Carnivore Complete

CARNIVORES
C-1 C-5 C-17 C-25 C-35 C-45 C-51 C-77 C-83 C-89 C-93 C-101 C-109 C-113 C-119 C-123 Badgers Bears, Black Bears, Grizzly/Brown Bears, Polar Bobcats Cats, Feral House Coyotes Dogs, Feral Foxes Mink Mountain Lions Raccoons River Otters Skunks Weasels Wolves Fred C. Lindzey Scott E. Hygnstrom Charles J. Jonkel Peter L. Clarkson and Ian Stirling Dallas R. Virchow and Denny Hogeland William D. Fitzwater Jeffrey S. Green, F. Robert Henderson, and Mark D. Collinge Jeffrey S. Green and Philip S. Gipson Robert L. Phillips and Robert H. Schmidt Edward K. Boggess James E. Knight Edward K. Boggess Edward P. Hill James E. Knight F. Robert Henderson William J. Paul and Philip S. Gipson
Fred Lindzey
Assistant Unit Leader Wyoming Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit US Fish and Wildlife Service University of Wyoming Laramie, Wyoming 82071
Fig. 1. Badger, Taxidea taxus
BADGERS
Damage Prevention and Control Methods

Exclusion
Toxicants
Identification
The badger (Taxidea taxus) is a stocky, medium-sized mammal with a broad head, a short, thick neck, short legs, and a short, bushy tail. Its front legs are stout and muscular, and its front claws are long. It is silver-gray, has long guard hairs, a black patch on each cheek, black feet, and a characteristic white stripe extending from its nose over the top of its head. The length of this stripe down the back varies. Badgers may weigh up to 30 pounds (13.5 kg), but average about 19 pounds (8.6 kg) for males and 14 pounds (6.3 kg) for females. Eyeshine at night is green.
None are registered.

Fumigants
Generally not practical.

Habitat Modification

Trapping
Controlling rodent populations may make habitats less suitable for badgers.
Frightening
Steel leghold traps. Live traps.

Shooting
Bright lights.
Repellents
Where permitted, shooting with a rifle, handgun, or shotgun is effective.
PREVENTION AND CONTROL OF WILDLIFE DAMAGE 1994

Cooperative Extension Division Institute of Agriculture and Natural Resources University of Nebraska - Lincoln United States Department of Agriculture Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service Animal Damage Control Great Plains Agricultural Council Wildlife Committee
C-1
General Biology, Reproduction, and Behavior

Badgers are members of the weasel family and have the musky odor characteristic of this family. They are especially adapted for burrowing, with strong front legs equipped with long, well-developed claws. Their digging capability is used to pursue and capture ground-dwelling prey. Typical burrows dug in pursuit of prey are shallow and about 1 foot (30 cm) in diameter. A female badger will dig a deeper burrow (5 to 30 feet long [1.5 to 9 m]) with an enlarged chamber 2 to 3 feet (0.6 to 0.9 m) below the surface in which to give birth. Dens usually have a single, often elliptical entrance, typically marked by a mound of soil in the front. Badgers have a rather ferocious appearance when confronted, and often make short charges at an intruder. They may hiss, growl, or snarl when fighting or cornered. Their quick movements, loose hide, muscular body, and tendency to retreat quickly into a den provide protection from most predators. Larger predators such as mountain lions, bears, and wolves will kill adult badgers. Coyotes and eagles will take young badgers. Badgers are active at night, remaining in dens during daylight hours, but are often seen at dawn or dusk. During winter they may remain inactive in their burrows for up to a month, although they are not true hibernators. Male badgers are solitary except during the mating season, and females are solitary except when mating or rearing young. Densities of badgers are reported to be about 1 per square mile (0.4/km2) although densities as high as 5 to 15 badgers per square mile (1.9 to 5.8/km2) have been reported. An adult males home range may be as large as 2.5 square miles (6.5 km2); the home range of adult females is typically about half that size. Badgers may use as little as 10% of their range during the winter.
Badgers breed in summer and early fall, but have delayed implantation, with active gestation beginning around February. Some yearling females may breed, but yearling males do not. As many as 5 young, but usually 2 or 3, are born in early spring. Young nurse for 5 to 6 weeks, and they may remain with the female until midsummer. Most young disperse from their mothers range and may move up to 32 miles (52 km). Badgers may live up to 14 years in the wild; a badger in a zoo lived to be 15 1/2 years of age.
Fig. 2. Range of the badger in North America.
Range
The badger is widely distributed in the contiguous United States. Its range extends southward from the Great Lakes states to the Ohio Valley and westward through the Great Plains to the Pacific Coast, though not west of the Cascade mountain range in the Northwest (Fig. 2). Badgers are found at elevations of up to 12,000 feet (3,600 m).
Damage and Damage Identification

Most damage caused by badgers results from their digging in pursuit of prey. Open burrows create a hazard to livestock and horseback riders. Badger diggings in crop fields may slow harvesting or cause damage to machinery. Digging can also damage earthen dams or dikes and irrigation canals, resulting in flooding and the loss of irrigation water. Diggings on the shoulders of roads can lead to erosion and the collapse of road surfaces. In late summer and fall, watch for signs of digging that indicate that young badgers have moved into the area. Badgers will occasionally prey on livestock or poultry, gaining access to protected animals by digging under fences or through the floor of a poultry house. Tracks can indicate the presence of badgers, but to the novice, badger tracks may appear similar to coyote tracks (see Coyotes). Claw marks are farther from the toe pad in badger tracks, however, and the front tracks have a pigeon-toed appearance (Fig. 3). Badgers usually consume all of a prairie dog except the head and the fur along the back. This characteristic probably holds true for much of their prey; however, signs of digging near the remains of prey are the best evidence of predation by a badger. Because badgers will kill black-footed ferrets, their presence is of concern in reintroduction programs for this endangered species.
Habitat
Badgers prefer open country with light to moderate cover, such as pastures and rangelands inhabited by burrowing rodents. They are seldom found in areas that have many trees.
Food Habits
Badgers are opportunists, preying on ground-nesting birds and their eggs, mammals, reptiles, amphibians, and insects. Common dietary items are ground squirrels, pocket gophers, prairie dogs, and other smaller rodents. Occasionally they eat vegetable matter. Metabolism studies indicate that an average badger must eat about two ground squirrels or pocket gophers daily to maintain its weight. Badgers may occasionally kill small lambs and young domestic turkeys, parts of which they often will bury.
C-2
For Additional Information

Hawthorne, D. W. 1980. Wildlife damage and control techniques. Pages 411-439 in S. D. Schemnitz, ed. Wildlife management techniques manual. The Wildl. Soc., Washington, DC.
H Badger
H Coyote
Lindzey, F. C. 1982. Badger. Pages 653-663 in J. A. Chapman and G. A. Feldhamer, eds. Wild mammals of North America: biology, management, and economics. The Johns Hopkins Univ. Press, Baltimore, Maryland. Long, C. A. 1973. Taxidea taxus. Mammal. Spec. 26:1-4. Messick, J. P. 1987. North American badger. Pages 584-597 in M. Novak, J. A. Baker, M. E. Obbard, and B. Malloch, eds. Wild furbearer management and conservation in North America. Ontario Ministry of Nat. Resour. Minta, S. C., and R. E. Marsh. 1988. Badgers (Taxidea taxus) as occasional pests in agriculture. Proc. Vertebr. Pest. Conf. 13:199208. Sargeant, A. B., and D. W. Warner. 1972. Movements and denning habits of a badger, J. Mammal. 53:207-210. Schwartz, C. W., and E. R. Schwartz. 1981. The wild mammals of Missouri, rev. ed. Univ. Missouri Press, Columbia. 356 pp. Wade, D. A. 1973. Control of damage by coyotes and some other carnivores. Coop. Ext. Serv. Pub. WR P-11, Colorado State Univ., Fort Collins. 29 pp. Wade, D. A., and J. E. Bowns. 1982. Procedures for evaluating predation on livestock and wildlife. Bull. B-1429, Texas A & M Univ. System, College Sta., and the US Fish Wildl. Serv. 42 pp.
Fig. 3. Badger tracks compared to coyote tracks.
Legal Status
In some states, badgers are classified as furbearers and protected by regulated trapping seasons, while in other states they receive no legal protection. Contact your state wildlife agency before conducting lethal control of badgers.
Trapping

Exclusion
Badgers can be removed by using live traps and/or leghold traps set like those for coyotes (see Coyotes). Snares have been used with mixed success. Badgers often return to old diggings. A good bait for badgers is a dead chicken placed within a recently dug burrow. Fur trapping may reduce badger populations locally, but badger pelts are generally of little value and most badgers are caught incidentally. Leghold traps (No. 3 or 4) are adequate to hold a badger. Rather than staking the trap to the ground, it is better to attach it to a drag such as a strong limb or similar object that the badger cannot pull down into its burrow. Badgers will often dig in a circle around a stake, sometimes enough to loosen the stake and drag the trap away.
Shooting
Mesh fencing buried to a depth of 12 to 18 inches (30 to 46 cm) can exclude most badgers. The cost and effort to construct such fences, however, preclude their use for large areas.
Editors
Scott E. Hygnstrom Robert M. Timm Gary E. Larson
Control of rodents, particularly burrowing rodents, offers the greatest potential for alleviating problems resulting from badger diggings. For example, controlling ground squirrels or pocket gophers in alfalfa fields will likely result in badgers hunting elsewhere.
Frightening
Badgers can be controlled by shooting. Spotlighting, if legal, can be effective. Incidental shooting has contributed to reducing their numbers in some areas.
Acknowledgments
This chapter is a revision of the chapter on badgers by Norman C. Johnson in the 1983 edition of Prevention and Control of Wildlife Damage. F. Robert Henderson and Steve Minta provided information included in this chapter. Figures 1 and 2 from Schwartz and Schwartz (1981). Figure 3 from Wade (1973).
Badgers may be discouraged from a problem area by the use of bright lights at night. High-intensity lamps used to light up a farmyard may discourage badger predation on poultry.
C-3
C-4
Scott E. Hygnstrom
Extension Wildlife Damage Specialist Department of Forestry, Fisheries and Wildlife University of Nebraska Lincoln, NE 68583-0819
BLACK BEARS
Fig. 1. Black bear, Ursus americanus

Exclusion
Frightening
Shooting
Install night lights and human effigies. Blaring music, pyrotechnics, and guarding dogs may provide temporary relief from damage.
Repellents
Baiting and predator callingbears lured within range can be shot with firearms of .30 caliber or larger. Tracking with dogs.
Avoiding Human-Bear Conflicts
Use heavy woven-wire or electric fences to exclude bears from apiaries, cabins, landfills, and other high-value properties. Store food in bear-proof structures or containers, or on elevated platforms.
Cultural Methods
Capsaicin spray.
Toxicants

Fumigants
Be familiar with several safety precautions when camping or traveling in bear country. In general, never feed black bears and avoid close encounters with them.
Use proper sanitation and solid-waste management techniques. Remove brush and cover around farmsteads, corrals, and residences. Confine livestock and remove carcasses. Locate camp sites and hiking trails in areas of low bear activity.

Trapping
Culvert and barrel live traps. Foot snares.

C-5
No prominent shoulder hump Less robust build Straight muzzle Short curved claws Adult male 250 pounds Adult female 150 pounds
Habitat
Black bears frequent heavily forested areas, including large swamps and mountainous regions. Mixed hardwood forests interspersed with streams and swamps are typical habitats. Highest growth rates are achieved in eastern deciduous forests where there is an abundance and variety of foods. Black bears depend on forests for their seasonal and yearly requirements of food, water, cover, and space.
Black bear
Prominent shoulder hump Massive head Dishface (long upturned muzzle) Chunky build Adult male 450 pounds Adult female 250 pounds
Food Habits
Black bears are omnivorous, foraging on a wide variety of plants and animals. Their diet is typically determined by the seasonal availability of food. Typical foods include grasses, berries, nuts, tubers, wood fiber, insects, small mammals, eggs, carrion, and garbage. Food shortages occur occasionally in northern bear ranges when summer and fall mast crops (berries and nuts) fail. During such years, bears become bolder and travel more widely in their search for food. Human encounters with bears are more frequent during such years, as are complaints of crop damage and livestock losses.
Long claws
Grizzly/Brown bear
Fig. 2. Characteristics of black bears and grizzly/brown bears.
Identification
The black bear (Ursus americanus, Fig. 1) is the smallest and most widely distributed of the North American bears. Adults typically weigh 100 to 400 pounds (45 to 182 kg) and measure from 4 to 6 feet (120 to 180 cm) long. Some adult males attain weights of over 600 pounds (270 kg). They are massive and strongly built animals. Black bears east of the Mississippi are predominantly black, but in the Rocky Mountains and westward various shades of brown, cinnamon, and even blond are common. The head is moderately sized with a straight profile and tapering nose. The ears are relatively small, rounded, and erect. The tail is short (3 to 6 inches [8 to 15 cm]) and inconspicuous. Each foot has five curved claws about 1 inch (2.5 cm) long that are non-retractable. Bears walk with a shuffling gait, but can be quite agile and quick when necessary. For short distances, they can run up to 35 miles per hour (56 km/hr). They are quite adept at climbing trees and are good swimmers.
It is important to be able to distinguish between black bears and grizzly/ brown bears (Ursus arctos). The grizzly/brown bear is typically much larger than the black bear, ranging from 400 to 1,300 pounds (180 to 585 kg). Its guard hairs have whitish or silvery tips, giving it a frosted or grizzly appearance. Grizzly/brown bears have a pronounced hump over the shoulder; a shortened, often dished face; relatively small ears; and long claws (Fig. 2).
Range
Black bears historically ranged throughout most of North America except for the desert southwest and the treeless barrens of northern Canada. They still occupy much of their original range with the exception of the Great Plains, the midwestern states, and parts of the eastern and southern coastal states (Fig. 3). Black bear and grizzly/brown bear distributions overlap in the Rocky Mountains, Western Canada, and Alaska.
Fig. 3. Range of the black bear in North America.
C-6

Black bears typically are nocturnal, although occasionally they are active during the day. In the South, black bears tend to be active year-round; but in northern areas, black bears undergo a period of semihibernation during winter. Bears spend this period of dormancy in dens, such as hollow logs, windfalls, brush piles, caves, and holes dug into the ground. Bears in northern areas may remain in their dens for 5 to 7 months, foregoing food, water, and elimination. Most cubs are born between late December and early February, while the female is still denning. Black bears breed during the summer months, usually in late June or early July. Males travel extensively in search of receptive females. Both sexes are promiscuous. Fighting occurs between rival males as well as between males and unreceptive females. Dominant females may suppress the breeding activities of subordinate females. After mating, the fertilized egg does not implant immediately, but remains unattached in the uterus until fall. Females in good condition will usually produce 2 or 3 cubs that weigh 7 to 12 ounces (198 to 340 g) at birth. After giving birth, the sow may continue her winter sleep while the cubs are awake and nursing. Lactating females do not come into estrus, so females generally breed only every other year. Parental care is solely the females responsibility. Males will kill and eat cubs if they have the opportunity. Cubs are weaned in late summer but usually remain close to the female throughout their first year. This social unit breaks up when the female comes into her next estrus. After the breeding season, the female and her yearlings may travel together for a few weeks. Black bears become sexually mature at approximately 3 1/2 years of age, but some females may not breed until their fourth year or later. In North America, black bear densities range from 0.3 to 3.4 bears per square mile (0.1 to 1.3 bears/km2). Densities
are highest in the Pacific Northwest because of the high diversity of habitats and long foraging season. The home range of black bears is dependent on the type and quality of the habitat and the sex and age of the bear. In mountainous regions, bears encounter a variety of habitats by moving up or down in elevation. Where the terrain is flatter, bears typically range more widely in search of food, water, cover, and space. Most adult females have well-defined home ranges that vary from 6 to 19 square miles (15 to 50 km2). Ranges of adult males are usually several times larger. Black bears are powerful animals that have few natural enemies. Despite their strength and dominant position, they are remarkably tolerant of humans. Interactions between people and black bears are usually benign. When surprised or protecting cubs, a black bear will threaten the intruder by laying back its ears, uttering a series of huffs, chopping its jaws, and stamping its feet. This may be followed by a charge, but in most instances it is only a bluff, as the bear will advance only a few yards (m) before stopping. There are very few cases where a black bear has charged and attacked a human. Usually people are unaware that bears are even in the vicinity. Most bears will avoid people, except bears that have learned to associate food with people. Food conditioning occurs most often at garbage dumps, campgrounds, and sites where people regularly feed bears. Habituated, foodconditioned bears pose the greatest threat to humans (Herrero 1985, Kolenosky and Strathearn 1987).
nuisance when they forage in garbage dumps and landfills. Black bears are about the only animals, besides skunks, that molest beehives. Evidence of bear damage includes broken and scattered combs and hives showing claw and tooth marks. Hair, tracks, scats, and other sign may be found in the immediate area. A bear will usually use the same path to return every night until all of the brood, comb, and honey are eaten. Field crops such as corn and oats are also damaged occasionally by hungry black bears. Large, localized areas of broken, smashed stalks show where bears have fed in cornfields. Bears eat the entire cob, whereas raccoons strip the ears from the stalks and chew the kernels from the ears. Black bears prefer corn in the milk stage. Bears can cause extensive damage to trees, especially in second-growth forests, by feeding on the inner bark or by clawing off the bark to leave territorial markings. Black bears damage orchards by breaking down trees and branches in their attempts to reach fruit. They will often return to an orchard nightly once feeding starts. Due to the perennial nature of orchard damage, losses can be economically significant. Few black bears learn to kill livestock, but the behavior, once developed, usually persists. The severity of black bear predation makes solving the problem very important to the individuals who suffer the losses. If bears are suspect, look for deep tooth marks (about 1/2 inch [1.3 cm] in diameter) on the neck directly behind the ears. On large animals, look for large claw marks (1/2 inch [1.3 cm] between individual marks) on the shoulders and sides. Bear predation must be distinguished from coyote or dog attacks. Coyotes typically attack the throat region. Dogs chase their prey, often slashing the hind legs and mutilating the animal. Tooth marks on the back of the neck are not usually found on coyote and dog kills. Claw marks are less prominent on coyote or dog kills, if present at all.
C-7

Damage caused by black bears is quite diverse, ranging from trampling sweet corn fields and tearing up turf to destroying beehives and even (rarely) killing humans. Black bears are noted for nuisance problems such as scavenging in garbage cans, breaking in and demolishing the interiors of cabins, and raiding campers campsites and food caches. Bears also become a
Different types of livestock behave differently when attacked by bears. Sheep tend to bunch up when approached. Often three or more will be killed in a small area. Cattle have a tendency to scatter when a bear approaches. Kills usually consist of single animals. Hogs can evade bears in the open and are more often killed when confined. Horses are rarely killed by bears, but they do get clawed on the sides. After an animal is killed, black bears will typically open the body cavity and remove the internal organs. The liver and other vital organs are eaten first, followed by the hindquarters. Udders of lactating females are also preferred. When a bear makes a kill, it usually returns to the site at dusk. Bears prefer to feed alone. If an animal is killed in the open, the bear may drag it into the woods or brush and cover the remains with leaves, grass, soil, and forest debris. The bear will periodically return to this cache site to feed on the decomposing carcass. Black bears occasionally threaten human health and safety. Dr. Stephen Herrero documented 500 injuries to humans resulting from encounters with black bears from 1960 to 1980 (Herrero 1985). Of these, 90% were minor injuries (minor bites, scratches, and bruises). Only 23 fatalities due to black bear attacks were recorded from 1900 to 1980. These are remarkably low numbers, considering the geographic overlap of human and black bear populations. Ninety percent of all incidents were likely associated with habituated, food-conditioned bears.
as not present or completely protect the species. In most western states, livestock owners and property owners may legally kill bears that are killing livestock, damaging property, or threatening human safety. Several states require a permit before removing a bear when the damage situation is not acute. In states where complete protection is required, the state wildlife agency or USDA-APHIS-ADC will usually offer prompt service when a problem occurs. The problem bear will be livetrapped and moved, killed, and/or compensation for damage offered. In a life-threatening situation, the bear can be shot, but proof of jeopardy may be required to avoid a citation for illegal killing.
tors to ensure good contact. Electric fences must deliver an effective shock to repel bears. Bears can be lured into licking or sniffing the wire by attaching attractants (salmon or tuna tins and bacon rinds) to the fence. Grounding may be increased, especially in dry, sandy soil, by laying grounded chicken wire around the outside perimeter of the electric fence. Check the fence voltage each week at a distance from the fence charger; it should yield at least 3,000 volts. To protect against voltage loss, keep the battery and fence charger dry and their connections free of corrosion. Make certain all connections are secure and check for faulty insulators (arcing between wire and post). Also clip vegetation beneath the fence. Each month, check the fence tension and replace baits with new salmon tins and bacon rinds. Always recharge the batteries during the day so that the fence is energized at night. Black bears are strong enough to tear open doors, rip holes in siding, and break glass windows to gain access to food stored inside cabins, tents, and other structures. Use solid frame construction, 3/4-inch (2-cm) plywood sheeting, and strong, tight-fitting shutters and doors. Steel plating is more impervious than wood. Bear-proof containers are available for campers in a variety of sizes. They can be used to safely store food and other bear attractants during backpacking trips or other outdoor excursions. In the absence of bear-proof containers, store food in airtight containers and suspend them by rope between two tall trees that are at least 100 yards (100 m) downwind of your campsite. Food, supplies, and beehives can be stored 15 to 20 feet (4 to 6 m) above ground on elevated platforms or bear poles. Support poles should be at least 6 inches (15 cm) in diameter and wrapped with a 4-foot-wide (1.4-m) piece of galvanized sheet metal, 6 to 7 feet (2 m) above ground. You can also place one or two hives on a flat or lowsloping garage roof. Be sure to add extra roof braces because two hives full of honey can weigh 800 pounds

Exclusion
Fencing has proven effective in deterring bears from landfills, apiaries, cabins, and other high-value properties. Fencing, however, is a relatively expensive abatement measure. Consider the extent, duration, and expense of damage when developing a prevention program. Numerous fence designs have been used with varying degrees of success. Electric fence chargers increase effectiveness. Depending on the amount of bear pressure, use an electric polytape portable fence (Fig. 4), or a weldedwire permanent fence (Fig. 5).
Fence Energizing System and Maintenance. To energize the fences,
Legal Status
In the early 1900s, black bears were classified as nuisance or pest species because of agricultural depredations. Times have changed and bear distributions and populations have diminished because of human activity. Many states, such as Colorado, Idaho, Minnesota, Montana, New Mexico, Oregon, Utah, and Wisconsin, manage the black bear as a big game animal. Most other states either consider black bears
C-8
use a 110-volt outlet or 12-volt deep cell (marine) battery connected to a high-output fence charger. Place the fence charger and battery in a case or empty beehive to protect them against weather and theft. Drive a ground rod 5 to 7 feet (1.5 to 2.1 m) into the ground, preferably into moist soil. Connect the ground terminal of the charger to the ground rod with a wire and ground clamp. Connect the positive fence terminal to the fence with a short piece of fence wire. Use connec-
Insulator Insulator 36" 36"

Gate handles Gate handles
26"
Beehive Beehive 16"
Salmon Salmontins tins 3'
Bacon rinds Bacon rinds
6" 6"
45
6" 6"
12'
1' 1'
Guy wire Guy wire
Ground rod Ground rod
5'6" 5'6"
Electric polytape portable fence. One person can easily and quickly install this fence. It is economical and dependable for low to moderate bear pressures. The fence consists of four strands of electric polytape that are attached to posts with insulators. The cost per fence (33 x 33 feet) is about $200. 1 12 48 4 1 1 200-yard roll of polytape 4-foot fence rods (5/16-inch diameter) Insulators or clips Gate handles 12-volt fence charger 12-volt deep cycle battery Herbicides
To install: Drive in four corner posts 1 foot deep and attach a guy wire. Clip vegetation in a 15-inch-wide strip under the fence and apply herbicide. Attach insulators on the inside of corner posts and stretch the electroplastic wire from the four posts at intervals of 6, 16, 26, and 36 inches from ground level. Hand tighten the polytape and join the ends with four square knots. Drive in the remaining posts at 12-foot intervals, attach insulators (on the outside of line posts), and insert polytape.
Fig. 4. Electric polytape portable fence
(360 kg) or more. An innovative technique for beekeepers is to place hives on a fenced (three-strand electric) flatbed trailer (8 feet x 40 feet [2.4 m x 12.2 m]). Though expensive, this method makes hives less vulnerable to bear damage and makes moving them very easy.
Cultural Methods
Implement regular garbage pickup and practice incineration. Reduce access to landfills through fencing, and bury refuse daily. Eliminate garbage dumps. Place livestock pens and beehives at least 50 yards (50 m) away from wooded areas and protective cover. Confine livestock in buildings and pens, especially during lambing or calving seasons. Remove carcasses from the site and dispose of them by rendering or deep burial. Plant susceptible crops (corn, oats, fruit) away from areas of protective cover. Pick and remove all fruit from orchard trees.
Prevention is the best method of controlling black bear damage. Sanitation and proper solid waste management are key considerations. Store food, organic wastes, and other bear attractants in bear-proof containers. Use garbage cans for nonfood items only.
Remove protective cover from a radius of 50 yards (50 m) around occupied buildings and residences. Locate campgrounds, campsites, and hiking trails in areas that are not frequented by bears to minimize people/bear encounters. Avoid seasonal feeding and denning areas and frequently used game trails. Where possible, clear hiking trails to provide a minimum viewing distance of 50 yards (50 m) down the trail.
Frightening Devices and Deterrents
Black bears can be frightened from an area (such as buildings, livestock corrals, orchards) by the extended use
C-9
insultor Insulator
fence post Fence woven Wovenwire wire hot wire Hot wire 5" Top View Top view
6' 6'
+ -
12'
64" 56" 56"

48" 36" Beehive Beehive 20"
6' 6'
Gate handles Gate handles

-
+ Approx. Approx. 12'
6" 6"
Approx. 6'
Ground rod Ground rod

2'
Woven-wire permanent fence. This fence, best used under high bear pressure, is the most durable and expensive barrier. It can be installed by two people in 8 hours. The fence consists of heavy, 5-foot woven wire, supported by wooden posts, ringed by two additional electrified wires. The cost per fence (33 x 33 feet) is about $400. 1 1 24 40 1 6 1 1 50-yard roll of 6-inch square mesh, 5-foot woven wire 150-yard roll of high-tensile (14-gauge) smooth wire 8-foot treated wooden posts Porcelain strain-insulators (screw-in types) 2-pound box of 1 1/2-inch fence staples gate handles 12-volt fence charger 12-volt deep cycle battery
Herbicides To install: Set posts 6 to 12 feet apart in 2-foot-deep holes. Align four corner posts at 5o angles from the vertical. Brace corner and gate posts from the inside with posts set at 45o angles. Clip a 15-inch-wide strip clear of vegetation under the fence and apply herbicide. Place one length of welded wire vertically into position and staple the end to a corner post. Pull the entire length of wire taut with a vehicle and staple the welded wire to the line posts. Continue until all sides, except the gate opening, are fenced. Fasten two strands of high-tensile wire to insulators positioned 5 inches away from the welded wire, at intervals of 6 and 56 inches above ground level. For a 12-foot gate opening, attach three strands of high-tensile wire to insulators on the gateposts. Space the wires at intervals of 6, 36, and 56 inches above ground level. Connect them to the two strands previously strung around the fence. These wires will be connected to the positive fence charger terminal. Attach three more wires to gatepost insulators at intervals of 20, 48, and 64 inches above ground level. These three wires will be connected together and to the ground rod. Fit insulated gate handles to the free ends of all six gate wires.
Fig. 5. Woven-wire permanent fence
C-10
of night lights, strobe lights, loud music, pyrotechnics, exploder canons, scarecrows, and trained guard dogs. The position of such frightening devices should be changed frequently. Over a period of time, animals usually become used to scare devices. Bears often become tolerant of human activity, too. At this point, scare devices are ineffective and human safety becomes a concern. Black bears are occasionally encountered in the backcountry on trails or at campsites. They can usually be frightened away by shouting, clapping hands, throwing objects, and by chasing. Such actions can be augmented by the noise of pots banging, gunfire, cracker shells, gas-propelled boat horns, and engines revving. It is important to attempt to determine the motivation of the offending bears. Habituated, food-conditioned bears can be very dangerous. Aggressive behavior toward a black bear should not be carried so far as to threaten the bear and elicit an attack. Black bears can be deterred from landfills, occupied buildings, and other sites by the use of 12-gauge plastic slugs or 38-mm rubber bullets. Aim for the large muscle mass in the hind quarters. Avoid the neck and front shoulders to minimize the risk of hitting and damaging an eye. Firearm safety training is recommended.
Repellents
Trapping Culvert and Barrel Traps. Live trapping black bears in culvert or barrel traps is highly effective and convenient (Fig. 6). Set one or two culvert traps in the area where the bear is causing a problem. Post warning signs on and in the vicinity of the trap. Use baits to lure the bear into the trap. Successful baits include decaying fish, beaver carcasses, livestock offal, fruit, candy, molasses, and honey. When the trap door falls, the bear is safely held without a need for dangerous handling or transfer. Bears can be immobilized, released at another site, or destroyed if necessary. Trapped bears that are released should first be transported at least 50 miles (80 km), preferably across a substantial geographic barrier such as a large river, swamp, or mountain range, and released in a remote area. Remote release mechanisms are highly recommended. Occasionally, food-conditioned bears will repeat their offenses. A problem bear should be released only once. If it causes subsequent problems it should be destroyed. Foot Snares. The Aldrich-type foot
Capsaicin or concentrated red pepper spray has been tested and used effectively on black bears. The spray range on most products is less than 30 feet (10 m), so capsaicin is only effective in close encounters. Capsaicin spray may become more popular where use of firearms is limited.
Toxicants
snare (Fig. 7) is used extensively by USDA-APHIS-ADC and state wildlife agency personnel to catch problem bears. This method is safe, when correctly used, and allows for the release of nontarget animals. Bears captured in this manner can be tranquilized, released, translocated, or destroyed. Use baits as described previously to attract bears to foot snare sets. The tools required for the pipe set are an Aldrich foot snare complete with the spring throw arm, a 9-inch (23-cm) long, 5-inch (13-cm) diameter piece of stove pipe, iron pin, hammer, and shovel. Cut a 1-inch (2.5-cm) slot, 6 1/2 inches (16.5 cm) long, down one side of the pipe. Place the pipe in a hole dug 9 inches (23 cm) deep into the ground. Cut a groove in the ground to accommodate the spring throw arm so that the pan will extend through the slot into the center of the pipe. The top of the pipe should be level with the ground surface. Anchor the pipe
securely to the ground, where possible, by attaching it to spikes or a stake driven into the ground inside the can. Bears will try to pull the pipe out of the ground if it gives. The spring throw arm should be placed with the pan extending into the pipe slot 6 inches (15 cm) down from the top of the pipe. Pack soil around the pipe 1 inch (2.5 cm) from the top. Leave the pipe slot open and the spring uncovered. Loop the cable around the pipe, leaving 1/2 inch (1.3 cm) of slack. Place the cable over the hood on the spring throw arm, then spike the cable to the ground in back of the throw arm. The cable is spiked to keep it flush to the ground so that it will not unkink or spring up prematurely. Cover the cable loop with soil to the top of the pipe. Anchor the cable securely to a tree at least 8 inches (20 cm) in diameter. Cover the spring throw arm and pipe slot with grass and leaves. Place a few boughs and some brush around the set to direct the bear into the pipe. The slot in the pipe and the spring throw arm should be at the back of the set. The bear can approach the set from either side or the front. Melt bacon into the bottom of the pipe and drop a small piece in. The bacon should not lie on the pan. Other bait or scent, such as a fishscented rag, may be used. Place a 15to 20-pound (6.8- to 9-kg) rock over the top of the pipe. Melt bacon grease on the top of it or rub it on. The rock will serve to prevent humans, birds, nontarget wild animals, and livestock from being caught in the snare. The bear will approach the set and proceed to lick the grease off the rock. It will then roll the rock from the top of the pipe and try to reach the bait with its mouth. When this fails, it will use a front foot, which will then be caught in the snare. The bear will try to reach the bait first with its mouth and may spring the set if the pan is not placed the required 6 inches (15 cm) below the top of the pipe. Pipe sets are more efficient, more economical, and safer than leghold traps. Sources of bear foot snares are found in Supplies and Materials.

Fumigants
C-11
Fig. 6. Culvert trap for live capture of bears.
Steel plate inserted in slot cut in culvert
Trigger detail
Frame
Suspend bait from rope or wire.
Cross section
Drop door
Rear
Front
C-12
Bacon grease
Rock
Anchor cable to tree or heavy log
Twig and grass cover
Snare
Ground level
Anchor pipe securely into ground with stake
Bacon grease
2-pound coffee can or 10 inches of 5-inch stovepipe Iron pin to control cable and snap lift of snare Fig. 7. Pipe snare set with Aldrich foot snare.
Shooting
Shooting is effective, but often a last resort, in dealing with a problem black bear. Permits are required in most states and provinces to shoot a bear out of season. To increase the probability of removing the problem bear, shooting should be done at the site where damage has occurred. Bears are most easily attracted to baits from dusk to dark. Place baits in the damaged area where there are safe shooting conditions and clear visibility. Use large, well-anchored carcass baits or heavy containers filled with rancid meat scraps, fat drippings, and rotten fruit or vegetables. Establish a stand roughly 100 yards (100 m) downwind from the bait and wait for the bear to appear. Strive for a quick kill, using a rifle of .30 caliber or larger. The animal must be turned over to
wildlife authorities in most states and provinces. Calling bears with a predator call has been reported to offer limited success. If nothing else works, it can be tried. It is best to use two people when calling since the bear may come up in an ugly mood, out of sight of the caller. As with any method of bear control, be cautious and use an adequate-caliber rifle to kill the bear. Call in the vicinity of the damage, taking proper precautions by wearing camouflage clothing, orienting the wind to blow the human scent away from the direction of the bears approach, and selecting an area that provides clear visibility for shooting. See Blair (1981) for bear-calling methods. Some states allow the use of dogs to hunt bears. Guides and professional
hunters with bear dogs can be called for help. Place the dogs on the track of the problem bear. Often the dogs will be able to track and tree the bear, allowing it to be killed, and thus solving the bear problem quickly.
Avoiding Human-Bear Conflicts Preventing Bear Attacks. Black and grizzly bears must be respected. They have great strength and agility, and will defend themselves, their young, and their territories if they feel threatened. Learn to recognize the differences between black and brown bears. Knowledge and alertness can help avoid encounters with bears that could be hazardous. They are unpredictable and can inflict serious injury. NEVER feed or approach a bear.
To avoid a bear encounter, stay alert and think ahead. Always hike in a
C-13
group. Carry noisemakers, such as bells or cans containing stones. Most bears will leave a vicinity if they are aware of human presence. Remember that noisemakers may not be effective in dense brush or near rushing water. Be especially alert when traveling into the wind since bears may not pick up your scent and may be unaware of your approach. Stay in the open and avoid food sources such as berry patches and carcass remains. Bears may feel threatened if surprised. Watch for bear signfresh tracks, digging, and scats (droppings). Detour around the area if bears or their fresh sign are observed. NEVER approach a bear cub. Adult female black bears are very defensive and may be aggressive, making threatening gestures (laying ears back, huffing, chopping jaws, stomping feet) and possibly making bluff charges. Black bears rarely attack humans, but they have a tolerance range which, when encroached upon, may trigger an attack. Keep a distance of at least 100 yards (100 m) between you and bears. Bears are omnivores, eating both vegetable and animal matter, so dont encourage them by leaving food or garbage around camp. When bears associate food with humans, they often lose their fear of humans and are attracted to campsites. Food-conditioned bears are very dangerous. In established campgrounds, keep your campsite clean, and lock food in the trunk of your vehicle. Dont leave dirty utensils around the campsite, and dont cook or eat in tents. After eating, place garbage in containers provided by the campground. In the backcountry, establish camp away from animal or walking trails and near large, sparsely branched trees that can be climbed should it become necessary. Choose another area if fresh bear sign is present. Cache food away from your tent, preferably suspended from a tree that is 100 yards (100 m) downwind of camp. Hang food from a strong branch at least 15 feet (4.5 m) high and 8 feet (2.4 m) from the trunk
of the tree. Use bear-proof or airtight containers for storing food and other attractants. Freeze-dried foods are light-weight and relatively odor-free. Pack out all noncombustible garbage. Burying it is useless and dangerous. Bears can easily smell it and dig it up. The attracted bear may then become a threat to the next group of hikers. Always have radio communication and emergency transportation available for remote base or work camps, in case of accidents or medical emergencies. Dont take dogs into the backcountry. The sight or smell of a dog may attract a bear and provoke an attack. Most dogs are no match for a bear. When in trouble, the dog may come running back to the owner with the bear in pursuit. Trained guard dogs are an exception and may be useful in detecting and chasing away bears in the immediate area.
Bear Confrontations. If a bear is seen at a distance, make a wide detour. Keep upwind if possible so the bear can pick up human scent and recognize human presence. If a detour or retreat is not possible, wait until the bear moves away from the path. Always leave an escape route and never harass a bear.
Adult grizzlies dont climb as a rule, but large ones can reach up to 10 feet (3 m). Occasionally, bears will bluff by charging within a few yards (m) of an unfortunate hiker. Sometimes they charge and veer away at the last second. If you are charged, attempt to stand your ground. The bear may perceive you as a greater threat than it is willing to tackle and may leave the area. Black bears are less formidable than grizzly bears, and may be frightened off by acting aggressively toward the animal. Do not play dead if a black bear is stalking you or appears to consider you as prey. Use sticks, rocks, frying pans, or whatever is available to frighten the animal away. As a last resort, when attacked by a grizzly/brown bear, passively resist by playing dead. Drop to the ground face down, lift your legs up to your chest, and clasp both hands over the back of your neck. Wearing a pack will shield your body. Brown bears have been known to inflict only minor injuries under these circumstances. It takes courage to lie still and quiet, but resistance is usually useless. Many people who work in or frequent bear habitat carry firearms for personal protection. High-powered rifles (such as a .458 magnum with a 510-grain softpoint bullet or a .375 magnum with a 300-grain soft-point bullet) or shotguns (12-gauge with rifled slugs) are the best choices, followed by large handguns (.44 magnum or 10 mm). Although not a popular solution, killing a bear that is attacking a human is justifiable.
If a bear is encountered at close range, keep calm and assess the situation. A bear rearing on its hind legs is not always aggressive. If it moves its head from side to side it may only be trying to pick up scent and focus its weak eyes. Remain still and speak in low tones. This may indicate to the animal that there is no threat. Assess the surroundings before taking action. There is no guaranteed life-saving method of handling an aggressive bear, but some behavior patterns have proven more successful than others. Do not run. Most bears can run as fast as a racehorse, covering 30 to 40 feet (9 to 12 m) per second. Quick, jerky movements can trigger an attack. If an aggressive bear is met in a wooded area, speak softly and back slowly toward a tree. Climb a good distance up the tree. Most black bears are agile climbers, so a tree offers limited safety, but you can defend yourself in a tree with branches or a boot heel.
Economics of Damage and Control

Black bear damage to the honey industry is a significant concern. Damage to apiaries in the Peace River area of Alberta was estimated at $200,000 in 1976. Damage incidents in Yosemite National Park were estimated to be as high as $113,197 in 1975, with $96,594 resulting from damage to vehicles in which food was stored. Thirty percent of all trees over 6 inches (15 cm) tall
C-14
were reported to be damaged by black bears on a 3,360 acre (1,630 ha) parcel in Washington State. In Wisconsin, one female black bear and her cubs caused an estimated $35,000 of damage to apple trees during a two-day period in 1987. In general, black bears can inflict significant economic damage in localized areas. Some states pay for damage caused by black bears. In western states, losses caused by black bears are usually less than 10% of total predation losses, although records are not complete. The extent of claims paid are not high but usually are greater than the license income that state wildlife agencies receive from black bear hunters. Deems and Pursley (1983) listed the states and provinces that pay for black bear depredations.

Blair, G. 1981. Predator callers companion. Winchester Press, Tulsa, Oklahoma. 267 pp. Boddicker, M. L., ed. 1980. Managing Rocky Mountain furbearers. Colorado Trappers Assoc., LaPorte, Colorado. 176 pp. Bromley, M., ed. 1989. Bear-people conflicts: proceedings of a symposium on management strategies. Northwest Terr. Dep. Renew. Resour. Yellowknife. 246 pp. Burt, W. H., and R. P. Grossenheider. 1976. A field guide to the mammals, 3d ed. Houghton Mifflin Co., Boston. 289 pp. Davenport, L. B., Jr. 1953. Agriculture depredation by the black bear in Virginia. J. Wildl. Manage. 17:331-340. Deems, E. F., and D. Pursley, eds. 1983. North American furbearers: a contemporary reference. Int. Assoc. Fish Wildl. Agencies and Maryland Dep. Nat. Resour. Annapolis, Maryland. 223 pp. Erickson, A. W. 1957. Techniques for livetrapping and handling black bears. Trans. North Amer. Wildl. Conf. 22:520-543. Graf, L. H., P. L. Clarkson, and J. A. Nagy. 1992. Safety in bear country: a reference manual, rev. ed. Northwest Terr. Dep. Renew. Resour. Yellowknife. 135 pp. Herrero, S. 1985. Bear attacks: their causes and avoidance. New Century Publ. Piscataway, New Jersey. 288 pp. Hygnstrom, S. E., and S. R. Craven. 1986. Bear damage and nuisance problems in Wisconsin. Univ. Wisconsin Ext. Publ. G3000. Madison, Wisconsin. 6 pp. Hygnstrom, S. E., and T. M. Hauge. 1989. A review of problem black bear management in Wisconsin. Pages 163-168 in M. Bromley, ed. Bear-people conflicts: proceedings of a symposium on management strategies. Northwest Terr. Dep. Renew. Resour. Yellowknife. Jonkel, C. J., and I. McT. Cowan. 1971. The black bear in the spruce-fir forest. Wildl. Monogr. 27. 57 pp.
Jope, K. L. 1985. Implications of grizzly bear habituation to hikers. Wildl. Soc. Bull. 13:32-37. Kolenosky, G. B., and S. M. Strathearn. 1987. Black bear. Pages 442-454 in M. Novak, J. A. Baker, M. E. Obbard, and B. Malloch, eds. Wild furbearer management and conservation in North America. Ontario Ministry of Nat. Resour. Toronto. McArthur, K. L. 1981. Factors contributing to effectiveness of black bear transplants. J. Wildl. Manage. 45:102-110. Meechan, W. R., and J. F. Thilenius. 1983. Safety in bear country: protective measures and bullet performance at short range. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-152. US Dep. Agric., For. Serv. Portland, Oregon. 16 pp. Rogers, L. L. 1984. Reactions of free-ranging black bears to capsaicin spray repellent. Wildl. Soc. Bull. 12:58-61. Rogers, L. L., D. W. Kuehn, A. W. Erickson, E. M. Harger, L. J. Verme, and J. J. Ozoga. 1976. Characteristics and management of black bears that feed in garbage dumps, camp grounds or residential areas. Int. Conf. Bear Res. Manage. 3:169-175. Rutherglen, R. A. 1973. The control of problem black bears. British Columbia Fish Wildl. Branch, Wildl. Manage. Rep. 11. 78 pp. Schwartz, C. W., and E. R. Schwartz. 1981. The wild mammals of Missouri, rev. ed. Univ. Missouri Press, Columbia. 356 pp. Singer, D. J. 1952. American black bear. Pages 97-102 in J. Walker McSpadden, ed. Animals of the world. Garden City Books, Garden City, New York. Van Wormer, J. 1966. The world of the black bear. J. B. Lippincott Co., Philadelphia. 168 pp. Wynnyk, W. P., and J. R. Gunson. 1977. Design and effectiveness of a portable electric fence for apiaries. Alberta Rec., Parks, and Wildl. Fish Wildl. Div. Alberta, Canada. 11 pp.
Acknowledgments
Much of the text was adapted from the chapter Black Bears by M. Boddicker from the 1986 revision of Prevention and Control of Wildlife Damage. Figure 1 from Schwartz and Schwartz (1981). Figure 2 from Graf et al. (1992). Figure 3 from Burt and Grossenheider (1976), adapted by Dave Thornhill, University of Nebraska-Lincoln. Figures 4 and 5 from Hygnstrom and Craven (1986). Figure 6 from Boddicker (1986). Figure 7 courtesy of Gregerson Manufacturing Co., adapted by Jill Sack Johnson. Figure 8 from Manitoba Fish and Wildlife agency publications, adapted by Jill Sack Johnson. Figure 9 by M. Boddicker.
Editors
C-15
C-16
Charles Jonkel
Director Ursid Research Center Missoula, Montana 59802
GRIZZLY/BROWN BEARS
Fig. 1. Grizzly/brown bear, Ursus arctos
Damage Prevention And Control Methods

Exclusion
Repellents and Deterrents
Shooting
Use heavy, chain-link or woven-wire fencing topped with barbed wire and buried at the bottom. Add outriggers and electrified wires to the outside perimeter. Metal (bar) cages and metal buildings will protect workers, food, and other attractants.
Cultural Methods
Capsaicin spray. Install early warning or detection systems around field stations or campsites. Use trained dogs to detect or deter bears. Use plastic slugs to deter bears.
Toxicants
Weapons that offer the best protection are high-powered rifles of .350 caliber or larger, and 12-gauge pump shotguns with rifled slugs. Handguns (.44 magnum) should be carried only for quick defense.
Other Methods Aversive Conditioning. Captured

Fumigants

Trapping
Keep threatened areas free of all attractants. Establish campsites, bee yards, and livestock bedding areas away from vegetation or other cover. Use proper solid waste management procedures. Prevent any rewards to bears, and immediately discourage all approaches by bears.
Frightening Devices
Use culvert traps or foot snares; for bait use only wild animal road kills and scents.
Immobilizing and Handling
and confined bears can be trained to fear and avoid humans through repeated confrontations and the use of repellents. Properly trained personnel and holding facilities designed for aversive conditioning are required.
Public Education. Implement
Boat horns, cracker shells, rifle shots, helicopter chases, yard lights, strobe lights.
Drugs used on bears are strictly controlled, require licensing, and are potentially dangerous to the animal, the drugging team, and unauthorized users. Postimmobilization care is very important.
programs to promote the prevention of bear problems.

