced by
about 89%. The device is used in Kansas and other states to protect
cows/calves from coyote predation. Most research on the effectiveness
of this device, however, has been done on sheep operations. Suggestions
for using the unit differ for pastured sheep and range operations.

To use the EG in fenced pastures (farm flocks):
* Place EGs above the ground on fence posts, trees, or T-posts so
they can be heard and seen at greater distances and to prevent
livestock from damaging them.
* Position EGs so that rain water cannot enter them and cause a
malfunction.
* Locate EGs so that light can enter the photocell port or window. If
positioned in deep shade, they may not turn on or off at the
desired times.

The number of EGs used to protect sheep in fenced pastures depends on
pasture size, terrain features, and the amount and height of vegetation
in or around the pasture. In general, at least two units should be used
in small (20 to 30 acres [8 to 12 ha]), level, short-grass pastures.
Three to four units should be used in larger (40 to 100 acres [16 to 40
ha]), hilly, tall grass, or wooded pastures. Don't use EGs in pastures
larger than about 100 acres (40 ha) because their effective range is
limited. The device could be useful in larger pastures when placed near
areas where sheep congregate and bed at night. EGs should be placed on
high spots, where kills have been found, at the edge of wooded areas,
near or on bedgrounds, or near suspected coyote travelways. They should
be moved to different locations every 10 to 14 days to reduce the
likelihood of coyotes getting used to them

To use the EG in open range (herded or range sheep):

The number of EGs used will depend on the number of sheep in the band
and the size of the bedground. Four units should be used to protect
bands of 1,000 ewes and their lambs.

When possible, place one EG in the center of the bedground and the
other three around the edge of the bedground. Try to place the units on
coyote travelways.

EGs should be placed on high points, ridge tops, edges of clearings,
or on high rocks or outcroppings. Hang the devices on tree limbs 5 to 7
feet (1.5 to 2.1 m) above ground level. If used above timberline or in
treeless areas, hang them from a tripod of poles.

Herders who bed their sheep tightly will have better results than
those who allow sheep to bed over large areas. Sheep that are bedded
about 200 yards (166 m) or less in diameter, or are spread out not more
than 200 to 400 yards (166 to 332 m) along a ridge top, can usually be
protected with EGs.

Repellents. The notion of repelling coyotes from sheep or calves is
appealing, and during the 1970s, university and government researchers
tested a wide variety of potentially repellent chemical compounds on
sheep. Both olfactory (smell) and gustatory (taste) repellents were
examined. The underlying objective was to find a compound that, when
applied to sheep, would prevent coyotes from killing them. Tests were
conducted with various prey species including rabbits, chickens, and
sheep. Some repellents were applied by dipping target animals in them,
others were sprayed on, and some were applied in neck collars or ear
tags.

Coyotes rely heavily on visual cues while stalking, chasing, and
killing their prey. Taste and smell are of lesser importance in
actually making the kill. These factors may in part account for the
fact that the repellent compounds were not able to consistently prevent
coyotes from killing, although some of the repellents were obviously
offensive to coyotes and prevented them from consuming the killed prey.
Several compounds were tested on sheep under field conditions, but none
appeared to offer significant, prolonged protection.

If an effective chemical repellent were to be found, the obstacles in
bringing it to industry use would be significant. The compound would
not only need to be effective, but also persistent enough to withstand
weathering while posing no undue risk to the sheep, other animals, or
the environment. It would also have to withstand the rigorous
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) approval process.

High-frequency sound has also been tested as a repellent for coyotes,
but the results were no more encouraging than for chemical repellents.
Coyotes, like dogs, responded to particular sound frequencies and
showed some aversion to sounds broadcast within one foot (30 cm) of
their ear. Researchers, however, were unable to broadcast the sound a
sufficient distance to test the effects under field conditions.

Aversive Conditioning. The objective of aversive conditioning is to
feed a coyote a preylike bait laced with an aversive agent that causes
the coyote to become ill, resulting in subsequent avoidance of the
prey. Most of the research on this technique has involved the use of
lithium chloride, a salt, as the aversive agent.

Aversive conditioning is well documented for averting rodents from food
sources, but significant problems must be overcome before the method
can be used to reduce coyote predation on sheep. Coyotes must be
induced to eat sheeplike baits that have been treated with the aversive
chemical. The chemical must cause sufficient discomfort, such as
vomiting, to cause coyotes to avoid other baits. Furthermore, the
avoidance must be transferred to live sheep and must persist long
enough without reinforcement for the method to offer realistic
protection to sheep.

To date, pen and field tests with aversive conditioning have yielded
conflicting and inconclusive results. It does not appear that aversive
conditioning is effective in reducing predation, but additional field
tests would be useful.

Guarding Animals.

Livestock Guarding Dogs. A livestock guarding dog is one that generally
stays with sheep or cattle without harming them and aggressively repels
predators. Its protective behaviors are largely instinctive, but proper
rearing plays a part. Breeds most commonly used today include the Great
Pyrenees, Komondor, Anatolian Shepherd, and Akbash Dog (Fig. 7). Other
Old World breeds used to a lesser degree include Maremma,
Sharplaninetz, and Kuvasz. Crossbreeds are also used.

