CARNIVORA 223 



Methods of controlling coyotes and wolves have been discussed in 

 two preceding chapters. The bounty system, which has been tried for 

 many years in most states, is very expensive, productive of endless 

 fraud and fails to give general or permanent relief. Coyote-proof 

 fences help to prevent destruction of stock, but the most effective 

 method of controlling these animals is by systematic trapping, poison- 

 ing, shooting and digging out dens of the young, in widespread co- 

 operative campaigns of state and federal authorities and stock-grow- 

 ers. 15 In Minnesota, bounties have been paid on wolves for forty-nine 

 years, to a total amount of $1,243,165.53, and for the last twenty-five 

 years. the annual expenditure for this purpose has slowly increased, 16 

 indicating that it is not a very effective method. This is typical of the 

 experience of other states. 



Though coyotes and wolves have much to their discredit in the de- 

 struction of useful animals, they have much to their credit in the de- 

 struction of harmful animals, as well as in the revenue derived from 

 their pelts. Carey quotes a correspondent thus : 



I think that probably Sequoia National Park is the only place in the United 

 States today where mountain lions, coyotes, skunks, wildcats, etc., are absolutely 

 protected. I think I can see the effects of this in the keeping down of the 

 smaller rodents, such as ground squirrels, rats, mice, etc., without any action 

 by the government. 17 



Coyotes will eat almost any kind of an animal within their power to 

 obtain. They take young deer and antelope, calves, colts, sheep, pigs, 

 goats, cats, dogs (one killed a loo-pound dog), all sorts of rodents 

 (rats, mice, gophers, prairie-dogs, rabbits, squirrels, etc.), weasels, 

 poultry, wild birds, reptiles (3 horned lizards in one), fish, insects, 

 crustaceans, etc. 18 They also eat melons and various kinds of fruit, 



15 Dixon, Control of the coyote in California, California College Agric. Bull. No. 

 320, pp. 379-397, 1920; Journ. Mammalogy, 11, 176, 1921. Bailey, Wolves in relation 

 to stock, game and national forests, U. S. Forest Service Bull. No. 72, 1907; 

 Destruction of wolves and coyotes, U. S. Biol. Sun'. Bull. No. 63, 1908. Lantz, 

 U. S. Biol. Surv. Bull. No. 20, 1906 ; Farmers' Bull., No. 226, 1906 ; Bounty laws in 

 force in the United States, Yearbook U. S. Dept. Agric. for 1907, pp. 560-565. 

 Lucas, Ann. Kept. U. S. Natl. Museum for 1889, p. 612. Palmer, Extermination of 

 noxious animals by bounties, Yearbook U. S. Dept. Agric. for 1896, pp. 55-68. Bell, 

 Wolf and coyote control, The Producer, Denver, vn, 3-4, 6-8, 1926. Young, Hints 

 on wolf and coyote trapping, U. S. Biol. Surv. Leaflet No. 59-L, 1930. 



16 Journ. Mammalogy, ix, 89, 1928. 



17 Carey, Journ. Mammalogy, xi, 229, 1930. 



18 Lantz, Coyotes in their economic relations, U. S. Biol. Surv. Bull. No. 20, 1905 ; 

 The relation of coyotes to stock-raising in the West, Farmers' Bull., No. 226, 1905. 

 Jotter, The coyote as a deer killer, California Fish and Game, I, 26-27, 1914. Hewitt, 

 The conservation of wild life of Canada, p. 225, 1921. Seton, Lives of game animals, 

 i, Part 2, pp. 355-417, 1929, with an excellent summary of the economic status of 

 coyotes. 