Avoiding Human-Bear Conflicts
Avoid bear encounters by staying alert. Never approach bear cubs. Avoid high bear-use areas. Eliminate bear attractants.

C-17
Introduction
Although wildlife management concepts were formed nearly 100 years ago, bears and their management have been poorly understood. Recent concern for the environment, species preservation, and ecosystem management are only now starting to affect the way we manage grizzly/brown bears (Ursus arctos, Fig. 1). Indeed, the difficulty in understanding brown bear biology, behavior, and ecology may have precluded sufficient change to prevent the ultimate loss of the species south of Canada. Grizzly/brown bears must be managed at the ecosystem level. The size of their ranges and their need for safe corridors between habitat units bring them into increasing conflict with people, and there seems to be little guarantee that people will sufficiently limit their activities and landuse patterns to reduce brown bear damage rates and the consequent need for damage control. Drastic changes may be needed in land-use management, zoning, wilderness designation, timber harvest, mining, real estate development, and range management to preserve the species and still meet damage control needs.
bears and polar bears have sharper, shorter claws). The males can weigh up to 2,000 pounds (900 kg), but grizzly males are normally around 400 to 600 pounds (200 to 300 kg). Wherever brown bears live, their size is influenced by their subspecies status, food supply, and length of the feeding season. Bone growth continues through the sixth year, so subadult nutrition often dictates their size potential. Brown bears are typically brown in color, but vary from pure white to black, with coastal brown bears and Kodiak bears generally lighter, even blond or beige. The interior grizzly bears are typically a dark, chocolate brown or black, with pronounced silver tips on the guard hairs. This coloration often gives them a silvery sheen or halo. They lack the neck ruff of the coastal bears, and grizzlies may even have light bands before and behind the front legs. Some particularly grizzled interior brown bears have a spectacled facial pattern similar to that of the panda or spectacled bears of Asia and South America. White grizzlies (not albinos) are also found in portions of Alberta and Montana, and in south-central British Columbia. Such white brown bears may be genetically identical to the polar bear, but so far electrophoresic studies have not been completed to determine the degree of relatedness. The interior grizzlys hump, an adaptation to their digging lifestyle, is seen less in the coastal brown bears, polar bears, or black bears. The brown bears (including the grizzly) are also characterized by their high eye profile, dish-shaped face, and short, thick ears.
Fig. 2. Distribution of grizzly/brown bears in North America.
ranged south of Canada onto the Great Plains along stream systems such as the Missouri River, and in isolated, small mountain ranges such as the Black Hills of South Dakota. They were scattered rather thinly in Mexico and in the southwestern United States, but may have numbered about 10,000 in California, occupying the broad, rich valleys as well as the mountains. A few brown bears (the Mexican or California grizzly) may still exist in northern Mexico. Occasionally, barrenground grizzlies are found hunting seals on the sea ice north of the Canadian mainland. The barren-ground grizzlies appear to be brown bear/ polar bear crosses, and could represent an intergrade form. Brown bears also occur on three large islands in the gulf of Alaska, and are isolated geographically from very similar coastal brown bears. A nearly isolated population (the Yellowstone grizzly) occurs in southern Montana, Wyoming, and southern Idaho. There could still be a few grizzlies in the mountains of southwestern Colorado, and a few still range out onto the prairies of Alberta and Montana, where the extinct Plains grizzly used to roam.
Identification
The brown bears of the world include numerous subspecies in Asia, Europe, and North America. Even the polar bear, taxonomically, may be a white phase of the brown bear. Support for this concept is provided by new electrophoresic studies and the fact that offspring of brown/polar bear crosses are fertile. The interior grizzly (Ursus arctos horribilis) is generally smaller than the coastal (Ursus arctos gyas) or island (Ursus arctos middendorffi) subspecies of North American brown bear, and it has the classic grizzled hair tips. Brown bears in general are very large and heavily built. Male brown bears are almost twice the weight of females. They walk with a plantigrade gait (but can walk upright on their hind legs), and have long claws for digging (black
C-18
Range
The brown bears of North America have lost considerable range, and are currently restricted to western Canada, Alaska, and the northwestern United States (Fig. 2). Their populations are considered secure in Canada and Alaska, but have declined significantly in the lower 48 states. Before settlement, 100,000 brown bears may have
Habitat
Grizzly/brown bear habitat is considerably varied. Brown bears may occupy areas of 100 to 150 square miles (140 to 210 km2), including
desert and prairie as well as forest and alpine extremes. The areas must provide enough food during the 5 to 7 months in which they feed to meet their protein, energy, and other nutritional requirements for reproduction, breeding, and denning. They often travel long distances to reach seasonally abundant food sources such as salmon streams, burned areas with large berry crops, and lush lowlands. Denning habitats may be a limiting factor in brown bear survival. Grizzly bears seek and use denning areas only at high elevations (above 6,000 feet [1,800 m]), where there are deep soils for digging, steep slopes, vegetative cover for roof support, and isolation from other bears or people. Since grizzlies select and build their dens in late September, when their sensitivity to danger is still very high, even minor disturbances may deter the bears from using the best sites. Unfortunately, the habitat types bears choose in September are scarce, and human recreational use of the same high-elevation areas is increasing. Travel corridors connecting large areas of grizzly habitat to individual home ranges are critical for maintaining grizzly populations. Adequate cover is also needed to provide free movement within their range without detection by humans. The land uses with the greatest impact on bear habitats and populations include road development, mining, clear-cut logging, and real estate development. Coastal brown bears use totally different habitats than the interior grizzly. They establish home ranges along coastal plains and salmon rivers where they feed on grasses, sedges, forbs, and fish. While the fishing brown bears may use very small ranges for extended periods, almost all bears make occasional, long-distance movements to other areas where food is abundant. This far-ranging behavior often leads to unexpected human-bear conflicts far from typical brown bear range. Social factors within bear populations influence habitat valuethe removal of one dominant bear or the sudden
deaths of several bears can cause the remaining bears to greatly alter their habitat-use patterns. Such changes occur simply because the social hierarchy within bear populations typically gives large bears dominance over the smaller ones, and each bear uses its range based on its relationship to the other bears in the area.
cially sheep that graze on open, remote rangeland.

Brown bears are typical of all bears physiologically, behaviorally, and ecologically. They are slow growing and long-lived (20 to 25 years). Their ability to store and use fat for energy makes long denning periods (5 to 7 months) possible. During denning they enter a form of hibernation in which their respiration rate (approximately 1 per minute) and heart rate (as low as 10 beats per minute) are greatly reduced. Their body temperature remains just a few degrees below normal; they do not eat, drink, defecate, or urinate, and their dormancy is continuous for 3 to 7 months. The adaptive value of winter denning relates to survival during inclement weather, when reduced food availability, decreased mobility, and increased energy demands for thermoregulation occur. In most populations, brown bears breed from mid-May to mid-July. Both males and females are polygamous, and although males attempt to defend females against other males, they are generally unsuccessful. Implantation of the fertilized ova is delayed until the females enter their dens, from late October to November. One to three (usually two) cubs are born in January in a rather undeveloped state. They require great care from their mothers, which leads to strong family bonding and transfer of information from mothers to offspring. Brown bears may not produce young until 5 to 6 years of age and may skip 3 to 6 years between litters. Because of their low reproductive potential, bear populations cannot respond quickly to expanded habitats or severe population losses. During the breeding season, male and female grizzly/brown bears spend considerable time together, and family groups break up. The young females are allowed to remain in the area, taking over a portion of their mothers
C-19
Food Habits
Food gathering is a top priority in the life of grizzly/brown bears. They feed extensively on both vegetation and animal matter. Their claws and front leg muscles are remarkably well adapted to digging for roots, tubers, and corms. They may also dig to capture ground squirrels, marmots, and pocket gophers. Brown bears are strongly attracted to succulent forbs, sedges, and grasses. In spring and early summer they may ingest up to 90 pounds (40 kg) of this high-protein forage per day. Bears gain their fat reserves to endure the 5- to 7- month denning period by feeding on highenergy mast (berries, pine nuts) or salmon. The 2 1/2- to 3-month summer feeding period is particularly crucial for reaching maximum body frame and preparing for the breeding season and winter. Being ultimate opportunists, brown bears feed on many other food items. For example, the Yellowstone grizzlies have clearly become more predatory since the closure of the garbage dumps in the Yellowstone area. They are exploiting the abundant elk and bison populations that have built up within the park. They hunt the elk calves in the spring, and some bears learn to hunt adult elk, moose, and even bison. The ungulate herds, domestic sheep, and cows also provide an abundant carrion supply each springthe animals that die over winter thaw out just when the bears need a rich food source. Bears are adept at securing food from human sources such as garbage dumps, dumpsters, trash cans, restaurants, orchards, and bee yards. Some bears learn to prey on livestock, espe-
range. They are not threatened by the males, even though they are still vulnerable without their mothers protection. The young males, however, must leave or be killed by the adult males. Many subadult males disperse into marginal bear habitats while trying to establish their own territories. This often leads to increased humanbear conflicts and the need for management and control actions. Home ranges vary in size, shape, and amount of overlap among individuals. Abundance and distribution of food is the major factor determining bear movements and home range size. Home ranges are smallest in southeastern Alaska and on Kodiak Island. The largest home ranges are found in the Rocky Mountains of Canada and Montana, the tundra regions of Alaska and Canada, and the boreal forest of Alberta. In areas where food and cover are abundant, brown bear home ranges can be as small as 9 square miles (24 km2). Where food resources are scattered, the ranges must be at least ten times larger to provide an adequate food base. Some bears establish seasonal patterns of movement in relation to dependable high-calorie foods sources, such as salmon streams and garbage dumps. Such movements are likely to place bears in close contact with humans. In addition to finding food, bears spend considerable time in attempting to detect people, evaluating situations, and taking corrective actions to avoid conflict with humans. People, on the other hand, typically go noisily about their business, often without ever knowing that a bear is nearby.
ban areas, and garbage dumps. Bears that are conditioned to human foods become used to the presence of humans and are therefore the most dangerous. Bear activity is intensely oriented to the summer months when people are also most active in the mountains and forests. Brown bear attacks have resulted in injuries ranging from superficial to debilitating, disfiguring, and fatal. Dr. Stephen Herrero documented 165 injuries to humans resulting from encounters with brown bears in North America from 1900 to 1980 (Herrero 1985). Fifty percent of the injuries were classified as major, requiring hospitalization for more than 24 hours or resulting in death. In addition to the 19 grizzly bear-inflicted deaths that Herrero reported, two Department of Public Safety employees reported 22 deaths in Alaska. Brown bears also occasionally cause problems around orchards, bee yards, growing crops, and livestock. Some bears occasionally kill cattle, sheep, pigs, horses, goats, and poultry, but most do not prey on livestock. Bears kill livestock by pursuing them at high speed, slashing from the rear and pulling the prey down. They hold the prey with their own weight while biting the head or neck area and delivering blows. The ventral area is then ripped open, and the hide sometimes skinned, sometimes devoured along with subcutaneous and visceral fat. Bears eat large volumes of flesh and body parts, leaving many large scats. Adult brown bear scats are 2 inches (5 cm) or more in diameter. The bear will often cover the remains with all types of nearby debrisvegetation, leaves, sticks, and soil, and then bed nearby. The investigator should look carefully for (and record) all wounds, tracks, hairs, and any other sign that would prove bear predation. It is important to document accurately the cause of death, the manner of killing, and all signs in the area that would indicate predation by bears. The lack of any such evidence should preclude brown bear control. Sheep predation may be more subtle to document since, when frightened, sheep readily stampede and injure or
kill themselves on felled timber or cliffs. In such a case, examiners should look carefully for neck and head bites, or smashed skulls, as well as tracks, bear hair, bear droppings, and other sign. Survey the overall scenethe flight path of the sheep, the place of cover and possible attack relative to the flight route, the amount consumed, and the freshness of any flesh or tissues in the bear droppings. Grizzly/brown bear attacks are often easily identified by tracks alone. The foot prints are very large, with claw marks on the front foot extending up to 4 inches (10 cm) in front of the toe marks. The toes of a grizzly are in a much straighter line than those of a black bear, and the grizzly paw includes greater webbing between the toes, which may show up in a mud print. Grizzly hair found in the area is another positive identifying characteristic. Look carefully on the ends of broken sticks, in rough areas on logs, under high logs, in the bark of trees, or in any pitch patches on conifers where a bear may have rubbed. Also check the barbs of any wire fencing nearby. All hair should be collected carefully in small envelopes and sent to a wildlife agency or university lab for identification. Most bear depredations are easily identified, especially if there is wet or soft ground in the area. Bears are not sneakythey march right in and take what they consider is theirs.
Legal Status
Grizzly bears south of Canada are protected as a threatened species under the US Endangered Species Act of 1973. Wyoming and Montana have limited grizzly bear hunting seasons as authorized under the act, but the seasons are currently closed pending clarification of the act through legal challenges in court and further actions by the states. Without state hunting seasons, killing of grizzlies is allowed only through official control actions or defense of self and property. North of the Canadian border, grizzlies are hunted to varying extents in Alaska,

Brown bears have many unique behaviors that subject them to situations in which they are perceived as a threat to humans or personal property. They are opportunistic feeders that may switch to scavenging humanproduced food and garbage if made available, becoming a problem around parks, camp grounds, cottages, suburC-20
Alberta, British Columbia, the Yukon, and the Northwest Territories. Wrongful killing of a grizzly bear mandates a severe penaltyup to $20,000 in fines. Taking is being more liberally defined as court challenges establish that even habitat destruction can be interpreted as taking or killing.
packers in bear country should use portable bear-proof containers. Attractants (food, meat, feed) can also be hung in an elaborate, bear-proof manner, at least 20 feet (6.5 m) above ground, and free from any aerial approach. Tower caches, 20 feet high or higher, can also be constructed using heavy poles and timbers.
Cultural Methods
Frightening Devices

Exclusion
The challenges of exclusion are formidable. Bears are incredibly adept at problem solving where food is concerned, no doubt as a result of their extreme orientation to food for a few short months. Brown bears will expend a great amount of energy and time digging under, breaking down, or crawling over barriers to food. They know how to use their great weight and strength to open containers. They will chew metal cans like bubble gum to extract the food. To exclude bears, use heavy, chain-link or woven-wire fencing at least 8 feet (2.4 m) high and buried 2 feet (0.6 m) below ground. Install metal bar extensions at an outward angle to the top of the fence and attach barbed wire or electrified smooth wire. Also consider attaching an electrified outrigger wire to the fence. Electric fencing is also very effective if built correctly. At a minimum, 12gauge, high-tensile fencing should be usednine wires high, spaced 6 inches (15 cm) at the top and 4 inches (10 cm) at the bottom, with alternating hot and ground wires. Both the top and bottom wires should be hot. Use a lowimpedance charger with a minimum output of 5,000 volts. In backcountry situations, an electric fence perimeter may be the only sure protection from grizzly/brown bear damage. Secure the camp, supplies, and livestock within the confined area. In the absence of fencing, bear-proof containers provide the best protection for food and other supplies. Use 45gallon (200-l) oil drums with locking lids to secure all bear attractants. Back-
Once a bear has developed a detrimental behavior, it may be impossible to change it. Prevention is directed mostly at keeping the bear population wild and fearful of people. If the mothers teach their young to avoid humans, problems will be minimal, though not nonexistent. Hunting pressure automatically teaches bears to avoid humans. Choose campsites, bee yards, and livestock bedding sites in areas not frequented by bears. Avoid riparian areas, rough ground, heavy cover, aspen groves, and berry-covered hillsides. In spring and early summer, bears frequent riparian areas, lowelevation flood plains, hillside parks, and alluvial fans where high protein grasses, sedges, and forbs are plentiful. In late June or early July, bears turn to areas with berries and other highenergy foods. Often, livestock need to be held out of such areas only an extra 2 weeks, until the bears turn to other foods. In areas with a history of bear problems, livestock should be confined in buildings or pens that are at least 50 yards (50 m) from wooded areas and protective cover, especially during the lambing or calving season. Remove carcasses from the site and dispose of them by rendering or deep burial. Bears should never be fed or intentionally given access to food scraps or garbage. Eliminate all sources of human foods around campsites, cabins, restaurants, and suburban areas. Keep garbage in clean and tightly sealed metal or plastic containers. Spray garbage cans and dumpsters regularly with disinfectants to reduce odors. Maintain regular garbage pickup schedules and bury or burn all garbage at fenced sanitary landfills.
Boat horns, cracker shells, rifle shots, and other loud noises may frighten bears from an area. Roaring engines and helicopter chases may also be effective. Barking dogs can be very useful, but they must be trained to bark on sight or smell of a bear. In addition, good bear dogs will chase bears, but they must be trained to pursue and corner without closing on the bear. Lights and strobe flashes are only marginally effective for bear damage prevention.
Repellents and Deterrents
Capsaicin spray has been reported to be an effective repellent. It may work only once, however, so a backup deterrent should always be available. Well-trained dogs can provide an early warning system as well as a deterrence to bears. Unfortunately, not many trained dogs are available in the United States or Canada. Plastic slugs may also be an effective deterrent against bears. Bears usually move rapidly to the nearest cover when frightened, so care must be taken to avoid being positioned between the bear and escape cover.
Trapping
The capture and translocation of bears can be effective in damage control. Unfortunately, relocation often only moves the problem to another site, and bears have been known to travel great distances to return to a trapping site. The handling process, if done correctly, is itself sufficiently traumatic to teach the bears to avoid humans. Use culvert traps or foot snares to capture bears. Care must be taken in baiting to avoid conditioning bears to people use only natural scents and baits such as wild animal road kills. Only properly trained personnel should be assigned to such work. The Ursid Research Center in Missoula, Montana, offers courses in capturing and handling bears. Consult state regulations and wildlife agency personnel before implementing any bear-trapping program.
C-21
Immobilizing and Handling
Bears are occasionally captured by injection with an immobilizing drug administered from a syringe dart fired from a capture gun. Bears have been successfully immobilized with darts fired from close range. Bears can be approached on foot, from vehicles, and from helicopters. The drugs most commonly used include a mixture of ketamine hydrochloride and xylazine hydrochloride (Ketaset-Rompun). This mixture has a high therapeutic index and results in little distress to the animal. The drugs chosen, the degree of sanitation, the approach to the set, the weapons carried, and the size of capture crews are extremely crucial in tending the animal. Interning with a recognized expert, or attending a certified course should be required before attempting to capture brown bears.
Shooting
Montana, problem bears were captured and brought into holding facilities where they were repeatedly confronted by humans and repelled with chemical sprays. Treatment was complete when the bear fled instantly to the sanctuary portion of an enclosure. The bear was then quickly returned to the wild. The captive process, called bear school, lasts only 4 to 6 days. This method can only be conducted by fully trained personnel. Field treatment may follow, using radio collars, 24-hour monitoring, and firearm backup. Aversive conditioning may cost up to $6,000 per animal, but it may be cost-effective, considering the alternatives.
Public Education
Watch for bear signfresh tracks, digging, and scats. Detour around the area if bears or their fresh sign are observed. NEVER approach a bear cub. Adult female brown bears are very defensive and may be aggressive, making threatening gestures (laying ears back, huffing, chopping jaws, stomping feet) and possibly making bluff charges. Bears have a tolerance range which, when encroached upon, may trigger an attack. Keep a distance of at least 100 yards (100 m) between you and bears. Bears are omnivorous, eating both vegetable and animal matter, so dont encourage bears by leaving food or garbage around camp. When bears associate food with humans, they may lose their fear of humans. Foodconditioned bears are very dangerous. In established campgrounds, keep your campsite clean and lock food in the trunk of your vehicle. Dont leave dirty utensils around the campsite, and dont cook or eat in tents. After eating, place garbage in containers provided at the campground. In the backcountry, establish camps away from animal or walking trails, and near large, sparsely branched trees that can be climbed should it become necessary. Choose another area if fresh bear sign is present. Cache food away from your tent, preferably suspended from a tree that is 100 yards (100 m) downwind of camp. Use bear-proof or airtight containers for storing food and other attractants. Freeze-dried foods are lightweight and relatively odorfree. Pack out all noncombustible garbage. Always have radio communication and emergency transportation available at remote base or work camps in case of accidents or medical emergencies. Dont take dogs into the backcountry. The sight or smell of a dog may attract a bear and stimulate an attack. Most dogs are no match for a bear. When in trouble, the dog may come running back to the owner with the bear in pursuit. Trained guarding dogs are an exception and may be very useful in
Many grizzlies have been killed in response to livestock depredations, as allowed under the US Endangered Species Act. Over time, public tolerance for this approach has declined and fewer bears are now being killed or removed. Currently, shooting is used most often on adult males, since they are not considered essential in a population. This may, however, be short-sighted, considering that all other bears in an area modify their own behavior based on the activities of the dominant adult male bear. Left alone, a bear often will not kill livestock again, or could be trained through aversive conditioning not to attack livestock again. Firearms should be carried by people working with bears or in areas where the risk of bear attack is high. The best protective weapons are high-powered rifles of .350 caliber or larger and 12gauge pump shotguns with rifled slugs. Handguns (.44 magnum) should be carried for quick defense only.
Aversive Conditioning
Public attitudes are crucial in determining what damage prevention or control is practical. The State of Montana now has two staff members authorized to work closely with people in grizzly range not only to solve bear problems but to meet with the public and listen to their concerns. They talk in schools and at rural functions and work with individual ranchers to solve special problems or help in emergencies.
Avoiding Human-Bear Conflicts Preventing Bear Attack. Grizzly/ brown bears must be respected. They have great strength and agility, and will defend themselves, their young, and their territories if they feel threatened. They are unpredictable and can inflict serious injury. NEVER feed or approach a bear.
Aversive conditioning may be effective in teaching bears to fear humans. In

C-22
To avoid a bear encounter, stay alert and think ahead. Always hike in a group. Carry noisemakers such as bells or cans containing stones. Most bears will leave a vicinity if they are aware of a human presence. Remember that noisemakers may not be effective in dense brush and near rushing water. Be especially alert when traveling into the wind since bears may not pick up your scent and may be unaware of your approach. Stay in the open and avoid food sources such as berry patches and carcass remains. Bears may feel threatened if surprised.
detecting and chasing away bears in the immediate area.

Bear Confrontations. If a brown
bear is seen at a distance, make a wide detour. Keep upwind if possible so the bear can pick up human scent and recognize human presence. If a detour or retreat is not possible, wait until the bear moves away from the path. Always leave an escape route and never harass a bear. If a brown bear is encountered at close range, keep calm and assess the situation. A bear rearing on its hind legs is not always aggressive. If it moves its head from side to side it may only be trying to pick up scent and focus its eyes. Remain still and speak in low tones. This may indicate to the animal that there is no threat. Assess the surroundings before taking action. There is no guaranteed life-saving method of handling an aggressive bear, but some behavior patterns have proven more successful than others. Do not run. Most bears can run as fast as a racehorse, covering 30 to 40 feet (9 to 12 m) per second. Quick, jerky movements can trigger an attack. If an aggressive bear is met in a wooded area, speak softly and back slowly toward a tree. Climb a good distance up the tree. Adult grizzlies dont climb as a rule, but large ones can reach up to 10 feet (3 m). Defend yourself in a tree with branches or a boot heel if necessary. Occasionally, bears will bluff by charging within a few yards (m) of an unfortunate hiker. Sometime they charge and veer away at the last second. If you are charged, attempt to stand your ground. The bear may perceive you as a greater threat than it is willing to tackle and may leave the area. As a last resort when attacked by a grizzly/brown bear, passively resist by playing dead. Drop to the ground face down, lift your legs up to your chest, and clasp both hands over the back of your neck. Wearing a pack will shield your body. Brown bears have been known to inflict only minor injuries under these circumstances. It takes courage to lie still and quiet, but resistance is usually useless.
Many people who work in or frequent bear habitat carry firearms for personal protection. Although not a popular solution, it is justifiable to kill a bear that is attacking a human.

Best, R. C. 1976. Ecological energetics of the polar bears (Ursus maritimus Phipps 1974). M.S. Thesis. Univ. Guelph, Ontario. 136pp. Boddicker, M. L. 1986. Black bears. Pages C5C15 in R. M. Timm, ed. Prevention and control of wildlife damage. Univ. Nebraska, Coop. Ex. Lincoln. Bromley, M. ed. 1989. Bear-people conflicts: proceedings of a symposium on management strategies. Northwest Terr. Dep. Renew. Resour. Yellowknife. 246pp. Brown, D. E. 1985. The grizzly in the Southwest: documentary of an extinction. Univ. Oklahoma Press, Norman. 274pp. Bunnell, F. L., and D. E. N. Tait. 1981. Population dynamics of bearsimplications. Pages 75-98 in C. W. Fowler and T. D. Smith, eds. Dynamics of large mammal populations. John Wiley & Sons, New York. Clarkson, P. L., and L. Sutterlin. 1984. Bear essentials. Ursid Res. Center, Missoula, Montana. 67pp. Craighead, J. J., and J. A. Mitchell. 1982. Grizzly bear. Pages 515-556 in J. A. Chapman and G. A. Feldhamer, eds. Wild mammals of North America: biology, management, and economics. The Johns Hopkins Univ. Press, Baltimore, Maryland. Graf, L. H., P. L. Clarkson, and J. A. Nagy. 1992. Safety in bear country: a reference manual. Rev. ed. Northwest Terr. Dep. Renew. Resour. Yellowknife. 135pp. Herrero, S. 1985. Bear attacks: their causes and avoidance. Winchester Press, Piscataway, New Jersey. 287pp. Jonkel, C. J. 1986. How to live in bear country. Ursid Res. Center Pub. 1. 33pp. Jonkel, C. J. 1987. Brown bear. Pages 456-473 in M. Novak, J. A. Baker, M. E. Obbard, and B. Malloch, eds. Wild furbearer management and conservation in North America. Ontario Ministry Nat. Resour. Toronto. Jonkel, C. J. 1993. Bear trapping drugging and handling manual. US Fish Wildl. Serv. Missoula, Montana. McNamee, T. 1984. The grizzly bear. A. Knopf Pub., New York. 308pp.

The US Endangered Species Act dictates that the bear be favored and protected. In terms of a natural resource, individual grizzlies are considered worth $500,000 by some accounts, and the $20,000 penalty for a wrongful death underscores the importance of management. In terms of tourism, recreation, film making, photography, hunting, and all the other cultural and art values of the grizzly, each bear is certainly worth the half million dollars cited above. Yet in Montana, where the future of the grizzly is in jeopardy, their value was only recently raised from $50 to $500. Bear parts have illegally sold for as much as $250 per front claw, $200 per paw, $10,000 for the hide, $500 for the skull, and $30,000 for the gall bladder. Poachers would likely be fined only $10,000 if caught. One hope for brown bears may be found in the private sectorpeople who value bears highly and contribute to organizations that support proper bear management. Damage prevention and control costs could also be met by such organizations. Because hunting is no longer widely practiced, revenues for bear management have declined. Wildlife agencies must develop a higher value for the brown bear and divert fees collected from hunting other species to meet the rising costs of bear management.
Acknowledgments
I am indebted to Julie Mae Ringelberg for help in preparing this manuscript. Tim Manley and Mile Madel of the Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife, and Parks provided advice and information. Figure 1 drawn by Clint E. Chapman, University of Nebraska.
Editors
C-23
C-24
Peter L. Clarkson
Wolf/Grizzly Bear Biologist Renewable Resources Government of the N.W.T. Inuvik, Northwest Territories Canada X0E 0T0
Ian Stirling
POLAR BEARS
Polar Bear Biologist Canadian Wildlife Service Edmonton, Alberta Canada T6H 2S5
Fig. 1. Polar bear, Ursus maritimus

Exclusion
Store garbage, human waste, food, and other products in areas not accessible to bears.
Deterrents and Frightening Devices
Vehicles, heavy construction equipment, snowmobiles, and helicopters can be used to chase polar bears away from work and living areas.
Detection Systems
Heavy woven-wire fences (minimum 6 feet [2 m] tall). Specifically designed electric fences. High metal walls (offshore oil rig caisson or drilling ship). Sturdy metal buildings and iron cages.
Cultural Methods
Loud noises, vehicle engines, cracker shells, rifle shots, barking dogs, and air horns. Trained bear dogs. Employ trained bear monitors with firearms and deterrents to protect communities, industry camps, and work places. Nonlethal firearm deterrents such as 12-gauge plastic slugs and 1 1/2inch (38-mm) rubber bullets.
Dogs, bear monitors, trip-wire fences, and electronic (infra-red, microwave, modulated light beam) alarm systems. Constant vigilance of personnel working at the site.
Repellents
Remove snow around buildings and work areas to increase visibility. Install good lighting in areas where it is essential to detect bears that may be in the vicinity.
Capsaicin spray.
Toxicants

C-25
Fumigants

Trapping
Live traps (culvert and barrel traps) and snares (Aldrich foot snares).
Shooting
Twelve-gauge shotgun and rifled slugs at close range. High-powered rifle of .30-06 caliber or larger at close or long range.
Other Methods
Drugging and immobilization with Telazol (safest and most reliable drug) administered by a dart gun or jabstick. Other drugs can be used with suitable care.
Alaska
Greenland
Identification
The polar bear (Fig. 1) is the largest member of the family Ursidae. Males are approximately twice the size of females. On average, adult males weigh 500 to 900 pounds (250 to 400 kg), depending on the time of year. An exceptionally large individual might reach 1,320 to 1,760 pounds (600 to 800 kg). Adult females weigh 330 to 550 pounds (150 to 250 kg) on average, although a pregnant female just prior to going into a maternity den could be double that weight. Polar bears have a heavy build overall, large feet, and a longer neck relative to their body size than other species of bears. The fur is white, but the shade may vary among white, yellow, grey, or almost brown, depending on the time of year or light conditions. The pelage consists of a thick underfur about 2 inches (5 cm) in length and guard hairs about 6 inches (15 cm) long. Polar bears have a plantigrade gait and five toes on each paw with short, sharp, nonretractable claws. Females normally have four functional mammae. The vitamin A content of the liver ranges between 15,000 and 30,000 units per gram and is toxic to humans if consumed in any quantity.
Canada
Fig. 2. Polar bear distribution map.
Range
Polar bears are distributed throughout the circumpolar Arctic. In North America, their range extends from the Canadian Arctic Islands and the permanent multiyear pack ice of the Arctic Ocean to the Labrador coast and southern James Bay. The southern limit of their distribution in open ocean areas such as the Bering Sea or Davis Strait varies depending on how far south seasonal pack ice moves during the winter (Fig. 2).
ice, probably because of the low density of seals there. Polar bears use a variety of habitats when hunting seals, including stable fast-ice with deep snowdrifts along pressure ridges that are suitable for seal birth lairs and breathing holes, the floe edge where leads are greater than 1 mile wide (1.6 km), and areas of moving ice with seven-eighths or more of ice cover. Bears may be near the coast or far offshore, depending on the distribution of these habitats. Ringed seals (Phoca hispida) and sometimes bearded seals (Erignathus barbatus) maintain their breathing holes from freezeup in the fall to breakup in the spring. Bears can hunt more successfully in areas where wind, water current, or tidal action cause the ice to continually crack and subsequently refreeze. During winter, bears are less abundant in deep bays or fiords in which expanses of flat annual ice have consolidated through the winter. In places
Habitat
From freezeup in the fall, through the winter, and until breakup in the spring, polar bears are dispersed over the annual ice along the mainland coast of continental North America, the inter-island channels, and the shore lead and polynia systems associated with them. Polar bears are not abundant in areas of extensive multiyear
C-26
where the snow cover in the fiords is deep, large numbers of ringed seals give birth to their pups in subnivean lairs in the spring. Consequently, polar bears in general, but especially females with newborn cubs, move into such areas in April and May to hunt seal pups. During summer, the response of the bears to the annual ice melts varies depending on where they live. Bears in the Beaufort and Chukchi seas may move hundreds of miles to stay with the ice. Bears in the Canadian arctic archipelago make seasonal movements of varying distances depending on ice conditions. Polar bears travel seasonally to remain where ice is present because they depend on the sea ice for most of their hunting. In Hudson Bay, James Bay, parts of Foxe Basin, and the southeastern coast of Baffin Island, the ice melts completely in the summer and there are no alternate areas with ice close enough to migrate to. In these areas the bears may be forced ashore as early as the end of July to fast on land until November. Some bears remain along the coast while others move inland to rest in pits in snow banks or in earth dens in areas of discontinuous permafrost. By late September or early October, bears that spent the summer on land tend to move toward the coast in anticipation of freezeup. Many conflicts with people occur in the fall when bears are waiting along coastal areas for the sea ice to form.
eggs, sea weed, grass, and other vegetation, although these food sources are much less common and probably not significant. Polar bears are curious animals and will investigate human settlements and garbage. They have been observed to ingest a wide range of indigestible and hazardous materials, such as plastic bags, styrofoam, car batteries, ethylene glycol, and hydraulic fluid.
cise and acclimatize to the cold, after which they move to the sea ice to hunt seals. The mean age of adults in a population is 9 to 10 years and average life expectancy is about 15 to 18 years. Maximum recorded age of a male in the wild is 29 years. Few male polar bears live past 20 years because of the intense competition and aggression among them. The oldest age recorded for a wild female polar bear is 32 years. Depending on the age and sex class, polar bears spend 19% to 25% of their total time hunting in the spring and 30% to 50% of their time hunting in the summer. Polar bears capture seals mainly by stalking them, by waiting for them to surface at a breathing hole or, in the spring, by digging out seal pups and sometimes adults from birth lairs beneath the snow. When a polar bear kills a seal it immediately eats as much as it can and then leaves. Polar bears do not cache food and normally only remain with a kill for a short time. In the case of a large food supply such as a dead whale or a garbage dump, individual bears may remain in an area for several days or even weeks. Polar bears sleep about 7 to 8 hours a day. They tend to be more active at night during the 24-hour daylight that prevails in the summer months, and to sleep during the day. Within 1 or 2 hours after feeding, they will usually sleep, regardless of the time of day. Before sleeping, females with cubs often move away from areas where other bears are active, probably to reduce the risk of predation on the cubs by adult males.

Polar bears mate on the sea ice in April and May. Implantation of the embryo is delayed until the following September. The adult sex ratio is even, but because females normally keep their young for about 2 1/2 years, they usually mate only once every 3 years. This creates a functional sex ratio of three or more males per female that results in intensive competition among males for access to estrus females. Maternity dens are usually dug in deep snow banks on steep slopes or stream banks near the sea by late October or early November, depending on the availability of snow. In the Beaufort Sea, a large proportion of the females den on the multiyear pack ice several hundred miles (km) offshore. On the Ontario and Manitoba coasts of Hudson Bay, female polar bears may have their maternity dens 30 to 60 miles (50 to 100 km) or more inland, though this is quite unusual elsewhere in polar bear range. Pregnant females normally have 2 young between about late November and early January. At birth, cubs weigh about 1.3 pounds (0.6 kg), have a covering of fine hair, and are blind. They are nursed inside the den until sometime between the end of February and the middle of April, depending on latitude. When the female opens her den, the cubs weigh 22 to 26 pounds (10 to 12 kg). The family remains near the den, sleeping in it at night or during inclement weather for up to another 2 weeks while the cubs exer-
Food Habits
Polar bears feed on ringed seals and to a lesser degree on bearded seals. About half of the ringed seals killed during the spring and early summer are the young of the year. These young seals are up to 50% fat by weight and are probably easy to catch because they are vulnerable and inexperienced. Less frequently taken prey include walrus (Odobenus rosmarus), white whales (Delphinapterus leucas), narwhals (Monodon monoceros), and harp seals (Pagophilus groenlandicus). Polar bears also eat small mammals, bird

Threat or damage from a polar bear differs from that of other bears because it can occur at any time of the year. Conflicts are commonly referred to as threat to life or property (TLP) or defense of life or property (DLP). Although polar bears are the most predatory of the three North American bears, their threat to human life has
C-27
been low. Historically, northern people (Inu, Inuit, Inuvialuit, and Inupiat) were aware of the threat posed by polar bears. Legends and artwork portray conflicts between northern people and polar bears. In recent times, polar bears have injured or killed people living and working in the Arctic. Fleck and Herrero (1988) provide a detailed discussion of polar bear-people conflicts in the Northwest Territories and other areas. The Bear-People Conflict Proceedings (Bromley 1989) includes several papers on handling and preventing encounters with bears. Damage to property can be serious in the remote and sometimes harsh arctic environment, where food and shelter may be essential to survival. Most property damage occurs at small semipermanent hunting camps, industrial camps, and in communities. Damage includes destruction of buildings and their contents, predation of tied dogs, destruction of snowmobile seats and other plastic or rubber products or equipment, and raiding of food caches.

Preventing Polar Bear-People Conflicts
Legal Status
Polar bears are protected in Canada and the United States. In Canada, polar bears are legally hunted. Seasons, protected categories, and quotas apply. In Alaska, polar bear hunting is not legal, but native people may kill animals for subsistence. In Russia and Svalbard, polar bears are completely protected. In Greenland, polar bears are legally harvested by Inuk hunters. Females with cubs in dens are protected. Deterring polar bears in Alaska is restricted to wildlife officers because polar bears are protected by the Marine Mammal Protection Act. This policy is being questioned because it does not allow companies or private individuals to deter a bear in a problem situation. It is, however, legal for anyone to shoot a bear in defense of life. In Canada it is legal for anyone to attempt to deter, and if necessary destroy, a bear in defense of life or property. Any bear killed in either jurisdiction must be reported to the nearest wildlife office.
C-28
Preventing bear-people conflicts has been given considerable attention in the Canadian and Alaskan Arctic since the mid-1970s. Reducing the number of polar bear-people conflicts has increased the safety of people living and working in the Arctic and reduced the number of polar bears killed in problem situations. An active public information and education program will help inform people how to prevent bear problems. Most wildlife agencies in bear country have a variety of public education materials available that are specifically designed to help people prevent bear problems and better handle any that may occur. Special information and training workshops have been developed by the Department of Renewable Resources, Northwest Territories, and adopted by wildlife agencies and industry in other jurisdictions. The workshops instruct people on how to prevent bear conflicts. Two publications to assist workshop instructors are available (Clarkson and Sutterlin 1983, and Clarkson 1986a). The Safety in Bear Country Manual (Bromley 1985, Graf et al. 1992) has been used as a reference text for most workshops. Many bear problems occur at industry camps and work sites. When designing and setting up camps, the number of conflicts can be reduced by considering the potential bear problems. Keeping a clean camp and reducing the number of attractants will reduce bear problems. Once a bear has received a food or garbage reward from a camp, it will quickly associate the camp with available food. Most bears that are habituated to human food or garbage are destroyed in a problem bear situation. To reduce the number of problems and problem bear deaths, careful planning and precautions should be taken. A Problem Bear Site Operations Plan was developed to help industrial operations better plan and pre-
vent bear problems (Clarkson et al. 1986b). The plan helps camp safety officers, team leaders, and managers locate and design facilities and programs that are site specific. It contains information and emergency contact telephone numbers, site design, personnel responsibilities, and techniques to detect and deter bears. The plan can be included in the Safety in Bear Country Manual as an additional chapter. Problem Bear Site Operation Plans have been developed for polar bear concerns at the arctic weather stations and for oil exploration activities in the Beaufort Sea. Each plan deals with being prepared for and preventing polar bear problems at specific sites. Avoiding and responding to close encounters with polar bears is addressed by Bromley (1985), Fleck and Herrero (1988), Stirling (1988a), and Graf et al. (1992). While each polar bear encounter is different, the chance of a serious or fatal bear problem can be reduced by keeping alert and being informed and prepared to deal with any bear problems that may arise.
Exclusion
Heavy woven-wire fences are effective in keeping bears out of an area. Fences must be constructed of sturdy materials and properly maintained to prevent bears from entering the exclosure. The fence should be a minimum of 6 feet (2 m) high, and the bottom should be secured to the ground or a cement foundation to prevent bears from lifting the fence and crawling under the wire. Keep fence gates closed when not in use to prevent bears from entering the area. Electric fences have been tested on polar bears with limited success; grounding problems during winter months have been the primary obstacle. Davis and Rockwell (1986) describe an electric fence they used to protect a camp during the summer months along the Hudson Bay coast. The use of high metal platforms, such as oil rig caissons, or offshore drilling ships, prevents bears from getting access to work and living areas. Sturdy metal buildings and iron bar cages
have been successfully used to store food and equipment, and prevent polar bear access.
Cultural Methods
Cracker shell
Regular snow removal from work and living areas in polar bear habitat will help make these sites safer by reducing potential hiding spots and increasing visibility for personnel. Install lighting around the work site to increase visibility and staff safety. Proper design and set-up of work and living sites will help reduce potential problems. Regular camp maintenance and proper handling and storage of food, wastes, and oil products will help reduce bear problems.
Deterrents and Frightening Devices
150 yards
200 yards
Nonlethal deterrents are used on polar bears in an attempt to scare them away rather than destroy them. Deterrents range from snowmobiles and vehicles to 12-gauge plastic slugs and cracker shells. Choosing an appropriate deterrent will depend on the type of problem and specific location (Table 1). Regardless of the type of deterrent used, all encounters with bears should be supported by an additional person equipped with a loaded firearm. Graf et al. (1992) reviewed several deterrents that are useful for polar bears. Clarkson (1989) recommends the use of a 12-gauge shotgun and a three-slug system (cracker shell, plastic slug, and lead slug). Deter bears from a site as soon as they are seen in the area, to prevent them from approaching closer and receiving some type of food or garbage reward. Figure 3 identifies the appropriate distances for deterring versus destroying a bear. Each bear deterrent situation is different, and depends on the bears behavior and safety options available at the site. When deterring a bear with a plastic slug, aim for the large muscle mass area in the hind quarters (Fig. 4). The neck and front shoulders should be avoided to minimize the risk of hitting and damaging an eye.
Plastic slug
30 to 60 yards
Lead slug
0 to 30 yards
Fig. 3. Deterring and destroying a bear with a 12-gauge shotgun.
C-29
Table 1. Review of deterrent methods.

Method Warning shots Effectiveness -will not scare some bears -repeated use may decrease effectiveness -same as for warning shots -should not be relied on for personal protection -same as for cracker shell Practicality -practical for most situations where portable, short-term deterrent is needed -same as for warning shots Advantages -readily available -easy to use -portable -same as for warning shots Limitations -may injure bear, if not carefully placed
Cracker shells
-improper storage and/or old stock can misfire -may be a fire hazard -may be a fire hazard
Blank pistol Screamer/banger
-same as for warning shots
-safe -loud, unusual, and prolonged noise -long range 100+ yards -same as for warning shots -easy to set up and use -portable
Pencil flare gun Propane cannon
-same as for cracker shell -will protect livestock and apiaries
-same as for warning shots -practical as immediate response to emergency situations -suitable for most problem bear situations
-same as for cracker shells -restricted to isolated areas as sound carries long distance -may injure bear if used at a range closer than recommended -use limited to renewable resource officers and R.C.M.P. in Canada -intensive training and practice necessary -may injure bear if shot not placed properly -special gun required -effort required for installation -regular maintenance required -may not be useful in all situations (wind) -limited range (6-8 yards) -not reliable in sub-zero temperatures
12-gauge plastic slugs
-very effective though some bears not deterred
-can be fired from a 12-gauge shotgun -portable -bears do not react aggressively
Rubber bullet (38 mm)
-very effective
-useful in most situations when a Renewable Resource Officer or R.C.M.P. can be contacted
Electric fence
-fence built to proper specifications will keep out polar bears
-suitable for temporary, semipermanent, and permanent installations
-permanent deterrent method -24 hours protection
Capsaicin sprays
-effective for polar bears in some circumstances -should not be relied on for personal protection
-portable -useful as a backup for other deterrent methods -useful while traveling or in small camp areas where other deterrents not allowed -useful while traveling or in small camps where vehicles or helicopters are used -same as for warning shots
-readily available -portable -easy to use
Vehicles (snowmachines, all terrain vehicles, helicopters) Air horns (boat horns)
-engine noise often frightens bears away -chasing bears for a short distance is effective -same as for warning shots and cracker shells
-easy if vehicle is accessible
-may be hazardous to persons and bears if not used properly
-same as for warning shots
-not reliable in cold temperatures -may provoke aggressive or curious reaction -source of noise is from person -untrained dogs can aggravate a bear and/or lead it back to camp -dogs can be killed -require a responsible handler -need several monitors for 24-hour protection -need good communication
Dogs
-specially trained dogs may be effective in some cases -not reliable
-suitable for camps of all sizes
-easy
Bear monitors
-can be highly effective if experienced with bears, deterrents, and firearms
-especially useful at large, established camps
-flexible
C-30
Table 2. Review of bear detection systems.