The characteristics of each sheep operation will dictate the number of
dogs required for effective protection from predators. If predators are
scarce, one dog is sufficient for most fenced pasture operations. Range
operations often use two dogs per band of sheep. The performance of
individual dogs will differ based on age and experience. The size,
topography, and habitat of the pasture or range must also be
considered. Relatively flat, open areas can be adequately covered by
one dog. When brush, timber, ravines, and hills are in the pasture,
several dogs may be required, particularly if the sheep are scattered.
Sheep that flock and form a cohesive unit, especially at night, can be
protected by one dog more effectively than sheep that are continually
scattered and bedded in a number of locations.
coyote guard dog akbash dog

Fig. 7. Livestock guarding dog (Akbash dog)

The goal with a new puppy is to channel its natural instincts to
produce a mature guardian dog with the desired characteristics. This is
best accomplished by early and continued association with sheep to
produce a bond between the dog and sheep. The optimum time to acquire a
pup is between 7 and 8 weeks of age. The pup should be separated from
litter mates and placed with sheep, preferably lambs, in a pen or
corral from which it can't escape. This socialization period should
continue with daily checks from the producer until the pup is about 16
weeks old. Daily checks don't necessarily include petting the pup. The
primary bond should be between the dog and the sheep, not between the
dog and humans. The owner, however, should be able to catch and handle
the dog to administer health care or to manage the livestock. At about
4 months, the pup can be released into a larger pasture to mingle with
the other sheep.

A guarding dog will likely include peripheral areas in its patrolling.
Some have been known to chase vehicles and wildlife and threaten
children and cyclists. These activities should be discouraged.
Neighbors should be alerted to the possibility that the dog may roam
onto their property and that some predator control devices such as
traps, snares, and M-44s present a danger to it. Many counties enforce
stringent laws regarding owner responsibility for damage done by
roaming dogs. It is in the best interests of the owner, dog, and
community to train the dog to stay in its designated area.

The use of guarding dogs does not eliminate the need for other
predation control actions. They should, however, be compatible with the
dog's behavior. Toxicants (including some insecticides and
rodenticides) used to control various pest species can be extremely
hazardous to dogs and are therefore not compatible with the use of
guarding dogs.

The M-44 is particularly hazardous to dogs. Some people have
successfully trained their dogs to avoid M-44s by allowing the dog to
set off an M-44 filled with pepper or by rigging the device to a rat
trap. The unpleasant experience may teach the dog to avoid M-44s, but
the method is not fool-proof--one error by the dog, and the result is
usually fatal. With the exception of toxic collars, which are not legal
in all states, toxicants should not be used in areas where guarding
dogs are working unless the dog is chained or confined while the
control takes place.

Dogs caught in a steel trap set for predators are rarely injured
seriously if they are found and released within a reasonable period of
time. If snares and traps are used where dogs are working, the producer
should: (1) encourage the use of sets and devices that are likely not
to injure the dog if it is caught, and (2) know where traps and snares
are set so they can be checked if a dog is missing. Aerial hunting, as
well as calling and shooting coyotes, should pose no threat to guarding
dogs. Ensuring the safety of the dog is largely the producer's
responsibility.

Dogs may be viewed as a first line of defense against predation in
sheep and cow/calf operations in some cases. Their effectiveness can be
enhanced by good livestock management and by eliminating predators with
suitable removal techniques.

Donkeys. Although the research has not focused on donkeys as it has on
guarding dogs, they are gaining in popularity as protectors of sheep
and goat flocks in the United States. A recent survey showed that in
Texas alone, over 2,400 of the 11,000 sheep and goat producers had used
donkeys as guardians.

The terms donkey and burro are synonymous (the Spanish translation of
donkey is burro) and are used interchangeably. Donkeys are generally
docile to people, but they seem to have an inherent dislike of dogs and
other canids, including coyotes and foxes. The typical response of a
donkey to an intruding canid may include braying, bared teeth, a
running attack, kicking, and biting. Most likely it is acting out of
aggression toward the intruder rather than to protect the sheep. There
is little information on a donkey's effectiveness with noncanid
predators such as bears, mountain lions, bobcats, or birds of prey.

Reported success of donkeys in reducing predation is highly variable.
Improper husbandry or rearing practices and unrealistic expectations
probably account for many failures. Donkeys are significantly cheaper
to obtain and care for than guarding dogs, and they are probably less
prone to accidental death and premature mortality than dogs. They may
provide a longer period of useful life than a guarding dog, and they
can be used with relative safety in conjunction with snares, traps,
M-44s, and toxic collars.

Researchers and livestock producers have identified several key points
to consider when using a donkey for predation control:
Use only a jenny or a gelded jack. Intact jacks are too aggressive and
may injure livestock. Some jennies and geldings may also injure
livestock. Select donkeys from medium-sized stock. Use only one donkey
per group of sheep. The exception may be a jenny with a foal. When two
or more adult donkeys are together or with a horse, they usually stay
together, not necessarily near the sheep. Also avoid using donkeys in
adjacent pastures since they may socialize across the fence and ignore
the sheep.

Allow about 4 to 6 weeks for a naive donkey to bond to the sheep.
Stronger bonding may occur when a donkey is raised from birth with
sheep.

Avoid feeds or supplements containing monensin or lasolacid. They are
poisonous to donkeys. Remove the donkey during lambing, particularly if
lambing in confinement, to avoid injuries to lambs or disruption of the
lamb-ewe bond. Test a new donkey's response to canids by challenging it
with a dog in a pen or small pasture. Discard donkeys that don't show
overt aggression to an intruding dog. Use donkeys in smaller (less than
600 acres [240 ha]), relatively open pastures with not more than 200 to
300 head of livestock. Large pastures with rough terrain and vegetation
and widely scattered livestock lessen the effectiveness of a donkey.

Llamas. Like donkeys, llamas have an inherent dislike of canids, and a
growing number of livestock producers are successfully using llamas to
protect their sheep. A recent study of 145 ranches where guard llamas
were used to protect sheep revealed that average losses of sheep to
predators decreased from 26 to 8 per year after llamas were employed.
Eighty percent of the ranchers surveyed were "very satisfied" or
"satisfied" with their llamas. Llamas reportedly bond with sheep within
hours and offer advantages over guarding dogs similar to those
described for donkeys.

