306 



The Great Plains — Our Liviiifi Resdiinc.'i 



replaced big game with cattle, sheep, hogs, and 

 poultry, and later waged poisoning campaigns 

 against wolves {Cauis luints). coyotes, and 

 other predators. 



Since the late 1 800's, a steady shift in human 

 populations from famis to urban centers has 

 occurred on the Great Plains. In some plains 

 states, these changes have resulted in more peo- 

 ple living in urban centers than in rural areas. 

 For example, in 1880. about QO^r of the Kansas 

 population lived on farms, but by 1930, farm 

 residents accounted for 60% of the total popula- 

 tion (U.S. Department of Commerce 1993). 

 Since that time, there have been further decreas- 

 es in the proportion of the rural population: by 

 1990 about 30% lived on farms. 



In addition, most famis have become larger 

 and more highly mechanized than those 40-50 

 years ago. Changes also have occurred in pro- 

 duction of domestic animals, with fewer farms 

 today raising cattle, hogs, sheep, and chickens. 

 Further, livestock and poultry are better cared 

 for now and often are raised in confinement 

 where they are unavailable to coyotes (Robel et 

 al. 1981). 



Canid Population Changes 



Populations of wolves, coyotes, red foxes 

 (Viilpes viilpes), swift foxes (V; velox). and dogs 

 {Cnnis familiaris) on the Great Plains probably 

 were relatively stable until settlers began arriv- 

 ing in the I860's. Wolves dominated the canid 

 social system except for the immediate area 

 around villages, where village dogs probably 

 dominated (Fig. 1 ). Because wolves are aggres- 

 sive toward coyotes, coyote numbers probably 

 were depressed (Young and Jackson 1951: 

 Mech 1970). Mech (1994) and others have 

 shown that the buffer zones that exist between 

 adjacent wolf packs (about 6-7 km wide) pro- 

 vide refugia for deer and other animals. Coyotes 

 may have occupied these buffer zones as well. 

 Red and swift foxes were locally common dur- 

 ing the 1800"s, and there was probably little 

 conflict between wolves and foxes. Because 

 coyotes are aggressive toward foxes, fox num- 

 bers likely declined as coyote numbers 

 increased (Johnson and Sarseant 1977). 



Fig. 1. Presettlement spatial rela- 

 tionships among home ranges of 

 three packs of wolves, two fami- 

 lies of coyotes, and two families of 

 foxes near a Native American vil- 

 lage with free-ranging dogs. 

 Buffer zones and boundaries of 

 wolf pack territories are dynamic, 

 changing with availability of food 

 and composition of wolf packs. 



Coyotes increased during settlement and 

 expanded their ranges as wolves were eliminat- 

 ed and bison were replaced with cattle and 

 sheep. Coyotes may have reached their highest 

 densities in North Dakota, and possibly other 

 parts of the Great Plains, from about 1895 to 

 1915 (Johnson and Sargeant 1977). 



Federal predator control started in 1915 

 when Congress appropriated $125,000 to orga- 

 nize and conduct control operations in partner- 

 ship with states and local sponsors. The initial 

 emphasis was on eliminating wolves from west- 

 em and midwestern states. This wolf-control 

 partnership was amazingly successful — almost 

 all wolves were removed from western states by 

 1923 (Young and Goldman 1944). Coyotes gen- 

 erally increased in numbers as wolf populations 

 declined. 



Coyote populations fluctuated from 1915 to 

 1950. hut bounty records suggest a general 

 decline after 1915 (Gier 1968: Johnson and 

 Sargeant 1977). In Kansas, low coyote popula- 

 tions were recorded from 1932 through 1940 

 (Cockrum 1952) and from 1954 through 1958 

 (Gier 1968). Compound 1080 (sodium tluo- 

 roacetate) was used to control coyotes in 

 Kansas from 1950 through I960: coyote num- 

 bers declined dramatically there. 



Through the 1960"s. coyote numbers contin- 

 ued to decline with increased use of Compound 

 1080 and other predator-control toxicants. 

 Coyote numbers generally increased throughout 

 the Great Plains after 1972 when the use of tox- 

 icants on federal lands was prohibited. Local 

 fluctuations in coyote populations have 

 occurred since 1970, largely in response to coy- 

 ote fur prices and trapping and hunting. 



Changing Coyote Diets 



Coyote diets on the Great Plains today are 

 markedly different than they were at the turn of 

 the century, a likely reflection of changes in 

 agricultural systems and human populations. 

 Early in this century, most people on the Great 

 Plains lived on mostly small farms and raised a 

 variety of domestic animals. These farms usual- 

 ly were distributed fairly evenly across much of 

 the region, making domestic animals widely 

 available as prey for coyotes. Many farms suf- 

 fered livestock and poultry losses from coyotes, 

 which intensified predator-control efforts. 



Studies of coyote diets on the Great Plains 

 through the I960"s demonstrated that rabbits, 

 rodents, and domestic animals were important 

 food items (Sperry 1941: Fichter et al. 1955; 

 Gier 1968). For example, in Kansas, almost 

 90% of the coyote diet was dominated by these 

 three prey groups (Fig. 2), and more than half of 

 all coyote stomachs sampled contained remains 

 of either domestic livestock or poultry (Gier 