Method Trip-wire fence Practicality -small or temporary camps Effectiveness -100% successful in field tests Advantages -small, light, portable -24-hour protection -inexpensive -easy to set up and operate -requires minimal equipment -24 hour protection -easy to install and maintain -resets automatically -powered by AC current or 12V batteries Limitations -may be triggered by other animals -must be reset manually
Microwave motion detection system
-large, semipermanent, and permanent camps
-100% successful in field tests
-perimeter limitation of 450 yards for single unit -may be triggered by other animals -relatively expensive -not easily moved -site levelling may be required -units must be bearproofed -protection may be inconsistent -dog may be mauled or killed -dogs may attract bears -some risk involved until you have seen a dogs reaction to bears -thorough training necessary to obtain maximum effectiveness -expensive -must be operated by trained personnel -poor functional operating distance -poor video image -effectiveness to detect bears has not been determined -some systems are expensive
Dogs
-most situations (requirements for dogs must be met, refer to text)
-inconsistent results
-simple -inexpensive -portable
Bear monitors
-medium to large semipermanent and permanent camps -potentially useful for large sites
-effectiveness depends on experiernce and training of monitor -100% successful in preliminary field tests
-flexible -provide protection as well as warning -24 hour protection -flexible -useful where unstable ground/ice conditions exist -portable -easy to use -portable -flexible
Infra-red system
Conventional security system
-potentially useful for most situations
-have been successfully used for detecting people -have not been field-tested on bears
Detection Systems
Detecting a polar bear that is approaching a work or living area is an important part of handling bear problems. Bear detection systems range from a simple tripwire to more technical electronic monitoring devices (Table 2). If a bear is approaching a work or living area, the personnel on site should have time first to ensure their safety and second to prepare to deter the bear. Detection systems must be properly installed and maintained to be effective. If bear problems are rare, a system that is too technical or difficult to maintain will soon be neglected. Bear monitors and dogs should have previous experience with bears. An experienced bear dog can act
both as a detection and deterrent system.

Repellents
Fumigants
No fumigants are registered for use on polar bears.

Trapping
Capsaicin (oleoresin of capsicum or concentrated red pepper) spray has been tested and used on black and grizzly bears (Hunt 1984), but has not yet been tested on polar bears. It may become more popular where restrictions on firearms are in place. Capsaicin needs to be scientifically tested before it can be formally recommended for polar bear protection.
Toxicants
No toxicants are registered for use on polar bears.
Live traps used to capture polar bears include culvert or barrel traps and foot snares. Both have been used to capture all three bear species in North America. The culvert trap has been used to capture polar bears at Churchill, Manitoba, and in the eastern Northwest Territories. It can also be used for short-term holding and transporting of captured polar bears. Foot snares were used in polar bear research in the early 1970s and are useful in some situations today. A
C-31
detailed description of using the culvert trap and foot snare is found in the Black Bears chapter in this handbook. In the early to mid-1900s, large leghold traps were used along the Arctic coast. These are no longer used today.
Shooting
Deterrent
Deterrent or lethal
Unfortunately, some bear-people conflicts require that problem bears be shot. Polar bears can be aggressive in attempting to obtain food, especially if they are in poor condition and near starving. If it is necessary to destroy a polar bear, it should be done as efficiently and humanely as possible. The 12-gauge pump action shotgun with lead slugs is an effective weapon for destroying a bear at close range (less than 100 feet [30 m]). It can also be used to deter a polar bear. Highpowered rifles of .30-06 or larger caliber are also effective in destroying bears. A rifle used for bear protection should be equipped with open sights for close-range use. Generally, if a bear is beyond 150 feet (45 m), destroying it is not necessary because the bear can be deterred before it comes closer. If it is necessary to destroy a bear beyond 100 feet (30 m), a high-powered rifle will be more accurate and have more penetration energy. Whether a shotgun or rifle is used, bears should be shot in the chest/vital organ area (Fig. 4). Handguns are not recommended for bear protection or for destroying problem bears. Proper training and practice is necessary to effectively use a firearm for bear protection or for destroying a bear.
Other Methods Drugging/Immobilization. Polar
Fig. 4. Recommended deterrent and lethal hit locations on bears.
bears are often immobilized in problem situations. Bears can be drugged while free ranging by darting them from the ground or from a helicopter, or darting after capture in a culvert trap or foot snare. Darts can be fired from a rifle or pistol. A jab stick can be used to immobilize bears captured in a culvert trap, but is not recommended for bears in a foot snare.
Darting from a helicopter (Bell 206 Jet Ranger or similar size), has been used for research and problem bear management. The helicopter should be equipped with a shooting window and have sling capabilities for moving bears. The helicopter should slowly approach the bear from behind at an altitude of 20 to 30 feet (6 to 10 m). Shooting distance from a helicopter is usually less than 30 feet (10 m). Bears should be darted in the large muscle areas of the neck, shoulder, or upper midback. Several immobilizing drugs have been used on polar bears in the past, however, Telazol is presently considered the most effective. Telazol is a safe and predictable drug to work with because there is a wide range of tolerance to high dosages, the reactions of darted bears can be easily interpreted, and the bears are able to thermoregulate while immobilized. Dosages of 8 to 9 mg/kg or greater are usually necessary to fully immobilize a polar bear for measuring and tagging. Immobilization time for adult bears depends on the injection site and weight of the bear. On the average, a bear will be immobilized in 4 to 5 minutes after the first injection of Telazol. Cubs of the year can be immobilized by hand or with a jabstick after being captured on or near their immobilized mother.
Holding, Transporting, and Relocating. Problem polar bears that
are captured or immobilized and not destroyed are usually held in a culvert trap or other suitable facility. Bears can be transported from a problem site with a culvert trap and released at another location if a road system exists. Road systems are limited in the arctic and relocating problem bears with culvert traps is usually not an effective option. In most cases, captured and immobilized bears need to be relocated by helicopter. Take precautions to ensure that bears are not injured or suffering from hyperthermia when transporting them in a cargo net below a helicopter. In Churchill, Manitoba, polar bears are captured in or near the town limits, held in a polar bear holding facility and then flown out to an area north of Churchill and released. Capturing and holding the bears in the polar bear jail prevents these bears from causing problems while they are waiting for the ice to form on Hudson Bay. Bears kept in a holding facility can be given water, but food is not recommended because the bears may begin to associate people and the holding facility with food. Although an expensive program, the polar bear jail at Churchill has reduced the number of polar bear problems and polar bear mortalities. Relocating problem bears usually does not solve the problem since they often return, sometimes from considerable
C-32
distances. Polar bears that are waiting along a coastline for ice to form should be moved in the general direction they would normally travel. Most of the polar bears released north of Churchill travel out on the sea ice and do not return to the townsite.
Acknowledgments
We gratefully acknowledge the following for their continued support of our research on bears in general, and polar bears in particular: the Northwest Territories Department of Renewable Resources, the Canadian Wildlife Service, Polar Continental Shelf Project, Manitoba Department of Natural Resources, World Wildlife Fund (Canada), Northern Oil and Gas Assessment Program, and the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada. All people, organizations, government departments, and industry previously involved in the Northwest Territories Safety in Bear Country Program are thanked for their past concern and support. L. Graf and K. Embelton assisted in wordprocessing and editing. Tables 1 and 2 were adapted from Graf et al. (1992). Figure 1 drawn by Clint Chapman, University of Nebraska. Figure 2 was adapted from Sterling (1988) by Dave Thornhill, University of Nebraska. Figures 3 and 4 are from Clarkson (1989).
Clarkson, P. L. 1989. The twelve-gauge shotgun: a bear deterrent and protection weapon. Pages 55-59 in M. Bromley, ed. Bear-people conflicts. Proc. Sym. Manage. Strategies. Northwest Territ. Dep. Renew. Resour., Yellowknife. Clarkson, P. L., and P. Gray. 1989. Presenting safety in bear country information to industry and the public. Pages 203-207 in M. Bromley, ed. Bear-people conflicts. Proc. Sym. Manage. Strategies. Northwest Territ. Dep. Renew. Resour., Yellowknife. Clarkson, P. L., P. A. Gray, J. E. McComiskey, L. R. Quaife, and J. G. Ward. 1986a. Managing bear problems in northern development areas. Northern Hydrocarbon Development Environment Problem Solving. Proc. Ann. Meeting Int. Soc. Petroleum Ind. Biol. 10:47-56. Clarkson, P. L., G. E. Henderson, and P. Kraft. 1986b. Problem bear site operation plans. Northwest Territ. Dep. Renew. Resour., Yellowknife. 12 pp. Clarkson, P. L., and L. Sutterlin. 1983. Bear essentials: a source book and guide to planning bear education programmes. Faculty Environ. Design, Univ. Calgary. 69 pp. Davis, J. C., and R. F. Rockwell. 1986. An electric fence to deter polar bears. Wild. Soc. Bull. 14:406-409. DeMaster, D. P., and I. Stirling. 1981. Ursus maritimus. Mammal. Species 145:1-7. Fleck, S., and S. Herrero. 1988. Polar bear conflicts with humans. Contract Rep. No. 3. Northwest Territ. Dep. Renew. Resour., Yellowknife. 155 pp. Graf, L. H., P. L. Clarkson, and J. A. Wagy. 1992. Safety in bear country: a reference manual, rev. ed. Northwest Territ. Dep. Renew. Resour., Yellowknife. 135 pp. Gray, P. A., and M. Sutherland. 1989. A review of detection systems. Pages 61-67 in M. Bromley, ed. Bear-people conflicts. Proc. Symp. Manage. Strategies. Northwest Territ. Dep. Renew. Resour., Yellowknife. Hunt, C. L. 1984. Behavioral responses of bears to tests of repellents, deterrents, and aversive conditioning. M.S. Thesis. Montana State Univ., Bozeman. 136 pp. Hygnstrom, S. E. 1994. Black bears. in S. E. Hygnstrom, R. M. Timm and G. E. Larson, eds. Prevention and Control of Wildlife Damage. Coop. Ext., Univ. Nebraska, Lincoln. Lewis, R. W., and J. A. Lentfer. 1967. The vitamin A content of polar bear liver: range and variability. Compar. Biochem. Physiol. 22:923-926. Lunn, N. J., and I. Stirling. 1985. The significance of supplemental food to polar bears during the ice-free period of Hudson Bay. Can. J. Zool. 63:2291-2297.

No specific studies or reports have documented the economic costs of polar bear damage in the Arctic. Past polar bear problems have ranged in cost from nothing to several thousands of dollars. With the remote locations of camps and communities and the expense of transporting food and products in the Arctic, replacement costs are high. Lost work time of personnel and programs can also be substantial because of polar bear problems. In September 1983, Esso Resources Canada had to suspend drilling until a wildlife officer could drug and remove a bear that had happened onto the artificial island, costing Esso about $125,000. A similar incident occurred in 1985, and cost Esso approximately $250,000 in lost work time. Hiring bear monitors can cost up to $250 per day to protect personnel, a camp, or an industrial site from polar bears. The cost of government staff and programs that are responsible for handling polar bear problems will depend on the number of problems. Churchill, Manitoba, has the most intensive government program to handle polar bear problems. This program costs the Manitoba government approximately $120,000 per year (M. Shoesmith, pers. commun.). Purchasing detection and deterrent equipment and educating people on the proper procedures to prevent and handle bear problems will cost companies and agencies. These costs, however, are minimal when compared to personnel safety, replacement costs of property in the Arctic, and long-term polar bear conservation concerns.

Amstrup, S. E. 1986. Research on polar bears in Alaska, 1983-1985. Proc. Working Meeting of the IUCN/SSC Polar Bear Specialist Group. 9:85-108. Arco Alaska, Inc. 1990. Fireweed No. 1 exploratory well. Polar Bear/Personnel Encounter and Monitoring Plans. 16 pp. Banfield, A. W. F. 1974. The mammals of Canada. Univ. Toronto Press, Toronto. 438 pp. Bromley, M. 1985. Safety in bear country: a reference manual. Northwest Territ. Dep. Renew. Resour., Yellowknife. 120 pp. Bromley, M., ed. 1989. Bear-people conflicts. Proc. Symp. Manage. Strategies Northwest Territ. Dep. Renew. Resour., Yellowknife. 246 pp. Calvert, W., I. Stirling, M. Taylor, L. J. Lee, G. B. Kolenosky, S. Kearney, M. Crete, B. Smith, and S. Luttich. 1991. Polar bear management in Canada 1985-87. Rep. to the IUCN Polar Bear Specialist Group. Proc. IUCN/SSC Polar Bear Specialists Group. IUCN Report No. 7:1-10. Clarkson, P. L. 1986a. Safety in bear country instructors guide. Northwest Territ. Dep. Renew. Resour., Yellowknife. 32 pp. Clarkson, P. L. 1986b. Eureka and Mould Bay weather stations problem bear site evaluation and recommendation. Northwest Territ. Dep. Renew. Resour., Yellowknife. 42 pp.
C-33
Meehan, W. R., and J. F. Thilenius. 1983. Safety in bear country: protective measures and bullet performance at short range. US Dep. Agric. For. Serv. Gen. Rep PNW-152. 16 pp. Rodahl, K. 1949. Toxicity of polar bear liver. Nature 164:530. Ramsay, M. A., and I. Stirling. 1988. Reproductive biology and ecology of female polar bears Ursus maritimus. J. Zool. London. 214:601-634. Schliebe, S. 1991. Polar bear management in Alaska. Report to the IUCN Polar Bear Specialist Group. Proc. IUCN/SSC Polar Bear Specialists Group. IUCN Rept. No. 7:62-69. Schweinsburg, R. E., L. J. Lee, and P. B. Latour. 1982. Distribution, movement, and abundance of polar bears in Lancaster Sound, Northwest Territories. Arctic 35:159-169. Stenhouse, G. B, L. J. Lee, and K. G. Poole. 1988. Some characteristics of polar bears killed during conflicts with humans in the Northwest Territories. Arctic 41:275-378. Stirling, I. 1975. Summary of a fatality involving a polar bear attack in the Mackenzie Delta, January 1975. Can. Wildl. Serv. Polar Bear Proj. Spec. Rep. 89. 2 pp. Stirling, I. 1988a. Polar bears. Univ. Michigan Press., Ann Arbor. 220 pp. Stirling, I. 1988b. Attraction of polar bears Ursus maritimus to offshore drilling sites in the eastern Beaufort Sea. Polar Record 24(148):1-8.
Stirling, I., and A. E. Derocher. 1990. Factors affecting the evolution and behavioural ecology of the modern bears. Int.. Conf. Bear Res. Manage. 8:189-204. Stirling, I., and M. A. Ramsay. 1986. Polar bears in Hudson Bay and Foxe Basin: present knowledge and research opportunities. Pages 341-354 in I. P. Martini, ed. Canadian Inland Seas. Elsevier Sci. Publ., Amsterdam. 494 pp. Stirling, I., D. Andriashek, and W. Calvert. 1993. Habitat preferences of polar bears in the western Canadian Arctic in late winter and spring. Polar Record 29:13-24. Stirling, I., C. Spencer, and D. Andriashek. 1989. Immobilization of polar bears Ursus maritimus with Telazol in the Canadian Arctic. J. Wildl. Diseases. 25:159-168. Struzik, E. 1987. Nanook: in the tracks of the great wanderer. Equinox Jan.-Feb. 1987. pp. 18-32. Urquhart, D. R., and R. E. Schweinsburg. 1984. Polar bear: life history and known distribution of the polar bear in the Northwest Territories up to 1981. Northwest Territ., Dep. Renew. Resour., Yellowknife. 69 pp. Uspenskii, S. M. 1977. The polar bear. Nauka, Moscow, 107 pp. (English trans. by Canadian Wildl. Serv., 1978).
Editors
C-34
Dallas Virchow
Extension Assistant-Wildlife Damage Control Department of Forestry, Fisheries and Wildlife University of Nebraska Scottsbluff, Nebraska 69361
Denny Hogeland
BOBCATS
District Director Nebraska Fur Harvesters Bridgeport, Nebraska 69336
Fig. 1. Bobcat, Lynx rufus

Exclusion
Repellents

Fumigants
Cage traps, 15 x 15 x 40 inches (38 x 38 x 100 cm) up to 24 x 24 x 48 inches (60 x 60 x 120 cm). Large body-gripping traps (Victor No. 330 Conibear) in cubby sets. Kill snares (1/16- or 5/64-inch steel [0.15- or 0.2-cm] cable, 6 to 8 feet [1.9 to 2.5 m] long). Live snares (3/32-inch [0.25-cm] steel cable, 6 to 8 feet [1.9 to 2.6 m] long) with protective clothing and equipment.
Shooting
Fence poultry and other small livestock located near human residence.
Cultural Methods

Toxicants

Trapping
Clear brush and timber in and around farmsteads and between large expanses of bobcat habitat and farmsteads.
Frightening
Fur trappers may be willing to trap and remove bobcats year-round in problem situations in exchange for trapping rights when pelts are prime. Steel leghold traps (No. 2, preferably No. 3 offset or No. 4 offset or padded).
Place flashing white lights, loud music, or dogs with livestock.
Predator calls, experienced trail hounds, and centerfire rifles.

C-35
Identification
The bobcat (Lynx rufus), alias wildcat, is a medium-sized member of the North American cat family. It can be distinguished at a distance by its graceful catlike movements, short (4to 6-inches [10- to 15-cm]) bobbed tail, and round face and pointed ears (Fig. 1). Visible at close distances are black hair at the tip of the tail and prominent white dots on the upper side of the ears. Body hair color varies, but the animals sides and flanks are usually brownish black or reddish brown with either distinct or faint black spots. The back is commonly brownish yellow with a dark line down the middle. The chest and outside of the legs are covered with brownish to light gray fur with black spots or bars. Bobcats living at high elevations and in northern states and Canada have relatively long hair. In southern states, bobcats may have a yellowish or reddish cast on their backs and necks.
Similar Species. The bobcat is two to three times the size of the domestic cat and appears more muscular and fuller in the body. Also, the bobcats hind legs are proportionately longer to its front legs than those of the domestic cat.
cm) long and weigh from 9 to 33 pounds (4 to 15 kg). Records indicate a tendency for heavier bobcats in the northern portions of their range and in western states at medium altitudes. The skull has 28 teeth. Milk teeth are replaced by permanent teeth when kittens are 4 to 6 months old. Females have 6 mammae.
porcupines, pocket gophers, and ground hogs comprise most of their diet. Opossums, raccoon, grouse, wild turkey, and other ground-nesting birds are also eaten. Occasionally, insects and reptiles can be part of the bobcats diet. In Canada, the snowshoe hare is the bobcats favorite fare. Bobcats occasionally kill livestock. They also resort to scavenging.
Range and Habitat

The bobcat occurs in a wide variety of habitats from the Atlantic to the Pacific ocean and from Mexico to northern British Columbia (Fig. 2). It occurs in the 48 contiguous states. The bobcat is as adapted to subtropical forests as it is to dense shrub and hardwood cover in temperate climates. Other habitats include chaparral, wooded streams, river bottoms, canyonlands, and coniferous forests to 9,000 feet (2,743 m). Bobcats prefer areas where these native habitat types are interspersed with agriculture and escape cover (rocky outcrops) close by. The bobcat has thrived where agriculture is interspersed through the above native habitat types, as in southern Canada.

Bobcats are secretive, shy, solitary, and seldom seen in the wild. They are active during the day but prefer twilight, dawn, or night hours. Bobcats tend to travel well-worn animal trails, logging roads, and other paths. They use their acute vision and hearing for locating enemies and prey. Bobcats do not form lasting pair bonds. Mating can occur between most adult animals. In Wyoming, female bobcats reach sexual maturity within their first year but males are not sexually mature until their second year. Nationwide, breeding can occur from January to June. In Wyoming, breeding typically begins in February and the first estrus cycle in midMarch. The gestation period in bobcats ranges from 50 to 70 days, averaging 62 days. Nationwide, young are born from March to July, with litters as late as October. The breeding season may be affected by latitude, altitude, and longitude, as well as by characteristics of each bobcat population. In Wyoming, births peak mid-May to mid-June and can occur as late as August or September. These late litters may be from recycling or late-cycling females, probably yearlings. In Utah, births may peak in April or May. In Arkansas, births may peak as early as March. Bobcats weigh about 2/3 pound (300 g) at birth. Litters contain from 2 to 4 kittens. Kittens nurse for about 60 days and may accompany their mother through their first winter. Although young bobcats grow very quickly
Food Habits
Bobcats are capable of hunting and killing prey that range from the size of a mouse to that of a deer. Rabbits, tree squirrels, ground squirrels, woodrats,
The Canada lynx appears more slender and has proportionately larger feet than the bobcat. At close distances, the ear tufts of the lynx can be seen. The tail of the lynx appears shorter than the bobcats and its tip looks like it was dipped in black paint. The bobcats tail is whitish below the tip. Lynx commonly occur in Canadas coniferous forests and, rarely, in the Rocky Mountains. Where both species occur, lynx occupy the more densely forested habitats with heavy snow cover. Male bobcats tend to be larger than females. Adult males range from 32 to 40 inches (80 to 102 cm) long and weigh from 14 to 40 pounds (6 to 18 kg) or more. Bobcats in Wyoming average between 20 and 30 pounds (9 and 14 kg). Nationwide, adult females range from 28 to 32 inches (71 to 81
C-36
Fig. 2 Range of the bobcat in North America.
during their first 6 months, males may not be fully grown until 1 1/2 years and females until 2 years of age. Bobcats may live for at least 12 years in the wild. Bobcats reach densities of about 1 per 1/4 square mile (0.7 km2) on some of the Gulf Coast islands of the southeastern United States. Densities vary from about 1 per 1/2 square mile (1.3 km2) in the coastal plains to about 1 cat per 4 square miles (10.7 km2) in portions of the Appalachian foothills. Mid-Atlantic and midwestern states usually have scarce populations of bobcats. The social organization and home range of bobcats can vary with climate, habitat type, availability of food, and predators. Bobcats are typically territorial and will maintain the same territories throughout their lives. One study showed home ranges in south Texas to be as small as 5/8 square mile (1.0 km2). Another study showed that individual bobcats in southeastern Idaho maintain home ranges from 2.5 square miles to 42.5 square miles (6.5 km2 to 108 km2) during a year. Females and yearlings with newly established territories tend to have smaller and more exclusive ranges than males. Females also tend to use all parts of their range more intensively than adult males. Bobcats commonly move 1 to 4 miles (2 to 7 km2) each day. One study found that bobcats in Wyoming moved from 3 to 7.5 miles (5 to 12 km) each day. Transient animals can move much greater distances; for example, a juvenile in one study moved 99 miles (158 km). Adult bobcats are usually found separately except during the breeding season. Kittens may be seen with their mothers in late summer through winter. An Idaho study found adult bobcats and kittens in den sites during periods of extreme cold and snow. Females with kittens less than 4 months old generally avoid adult males because they kill kittens. In Canada and the western United States, bobcat population levels tend to follow prey densities. Some biologists
believe that coyote predation restricts bobcat numbers. Unfortunately, not enough is known about the relative importance of factors such as litter size, kitten survival, adult sex ratios, and survival rates to predict changes in local bobcat populations. Also, relatively low densities and variable trapping success hinder researchers from easily predicting changes in populations. Since the late 1970s, state game agencies have been tagging bobcat pelts harvested in their states. Information from these pelts is being used to estimate bobcat population trends and factors that contribute to those changes.
victims jaws, leaves canine teeth marks 3/4 to 1 inch (2 to 2.5 cm) apart. Carcasses that are rabbit-size or smaller may be entirely consumed at one feeding. Bobcats may return several times to feed on large carcasses. Bobcats, like cougars, often attempt to cover unconsumed remains of kills by scratching leaves, dirt, or snow over them. Bobcats reach out about 15 inches (38 cm) in raking up debris to cover their kills, while cougars may reach out 24 inches (61 cm). Bobcats also leave signs at den sites. Young kittens attempt to cover their feces at their dens. Females with young kittens may mark prominent points around den sites with their feces. Adult bobcats leave conspicuous feces along frequently traveled rocky ridges or other trails. These are sometimes used as territorial markings at boundaries. Adult bobcats also mark trails or cave entrances with urine. This is sprayed on rocks, bushes, or snow banks. Bobcats may leave claw marks at urine or feces scent posts by scraping with their hind feet. These marks are 10 to 12 inches (25 to 30 cm) long by 1/2 inch (1.25 cm) wide. Bobcats also occasionally squirt a pasty substance from their anal glands to mark areas. The color of this substance is white to light yellow in young bobcats but is darker in older bobcats.

Bobcats are opportunistic predators, feeding on poultry, sheep, goats, house cats, small dogs, exotic birds and game animals, and, rarely, calves. Bobcats can easily kill domestic and wild turkeys, usually by climbing into their night roosts. In some areas, bobcats can prevent the successful introduction and establishment of wild turkeys or can deplete existing populations. Bobcats leave a variety of sign. Bobcat tracks are about 2 to 3 inches (5 to 8 cm) in diameter and resemble those of a large house cat. Their walking stride length between tracks is about 7 inches (18 cm). Carcasses of bobcat kills are often distinguishable from those of cougar, coyote, or fox. Bobcats leave claw marks on the backs or shoulders of adult deer or antelope. On large carcasses, bobcats usually open an area just behind the ribs and begin feeding on the viscera. Sometimes feeding starts at the neck, shoulders, or hindquarters. Bobcats and cougar leave clean-cut edges of tissue or bone while coyotes leave ragged edges where they feed. Bobcats bite the skull, neck, or throat of small prey like lambs, kids, or fawns, and leave claw marks on their sides, back, and shoulders. A single bite to the throat, just behind the
Legal Status
Among midwestern states, the bobcat is protected in Iowa, Illinois, Indiana, Ohio, and in most counties of Kentucky. It is managed as a furbearer or game animal in the plains states. Western states generally exempt depredating bobcats from protected status. They can usually be killed by landowners or their agent. In the more eastern states and states where bobcats are totally protected, permits are required from the state wildlife agency to destroy bobcats. Consult with your state wildlife agency regarding local regulations and restrictions.
C-37

Exclusion
Use woven-wire enclosures to discourage bobcats from entering poultry and small animal pens at night. Bobcats can climb, so wooden fence posts or structures that give the bobcat footing may not be effective. Bobcats also have the ability to jump fences 6 feet (1.8 m) or more in height. Use woven wire overhead if necessary. Fences are seldom totally effective except in very small enclosures.
Cultural Methods
be lured from their course of travel more than a few yards (m). The bobcats use of dense cover for capturing rodents and rabbits can be used in capture techniques to guide the animal or even its footsteps. In the past, the demand for bobcat pelts was moderately high due to fur values. This had encouraged late fall and winter harvest periods. Also, the bobcats high fur quality attracts harvest for recreation or utility. If bobcat depredations are common over time, consider inviting a fur trapper to take bobcats during prime fur periods. Fewer bobcats may result in less competition for native foods and less depredation. Fur trappers may undertake the capture and relocation of bobcats during spring and summer months from areas where depredations are occurring in return for fur trapping rights during fall and winter months. Many of the same sets used for foxes and coyotes will also catch bobcats. Few sets that target bobcats will catch other predators. Bobcats can be led by guide sticks or brush to dirt hole or flat sets where proper lures are used.
Leghold Traps. Steel leghold traps, Nos. 2, 3, and 4 are commonly used to capture bobcats. Trap size selection depends on the area and weather conditions. For coarse-textured sandy
soils, use a No. 2 coilspring trap. Use a No. 3 trap for wet or fine-textured clay soils. Use No. 4 traps for frozen soils or in deep snow sets. A bobcat is easy to hold, but sometimes more power and jaw spread is required than a No. 2 coilspring provides. The bobcats foot may be too large for proper foot placement and a good catch. Guide sticks and stones can be used (Fig. 3). Bobcats prefer fresh baits such as rabbit, muskrat, or poultry. Scattered bits of fur and feathers work well. Bobcats can be drawn to traps by flags hung from trees or rocks located near trap sets (Fig. 4). Suspend flags about 4 feet (1.3 m) above the ground with fine wire or string. A combination of stiff wire with string attached to its end prevents entangling in tree branches. Where animal parts are illegal, aluminum foil or jar lids or imitation fur can be used. Location is the key to trapping bobcats. If the location is not correct, no flags or baits will work. A flag set uses a piece of fur or a couple of feathers suspended about 4 feet (120 cm) above ground with fine wire or string. Build a small mound of soil under the flag 1 foot (30 cm) high and 2 feet (60 cm) in diameter. Bobcats step onto these mounds to reach the flag. Bury steel leghold traps in the
Bobcats prefer areas with sufficient brush, timber, rocks, and other cover, and normally do not move far from these areas. Keep brush cut or sprayed around ranches and farmsteads to eliminate routes of connecting vegetation from bobcat habitat to potential predation sites.
Frightening
Use night lighting with white flashing lights, or bright continuous lighting, to repel bobcats. You can also use blaring music, barking dogs, or changes in familiar structures to temporarily discourage bobcats.
Repellents, Fumigants, and Toxicants
No chemical repellents, fumigants, or toxicants are currently registered for bobcats. Commercial house cat repellents might be effective in some very unusual circumstances. A hindrance to development of toxicants is the bobcats preference to feed on fresh kills.
Trapping
Bobcats are more easily trapped than are coyotes or foxes, but the bobcats reclusiveness makes set locations difficult to find. When hunting, bobcats use their sense of smell less than coyotes do, so lures and baits are usually not effective. The bobcats acute vision, hearing, and inquisitiveness however, can be capitalized upon. Even with the best sets, bobcats cannot
C-38
Bobcat trail
Fig. 3. Blind or trail set using guide sticks and stones.
Stones
(Traps bedded in ground) Pebbles
mound. Steel leghold traps can also be used in other sets. See instructions in the Mountain Lions chapter. Trash or mound sets take advantage of bobcats covering their scat and leftover food (Fig. 5). This set is very common. Pull up a pile of trash or litter over a large bait, to mimic bobcat behavior. A smaller mound can be made with urine poured over the trash. These sets are useful where exposed baits are illegal. Both sets should be used where backing such as rocks or trees are available. Place a steel leghold trap and guide sticks in front of trash pile sets.
Body-gripping Traps. Body-
gripping traps are very effective killer traps for eliminating bobcats. These kill traps are spring-loaded. When the trigger is released, the trap closes on the animal in a scissors-like action. An example of this type of trap is the Victor No. 330 Conibear. This trap, and others like it, can be very dangerous to use, breaking arms, or killing large dogs if improperly set. Check local regulations to determine if they are legal to use in your area. For bobcats, set these traps in trails at the base of a cliff or in brush. Use bait or lures beyond the trap to entice the bobcat to
walk through it. Strategic bait placement also keeps bobcats preoccupied. These sets can be made in dense cover in trails, at the entrances to dens, or at gaps in fences or brush where bobcats travel. These traps can also be set in entrances to cubbies constructed to trap bobcats. Place an attractive bait at the rear of the cubby and place the kill trap so that the bobcat must go through it to reach the bait. See Mountain Lions for other sets made with body-gripping traps. Specific instructions on trapping bobcats are found in Boddicker (1980). Extensive bobcat trapping methods can also be found in Weiland (1976), Young (1941), Johnson (1979), and Musgrave and Blair (1979). Check all local and state laws for using traps, snares, baits, or lures.
Wire Cage Traps. Very large cage
Flag (feathers, fur, tinsel)
Mound 1' high x 1 1/2' diameter Fig. 4. Flag set made with a buried steel leghold trap in a mound.
traps, made of wire mesh or metal, when properly set, are effective. Commercial traps from 15 x 15 x 40 inches (38 x 38 x 100 cm) up to 24 x 24 x 48 inches (60 x 60 x 120 cm) are available. See the Supplies and Materials chapter. Use brush or grass on the top and sides of the cage to give the appearance of a natural cubby or recess in a rock outcrop or brush. Traps should be set in the vicinity of depredations, travelways to and from bobcat cover,
T r a i l
Guide rocks or brush
Tree
Mound
Top view Partially exposed bait
Mound of trash
Trap Trail Fig. 5. Trash or scat mound set. 8"-10" from mound Side view
C-39
Brush or grass to cover outside of tunnel Hanging bait Woven wire or cribbing
Stakes to tie down tunnel Guiding brush
5' snare, one on each end of tunnel
Snare position
6"-8"
10"-12"
4'-5'
2'
Fig. 6. Cubby set with snare.
the furbearer season or for animals for which relocation has failed (Fig. 8). They are best made from fine steel cable, 1/16 inch (0.15 cm) or 5/64 inch (0.2 cm) in diameter. Positive locks work well. Set kill snares with the bottom of the loop about 10 to 12 inches (25 to 30 cm) off the ground with a loop 6 to 8 inches (15 to 20 cm) in diameter. This loop must be set perpendicular to the trail. Live snare sets capture and hold bobcats alive. They differ from kill snare sets by their cable size, locks, and entanglement precautions. Larger cables and relaxed locks on live snare sets can reduce injury if set properly. Relaxed locks tighten onto animals but relax as the animal stops struggling. This allows the animal to breath normally and regain composure. Set snares in trails where bobcats are known to travel (Fig. 7). Baits and lures are usually not used with snares and may hinder success. Use camouflage only to break up some of the outline of the snare, preferably with native material, like grasses. Do not tie camouflage material to the loop of the snare. Spring-loaded snares work best. Put memory into the snare by placing tension on the inside of the lock against the cable with your finger as you close the snare once or twice. This prevents a bobcat from walking through a snare. Cables respond to the memory by closing easily. Kill snares actually kill the captured bobcat and are most often used during Kill snares may be tied off to a 3-inch (7.5-cm) diameter tree or larger . To aid quick kills, hammer 2-foot (60-cm) stakes into the ground, leaving 6 to 8 inches (15 to 20 cm) aboveground. Killsnare locks (Gregerson, Camlock, Thompson, Keflock) are in several of the supply catalogs listed in Supplies and Materials. The live snare set (Fig. 9) requires more expertise than the kill snare set. Also, capture and transport of bobcats is very dangerous. Use 3/32-inch (0.25-cm) steel cable 6 to 8 feet (1.9 to 2.5 m) long. Use snares with high quality swivels located midway or closer to the loop. Stake live snares to the ground with steel stakes, hammered to just below ground level. Use loop sizes as in the kill snare set. Clear
Base of steep hill or rock outcrop fence with rocks, brush, grass
Fig. 7. Trail set with snare.
and around bobcat trails, dens, and hunting sites. Cover the cage bottom with soil. Bait the cage with poultry, rabbit, or muskrat carcasses, or live animals. Check local and state laws for restrictions.
Snares. Snares are very effective for bobcats but require expertise and caution. When properly set, a snare can be used to either kill or restrain a bobcat. Snares can be placed in the same locations and situations as body-gripping traps. They are particularly effective in cubby sets, bobcat runways, and den entrances (Fig. 6). Properly placed, snares offer the advantages of bodygripping traps without the danger to pets and nontarget wildlife. C-40
Kink in cable at lock on end of snare
To stake Place grass or brush on both sides of snare and guide to break up outline. Tree stump or brush permissible
6"-8" 2' tangle stakes
10"-12" Snare support wire Fig. 8. Kill snare with washer lock.
4"-6"
Stake at ground level
Grass fence
6"-8"
Stake at ground level
Total area surrounding stake is cleared of entanglements (rocks, brush, stumps)
10"-12"
Fig. 9. Live snare with washer lock.
C-41
brush and other entanglements from the area. Use extreme caution when releasing a snared animal. Catch poles with adjustable steel nooses, thick leather gloves or gauntlets, and other protective clothing are necessary. Immobilizing drugs such as ketamine hydrochloride should be accessible. Two people should handle captures; one at the neck and the other at the back feet to remove the snare. Cut a 1/2- x 4-inch (1.2- x 10-cm) slot from the bottom up toward the center of a 3- x 3-foot (1- x 1-m), 5/8-inch (1.6-cm) or larger piece of plywood. A handle should be attached at the upper end. Place the plywood between you and the snared animal and let the cable run through the slot as you approach, keeping the cable tight. Check live snare sets frequently to avoid unnecessary stress and loss of captured bobcats to predators, such as eagles, coyotes, and mountain lions. See Supplies and Materials for suppliers of bobcat snares. Always ask for expert advice before attempting live captures. Extensive instructions on snaring can be found in Grawe (1981) and Krause (1981).
Shooting
the kill. Rifles of .22 centerfire or larger, or shotguns with 1 1/4 ounces (35 g) or more of No. 2 or larger shot are recommended, since bobcats are rather large and require considerable killing power.

Bailey, T. N. 1974. Social organization in a bobcat population. J. Wildl. Manage. 38:435-446. Bailey, T. N. 1980. Factors of bobcat social organization and some management implications. Proc. Worldwide Furbearer Conf. 2:984-1000. Blair, C. 1981. Predator callers companion. Winchester Press, Tulsa, Oklahoma. 267 pp. Blum, L. G., and P. C. Escherich. 1979. Bobcat research conference proceedings, current research on biology and management of Lynx rufus. Natl. Wildl. Fed. Sci. Tech. Ser. 6 137 pp. Boddicker, M. L., (ed.). 1980. Managing Rocky Mountain furbearers. Colorado Trappers Assoc. LaPorte, Colorado. 176 pp. Clark, T. W., and M. R. Stromberg. 1987. Mammals in Wyoming. Univ. Kansas Museum Nat. Hist. 319 pp. Crowe, D. M. 1972. The presence of annuli in bobcat tooth cementum layers. J. Wildl. Manage. 36:1330-1332. Crowe, D. M. 1975a. A model for exploited bobcat populations in Wyoming. J. Wildl. Manage. 39:408-415. Crowe, D. M. 1975b. Aspects of aging, growth, and reproduction of bobcats from Wyoming. J. Mammal. 56:177-198. Deems, E. F., and D. Pursley, (eds.). 1983. North American furbearers a contemporary reference. Int. Assoc. Fish Wildl. Agencies and Maryland Dep. Nat. Resour., Annapolis. 223 pp. Fredrickson L. 1981. Bobcat management. South Dakota Conserv. Digest 48:10-13. Gluesing, E. A., S. D. Miller, and R. M. Mitchell. 1986. Management of the North American bobcat: information needs for nondetrimental findings. Trans. N. A. Wildl. Nat. Resour. Conf. 51:183-192. Grawe, A. 1981. Grawes snaring methods. Wahpeton, North Dakota. 48 pp. Johnson, C. 1979. The bobcat trappers bible. Spearman Publ. Sutton, Nebraska. 32 pp. Karpowitz, J. F., and J. T. Flinders. 1979. Bobcat research in Utaha progress report. Natl. Wildl. Fed. Sci. Tech. Ser. 6:70-73 Koehler, G. 1987. The bobcat. Pages 399-409 in R. L. De Silvestro, ed. Audubon Wildlife Report 1987. Natl. Audubon Soc., New York.

Damage by bobcats is rather uncommon and statistics related to this damage are not well developed. In western states where data have been obtained, losses of sheep and goats have comprised less than 10% of all predation losses. Typical complaints of bobcat predation involve house cats and poultry allowed to roam at will in mountain subdivisions and ranches. Bobcats are taken by trappers and by hunters using hounds. The pelts are used for coats, trim, and accessories, the spotted belly fur being most valuable. Bobcat pelts are used for wall decorations and rugs. In recent years, North American bobcat harvests have produced about 25,000 pelts valued at $2.5 million annually. Aesthetically, the bobcat is a highly regarded carnivore. To many people the bobcat represents the essence of wildness in any habitat it occupies.
Bobcats respond to predator calls at night and can be shot. Use a red, blue, or amber lens with an 80,000- to 200,000-candlepower (lumen) spotlight to locate bobcats. Sources of predator calls are found in Supplies and Materials. Dogs trained to track bobcats can be useful in removing problem animals. Bobcats can be shot after being treed. Bobcats may develop a time pattern in their depredations on livestock or poultry. You can lie in wait and ambush the bobcat as it comes in for
Acknowledgments
Thanks are due to Major Boddicker, who authored this chapter in the 1983 edition of this manual. The sections on identification, habitat, food habits, general biology, and economics were adapted from his work. Thanks also go to Bill Phillips, Arizona Game and Fish Department, and Chuck McCullough, Nebraska Game and Parks Commission, for their information. Figure 1 from Schwartz and Schwartz (1981). Figure 2 by Sheri Bordeaux. Figures 3 through 6, 8 and 9 by Denny Hogeland, adapted by Sheri Bordeaux. Figure 7 adapted from M. L. Boddicker, 1980.
C-42
Krause, T. 1981. Dynamite snares and snaring. Spearman Pub., Sutton, Nebraska. 80 pp. McCord, C. M., and L. E. Cardoza. 1982. Bobcat and lynx. Pages 728-768 in J. A. Chapman and G. A. Feldhamer, eds. Wild mammals of North America: biology, management, and economics. The Johns Hopkins Univ. Press, Baltimore, Maryland. Musgrave, B., and C. Blair. 1979. Fur trapping. Winchester Press, Tulsa, Oklahoma. 246 pp. Robinson, W. B. 1953. Population trends of predators and fur animals in 1080 station areas. J. Mammal. 34:220-227. Rue, L. 1981. Furbearing animals of North America. Crown Pub., New York. 343 pp. Sampson, F. W. 1967. Missouri bobcats. Missouri Conserv. 28:7. Schwartz, C. W., and E. R. Schwartz. 1981. The wild mammals of Missouri, rev. ed. Univ. Missouri Press, Columbia. 356 pp. Scott, J. 1977. On the track of the lynx. Colorado Outdoors 26:1-3. Wassmer, D. A., D. D. Guenther, and J. N. Layn. 1988. Ecology of the bobcat in south-central Florida. Bulls. Florida St. Museum, Biol. Sci. 33:159-228. Weiland, G. 1976. Long liner cat trapping. Garold Weiland, Pub. Glenham, South Dakota. 25 pp. Young, S. P. 1941. Hints on bobcat trapping. US Fish Wildl. Serv. Circ. No. 1, US Govt. Print. Off., Washington, DC. 6 pp. Young, S. P. 1958. The bobcat of North America. Stackpole Co., Harrisburg, Pennsylvania. 193 pp.
Editors
C-43
C-44
William D. Fitzwater
Director New Mexico Outdoor Communicators 7104 Bellrose Avenue, NE Albuquerque, New Mexico 87110
HOUSE CATS (Feral)
Fig. 1. House cat, Felis domesticus

Exclusion
Fumigants
Identification
The cat has been the most resistant to change of all the animals that humans have domesticated. All members of the cat family, wild or domesticated, have a broad, stubby skull, similar facial characteristics, lithe, stealthy movements, retractable claws (except the cheetah), and nocturnal habits. Feral cats (Fig. 1) are house cats living in the wild. They are small in stature, weighing from 3 to 8 pounds (1.4 to 3.6 kg), standing 8 to 12 inches (20 to 30.5 cm) high at the shoulder, and 14 to 24 inches (35.5 to 61 cm) long. The tail adds another 8 to 12 inches (20 to 30.5 cm) to their length. Colors range from black to white to orange, and an amazing variety of combinations in between. Other hair characteristics also vary greatly.

Trapping
Practical for protecting small poultry and mammals.

Cultural Methods
Box traps. No. 1, 1.5, or 2 leghold traps. No. 220 Conibear or body-gripping traps. Snares.
Shooting
Clean up debris, burn refuse and brush piles, seal buildings, reduce habitat and food sources.
Repellents
Many products are registered but are practical only for small areas.
Frightening
Centerfire rifles, .22 rimfire rifles, and shotguns are effective for quick removal.
Other Methods
Dogs.
Toxicants
Responsible care by cat owners.