Other Animals. USDA's Agricultural Research Service tested the bonding
of sheep to cattle as a method of protecting sheep from coyote
predation. There was clearly some protection afforded the sheep that
remained near cattle. Whether this protection resulted from direct
action by the cattle or by the coyotes' response to a novel stimulus is
uncertain. Later studies with goats, sheep, and cattle confirmed that
when either goats or sheep remained near cattle, they were protected
from predation by coyotes. Conversely, goats or sheep that grazed apart
from cattle, even those that were bonded, were readily preyed on by
coyotes.

There are currently no research data available on the ideal ratio of
cattle to sheep, the breeds of cattle, age of cattle most likely to be
used successfully, or on the size of bonded groups to obtain maximum
protection from predation. Multispecies grazing offers many advantages
for optimum utilization of forage, and though additional study and
experience is needed, it may also be a tool for coyote damage control.

Any animal that displays aggressive behavior toward intruding coyotes
may offer some benefit in deterring predation. Other types of animals
reportedly used for predation control include goats, mules, and
ostriches. Coyotes in particular are suspicious of novel stimuli. This
behavior is most likely the primary reason that many frightening
tactics show at least temporary effectiveness.

Toxicants

Pesticides have historically been an important component in an
integrated approach to controlling coyote damage, but their use is
extremely restricted today by federal and state laws. All pesticides
used in the United States must be registered with the EPA under the
provisions of FIFRA and must be used in accordance with label
directions. Increasingly restrictive regulations implemented by EPA
under the authority of FIFRA, the National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA), presidential order, and the Endangered Species Act have
resulted in the near elimination of toxicants legally available for
predator damage control.

The only toxicants currently registered for mammalian predator damage
control are sodium cyanide, used in the M-44 ejector device, and
Compound 1080 (sodium monofluoroacetate), for use in the livestock
protection collar. These toxicants are Restricted Use Pesticides and
may be used only by certified pesticide applicators. Information on
registration status and availability of these products in individual
states may be obtained from the respective state's department of
agriculture.

Sodium Cyanide in the M-44. The M-44 is a spring-activated device used
to expel sodium cyanide into an animal's mouth. It is currently
registered by EPA for use by trained personnel in the control of
depredating coyotes, foxes, and dogs.

The M-44 consists of a capsule holder wrapped in an absorbent material,
an ejector mechanism, a capsule containing approximately 0.9 grams of a
powdered sodium cyanide mixture, and a 5- to 7-inch (15- to 18-cm)
hollow stake (Fig. 8). For most effective use, set M-44s in locations
similar to those for good trap sets. Drive the hollow stake into the
ground. Cock the ejector unit and secure it in the stake. Screw the
wrapped capsule holder containing the cyanide capsule onto the ejector
unit, and apply fetid meat bait to the capsule holder. Coyotes
attracted by the bait will try to bite the baited capsule holder. When
the M-44 is pulled, the spring-activated plunger propels sodium cyanide
into the animal's mouth, resulting in death within a few seconds.
M-44 coyote management device diagram

Fig. 8. The M-44 device consists of the (a) base, (b) ejector, (c)
capsule holder, and (d) cyanide-containing plastic capsule.

The M-44 is very selective for canids because of the attractants used
and the unique requirement that the device be triggered by pulling on
it. While the use of traps or snares may present a hazard to livestock,
M-44s can be used with relative safety in pastures where livestock are
present. Although not recommended, they can also be used in the
presence of livestock guarding dogs if the dogs are first successfully
conditioned to avoid the devices. This can be done by allowing them to
pull an M-44 loaded with pepper. An additional advantage of M-44s over
traps is their ability to remain effective during rain, snow, and
freezing conditions.

While M-44s can be used effectively as part of an integrated damage
control program, they do have several disadvantages. Because canids are
less responsive to food-type baits during warm weather when natural
foods are usually abundant, M-44s are not as effective during warmer
months as they are in cooler weather. M-44s are subject to a variety of
mechanical malfunctions, but these problems can be minimized if a
regular maintenance schedule is followed. A further disadvantage is the
tendency for the cyanide in the capsules to absorb moisture over time
and to cake, becoming ineffective. Maximum effectiveness of M-44s is
hampered by the requirement to follow 26 use restrictions established
by the EPA in the interest of human and environmental safety. The M-44
is not registered for use in all states, and in those where it is
registered, the state may impose additional use restrictions. A formal
training program is required before use of M-44s. Some states allow its
use only by federal ADC specialists, whereas other states may allow
M-44s to be used by trained and certified livestock producers.

1080 Livestock Protection Collar. The livestock protection collar (LP
collar or toxic collar) is a relatively new tool used to selectively
kill coyotes that attack sheep or goats. Collars are placed on sheep or
goats that are pastured where coyotes are likely to attack. Each collar
contains a small quantity (300 mg) of Compound 1080 solution. The
collars do not attract coyotes, but because of their design and
position on the throat, most attacking coyotes will puncture the collar
and ingest a lethal amount of the toxicant. Unlike sodium cyanide, 1080
is slow-acting, and a coyote ingesting the toxicant will not exhibit
symptoms or die for several hours. As a result, sheep or goats that are
attacked are usually killed. The collar is registered only for use
against coyotes and may be placed only on sheep or goats.

The LP collar must be used in conjunction with specific sheep and goat
husbandry practices to be most effective. Coyote attacks must be
directed or targeted at collared livestock. This may be accomplished by
temporarily placing a "target" flock of perhaps 20 to 50 collared lambs
or kids and their uncollared mothers in a pasture where coyote
predation is likely to occur, while removing other sheep or goats from
that vicinity. In situations where LP collars have been used and found
ineffective, the common cause of failure has been poor or ineffective
targeting. It is difficult to ensure effective targeting if
depredations are occurring infrequently. In most instances, only a high
and regular frequency of depredations will justify spending the time,
effort, and money necessary to become trained and certified, purchase
collars, and use them properly.