C-45
Range
Cats are found in commensal relationships wherever people are found. In some urban and suburban areas, cat populations equal human populations. In many suburban and eastern rural areas, feral house cats are the most abundant predators.
Habitat
Feral cats prefer areas in and around human habitation. They use abandoned buildings, barns, haystacks, post piles, junked cars, brush piles, weedy areas, culverts, and other places that provide cover and protection.
Where documented, their impact on wildlife populations in suburban and rural areasdirectly by predation and indirectly by competition for food appears enormous. A study under way at the University of Wisconsin (Coleman and Temple 1989) may provide some indication of the extent of their impact in the United States as compared to that in the United Kingdom, where Britains five million house cats may take an annual toll of some 70 million animals and birds (Churcher and Lawton 1987). Feral cats occasionally kill poultry and injure house cats. Feral cats serve as a reservoir for human and wildlife diseases, including cat scratch fever, distemper, histoplasmosis, leptospirosis, mumps, plague, rabies, ringworm, salmonellosis, toxoplasmosis, tularemia, and various endo- and ectoparasites.
eliminating cat predation and nuisance. Provide overhead fencing to keep cats out of bird or poultry pens. Wire mesh with openings smaller than 2.5 inches (6.4 cm) should offer adequate protection.
Cultural Methods
Cat numbers can be reduced by eliminating their habitat. Old buildings should be sealed and holes under foundations plugged. Remove brush and piles of debris, bale piles, old machinery, and junked cars. Mow vegetation in the vicinity of buildings. Elimination of small rodents and other foodstuffs will reduce feral cat numbers.
Repellents
Food Habits
Feral cats are opportunistic predators and scavengers that feed on rodents, rabbits, shrews, moles, birds, insects, reptiles, amphibians, fish, carrion, garbage, vegetation, and leftover pet food.
Legal Status
Cats are considered personal property if ownership can be established through collars, registration tags, tattoos, brands, or legal description and proof of ownership. Cats without identification are considered feral and are rarely protected under state law. They become the property of the landowner upon whose land they exist. Municipal and county animal control agencies, humane animal shelters, and various other public and private pet management agencies exist because of feral or unwanted house cats and dogs. These agencies destroy millions of stray cats annually. State, county, and municipal laws related to cats vary. Before lethal control is undertaken, consult local laws. If live capture is desired, consult the local animal control agency for instructions on disposal of cats.

Feral cats produce 2 to 10 kittens during any month of the year. An adult female may produce 3 litters per year where food and habitat are sufficient. Cats may be active during the day but typically are more active during twilight or night. House cats live up to 27 years. Feral cats, however, probably average only 3 to 5 years. They are territorial and move within a home range of roughly 1.5 square miles (4 km2). After several generations, feral cats can be considered to be totally wild in habits and temperament.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has registered the following chemicals individually and in combination for repelling house cats: anise oil, methyl nonyl ketone, Ro-pel, and Thymol. There is little objective evidence, however, of these chemicals effectiveness. Some labels carry the instructions that when used indoors, disciplinary action must reinforce the repellent effect. Some repellents carry warnings about fabric damage and possible phytotoxicity. When used outdoors, repellents must be reapplied frequently. Outdoor repellents can be used around flower boxes, furniture, bushes, trees, and other areas where cats are not welcomed. Pet stores and garden supply shops carry, or can order, such repellents. The repellents are often irritating and repulsive to humans as well as cats.
Frightening
Damage
Feral cats feed extensively on songbirds, game birds, mice and other rodents, rabbits, and other wildlife. In doing so, they lower the carrying capacity of an area for native predators such as foxes, raccoons, coyotes, bobcats, weasels, and other animals that compete for the same food base.
C-46
Dogs that show aggression to cats provide an effective deterrent when placed in fenced yards and buildings where cats are not welcome.
Toxicants

Exclusion
No toxicants are registered for control of feral cats.

Fumigants
Exclusion by fencing, repairing windows, doors, and plugging holes in buildings is often a practical way of
No fumigants are registered for control of feral house cats. Live-trapped
cats or cats in holes or culverts can be euthanized with carbon dioxide gas or pulverized dry ice (carbon dioxide) at roughly 1/2 pound per cubic yard (0.3 kg/m3) of space.
Trapping Live Traps. Live-trapping cats in
commercial or homemade box traps (Fig. 2) is a feasible control alternative, particularly in areas where uncontrolled pets are more of a problem than wild cats. Trap openings should be 11 to 12 inches (28 to 30 cm) square and 30 inches (75 cm) or more long. Double-ended traps should be at least 42 inches (105 cm) long. The cat can be captured and turned over to animal control agencies without harm, given back to the owner with proper warnings, or euthanized by shooting, lethal injection, or asphyxiation with carbon dioxide gas. Sources for commercial traps are found in Supplies and Materials. Set live traps in areas of feral cat activity, such as feeding and loafing areas, travelways along fences, tree lines, or creeks, dumps, and garbage cans. Successful baits include fresh or canned fish, commercial cat foods, fresh liver, and chicken or rodent carcasses. Catnip and rhodium oil are often effective in attracting cats.
Leghold Traps. Leghold traps No. 1,
1 - Door up in grooves guiding its fall. 2 - Treadle board resting on a fulcrum. (Fulcrum made by nailing a small piece of wood across floor of trap. Weight of animal on back part of treadle depresses treadle, pulls back trigger wire and allows door to fall.) 3 - Trigger wire. (Three-gauge wire is connected to a screw eye at one side of treadle and back of fulcrum, extended along side of box to top of trap and passed through a second screw eye. When trap is set, door rests on the projecting end of trigger wire.) 4 - Back wall with 3-inch square opening. (Inside of opening is screened and provided with a tight door on outside to permit observation of captive animal and introduction of a fumigant for its disposal. Door is open when trap is set; closed when fumigant is introduced.) 5 - Uprights containing grooves in which door slides. (Grooves should be greased for easy action of door.)
Fig. 2a. Front and partial interior of box trap set.
1.5, or 2 are sufficient to catch and hold feral cats (Fig. 3). These traps are particularly useful on cats that are not susceptible to box traps. Place the traps in a shallow hole the size and shape of the set trap. Cover the pan with waxed paper and then cover the trap with sifted soil, sawdust, or potting soil. Place the bait material far enough beyond the trap that the cat must step on the trap to reach it. Traps can be set at entrances to holes where cats are hiding, entryways to buildings, or near garbage cans. Domestic cats caught in leghold traps should be handled with care. Cover the cat with a blanket, sack, or coat; pin it down with body weight; and release the trap. Catch poles can also be used to subdue trapped cats.
Conibear or Body-gripping Traps. Conibear or body-gripping
Groove for door
Bait Trigger wire End of trigger wire on which door rests when trap is set
Treadle board
Fulcrum Fig. 2b. Side view of cat trap.
traps are lethal traps that work like
C-47
double-jawed mouse traps. They should be set only where no other animals will get into them. The No. 220 size is most effective for cats. Set traps in front of culverts or entry holes, in garbage cans, or boxes with the bait Bait (inside) placed in the back (Fig. 3).
Snares. Snare sizes No. 1 and 2 are very effective as live traps or kill traps when set properly. Place snares in entrances to dens or crawlthroughs, in trails in weeds, or in garbage cans, boxes, or other restricted access arrangements where bait is placed (Fig. 4). Sources for snares are found in Supplies and Materials. Shooting
(place leghold trap instead of No. 220 Conibear at opening of box)
Wooden box
Stake
No. 220 Conibear
No. 1 Leghold
Feral cats can be shot with .22 rimfire and other calibers of centerfire rifles and shotguns in rural areas where it is safe. In buildings and urban areas, powerful air rifles are capable of killing cats with close-range head shots. Cats can be lured out of heavy cover for a safe shot by using predator calls, elevated decoys of fur or feathers, or meat baits.
Other Methods
Stake
Fig. 3. Cubby set (box set) with Conibear or leghold trap.
Supplemental feeding of feral or freeroaming house cats will probably have little effect in reducing their depredations on songbirds and other wildlife. Even well-fed cats will often bring home a small prey they have caught and proudly display it to their owners without eating it. Laboratory studies suggest that hunger and hunting are controlled by separate neurological centers in the cat brain, so the rate of predation is not affected by the availability of cat food. The hunter is often the hunted. Dogs and coyotes, which are adapting to urban environments, are probably the greatest predators of cats, next to humans and cars. Feral cats are often found on the borders of human habitation. Large predators such as bobcats, mountain lions, fox, coyotes, and feral dogs eliminate cats that stray too far afield.
Wrap wire in brush to obtain the proper height of snare loop. Clamp 14-gauge wire on snare cable here. Bend snare cable here. Dont let any brush touch the snare loop. Suspend the bottom of the loop 6 to 8 inches from the ground. The loop should be 6 to 8 inches in diameter.
6"-8" Cat trail 14-gauge wire
Fig. 4. Trail snare set
C-48
In the final analysis, many problems with feral cats could be avoided if cat owners would practice responsible pet ownership. The same licensing and leash laws pertaining to dogs should be applied to cats. Spaying or neutering should be encouraged for household pets not kept for breeding purposes. Neutering is not a costeffective program for controlling feral populations. Unwanted cats should be humanely destroyed, not abandoned to fend for themselves.
Acknowledgments
I wish to acknowledge M. L. Boddicker, who was the author of the House Cats chapter in the 1983 edition of Prevention and Control of Wildlife Damage. Figure 1 by Emily Oseas Routman. Figure 2 adapted from Boddicker (1978), Housecats in F. R. Henderson, Prevention and Control of Wildlife Damage, Kansas State Univ., Manhattan. Figure 3 by M. L. Boddicker, adapted by Jill Sack Johnson. Figure 4 courtesy of Gregerson Manufacturing Co., adapted by Jill Sack Johnson.
Coman, B. J., and H. Brunner. 1972. Food habits of the feral house cat in Victoria. J. Wildl. Manage. 36:848-853. Errington, P. L. 1936. Notes on food habits of southern Wisconsin house cats. J. Mammal. 17:64-65. Fitzwater, W. D. 1986. Extreme care needed when controlling cats. Pest Control 54:10. Jackson, W. B. 1951. Food habits of Baltimore, Maryland cats in relation to rat populations. J. Mammal. 32:458-461. Parmalee, P. W. 1953. Food habits of the feral house cat in east-central Texas. J. Wildl. Manage. 17:375-376. Remfry, J. 1985. Humane control of feral cats. Pages 41-49 in D. P. Britt, ed. Humane control of land mammals/birds. Univ. Fed. An. Welfare. United Kingdom. Rolls, E. C. 1969. They all ran wild: the story of pests on the land in Australia. Angus and Robertson, Sydney and London. 444pp. Tuttle, J. L. 1978. Dogs and cats need responsible owners. Univ. Illinois Coop. Ext. Serv. Circ. No. 1149. Warner, R. E. 1985. Demography and movements of free-ranging domestic cats in rural Illinois. J. Wildl. Manage. 49:340-346. Webb, C. H. 1965. Pets, parasites, and pediatrics. Pediatrics 36:521-522.

The place of cats in the modern urban world is certainly secure even though their reputation as rodent controllers has not been supported by objective research. Cats have replaced dogs as the most common family pet in the United States. Their owners support a growing segment of the economy in the pet food and pet supplies industries. On the other hand, feral cats are responsible for the transmission of many human and wildlife diseases and kill substantial amounts of wildlife.

Anonymous. 1974. Ecology of the surplus dog and cat problem. Proc. Natl. Conf. Am. Humane Assoc., Denver, Colorado. 128pp. Bisseru, B. 1967. Diseases of man acquired from his pets. Wm. Heinermann Medical Books, London. 482 pp. Boddicker, M. L. 1979. Controlling feral and nuisance house cats. Colorado State Univ. Ext. Serv., S.A. Sheet No. 6.508, Ft. Collins. Churcher, P. B., and J. H. Lawton. 1987. Predation by domestic cats in an English village. J. Zool. (London) 212:439-455. Coleman, J. S., and S. A. Temple. 1989. Effects of free-ranging cats on wildlife: a progress report. Proc. Eastern Wildl. Damage Control Conf. 4:9-12.
Editors
C-49
C-50
Jeffrey S. Green
Assistant Regional Director USDA-APHISAnimal Damage Control Lakewood, Colorado 80228

F. Robert Henderson
COYOTES
Extension Specialist Animal Damage Control Kansas State University Manhattan, Kansas 66506-1600
Mark D. Collinge
State Director USDA-APHISAnimal Damage Control Boise, Idaho 83705
Fig. 1. Coyote, Canis latrans

Exclusion
Shed lambing, kidding, and calving usually reduce coyote predation. Remove carrion to help limit coyote populations.
Frightening Agents and Repellents
Toxicants
Produce livestock in confinement. Herd livestock into pens at night. Exclusion fences (net-wire and/or electric), properly constructed and maintained, can aid significantly in reducing predation.
Cultural Methods and Habitat Modification
M-44 ejector devices for use with sodium cyanide-loaded plastic capsules. They are most effective during cold weather (fall to spring). Livestock protection collars (LPC) containing Compound 1080 (sodium monofluoroacetate) are registered for use only in certain states.
Fumigants
Guarding dogs: Some dogs have significantly reduced coyote predation. Donkeys and llamas: Some are aggressive toward canines and have reduced coyote predation. Sonic and visual repellents: Strobe lights, sirens, propane cannons, and others have reduced predation on both sheep and calves. Chemical odor and taste repellents: None have shown sufficient effectiveness to be registered for use.
Select pastures that have a lower incidence of predation to reduce exposure of livestock to predation. Herding of livestock generally reduces predation due to human presence during the herding period. Change lambing, kidding, and calving seasons.
Gas cartridges are registered as a burrow (den) fumigant.

Trapping
Leghold traps (Nos. 3 and 4) are effective and are the most versatile control tool. Snares are effective where coyotes pass through or under net-wire fences and in trail sets.

C-51
Shooting
Shooting from the ground is effective. Use rabbit distress calls or mimic howling or other coyote sounds to bring coyotes within shooting distance.
Aerial hunting is effective in removing coyotes where terrain, ground cover, vegetation, regulations, and landownership conditions permit. Hunting with dogs is effective for trailing coyotes from kill sites, locating dens, running coyotes, and assisting with aerial hunting or calling.
Other Methods
Denning: Remove adult coyotes and/ or their young from dens.
Identification
In body form and size, the coyote (Canis latrans) resembles a small collie dog, with erect pointed ears, slender muzzle, and a bushy tail (Fig. 1). Coyotes are predominantly brownish gray in color with a light gray to cream-colored belly. Color varies greatly, however, from nearly black to red or nearly white in some individuals and local populations. Most have dark or black guard hairs over their back and tail. In western states, typical adult males weigh from 25 to 45 pounds (11 to 16 kg) and females from 22 to 35 pounds (10 to 14 kg). In the East, many coyotes are larger than their western counterparts, with males averaging about 45 pounds (14 kg) and females about 30 pounds (13 kg). Coyote-dog and coyote-wolf hybrids exist in some areas and may vary greatly from typical coyotes in size, color, and appearance. Also, coyotes in the New England states may differ in color from typical western coyotes. Many are black, and some are reddish. These colorations may partially be due to past hybridization with dogs and wolves. True wolves are also present in some areas of coyote range, particularly in Canada, Alaska, Montana, northern Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Michigan. Relatively few wolves remain in the southern United States and Mexico.
Habitat
Many references indicate that coyotes were originally found in relatively open habitats, particularly the grasslands and sparsely wooded areas of the western United States. Whether or not this was true, coyotes have adapted to and now exist in virtually every type of habitat, arctic to tropic, in North America. Coyotes live in deserts, swamps, tundra, grasslands, brush, dense forests, from below sea level to high mountain ranges, and at all intermediate altitudes. High densities of coyotes also appear in the suburbs of Los Angeles, Pasadena, Phoenix, and other western cities.
weaker lambs are also present. Usually, the stronger lamb is on the periphery and is more active, making it more prone to attack than a weaker lamb that is at the center of the flock and relatively immobile. Coyote predation on livestock is generally more severe during early spring and summer than in winter for two reasons. First, sheep and cows are usually under more intensive management during winter, either in feedlots or in pastures that are close to human activity, thus reducing the opportunity for coyotes to take livestock. Second, predators bear young in the spring and raise them through the summer, a process that demands increased nutritional input, for both the whelping and nursing mother and the growing young. This increased demand corresponds to the time when young sheep or beef calves are on pastures or rangeland and are most vulnerable to attack. Coyote predation also may increase during fall when young coyotes disperse from their home ranges and establish new territories.
Food Habits
Coyotes often include many items in their diet. Rabbits top the list of their dietary components. Carrion, rodents, ungulates (usually fawns), insects (such as grasshoppers), as well as livestock and poultry, are also consumed. Coyotes readily eat fruits such as watermelons, berries, and other vegetative matter when they are available. In some areas coyotes feed on human refuse at dump sites and take pets (cats and small dogs). Coyotes are opportunistic and generally take prey that is the easiest to secure. Among larger wild animals, coyotes tend to kill young, inexperienced animals, as well as old, sick, or weakened individuals. With domestic animals, coyotes are capable of catching and killing healthy, young, and in some instances, adult prey. Prey selection is based on opportunity and a myriad of behavioral cues. Strong, healthy lambs are often taken from a flock by a coyote even though smaller,

Coyotes are most active at night and during early morning hours (especially where human activity occurs), and during hot summer weather. Where there is minimal human interference and during cool weather, they may be active throughout the day. Coyotes bed in sheltered areas but do not generally use dens except when raising young. They may seek shelter underground during severe weather or when closely pursued. Their physical abilities include good eyesight and
Range
Historically, coyotes were most common on the Great Plains of North America. They have since extended their range from Central America to the Arctic, including all of the United States (except Hawaii), Canada, and Mexico.
C-52
hearing and a keen sense of smell. Documented recoveries from severe injuries are indicative of coyotes physical endurance. Although not as fleet as greyhound dogs, coyotes have been measured at speeds of up to 40 miles per hour (64 km/hr) and can sustain slower speeds for several miles (km). Distemper, hepatitis, parvo virus, and mange (caused by parasitic mites) are among the most common coyote diseases. Rabies and tularemia also occur and may be transmitted to other animals and humans. Coyotes harbor numerous parasites including mites, ticks, fleas, worms, and flukes. Mortality is highest during the first year of life, and few survive for more than 10 to 12 years in the wild. Human activity is often the greatest single cause of coyote mortality. Coyotes usually breed in February and March, producing litters about 9 weeks (60 to 63 days) later in April and May. Females sometimes breed during the winter following their birth, particularly if food is plentiful. Average litter size is 5 to 7 pups, although up to 13 in a litter has been reported. More than one litter may be found in a single den; at times these may be from females mated to a single male. As noted earlier, coyotes are capable of hybridizing with dogs and wolves, but reproductive dysynchrony and behaviors generally make it unlikely. Hybrids are fertile, although their breeding seasons do not usually correspond to those of coyotes. Coyote dens are found in steep banks, rock crevices, sinkholes, and underbrush, as well as in open areas. Usually their dens are in areas selected for protective concealment. Den sites are typically located less than a mile (km) from water, but may occasionally be much farther away. Coyotes will often dig out and enlarge holes dug by smaller burrowing animals. Dens vary from a few feet (1 m) to 50 feet (15 m) and may have several openings. Both adult male and female coyotes hunt and bring food to their young for several weeks. Other adults associated with the denning pair may also help in
feeding and caring for the young. Coyotes commonly hunt as singles or pairs; extensive travel is common in their hunting forays. They will hunt in the same area regularly, however, if food is plentiful. They occasionally bury food remains for later use. Pups begin emerging from their den by 3 weeks of age, and within 2 months they follow adults to large prey or carrion. Pups normally are weaned by 6 weeks of age and frequently are moved to larger quarters such as dense brush patches and/or sinkholes along water courses. The adults and pups usually remain together until late summer or fall when pups become independent. Occasionally pups are found in groups until the breeding season begins. Coyotes are successful at surviving and even flourishing in the presence of people because of their adaptable behavior and social system. They typically display increased reproduction and immigration in response to human-induced population reduction.
the site. The quantity of sheep or calf remains left after a kill vary widely depending on how recently the kill was made, the size of the animal killed, the weather, and the number and species of predators that fed on the animal. One key in determining whether a sheep or calf was killed by a predator is the presence or absence of subcutaneous (just under the skin) hemorrhage at the point of attack. Bites to a dead animal will not produce hemorrhage, but bites to a live animal will. If enough of the sheep carcass remains, carefully skin out the neck and head to observe tooth punctures and hemorrhage around the punctures. Talon punctures from large birds of prey will also cause hemorrhage, but the location of these is usually at the top of the head, neck, or back. This procedure becomes less indicative of predation as the age of the carcass increases or if the remains are scanty or scattered. Coyotes, foxes, mountain lions, and bobcats usually feed on a carcass at the flanks or behind the ribs and first consume the liver, heart, lungs, and other viscera. Mountain lions often cover a carcass with debris after feeding on it. Bears generally prefer meat to viscera and often eat first the udder from lactating ewes. Eagles skin out carcasses on larger animals and leave much of the skeleton intact. With smaller animals such as lambs, eagles may bite off and swallow the ribs. Feathers and whitewash (droppings) are usually present where an eagle has fed. Coyotes may kill more than one animal in a single episode, but often will only feed on one of the animals. Coyotes typically attack sheep at the throat, but young or inexperienced coyotes may attack any part of the body. Coyotes usually kill calves by eating into the anus or abdominal area. Dogs generally do not kill sheep or calves for food and are relatively indiscriminate in how and where they attack. Sometimes, however, it is difficult to differentiate between dog and coyote kills without also looking at other sign, such as size of tracks (Fig. 2) and spacing and size of canine
C-53

Coyotes can cause damage to a variety of resources, including livestock, poultry, and crops such as watermelons. They sometimes prey on pets and are a threat to public health and safety when they frequent airport runways and residential areas, and act as carriers of rabies. Usually, the primary concern regarding coyotes is predation on livestock, mainly sheep and lambs. Predation will be the focus of the following discussion. Since coyotes frequently scavenge on livestock carcasses, the mere presence of coyote tracks or droppings near a carcass is not sufficient evidence that predation has taken place. Other evidence around the site and on the carcass must be carefully examined to aid in determining the cause of death. Signs of a struggle may be evident. These may include scrapes or drag marks on the ground, broken vegetation, or blood in various places around
tooth punctures. Coyote tracks tend to be more oval-shaped and compact than those of common dogs. Nail marks are less prominent and the tracks tend to follow a straight line more closely than those of dogs. The average coyotes stride at a trot is 16 to 18 inches (41 to 46 cm), which is typically longer than that of a dog of similar size and weight. Generally, dogs attack and rip the flanks, hind quarters, and head, and may chew ears. The sheep are sometimes still alive but may be severely wounded. Accurately determining whether or not predation occurred and, if so, by what species, requires a considerable amount of knowledge and experience. Evidence must be gathered, pieced together, and then evaluated in light of the predators that are in the area, the time of day, the season of the year, and numerous other factors. Sometimes even experts are unable to confirm the cause of death, and it may be necessary to rely on circumstantial information. For more information on this subject, refer to the section Procedures for Evaluating Predation on Livestock and Wildlife, in this book.
3"
5"
Coyote
Wolf
2 1/2"
4"
Legal Status
The status of coyotes varies depending on state and local laws. In some states, including most western states, coyotes are classified as predators and can be taken throughout the year whether or not they are causing damage to livestock. In other states, coyotes may be taken only during specific seasons and often only by specific methods, such as trapping. Night shooting with a spotlight is usually illegal. Some state laws allow only state or federal agents to use certain methods (such as snares) to take coyotes. Some states have a provision for allowing the taking of protected coyotes (usually by special permit) when it has been documented that they are preying on livestock. In some instances producers can apply control methods, and in others, control must be managed by a federal or state agent. Some eastern states consider the coyote a game animal, a furbearer, or a protected species.
C-54
Red fox Large dog Fig. 2. Footprints of canid predators
Federal statutes that pertain to wildlife damage control include the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), which deals with using toxicants, and the Airborne Hunting Act, which regulates aerial hunting. Laws regulating coyote control are not necessarily uniform among states or even among counties within a state, and they may change frequently. A 1989 Supreme Court action established that it was not legal to circumvent the laws relative to killing predators, even to protect personal property (livestock) from predation.

For managing coyote damage, a variety of control methods must be available since no single method is effective in every situation. Success usually involves an integrated approach, combining good husbandry practices with effective control methods for short periods of time. Regardless of the means used to stop damage, the focus should be on damage prevention and control rather than elimination of coyotes. It is neither wise nor practical to kill all coyotes. It is important to try to prevent coyotes from killing calves or sheep for the first time. Once a coyote has killed livestock, it will probably continue to do so if given the
opportunity. Equally important is taking action as quickly as possible to stop coyotes from killing after they start.
Exclusion
1/4" x 4 1/2" carriage bolt galvanized woven wire
Most coyotes readily cross over, under, or through conventional livestock fences. A coyotes response to a fence is influenced by various factors, including the coyotes experience and motivation for crossing the fence. Total exclusion of all coyotes by fencing, especially from large areas, is highly unlikely since some eventually learn to either dig deeper or climb higher to defeat a fence. Good fences, however, can be important in reducing predation, as well as increasing the effectiveness of other damage control methods (such as snares, traps, or guarding animals). Recent developments in fencing equipment and design have made this technique an effective and economically practical method for protecting sheep from predation under some grazing conditions. Exclusion fencing may be impractical in western range sheep ranching operations.
Net-Wire Fencing. Net fences in
69"
56"
72" galvanized fencing 6" stays 4" vertical spacing at top 1 1/2" at the bottom
3" treated pole 7' long
23" apron (old fencing)
28"
Fig. 3. Barrier fence with wire overhang and buried apron.
good repair will deter many coyotes from entering a pasture. Horizontal spacing of the mesh should be less than 6 inches (15 cm), and vertical spacing less than 4 inches (10 cm). Digging under a fence can be discouraged by placing a barbed wire at ground level or using a buried wire apron (often an expensive option). The fence should be about 5 1/2 feet (1.6 m) high to discourage coyotes from jumping over it. Climbing can usually be prevented by adding a charged wire at the top of the fence or installing a wire overhang. Barrier fences with wire overhangs and buried wire aprons were tested in Oregon and found effective in keeping coyotes out of sheep pastures (Fig. 3). The construction and materials for such fencing are usually expensive. Therefore, fences of this type are rarely used except around corrals, feedlots, or areas of temporary sheep confinement.
Electric Fencing. Electric fencing, used for years to manage livestock, has recently been revolutionized by the introduction of new energizers and new fence designs from Australia and New Zealand. The chargers, now also manufactured in the United States, have high output with low impedance, are resistant to grounding, present a minimal fire hazard, and are generally safe for livestock and humans. The fences are usually constructed of smooth, high-tensile wire stretched to a tension of 200 to 300 pounds (90 to 135 kg). The original design of electric fences for controlling predation consisted of multiple, alternately charged and grounded wires, with a charged trip wire installed just above ground level about 8 inches (20 cm) outside the main fence to discourage digging. Many recent designs have every wire charged.
The number of spacings between wires varies considerably. A fence of 13 strands gave complete protection to sheep from coyote predation in tests at the USDAs US Sheep Experiment Station (Fig. 4). Other designs of fewer wires were effective in some studies, ineffective in others. The amount of labor and installation techniques required vary with each type of fencing. High-tensile wire fences require adequate bracing at corners and over long spans. Electric fencing is easiest to install on flat, even terrain. Labor to install a high-tensile electric fence may be 40% to 50% less than for a conventional livestock fence. Labor to keep electric fencing functional can be significant. Tension of the wires must be maintained, excessive vegetation under the fence must be removed to prevent grounding, damC-55
Fiberglass line post
age from livestock and wildlife must be repaired, and the charger must be checked regularly to ensure that it is operational. Coyotes and other predators occasionally become trapped inside electric fences. These animals receive a shock as they enter the pasture and subsequently avoid approaching the fence to escape. In some instances the captured predator may be easy to spot and remove from the pasture, but in others, particularly in large pastures with rough terrain, the animal may be difficult to remove.
Electric Modification of Existing Fences. The cost to completely
66' Fiberglass stays 6'
22' 11'
Fiberglass line post Charged wire Ground wire
+ 8" - 8" + 8" - 8" + 8" + + + 8" 8" 8" 4" 4" 4" 4" Ground level Trip wire 8" 6" Note: Drawing not to scale
Fiberglass stay
Fig. 4. High-tensile, electric, antipredator fence.
replace old fences with new ones, whether conventional or electric, can be substantial. In instances where existing fencing is in reasonably good condition, the addition of one to several charged wires can significantly enhance the predator-deterring ability of the fence and its effectiveness for controlling livestock (Fig. 5). A charged trip wire placed 6 to 8 inches (15 to 230 cm) above the ground about 8 to 10 inches (20 to 25 cm) outside the fence is often effective in preventing coyotes from digging and crawling under. This single addition to an existing fence is often the most effective and economical way to fortify a fence against coyote passage. If coyotes are climbing or jumping a fence, charged wires can be added to the top and at various intervals. These wires should be offset outside the fence. Fencing companies offer offset brackets to make installation relatively simple. The number of additional wires depends on the design of the original fence and the predicted habits of the predators.
Outrigger post with four wires
Portable Electric Fencing. The
Fig. 5. Existing woven-wire livestock fence modified with electrified wire.
advent of safe, high-energy chargers has led to the development of a variety of portable electric fences. Most are constructed with thin strands of wire running through polyethylene twine or ribbon, commonly called polywire or polytape. The polywire is available in single and multiple wire rolls or as mesh fencing of various heights. It can be quickly and easily installed to serve
C-56
as a temporary corral or to partition off pastures for controlled grazing. Perhaps the biggest advantage of portable electric fencing is the ability to set up temporary pens to hold livestock at night or during other predator control activities. Portable fencing increases livestock management options to avoid places or periods of high predation risk. Range sheep that are not accustomed to being fenced, however, may be difficult to contain in a portable fence.
Fencing and Predation Management. The success of various types of
As a final note, fences can pose problems for wildlife. Barrier fences in particular exclude not only predators, but also many other wildlife species. This fact should be considered where fencing intersects migration corridors for wildlife. Ungulates such as deer may attempt to jump fences, and they occasionally become entangled in the top wires.
Cultural Methods and Habitat Modification
Counting sheep and calves regularly is important in large pastures or areas with heavy cover where dead livestock could remain unnoticed. It is not unusual for producers who do not regularly count their sheep to suffer fairly substantial losses before they realize there is a problem. Determining with certainty whether losses were due to coyotes or to other causes may become impossible.
Season and Location of Lambing or Calving. Both season and location
fencing in keeping out predators has ranged from poor to excellent. Density and behavior of coyotes, terrain and vegetative conditions, availability of prey, size of pastures, season of the year, design of the fence, quality of construction, maintenance, and other factors all interplay in determining how effective a fence will be. Fencing is most likely to be cost-effective where the potential for predation is high, where there is potential for a high stocking rate, or where electric modification of existing fences can be used. Fencing can be effective when incorporated with other means of predation control. For example, combined use of guarding dogs and fencing has achieved a greater degree of success than either method used alone. An electric fence may help keep a guarding dog in and coyotes out of a pasture. If an occasional coyote does pass through a fence, the guarding dog can keep it away from the livestock and alert the producer by barking. Fencing can also be used to concentrate predator activity at specific places such as gateways, ravines, or other areas where the animals try to gain access. Traps and snares can often be set at strategic places along a fence to effectively capture predators. Smaller pastures are easier to keep free from predators than larger ones encompassing several square miles (km2). Fencing is one of the most beneficial investments in predator damage control and livestock management where practical factors warrant its use.
At the present time, there are no documented differences in the vulnerability of various breeds of sheep to coyote or dog predation because there has been very little research in this area. Generally, breeds with stronger flocking behaviors are less vulnerable to predators. A possible cause of increased coyote predation to beef cattle calves is the increased use of cattle dogs in herding. Cows herded by dogs may not be as willing to defend newborn calves from coyotes as those not accustomed to herding dogs.
Flock or Herd Health. Healthy
sheep flocks and cow/calf herds have higher reproductive rates and lower overall death losses. Coyotes often prey on smaller lambs. Poor nutrition means weaker or smaller young, with a resultant increased potential for predation. Ewes or cows in good condition through proper nutrition will raise stronger young that may be less vulnerable to coyote predation.
Record Keeping. Good record-
of lambing and calving can significantly affect the severity of coyote predation on sheep or calves. The highest predation losses of sheep and calves typically occur from late spring through September due to the food requirements of coyote pups. In the Midwest and East, some lambing or calving occurs between October and December, whereas in most of the western states lambing or calving occurs between February and May. By changing to a fall lambing or calving program, some livestock producers have not only been able to diversify their marketing program, but have also avoided having a large number of young animals on hand during periods when coyote predation losses are typically highest. Shortening lambing and calving periods by using synchronized or group breeding may reduce predation by producing a uniform lamb or calf crop, thus reducing exposure of small livestock to predation. Extra labor and facilities may be necessary, however, when birthing within a concentrated period. Some producers practice early weaning and do not allow young to go to large pastures, thus reducing the chance of coyote losses. This also gives orphaned and weak young a greater chance to survive. The average beef cattle calf production is about 78% nationwide. First-calf heifers need human assistance to give birth to a healthy calf about 40% of the time. Cow/calf producers who average 90% to 95% calf crops generally check their first-calf heifers every 2 hours during calving. Also, most good producers place first-calf heifers in
C-57
keeping and animal identification systems are invaluable in a livestock operation for several reasons. From the standpoint of coyote predation, records help producers identify loss patterns or trends to provide baseline data that will help determine what type and amount of coyote damage control is economically feasible. Records also aid in identifying critical problem areas that may require attention. They may show, for example, that losses to coyotes are high in a particular pasture in early summer, thus highlighting the need for preventive control in that area.
small pastures (less than 160 acres [64 ha]). When all cows are bred to produce calves in a short, discreet (e.g. 60-day) period, production typically increases and predation losses decrease. The birth weight of calves born to first-calf heifers can be decreased by using calving-ease bulls, thus reducing birthing complications that often lead to coyote predation. Producers who use lambing sheds or pens for raising sheep and small pastures or paddocks for raising cattle have lower predation losses than those who lamb or calve in large pastures or on open range. The more human presence around sheep, the lower the predation losses. Confining sheep entirely to buildings virtually eliminates predation losses.
Corrals. Although predation can
Some producers reason that coyotes are less likely to kill livestock if there is carrion available. This may be a valid preventative measure if an adequate supply of carrion can be maintained far away from livestock. If a coyote becomes habituated to a diet of livestock remains, however, it may turn to killing livestock in the absence of carcasses. Wherever there is easily accessible carrion, coyotes seem to gather and predation losses are higher. Conversely, where carrion is generally not available, losses are lower. A study in Canada showed that the removal of livestock carcasses significantly reduced overwinter coyote populations and shifted coyote distributions out of livestock areas.
Habitat Changes. Habitat features change in some areas, depending on seasonal crop growth. Some cultivated fields are devoid of coyotes during winter but provide cover during the growing season, and a corresponding increase in predation on nearby livestock may occur.
nerable to coyote predation than those in closer, more open, and smaller pastures. In general, a relatively small, open, tightly fenced pasture that can be kept under close surveillance is a good choice for birthing livestock that are likely targets of coyotes. Past experience with predators as well as weather and disease considerations should also serve as guides in the selection of birthing pastures. A factor not completely understood is that, at times, coyotes and other predators will kill in one pasture and not in another. Therefore, changing pastures during times of loss may reduce predation. There may 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 arent used, daily or periodic checking of the livestock is a good husbandry practice. Frightening Devices and Repellents
occur at any time, coyotes tend to kill sheep at night. Confining sheep at night is one of the most effective means of reducing losses to predation. Nevertheless, some coyotes and many dogs are bold enough to enter corrals and kill sheep. A coyote-proof corral is a wise investment. Coyotes are more likely to attack sheep in unlighted corrals than in corrals with lights. Even if the corral fence is not coyote-proof, the mere fact that the sheep are confined reduces the risk of predation. Penning sheep at night and turning them out at mid-morning might reduce losses. In addition, coyotes tend to be more active and kill more sheep on foggy or rainy days than on sunny days. Keeping the sheep penned on foggy or rainy days may be helpful. Aside from the benefits of livestock confinement, there are some problems associated it. Costs of labor and materials associated with building corrals, herding livestock, and feeding livestock must be considered. In addition, the likelihood of increased parasite and disease problems may inhibit adoption of confinement as a method of reducing damage.
Carrion Removal. Removal and
The creation of nearly 40 million acres (16 million ha) of Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) acres may benefit many species of wildlife, including predators. These acres harbor prey for coyotes and foxes, and an increase in predator populations can reasonably be predicted. Clearing away weeds and brush from CRP areas may reduce predation problems since predators usually use cover in their approach to livestock. Generally, the more open the area where livestock are kept, the less likely that coyote losses will occur. Often junk piles are located near farmsteads. These serve as good habitat for rabbits and other prey and may bring coyotes into close proximity with livestock, increasing the likelihood for opportunistic coyotes to prey on available livestock. Removing junk piles may be a good management practice.
Pasture Selection. If sheep or beef
proper disposal of dead sheep and cattle are important since livestock carcasses tend to attract coyotes, habituating them to feed on livestock.
C-58
cattle are not lambed or calved in sheds or lots, the choice of birthing pastures should be made with potential coyote predation problems in mind. Lambs and calves in remote or rugged pastures are usually more vul-
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.
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 USDAs Denver Wildlife Research
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): 1. 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. 2. Position EGs so that rain water cannot enter them and cause a malfunction. 3. 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. 4. 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.
C-59
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.
5. Dont 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. 6. 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): 1. 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. 2. 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. 3. 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. 4. 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
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 live-
stock 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
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
C-60
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 producers responsibility.
Fig. 7. Livestock guarding dog (Akbash dog)
scattered and bedded in a number of locations. 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 cant escape. This socialization period should continue with daily checks from the producer until the pup is about 16 weeks old. Daily checks dont 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 dogs 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 foolproofone 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
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 donkeys 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
C-61
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: 1. 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. 2. 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. 3. 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. 4. Avoid feeds or supplements containing monensin or lasolacid. They are poisonous to donkeys. 5. Remove the donkey during lambing, particularly if lambing in confinement, to avoid injuries to lambs or disruption of the lamb-ewe bond. 6. Test a new donkeys response to canids by challenging it with a dog in a pen or small pasture. Discard donkeys that dont show overt aggression to an intruding dog. 7. 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.
C-62
Llamas. Like donkeys, llamas have an
Toxicants
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. USDAs 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.
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 states department of agriculture.
Sodium Cyanide in the M-44. The
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.
M-44 is a spring-activated device used to expel sodium cyanide into an animals 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
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 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
Fig. 8. The M-44 device consists of the (a) base, (b) ejector, (c) capsule holder, and (d) cyanidecontaining plastic capsule.
spring-activated plunger propels sodium cyanide into the animals mouth, resulting in death within a few seconds. 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
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.
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.
C-63
Trapping
7.
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:
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.
8. 9.
1. 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. 2. Decide where to place the trap sets. Always place them in an open, flat area because of wind currents, dispersion of scent, and visibility. Never place traps uphill or downhill from the coyotes expected path of approach. Look for open places where coyote tracks indicate that the animal milled around or stopped. 3. Place the set upwind from the path (or site of coyote activity) so the prevailing wind will carry the scent across the area of expected coyote activity. 4. Choose a level spot as close as possible to, but not directly on, the coyotes path. The coyotes approach should never be over dry leaves, tall grass, stones, sticks, weeds, or rough ground. Make each set where the coyote has clear visibility as it approaches. 5. Place the set using two No. 3 traps with a cold-shut chain repair link affixed to the top of a steel stake. The link should swivel around the stake top. The stake should be at least 18 inches (46 cm) long, or longer if the soil is loose. Use two stakes set at an angle to each other if the soil will not hold with a single stake. Figures 9 through 29 illustrate the procedures for making a set.
10. 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.
1. 2.
One 5-gallon (19-l) plastic bucket to carry equipment. Two No. 3 or No. 4 traps per set.
3. One 18- to 24-inch (46- to 61-cm) stake for holding both traps in place. 4. 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.
5. 6.
Fig. 9. A piece of canvas, about 3 feet x 6 feet, used as a kneeling cloth, makes preparing the trap site much easier.
Fig. 10. Kneel down on the cloth and outline a trench approximately 3 feet long, 7 inches wide, and 2 inches deep. Dig the trench so that it runs lengthwise to the prevailing wind.
C-64
Fig 11. Dig out the soil with tools and by hand.
Fig 14. Compress this spring below the jaw hinge, then bend the spring as shown above.
Fig. 12. Pile the excavated soil from the trench on the kneeling cloth.
Fig 15. Hold the compressed spring with your right leg as shown above, then compress the left spring. Hold this spring down with your left hand.
Fig. 13. Place one of the traps on your left leg just above your knee. Grasp the trap spring nearest your right leg as shown, and compress the spring.
Fig. 16. Carefully spread the jaws. Reach under the jaws with your left hand, holding the pan up while you ease the two springs tension so that the trap will remain set.
C-65
Fig. 17. Twist the springs back toward the trigger. Always set the trap in the ground so that the animal walks into it over the jaw that is nearest to the bottom of the trench, as shown above.
Fig 20. Take out or add soil until the trap pan and jaws are about 1/2 inch below the level of the surrounding ground. Build a ridge for the jaw opposite the trigger to sit on. On the side of the trap that has the trigger, place soil under the trap pan cover on either side of the trigger to hold the pan cover up tight against the bottom of the jaws.
Fig. 18. Drive a steel stake into the center of the trench so that the top of the stake is even with the bottom of the trench. Place one of the set traps at each end of the trench. Place the trap so it sits solidly and will not tip if the coyote steps on the spring or jaws.
Fig 21. Stretch the pan cover tightly across the pan and under the jaws. Pan and jaws should be level and flat. In cold weather, plastic can be placed under the trap. Place plastic baggies on each spring and mix table salt with dry soil or peat moss to cover the trap. Set the other trap as shown above. Place the pan cover so that the dog or trigger can move upward without binding it in. Anything that slows the action of the trap can cause a miss or a toe hold.
Fig. 19. Place canvas, plastic, screen, cloth, wax paper, or a similar material over the pan and under the trap jaws. Be sure the pan sits level with the trap jaws.
Fig. 22. Use a sifter of 1/4-inch hail screen on a wood frame, 7 inches by 10 inches and 2 inches deep. Sift soil from the canvas kneeling cloth over the set, covering the entire trench back to ground level (except directly over the traps).
C-66
Fig. 23. The trap should be set about 1/4 inch below the level of the surrounding ground. The set must look natural. The soil around the trap and over the springs, chains, and stake should be packed to the same firmness as the ground the coyote walks on in its approach to the set. Only soft soil should be directly over the trap pan within the set jaw area. Use a curved stick, brush, or rib bone to level soil over the trap.
Fig. 26. Carefully brush out all tracks and signs of activity.
Fig. 24. Place an object over the buried stake that can be easily seen; the further away it can be seen, the better. Use an old, dried bleached bone, a dried cow chip, a small bush or clump of grass, an old dried root, a small stake, or a stump. The object should be about 6 to 8 inches high and be very visible.
Fig. 27. Use the canvas kneeling cloth to carry away all loose soil. This cloth can also be used to carry soil to the set. In summer it is a good idea to store fine dry soil for use in winter. You can often locate dry soil in wet weather under bridges, on cut banks, or in old sheds.
Fig. 25. Place a tablespoon of coyote urine on the projection. When smelling the scent and seeing the projection, the coyote will likely walk directly into the wind and step into a trap as it approaches the projection. A coyote dropping placed nearby will improve the set.
Fig. 28. Discard the material removed from the trap site.
C-67
gripping traps are dangerous and illegal in some states for catching coyotes. When pet dogs might be present, use a padded-jaw No. 3 double coilspring trap. While additional testing needs to be conducted, results of research to reduce injury using padded-jaw traps have been encouraging. In tests with No. 3 Soft-Catch coilsprings, No. 3 NM longsprings, and No. 4 Newhouse longsprings, capture rates for coyotes were 95%, 100%, and 100%, respectively. Soft-Catch traps caused the least visible injury to captured coyotes.
Anchoring Traps. Chain swivels are necessary for trapping coyotes. One swivel at the stake, one in the middle of the chain, and one at the trap are recommended. Drags (Fig. 30) instead of stakes can be used where there is an abundance of brush or trees or where the ground is too rocky to use a stake. Use a long chain (5 feet [1.5 m] or more) on a drag. Lures and Scents. Coyotes are interested in and may be attracted to odors in their environment. Commercially available lures and scents or natural odors such as fresh coyote, dog, or cat droppings or urine may produce good results. Coyote urine works the best. Problems in Trapping Coyotes.
Fig. 29. Leave the trap area as near to its original condition as possible. The coyotes keen sense of sight and smell will quickly alert it to danger.
Always bury the traps and stake in the ground using dry, finely sifted soil. One of the most difficult aspects of using traps is trapping when the ground is frozen, muddy, wet, or damp. If the weather is expected to turn cold and/or wet, you should use one or a combination of the following materials in which to set and cover the traps: Canadian sphagnum peat moss, very dry soil, dry manure, buckwheat hulls, or finely chopped hay. A mixture of one part table salt or calcium chloride with three parts dry soil will prevent the soil from freezing over the trap. When using peat moss or other dry, fluffy material, cover the material with a thin layer of dry soil mixed with 1/4 teaspoon of table salt. This will blend the set with the surrounding soil and prevent the wind from blowing peat moss away from the trap. As an alternative, traps could be set in a bed of dry soil placed over the snow or frozen ground.
Guiding Coyote Footsteps. Use a few strategically placed dirt clods, sticks, small rocks, or stickers around the set to guide the coyotes foot to the traps. Coyotes will tend to avoid the obstacles and place their feet in bare areas. Do not use this method to the extent that the set looks unnatural. Care of Coyote Traps. New traps
traps are available from trapping supply outlets. Some trappers also wax their traps to prevent them from rusting and to extend the life of the traps. Inevitably, rusting will occur when traps are in use. It does not harm the traps, but after their continued use the rust often will slow the action of the trap and cause it to miss a coyote. Traps also become contaminated with skunk musk, gasoline, oil, blood, or other odors. It is important that traps be clean and in good working condition. Rusted traps should be cleaned with a wire brush to ensure that the trigger and pan work freely. Check the chain links for open links. File the triggers and receivers to eliminate all rounded edges. Make any adjustments necessary so that the pan will sit level and the trap perform smoothly.
Size of Traps for Coyotes. There
can be used to trap coyotes, but better results may be obtained by using traps that have been dyed. Dyeing traps helps prevent rust and removes odors. Wood chips or crystals for dyeing
C-68
are many suitable traps for catching coyotes. Both the No. 3 and No. 4 are good choices. Many trappers prefer a No. 3 coilspring round-jawed off-set trap. It is a good idea to use superweld kinkless chain. The length of chain varies depending on whether the trap is staked or a drag is used. A longer chain should be used with a drag. The off-set jaws are designed to reduce broken foot bones, which can allow the coyote to escape by wriggling out of the trap. Traps with coil springs are good coyote traps, but they require more upkeep than a double longspring trap. The type and size of trap may be regulated in each state. Body
A great deal of experience is required to effectively trap coyotes. Trapping by experienced or untrained people may serve to educate coyotes, making them very difficult to catch, even by experienced trappers. Coyotes, however, exhibit individualized patterns of behavior. Many, but not all, coyotes become trap-shy after being caught and then escaping from a trap. There is a record of one coyote having been caught eight times in the same set. Some coyotes require considerably more time and thought to trap than others. With unlimited time, a person could trap almost any coyote. If a coyote digs up or springs a trap without getting caught, reset the trap in the same place. Then carefully set one or two traps near the first set. Use gloves and be careful to hide the traps. Changing scents or using various
Killing a Trapped Coyote. A coyote