The outstanding advantage in using the LP collar is its selectivity in
eliminating individual coyotes that are responsible for killing
livestock. The collar may also be useful in removing depredating
coyotes that have eluded other means of control. Disadvantages include
the cost of collars (approximately $20 each) and livestock that must be
sacrificed, more intensive management practices, and the costs and
inconvenience of complying with use restrictions, including
requirements for training, certification, and record keeping. One use
restriction limits the collars to use in fenced pastures only. They
cannot be used to protect sheep on open range. Also, collars are not
widely available, because they are registered for use in only a few
states.

Fumigants

Carbon monoxide is an effective burrow fumigant recently re-registered
by the EPA. Gas cartridges, which contain 65% sodium nitrate and 35%
charcoal, produce carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, and other noxious
gases when ignited. They were registered by the EPA in 1981 for control
of coyotes in dens only. This is the only fumigant currently registered
for this purpose.

Trapping

There are many effective methods for trapping coyotes, and success can
be enhanced by considering several key points. Coyotes learn from past
events that were unpleasant or frightening, and they often avoid such
events in the future. In spring and summer, most coyotes limit their
movements to a small area, but in late summer, fall, and winter they
may roam over a larger area. Coyotes follow regular paths and
crossways, and they prefer high hills or knolls from which they can
view the terrain. They establish regular scent posts along their paths,
and they depend on their ears, nose, and eyes to sense danger.

The following describes one method of trapping that has proven
effective for many beginners.

Items Needed to Set a Coyote Trap:
* One 5-gallon (19-l) plastic bucket to carry equipment.
* Two No. 3 or No. 4 traps per set.
* One 18-to 24-inch (46-to 61-cm) stake for holding both traps in
place.
* Straight claw hammer to dig a hole in the ground for trap placement
and to pound the stake into the ground.
* Leather gloves to protect fingers while digging the trap bed.
* Cloth (or canvas) feed sack to kneel on while digging a trap bed
and pounding the stake.
* Roll of plastic sandwich bags to cover and prevent soil from
getting under the pan of the trap.
* Screen sifter for sifting soil over the traps.
* Rib bone for leveling off soil over the traps once they are set in
place and covered.
* Bottle of coyote urine to attract the coyote to the set (keep urine
away from other equipment).

Locating the Set. Coyotes travel where walking is easy, such as along
old roads, and they have preferred places to travel, hunt, rest, howl,
and roam. Do not set traps directly in a trail but to one side where
coyotes may stop, such as on a hilltop, near a gate, or where cover
changes. Make the set on level ground to ensure that the coyote walks
across level ground to it.

Good locations for a set are often indicated by coyote tracks. The
following are good locations on most farms and ranches for setting
traps: high hills and saddles in high hills; near isolated land
features or isolated bales of hay; trail junctions, fences, and stream
crossings; pasture roads, livestock trails, waterways, game trails, and
dry or shallow creek beds; near pond dams, field borders, field
corners, groves of trees, and eroded gullies; sites near animal
carcasses, bone or brush piles; and under rim rocks.

Making the Set. Place three to five trap sets near the area where
coyotes have killed livestock.

First, observe the area where the losses are occurring and look for
tracks and droppings to determine the species responsible. Study the
paths used by predators. If you have 4 hours to spend setting traps,
spend at least 3 of them looking for coyote sign.
* Decide where to place the trap sets. Always place them in an open,

[continued in next message]

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

[continued from previous message]

seem to be a relationship between size of pasture and predator losses,
with higher loss rates reported in larger pastures. In reality, loss
rates may not be related as much to pasture size as to other local
conditions such as slope, terrain, and human populations. Hilly or
rugged areas are typically sparsely populated by humans and are
characterized by large pastures. These conditions are ideal for
coyotes.

Sheep pastures that contain or are adjacent to streams, creeks, and
rivers tend to have more coyote problems than pastures without such
features. Water courses serve as hunting and travel lanes for coyotes.

Herders. Using herders with sheep or cattle in large pastures can help
reduce predation, but there has been a trend away from herders in
recent years because of increasing costs and a shortage of competent
help. Nevertheless, tended flocks or herds receive closer attention
than untended livestock, particularly in large pastures, and problems
can be solved before they become serious. We recommend two herders per
band of range sheep. If herders aren't used, daily or periodic checking
of the livestock is a good husbandry practice.

Frightening Devices and Repellents

Frightening devices are useful for reducing losses during short periods
or until predators are removed. The devices should not be used for long
periods of time when predation is not a problem. To avoid acclimation
you can increase both the degree and duration of effectiveness by
varying the position, appearance, duration, or frequency of the
frightening stimuli, or using them in various combinations. Many
frightening methods have been ridiculed in one way or another;
nevertheless, all of the techniques discussed here have helped
producers by saving livestock and/or buying some time to institute
other controls.

Lights. A study involving 100 Kansas sheep producers showed that using
lights above corrals at night had the most marked effect on losses to
coyotes of all the devices examined. Out of 79 sheep killed by coyotes
in corrals, only three were killed in corrals with lights. Nearly 40%
of the producers in the study used lights over corrals. There was some
indication in the study that sheep losses to dogs were higher in
lighted corrals, but the sample size for dog losses was small and the
results inconclusive. Most of the producers (80%) used mercury vapor
lights that automatically turned on at dusk and off at dawn.

Another advantage of lighted corrals is that coyotes are more
vulnerable when they enter the lighted area. Coyotes often establish a
fairly predictable pattern of killing. When this happens in a lighted
corral, it is possible for a producer to wait above or downwind of the
corral and to shoot the coyote as it enters. Red or blue lights may
make the ambush more successful since coyotes appear to be less
frightened by them than by white lights. Revolving or flashing the
lights may enhance their effectiveness in frightening away predators.
There is some speculation that the old oil lamps used in highway
construction repelled coyotes, presumably because of their flickering
effect.

Bells and Radios. Some sheep producers place bells on some or all of
their sheep to discourage predators. Where effects have been measured,
however, no difference in losses was detected. Some producers use a
radio tuned to an all-night station to temporarily deter coyotes, dogs,
and other predators.

Vehicles. Parking cars or pickups in the area where losses are
occurring often reduces predation temporarily. Effectiveness can be
improved or extended by frequently moving the vehicle to a new
location. Some producers place a replica of a person in the vehicle
when losses are occurring in the daylight. If predators continue to
kill with vehicles in place, the vehicle serves as a comfortable blind
in which to wait and shoot offending predators.

Propane Exploders. Propane exploders produce loud explosions at timed
intervals when a spark ignites a measured amount of propane gas. On
most models, the time between explosions can vary from about 1 minute
to 15 minutes. Their effectiveness at frightening coyotes is usually
only temporary, but it can be increased by moving exploders to
different locations and by varying the intervals between explosions. In
general, the timer on the exploder should be set to fire every 8 to 10
minutes, and the location should be changed every 3 or 4 days. In
cattle pastures, these devices should be placed on rigid stands above
the livestock. Normally, the exploder should be turned on just before
dark and off at daybreak, unless coyotes are killing livestock during
daylight hours. Motion sensors are now available and likely improve
their effectiveness, though it is still only temporary. Exploders are
best used to reduce losses until more permanent control or preventive
measures can be implemented. In about 24 coyote depredation complaints
over a 2-year period in North Dakota, propane exploders were judged to
be successful in stopping or reducing predation losses until offending
coyotes could be removed. "Success time" of the exploders appears to
depend a great deal on how well they are tended by the livestock
producer.

Strobe Lights and Sirens. The USDA's Denver Wildlife Research
electronic guard coyote frightening device

Fig. 6. Electronic Guard frightening device

Center developed a frightening device called the Electronic Guard (EG)
(Fig. 6). The EG consists of a strobe light and siren controlled by a
variable interval timer that is activated at night with a photoelectric
cell. In tests conducted in fenced pastures, predation was reduced by
about 89%. The device is used in Kansas and other states to protect
cows/calves from coyote predation. Most research on the effectiveness
of this device, however, has been done on sheep operations. Suggestions
for using the unit differ for pastured sheep and range operations.

To use the EG in fenced pastures (farm flocks):
* Place EGs above the ground on fence posts, trees, or T-posts so
they can be heard and seen at greater distances and to prevent
livestock from damaging them.
* Position EGs so that rain water cannot enter them and cause a
malfunction.
* Locate EGs so that light can enter the photocell port or window. If
positioned in deep shade, they may not turn on or off at the
desired times.

The number of EGs used to protect sheep in fenced pastures depends on
pasture size, terrain features, and the amount and height of vegetation
in or around the pasture. In general, at least two units should be used
in small (20 to 30 acres [8 to 12 ha]), level, short-grass pastures.
Three to four units should be used in larger (40 to 100 acres [16 to 40
ha]), hilly, tall grass, or wooded pastures. Don't use EGs in pastures
larger than about 100 acres (40 ha) because their effective range is
limited. The device could be useful in larger pastures when placed near
areas where sheep congregate and bed at night. EGs should be placed on
high spots, where kills have been found, at the edge of wooded areas,
near or on bedgrounds, or near suspected coyote travelways. They should
be moved to different locations every 10 to 14 days to reduce the
likelihood of coyotes getting used to them

To use the EG in open range (herded or range sheep):

The number of EGs used will depend on the number of sheep in the band
and the size of the bedground. Four units should be used to protect
bands of 1,000 ewes and their lambs.

When possible, place one EG in the center of the bedground and the
other three around the edge of the bedground. Try to place the units on
coyote travelways.

EGs should be placed on high points, ridge tops, edges of clearings,
or on high rocks or outcroppings. Hang the devices on tree limbs 5 to 7
feet (1.5 to 2.1 m) above ground level. If used above timberline or in
treeless areas, hang them from a tripod of poles.

Herders who bed their sheep tightly will have better results than
those who allow sheep to bed over large areas. Sheep that are bedded
about 200 yards (166 m) or less in diameter, or are spread out not more
than 200 to 400 yards (166 to 332 m) along a ridge top, can usually be
protected with EGs.

Repellents. The notion of repelling coyotes from sheep or calves is
appealing, and during the 1970s, university and government researchers
tested a wide variety of potentially repellent chemical compounds on
sheep. Both olfactory (smell) and gustatory (taste) repellents were
examined. The underlying objective was to find a compound that, when
applied to sheep, would prevent coyotes from killing them. Tests were
conducted with various prey species including rabbits, chickens, and
sheep. Some repellents were applied by dipping target animals in them,
others were sprayed on, and some were applied in neck collars or ear
tags.

Coyotes rely heavily on visual cues while stalking, chasing, and
killing their prey. Taste and smell are of lesser importance in
actually making the kill. These factors may in part account for the
fact that the repellent compounds were not able to consistently prevent
coyotes from killing, although some of the repellents were obviously
offensive to coyotes and prevented them from consuming the killed prey.
Several compounds were tested on sheep under field conditions, but none
appeared to offer significant, prolonged protection.

If an effective chemical repellent were to be found, the obstacles in
bringing it to industry use would be significant. The compound would
not only need to be effective, but also persistent enough to withstand
weathering while posing no undue risk to the sheep, other animals, or
the environment. It would also have to withstand the rigorous
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) approval process.