Drag hook with S link for coyote traps
Mild steel rod 5/16" diameter 8" long
1 1/2" offset twist Side view
Mild steel rod 7/16" diameter about 28" long
10 1/2"
will make its most desperate attempt to get out of the trap as a person approaches. As soon as you get within a few feet (m) of the coyote, check to see that the trap has a firm hold on the coyotes foot. If so, shoot the coyote in the head, with a .22 caliber weapon. It is often a good idea to reset the trap in the same place. The blood from the coyote will not necessarily harm the set as long as it is not on the trap or on the soil over the reset traps. Reset the trap regardless of the species of animal captured, skunks included.
Draw Stations. Draw stations are natural areas or places set up intentionally to draw coyotes to a particular location. For example, the straw and cleanings from a chicken house can be placed in an area where coyote tracks are found. Traps can then be set around the edges of the straw. Areas around carcasses or parts of animals, such as a cows head, are good places to set traps. Wire the carcass to a stake driven into the ground and out of sight. Once coyotes start feeding, set traps 30 to 60 feet (9 to 18 m) upwind from the carcasses or draw station. Never set traps very close to carcasses because nontarget animals such as vultures, eagles, hawks, skunks, and opossums will be caught. If sheep graze in an area where traps are set, cover the traps with a disc blade or brush during the day and uncover them at night when the sheep are penned. Opposition to Traps. Opposition to
About 1" weld on both sides
Points sharpened and given 1 1/2" offset twist
7"
Fig. 30. Trapping drag
tricks, such as a lone feather as a visual attraction near a set, or a ticking clock in a dirt hole set as an audible attraction, may help in trying to catch wary coyotes.
Resetting Traps and Checking Trap Sets. Once a coyote is caught at
a set, reset the trap in the same place. The odor and disturbance at the set where a coyote has been caught will often attract other coyotes. Sometimes other coyotes will approach but not enter the circle where the coyote was caught. If signs indicate that this has happened, move the trap set outside of the circle. Leave all sets out for at least 2 weeks before moving the traps to a new location. Check the traps once every 24 hours, preferably in the morning around 9 or 10 oclock. Reapply the scent every 4 days, using 8 to 10 drops of coyote urine.
Human Scent and Coyote Trapping. Minimize human scent around
are being set in warm months, make sure the trapper has recently bathed, has clean clothes, and is not sweating. Leave no unnecessary foreign odors, such as cigarette butts or gum wrappers, near the set. Wear clean gloves and rubber footwear while setting traps. A landowner may have an advantage over a stranger who comes to set traps since the coyotes are acquainted with the landowners scent and expect him/her to be there. Coyotes have been known to leave an area after encountering an unfamiliar human scent. Because of human scent, coyotes are more difficult to catch with traps in wet or humid weather. Wear gloves, wax traps, and take other precautionary measures in areas where humans are not commonly present, where wet weather conditions are common, and where coyotes have been trapped for several years and have learned to avoid traps.
trap sets as much as possible. If traps
foothold traps is based primarily on two objections: (1) a lack of selectivity for the animal which the trap is set for and (2) foot injury sustained by the captured animal. Trap pan tension devices such as sticks, forked twigs, springs, and sponges placed under the trap pan have been used for many years to reduce captures of nontarget species. Many coyote traps have an adjustable pan tension screw. One study evaluated two pan tension devices. Preliminary results indicated that the use of either device could exclude nearly 90% of the gray foxes, swift foxes, striped skunks, opossums, and jackrabbits that stepped on traps,
C-69
Swivel
Wrap snare around snare support
Slide lock
U-shaped snare support
2.5' to 10' galvanized aircraft cable
Bend snare to prevent wind from closing it
Fig. 31. Coyote snare
Fig. 33. Setting the snare
Cable, NOT wire, holds snare to stake 36" galvanized No. 9 wire
Notched driving rod V bend prevents movement 1/2" rebar stake
Fig. 32. Driving the support wire
Fig. 34. Fastening the snare to the stake
as compared with 24% on average for unequipped traps. A variety of other species were excluded at even higher rates. Some coyotes were also excluded, but because more traps remained functional, the net result appeared to be an increase in coyote trapping efficiency. Advances in trap design, including off-set jaws and padded-jaw traps, have increased the humaneness of foothold traps. Traps should be checked once or twice each day to minimize the length of time that an animal must remain in a trap.
Snares
capture it by the neck, body, or leg. Snares usually consist of a 2.5- to 10foot (0.75- to 3.0-m) long piece of galvanized aircraft cable containing a slide lock that forms a loop in the cable (Fig. 31). On short snares, a swivel to prevent twisting and breaking the cable is attached to the end of the cable opposite the loop. On longer snares, swivels can be located near the middle of the cable and at one end. Snares offer several advantages over steel foothold traps. They are lightweight, compact, simple in function, affected little by weather, easy to set, low in cost, and offer a high degree of human safety. In a south Texas study,
snares were 10 times more selective over steel foothold traps for target species of coyotes and bobcats. Snares, however, can be a greater hazard than traps to livestock. Recent research has produced deer stops and break-away or relaxing locks that have significantly improved snare specificity.
Preparation of Snares. New commercial snares and extension cables can be cleaned by boiling each dozen snares in a pan or bucket of water with 4 tablespoons (16 gm) of baking soda for one hour. The snares will turn a dull gray after being removed from this bath and hung up to dry outdoors. Darken snares by boiling them in
Snaring is the technique of setting a steel-cable loop in an animals path to

C-70
Keep slide clear of fence
7" to 10" diameter round loop
ing. A lead cable that is at least as strong as the snare cable can be used to attach short snares to the rebar stake. Avoid using 9-gauge (0.38-cm) wire or several strands of 14-gauge (0.21-cm) wire to anchor snares to a rebar stake because they may bend back and forth, crystallize, and break. When used for coyotes, snares also can be secured to a dead tree limb that is at least 6 inches (15 cm) in diameter and 6 feet (2 m) long. Snares set in holes under woven-wire fences can be held in place about 1 to 2 inches (2.5 to 5 cm) from the fence with the snare support system (Fig. 35). The snare should be set far enough away from the fence to prevent the lock from catching on the bottom wire of the fence. The bottom of the loop should be about 2 inches (5 cm) above the bottom of the hole. The snares can be anchored to the heavy-gauge wire on the bottom of the fence. Two strands of baling wire or S hooks can be used to fasten the snare to the bottom wire. If there is a chance of accidentally catching a pet dog, a leg snare set is recommended (Fig. 36). Set a small loop about 5 inches (13 cm) or less to one side of the opening, and set the bottom of the loop on the ground. When a coyote goes under a fence, it places both front feet firmly on the ground, and sticks its head just under the bottom wire. Once its head is past the bottom wire, the coyote begins to raise its head. The idea is to set the leg snare so that one front foot will pass through the snare. Snares are usually set in the form of a round or oval loop. In a trail set (Fig. 37), a round loop that is 12 inches (30 cm) in diameter can form an oval loop that is about 14 inches (36 cm) high and 10 inches (25 cm) wide. Use a 5/64- or 3/32-inch (0.2- or 0.24-cm) diameter galvanized aircraft cable for snaring coyotes. Varying round loop diameters and heights above ground is recommended when snaring coyotes (Table 1). The loop size in a hole in a fence should vary depending upon the size of the hole.
About 2"
Fig. 35. Snare set for woven wire
Small loop (about 5")
Loop on ground to side of opening
Fig. 36. Leg snare set
brown logwood crystals and dye. After boiling, snares should be kept clean of foreign odors. Wear clean gloves when handling and setting snares.
How to Set Snares. Snares designed
to capture predators by the neck or leg are set directly in the animals path of movement and are held in place using various techniques. One support that works particularly well can be constructed from a 36-inch (0.9-m) piece of 12-gauge galvanized or 9-gauge soft wire. Form a V bend in the support wire, about 4 inches (10 cm) from the end, and drive the wire into the ground with a notched rod (Fig. 32) to
prevent the support from moving in the wind. Wrap the snare around the support about three times and hold it in place with a U bend formed in the upper end of the snare support. Bend the snare cable upward slightly, just inside the lock, to ensure that the snare loop is not closed by the wind (Fig. 33). Snares should be attached to a solid object so that captured animals cannot escape (Fig. 34). A steel 1/2-inch (1.3cm) diameter rebar, 24 to 30 inches (61 to 72 cm) long (depending on soil hardness), makes a good anchor for coyotes and smaller predators. Attach snares to the rebar with a strong swivel to prevent tangling and break-
C-71
Table 1.Specific loop dimensions for snaring coyotes.

Round loop diameter in inches (cm) 9-12 7-10 (23-30) (18-25) Height of loop above ground in inches (cm) 10-12 2 (25-30) (5)
Type of set Trail Under fence
Where to Set Snares. Animals usu-
ally follow the easiest route through heavy cover. These routes, which generally consist of trails, are excellent locations to snare predators. Snares are effective along trails leading to draw stations. Some effective locations for snaring coyotes include: (1) along trails in thickets or heavy vegetation leading to a carcass, (2) on trails under fences, (3) on livestock trails in vacant pastures, (4) in the bottoms of ravines, and 5) on narrow paths inside weeds or brush. Trails can be created by driving on weeds or stubble with a pickup, by walking in snow, or by mowing a trail through weeds or grass with a weed eater.
Regulations for Snaring. Snares
Not more than 1"
Eye guide points
Steel stake Eye guide points No. 9 extension cable (NOT wire)
9" to 12"
10" to 12"
Trail Fig. 37. Trail snare set
are not legal in all states. Where snares are legal, most states have regulations which require that snares be visually inspected every 24 hours. Snares should be checked early in the morning to increase the probability of releasing nontarget animals unharmed.
Methods to Avoid Capturing Nontarget Animals. Sites where snares
are set should be carefully selected to avoid capturing nontarget animals. Avoid setting snares: (1) in pastures with livestock, (2) within 25 yards (23 m) of animal carcasses (to prevent capturing birds of prey and other scavengers), (3) within major deer, elk, or antelope wintering areas (these big game animals are much less susceptible to foothold traps), (4) on any trails being used by livestock, deer, elk, and other nontarget animals (attract predators away from these trails with specific baits and lures), (5) under fences where livestock, antelope, deer, or nontarget dogs are using the crawl space, and (6) where people can readily view captured animals.
Use a short snare cable to reduce injuries where accidentally captured dogs might jump over a fence or a tree branch. Also avoid using entangling devices (attachments that increase the chance of killing the snared animal) where dogs might be captured. Use the lightest snare lock (breakaway lock) possible to capture the desired animal. If livestock, deer, elk, or antelope are captured by a leg, they can usually break a light lock but may be held by heavy locks. Record the location and number of snares on a map so they can be found, and remove all snares when damage stops or when they cannot be checked frequently.
Shooting
Shooting coyotes is legal in many situations, and it often ranks high among the choices for removing a predator. Safety, however, is a critical factor that in some circumstances may preclude the use of firearms (for example, local laws may prohibit shooting, or neighbors may be too close).
For shooting coyotes, a mediumpowered bolt-action rifle fitted with a scope is recommended. The .223 Remington, .22-250, .220 Swift, or the .243 Winchester are all capable of killing a coyote up to a distance of 250 yards (225 m). Since coyotes are able to detect human scent, the shooter should take a stand downwind from where the coyote will likely approach. An elevated location where the lighting works to the shooters advantage is a good choice. If predators are killing sheep in the daytime, construct a comfortable blind at a vantage point in the pasture where the killing has occurred. Whenever possible, rest the rifle on a solid support while aiming. A homemade shooting stick will improve accuracy over shooting freehand. A shotgun, preferably a 12-gauge semi-automatic, can be used for shooting at short range (less than 50 yards [45 m]). Often it is advisable to have both a 12-gauge shotgun and a scoped rifle available. Copper-coated (BB) lead shot, No. 4 buckshot (lead), and in newer shotguns, the larger-sized steel shot works well for killing coyotes.
C-72
Shooting From Ground Vehicles. Shooting from vehicles (snowmobiles, motorcycles, and pickups) in open, flat prairie country can be effective and provide immediate results. Under most circumstances, however, this method is not practical as it requires keen driving skills, is dangerous, and is illegal in most states. Calling and Shooting Coyotes.
have successfully evaded traditional ground control methods such as trapping. Fixed-wing aerial hunting is limited primarily to open areas with little vegetative cover. The greater maneuverability of helicopters makes them more useful for hunting in areas of brush, scattered timber, and rugged terrain. Although aerial hunting can be conducted over bare ground, it is most effective where there is deep snow cover. Animals are more visible against a background of snow and are much less mobile in their attempts to avoid the aircraft. Under optimal conditions of clear, sunny skies and fresh snow cover, much of the hunting can be accomplished by searching for and following fresh coyote tracks. Aerial hunting success can be increased when conducted with the assistance of a ground crew. Before the plane arrives, a ground crew can locate coyotes in the hunting area by eliciting howls with a siren, a mouth-blown howler call, or a voice howl. Two-way radio communication allows the ground crew to direct the aircraft toward the sound of the coyotes, thus reducing hunting time. Aerial hunting is not recommended for, nor undertaken by, most livestock producers because of the special skills required of both pilot and gunner and the danger inherent with the low-level flight. Although weather, terrain, and state laws limit the application of this method, it can often provide a prompt resolution to depredation problems.
Denning
intruders. Coyotes often den year after year in the same general location. If a particular denning pair of coyotes has a history of existing with and not preying on livestock, it may be to the producers advantage to leave them alone. Their removal will open up a territory that may become occupied with coyotes that are more likely to prey on livestock. Although tracking a coyote from a livestock kill back to its den requires skill and persistence, it is probably the most foolproof method to locate the den of the offending animals. If tracking is not feasible because of poor tracking conditions or lack of the required skills, there are alternatives that may be used. Coyotes will usually howl in response to a howl from another coyote near their den. One or both adult coyotes will often be near the den between 7:30 to 9:00 a.m. A response can be elicited by voice howling, blowing a coyote howler call, or broadcasting recorded calls from a tape player. It is usually best to wait 30 minutes to 1 hour between howls because the same coyotes may not respond again within that period. Once the approximate location of a den is determined, careful planning is required to ensure the best chance of immediately removing the adult coyotes. The hunter should approach the den unseen and downwind to within calling distance, armed with a high powered rifle and/or repeating shotgun loaded with heavy shot. A call that imitates the whines or yelps of a coyote pup can be very effective under these circumstances, especially when used in conjunction with a dog to act as a decoy. A small- to medium-sized dog moving in the vicinity of the den gives the coyotes something to focus on and reduces the likelihood that the hunter will be detected. The sounds of a pup in distress along with the sight of a dog so near the den will cause most coyotes to display highly aggressive behavior, frequently chasing the dog back to within close proximity of the hunter.
Coyotes may respond to predator calls. Calling, like other methods of predation control, should be used sparingly and only when needed. Coyotes can be called at any time of the day although the first couple of hours after dawn and the last few hours before darkness are usually best. Call in areas where there are signs of coyotes, such as tracks or droppings. In some situations, coyotes can be located by listening to their howling at sundown and sunrise. Some hunters use sirens to elicit howls from coyotes. Often a voice imitation of a coyote howl works as well. Coyotes often come to a howl without howling back, so the prudent hunter is always ready to shoot.
Hunting at Night. Not many people
have witnessed predators killing livestock because it usually occurs at night, away from human activity. As stated previously, calling and shooting predators at night is illegal in many states. Where legal, however, hunting at night with the use of artificial lights may be effective. Red or blue light tends to spook predators less readily than white light does. Calling without the use of artificial lights is effective only with snow cover and the light of a full moon.
Aerial Hunting. The use of aircraft for shooting coyotes is strictly regulated by the provisions of the Airborne Hunting Act and is allowed only under special permit in states where legal. Aerial hunting is selective and allows taking only the target species. Although it is costly, it may be one of the most cost-effective methods of reducing predator damage when all factors are considered. It is often the best method where conditions are right for removing depredating animals that
Predation can frequently be resolved by locating coyote dens and removing the pups and/or the adults responsible for depredations. Denning may also be warranted as a preventive control strategy if coyote predation has historically and consistently occurred in a particular area during the lambing season. Breeding pairs of coyotes are extremely territorial. They vigorously defend their territories against other canine
C-73
After the adults are removed, the pups can be killed by fumigating the den with a gas cartridge registered for this purpose, or the pups can be dug out by hand. If attempts to shoot one or both adults are unsuccessful, the chances of trapping or snaring them are improved if the pups are left alive and confined in the den. This can be accomplished by driving stakes 2 inches (5 cm) apart down through the den entrance. Carefully place blind sets in the den trails or at the den mound. Capture will often result when the adults return to investigate the area. If the adults are not captured within a reasonable period of time, the pups should be destroyed. Removal of the pups is often effective in stopping predation even if the adult coyotes are not removed. An airplane can be used very effectively to locate coyote dens when depredations occur in spring or early summer in open prairies or sagebrush terrain. Early morning hours provide the best light conditions for locating adult animals near the den site or as they return from hunting. The low angle light reflects on the coyote and provides good contrast with the surrounding vegetation and soil. Actual den sign, however, shows up better during the middle of the day with light coming from directly overhead. Dens are most easily located after the pups have begun venturing outside. The pups soon trample down the vegetation around the den, making the site more visible from the air. If aerial shooting is legal, it is often possible to remove the adults and pups in one operation. In open terrain, landings can often be made within walking distance of the den. Although denning requires special skills, training, and often considerable time, the advantages can be significant. A cost-benefit analysis conducted during one study determined that the cost to remove a den of depredating coyotes could be recovered if only 3.6 lambs were saved. In the same study, the average number of lambs killed by each depredating pair of coyotes was 4.9 per week. While these findings in-
dicate that denning could be cost effective after only a few days, the benefits actually continue in most instances for the duration of the season. Denning can be very selective for the offending animals and can resolve some depredation problems at relatively low cost.
Hunting with Dogs. Several breeds are generally known as trailing hounds, including Walkers, Julys, redbones, blueticks, black and tans, Plott hounds, and English fox hounds. Trail hounds follow the scent left by a predator and run it to tree or bay it on the ground. Coyotes are seldom caught and killed by trail hounds. In most instances, trail hounds are used in combination with sight hounds. The trail hounds run coyotes into the open, and then sight hounds are released to capture the fleeing coyote. More commonly, coyotes are shot as they run from the pack of hounds. Sight hounds, generally greyhounds or Russian wolf hounds, are used in open prairie country to run coyotes down and kill them.
predation on sheep producers was a loss of $13 million, and the impact on consumers was $4 million in additional costs. The General Accounting Office (GAO 1990) estimated that coyotes in 17 western states killed sheep and lambs valued at $18 million in 1989. The National Agricultural Statistical Service (NASS 1991) reported that sheep and lamb losses to coyotes in the United States were valued at $18.3 million in 1990. The US Fish and Wildlife Service (1978) reported calf losses between birth and weaning to coyotes across the United States at 0.4%, with predation decreasing to nearly zero by weaning time. Dorrance (1982) reported that coyotes were responsible for 16% of the 1,520 confirmed predation losses of cattle in Alberta from 1974 to 1978. Coyote predation on calves caused producers with coyote problems across the United States to lose an estimated $20 million. However, because of the greater price flexibility of beef compared with sheep, the reduction in the number of beef calves marketed (estimated at 0.4%, or 115,000 fewer calves) resulted in a higher price, which benefited beef producers by $81 million. The net impact of the reduced supply of beef as a result of coyote predation was a gain of $61 million to beef producers, but it cost consumers an additional $98 million in higher prices for beef, resulting in an overall loss of $37 million. NASS (1992) reported that cattle and calf losses to coyotes in the United States were valued at $24.3 million in 1991. Coyote predation also can cause substantial losses of domestic goats. In three studies in Texas, where an estimated 1.1 million goats (about 90% of the goats in the United States) are raised (Scrivner et al. 1985), predators were reported to take 18.1% of the adults and 33.9% of the kids (Pearson 1986). NASS (1991) reported that goat losses to coyotes in the United States were valued at $5.7 million in 1990. Pearson (1986) stated that predators, particularly coyotes, accounted for

Sheep numbers in the United States have declined about 80% from 1942 to 1976 (Gee et al. 1977). Former sheep producers reported that the principal reasons for leaving the sheep industry included high predation losses, low lamb and wool prices, a shortage of good hired labor, and the producers age. The US Fish and Wildlife Service (1978) estimated the economic impact of coyote predation on producers with predator problems, on producers without predator problems, and on consumers during 1977. They used an average lamb loss rate of 4% (267,000 lambs) and a ewe loss rate of 1.5% (125,000 ewes) to estimate an economic loss of $19 million to producers from coyote predation in the 17 western states. The reduced number of sheep and lambs resulted in a higher market price, which benefited producers by $6 million. The net impact of coyote
C-74
losses of hundreds of chickens and turkeys in the 14 western states. In one study, Andelt and Gipson (1979) reported that between June 4 and August 31, 1976, a mated pair of coyotes apparently killed 268 domestic turkeys in Nebraska valued at $938. Although the average value of livestock losses to coyotes reflected the overall impact on producers, it did not reflect the severity of losses to some individuals. Balser (1964) and Gee et al. (1977) indicated that coyote predation is much more serious for some producers than others. Most sheep producers suffer no or minor predator losses, whereas 20% to 25% of the producers suffer losses that are significantly higher than the average (US Fish Wildl. Serv. 1978). These losses can drive producers out of business because of low profit margins. Nonfatal injuries and harassment of livestock by coyotes also can result in reduced weight gain and subsequent reductions in profit.

Alberta Agriculture. 1990. Methods of investigating predation of livestock. Alberta Agric., Crop Prot. Branch, Agdex 684-4. 36 pp. Andelt, W. F. 1987. Coyote predation. Pages 128-140 in M. Novak, J. A. Baker, M. E. Obbard, and B. Malloch. Wild furbearer management and conservation in North America. Ontario Ministry. Nat. Resour. Andelt, W. F. 1988. Proper use of snares for capturing furbearers. Colorado State Univ. Coop. Ext. Serv. Pub. 6.517, Fort Collins. 4 pp. Andelt, W. F., and P. S. Gipson. 1979. Domestic turkey losses to radio-tagged coyotes. J. Wildl. Manage. 4:673-679. Balser, D. S. 1964. Management of predator populations with antifertility agents. J. Wildl. Manage. 28:352-358. Bateman, J. 1971. Animal traps and trapping. Stackpole Books. Harrisburg, Pennsylvania. 286 pp. Bekoff, M., ed. 1978. Coyotes: biology, behavior, and management. Academic Press, New York. 384 pp. Boggess, E. K., F. R. Henderson, and C. W. Spaeth. 1980. Managing predator problems: practices and procedures for preventing and reducing livestock losses. Coop. Ext. Serv. C-620, Kansas State Univ., Manhattan. 19 pp. Connolly, G. 1992a. Sheep and goat losses to predators in the United States. Proc. Eastern Wildl. Damage Control Conf. 5:75-82. Connolly, G. 1992b. Coyote damage to livestock and other resources. Pages 161-169 in A. H. Boer, ed. Proceedings, ecology and management of the eastern coyote. Univ., New Brunswick, Fredericton. Connolly, G. E. 1988. M-44 sodium cyanide ejectors in the Animal Damage Control program, 19761986. Proc. Vertebr. Pest Conf. 13:220-225. Connolly, G. E. and W. M Longhurst. 1975. The effects of control on coyote populations a simulation model. Univ. California, Coop. Ext. Serv. Bull. 1872. 37 pp. deCalesta, D. S. 1983. Building an electric antipredator fence. Pacific Northwest Ext. Pub. 225. 11 pp. Dorrance, M. J. 1982. Predation losses of cattle in Alberta. J. Range Manage. 35:690-692. Gee, C. K., W. R. Bailey, R. L. Gum, and L. M. Arthur. 1977. Sheep and lamb losses to predators and other causes in the western United States. US Dep. Agric., Econ. Res. Serv., Agric. Econ. Rep. 369. 41 pp. Gee, C. K., D. B. Nielsen and D. M. Stevens. 1977. Factors in the decline of the western sheep industry. US Dep. Agric., Econ. Res. Serv., Agric. Econ. Rep. 377. 31 pp.
General Accounting Office (GAO). 1990. Wildlife management effects of Animal Damage Control program on predators. GAO/RCED-90-149, US General Account. Office, Washington, DC. 31 pp. Gier, H. T. 1968. Coyotes in Kansas. Revised. Kansas State Coll. Agric. Exp. Stn. Bull. 393. 118 pp. Green, J. S. ed. 1987. Protecting livestock from coyotes: a synopsis of the research of the Agricultural Research Service. Natl. Tech. Info. Serv. PB 88 133590/AS. 105 pp. Green, J. S., and R. A. Woodruff. 1991. Livestock guarding dogs protect sheep from predators. US Dep. Agric., Agric. Info. Bull. No. 588. 31 pp. Henderson, F. R. 1986. How to Call a Coyote, Kansas State Univ., Coop. Ext. Serv., Manhattan. Pub. C-400. 4 pp. Henderson, F. R. 1987. How to trap a coyote. Kansas State. Univ., Coop. Ext. Serv., Pub. C-660. 12 pp. Henderson, F. R. 1988. Use of snares for capturing coyotes. CES, Kansas State Univ., Coop. Ext. Serv. Pub. C-698., Manhattan. 4 pp. Henderson, F. R., E. K. Boggess, and R. J. Robel. 1977. Understanding the coyote. Kansas State Univ. Coop. Ext. Serv., Pub. C-578., Manhattan. 24 pp. Hulet, C. V., D. M. Anderson, J. N. Smith, W. L. Shupe, C. A. Taylor, Jr., and L. W. Murray. 1989. Bonding of goats to sheep and cattle for protection from predators. Appl. An. Behav. Sci. 22:261-267. Knowlton, F. F. 1972. Preliminary interpretations of coyote population mechanics with some management implications. J. Wildl. Manage. 36:369-382. Linhart, S. B., G. J. Dasch, and F. J. Turkowski. 1981. The steel leghold trap: techniques for reducing foot injury and increasing selectivity. Proc. Worldwide Furbearer Conf. 3:1560-1578. Linhart, S. B., J. D. Roberts, and G. J. Dasch. 1981. Electric fencing reduces coyote predation on pastured sheep. J. Range Manage. 35:276-281. Linhart, S. B., R. T. Sterner, G. J. Dasch, and J. W. Theade. 1984. Efficacy of light and sound stimuli for reducing coyote predation upon pastured sheep. Prot. Ecol. 6:75-84. Meduna, R. 1977. Relationship between sheep management and coyote predation. M.S. Thesis, Kansas State Univ., Manhattan. 140 pp. National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS). 1991. Sheep and goat predator loss. US Dep. Agric., Agric. Statistics Board, Washington, DC. National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS). 1992. Cattle and calves death loss. US Dep Agric., Agric. Statistics Board, Washington, DC.
Acknowledgments
Much of the information and several of the figures for this chapter were adapted from the SID Sheep Production Handbook, Predator Damage Control chapter, published by the American Sheep Industry Association, Inc. (1990) and various publications authored by F. R. Henderson, J. S. Green, W. F. Andelt, G. E. Connolly, and D. A. Wade. The section on economics of damage and control was adapted from Andelt (1987). Figure 1 by Emily Oseas Routman. Figure 6 adapted from a USDA-APHIS-ADC illustration by Renee Lanik, University of Nebraska-Lincoln.
C-75
Pearson, E. W. 1986. A literature review of livestock losses to predators in western U.S. US Fish Wildl. Serv. Final Rep., Denver, Colorado. 20 pp. Robel, R. J., A. D. Dayton, F. R. Henderson, R. L. Meduna, and C. W. Spaeth. 1981. Relationships between husbandy methods and sheep losses to canine predators. J. Wildl. Manage. 45:894911. Scrivner, J. H. 1983. The 1080 toxic collar: economics of field use in Texas. Proc. Western Wildl. Damage Control Conf. 1:201-204. Scrivner, J. H., D. A. Wade, G. E. Connolly, and L. C. Howard, Jr. 1985. The effects of predation on an Angora goat ranch. Nat. Wool Grower. 75:10-13. Shelton, M. 1984. The use of conventional and electric fencing to reduce coyote predation on sheep and goats. Texas Agric. Exp. Stn. MP 1556. 12 pp. Till, J. A., and F. F. Knowlton. 1983. Efficacy of denning in alleviating coyote depredations on domestic sheep. J. Wildl. Manage. 47:1018-1025. Todd, A. W. and L. B. Keith. 1976. Responses of coyotes to winter reductions in agricultural carrion. Alberta Wildl. Tech. Bull. 5. 32 pp. USDA. 1993. Animal Damage Control Program. Supplement to the Draft Environmental Impact Statement-1992. US Dep. Agric. Washington, DC. US Fish and Wildlife Service. 1978. Predator damage in the West: a study of coyote management alternatives. US Fish Wildl. Serv., Washington, DC. 168 pp. Wade, D. A. 1973. Control of damage by coyotes and some other carnivores. Colorado State Univ., Coop. Ext. Serv. Bull. 482a. 16 pp.
Wade, D. A. 1976. The use of aircraft in predator control. Vertebr. Pest Conf. Proc. 7:154-160. Wagner, F. H. 1988. Predator control and the sheep industry: the role of science in policy formation. Regina Books, Claremont, California. 230 pp. Walton, M. T., and C. A. Feild. 1989. Use of donkeys to guard sheep and goats in Texas. Eastern Wildl. Damage Control Conf. 4:87-94. Young, S. P., and H. T. Jackson. 1951. The clever coyote. The Stackpole Co., Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, and the Wildl. Manage. Inst., Washington, DC. 411 pp.
Video Tapes
Video tape, VHS. Livestock Guarding Dogs, Protecting Sheep From Coyotes. US Dep. Agric., An. Plant Health Inspect. Serv., An. Damage Control. Video tape, VHS. How to Call a Coyote. Kansas State Univ., Coop. Ext. Serv. Manhattan. Video tape VHS. How to Snare a Coyote. Kansas State Univ. Coop. Ext. Serv., Manhattan. Video tape, VHS. A Matter of Perspective. Texas A&M Coop. Ext. Serv. San Angelo. Video tape, VHS. How to Trap a Coyote. Colorado State Univ. Coop. Ext. Serv., Fort Collins.
Editors
C-76
Jeffrey S. Green
Assistant Regional Director USDA-APHISAnimal Damage Control Lakewood, Colorado 80228

Philip S. Gipson
FERAL DOGS
Unit Leader Kansas Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit Kansas State University Manhattan, Kansas 66506-3501
Fig. 1. Feral dog, Canis familiaris

Exclusion
Toxicants
Other Methods
Sodium cyanide in M-44 ejector devices.

Fumigants
Eliminate food supplies. Destroy dens. Catch poles. Jab sticks.

Cultural Considerations
Net wire fences. Electric fences.

Frightening

Trapping
Live traps. No. 3 or 4 steel leghold traps. Cable neck snares.

Shooting
Yard lights, effigies, pyrotechnics. Electronic Guard. Livestock guarding animals.

Repellents
Public education. Dog control laws. Professional carnivore damage control specialists.
Hunting from the air. Hunting from the ground.
Several products are registered but are practical only for small areas. Capsaicin and anise oil may protect humans from attack by dogs.

C-77
Identification
In appearance, most feral dogs (Fig. 1) are difficult, if not impossible, to distinguish from domestic dogs. Like domestic dogs, feral dogs (sometimes referred to as wild or free-ranging dogs) manifest themselves in a variety of shapes, sizes, colors, and even breeds. McKnight (1964) noted German shepherds, Doberman pinschers, and collies as breeds that often become feral. Most feral dogs today are descendants of domestic dogs gone wild, and they often appear similar to dog breeds that are locally common. The primary feature that distinguishes feral from domestic dogs is the degree of reliance or dependence on humans, and in some respect, their behavior toward people. Feral dogs survive and reproduce independently of human intervention or assistance. While it is true that some feral dogs use human garbage for food, others acquire their primary subsistence by hunting and scavenging like other wild canids. Feral and domestic dogs often differ markedly in their behavior toward people. Scott and Causey (1973) based their classification of these two types by observing the behavior of dogs while confined in cage traps. Domestic dogs usually wagged their tails or exhibited a calm disposition when a human approached, whereas most feral dogs showed highly aggressive behavior, growling, barking, and attempting to bite. Some dogs were intermediate in their behavior and couldnt be classified as either feral or domestic based soley on their reaction to humans. Since many feral dogs have been pursued, shot at, or trapped by people, their aggressive behavior toward humans is not surprising. Gipson (1983) described the numerous lead pellets imbedded under the skin of a feral dog caught in Arkansas as a testament to its relationship with people. Feral dogs are usually secretive and wary of people. Thus, they are active during dawn, dusk, and at night much like other wild canids. They often travel in packs or groups and may
C-78
have rendezvous sites like wolves. Travel routes to and from the gathering or den sites may be well defined. Food scraps and other evidence of concentrated activity may be observed at gathering sites. The appearance of tracks left by feral dogs varies with the size and weight of the animal. Generally, dog tracks are rounder and show more prominent nail marks than those of coyotes, and they are usually larger than those of foxes. Since a pack of feral dogs likely consists of animals in a variety of sizes and shapes, the tracks from a pack of dogs will be correspondingly varied, unlike the tracks of a group of coyotes. The publication by Acorn and Dorrance (1990) contains a comparative illustration of canid tracks.
in remote sites where they feed on wildlife and native fruits. The only areas that do not appear to be suitable for feral dogs are places where food and escape cover are not available, or where large native carnivores, particularly wolves, are common and prey on dogs.
Food Habits
Like coyotes, feral dogs have catholic diets and are best described as opportunistic feeders. They can be efficient predators, preying on small and large animals, including domestic livestock. Many rely on carrion, particularly road-killed animals, crippled waterfowl, green vegetation, berries and other fruits, and refuse at garbage dumps.
Range
Feral dogs are the most widespread of the wild canids. They may occur wherever people are present and permit dogs to roam free or where people abandon unwanted dogs. Feral dogs probably occur in all of the 50 states, Canada, and Central and South America. They are also common in Europe, Australia, Africa, and on several remote ocean islands, such as the Galapagos. Home ranges of feral dogs vary considerably in size and are probably influenced by the availability of food. Dog packs that are primarily dependent on garbage may remain in the immediate vicinity of a dump, while other packs that depend on livestock or wild game may forage over an area of 50 square miles (130 km2) or more.

Feral dogs are highly adaptable, social carnivores. Most are about the size of a coyote or slightly larger. Many breeds of dogs are capable of existing in the wild, but after a few generations of uncontrolled breeding, a generalized mongrel tends to develop. Often it has a German shepherd or husky-like appearance. Feral dogs on the Galapagos Islands resemble the original introduced breeds: hounds, pointers, and Borzoi. Gipson (1983) suggested that family groups of feral dogs are more highly organized than previously believed. Pup rearing may be shared by several members of a pack. Survival of pups born during autumn and winter has been documented, even in areas with harsh winter weather. Gipson found that only one female in a pack of feral dogs studied in Alaska gave birth during two years of study, even though other adult females were present in the pack. The breeding female gave birth during late September or early October during both years. It is noteworthy that all pups from both litters had similar color markings, suggesting that
Habitat
Feral dogs are often found in forested areas or shrublands in the vicinity of human habitation. Some people will not tolerate feral dogs in close proximity to human activity; thus they take considerable effort to eliminate feral dogs in such areas. Feral dogs may be found on lands where human access is limited, such as military reservations and large airports. They may also live
the pups had the same father. Adult males of different colors were present in the pack. Nesbitt (1975) commented on the rigid social organization of a pack of feral dogs where nonresident dogs were excluded, including females in estrus. In one instance, Nesbitt used three separate female dogs in estrus as bait (dogs were chained in the back of a corral-type trap) over a 59-day period and captured no feral dogs. He then baited the same trap with carrion, and a pack of feral dogs, including four adult males, entered the trap within 1 week. Hybridization between feral dogs and other wild canids can occur, but nonsynchronous estrus periods and pack behavior (that is, excluding nonresident canids from membership in the pack) may preclude much interbreeding. Dens may be burrows dug in the ground or sheltered spots under abandoned buildings or farm machinery. Feral dogs commonly use former fox or coyote dens.
When domestic dogs attack domestic animals, they may injure or kill several, but they seldom consume their victims. Rather, they leave the impression that they were involved in vicious play rather than an attempt to obtain food. The most diagnostic characteristic of injuries caused by dogs is usually the slashing and biting of prey animals over much of their bodies. Wade and Bowns (1983) and Acorn and Dorrance (1990) present a detailed pictorial and descriptive aid to identifying predators that damage livestock. Feral dogs may become skilled at hunting in groups for small game such as rabbits and hares and large game including deer and even moose. Some wildlife managers feel that feral dogs are a serious threat to deer, especially in areas with heavy snows (Lowry 1978). Others have found no evidence that feral dogs pose a significant threat to deer (Causey and Cude 1980). Clearly, the impact of feral dogs, both on livestock and wildlife, varies by location and is influenced by factors such as availability of other food, the number of dogs, and competition by other predators. Feral dogs may feed on fruit crops including melons, berries, and grapes, and native fruits such as persimmons and blackberries. Damage to melons is similar to that caused by coyotes. The side of a ripe melon is usually bitten open and the insides eaten. Feral dogs commonly kill house cats, and they may injure or kill domestic dogs. In areas where people have not hunted and trapped feral dogs, the dogs may not have developed fear of humans, and in those instances such dogs may attack people, especially children. This can be a serious problem in areas where feral dogs feed at and live around garbage dumps near human dwellings. Such situations occur most frequently around small remote towns. On the Galapagos Islands, feral dogs have significantly impacted native populations of tortoises, iguanas, and birds.
Legal Status
State and local laws concerning feral and free-ranging dogs vary considerably, but most states have some regulations. Many states, particularly those in the west, permit individuals to shoot dogs that are chasing or killing game animals or livestock. State agencies or agriculture departments usually are responsible for controlling feral dogs in rural areas. No states consider feral dogs to be game animals. Most cities have animal control agents to pick up abandoned and free-ranging domestic dogs.

Exclusion

Livestock and poultry can be victims of harassment, injury, and death from both domestic and feral dogs. Distinguishing between livestock killed by domestic or feral dogs and that killed by coyotes may be difficult since the mode of attack can be similar. Coyotes usually attack an animal at the throat; domestic dogs are relatively indiscriminate in how and where they attack. Sometimes, however, dogs kill the way coyotes do, and young and inexperienced coyotes may attack any part of the body of their prey as dogs would. The survival of feral dogs, much like that of other wild canids, depends on their ability to secure food. Therefore feral dogs are usually adept predators. Unlike most domestic dogs, feral dogs rely on their prey for food, and thus consume much of what they kill. Feral dogs favor the hindquarters and viscera (liver, spleen, heart, lungs).
Protect livestock and poultry from feral and domestic dogs with wellmaintained net fences. Horizontal spacing of the mesh should be less than 6 inches (15 cm); vertical spacing should be less than 4 inches (10 cm). Barbed wire at ground level or a buried wire apron will discourage dogs from digging under the fence. The fence should be about 6 feet (1.8 m) high to hinder animals from jumping over. The effectiveness of fences can be increased by adding one or more electrically charged wires along the bottom and top. Charged wires are positioned so that the intruding dog encounters them before digging under or climbing over the fence. Electric fences consisting of up to 12 alternating ground and charged wires have been effective at deterring dogs (Dorrance and Bourne 1980). Other configurations have also been successful (Shelton 1984, deCalesta 1983). Electric fences must be checked regularly to ensure that the wires are sufficiently charged. Maintenance of fences may be difficult in areas with drifting snow and where large wild animals are common. Moose and bears can be particularly destructive to electric fences. Fencing is one of the most beneficial investments in dealing with predator
C-79
damage and livestock management if practicality warrants its use.

Frightening
Several visual and auditory devices (yard lights, effigies, loud music, pyrotechnics) have been used to frighten coyotes from livestock pens and pastures, and are likely to be effective with feral dogs. Researchers at the Denver Wildlife Research Center developed and tested a device called the Electronic Guard, a combination strobe light and siren that periodically activates during the night. The noise and light have been effective in reducing coyote predation on flocks of sheep. Similar results could reasonably be anticipated with feral dogs. Guarding dogs that have been reared with livestock and trained to remain with them can be a deterrent to depredating feral dogs (Green and Woodruff 1991). Since a pack of feral dogs is quite capable of killing other dogs, more than one guarding dog may be needed where feral dogs are a threat. Donkeys and llamas have also been used to keep dogs away from livestock.
Repellents
gicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) Section 3 registration for sodium cyanide used in M-44 delivery devices. Although the product label for M-44 cyanide capsules lists wild dogs among the canids that can be controlled when they are preying on livestock (others include coyotes and red and gray foxes), ADC policy prohibits using M-44s for specifically killing dogs. Some dogs are killed by M-44s when they are being used to kill coyotes, but dogs are not the target animal. In addition, at least one state has a law prohibiting ADC from using M-44s to intentionally kill dogs. Several states hold their own registrations for using M-44s, and their policy with regard to feral dogs may be different from that of ADC. Consult state and local regulations with respect to M-44 use. In all instances, M-44s can only be used by certified applicators. Toxic collars containing Compound 1080 (sodium monofluoroacetate) placed on domestic animals may kill depredating dogs if the dogs puncture the collar during an attack. The collars, however, are only registered for use against coyotes.
Fumigants
Shooting
Aerial shooting is one of the most efficient control techniques available for killing feral dogs. Where a pack of damaging feral dogs is established, it may be worthwhile to trap one or two members of the pack, fit them with radio transmitters, and release them. Feral dogs are highly social, and by periodically locating the radio-tagged dogs with a radio receiver, it is possible to locate other members of the group. When other members of the pack are destroyed, the radioed dogs can be located and shot. This technique has been used effectively by the Alaska Department of Fish and Game to eliminate packs of problem wolves. Hunting from the ground has been used to control feral dogs. A predator call may lure dogs within rifle range. Establishing a shooting blind can be helpful, especially along a trail used by dogs, near a den, a garbage dump, or a large animal carcass.
Other Methods
Methyl nonyl ketone, mostly in granular form or in liquid sprays, is widely used to prevent urination or defecation by dogs in yards and storage areas. Several other chemicals are registered for repelling dogs including anise oil, Bitrex, capsaicin, d-linonene, dried blood, essential oils, napthalene, nicotene, Ropel, Thiram, Thymol, and tobacco dust. These chemicals may be useful in keeping feral dogs from establishing scent stations or relieving themselves on selected sites, but they probably have little value in protecting livestock or poultry. Capsaicin (oleoresin of capsicum) and oil of anise may be effective in protecting humans from attack by dogs.
Toxicants
No fumigants are registered for the control of feral dogs.

Trapping
There are no toxicants widely used for controlling feral dogs in the United States. The USDA-APHIS-ADC program holds a Federal Insecticide, FunC-80
Live traps are generally effective in capturing feral dog pups and occasionally adult dogs. Steel leghold traps (No. 3 or 4) are convenient and effective for trapping wild dogs. Carrion and scent baits used to lure coyotes to traps may be effective in attracting feral dogs. Nontarget species or pets inadvertently captured can be released. Caution should be exercised when approaching a dog in a trap, since feral dogs may be vicious when confined, and even pet dogs may bite under those circumstances. Cable neck snares may be set at openings in fences or along narrow trails used by dogs. Use care when setting snares because they may kill pets or livestock that are caught.
Fencing garbage dumps, burying garbage in sanitary landfills frequently, or removing livestock carrion may help reduce local feral dog populations. Locating and destroying dens, especially when pups are present, may also be helpful. Use catch poles to capture and restrain feral dogs. Dart guns and jab sticks can be used to administer tranquilizing or euthanizing agents.
Cultural Considerations
The long-term solution to most problems caused by unconfined dogs, including feral dogs, is responsible dog ownership and effective local dog management programs. Many depredation problems can be solved by confining dogs to kennels or to the owners property. Dog breeding must be controlled. Unwanted dogs should be placed for adoption or destroyed rather than abandoned, since the latter leads to the formation of free-living, feral populations. Dog management programs should include the following: (1) public educa-
tion about proper care and confinement of dogs; (2) laws that identify that dog owners are legally responsible for damage caused by dogs; (3) laws that prohibit abandonment of unwanted dogs and require humane disposal of unwanted dogs; (4) holding facilities and personnel trained to handle unwanted or nuisance dogs; and (5) assistance by professional control specialists where feral dogs are established.
Acknowledgments
Figure 1 drawn by Rene Lanik, University of Nebraska-Lincoln.

Acorn, R. C., and M. J. Dorrance. 1990. Methods of investigating predation of livestock. Alberta Agric. Agdex 684-14. Edmonton, Alberta, Canada. Barnett, B. D. 1986. Eradication and control of feral and free-ranging dogs in the Galapagos Islands. Proc. Vertebr. Pest Conf. 12:359-368. Boggess, E. K., R. D. Andrews, and R. A. Bishop. 1978. Domestic animal losses to coyotes and dogs in Iowa. J. Wildl. Manage. 42:362-372. Causey, M. K., and C. A. Cude. 1980. Feral dog and white-tailed deer interactions in Alabama. J. Wildl. Manage. 44:481-484. deCalesta, D. S. 1983. Building an electric antipredator fence. Pacific Northwest Ext. Publ. 225:11. Denny, R. N. 1974. The impact of uncontrolled dogs on wildlife and livestock. Trans. N.A. Wildl. Nat. Resour. Conf. 39:257-291. Dorrance, M. J., and J. Bourne. 1980. An evaluation of anti-coyote electric fencing. J. Range Manage. 33:385-387. Gipson, P. S. 1983. Evaluations of behavior of feral dogs in interior Alaska, with control implications. Vertebr. Pest Control Manage. Mater. 4th Symp. Am. Soc. Testing Mater. 4:285-294. Gipson, P. S., and J. A. Sealander. 1977. Ecological relationships of white-tailed deer and dogs in Arkansas. Pages 3-16 in R. L. Phillips and C. Jonkel, eds. Proc. 1975 Predator Symp. Montana For. Conserv. Exper. Stn., Univ. Montana, Missoula. 268 pp. Green, J. S. 1989. Donkeys for predation control. Proc. Eastern Wildl. Damage Control Conf. 4:83-86. Green, J. S., and R. A. Woodruff. 1991. Livestock guarding dogs: protecting sheep from predators. US Dep. Agric., Agric. Info. Bull. No. 588. 31 pp.
Linhart, S. B., G. J. Dasch, R. R. Johnson, J. D. Roberts, and C. J. Packham. 1992. Electronic frightening devices for reducing coyote predation on domestic sheep: efficacy under range conditions and operational use. Proc. Vertebr. Pest Conf. 15:386-392. Lowry, D. A. 1978. Domestic dogs as predators on deer. Wildl. Soc. Bull. 6:38-39. McKnight, T. 1964. Feral livestock in AngloAmerica. Univ. Calif. Publ. Geogr., Vol. 16. Univ. Calif. Press, Berkeley. Nesbitt, W. H. 1975. Ecology of a feral dog pack on a wildlife refuge. Pages 391-396 in M. W. Fox, ed. The wild canids. Van Nostrand Reinhold Co., New York. Nesse, C. E., W. M. Longhurst, and W. E. Howard. 1976. Predation and the sheep industry in California 1972-1974. Univ. Calif., Div. Agric. Sci. Bull. 1878. 63 pp. Scott, M. D., and K. Causey. 1973. Ecology of feral dogs in Alabama. J. Wildl. Manage. 37:253-265. Shelton, M. 1984. The use of conventional and electric fencing to reduce coyote predation on sheep and goats. Tex. Agric. Exp. Stn. MP 1556:12. US Fish and Wildlife Service. 1979. Final environmental impact statement for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services mammalian predator damage management for livestock protection in the western United States. US Dep. Inter. Washington, DC. 789 pp. Wade, D. A., and J. E. Bowns. 1983. Procedures for evaluating predation on livestock and wildlife. Bull. No. B-1429. Texas A & M Univ., College Station. 42 pp. Walton, M. T., and C. A. Field. 1989. Use of donkeys to guard sheep and goats in Texas. Proc. Eastern Wildl. Damage Control Conf. 4:87-94.

Feral dogs may destroy livestock and poultry valued at thousands of dollars. In such instances, the costs of controlling dogs may be warranted. Boggess and his co-workers (1978) examined 5,800 claims of domestic livestock lost to dogs and coyotes in Iowa between 1960 and 1974. Dogs were considered responsible for 49% of the reported sheep losses, 45% of the cattle losses, 66% of the swine losses, and 82% of the poultry losses. Denny (1974) conducted a nationwide survey of state departments of agriculture, wildlife conservation agencies, and related agencies to determine problems caused by unconfined dogs. Damage to wildlife, especially deer, small game, and birds was considered the primary problem caused by dogs. Damage to game animals may be a serious local problem. In view of the value placed on game animals by hunters and other wildlife enthusiasts, local control to benefit wild game may be economically justified. The second most serious problem reported was damage to livestock.
Editors
C-81
C-82
Robert L. Phillips
Wildlife Research Biologist Denver Wildlife Research Center USDA-APHIS-ADC Denver, Colorado 80225-0266
Robert H. Schmidt
FOXES
Assistant Professor Department of Fisheries and Wildlife Utah State University Logan, Utah 84322-5210
Fig. 1. Red fox, Vulpes vulpes (left) and gray fox, Urocyon cinereoargenteus (right).

Exclusion
Frightening
Trapping
Flashing lights and exploders may provide temporary protection. Well-trained livestock guarding dogs may be effective in some situations.
Repellents
Steel leghold traps. Cage or box traps. Snares.

Shooting
Net wire fence. Electric fence.

Cultural Methods
Protect livestock and poultry during most vulnerable periods (for example, shed lambing, farrowing pigs in protective enclosures).
None are registered for livestock protection.

Toxicants
Predator calling techniques. Aerial hunting.

Other Methods
M-44 sodium cyanide mechanical ejection device, in states where registered.

Fumigants
Den hunting. Remove young foxes from dens to reduce predation by adults.
Gas cartridges for den fumigation, where registered.

C-83
Identification
The red fox (Vulpes vulpes) is the most common of the foxes native to North America. Most depredation problems are associated with red foxes, although in some areas gray foxes (Urocyon cinereoargenteus) can cause problems. Few damage complaints have been associated with the swift fox (V. velox), kit fox (V. macrotis), or Arctic fox (Alopex lagopus). The red fox is dog-like in appearance, with an elongated pointed muzzle and large pointed ears that are usually erect and forward. It has moderately long legs and long, thick, soft body fur with a heavily furred, bushy tail (Fig. 1). Typically, red foxes are colored with a light orange-red coat, black legs, lighter-colored underfur and a whitetipped tail. Silver and cross foxes are color phases of the red fox. In North America the red fox weighs about 7.7 to 15.4 pounds (3.5 to 7.0 kg), with males on average 2.2 pounds (1 kg) heavier than females. Gray foxes weigh 7 to 13 pounds (3.2 to 5.9 kg) and measure 32 to 45 inches (81 to 114 cm) from the nose to the tip of the tail (Fig. 1). The color pattern is generally salt-and-pepper gray with buffy underfur. The sides of the neck, back of the ears, legs, and feet are rusty yellow. The tail is long and bushy with a black tip. Other species of foxes present in North America are the Arctic fox, swift fox, and kit fox. These animals are not usually associated with livestock and poultry depredation because they typically eat small rodents and lead a secretive life in remote habitats away from people, although they may cause site-specific damage problems.
Gray foxes are found throughout the eastern, north central, and southwestern United States They are found throughout Mexico and most of the southwestern United States from California northward through western Oregon (Fig. 3). Kit foxes are residents of arid habitats. They are found from extreme southern Oregon and Idaho south along the Baja Peninsula and eastward through southwestern Texas and northern Mexico (Fig. 4). The present range of swift foxes is restricted to the central high plains. They are found in Kansas, the Oklahoma panhandle, New Mexico, Texas, Nebraska, South Dakota, Wyoming, and Colorado (Fig. 4). As its name indicates, the Arctic fox occurs in the arctic regions of North America and was introduced on a number of islands in the Aleutian chain.
Fig. 2. Range of the red fox in North America.
Habitat
The red fox is adaptable to most habitats within its range, but usually prefers open country with moderate cover. Some of the highest fox densities reported are in the north-central United States, where woodlands are interspersed with farmlands. The range of the red fox has expanded in recent years to fill habitats formerly occupied by coyotes (Canis latrans). The reduction of coyote numbers in many sagebrush/grassland areas of Montana and Wyoming has resulted in increased fox numbers. Red foxes have also demonstrated their adaptability by establishing breeding populations in many urban areas of the United States, Canada, and Europe. Gray foxes prefer more dense cover such as thickets, riparian areas, swamp land, or rocky pinyon-cedar ridges. In eastern North America, this species is closely associated with edges of deciduous forests. Gray foxes can also be found in urban areas where suitable habitat exists.
Fig. 3. Range of the gray fox in North America.
Range
Red foxes occur over most of North America, north and east from southern California, Arizona, and central Texas. They are found throughout most of the United States with the exception of a few isolated areas (Fig. 2).
Fig 4. Range of the swift fox (dark) and the kit fox (light) in North America..
C-84
Food Habits
Foxes are opportunists, feeding mostly on rabbits, mice, bird eggs, insects, and native fruits. Foxes usually kill animals smaller than a rabbit, although fawns, pigs, kids, lambs, and poultry are sometimes taken. The foxs keen hearing, vision, and sense of smell aid in detecting prey. Foxes stalk even the smallest mice with skill and patience. The stalk usually ends with a sudden pounce onto the prey. Red foxes sometimes kill more than they can eat and bury food in caches for later use. All foxes feed on carrion (animal carcasses) at times.
in the arctic zones. Red foxes generally produce 4 to 9 pups. Gray foxes usually have 3 to 7 pups per litter. Arctic foxes may have from 1 to 14 pups, but usually have 5 or 6. Foxes disperse from denning areas during the fall months and establish breeding areas in vacant territories, sometimes dispersing considerable distances.
Legal Status
Foxes in the United States are listed as furbearers or given some status as game animals by most state governments. Most states allow for the taking of foxes to protect private property. Check with your state wildlife agency for regulations before undertaking fox control measures.

Foxes may cause serious problems for poultry producers. Turkeys raised in large range pens are subject to damage by foxes. Losses may be heavy in small farm flocks of chickens, ducks, and geese. Young pigs, lambs, and small pets are also killed by foxes. Damage can be difficult to detect because the prey is usually carried from the kill site to a den site, or uneaten parts are buried. Foxes usually attack the throat of young livestock, but some kill by inflicting multiple bites to the neck and back. Foxes do not have the size or strength to hold adult livestock or to crush the skull and large bones of their prey. They generally prefer the viscera and often begin feeding through an entry behind the ribs. Foxes will also scavenge carcasses, making the actual cause of death difficult to determine. Pheasants, waterfowl, other game birds, and small game mammals are also preyed upon by foxes. At times, fox predation may be a significant mortality factor for upland and wetland birds, including some endangered species. Rabies outbreaks are most prevalent among red foxes in southeastern Canada and occasionally in the eastern United States. The incidence of rabies in foxes has declined substantially since the mid-1960s for unexplained reasons. In 1990, there were only 197 reported cases of fox rabies in the United States as compared to 1,821 for raccoons and 1,579 for skunks. Rabid foxes are a threat to humans, domestic animals, and wildlife.

Exclusion

Foxes are crepuscular animals, being most active during the early hours of darkness and very early morning hours. They do move about during the day, however, especially when it is dark and overcast. Foxes are solitary animals except from the winter breeding season through midsummer, when mates and their young associate closely. Foxes have a wide variety of calls. They may bark, scream, howl, yap, growl, or make sounds similar to a hiccup. During winter a male will often give a yelling bark, wo-wo-wo, that seems to be important in warning other male foxes not to intrude on its territory. Red foxes may dig their own dens or use abandoned burrows of a woodchuck or badger. The same dens may be used for several generations. Gray foxes commonly use wood piles, rocky outcrops, hollow trees, or brush piles as den sites. Foxes use their urine and feces to mark their territories. Mating in red foxes normally occurs from mid-January to early February. At higher latitudes (in the Arctic) mating occurs from late February to early March. Estrus in the vixen lasts 1 to 6 days, followed by a 51- to 53-day gestation period. Fox pups can be born from March in southern areas to May
Construct net wire fences with openings of 3 inches (8 cm) or less to exclude red foxes. Bury the bottom of the fence 1 to 2 feet (0.3 m to 0.9 m) with an apron of net wire extending at least 12 inches (30 cm) outward from the bottom. A top or roof of net wire may also be necessary to exclude all foxes, since some will readily climb a fence. A 3-wire electric fence with wires spaced 6 inches, 12 inches, and 18 inches (15 cm, 31 cm, and 46 cm) above the ground can repel red foxes. Combination fences that incorporate net and electric wires are also effective.
Cultural Methods
The protection of livestock and poultry from fox depredation is most important during the spring denning period when adults are actively acquiring prey for their young. Watch for signs of depredation during the spring, especially if there is a history of fox depredation. Foxes, like other wild canids, will often return to established denning areas year after year. Foxes frequently den in close proximity to human habitation. Dens may be located close to farm buildings, under haystacks or patches of cover, or even inside hog lots or small pastures used for lambing. Because of the elusive habits of foxes, dens in these locations may not be noticed until excessive depredations have occurred. The practice of shed lambing and farrowing in protected enclosures can be useful in preventing fox depredation on young livestock. Also, removal of
C-85
livestock carcasses from production areas can make these areas less attractive to predators.
Frightening
Trapping
Foxes readily adapt to noise-making devices such as propane exploders, timed tape recordings, amplifiers, or radios, but such devices may temporarily reduce activity in an area. Flashing lights, such as a rotating beacon or strobe light, may also provide temporary protection in relatively small areas or in livestock or poultry enclosures. Combinations of frightening devices used at irregular intervals should provide better protection than use of a single device because animals may have more difficulty in adapting to these disturbances. When properly trained, some breeds of dog, such as Great Pyrenees and Akbash dogs, have been useful in preventing predation on sheep. The effectiveness of dogs, even the guard dog breeds, seems to depend entirely on training and the individual disposition of the dog.
Toxicants
Trapping is a very effective and selective control method. A great deal of expertise is required to effectively trap foxes. Trapping by inexperienced people may serve to educate foxes, making them very difficult to catch, even by experienced trappers. Traps suitable for foxes are the Nos. 1 1/2, 1 3/4, and 2 double coilspring trap and the Nos. 2 and 3 double longspring trap. Traps with offset and padded jaws cause less injury to confined animals and facilitate the release of nontarget captures. State and provincial wildlife agencies regulate the traps and sets that can be used for trapping. Consult your local agency personnel for restrictions that pertain to your area. Proper set location is important when trapping foxes. Sets made along trails, at entrances to fields, and near carcasses are often most productive (Fig. 5). Many different sets are suc-
cessful, and can minimize the risk of nontarget capture. One of the best is the dirt-hole set (Fig. 6). Dig a hole about 6 inches (15 cm) deep and 3 inches (8 cm) in diameter at a downward angle just behind the spot where the trap is to be placed. Four to five drops of scent should be placed in the back of the hole. Move back from the bait hole and dig a hole 2 inches (5 cm) deep that is large enough to accommodate the trap and chain. Fasten the trap chain to a trap stake with a chain swivel and drive the stake directly under the place where the trap is set. Fold and place the chain under or beside the trap. Set the trap about 1/2 inch (1.3 cm) below the ground. Adjust the tension device on the trap to eliminate the capture of lighter animals. When the set is completed, the pan of the trap should be approximately 5 inches (13 cm) from the entrance of the hole with the pan slightly offset from the center of the hole (Fig. 6). Cover
The M-44, a sodium cyanide mechanical ejection device, is registered for control of red and gray foxes nationwide by USDA-APHIS-ADC personnel, and in some states by certified pesticide applicators. Information on the safe, effective use of sodium cyanide is available from the appropriate state agency charged with the registration of pesticides. M-44s are generally set along trails and at crossings regularly used by foxes.
Fumigants
Fenceline Gateway
Saddle Haystack
Trail
Gas cartridges made by USDAAPHIS-ADC are registered for fumigating the dens of coyotes, pocket gophers, ground squirrels, and other burrowing rodents. Special Local Needs permits 24(c) are available in North and South Dakota and Nebraska for gas cartridge fumigation of fox dens. State and local regulations should be consulted before using den fumigants.
Dike Pond Carcass pile
Fig. 5. Good locations for setting leghold traps for foxes.
C-86
the area between the jaws and over the trap pan with a piece of waxed paper, light canvas, or light screen wire. The trap must be firmly placed so that it does not move or wobble. The entire trap should be covered lightly with sifted soil up to the original ground level. Fox scents and lures can be homemade, but this requires some knowledge of scent making as described in various trapping books. Commercial trap scents can be purchased from most trapping suppliers (see Supplies and Materials). Experiment with various baits and scents to discover the combination of odors that will be most appropriate for your area. Equipment needed for trapping foxes includes traps, a sifter with a 3/16- or 1/2-inch screen (0.5 or 1.3 cm), trap stakes, trowel, gloves (which should be used only for trapping), a 16- to 20ounce (448- to 560-g) carpenters hammer with straight claws, and a bottle of scent. Remove the factory oil finish on the traps by boiling the traps in water and vinegar or by burying the traps in moist soil for one to two weeks until lightly rusted. The traps should then be dyed with commercially available trap dye to prevent further corrosion. Do not allow the traps and other trapping equipment to come in contact with gasoline, oil, or other strongsmelling and contaminating materials. Cleanliness of equipment is absolutely necessary for consistent trapping success. Cage traps are sometimes effective for capturing juvenile red foxes living in urban areas. It is uncommon to trap an adult red fox in a cage or a box trap; however, kit and swift foxes can be readily captured using this method.
Fig. 7. Properly set neck snare for foxes.
Fig. 6. A dirt-hole set showing proper trap placement.
Snares made from 1/16-inch, 5/64inch, and 3/32-inch (0.15 cm, 0.2 cm, and 0.25 cm) cable can be very effective for capturing both red and gray foxes. Snares are generally set in trails or in crawl holes (under fences) that are frequented by foxes. The standard loop size for foxes is about 6 inches (15 cm) with the bottom of the loop about 10 to 12 inches (25 to 30 cm) above ground level (Fig. 7). Trails leading to
C-87
and from den sites and to carcasses being fed on by foxes make excellent locations for snares.
Shooting
Harvest of foxes by sport hunters and fur trappers is another method of reducing fox populations in areas where damage is occurring. Livestock and poultry producers who have predation problems during the late fall and winter can sometimes find private fur trappers willing to hunt or trap foxes around loss sites. Depredations are usually most severe, however, during the spring when furs are not saleable, and it is difficult to interest private trappers at that time. Artificial rabbit distress calls can be used to decoy foxes to within rifle or shotgun range. Select a spot that faces into the wind, at the edge of a clearing or under a bush on a slight rise where visibility is good. Blow the call at 1/2to 1-minute intervals, with each call lasting 5 to 10 seconds. If a fox appears, remain motionless and do not move the rifle or shotgun until ready to shoot. If a fox does not appear in about 20 minutes, move to a new spot and call again. Aerial hunting can be used in some western states to remove problem foxes. This activity is closely regulated and is usually limited to USDAAPHIS-ADC personnel or individuals with special permits from the state regulatory agency.
Den Hunting
during the early and late hours of the day when adult foxes are moving about in search of food. Preferred denning sites are usually on a low rise facing a southerly direction. When fox pups are several weeks old, they will spend time outside the den in the early morning and evening hours. They leave abundant signs of their presence, such as matted vegetation and remnants of food, including bits of bone, feathers, and hair. Frequently used den sites have a distinctive odor. Fox pups may be removed by trapping or by fumigating the den with gas cartridges if they are registered for your area. In some situations it may be desirable to remove the pups without killing them. The mechanical wire ferret has proved to be effective in chasing the pups from the den without harming them. This device consists of a long piece of smooth spring steel wire with a spring and wooden plug at one end and a handle at the other. This wire is twisted through the den passageways, chasing foxes out of other den openings where they can be captured by hand or with dip nets. Small dogs are sometimes trained to retrieve pups unharmed from dens. Wire-cage box traps placed in the entrance of the den can also be useful for capturing young foxes.

Burt, W. H., and R. P. Grossenheider. 1976. A field guide to mammals, 3d ed. Houghton Mifflin Co., Boston. 289 pp. Foreyt, W. J. 1980. A live trap for multiple capture of coyote pups from dens. J. Wildl. Manage. 44:487-88. Fritzell, E. K., and K. J. Haroldson. 1982. Urocyon cinereoargenteus. Mammal. Sp. 189:1-8. Dolbeer, R. A., N. R. Holler, and D. W. Hawthorne. 1994. Identification and control of wildlife damage. Pages 474-506 in T. A. Bookhout ed. Research and management techniques for wildlife and habitats. The Wildl. Soc., Bethesda, Maryland. Krause, T. 1982. NTA trapping handbook a guide for better trapping. Spearman Publ. and Printing Co., Sutton, Nebraska. 206 pp. Samuel, D. E., and B. B. Nelson. 1982. Foxes. Pages 475-90 in J. A. Chapman and G. A Feldhamer eds., Wild mammals of North America: biology, management, and economics. The Johns Hopkins Univ. Press, Baltimore, Maryland. Schwartz, C. W., and E. R. Schwartz. 1981. The wild mammals of Missouri, rev. ed. Univ. Missouri Press, Columbia. 356 pp. Storm, G. L., R. D. Andrews, R. L. Phillips, R. A. Bishop, D. B. Siniff, and J. R. Tester. 1976. Morphology, reproduction, dispersal and mortality of midwestern red fox populations. Wildl. Mono. No. 49. The Wildl. Soc., Inc., Washington, DC. 82 pp. Storm, G. L., and K. P. Dauphin. 1965. A wire ferret for use in studies of foxes and skunks. J. Wildl. Manage. 29:625-26. Voigt, D. R. 1987. Red fox. Pages 379-93 in M. Novak, J. A. Baker, M. E. Obbard, and B. Malloch eds., Wildlife Furbearer Management and Conservation in North America. Ontario Ministry of Nat. Resour.
Acknowledgments
We thank Norman C. Johnson, whose chapter Foxes in the 1983 edition of this manual provided much of the information used in this section. F. Sherman Blom, Ronald A. Thompson, and Judy Loven (USDA-APHIS-ADC) provided useful comments. Figure 1 from Schwartz and Schwartz (1981) adapted by Jill Sack Johnson. Figures 2, 3, and 4 courtesy of Pam Tinnin. Figure 5 courtesy of Bob Noonan. Figures 6 and 7 courtesy of Tom Krause.
Fox depredations often increase during the spring whelping season. Damage may be reduced or even eliminated by locating and removing the young foxes from the den. Locate fox dens by observing signs of fox activity and by careful observation
Editors
C-88
Edward K. Boggess
Wildlife Program Manager Minnesota Department of Natural Resources St. Paul, Minnesota 55155
Fig. 1. The mink, Mustela vison, is a semiaquatic furbearer well known for its high-quality fur.
MINK
Identification Damage Prevention and Control Methods

Exclusion Toxicants, Fumigants, Repellents

Trapping
Exclusion usually is the best solution to mink predation on domestic animals. Confine animals in fenced areas. Seal all openings larger than 1 inch (2.5 cm).
Mink can be captured most easily in leghold or Conibear-type traps, but live traps may work around farmsteads.
Shooting
May not be legal. Normally difficult and impractical.
Generally not feasible.

Frightening
No methods are effective.
The mink (Mustela vison, Fig. 1) is a member of the weasel family. It is about 18 to 24 inches (46 to 61 cm) in length, including the somewhat bushy 5- to 7-inch (13- to 18-cm) tail, and weighs 1 1/2 to 3 pounds (0.7 to 1.4 kg). Females are about three-fourths the size of males. Both sexes are a rich chocolate-brown color, usually with a white patch on the chest or chin and scattered white patches on the belly. The fur is relatively short with the coat consisting of a soft, dense underfur concealed by glossy, lustrous guard hairs. Mink also have anal musk glands common to the weasel family and can discharge a disagreeable musk if frightened or disturbed. Unlike skunks, however, they cannot forcibly spray musk.

C-89
Range and Habitat

Mink are found throughout North America, with the exception of the desert southwest and tundra areas (Fig. 2). Mink are shoreline dwellers and their one basic habitat requirement is a suitable permanent water area. This may be a stream, river, pond, marsh, swamp, or lake. Waters with good populations of fish, frogs, and aquatic invertebrates and with brushy or grassy ungrazed shorelines provide the best mink habitat. Mink use many den sites in the course of their travels and the availability of adequate den sites is a very important habitat consideration. These may be muskrat houses, bank burrows, holes, crevices, log jams, or abandoned beaver lodges.
Legal Status
Mink are protected furbearers in most states, with seasons established for taking them when their fur is prime. Most states, however, have provisions for landowners to control furbearers which are damaging their property at anytime of the year. Check with your state wildlife agency before using any lethal controls.
Fig. 2. Distribution of mink in North America.

Mink damage usually is localized. If needed, lethal controls can be directed at the individual mink causing the damage.
Exclusion
Food Habits
The mink is strictly carnivorous. Because of its semiaquatic habits, it obtains about as much food on land as in water. Mink are opportunistic feeders with a diet that includes mice and rats, frogs, fish, rabbits, crayfish, muskrats, insects, birds, and eggs.
Mink are active mainly at night and are active year-round, except for brief intervals during periods of low temperature or heavy snow. Then they may hole up in a den for a day or more. Male mink have large home ranges and travel widely, sometimes covering many miles (km) of shoreline. Females have smaller ranges and tend to be relatively sedentary during the breeding season.

Mink may occasionally kill domestic poultry around farms. They typically kill their prey by biting them through the skull or neck. Closely spaced pairs of canine tooth marks are sign of a mink kill. Mink will attack animals up to the size of a chicken, duck, rabbit, or muskrat. While eating muskrats, a mink will often make an opening in the back or side of the neck and skin the animal by pulling the head and body through the hole as it feeds. Like some other members of the weasel family, mink occasionally exhibit surplus killing behavior (killing much more than they can possibly eat) when presented with an abundance of food, such as in a poultry house full of chickens. Mink may place many dead chickens neatly in a pile. Mink can eat significant numbers of upland nesting waterfowl or game bird young, particularly in areas where nesting habitat is limited.

Mink are polygamous and males may fight ferociously for mates during the breeding season, which occurs from late January to late March. Gestation varies from 40 to 75 days with an average of 51 days. Like most other members of the weasel family, mink exhibit delayed implantation; the embryos do not implant and begin completing their development until approximately 30 days before birth. The single annual litter of about 3 to 6 young is born in late April or early May and their eyes open at about 3 weeks of age. The young are born in a den which may be a bank burrow, a muskrat house, a hole under a log, or a rock crevice. The mink family stays together until late summer when the young disperse. Mink become sexually mature at about 10 months of age.
C-90
Usually the best solution to mink predation on domestic animals is to physically exclude their entry, sealing all openings larger than 1 inch (2.5 cm) with wood or tin and by using 1-inch (2.5-cm) mesh poultry netting around chicken yards and over ventilation openings. Mink do not gnaw like rodents, but they are able to use burrows or gnawed openings made by rats.
Habitat modification generally is not a feasible means of reducing mink predation problems on farms. If the objective is to increase natural production of upland nesting wild birds, however, habitat modification may be applicable. The best method of increasing upland nesting success is usually to increase the size and quality of cover areas such as grasslands, legumes, or set-aside areas. Although increasing the density of nesting cover may reduce nest predation by mink, it could lead to an increase in nest predation by species which favor dense cover, such as the Franklin ground squirrel. Because mink frequently use multiple den sites, elimination of potential denning areas may reduce their densities.
Frightening
There are no known frightening devices that are effective for deterring mink predation.
Repellents, Toxicants, and Fumigants
There are no repellents, toxicants, or fumigants registered for mink damage control.
Trapping
Mink can most easily be captured in leghold traps (No. 11 double longspring or No. 1 1/2 coilspring) or in Conibear-type body-gripping traps equivalent to No. 120 traps. Mink are suspicious of new objects and are difficult to capture in live traps. Singledoor live traps may be effective if baited and placed in dirt banks or rock walls. Double-door live traps can be effective in runways, particularly if the trap doors are wired open and the trap is left in place for some time before activating the trap. Live traps may also be effective around farmyards because mink are more accustomed to encountering human-made objects in those areas. Blind sets are very effective for mink if suitable locations can be found. These sets do not require bait or lures and are placed in areas along mink travel lanes where the animals are forced to travel in restricted areas (Fig. 3). Good sites for blind sets include small culverts, tiles, narrow springs, muskrat runs, and areas under overhanging banks or under the roots of streamside trees (Fig. 4). If necessary, the opening can be restricted with the use of a few sticks or grass to direct the mink over the trap. Another good mink set is the pocket set using bait (Fig. 5). This set is made by digging a 3-inch (7.6-cm) diameter hole horizontally back into a bank at the water level. The bottom of the hole should contain about 2 inches (5 cm) of water, and it should extend back at least 10 inches (25 cm) into the bank. Place a bait (fresh fish, muskrat carcass, or frog) in the back of the hole above water level and place the trap
Fig. 3. An obstruction set catches a mink where it is traveling along the bank and is forced into the water. Disturbance at the trap site should be kept to a minimum.
Fig. 4. The spring set catches the mink where a small feeder stream or tile outlet enters a larger stream or impoundment.
Fig. 5. The pocket set is effective for mink. Bait or lure is placed in the back of the hole above the water level. (Note: the stake is set off to one side and its top should be driven below the water line).
C-91
underwater at the opening of the hole. Traps should be solidly staked and connected to a drowning wire leading to deep water. Use live traps around a farmyard if there is a high likelihood of catching pets. Otherwise, leghold or Conibear traps can be used with or without bait in runs or holes used by mink.
Shooting
Acknowledgments
Information for this section came from a variety of published and unpublished sources. Information on damage identification was adapted from Dolbeer et al. (1994). Figures 1 and 2 from Schwartz and Schwartz (1981). Figures 3, 4, and 5 by Michael D. Stickney, from the New York Department of Environmental Conservation publication, Trapping Furbearers, Student Manual (1980), by R. Howard, L. Berchielli, C. Parsons, and M. Brown. The figures are copyrighted and are used with permission.
Some states may have restrictions on shooting mink, although many will make exceptions in damage situations. If a mink is raiding poultry and can be caught in the act, shooting the animal is a quick way to solve the problem. Normally, though, it is difficult to shoot mink because of their nocturnal habits.

Dolbeer, R. A., N. R. Holler, and D. W. Hawthorne. 1994. Identification and control of wildlife damage. Pages 474-506 in T. A. Bookhout, ed. Research and management techniques for wildlife and habitats. The Wildl. Soc., Bethesda, Maryland. Eagle, T. C., and J. S. Whitman. 1987. Mink. Pages 614-625 in M. Novak, J. A. Baker, M. E. Obbard, and B. Mallock, eds. Wild furbearer management and conservation in North America. Ontario Trappers Assoc. and Ontario Ministry Nat. Resour. Linscombe, C., N. Kinler, and R. J. Aukrich. 1982. Mink. Pages 629-643 in J. A. Chapman and G. A. Feldhamer, eds. Wild mammals of North America: biology, management, and economics. The Johns Hopkins Univ. Press, Baltimore, Maryland. Schwartz, C. W., and E. R. Schwartz. 1981. The wild mammals of Missouri. rev. ed. Univ. Missouri Press, Columbia. 356 pp.

Although an individual incident of mink predation can be costly, overall the problem is not very significant to agriculture. Mink damage control on a case-by-case basis generally can be justified from a cost/benefit standpoint, but large-scale control programs are neither necessary nor desirable. Exclusion procedures may or may not be economically justifiable, depending on the severity of the problem and the amount of repairs needed. Normally, such costs can be justified for a recurring problem when amortized over the life of the exclusion structures. Usually damage from other predators and rodents is reduced as well. Mink are important semiaquatic carnivores in wetland wildlife communities, and are also valuable as a fur resource. About 400,000 to 700,000 wild mink are harvested each year throughout North America, for an annual income exceeding $5 million. Therefore, all lethal control should be limited to specific instances of documented damage.
Editors
C-92
James E. Knight
Extension Wildlife Specialist Animal and Range Sciences Montana State University Bozeman, MT 59717
MOUNTAIN LIONS
Fig. 1. Mountain lion, Felis concolor

Exclusion
Repellents
Shooting

Toxicants
Used in conjunction with predator kill watching, or calling.

Other Methods
Install heavy woven-wire or electric fences to protect poultry and domestic animals of high value.
Cultural Methods

Fumigants
The use of hounds trained to trail and tree lions is very effective.

Trapping
Remove brush and timber near farm or ranch buildings.

Frightening
Leghold traps sizes No. 4 and 4 1/2 Newhouse. Leghold snares. Snares. Cage traps.
Night lighting, blaring music, or barking dogs may repel lions.

C-93
primary range occurs in western Canada and in the western and southwestern United States. Sparse populations occur in the south, from Texas to Florida. Several mountain lion sightings have occurred in midwestern and eastern states but populations are not recognized.
running speeds for short distances and are agile tree climbers. Generally solitary, they defend territories. Dominant males commonly kill other males, females, and cubs. A mountain lions home range is usually 12 to 22 square miles (31 to 57 km2), although it may travel 75 to 100 miles (120 to 161 km) from its place of birth. The mountain lion does not have a definite breeding season, and mating may take place at any time. In North America there are records of births in every month, although the majority of births occur in late winter and early spring. The female is in estrus for approximately 9 days. After a gestation period of 90 to 96 days, 1 to 5 young (usually 3 or 4) are born. The kittens can eat meat at 6 weeks although they usually nurse until about 3 months of age. The young usually hunt with their mother through their first winter. Historically, the North American mountain lion population was drastically reduced by the encroachment of civilization and habitat destruction. Some populations in the West are growing rapidly. Local populations may fluctuate in response to changes in prey populations, particularly deer, their primary food source. The mountain lion is usually hunted as a trophy animal with the aid of trail and sight hounds. Pelts are used for trophy mounts and rugs; claws and teeth are used for jewelry and novelty ornaments. The mountain lion is not an important species in the fur trade. In North America, it is primarily harvested in Arizona, New Mexico, Utah, Colorado, Idaho, western Montana, British Columbia, and Alberta.
Habitat
The mountain lion can be found in a variety of habitats including coniferous forests, wooded swamps, tropical forests, open grasslands, chaparral, brushlands, and desert edges. They apparently prefer rough, rocky, semiopen areas, but show no particular preferences for vegetation types. In general, mountain lion habitat corresponds with situations where deer occur in large, rugged, and remote areas.
Fig. 2. Range of the mountain lion in North America.
Identification
The mountain lion (cougar, puma, catamount, panther; Fig. 1) is the largest cat native to North America. The head is relatively small, and the face is short and rounded. The neck and body are elongate and narrow. The legs are very muscular and the hind legs are considerably longer than the forelegs. The tail is long, cylindrical, and wellhaired. The pelage of the mountain lion varies considerably. There are two major color phases red and gray. The red phase varies from buff, cinnamon, and tawny to a very reddish color, while the gray phase varies from silvery gray to bluish and slate gray. The sides of the muzzle are black. The upper lip, chin, and throat are whitish. The tail is the same color as the body, except for the tip, which is dark brown or black. The young are yellowish brown with irregular rows of black spots. Male mountain lions are usually considerably larger than females. Adults range from 72 to 90 inches (183 to 229 cm) in total length including the tail, which is 30 to 36 inches (76 to 91 cm) long. They weigh from 80 to 200 pounds (36 to 91 kg). The mountain lions skull has 30 teeth. Female mountain lions have 8 mammae.
Food Habits
Mountain lions are carnivorous. Their diet varies according to habitat, season, and geographical region. Although deer are their preferred prey and are a primary component of their diet, other prey will be taken when deer are unavailable. Other prey range from mice to moose, including rabbits, hares, beaver, porcupines, skunks, martens, coyotes, peccaries, bear cubs, pronghorn, Rocky Mountain goats, mountain sheep, elk, grouse, wild turkeys, fish, occasionally domestic livestock and pets, and even insects. Mountain lions, like bobcats and lynx, are sometimes cannibalistic.

Mountain lions are shy, elusive, and primarily nocturnal animals that occasionally are active during daylight hours. For this reason they are seldom observed, which leads the general public to believe that they are relatively rare, even in areas where lion populations are high. They attain great

Mountain lions are predators on sheep, goats, cattle, and horses. House cats, dogs, pigs, and poultry are also prey. Damage is often random and unpredictable, but when it occurs, it can consist of large numbers of livestock killed in short periods of time. Cattle, horse, and burro losses are
Range
The range of the mountain lion in North America is shown in figure 2. Its
C-94
often chronic in areas of high lion populations. Lions are considered to have negative impacts on several bighorn sheep herds in New Mexico, Arizona, Nevada, and Colorado. In areas of low deer numbers, mountain lions may kill deer faster than deer can reproduce, thus inhibiting deer population growth. This usually occurs only in situations where alternative prey keep lions in the area and higher deer populations are not close by. Lions are opportunistic feeders on larger prey, including adult elk and cattle. Individual lions may remain with a herd and prey on it consistently for many weeks, causing significant number reductions. Mountain lions cause about 20% of the total livestock predation losses in western states annually. Historically, lion damage was suffered by relatively few livestock producers who operate in areas of excellent lion habitat and high lion populations. This historic pattern has changed in recent years, as lion distribution has spread, resulting in frequent sightings and occasional damage in residential developments adjacent to rangelands, montane forests, and other mountain lion habitat. Predation typically is difficult to manage although removal of the offending animals is possible if fresh kills can be located. Sheep, goats, calves, and deer are typically killed by a bite to the top of the neck or head. Broken necks are common. Occasionally, mountain lions will bite the throat and leave marks similar to those of coyotes. The upper canine teeth of a mountain lion, however, are farther apart and considerably larger than a coyotes (1 1/2 to 2 1/4 inches [3.8 to 5.7 cm] versus 1 1/8 to 1 3/8 inches [2.8 to 3.5 cm]). Claw marks are often evident on the carcass. Mountain lions tend to cover their kills with soil, leaves, grass, and other debris. Long scratch marks (more than 3 feet [1 m]) often emanate from a kill site. Occasionally, mountain lions drag their prey to cover before feeding, leaving well-defined drag marks.
Tracks of the mountain lion are generally hard to observe except in snow or on sandy ground. The tracks are relatively round, and are about 4 inches (10 cm) across. The three-lobed heel pad is very distinctive and separates the track from large dog or coyote tracks. Claw marks will seldom show in the lion track. Heel pad width ranges from 2 to 3 inches (5 to 8 cm). The tracks of the front foot are slightly larger than those of the hind foot. The four toes are somewhat teardrop shaped and the rear pad has three lobes on the posterior end. Although uncommon, mountain lion attacks on humans occasionally occur. Fifty-three unprovoked mountain attacks on humans were documented in the US and Canada from 1890 to 1990. Nine attacks resulted in 10 human deaths. Most victims (64%) were children who were either alone or in groups of other children. Attacks on humans have increased markedly in the last two decades (see Beier 1991).

Exclusion
Heavy woven-wire fencing at least 10 feet (3 m) high is required to discourage lions. Overhead fencing is also necessary for permanent and predictable protection. Fencing is practical only for high-value livestock and poultry. Night fencing under lights or in sealed buildings is useful where practical. Electric fencing with alternating hot and ground wires can effectively exclude mountain lions. Wires should be 10 feet (3 m) high, spaced 4 inches (10 cm) apart, and charged with at least 5,000 volts.
Cultural Methods
Mountain lions prefer to hunt and stay where escape cover is close by. Removal of brush and trees within 1/4 mile (0.4 km) of buildings and livestock concentrations may result in reduced predation. Chronic mountain lion predation has led to some ranchers shifting from sheep to cattle production. In areas with high levels of predation, some ranchers have changed from cow-calf to steer operations.
Frightening
Legal Status
All of the western states except California allow the harvest of lions. They are protected in all other states where present. Generally, western states manage mountain lions very conservatively as big game animals. Lion harvests are severely restricted by the harvest methods allowed and by quotas. If mountain lion predation is suspected in states where lions are protected, contact a local wildlife management office for assistance. Most states allow for the protection of livestock from predators by landowners or their agents when damage occurs or is expected. Some states, however, require that a special permit for the control of mountain lions be obtained or that the wildlife agency personnel or their agent do the control work. Several states have a damage claim system that allows for recovery of the value of livestock lost to mountain lion predation.
Bright lights, flashing white lights, blaring music, barking dogs, and changes in the placement of scarecrow objects in livestock depredation areas may temporarily repel mountain lions. The Electronic Guard, a strobe light/ siren device developed by USDAAPHIS-ADC, may also deter lions.
Repellents
No chemical repellents are registered for mountain lions.

Toxicants
No chemical toxicants are registered for mountain lion control. Since lions prefer to eat their own kills and fresh untainted meats, an efficient delivery system for toxicants has not been developed.
C-95
1" sifted dirt Plastic pan cover
rhodium, and house cat urine and gland materials are effective attractants. Mountain lions are very curious and respond to hanging and moving flags of skin, feathers, or bright objects.
Leg Snares. Leg snares are effective
Trap jaw No. 4 or 4 1/2 Newhouse trap
when set as described in the Black Bears chapter, and as shown here in figures 4, 5, and 6. Substitute leg snares for the No. 4 or 4 1/2 leghold traps. The Aldrich-type foot snare can be used to catch mountain lions. This set is made on trails frequented by lions; stones or sticks are used to direct foot placement over the triggering device.
Snares. Snares can be set to kill mountain lions or hold them alive for tranquilization. Commercially made mountain lion snares are available from Gregerson Manufacturing (see Supplies and Materials). They should be suspended in lion runways and trails (Fig. 7), or set with baits in cubby arrangements (Figs. 8 and 9).
Stake 24" to 36"
Fig. 3. Bedded trap
No. 9 wire attachment to large drag 200 -pound rock, log, or tree
Lion-killed horse
Kill snares should be placed with the bottom of the loop approximately 16 inches (40 cm) above the ground with a loop diameter of 12 to 16 inches (30 to 41 cm). Snares intended to capture lions alive should be placed with the bottom of the loop 14 inches (36 cm) from the ground and a loop diameter of 18 to 20 inches (46 to 51 cm). Snares set for live capture should be checked daily from a distance.
Cage Traps. Large, portable cage
No. 4 1/2 Newhouse trap
Fig. 4. Trap set at mountain lion kill.
Fumigants
No chemical fumigants are registered for use on lions.