High-frequency sound has also been tested as a repellent for coyotes,
but the results were no more encouraging than for chemical repellents.
Coyotes, like dogs, responded to particular sound frequencies and
showed some aversion to sounds broadcast within one foot (30 cm) of
their ear. Researchers, however, were unable to broadcast the sound a
sufficient distance to test the effects under field conditions.

Aversive Conditioning. The objective of aversive conditioning is to
feed a coyote a preylike bait laced with an aversive agent that causes
the coyote to become ill, resulting in subsequent avoidance of the
prey. Most of the research on this technique has involved the use of
lithium chloride, a salt, as the aversive agent.

Aversive conditioning is well documented for averting rodents from food
sources, but significant problems must be overcome before the method
can be used to reduce coyote predation on sheep. Coyotes must be
induced to eat sheeplike baits that have been treated with the aversive
chemical. The chemical must cause sufficient discomfort, such as
vomiting, to cause coyotes to avoid other baits. Furthermore, the
avoidance must be transferred to live sheep and must persist long
enough without reinforcement for the method to offer realistic
protection to sheep.

To date, pen and field tests with aversive conditioning have yielded
conflicting and inconclusive results. It does not appear that aversive
conditioning is effective in reducing predation, but additional field
tests would be useful.

Guarding Animals.

Livestock Guarding Dogs. A livestock guarding dog is one that generally
stays with sheep or cattle without harming them and aggressively repels
predators. Its protective behaviors are largely instinctive, but proper
rearing plays a part. Breeds most commonly used today include the Great
Pyrenees, Komondor, Anatolian Shepherd, and Akbash Dog (Fig. 7). Other
Old World breeds used to a lesser degree include Maremma,
Sharplaninetz, and Kuvasz. Crossbreeds are also used.

The characteristics of each sheep operation will dictate the number of
dogs required for effective protection from predators. If predators are
scarce, one dog is sufficient for most fenced pasture operations. Range
operations often use two dogs per band of sheep. The performance of
individual dogs will differ based on age and experience. The size,
topography, and habitat of the pasture or range must also be
considered. Relatively flat, open areas can be adequately covered by
one dog. When brush, timber, ravines, and hills are in the pasture,
several dogs may be required, particularly if the sheep are scattered.
Sheep that flock and form a cohesive unit, especially at night, can be
protected by one dog more effectively than sheep that are continually
scattered and bedded in a number of locations.
coyote guard dog akbash dog

Fig. 7. Livestock guarding dog (Akbash dog)

The goal with a new puppy is to channel its natural instincts to
produce a mature guardian dog with the desired characteristics. This is
best accomplished by early and continued association with sheep to
produce a bond between the dog and sheep. The optimum time to acquire a
pup is between 7 and 8 weeks of age. The pup should be separated from
litter mates and placed with sheep, preferably lambs, in a pen or
corral from which it can't escape. This socialization period should
continue with daily checks from the producer until the pup is about 16
weeks old. Daily checks don't necessarily include petting the pup. The
primary bond should be between the dog and the sheep, not between the
dog and humans. The owner, however, should be able to catch and handle
the dog to administer health care or to manage the livestock. At about
4 months, the pup can be released into a larger pasture to mingle with
the other sheep.

A guarding dog will likely include peripheral areas in its patrolling.
Some have been known to chase vehicles and wildlife and threaten
children and cyclists. These activities should be discouraged.
Neighbors should be alerted to the possibility that the dog may roam
onto their property and that some predator control devices such as
traps, snares, and M-44s present a danger to it. Many counties enforce
stringent laws regarding owner responsibility for damage done by
roaming dogs. It is in the best interests of the owner, dog, and
community to train the dog to stay in its designated area.

The use of guarding dogs does not eliminate the need for other
predation control actions. They should, however, be compatible with the
dog's behavior. Toxicants (including some insecticides and
rodenticides) used to control various pest species can be extremely
hazardous to dogs and are therefore not compatible with the use of
guarding dogs.

The M-44 is particularly hazardous to dogs. Some people have
successfully trained their dogs to avoid M-44s by allowing the dog to
set off an M-44 filled with pepper or by rigging the device to a rat
trap. The unpleasant experience may teach the dog to avoid M-44s, but
the method is not fool-proof--one error by the dog, and the result is
usually fatal. With the exception of toxic collars, which are not legal
in all states, toxicants should not be used in areas where guarding
dogs are working unless the dog is chained or confined while the
control takes place.

Dogs caught in a steel trap set for predators are rarely injured
seriously if they are found and released within a reasonable period of
time. If snares and traps are used where dogs are working, the producer
should: (1) encourage the use of sets and devices that are likely not
to injure the dog if it is caught, and (2) know where traps and snares
are set so they can be checked if a dog is missing. Aerial hunting, as
well as calling and shooting coyotes, should pose no threat to guarding
dogs. Ensuring the safety of the dog is largely the producer's
responsibility.

Dogs may be viewed as a first line of defense against predation in
sheep and cow/calf operations in some cases. Their effectiveness can be
enhanced by good livestock management and by eliminating predators with
suitable removal techniques.

Donkeys. Although the research has not focused on donkeys as it has on
guarding dogs, they are gaining in popularity as protectors of sheep
and goat flocks in the United States. A recent survey showed that in
Texas alone, over 2,400 of the 11,000 sheep and goat producers had used
donkeys as guardians.

The terms donkey and burro are synonymous (the Spanish translation of
donkey is burro) and are used interchangeably. Donkeys are generally
docile to people, but they seem to have an inherent dislike of dogs and
other canids, including coyotes and foxes. The typical response of a
donkey to an intruding canid may include braying, bared teeth, a
running attack, kicking, and biting. Most likely it is acting out of
aggression toward the intruder rather than to protect the sheep. There
is little information on a donkey's effectiveness with noncanid
predators such as bears, mountain lions, bobcats, or birds of prey.