Trapping Leghold Traps. Mountain lions are extremely strong and require very strong traps. Well-bedded Newhouse traps in size No. 4 or 4 1/2 are recommended (Fig 3). Recommended sets are shown in figures 3 and 4. Use large C-96
heavy drags, sturdy stakes, or substantial trees, posts, or rocks to anchor traps to ensure against escape. Mountain lions are easily trapped along habitual travel ways, in areas of depredations, and at kill sites. Although blind sets are usually made in narrow paths frequented by lions, baits made of fish products, poultry, porcupine, rabbits, or deer parts, as well as curiosity lures like catnip, oil of
traps are used by USDA-APHIS-ADC personnel in California to capture moutain lions that kill pets and livestock in suburban areas and on small rural holdings. The traps are constructed of 4-foot (120-cm) wide, 4-foot (120-cm) high, 10-foot (3-m) long welded-wire stock panels with 2 x 4-inch (5 x 10-cm) grid. The trap is placed where the mountain lion left the kill, and it is baited with the remains of the kill. See Shuler (1992) for details on this method.
Shooting
Mountain lions sometimes return to a fresh kill to feed and can be shot from ambush when they do so. Locate an ambush site where the shooter cannot
Pie tin nailed on tree over catnip-vaseline soaked cloth
be seen and the wind carries the shooters odor away from the direction that the cat will use to approach the kill site. Set up at least 50 yards (45 m) from the kill site. Calibers from .222 Remington and larger are recommended. Mountain lions can be called into shooting range with predator calls, particularly sounds that simulate the distress cry of a doe deer. See Blair (1981) for additional information on calling lions.
Other Methods
Lion trail No. 4 1/2 trap
Guide stick
Fig. 5. Lion catnip set
Chain or cable
Swivel Snare with lock Lion trail
Guide stones
Trained dogs can be used to capture or kill depredating lions. The dogs are most often released at the kill site, where they pick up the lions scent and track the lion until it is cornered or climbs a tree. The lion can then be shot and removed, or tranquilized and transplanted at least 300 miles (480 km) away. Transplanting of lions is not recommended unless they are moved to an area where no present lion population exists, where habitat and weather are similar to those of the original area, and where there will be no problem of potential depredation by the translocated lions. Placing a mountain lion in an area with which it is unfamiliar reduces its chance of survival and is likely to disrupt the social hierarchy that exists there. Lions from a distant area may transmit a disease or contaminate a gene pool that has been maintained through a natural selection process for population survival in a specific area. In addition, depredating lions are likely to cause depredation problems in the area to which they are transplanted. Hunting of mountain lions as big game animals should be encouraged in areas of predation to lower the competition for native food sources. To reduce or eliminate future losses, quick action should be taken as soon as predation is discovered.
Stepping stick Coffee or juice can buried in soil Snare laid on tinfoil or heavy paper Tinfoil cover with an X cut in surface

Verifying livestock losses to mountain lions is difficult because of the rough mountainous terrain and vegetation cover present where most lion
C-97
Buried coffee can
Fig. 6. Lion-trail leg-snare set
Wrap wire in brush to obtain the proper height of snare loop. Clamp 14-gauge wire on snare cable here. Bend snare cable here. Dont let any brush touch the snare loop. The bottom of the snare loop should be 16 to 18 inches above the ground with loop diameter of 12 to 16 inches.
predation occurs. Many losses occur that are never confirmed. Generally, lion predation is responsible for only a small fraction of total predation losses suffered by ranchers, but individual ranchers may suffer serious losses. In Nevada, it was estimated that annual losses of range sheep to mountain lions averaged only 0.29% (Shuminski 1982). These losses, however, were not evenly distributed among ranchers. Fifty-nine sheep (mostly lambs) were killed in one incidence. The mountain lion involved apparently killed 112 sheep in the area before it was captured. In states such as Colorado and Wyoming, where damages are paid for lion predation, contact the state wildlife agency for information about the claims process and paperwork. Most systems require immediate reporting and verification of losses before payments are made.
Lion trail No. 9 wire
Fig. 7. Kill snare set
Rock overhang
Bait Cubby sides
Guide stick
Snare
Rock, stake, or drag
Fig. 8. Rock cubby snare set
C-98
Bait Woven-wire pen
4'
8' to 10' Cover with grass, branches, brush
24" to 36" stake
Fig. 9. Woven-wire pen set (snare)
Acknowledgments
Much of this information was prepared by M. L. Boddicker in Mountain Lions, Prevention and Control of Wildlife Damage (1983). I thank Keith Gregerson for use of the snare suspension and anchoring diagram and the Colorado Trappers Association for use of diagrams of lion sets from its book (Boddicker 1980). Sections on identification, habitat, food habits, and general biology are adapted from Deems and Pursley (1983). Figures 1 and 2 from Schwartz and Schwartz (1981), adapted by Jill Sack Johnson. Figures 3, 4, 5, and 6 from Boddicker (1980). Figure 7 courtesy of Gregerson Manufacturing Co., adapted by Jill Sack Johnson. Figures 8 and 9 by Boddicker, adapted by Jill Sack Johnson.

Beier, P. 1991. Cougar attacks on humans in the United States and Canada. Wildl. Soc. Bull. 19:403-412. Blair, G. 1981. Predator callers companion. Winchester Press, Tulsa, Oklahoma. 267 pp. Boddicker, M. L., ed. 1980. Managing rocky mountain furbearers. Colorado Trappers Assoc., LaPorte, Colorado. 176 pp. Bowns, J. E. 1985. Predation-depredation. Pages 204-205 in J. Roberson and F. G. Lindzey, eds. Proc. Mountain Lion Workshop, Salt Lake City, Utah. Deems, E. F. and D. Pursley, eds. 1983. North American furbearers: a contemporary reference. Int. Assoc. Fish Wildl. Agencies and the Maryland Dep. Nat. Resour., Annapolis. 223 pp. Hornocker, M. G. 1970. An analysis of mountain lion predation upon mule deer and elk in the Idaho primitive area. Wildl. Monogr. 21. 39 pp. Hornocker, M. G. 1976. Biology and life history. Pages 38-91 in G. C. Christensen and R. J. Fischer, eds. Trans. mountain lion workshop, Sparks, Nevada. Lindzey, F. G. 1987. Mountain lion. Pages 657668 in M. Novak, J. A. Baker, M. E. Obbard, and B. Malloch. Wild furbearer management and conservation in North America. Minist. Nat. Resour., Toronto, Ontario.
Paradiso, J. L. 1972. Status report on cats (Felidae) of the world, 1971. US Fish Wildl. Serv., Special Sci. Rep., Wildl. No. 157. 43 pp. Robinette, W. L., J. S. Gashwiler, and O. W. Morris. 1959. Food habits of the cougar in Utah and Nevada. J. Wildl. Manage. 23:261273. Schwartz, C. W. and E. R. Schwartz. 1981. The wild mammals of Missouri. rev. ed. Univ. Missouri Press, Columbia. 356 pp. Sealander, J. A., and P. S. Gipson. 1973. Status of the mountain lion in Arkansas, Proc. Arkansas Acad. Sci. 27:38-41. Sealander, J. A., M. G. Hornocker, W. V. Wiles, and J. P. Messick. 1973. Mountain lion social organization in the Idaho primitive area. Wildl. Mono. 35:1-60. Shaw, H. 1976. Depredation. Pages 145-176 in G. C. Christensen and R. J. Fischer, eds. Trans. mountain lion workshop, Sparks, Nevada. Shuler, J. D. 1992. A cage trap for live-trapping mountain lions. Proc. Vertebr. Pest Conf. 15:368-370. Shuminski, H. R. 1982. Mountain lion predation on domestic livestock in Nevada. Proc. Vertebr. Pest Conf. 10:62-66.
Editors
C-99
C-100
Edward K. Boggess
Wildlife Program Manager Minnesota Department of Natural Resources St. Paul, Minnesota 55155
RACCOONS
Fig. 1. The distinctively marked raccoon (Procyon lotor) is usually found in association with water.

Exclusion
Identification
The raccoon (Procyon lotor), also called coon, is a stocky mammal about 2 to 3 feet (61 to 91 cm) long, weighing 10 to 30 pounds (4.5 to 13.5 kg) (rarely 40 to 50 pounds [18 to 22.5 kg]). It is distinctively marked, with a prominent black mask over the eyes and a heavily furred, ringed tail (Fig. 1). The animal is a grizzled salt-and-pepper gray and black above, although some individuals are strongly washed with yellow. Raccoons from the prairie areas of the western Great Plains are paler in color than those from eastern portions of the region.

Trapping
Usually the best method for coping with almost all types of raccoon damage.
Remove obvious sources of food or shelter around the premises; usually not practical as a sole method of controlling damage.
Frightening
Cage traps, body-gripping, and foothold traps are very effective, especially in conjunction with exclusion and/or habitat modification.
Shooting
Several methods may be effective, but only for a short time.
Can be very effective, particularly if trained hounds are used to tree the raccoons. Local regulations may apply.

C-101
birds and waterfowl. Contrary to popular myth, raccoons do not always wash their food before eating, although they frequently play with their food in water. Raccoons breed mainly in February or March, but matings may occur from December through June, depending on latitude. The gestation period is about 63 days. Most litters are born in April or May but some late-breeding females may not give birth until June, July, or August. Only 1 litter of young is raised per year. Average litter size is 3 to 5. The young first open their eyes at about 3 weeks of age. Young raccoons are weaned sometime between 2 and 4 months of age. Raccoons are nocturnal. Adult males occupy areas of about 3 to 20 square miles (8 to 52 km2), compared to about 1 to 6 square miles (3 to 16 km2) for females. Adult males tend to be territorial and their ranges overlap very little. Raccoons do not truly hibernate, but they do hole up in dens and become inactive during severe winter weather. In the southern United States they may be inactive for only a day or two at a time, whereas in the north this period of inactivity may extend for weeks or months. In northern areas, raccoons may lose up to half their fall body weight during winter as they utilize stored body fat. Raccoon populations consist of a high proportion of young animals, with one-half to three-fourths of fall populations normally composed of animals less than 1 year in age. Raccoons may live as long as 12 years in the wild, but such animals are extremely rare. Usu-
ally less than half of the females will breed the year after their birth, whereas most adult females normally breed every year. Family groups of raccoons usually remain together for the first year and the young will often den for the winter with the adult female. The family gradually separates during the following spring and the young become independent.
Fig. 2. Distribution of the raccoon in North America.

Raccoons may cause damage or nuisance problems in a variety of ways, and their distinctive tracks (Fig. 3) often provide evidence of their involvement in damage situations. Raccoons occasionally kill poultry and leave distinctive signs. The heads of adult birds are usually bitten off and left some distance from the body. The crop and breast may be torn and chewed, the entrails sometimes eaten, and bits of flesh left near water. Young poultry in pens or cages may be killed or injured by raccoons reaching through the wire and attempting to pull the birds back through the mesh. Legs or feet of the young birds may be missing. Eggs may be removed completely from nests or eaten on the spot with only the heavily cracked shell remaining. The lines of fracture will normally be along the long axis of the egg, and the nest materials are often disturbed. Raccoons can also destroy bird nests in artificial nesting structures such as bluebird and wood duck nest boxes.
Range
The raccoon is found throughout the United States, with the exception of the higher elevations of mountainous regions and some areas of the arid Southwest (Fig. 2). Raccoons are more common in the wooded eastern portions of the United States than in the more arid western plains.
Habitat
Raccoons prefer hardwood forest areas near water. Although commonly found in association with water and trees, raccoons occur in many areas of the western United States around farmsteads and livestock watering areas, far from naturally occurring bodies of permanent water. Raccoons den in hollow trees, ground burrows, brush piles, muskrat houses, barns and abandoned buildings, dense clumps of cattail, haystacks, or rock crevices.

Walking
6"
Raccoons are omnivorous, eating both plant and animal foods. Plant foods include all types of fruits, berries, nuts, acorns, corn, and other types of grain. Animal foods are crayfish, clams, fish, frogs, snails, insects, turtles and their eggs, mice, rabbits, muskrats, and the eggs and young of ground-nesting
C-102
Front foot Hind foot
Fig. 3. The five long rear toes and the handlike front print are characteristic of raccoon tracks. Except in soft mud or sand, the heel of the hind foot seldom shows.
4 1/4"
Raccoons can cause considerable damage to garden or truck crops, particularly sweet corn. Raccoon damage to sweet corn is characterized by many partially eaten ears with the husks pulled back. Stalks may also be broken as raccoons climb to get at the ears. Raccoons damage watermelons by digging a small hole in the melon and then raking out the contents with a front paw. Raccoons cause damage or nuisance problems around houses and outbuildings when they seek to gain entrance to attics or chimneys or when they raid garbage in search of food. In many urban or suburban areas, raccoons are learning that uncapped chimneys make very adequate substitutes for more traditional hollow trees for use as denning sites, particularly in spring. In extreme cases, raccoons may tear off shingles or facia boards in order to gain access to an attic or wall space. Raccoons also can be a considerable nuisance when they roll up freshly laid sod in search of earthworms and grubs. They may return repeatedly and roll up extensive areas of sod on successive nights. This behavior is particularly common in mid- to late summer as young raccoons are learning to forage for themselves, and during periods of dry weather when other food sources may be less available. The incidence of reported rabies in raccoons and other wildlife has increased dramatically over the past 30 years. Raccoons have recently been identified as the major wildlife host of rabies in the United States, primarily due to increased prevalence in the eastern United States.
6" 6"
Fig. 4. Electric fencing can be very effective at excluding raccoons from sweet corn or other crops. Two wires are recommended, but one wire 6 inches above the ground may be sufficient. Electric fence chargers are available at farm supply dealers. The fence can be activated at dusk and turned off after daybreak.

Exclusion
greatly increase the effectiveness of a fence for excluding raccoons. Damage to sweet corn or watermelons can most effectively be stopped by excluding raccoons with a single or double hot-wire arrangement (Fig. 4). The fence should be turned on in the evening before dusk, and turned off after daybreak. Electric fences should be used with care and appropriate caution signs installed. Wrapping filament tape around ripening ears of corn (Fig. 5) or placing plastic bags over the ears is an effective method of reducing raccoon damage to sweet corn. In general, tape or fencing is more effective than bagging. When using tape, it is important to apply the type with glass-yarn filaments embedded within so that the
C-103
Legal Status
Raccoons are protected furbearers in most states, with seasons established for running, hunting, or trapping. Most states, however, have provisions for landowners to control furbearers that are damaging their property. Check with your state wildlife agency before using any lethal controls.
Exclusion, if feasible, is usually the best method of coping with raccoon damage. Poultry damage generally can be prevented by excluding the raccoons with tightly covered doors and windows on buildings or mesh-wire fences with an overhang surrounding poultry yards. Raccoons are excellent climbers and are capable of gaining access by climbing conventional fences or by using overhanging limbs to bypass the fence. A hot wire from an electric fence charger at the top of the fence will
raccoons cannot tear through the tape. Taping is more labor-intensive than fencing, but may be more practical and acceptable for small backyard gardens. Store garbage in metal or tough plastic containers with tight-fitting lids to discourage raccoons from raiding garbage cans. If lids do not fit tightly, it may be necessary to wire, weight, or clamp them down to prevent raccoons from lifting the lid to get at garbage. Secure cans to a rack or tie them to a support to prevent raccoons from tipping them over. Prevent raccoon access to chimneys by securely fastening a commercial cap of sheet metal and heavy screen over the top of the chimney (Fig. 6). Raccoon access to rooftops can be limited by removing overhanging branches and by wrapping and nailing sheets of slick metal at least 3 feet (90 cm) square around corners of buildings. This prevents raccoons from being able to get a toehold for climbing (Fig. 7). While this method may be practical for outbuildings, it is unsightly and generally unacceptable for homes. It is more practical to cover chimneys or other areas attracting raccoons to the rooftop or to remove the offending individual animals than to completely exclude them from the roof. Homeowners attempting to exclude or remove raccoons in the spring and summer should be aware of the possibility that young may also be present.
Do not complete exclusion procedures until you are certain that all raccoons have been removed from or have left the exclusion area. Raccoons frequently will use uncapped chimneys as natal den sites, raising the young on the smoke shelf or the top of the fireplace box until weaning. Homeowners with the patience to wait out several weeks of scratching, rustling, and chirring sounds will normally be rewarded by the mother raccoon moving the young from the chimney at the time she begins to wean them. Homeowners with less patience can often contact a pest removal or chimney sweep service to physically remove the raccoons. In either case, raccoon exclusion procedures should be completed immediately after the animals have left or been removed.
Fig. 5. Wrapping a ripening ear of sweet corn with reinforced filament tape as shown can reduce raccoon damage by 70% to 80%. It is important that each loop of the tape be wrapped over itself so that it forms a closed loop that cannot be ripped open by the raccoon.
There are no practical means of modifying habitat to reduce raccoon depredations, other than removing any obvious sources of food or shelter which may be attracting the raccoons to the premises. Raccoons forage over wide areas, and anything other than local habitat modification to reduce raccoon numbers is not a desirable technique for reducing damage. Raccoons sometimes will roll up freshly laid sod in search of worms or grubs. If sodded areas are not extensive, it may be possible to pin the rolls
Fig. 6. A cap or exclusion device will keep raccoons and other animals out of chimneys. These are available commercially and should be made of heavy material. Tightly clamp or fasten them to chimneys to prevent raccoons from pulling or tearing them off.
Fig. 7. Raccoon access to rooftops can be eliminated by pruning back overhanging limbs and tacking slick sheets of metal at least 3 feet square around corners of buildings.
C-104
down with long wire pins, wooden stakes, or nylon netting until the grass can take root, especially if the damage is restricted to only a portion of the yard, such as a shaded area where the grass is slower to take root. In more rural areas, use of electric fences may be effective (see section on exclusion). Because the sod-turning behavior is most prevalent in mid- to late summer when family groups of raccoons are learning to forage, homeowners may be able to avoid problems by having the sod installed in spring or early summer. In most cases, however, removal of the problem raccoons is usually necessary.
Frightening
Fig. 8. A cage-type live trap, although bulky and expensive, is often the best choice for removing raccoons near houses or buildings where there is a likelihood of capturing dogs or cats.
Although several techniques have been used to frighten away raccoons, particularly in sweet corn patches, none has been proven to be effective over a long period of time. These techniques have included the use of lights, radios, dogs, scarecrows, plastic or cloth streamers, aluminum pie pans, tin can lids, and plastic windmills. All of these may have some temporary effectiveness in deterring raccoons, but none will provide adequate long-term protection in most situations.
trap should be tightly screened with one-half inch (1.3 cm) or smaller mesh wire to prevent raccoons from reaching through the wire to pull out the bait. Conibear-type body-gripping traps are effective for raccoons and can be used in natural or artificial cubbies or boxes. Because these traps do not allow for selective release of nontarget catches, they should not be used in areas where risk of nontarget capture is high. Box or leghold traps should be used in those situations instead. It is possible, however, to use body-gripping traps in boxes or on leaning poles so that they are inaccessible to dogs (Figs. 9 and 10). Check local state laws for restrictions regarding use of Conibear-type traps out of water. Raccoons also can be captured in foothold traps. Use a No. 1 or No. 1 1/2 coilspring or stoploss trap fastened to a drag such as a tree limb 6 to 8 feet (1.8 to 2.4 m) long. For water sets, use a drowning wire that leads to deep water. The D-P trap and Egg trap are new foot-holding devices that are highly selective, dog-proof, and show promise for reducing trap-related injury. They are available from trapping supply outlets. The pocket set is very effective for raccoons, and is made along the waters edge where at least a slight bank is present (Fig. 11). Dig a hole
C-105
There are no repellents, toxicants, or fumigants currently registered for raccoon control.
Trapping
Raccoons are relatively easy to catch in traps, but it takes a sturdy trap to hold one. For homeowners with pets, a live or cage-type trap (Fig. 8) is usually the preferable alternative to a leghold trap. Traps should be at least 10 x 12 x 32 inches (25.4 x 30.5 x 81.3 cm) and wellconstructed with heavy materials. They can be baited with canned fishflavored cat food, sardines, fish, or chicken. Place a pile of bait behind the treadle and scatter a few small bits of bait outside the opening of the trap and just inside the entrance. Traps with a single door should be placed with the back against a wall, tree, or other object. The back portion of the
Fig. 9. A raccoon box is suspended 6 inches above the ground and is equipped with a Conibear-type trap. Suspended at this level, this set is dog-proof.
Fig. 10. The leaning-pole set for raccoons is another dog-proof set. The trigger should be on top to prevent the trap from being sprung by squirrels or chipmunks. Bait should be beyond the trap and covered so that it cannot be seen by birds. The set is more effective if a few drops of fish oil or other lure are placed along the pole from the ground level up to the trap.
3 to 6 inches (7.6 to 15.2 cm) in diameter horizontally back into the bank at least 10 to 12 inches (25.4 to 30.5 cm). The bottom 2 inches (5.1 cm) of the hole should be below the water level. Place a bait or lure (fish, frog, anise oil, honey) in the back of the hole, above the water level. Set the trap (a No. 1 or 1 1/2 coilspring, doublejaw or stoploss is recommended) below the water level in front of or just inside the opening. The trap should be tied to a movable drag or attached with a one-way slide to a drowning wire leading to deep water. Dirt-hole sets (Fig. 12) are effective for raccoons. Place a bait or lure in a small hole and conceal the trap under a light covering of soil in front of the hole. A No. 1 or 1 1/2 coilspring trap is recommended for this set. It is important to use a small piece of clean cloth, light plastic, or a wad of dry grass to
To deep water
Fig. 11. The pocket set is very effective for raccoons and mink. Place a bait in the back of the hole above the water level and attach the trap to a one-way slide on a drowning wire leading to deep water, or to a movable drag such as a large rock or a section of tree limb 5 to 6 feet long and 3 to 5 inches in diameter.
C-106
Dirt-hole Set
Acknowledgments
Although information for this section came from a variety of sources, I am particularly indebted to Eric Fritzell of the University of Missouri, who provided a great deal of recently published and unpublished information on raccoons in the central United States. Information on damage identification was adapted from Dolbeer et al. 1994. Figures 1 through 3 from Schwartz and Schwartz (1981).
Sifted soil Trap Bait
Stake
Figures 4, 6, and 7 by Jill Sack Johnson. Figure 5 from Conover (1987).
Bait hole 6" deep
Excavated 2" to 3" deep
Figures 8, 9, and 10 by Michael D. Stickney, from the New York Department of Environmental Conservation publication Trapping Furbearers, Student Manual (1980), by R. Howard, L. Berchielli, G. Parsons, and M. Brown. The figures are copyrighted and are used with permission. Figure 11 by J. Tom Parker, from Trapping Furbearers: Managing and Using a Renewable Natural Resource, a Cornell University publication by R. Howard and J. Kelly (1976). Used with permission. Figure 12 adapted from Controlling Problem Red Fox by F. R. Henderson (1973), Cooperative Extension Service, Kansas State University, Manhattan.
Set before covering Completed set Fig. 12. The dirt-hole set is effective for all species of terrestrial furbearers, including raccoons. The bait is placed in the hole and should be lightly covered with soil so that it is not visible.
prevent soil from getting under the round pan of the trap and keeping it from going down. If this precaution is not taken, the trap may not go off.
Shooting

Statistics are unavailable on the amount of economic damage caused by raccoons, but the damage may be offset by their positive economic and aesthetic values. In 1982 to 1983, raccoons were by far the most valuable furbearer to hunters and trappers in the United States; an estimated 4.8 million raccoons worth $88 million were harvested. Raccoons also provide recreation for hunters, trappers, and people who enjoy watching them. Although raccoon damage and nuisance problems can be locally severe, widespread raccoon control programs are not justifiable, except perhaps to prevent the spread of raccoon rabies. From a cost-benefit and ecological standpoint, prevention practices and specific control of problem individuals or localized populations are the most desirable alternatives.

Conover, M. R. 1987. Reducing raccoon and bird damage to small corn plots. Wildl. Soc. Bull. 15:268-272. Dolbeer, R. A., N. R. Holler, and D. W. Hawthorne. 1994. Identification and control of wildlife damage. Pages 474-506 in T. A. Bookhout, ed. Research and management techniques for wildlife and habitats. The Wildl. Soc. Bethesda, Maryland. Kaufmann, J. H. 1982. Raccoon and allies. Pages 567-585 in J. A. Chapman and G. A. Feldhamer, eds. Wild mammals of North America: biology, management and economics. The Johns Hopkins Univ. Press, Baltimore, Maryland. Schwartz, C. W., and E. R. Schwartz. 1981. The wild mammals of Missouri, rev. ed. Univ. Missouri Press, Columbia. 356 pp. Sanderson, G. C. 1987. Raccoon. Pages 486-499 in M. Novak, J. A. Baker, M. E. Obbard, and B. Malloch, eds. Wild furbearer management and conservation in North America. Ontario Trappers Assoc., North Bay.
Raccoons are seldom seen during the day because of their nocturnal habits. Shooting raccoons can be effective at night with proper lighting. Trained dogs can be used to tree the raccoons first. A .22-caliber rifle will effectively kill treed raccoons. Many states have restrictions on the use of artificial light to spot and shoot raccoons at night, and shooting is prohibited in most towns and cities. It is advisable to check with state and local authorities before using any lethal controls for raccoons.
Editors
C-107
C-108
Edward P. Hill
Chief, Bird Control Research Section Denver Wildlife Research Center USDA-APHIS-ADC Denver, Colorado 80225
RIVER OTTERS
Fig. 1. The North American river otter, Lutra canadensis

Exclusion
Trapping
Identification
River otters (Lutra canadensis, Fig. 1) are best known for their continuous and playful behavior, their aesthetic value, and the value of their durable, high-quality fur. They have long, streamlined bodies, short legs, and a robust, tapered tail, all of which are well adapted to their mostly aquatic habitat. They have prominent whiskers just behind and below the nose, thick muscular necks and shoulders, and feet that are webbed between the toes. Their short but thick, soft fur is brown to almost black except on the chin, throat, cheeks, chest, and occasionally
Fence small raceways, tanks, or ponds with 3 x 3-inch (7.6 x 7.6-cm) mesh wire.
Repellents
Use Conibear traps (Nos. 220 and 330), foothold traps (No. 2), and snares to control river otters in damage situations. For restocking purposes, river otters can be caught in live traps, modified No. 1 1/2 soft-catch traps, and No. 11 longspring traps.
Shooting

Toxicants

Fumigants
If nonlethal approaches cannot be employed, shooting with shotgun or small-caliber rifle can be effective in damage situations that involve only one or two otters.

C-109
Fig. 2. Distribution of the river otter in North America.
to excessive harvest. The loss of ponds and other wetland habitat that resulted from the extirpation of beaver in the late 1800s may have adversely affected continental populations of river otters more than any other factor. Increases in the range and numbers of river otters in response to the return of beaver has been dramatic, particularly in the southeastern United States. Recent releases totaling more than 1,000 otters have been made in Arizona, Colorado, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Missouri, Nebraska, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, and West Virginia in efforts to reestablish local populations. River otters are almost invariably associated with water (fresh, brackish, and salt water), although they may travel overland for considerable distances. They inhabit lakes, rivers, streams, bays, estuaries, and associated riparian habitats. They occur at much higher densities in regions of the Great Lakes, in brackish marshes and inlets, and in other coastal habitats than farther inland. In colder climates, otters frequent rapids and waterfall areas that remain ice-free. Vegetative cover and altitude do not appear to influence the river otters distribution as much as do good or adequate water quality, the availability of forage fish, and suitable denning sites.

The reproductive biology of river otters and all other weasels is complex because of a characteristic known as delayed implantation. Following breeding and fertilization in spring, eggs (blastocysts) exist in a freefloating state until the following winter or early spring. Once they implant, fetal growth lasts 60 to 65 days until the kits are born, usually in spring (March through May) in most areas. In the southern portion of the range the dates of birth occur earlier, mostly in January and February, implying implantation in November and December. Litters usually contain 2 to 4 kits, and the female alone cares for the young. They usually remain together as a family group though the fall and into the winter months. Sexual maturity in young is believed to occur at about 2 years of age in females, but later in males. River otters are chiefly nocturnal, but they frequently are active during daylight hours in undisturbed areas. Socially, the basic group is the female and her offspring. They spend much of their time feeding and at what appears to be group play, repeatedly sliding down steep banks of mud or snow. They habitually use specific sites (toilets) for defecation. Their vocalizations include chirps, grunts, and loud piercing screams. They are powerful swimmers and are continuously active, alert, and quickcharacteristics that give them immense aesthetic and recreational value. Their webbed feet, streamlined bodies, and long, tapered tails enable them to move through water with agility, grace, and speed. Seasonally, they may travel distances of 50 to 60 miles (80 to 96 km) along streams or lake shores, and their home ranges may be as large as 60 square miles (155 km2). Males have been recorded to travel up to 10 miles (16 km) in 1 night. River otters use a variety of denning sites that seem to be selected based on availability and convenience. Hollow
the belly, where it is usually lighter, varying from brown to almost beige. Adult males usually attain lengths of nearly 48 inches (122 cm) and weights of about 25 pounds (11.3 kg), but may reach 54 inches (137 cm) and 33 pounds (15 kg). Their sex can be readily distinguished by the presence of a baculum (penile bone). Females have 4 mammae on the upper chest and are slightly smaller than males. Female adults measure about 44 inches (112 cm) and weigh 19 pounds (8.6 kg). The mean weights and sizes of river otters in southern latitudes tend to be lower than those in latitudes farther north.
Range and Habitat

River otters occur throughout North America except the arctic slopes, the arid portions of the Southwest, and the intensive agricultural and industrialized areas of the midwestern United States (Fig. 2). Their precolonial range apparently included all of North America except the arid Southwest and the northernmost portions of Alaska and Canada. Otter populations are confined to water courses, lakes, and wetlands, and therefore, population densities are lower than those of terrestrial species. Their extirpation from many areas is believed to have been related more to poisoning by pesticides bio-magnified in fishes, and to the indirect adverse effects of water pollution on fish, their main food, than
C-110
Food Habits
The diet of the river otter throughout its range is primarily fish. Numerous species and varieties of fresh and anadromous fishes are eaten, but shellfish, crayfish, amphibians, and reptiles are also frequently eaten, as are several species of crabs in coastal marshes. Mammals and birds are rarely eaten. Consumption of game fishes in comparison to nongame (rough) fishes is generally in proportion to the difficulty, or ease, with which they can be caught. Because of the availability of abundant alternate food species in warm water, losses of the warm water sport fishes are believed minor compared to losses river otters can inflict on cold water species such as trout and salmon.
logs, rock crevices, nutria houses, and abandoned beaver lodges and bank dens are used. They will also frequent unused or abandoned human structures or shelters. Natal dens tend to be located on small headwater branches or streams leading to major drainages or lakes.

The presence of river otter(s) around or in a fish hatchery, aquaculture, or fish culture facility is a good indication that a damage problem is imminent. Otter scats or toilets that contain scales, exoskeletons, and other body parts of the species being produced is additional evidence that damage is ongoing. Uneaten parts of fish in shallow water and along the shore is evidence that fish are being taken. Otters usually eat all of a small catfish except for the head and major spines, whereas small trout, salmon, and many of the scaled fishes may be totally eaten. Uneaten carcasses with large puncture holes are likely attributable to herons. River otters can occasionally cause substantial damage to concentrations of fishes in marine aquaculture facilities. Often the damage involves learned feeding behavior by one or a family of otters.
trol research and experimentation has been done. Registration of repellents, toxicants, or fumigants for river otter control has not been sought. Alternate aquacultural practices and species, predator avoidance behavior, and use of protective habitat have not been fully explored. Careful assessment should be made of reported damage to determine if nonlethal preventative measures can be employed, and to ensure that if any lethal corrective measures are employed, they do not violate state or federal laws. Damage problems should then be approached on an individual basis. Cultural methods and habitat modification are normally not applicable. Opportunities to use repellents, toxicants, fumigants, and frightening devices are infrequent, yet the development of any of these or other effective nonlethal approaches would be preferable to lethal control measures.
Exclusion
fish. Hog wire-type fences have also been used effectively, but these should be checked occasionally to ensure that the lower meshes have not been spread apart or raised to allow otters to enter. Electric fences have also been used, but they require frequent inspection and maintenance, and like other fencing, are usually impractical for protecting individual small ponds, raceways, or tanks in a series. They are of greater utility as a supplement to perimeter fences surrounding an aquaculture facility.
Trapping
Legal Status
The river otter is listed in Appendix II of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Flora and Fauna (CITES). Its inclusion in this appendix subjects it to international restrictions and state/province export quotas because of its resemblance to the European Otter. Moreover, the river otter is totally protected in 17 states. Twenty-seven states have trapping seasons, and four states and two provinces have hunting seasons.
Fencing with 3 x 3-inch (7.6 x 7.6-cm) or smaller mesh wire can be an economically effective method of preventing damage at aquacultural sites that are relatively small, or where fish or aquaculture activities are concentrated. Fencing is more economical for protection of small areas where research, experimental, or propagation facilities such as raceways, tanks, ponds, or other facilities hold concentrations of
Traps that have been used effectively for river otters include the Conibear (sizes 220 and 330) or other similar body-gripping traps and leghold traps (modified No. 1 1/2 soft-catch and No. 11 double longspring). The latter two are usually employed to capture river otters for restocking purposes. In water, body-gripping traps are usually placed beneath the water surface or partially submerged where runs become narrow or restricted (Fig. 3). They are effective when partially submerged at dam crossings, the main runs in beaver ponds, or other locations where otters frequently leave the water. Body-gripping traps are also effective in otter trails that connect pools of water or that cross small peninsulas. In these sets, the trap should

Because river otter damage has been minor compared to that of other species, and because of its legal status under the CITES Agreement, little con-
Fig. 3. Body-gripping trap suspended with a pole through the spring loops in a channel set to capture a river otter.
C-111
be placed at a height to blend with the surrounding vegetation to catch an otter that is running or sliding. After ice forms on the surface of streams and lakes, some trappers bait the triggers of body-gripping traps with whole fish. River otter trapping is prohibited in 21 states and one Canadian province. Check local regulations before trapping. Most of the wild otters used for restocking in recent years were caught with No. 11 longspring traps in coastal Louisiana. These animals were usually caught in sets for nutria, in traps that were set in narrow trails and pullouts where shallow water necessitated that otters walk rather than swim. Leghold traps are also effective when placed in shallow edges of trails leading to otter toilets or other areas they frequent. Leghold traps set in out-of-water trails and peninsula crossings should be covered with damp leaves or other suitable covering. With the depression of fur prices, nuisance beaver problems and efforts to control them have increased substantially throughout the United States. The killing of otters during beaver control trapping can be minimized by using snares, but they do occasionally sustain moderate injuries. In most situations, snared river otters can be released unharmed. Accordingly, snares are neither the most effective, nor the most convenient devices for capturing river otters or removing them from an area, and therefore are not recommended for either.
Shooting
Acknowledgments
Figure 1 from Schwartz and Schwartz (1981). Figure 2 from Toweill and Tabor (1982), adapted by Dave Thornhill, University of NebraskaLincoln. Figure 3 by Clint Chapman, University of Nebraska-Lincoln.
Shooting the offending otters that cause damage problems will often effectively prevent continued losses. Although otters are shy, they are inquisitive and will often swim within close range of a small rifle or shotgun. Extreme caution should be taken to avoid ricochet when shooting a rifle at objects surrounded by water. Shooting river otters for fur harvest is legal in four states and one Canadian province. Check your local, state, and federal laws and permits governing shooting, the use of lights after dark, the seasons, and the possession of otter carcasses or parts, to ensure that planned activities are legal.

Hill, E. P. 1983. River otter (Lutra canadensis) Pages 176-181 in E. F. Deems Jr. and D. Pursley eds. North American furbearers, a contemporary reference. Internat. Assoc. Fish Wildl. Agencies and Maryland Dep. Nat. Resour. Hill, E.P., and V. Lauhachinda. 1980. Reproduction in river otters from Alabama and Georgia. Pages 478-486 in J. A. Chapman and D. Pursley eds., Proc. worldwide furbearer conf. Maryland Dep. Nat. Resour., Annapolis. Melquist, W. E., and Ana E. Dronkert 1987. River otter. Pages 626-641 in M. Novak, J. A. Baker, M. E. Obbard, and B. Malloch eds. Wild furbearer management and conservation in North America. Ontario Minister of Nat. Resour., Toronto. Toweill, D. E., and J. E. Tabor. 1982. River otter. Pages 688-703 in J. A. Chapman and G. A. Feldhamer eds. Wild mammals of North America: biology, management, and economics. The Johns Hopkins Univ. Press., Baltimore, Maryland.

Although individual incidences of river otter damage and predation on fish can cause substantial losses to pond owners and to fresh water and marine aquacultural interests, their total effects are believed to be insignificant. Given the otters aesthetic and recreational value, and its current legal status, consideration of broad control programs are unwarranted and undesirable.
Editors
C-112
James E. Knight
Extension Wildlife Specialist Animal and Range Sciences Montana State University Bozeman, MT 59717
SKUNKS
Fig. 1. Left, the striped skunk, Mephitis mephitis; right, the spotted skunk, Spilogale putorius

Exclusion
Repellents
Identification
The skunk, a member of the weasel family, is represented by four species in North America. The skunk has short, stocky legs and proportionately large feet equipped with well-developed claws that enable it to be very adept at digging. The striped skunk (Fig. 1) is characterized by prominent, lateral white stripes that run down its back. Its fur is otherwise jet black. Striped skunks are the most abundant of the four species. The body of the striped skunk is about the size of an ordinary house cat (up to 29 inches [74 cm] long and weighing about 8 pounds [3.6 kg] ). The spotted skunk (Fig. 1) is smaller (up to 21 inches [54 cm] long and weighing about 2.2 pounds [1 kg]), more weasellike, and is readily distinguishable by white spots and short, broken white stripes in a dense jet-black coat.
Buildings: close cellar and outside basement and crawl space doors; seal and cover all openings including window wells and pits. Poultry yards: install wire mesh fences. Beehives: elevate and install aluminum guards.
Some home remedies such as moth balls or flakes or ammonia solution may be useful, but no repellents are registered.
Toxicants

Fumigants
Gas cartridges.
Trapping
Box trap. Leghold trap.

Shooting
Removal of garbage, debris, and lumber piles.

Frightening
Practical only when animals are far from residential areas.

Other Methods
Lights and sounds are of limited value.
Skunk removal. Odor removal.

C-113
The hooded skunk (Mephitis macroura) is identified by hair on the neck that is spread out into a ruff. It is 28 inches (71 cm) long and weighs the same as the striped skunk. It has an extremely long tail, as long as the head and body combined. The back and tail may be all white, or nearly all black, with two white side stripes. The hog-nosed skunk (Conepatus leucontus) has a long snout that is hairless for about 1 inch (2.5 cm) at the top. It is 26 inches (66 cm) long and weighs 4 pounds (1.8 kg). Its entire back and tail are white and the lower sides and belly are black. Skunks have the ability to discharge nauseating musk from the anal glands and are capable of several discharges, not just one.
Habitat
Skunks inhabit clearings, pastures, and open lands bordering forests. On prairies, skunks seek cover in the thickets and timber fringes along streams. They establish dens in hollow logs or may climb trees and use hollow limbs.
Food Habits
Skunks eat plant and animal foods in about equal amounts during fall and winter. They eat considerably more animal matter during spring and summer when insects, their preferred food, are more available. Grasshoppers, beetles, and crickets are the adult insects most often taken. Field and house mice are regular and important items in the skunk diet, particularly in winter. Rats, cottontail rabbits, and other small mammals are taken when other food is scarce.
Fig. 2a. Range of the striped skunk in North America.
Range
The striped skunk is common throughout the United States and Canada (Fig. 2a). Spotted skunks are uncommon in some areas, but distributed throughout most of the United States and northern Mexico (Fig 2b). The hooded skunk and the hog-nosed skunk are much less common than striped and spotted skunks. Hooded skunks are limited to southwestern New Mexico and western Texas. The hog-nosed skunk is found in southern Colorado, central and southern New Mexico, the southern half of Texas, and northern Mexico.

Skunks become a nuisance when their burrowing and feeding habits conflict with humans. They may burrow under porches or buildings by entering foundation openings. Garbage or refuse left outdoors may be disturbed by skunks. Skunks may damage beehives by attempting to feed on bees. Occasionally, they feed on corn, eating only the lower ears. If the cornstalk is knocked over, however, raccoons are more likely the cause of damage. Damage to the upper ears of corn is indicative of birds, deer, or squirrels. Skunks dig holes in lawns, golf courses, and gardens to search for insect grubs found in the soil. Digging normally appears as small, 3- to 4-inch (7- to 10-cm) cone-shaped holes or patches of upturned earth. Several other animals, including domestic dogs, also dig in lawns. Skunks occasionally kill poultry and eat eggs. They normally do not climb fences to get to poultry. By contrast,
Fig. 2b. Range of the spotted skunk in North America.

Adult skunks begin breeding in late February. Yearling females (born in the preceding year) mate in late March. Gestation usually lasts 7 to 10 weeks. Older females bear young during the first part of May, while yearling females bear young in early June. There is usually only 1 litter annually. Litters commonly consist of 4 to 6 young, but may have from 2 to 16. Younger or smaller females have smaller litters than older or larger
females. The young stay with the female until fall. Both sexes mature by the following spring. The age potential for a skunk is about 10 years, but few live beyond 3 years in the wild. The normal home range of the skunk is l/2 to 2 miles (2 to 5 km) in diameter. During the breeding season, a male may travel 4 to 5 miles (6.4 to 8 km) each night. Skunks are dormant for about a month during the coldest part of winter. They may den together in winter for warmth, but generally are not sociable. They are nocturnal in habit, rather slow-moving and deliberate, and have great confidence in defending themselves against other animals.
C-114
rats, weasels, mink, and raccoons regularly climb fences. If skunks gain access, they will normally feed on the eggs and occasionally kill one or two fowl. Eggs usually are opened on one end with the edges crushed inward. Weasels, mink, dogs and raccoons usually kill several chickens or ducks at a time. Dogs will often severely mutilate poultry. Tracks may be used to identify the animal causing damage. Both the hind and forefeet of skunks have five toes. In some cases, the fifth toe may not be obvious. Claw marks are usually visible, but the heels of the forefeet normally are not. The hindfeet tracks are approximately 2 1/2 inches long (6.3 cm) (Fig. 3). Skunk droppings can often be identified by the undigested insect parts they contain. Droppings are 1/4 to 1/2 inch (6 to 13 mm) in diameter and 1 to 2 inches (2.5 to 5 cm) long. Odor is not always a reliable indicator of the presence or absence of skunks. Sometimes dogs, cats, or other animals that have been sprayed by skunks move under houses and make owners mistakenly think skunks are present. Rabies may be carried by skunks on occasion. Skunks are the primary carriers of rabies in the Midwest. When rabies outbreaks occur, the ease with which rabid animals can be contacted increases. Therefore, rabid skunks are prime vectors for the spread of the virus. Avoid overly aggressive skunks that approach without hesitation. Any skunk showing abnormal behavior, such as daytime activity, may be rabid and should be treated with caution. Report suspicious behavior to local animal control authorities.
Front Fig. 3. Tracks of the striped skunk. Hind

Exclusion
Debris such as lumber, fence posts, and junk cars provide shelter for skunks, and may encourage them to use an area. Clean up the area to discourage skunks.
Frightening
Legal Status
Striped skunks are not protected by law in most states, but the spotted skunk is fully protected in some. Legal status and licensing requirements vary. Check with state wildlife officials before removing any skunks.
Keep skunks from denning under buildings by sealing off all foundation openings. Cover all openings with wire mesh, sheet metal, or concrete. Bury fencing 1 1/2 to 2 feet (0.4 to 0.6 m) where skunks can gain access by digging. Seal all ground-level openings into poultry buildings and close doors at night. Poultry yards and coops without subsurface foundations may be fenced with 3-foot (1-m) wire mesh fencing. Bury the lowest foot (0.3 m) of fencing with the bottom 6 inches (15.2 cm) bent outward from the yard or building. Skunks can be excluded from window wells or similar pits with mesh fencing. Place beehives on stands 3 feet (1 m) high. It may be necessary to install aluminum guards around the bases of hives if skunks attempt to climb the supports. Skunks, however, normally do not climb. Use tight-fitting lids to keep skunks out of garbage cans.
Lights and sounds may provide temporary relief from skunk activity.
Repellents
There are no registered repellents for skunks. Most mammals, including skunks, can sometimes be discouraged from entering enclosed areas with moth balls or moth flakes (naphthalene). This material needs to be used in sufficient quantities and replaced often if it is to be effective. Ammonia-soaked cloths may also repel skunks. Repellents are only a temporary measure. Permanent solutions require other methods.
Toxicants
No toxicants are registered for use in controlling skunks.