Reported success of donkeys in reducing predation is highly variable.
Improper husbandry or rearing practices and unrealistic expectations
probably account for many failures. Donkeys are significantly cheaper
to obtain and care for than guarding dogs, and they are probably less
prone to accidental death and premature mortality than dogs. They may
provide a longer period of useful life than a guarding dog, and they
can be used with relative safety in conjunction with snares, traps,
M-44s, and toxic collars.

Researchers and livestock producers have identified several key points
to consider when using a donkey for predation control:
Use only a jenny or a gelded jack. Intact jacks are too aggressive and
may injure livestock. Some jennies and geldings may also injure
livestock. Select donkeys from medium-sized stock. Use only one donkey
per group of sheep. The exception may be a jenny with a foal. When two
or more adult donkeys are together or with a horse, they usually stay
together, not necessarily near the sheep. Also avoid using donkeys in
adjacent pastures since they may socialize across the fence and ignore
the sheep.

Allow about 4 to 6 weeks for a naive donkey to bond to the sheep.
Stronger bonding may occur when a donkey is raised from birth with
sheep.

Avoid feeds or supplements containing monensin or lasolacid. They are
poisonous to donkeys. Remove the donkey during lambing, particularly if
lambing in confinement, to avoid injuries to lambs or disruption of the
lamb-ewe bond. Test a new donkey's response to canids by challenging it
with a dog in a pen or small pasture. Discard donkeys that don't show
overt aggression to an intruding dog. Use donkeys in smaller (less than
600 acres [240 ha]), relatively open pastures with not more than 200 to
300 head of livestock. Large pastures with rough terrain and vegetation
and widely scattered livestock lessen the effectiveness of a donkey.

Llamas. Like donkeys, llamas have an inherent dislike of canids, and a
growing number of livestock producers are successfully using llamas to
protect their sheep. A recent study of 145 ranches where guard llamas
were used to protect sheep revealed that average losses of sheep to
predators decreased from 26 to 8 per year after llamas were employed.
Eighty percent of the ranchers surveyed were "very satisfied" or
"satisfied" with their llamas. Llamas reportedly bond with sheep within
hours and offer advantages over guarding dogs similar to those
described for donkeys.

Other Animals. USDA's Agricultural Research Service tested the bonding
of sheep to cattle as a method of protecting sheep from coyote
predation. There was clearly some protection afforded the sheep that
remained near cattle. Whether this protection resulted from direct
action by the cattle or by the coyotes' response to a novel stimulus is
uncertain. Later studies with goats, sheep, and cattle confirmed that
when either goats or sheep remained near cattle, they were protected
from predation by coyotes. Conversely, goats or sheep that grazed apart
from cattle, even those that were bonded, were readily preyed on by
coyotes.

There are currently no research data available on the ideal ratio of
cattle to sheep, the breeds of cattle, age of cattle most likely to be
used successfully, or on the size of bonded groups to obtain maximum
protection from predation. Multispecies grazing offers many advantages
for optimum utilization of forage, and though additional study and
experience is needed, it may also be a tool for coyote damage control.

Any animal that displays aggressive behavior toward intruding coyotes
may offer some benefit in deterring predation. Other types of animals
reportedly used for predation control include goats, mules, and
ostriches. Coyotes in particular are suspicious of novel stimuli. This
behavior is most likely the primary reason that many frightening
tactics show at least temporary effectiveness.

Toxicants

Pesticides have historically been an important component in an
integrated approach to controlling coyote damage, but their use is
extremely restricted today by federal and state laws. All pesticides
used in the United States must be registered with the EPA under the
provisions of FIFRA and must be used in accordance with label
directions. Increasingly restrictive regulations implemented by EPA
under the authority of FIFRA, the National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA), presidential order, and the Endangered Species Act have
resulted in the near elimination of toxicants legally available for
predator damage control.

The only toxicants currently registered for mammalian predator damage
control are sodium cyanide, used in the M-44 ejector device, and
Compound 1080 (sodium monofluoroacetate), for use in the livestock
protection collar. These toxicants are Restricted Use Pesticides and
may be used only by certified pesticide applicators. Information on
registration status and availability of these products in individual
states may be obtained from the respective state's department of
agriculture.

Sodium Cyanide in the M-44. The M-44 is a spring-activated device used
to expel sodium cyanide into an animal's mouth. It is currently
registered by EPA for use by trained personnel in the control of
depredating coyotes, foxes, and dogs.

The M-44 consists of a capsule holder wrapped in an absorbent material,
an ejector mechanism, a capsule containing approximately 0.9 grams of a
powdered sodium cyanide mixture, and a 5- to 7-inch (15- to 18-cm)
hollow stake (Fig. 8). For most effective use, set M-44s in locations
similar to those for good trap sets. Drive the hollow stake into the
ground. Cock the ejector unit and secure it in the stake. Screw the
wrapped capsule holder containing the cyanide capsule onto the ejector
unit, and apply fetid meat bait to the capsule holder. Coyotes
attracted by the bait will try to bite the baited capsule holder. When
the M-44 is pulled, the spring-activated plunger propels sodium cyanide
into the animal's mouth, resulting in death within a few seconds.
M-44 coyote management device diagram

Fig. 8. The M-44 device consists of the (a) base, (b) ejector, (c)
capsule holder, and (d) cyanide-containing plastic capsule.

The M-44 is very selective for canids because of the attractants used
and the unique requirement that the device be triggered by pulling on
it. While the use of traps or snares may present a hazard to livestock,
M-44s can be used with relative safety in pastures where livestock are
present. Although not recommended, they can also be used in the
presence of livestock guarding dogs if the dogs are first successfully
conditioned to avoid the devices. This can be done by allowing them to
pull an M-44 loaded with pepper. An additional advantage of M-44s over
traps is their ability to remain effective during rain, snow, and
freezing conditions.

While M-44s can be used effectively as part of an integrated damage
control program, they do have several disadvantages. Because canids are
less responsive to food-type baits during warm weather when natural
foods are usually abundant, M-44s are not as effective during warmer
months as they are in cooler weather. M-44s are subject to a variety of
mechanical malfunctions, but these problems can be minimized if a
regular maintenance schedule is followed. A further disadvantage is the
tendency for the cyanide in the capsules to absorb moisture over time
and to cake, becoming ineffective. Maximum effectiveness of M-44s is
hampered by the requirement to follow 26 use restrictions established
by the EPA in the interest of human and environmental safety. The M-44
is not registered for use in all states, and in those where it is
registered, the state may impose additional use restrictions. A formal
training program is required before use of M-44s. Some states allow its
use only by federal ADC specialists, whereas other states may allow
M-44s to be used by trained and certified livestock producers.

1080 Livestock Protection Collar. The livestock protection collar (LP
collar or toxic collar) is a relatively new tool used to selectively
kill coyotes that attack sheep or goats. Collars are placed on sheep or
goats that are pastured where coyotes are likely to attack. Each collar
contains a small quantity (300 mg) of Compound 1080 solution. The
collars do not attract coyotes, but because of their design and
position on the throat, most attacking coyotes will puncture the collar
and ingest a lethal amount of the toxicant. Unlike sodium cyanide, 1080
is slow-acting, and a coyote ingesting the toxicant will not exhibit
symptoms or die for several hours. As a result, sheep or goats that are
attacked are usually killed. The collar is registered only for use
against coyotes and may be placed only on sheep or goats.

The LP collar must be used in conjunction with specific sheep and goat
husbandry practices to be most effective. Coyote attacks must be
directed or targeted at collared livestock. This may be accomplished by
temporarily placing a "target" flock of perhaps 20 to 50 collared lambs
or kids and their uncollared mothers in a pasture where coyote
predation is likely to occur, while removing other sheep or goats from
that vicinity. In situations where LP collars have been used and found
ineffective, the common cause of failure has been poor or ineffective
targeting. It is difficult to ensure effective targeting if
depredations are occurring infrequently. In most instances, only a high
and regular frequency of depredations will justify spending the time,
effort, and money necessary to become trained and certified, purchase
collars, and use them properly.

The outstanding advantage in using the LP collar is its selectivity in
eliminating individual coyotes that are responsible for killing
livestock. The collar may also be useful in removing depredating
coyotes that have eluded other means of control. Disadvantages include
the cost of collars (approximately $20 each) and livestock that must be
sacrificed, more intensive management practices, and the costs and
inconvenience of complying with use restrictions, including
requirements for training, certification, and record keeping. One use
restriction limits the collars to use in fenced pastures only. They
cannot be used to protect sheep on open range. Also, collars are not
widely available, because they are registered for use in only a few
states.

Fumigants

Carbon monoxide is an effective burrow fumigant recently re-registered
by the EPA. Gas cartridges, which contain 65% sodium nitrate and 35%
charcoal, produce carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, and other noxious
gases when ignited. They were registered by the EPA in 1981 for control
of coyotes in dens only. This is the only fumigant currently registered
for this purpose.

Trapping

There are many effective methods for trapping coyotes, and success can
be enhanced by considering several key points. Coyotes learn from past
events that were unpleasant or frightening, and they often avoid such
events in the future. In spring and summer, most coyotes limit their
movements to a small area, but in late summer, fall, and winter they
may roam over a larger area. Coyotes follow regular paths and
crossways, and they prefer high hills or knolls from which they can
view the terrain. They establish regular scent posts along their paths,
and they depend on their ears, nose, and eyes to sense danger.

The following describes one method of trapping that has proven
effective for many beginners.

Items Needed to Set a Coyote Trap:
* One 5-gallon (19-l) plastic bucket to carry equipment.
* Two No. 3 or No. 4 traps per set.
* One 18-to 24-inch (46-to 61-cm) stake for holding both traps in
place.
* Straight claw hammer to dig a hole in the ground for trap placement
and to pound the stake into the ground.
* Leather gloves to protect fingers while digging the trap bed.
* Cloth (or canvas) feed sack to kneel on while digging a trap bed
and pounding the stake.
* Roll of plastic sandwich bags to cover and prevent soil from
getting under the pan of the trap.
* Screen sifter for sifting soil over the traps.
* Rib bone for leveling off soil over the traps once they are set in
place and covered.
* Bottle of coyote urine to attract the coyote to the set (keep urine
away from other equipment).

Locating the Set. Coyotes travel where walking is easy, such as along
old roads, and they have preferred places to travel, hunt, rest, howl,
and roam. Do not set traps directly in a trail but to one side where
coyotes may stop, such as on a hilltop, near a gate, or where cover
changes. Make the set on level ground to ensure that the coyote walks
across level ground to it.

Good locations for a set are often indicated by coyote tracks. The
following are good locations on most farms and ranches for setting
traps: high hills and saddles in high hills; near isolated land
features or isolated bales of hay; trail junctions, fences, and stream
crossings; pasture roads, livestock trails, waterways, game trails, and
dry or shallow creek beds; near pond dams, field borders, field
corners, groves of trees, and eroded gullies; sites near animal
carcasses, bone or brush piles; and under rim rocks.

Making the Set. Place three to five trap sets near the area where
coyotes have killed livestock.

First, observe the area where the losses are occurring and look for
tracks and droppings to determine the species responsible. Study the
paths used by predators. If you have 4 hours to spend setting traps,
spend at least 3 of them looking for coyote sign.
* Decide where to place the trap sets. Always place them in an open,

[continued in next message]

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)