Fumigants
Properly dispose of garbage or other food sources that will attract skunks. Skunks are often attracted to rodents living in barns, crawl spaces, sheds, and garages. Rodent control programs may be necessary to eliminate this attraction.
Two types of gas cartridges are registered for fumigating skunk burrows. Fumigation kills skunks and any other animals present in the burrows by suffocation or toxic gases. Follow label directions and take care to avoid fire hazards when used near structures.
C-115
24"
6"
completely covered, it is a proven, effective method for relocating a skunk. If the skunk is to be killed, the US Department of Agriculture recommends shooting or euthanization with CO2.
Leghold Traps. Leghold traps
Top View
24" 12"
should not be used to catch skunks near houses because of potential problem of scent discharge. To remove a live skunk caught in a leghold trap, a veterinarian or wildlife official may first inject it with a tranquilizer, then remove it from the trap for disposal or release elsewhere.
Shooting
12" Front view
36" Side view
Metal triangle keeps door from raising.
Skunks caught in leghold traps may be shot. Shooting the skunk in the middle of the back to sever the spinal cord and paralyze the hind quarters may prevent the discharge of scent. Shooting in the back should be followed immediately by shooting in the head. Most people who shoot trapped skunks should expect a scent discharge.
Other Methods Skunk Removal. The following steps are suggested for removing skunks already established under buildings.
Galvanized metal treadle Galvanized metal door Fig. 4. A box trap can be easily built using scrap lumber and small-mesh, welded-wire fencing.
1. Seal all possible entrances along the foundation, but leave the main burrow open. 2. Sprinkle a layer of flour 2 feet (0.6 m) in circumference on the ground in front of the opening. 3. After dark, examine the flour for tracks which indicate that the skunk has left to feed. If tracks are not present, reexamine in an hour. 4. After the den is empty, cover the remaining entrance immediately. 5. Reopen the entrance the next day for 1 hour after dark to allow any remaining skunks to exit before permanently sealing the entrance. A wooden door suspended from wire can be improvised to allow skunks to leave a burrow but not to reenter. Burrows sealed from early May to
Trapping Box Traps. Skunks can be caught in
live traps set near the entrance to their den. When a den is used by more than one animal, set several traps to reduce capture time. Live traps can be purchased or built. Figures 4 and 5 illustrate traps that can be built easily. Consult state wildlife agency personnel before trapping skunks. Use canned fish-flavored cat food to lure skunks into traps. Other food baits such as peanut butter, sardines, and chicken entrails are also effective. Before setting live traps, cover them with canvas to reduce the chances of a
C-116
trapped skunk discharging its scent. The canvas creates a dark, secure environment for the animal. Always approach a trap slowly and quietly to prevent upsetting a trapped skunk. Gently remove the trap from the area and release or kill the trapped skunk. Captured skunks should be transported at least 10 miles (16 km) and released in a habitat far from human dwellings. Attach a length of heavy string or fishing line to the trap cover and release the skunk from a distance. Removing and transporting a livetrapped skunk may appear to be a precarious business, but if the trap is
Trigger mechanism Trigger hole and plate
1 1/4" trigger hole
Underside
1/2" hole in end
5"
10"
Side view
2 1/2"
Notch
1/2" x 9" dowel
6 1/2"
Attach bait
Fig. 5. Alternate design for a box trap.
C-117
mid-August may leave young skunks trapped in the den. If these young are mobile they can usually be boxtrapped easily using the methods previously described. Where skunks have entered a garage, cellar, or house, open the doors to allow the skunks to exit on their own. Do not prod or disturb them. Skunks trapped in cellar window wells or similar pits may be removed by nailing cleats at 6-inch (15-cm) intervals to a board. Lower the board into the well and allow the skunk to climb out on its own. Skunks are mild-tempered animals that will not defend themselves unless they are cornered or harmed. They usually provide a warning before discharging their scent, stamping their forefeet rapidly and arching their tails over their backs. Anyone experiencing such a threat should retreat quietly and slowly. Loud noises and quick, aggressive actions should be avoided.
Odor Removal. Many individuals find the smell of skunk musk nauseating. The scent is persistent and difficult to remove. Diluted solutions of vinegar or tomato juice may be used to eliminate most of the odor from people, pets, or clothing. Clothing may also be soaked in weak solutions of household chloride bleach or ammonia. On camping trips, clothing can be smoked over a cedar or juniper fire. Neutroleum alpha is a scent-masking solution that can be applied to the sprayed area to reduce the odor. It is available through some commercial cleaning suppliers and the local USDA-APHIS-ADC office. Walls or structural areas that have been sprayed by skunks can be washed down with vinegar or tomato juice solutions or sprayed with neutroleum alpha. Use ventilation fans to speed up the process of odor dissipation. Where musk has entered the eyes, severe
burning and an excessive tear flow may occur. Temporary blindness of 10 or 15 minutes may result. Rinse the eyes with water to speed recovery.
Acknowledgments
Much of the information for this chapter was based on a publication by F. Robert Henderson. Figures 1 and 2 from Schwartz and Schwartz (1981). Figures 3 through 5 by Jerry Downs, Graphic Artist, Cooperative Extension Service, New Mexico State University.

Skunks should not be needlessly destroyed. They are highly beneficial to farmers, gardeners, and landowners because they feed on large numbers of agricultural and garden pests. They prey on field mice and rats, both of which may girdle trees or cause health problems. Occasionally they eat moles, which cause damage to lawns, or insects such as white grubs, cutworms, potato beetle grubs, and other species that damage lawns, crops, or hay. Skunks occasionally feed on groundnesting birds, but their impact is usually minimal due to the large abundance of alternative foods. Skunks also feed on the eggs of upland game birds and waterfowl. In waterfowl production areas, nest destruction by eggseeking predators such as skunks can significantly reduce reproduction. The occasional problems caused by the presence of skunks are generally outweighed by their beneficial habits. Some people even allow skunks to den under abandoned buildings or woodpiles. Unless skunks become really bothersome, they should be left alone. An economic evaluation of the feeding habits of skunks shows that only 5% of the diet is made up of items that are economically valuable to people. The hide of the skunk is tough, durable, and able to withstand rough use. Generally there is little market for skunk pelts but when other furbearer prices are high, skunks are worth pelting.

Burt, W. H., and R. P. Grossenheider. 1976. A field guide to the mammals, 3d ed. Houghton Mifflin Co., Boston. 289 pp. Deems, E. F., Jr., and D. Pursley, eds. 1983. North American furbearers: a contemporary reference. Int. Assoc. Fish Wildl. Agencies and Maryland Dep. Nat. Resour. 223 pp. Godin, A. J. 1982. Striped and hooded skunks. Pages 674-687 in J. A. Chapman and G. A. Feldhamer, eds. Wild mammals of North America: biology, management, and economics. The Johns Hopkins Univ. Press, Baltimore, Maryland. Howard, W. E., and R. E. Marsh. 1982. Spotted and hog-nosed skunks. Pages 664-673 in J. A. Chapman and G. A. Feldhamer, eds. Wild mammals of North America: biology, management, and economics. The Johns Hopkins Univ. Press, Baltimore, Maryland. Rosatte, Richard C. 1987. Striped, spotted, hooded, and hog-nosed skunk. Pages 598613 in M. Novak, J. A. Baker, M. E. Obbard, and B. Malloch, eds. Wild furbearer management and conservation in North America. Ministry of Nat. Resour., Ontario, Canada.
Editors
C-118
F. Robert Henderson
Extension Specialist Animal Damage Control Department of Animal Sciences and Industry Kansas State University Manhattan, Kansas 66506
WEASELS
Fig. 1. Least weasel, Mustela nivalis (left); Shorttailed weasel, M. erminea, in summer coat (middle); Short-tailed weasel in winter coat (right).

Exclusion
Identification
Weasels belong to the Mustelidae family, which also includes mink, martens, fishers, wolverines, badgers, river otters, black-footed ferrets, and four species of skunks. Although members of the weasel family vary in size and color (Fig. 1), they usually have long, slender bodies, short legs, rounded ears, and anal scent glands. A weasels hind legs are barely more than half as long as its body (base of head to base of tail). The weasels forelegs also are notably short. These short legs on a long, slender body may account for the long-tailed weasels (Mustela
frenata) distinctive running gait. At every bound the long body loops upward, reminding one of an inchworm. In the typical bounding gait of the weasel, the hind feet register almost, if not exactly, in the front foot impressions, with the right front foot and hind feet lagging slightly behind. The stride distance normally is about 10 inches (25 cm). Male weasels are distinctly larger than females. The long-tailed and shorttailed (M. erminea) weasels have a black tip on their tails, while the least weasel (M. nivalis) lacks the black tip
Block all entrances 1 inch (2.5 cm) or larger with 1/2-inch (1.3-cm) hail screen or similar materials.
Trapping
Set No. 0 or No. 1 leghold traps inside a protective wooden box. Live traps.
Other Methods
Not applicable or effective.

C-119
Fig. 2. Identification of the weasels.
Range
Three species of weasels live in North America. The most abundant and widespread is the long-tailed weasel. Some that occur in parts of Kansas, Oklahoma, Texas, and New Mexico have a dark mask and are often called bridled weasels. The short-tailed weasel occurs in Canada, Alaska, and the northeastern, Great Lakes, and northwestern states, while the least weasel occurs in Canada, Alaska, and the northeastern and Great Lakes states (Fig. 3).
Least weasel, Mustela nivalis 8 inches long; 2 1/2 ounces in weight short tail without black tip white feet
Short-tailed weasel, M. erminea 13 inches long; 6 ounces in weight black tip on tail white feet
Habitat
Some authors report finding weasels only in places with abundant water, although small rodents, suitable as food, were more abundant in surrounding habitat. Weasels are commonly found along roadsides and around farm buildings. The absence of water to drink is thought to be a limiting factor (Henderson and Stardom 1983). A typical den has two surface openings about 2 feet (61 cm) apart over a burrow that is 3 to 10 feet (0.9 to 3 m) long. Other weasel dens have been found in the trunk of an old uprooted oak, in a bag of feathers, in a threshing machine, in the trunk of a hollow tree, in an old mole run, a gopher burrow, and a prairie dog burrow (Henderson and Stardom 1983).
18-inch ruler
Long-tailed weasel, M. frenata 16 inches long; 12 ounces in weight black tip on tail brown feet
(Fig. 2). The long-tailed weasel sometimes is as long as 24 inches (61 cm). The short-tailed weasel is considerably smaller, rarely longer than 13 inches (33 cm) and usually weighing between 3 and 6 ounces (87 and 168 g). Just as
its common name implies, the least weasel is the smallest, measuring only 7 or 8 inches (18 to 20 cm) long and weighing 1 to 2 1/2 ounces (28 to 70 g). Many people assume the least weasel is a baby weasel since it is so small.
Fig. 3. Range of the (a) long-tailed weasel, (b) short-tailed weasel, and (c) least weasel in North America.
C-120
Weasel population densities vary with season, food availability, and species. In favorable habitat, maximum densities of the least weasel may reach 65 per square mile (169/km2); the short-tailed weasel, 21 per square mile (54/km2); and the long-tailed weasel, 16 to 18 per square mile (40 to 47/km2). Population densities fluctuate considerably with year-to-year changes in small mammal abundance, and densities differ greatly among habitats.
Fig. 4. Weasels are efficient killers, preying on mice as well as on pocket gophers, birds, and other animals.
Weasels, like all mustelids, produce a pungent odor. When irritated, they discharge the odor, which can be detected at some distance (Jackson 1961). Long-tailed weasels mate in late summer, mostly from July through August. Females are induced ovulators and will remain in heat for several weeks if they are not bred. There is a long delay in the implantation of the blastocyst in the uterus, and the young are born the following spring, after a gestation period averaging 280 days. Average litters consist of 6 young, but litters may include up to 9 young. The young are blind at birth and their eyes open in about 5 weeks. They mature rapidly and at 3 months of age the females are fully grown. Young females may become sexually mature in the summer of their birth year.
Food Habits
The weasel family belongs to the order Carnivora. With the exception of the river otter, all members of the weasel family feed primarily on insects and small rodents (Fig. 4). Their diet consists of whatever meat they can obtain and may include birds and bird eggs. As predators, they play an important role in the ecosystem. Predators tend to hunt the most abundant prey, turning to another species if the numbers of the first prey become scarce. In this way, they seldom endanger the long-term welfare of the animal populations they prey upon. Long-tailed weasels typically prey on one species that is continually available. The size of the prey population varies from year to year and from season to season. At times, weasels will kill many more individuals of a prey species than they can immediately eat. Ordinarily, they store the surplus for future consumption, much the same as squirrels gather and store nuts. Pocket gophers are the primary prey of long-tailed weasels. In some regions these gophers are regarded as nuisances because they eat alfalfa plants in irrigated meadows and native plants in mountain meadows where livestock graze. Because of its predation on pocket gophers and other rodents, the long-tailed weasel is sometimes referred to as the farmers best friend. This statement, however, is
an oversimplification of a biological relationship. Weasels prefer a constant supply of drinking water. The long-tailed weasel drinks up to 0.85 fluid ounces (26 ml) daily.

Weasels are active in both winter and summer; they do not hibernate. Weasels are commonly thought to be nocturnal but evidence indicates they are more diurnal in summer than in winter. Home range sizes vary with habitat, population density, season, sex, food availability, and species (Svendsen 1982). The least weasel has the smallest home range. Males use 17 to 37 acres (7 to 15 ha), females 3 to 10 acres (1 to 4 ha). The short-tailed weasel is larger than the least weasel and has a larger home range. Male short-tailed weasels use an average of 84 acres (34 ha), and females 18 acres (7 ha), according to snow tracking. The long-tailed weasel has a home range of 30 to 40 acres (12 to 16 ha), and males have larger home ranges in summer than do females. The weasels appear to prefer hunting certain coverts with noticeable regularity but rarely cruise the same area on two consecutive nights.

Occasionally weasels raid poultry houses at night and kill or injure domestic fowl. They feed on the warm blood of victims bitten in the head or neck. Rat predation on poultry usually differs in that portions of the body may be eaten and carcasses dragged into holes or concealed locations.
Legal Status
All three weasels generally are considered furbearers under state laws, and a season is normally established for fur harvest. Check local and state laws before undertaking weasel control measures.
C-121

Exclusion
Weasels can be excluded from poultry houses and other structures by closing all openings larger than 1 inch (2.5 cm). To block openings, use 1/2-inch (1.3cm) hardware cloth, similar wire mesh, or other materials.
Trapping
Weasels are curious by nature and are rather easily trapped in No. 0 or 1 steel leghold traps. Professional trappers in populated areas use an inverted wooden box 1 or 2 feet (30 or 60 cm) long, such as an apple box, with a 2- to 3-inch (5- to 8cm) round opening cut out in the lower part of both ends (Fig. 5). Dribble a trail of oats or other grain through the box. Mice will frequent it to eat the grain and weasels will investigate the scent of the mice. A trap should be set inside the box, directly under the hole at each end of the box. Keep the trap pan tight to prevent the mice from setting off the trap. Alternatively, make a hole in only one end of the box and suspend a fresh meat bait against the opposite end of the box. Set the trap directly under the bait. Trap sets in old brush piles, under outbuildings, under fences, and along stone walls are also suggested, since the weasel is likely to investigate any small covered area. Trap sets should be protected by objects such as boards or tree limbs to protect nontarget wildlife. Weasels can also be captured in live traps with fresh meat as suitable bait. If trapping to alleviate damage is to be conducted at times other than the designated season, the local wildlife agency representative must be notified.
Fig. 5. A trap set within a wooden box can successfully catch weasels without catching larger nontarget species.
beneficial animals and game species. The killing of domestic poultry may come only after the rat population around the farmyard is diminished. In fact, rats may have destroyed more poultry than the weasel. In most cases, a farmer lives with weasels on the farm for years without realizing that they are even there, until they kill a chicken.
Hamilton, W. J., Jr. 1933. The weasels of New York. Am. Midl. Nat. 14:289-337. Henderson, F. R., and R. R. P. Stardom. 1983. Shorttailed and long-tailed weasel. Pages 134-144 in E. F. Deems, Jr. and D. Purseley, eds. North American furbearers: a contemporary reference. Internatl. Assoc. Fish Wildl. Agencies Maryland Dep. Nat. Resour. Jackson, H. H. T. 1961. Mammals of Wisconsin. Univ. Wisconsin Press, Madison. 504 pp. King, C. M. 1975. The home range of the weasel (Mustela nivalis) in an English woodland. J. An. Ecol. 44:639-668. MacLean, S. F., Jr., B. M. Fitzgerald, and F. A. Pitelka. 1974. Population cycles in arctic lemmings: winter reproduction and predation by weasels. Arctic Alpine Res. 6:112. Polderboer, E. B., L. W. Kuhn, and G. O. Hendrickson. 1941. Winter and spring habits of weasels in central Iowa. J. Wildl. Manage. 5:115-119. Quick, H. F. 1944. Habits and economics of New York weasel in Michigan. J. Wildl. Manage. 8:71-78. Quick, H. F. 1951. Notes on the ecology of weasels in Gunnison County, Colorado. J. Mammal. 32:28-290. Schwartz, C. W. and E. R. Schwartz. 1981. The Wild mammals of Missouri, rev. ed. Univ. Missouri Press, Columbia. 356 pp. Svendsen, G. E. 1982. Weasels. Pages 613-628 in J. A. Chapman and G. A. Feldhamer, eds., Wild mammals of North America: biology, management, and economics. The Johns Hopkins Univ. Press, Baltimore, Maryland.
Acknowledgments
Figures 1, 2, and 4 adapted by Jill Sack Johnson from Weasel Family of Alberta (no date), Alberta Fish and Wildlife Division, Alberta Energy and Natural Resources, Edmonton (with permission). Figure 3 adapted from Burt and Grossenheider (1976) by Jill Sack Johnson. Figure 5 adapted from a publication by the US Fish and Wildlife Service.

Burt, W. H., and R. P. Grossenheider. 1976. A field guide to the mammals, 3d ed. Houghton Mifflin Co., Boston. 289 pp. Fitzgerald, B. M. 1977. Weasel predation on a cyclic population of the montane vole (Microtus montanus) in California. J. An. Ecol. 46:367-397. Glover, F. A. 1942. A population study of weasels in Pennsylvania. M.S. Thesis, Pennsylvania State Univ. University Park. 210 pp. Hall, E. R. 1951. American weasels. Univ. Kansas Museum Nat. Hist. Misc. PubL. 4:1-466. Hall, E. R. 1974. The graceful and rapacious weasel. Nat. Hist. 83(9):44-50.

Svendsen (1982) writes: Overall, weasels are more of an asset than a liability. They eat quantities of rats and mice that otherwise would eat and damage additional crops and produce. This asset is partially counter-balanced by the fact that weasels occasionally kill
C-122
Editors
William J. Paul
District Supervisor USDA-APHISAnimal Damage Control Grand Rapids, Michigan 55744

Philip S. Gipson
WOLVES
Unit Leader Kansas Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit Division of Biology Kansas State University Manhattan, Kansas 66506-3501
Fig. 1. Adult gray wolf, Canis lupus

Exclusion
Frightening
Shooting
Livestock guarding dogs. Flashing lights and siren devices.

Toxicants
Use predator calls or voice howling to lure wolves into rifle range. Aerial hunting from a helicopter or fixed-wing aircraft. Hunting seasons for legal fur harvest.
Other Methods
Net wire fences. Electric fences.

Cultural Methods

Trapping
Proper disposal of dead livestock carcasses. Do not allow calving or lambing on remote, wooded pastures. Pen small flocks of sheep at night or bring near buildings.
No. 4, 14, 114, or 4 1/2 Newhouse leghold traps, No. 4 or 7 McBride traps, Braun wolf trap. Thompson 4xx or 5xx snares, Gregerson No. 14 wolf snare. Trapping seasons for legal fur harvest.
Use a dart gun to chemically immobilize wolves from a helicopter. Long-range land-use planning should take into account potential conflicts between wolves and livestock.

C-123
Identification
Two species of wolves occur in North America, gray wolves (Canis lupus) and red wolves (Canis rufus). The common names are misleading since individuals of both species vary in color from grizzled gray to rusty brown to black. Some gray wolves are even white. The largest subspecies of the gray wolf are found in Alaska and the Northwest Territories of Canada. Adult male gray wolves typically weigh 80 to 120 pounds (36.3 to 54.4 kg), and adult females 70 to 90 pounds (31.8 to 40.8 kg). Although males rarely exceed 120 pounds (54.4 kg), and females 100 pounds (45.4 kg), some individuals may weigh much more. Gray wolves vary in length from about 4.5 to 6.5 feet (1.4 to 2 m) from nose to tip of tail and stand 26 to 36 inches (66 to 91.4 cm) high at the shoulders (Mech 1970). Red wolves are intermediate in size between gray wolves and coyotes. Typical red wolves weigh 45 to 65 pounds (20.4 to 29.5 kg). Total length ranges from about 4.4 to 5.4 feet (1.3 to 1.6 m) (Paradiso and Nowak 1972). Wherever wolves occur, their howls may be heard. The howl of a wolf carries for miles on a still night. Both gray wolves and red wolves respond to loud imitations of their howl or to sirens.
1970s, biologists captured the last few red wolves for captive breeding before the species was lost to hybridization. The red wolf was considered extinct in the wild until 1987, when reintroductions began. Red wolf recovery attempts have been made on Bulls Island near Charleston, South Carolina, and on Alligator River National Wildlife Refuge in eastern North Carolina (Phillips and Parker 1988). The Great Smoky Mountains National Park in western North Carolina and eastern Tennessee is also being considered as a red wolf reintroduction area. The goal of the red wolf recovery plan is to return red wolves to nonendangered status by re-establishment of self-sustaining wild populations in at least 2 locations within the species historic range (Abraham et al. 1980:14).
Fig. 2. Current range of the gray wolf (light) and red wolf (dark) in North America.
Minnesota has the largest population of wolves in the lower 48 states, estimated at 1,550 to 1,750. A population of wolves exists on Isle Royale in Lake Superior, but the population is at an all-time low of 12 animals. In recent years, wolves have recolonized Wisconsin, the Upper Peninsula of Michigan, northwestern Montana, central and northern Idaho, and northern Washington. A few isolated gray wolves may also exist in remote areas of Mexico. Current efforts to reestablish gray wolves are being conducted in northwestern Montana, central Idaho, the Greater Yellowstone area, and northern Washington (USFWS 1987). Recovery through natural recolonization is likely in northwestern Montana, central Idaho, and northern Washington. Due to Greater Yellowstones geographic isolation from areas with established wolf populations, recovery there would likely require the reintroduction of wolves into Yellowstone National Park. Red wolves originally occurred from central Texas to Florida and north to the Carolinas, Kentucky, southern Illinois, and southern Missouri (Young and Goldman 1944). Years of predator control and habitat conversion had, by 1970, reduced the range of the red wolf to coastal areas of southeastern Texas and possibly southwestern Louisiana. When red wolf populations became low, interbreeding with coyotes became a serious problem. In the mid-
Habitat
Gray wolves occupy boreal forests and forest/agricultural edge communities in Minnesota, northern Wisconsin, and northern Michigan. In northwest Montana, northern Idaho, and northern Washington, wolves inhabit forested areas. In Canada and Alaska, wolves inhabit forested regions and alpine and arctic tundra. In Mexico, gray wolves are limited to remote forested areas in the Sierra Madre Occidental Mountains. The last areas inhabited by red wolves were coastal prairie and coastal marshes of southeastern Texas and possibly southwestern Louisiana. These habitats differ markedly from the diverse forested habitats found over most of the historic range of red wolves.
Range
During the 1800s, gray wolves ranged over the North American continent as far south as central Mexico. They did not inhabit the southeastern states, extreme western California, or far western Mexico (Young and Goldman 1944). In the late 1800s and early 1900s, wolves were eliminated from most regions of the contiguous United States by control programs that incorporated shooting, trapping, and poisoning. Today, an estimated 55,000 gray wolves exist in Canada and 5,900 to 7,200 in Alaska. In the contiguous United States, the distribution of the gray wolf has been reduced to approximately 3% of its original range.
C-124
Food Habits
Mech (1970) reported that gray wolves prey mainly on large animals including white-tailed deer, mule deer, moose, caribou, elk, Dall sheep, bighorn sheep, and beaver. Small mammals and carrion make up the balance of their diet. During the 1800s, gray wolves on the Great Plains preyed
mostly on bison. As bison were eliminated and livestock husbandry established, wolves commonly killed livestock. Red wolves in southern Texas fed primarily on small animals such as nutria, rabbits, muskrats, and cotton rats (Shaw 1975). Carrion, wild hogs, calves, and other small domestic animals were also common food items.
been reported as early as January and as late as April. Pups are born 60 to 63 days after conception, usually during April or May. Most litters contain 4 to 7 young. Courtship is an intimate part of social life in the pack. Mating usually occurs only between the dominant (alpha) male and female of the pack. Thus, only 1 litter will be produced by a pack during a breeding season. All pack members aid in rearing the pups. Dominance is established within days after gray wolf pups are born. As pups mature, they may disperse or maintain close social contact with parents and other relatives and remain members of the pack. Little is known about reproduction in red wolves, but it appears to be similar to that of gray wolves. Red wolves may breed from late December to early March. Usually 6 to 8 pups are produced.

Gray wolves are highly social, often living in packs of two to eight or more individuals. A pack consists of an adult breeding pair, young of the year, and offspring one or more years old from previous litters that remain with the pack. The pack structure of gray wolves increases the efficiency of wolves in killing large prey. Red wolves may be less social than gray wolves, although red wolves appear to maintain a group social structure throughout the year. Each wolf pack has a home range or territory that it defends against intruding wolves. Packs maintain their territories by scent marking and howling. On the tundra, packs of gray wolves may have home ranges approaching 1,200 square miles (3,108 km2). In forested areas, ranges are much smaller, encompassing 40 to 120 square miles (104 to 311 km2). Some wolves leave their pack and territory and become lone wolves, drifting around until they find a mate and a vacant area in which to start their own pack, or wandering over large areas without settling. Extreme movements, of 180 to 551 miles (290 to 886 km), have been reported. These movements were probably of dispersing wolves. The home ranges of red wolves are generally smaller than those of gray wolves. Red wolf home ranges averaged 27.3 square miles (71 km2) in southern Texas (Shaw 1975). Wild gray wolves usually are sexually mature at 22 months of age. Breeding usually takes place from early February through March, although it has
Cattle, especially calves, are the most common livestock taken. Wolves are capable of killing adult cattle but seem less inclined to do so if calves are available. Attacks usually involve only one or two cattle per event. Depredation on sheep or poultry often involves surplus killing. In Minnesota, wolf attacks on sheep may leave several (up to 35) individuals killed or injured per night. Attacks on flocks of domestic turkeys in Minnesota have resulted in nightly losses of 50 to 200 turkeys. Wolf attacks on livestock are similar to attacks on wild ungulates. A wolf chases its prey, lunging and biting at the hindquarters and flanks. Attacks on large calves, adult cattle, or horses are characterized by bites and large ragged wounds on the hindquarters, flanks, and sometimes the upper shoulders (Roy and Dorrance 1976). When the prey is badly wounded and falls, a wolf will try to disembowel the animal. Attacks on young calves or sheep are characterized by bites on the throat, head, neck, back, or hind legs. Wolves usually begin feeding on livestock by eating the viscera and hindquarters. Much of the carcass may be eaten, and large bones chewed and broken. The carcass is usually torn apart and scattered with subsequent feedings. A wolf can eat 18 to 20 pounds (8.1 to 9 kg) of meat in a short period. Large livestock killed by wolves are consumed at the kill site. Smaller livestock may be consumed at the kill site in one or two nights or they may be carried or dragged a short distance from the kill site. Wolves may carry parts of livestock carcasses back to a den or rendezvous sites. Wolves may also carry off and bury parts of carcasses. Wolves and coyotes may show similar killing and feeding patterns on small livestock. Where the livestock has been bitten in the throat, the area should be skinned out so that the size and spacing of the tooth holes can be examined. The canine tooth holes of a wolf are about 1/4 inch (0.6 cm) in diameter while those of a coyote are about 1/8 inch (0.3 cm) in diameter. Wolves usually do not readjust their grip in the
C-125

The ability of wolves to kill cattle, sheep, poultry, and other livestock is well documented (Young and Goldman 1944, Carbyn 1983, Fritts et al. 1992). From 1975 through 1986 an average of 21 farms out of 7,200 (with livestock) in the Minnesota wolf range suffered verified losses annually to wolves (Fritts et al. 1992). In more recent years, 50 to 60 farms annually have been affected by wolf depredations in Minnesota. Domestic dogs and cats are also occasionally killed and eaten by gray wolves. In many instances, wolves live around livestock without causing damage or causing only occasional damage. In other instances, wolves prey on livestock and cause significant, chronic losses at individual operations. In Minnesota, wolf depredation on livestock is seasonal, most losses occurring between April and October, when livestock are on summer pastures. Livestock are confined to barnyards in the winter months, and therefore are less susceptible to predation.
throat area as coyotes sometimes do; thus, a single set of large tooth holes in the throat area is typical of wolf depredation. Coyotes will more often leave multiple tooth holes in the throat area. Attacks on livestock by dogs may be confused with wolf depredation if large tracks are present, especially in more populated areas. Large dogs usually injure and kill many animals. Some dogs may have a very precise technique of killing, but most leave several mutilated livestock. Unless they are feral, they seldom feed on the livestock they have killed. Wolves are attracted to and will scavenge the remains of livestock that have died of natural causes. Dead livestock in a pasture or on range land will attract wolves and increase their activity in an area. It is important to distinguish between predation and scavenging. Evidence of predation includes signs of a struggle and hemorrhaging beneath the skin in the throat, neck, back, or hindquarter area. Tracks left by wolves at kill sites are easily distinguishable from those of most other predators except large dogs. Wolf tracks are similar to coyote tracks but are much larger and reveal a longer stride. A wolfs front foot is broader and usually slightly longer than its rear foot. The front foot of the Alaskan subspecies is 4 to 5 inches (10.2 to 12.7 cm) long (without claws) and 3 3/4 to 5 inches (9.5 to 12.7 cm) wide; the rear foot is 3 3/4 to 4 3/4 inches (9.5 to 12.1 cm) long and 3 to 4 1/2 inches (7.6 to 11.4 cm) wide (Murie 1954) (Fig. 3). Track measurements of the eastern subspecies of gray wolf found in Minnesota and Wisconsin are slightly smaller. The distance between rear and front foot tracks of a wolf walking or trotting on level ground varies between 25 and 38 inches (63.5 to 96.5 cm). When walking, wolves usually leave tracks in a straight line, with the rear foot prints overlapping the front foot prints. In deep snow, wolves exhibit a single-file pattern of tracks, with following wolves stepping in the tracks of the leading wolf. Wolf tracks are similar to the tracks of some large breeds of dogs but are genC-126
Gray Wolf
4 1/2"
3 1/2"
Coyote
2 1/2"
2" Fig. 3. Gray wolf and coyote silhouettes and track measurements of each.
erally larger and more elongated, with broader toe pads and a larger heel pad. Dog tracks are rounder than wolf tracks, and the stride is shorter. When walking, dogs leave a pattern of tracks that looks straddle-legged, with the rear prints tending not to overlap the front prints. Their tracks appear to wander, in contrast to the straight-line pattern of wolf tracks. Scats (droppings) left in the vicinity of a kill site or pasture may be useful in determining wolf depredation. Wolf scats are usually wider and longer than coyote scats. Scats 1 inch (2.5 cm) or larger in diameter are probably from wolves; smaller scats may be from wolves or coyotes. Wolf scats frequently contain large amounts of hair and bone fragments. An analysis of the hair contained in scats may indicate possible livestock depredation. Since wolves feed primarily on big game, their scats are not as likely to contain the fine fur or the small bones and teeth that are often found in coyote scats. During hard winters, gray wolves may contribute to the decline of populations of deer, moose, and caribou in northern areas (Gauthier and Theberge
1987). Studies in Minnesota (Mech and Karns 1977), Isle Royale (Peterson 1977), and Alaska (Gasaway et al. 1983, Ballard and Larsen 1987) indicate that predation by wolves, especially during severe winters, may bring about marked declines in ungulate populations. It appears that after ungulate populations reach low levels, wolves may exert long-term control over their prey populations and delay their increase.
Legal Status
All gray wolves in the contiguous 48 states are classified as endangered except for members of the Minnesota population, which are classified as threatened. The maximum penalty for illegally killing a wolf is imprisonment of not more than 1 year, a fine of not more than $20,000, or both. The classification of the wolf in Minnesota was changed from endangered to threatened in April 1978. This classification allows a variety of management options, including the killing of wolves that are preying on livestock by authorized federal or state personnel. In Canada and Alaska, gray
wolves are considered both furbearers and game animals and are subject to sport harvest and control measures regulated by province or state agencies. Red wolves are classified as endangered in the United States. This classification restricts control of red wolves to authorized federal or state damage control personnel, who may capture and relocate red wolves that are preying on livestock.

Exclusion
If wolf depredation is suspected, livestock producers should observe their livestock as often as possible. Frequent observation may be difficult in large wooded pastures or on large tracts of open rangeland. The more often livestock are checked, however, the more likely that predation will be discovered. Frequent checks will also help the operator determine if any natural mortality is occurring in the herd or flock, and if any livestock thought to be pregnant are barren and not producing. The presence of humans near herds and flocks also tends to decrease damage problems.
Frightening
ably most effective in small, open pastures, around penned livestock, or in situations where other lethal methods may not be acceptable. They can also provide short-term protection from wolves while other control methods are initiated.
Toxicants
None are registered for wolves in the United States.

Fumigants
None are registered for wolves in the United States.

Trapping
Fences may help prevent livestock losses to wolves. Exclude wolves with well-maintained woven-wire fences that are 6 to 7 feet (1.8 to 2.1 m) high. Install electrically charged wires along the bottom and top of woven-wire fences to increase their effectiveness. Several antipredator fencing designs are available (Thompson 1979, Dorrance and Bourne 1980, Linhart et al. 1984).
Cultural Methods
Livestock carcasses left in or near pastures may attract wolves and other predators to the area and increase the chances of depredation. Remove and properly dispose of all dead livestock by rendering, burying, or burning. Calves and lambs are particularly vulnerable to predators, and cows are vulnerable while giving birth. Confine cows and ewes to barnyard areas during calving and lambing season if possible or maintain them near farm buildings. Hold young livestock near farm buildings for 2 weeks or longer, before moving them with the herd to pastures or rangeland. As newborns mature they are better able to stay with their mothers and the herd or flock, and are less likely to be killed by wolves. Nighttime losses of sheep to wolves can be reduced by herding the sheep close to farm buildings at night or putting them in pens where possible.
Livestock guarding dogs have been used for centuries in Europe and Asia to protect sheep and other types of livestock. The dogs are bonded socially to a particular type of livestock. They stay with the livestock without harming them and either passively repel predators by their presence or chase predators away. Livestock guarding dogs are currently being used by producers in the western United States to protect sheep and other livestock from coyotes and bears. They have been used in Minnesota to protect sheep from coyotes and cattle from wolves. The most common breeds of dogs used in the United States are the Anatolian shepherd, Great Pyrennees, Komondor, Akbash dogs, Kuvasz, Maremma, and Shar Plainintez. Livestock guarding dogs should be viewed as a supplement to other forms of predator control. They usually do not provide an immediate solution to a predator problem because time must be spent raising puppies or bonding the dogs to the livestock they protect. Green et al. (1984) and Green and Woodruff (1990) discuss proper methods for selecting and training livestock guarding dogs and reasonable expectations for effectiveness of guarding dogs against predators. Consult with USDA-APHIS-ADC personnel for additional information. Strobe light/siren devices (Electronic Guard [USDA-APHIS-ADC]) may be used to reduce livestock depredation up to 4 months. Such devices are prob-
Control of damage caused by wolves is best accomplished through selective trapping of depredating wolves. Another method is to classify wolves as furbearers and/or game animals and encourage sport harvest to hold wolf populations at acceptable levels. The Alberta Fish and Wildlife Division has used this approach successfully in Canada, where gray wolves are classified as furbearers. A similar approach was proposed by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources in 1980 and 1982 to help control the expanding wolf population in Minnesota, but it was ruled illegal because of the wolfs threatened status in Minnesota. Steel leghold traps, Nos. 4, 14, 114, and 4 1/2 Newhouse or Nos. 4 and 7 McBride are recommended for capturing wolves. Nos. 4 and 14 Newhouse traps and the No. 4 McBride trap are routinely used for research and depredation-control trapping of wolves in Minnesota. Some wolf trappers feel that Nos. 4 and 14 Newhouse traps are too small for wolves. Where larger subspecies of the gray wolf exist, use the No. 4 1/2 Newhouse, No. 7 McBride, or the Braun wolf trap. Set traps at natural scent posts where wolves urinate and/or defecate along their travel routes. Make artificial scent posts by placing a small quantity of wolf urine, lure, or bait on weeds, clumps of grass, low bushes, log ends, or bones located along wolf travel routes. Place traps near the carcasses of animals killed or scavenged by
C-127
wolves, at trail junctions, or at water holes on open range. Set snares (Thompson 4xx or 5xx, Gregerson No. 14) at holes in or under fences where wolves enter livestock confinement areas, or where wolves create trails in heavy cover. Use traps and snares that are clean and free of foreign odor. Remove grease and oil from new traps and snares, set them outside until slightly rusted, and then boil them in a solution of water and logwood trap dye. Wear gloves when handling traps and snares to minimize human odor. While constructing the set, squat or kneel on a clean canvas setting cloth to minimize human odor and disturbance at the site. Traps may be either staked or attached to a draghook. A trap that is staked should have about 4 feet (1.2 m) of chain attached to it. A trap with a draghook should have 6 to 8 feet (1.8 to 2.4 m) of chain attached.
Shooting
ing by helicopter can be used to dart and chemically immobilize depredating wolves so that they can be relocated from problem areas. Some recent wolf control actions in Montana have used this technique. Long-range land-use planning should solve most conflicts between livestock producers and wolves. When wolves are present in the vicinity of livestock, predation problems are likely to develop. Therefore, care should be taken in selecting areas for reestablishing wolf populations to assure that livestock production will not be threatened by wolves.
Acknowledgments
Information contained in the sections on identification, habitat, food habits, and general biology are adapted from Mech (1970). The manual, Methods of Investigating Predation of Domestic Livestock, by Roy and Dorrance was very helpful in developing the section on wolf damage identification. Recommendations for preventing or reducing wolf damage were developed in association with Dr. Steven H. Fritts. We would also like to thank Scott Hygnstrom for reviewing this chapter and providing many helpful comments. Figure 1 from Schwartz and Schwartz (1981). Figure 2 adapted from Schwartz and Schwartz (1981) by Jill Sack Johnson. Figure 3 adapted from a Michigan Department of Natural Resources pamphlet.

Wolves can sometimes cause serious economic losses to individual livestock producers. Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Montana have established compensation programs to pay producers for damage caused by wolves. In recent years, $40,000 to $45,000 has been paid annually to Minnesota producers for verified claims of wolf damage. Control of depredating wolves is often economically feasible, but it can be timeconsuming and labor intensive. If wolves can be trapped, snared, or shot at depredation sites, the cost is usually low. Deer, moose, and other ungulates have great economic and aesthetic value, but wolves have strong public support. Thus, wolf control is often highly controversial. Where wolves are the dominant predator on an ungulate species and prey numbers are below carrying capacity, a significant reduction in wolf numbers can produce increases in the number of ungulate prey (Gasaway et al 1983, Gauthier and Theberge 1987) and therefore sometimes can be economically justified. When control programs are terminated, wolves may rapidly recover through immigration and reproduction (Ballard et al. 1987). Therefore, wolf control must be considered as an acceptable management option (Mech 1985).

Abraham, G. R., D. W. Peterson, J. Herring, M. A. Young, and C. J. Carley. 1980. Red wolf recovery plan. US Fish Wildl. Serv., Washington, DC. 22 pp. Ballard, W. B., and D. G. Larsen. 1987. Implications of predator-relationships to moose management. Swedish Wildl. Res. Suppl. 1:581-602. Ballard, W. B., J. S. Whitman, and C. L. Gardner. 1987. Ecology of an exploited wolf population in south-central Alaska. Wildl. Mono. 98. 54 pp. Carbyn, L. N., ed. 1983. Wolves in Canada and Alaska: their status, biology, and management. Can. Wildl. Serv. Rep. 45, Ottawa. 135 pp. Dorrance, M. J., and J. Bourne. 1980. An evaluation of anti-coyote electric fencing. J. Range Manage. 33:385-387. Fritts, S. H., W. J. Paul, L. D. Mech, and D. P. Scott. 1992. Trends and management of wolf-livestock conflicts in Minnesota. US Fish Wildl. Serv. Resour. Publ. 181., Washington, DC. 27 pp. Gasaway, W. C., R. O. Stephenson, J. L. David, P. K. Shepherd, and O. E. Burris. 1983. Interrelationships of wolves, prey, and man in interior Alaska. Wildl. Mono. 84. 50 pp. Gauthier, D. A., and J. B. Theberge. 1987. Wolf predation. Pages 120-127 in M. Novak, J. A. Baker, M. E. Obbard, and B. Mallach, eds. Wild furbearer management and conservation in North America. Ont. Minist. Nat. Resour., Toronto. Green, J. S., and R. A. Woodruff. 1990. Livestock guarding dogs: protecting sheep from predators. US Dep. Agric. Info. Bull. 588. 31 pp.
Where legal, local wolf populations can be reduced by shooting. Call wolves into rifle range using a predator call or by voice howling. Aerial hunting by helicopter or fixedwing aircraft is one of the most efficient canid control techniques available where it is legal and acceptable to the general public. Aerial hunting can be economically feasible when losses are high and the wolves responsible for depredation can be taken quickly. When a pack of wolves is causing damage, it may be worthwhile to trap one or two members of the pack, outfit them with collars containing radio transmitters and release them. Wolves are highly social and by periodically locating the radiotagged wolves with a radio receiver, other members of the pack may be found and shot. The wolves wearing radio collars can then be located and shot. This technique has been used effectively by the Alaska Department of Fish and Game.
Other Methods
In situations where lethal control of depredating wolves may not be authorized (USFWS 1987), aerial huntC-128
Green, J. S., R. A. Woodruff, and T. T. Tueller. 1984. Livestock guarding dogs for predator control: costs, benefits, and practicality. Wildl. Soc. Bull. 12:44-50. Linhart, S. B., J. D. Roberts, and G. J. Dasch. 1982. Electric fencing reduces coyote predation on pastured sheep. J. Range Manage. 35:276-281. Linhart, S. B., R. T. Sterner, G. J. Dasch, and J. W. Theade. 1984. Efficacy of light and sound stimuli for reducing coyote predation upon pastured sheep. Prot. Ecol. 6:75-84. Mech, L. D. 1970. The wolf: the ecology and behavior of an endangered species. The Natural History Press, Doubleday, New York. 384 pp. Mech, L. D. 1985. How delicate is the balance of nature? Natl. Wildl., February-March:54-58. Mech, L. D., and P. D. Karns. 1977. Role of the wolf in a deer decline in the Superior National Forest. US Dep. Agric. For. Serv. Res. Rep. NC-148. 23 pp. Murie, O. J. 1954. A field guide to animal tracks. The Riverside Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts. 374 pp. Paradiso, J. L., and R. M. Nowak. 1972. A report on the taxonomic status and distribution of the red wolf. US Dep. Inter. Special Sci. Rep. Wildl. 145. 36 pp. Peterson, R. O. 1977. Wolf ecology and prey relationships on Isle Royale. US Natl. Park Serv. Sci. Mono. 11. 210 pp. Phillips, M. K., and W. T. Parker. 1988. Red wolf recovery: a progress report. Conserv. Biol. 2:139-141. Roy, L. D., and M. J. Dorrance. 1976. Methods of investigating predation of domestic livestock. Alberta Agric. Plant Ind. Lab., Edmonton. 54 pp. Schwartz, C. W., and E. R. Schwartz. 1981. The wild mammals of Missouri, rev. ed. Univ. Missouri Press, Columbia. 356 pp. Shaw, J. H. 1975. Ecology, behavior, and systematics of the red wolf (Canis rufus). Ph.D. Diss. Yale Univ. 99 pp. Thompson, B. C. 1979. Evaluation of wire fences for coyote control. J. Range Manage. 32:457-461. US Fish and Wildlife Service. 1987. Northern Rocky Mountain wolf recovery plan. US Fish Wildl. Serv., Denver, Colorado. 119 pp. Young, S. P., and E. A. Goldman. 1944. The wolves of North America. Parts 1 and 2. Dover Publ. Inc., New York. 636 pp.
Editors
C-129

Carnivore Complete

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Carnivore Complete

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

CARNIVORES

Damage Prevention and Control Methods

None are registered.

Generally not practical.

None are registered.

Steel leghold traps. Live traps.

Where permitted, shooting with a rifle, handgun, or shotgun is effective.

None are registered.

PREVENTION AND CONTROL OF WILDLIFE DAMAGE 1994

General Biology, Reproduction, and Behavior

Fig. 2. Range of the badger in North America.

Damage and Damage Identification

For Additional Information

Fig. 3. Badger tracks compared to coyote tracks.

Damage Prevention and Control Methods

Fig. 1. Black bear, Ursus americanus

Damage Prevention and Control Methods

None are registered.

None are registered.

Culvert and barrel live traps. Foot snares.

PREVENTION AND CONTROL OF WILDLIFE DAMAGE 1994

Fig. 2. Characteristics of black bears and grizzly/brown bears.

Fig. 3. Range of the black bear in North America.

General Biology, Reproduction, and Behavior

Damage and Damage Identification

Damage Prevention and Control Methods

Insulator Insulator 36" 36"

Salmon Salmontins tins 3'

Bacon rinds Bacon rinds

Guy wire Guy wire

Ground rod Ground rod

Fig. 4. Electric polytape portable fence

64" 56" 56"

Gate handles Gate handles

+ Approx. Approx. 12'

Ground rod Ground rod

Fig. 5. Woven-wire permanent fence

None are registered.

None are registered.

Fig. 6. Culvert trap for live capture of bears.

Steel plate inserted in slot cut in culvert

Suspend bait from rope or wire.

Anchor cable to tree or heavy log

Twig and grass cover

Anchor pipe securely into ground with stake

Economics of Damage and Control

For Additional Information

Director Ursid Research Center Missoula, Montana 59802

Fig. 1. Grizzly/brown bear, Ursus arctos

Damage Prevention And Control Methods

Repellents and Deterrents

None are registered.

None are registered.

programs to promote the prevention of bear problems.

PREVENTION AND CONTROL OF WILDLIFE DAMAGE 1994

Fig. 2. Distribution of grizzly/brown bears in North America.

cially sheep that graze on open, remote rangeland.

General Biology, Reproduction, and Behavior

Damage and Damage Identification

Damage Prevention and Control Methods

Immobilizing and Handling

Aversive conditioning may be effective in teaching bears to fear humans. In

detecting and chasing away bears in the immediate area.