Aldeer.com Forums Alabama Deer Talk Serious Deer Talk Forum COYOTE BOUNTY

As for the success of a bounty, history has shown that bounties tend not to be very successful with species that are habitat and food generalists, and have such a high rate of reproduction. As it is, deer hunters who hate coyotes probably shoot every coyote they see and have little to no impact on numbers.

Sorry if this is an unpopular stance. I saw the same approach with a pig bounty on Fort Benning. The cost to the taxpayer has been over $100,000 and the pig density on Benning has stayed the same (or actually increased slightly) since the beginning of the program. The massive increase in harvest of pigs on Fort Benning suggests that they are killing 2-3 times as many pigs today. What nobody wants to admit is that hunters are killing pigs off base, and bringing the required evidence on base for the bounty. Along these lines, the greatest beneficiaries of a coyote bounty in Alabama would be hunters in Mississippi, Georgia, Tennessee, and Florida.

Seems like we just had this thread a few weeks ago. A coyote bounty would only be an exercise in futility as Steve pointed out. Most hunters I know, shoot every coyote they see and only manage 1 or 2 a year. A bounty will not help you see more coyotes and I don't think $10 apiece will really have folks hunting them more.

Instead of looking at coyotes, why don't people look more at land management practices. Maybe some foresters can weigh in, but I have noticed a larger percentage of clear cutting in my area. I am not a forester, nor do I claim to be knowledgable in the area, but I was told about 2 years ago that timber prices were way down so some large landowners were electing to cut their stand for pulpwood instead of waiting out the market for timber to rebound. That's a huge loss of habitat for the deer in some areas. I think some dwindling deer numbers in some areas are inaccurately attributed to coyotes when some other very influential factors are at play. Coyotes have been here for years. They didn't just recently learn to hunt deer.

I would rather try to hide a fawn in a 2 yr old clearcut than a well-over stocked pine stand anyday! I would think it would have benefited the deer. Also more food

That works great 3 years from now. Most timber managers will let this years' clear cuts sit idle this year and give the hardwood stumps 1 growing season to re-sprout before spraying the area to kill the hardwoods before replanting in pines next winter.

The point is, What do THIS year's fawns do? Do you think it has an impact? Hmmmmmmm? The deer have to go somewhere. I don't see many in barren clearcuts. Force the deer to seek less than desirable cover and coyotes may have a greater impact than normal. Again my point is that coyotes are blamed, but land management may have been the root cause. Maybe? Maybe not?

Actual acreage clearcut and replanting is WAY off in the last 3 years. Any landowners who grew out their timber past pulpwood would be crazy to clearcut it at pulpwood prices unless it were dyeing. The number of loggers we have is @ 30-40% of the number we had 3 years ago and prices are still down. Our tree planting acreage is probably 50% of what it was then.

THIS years fawns move to the woods next to the clearcut. Average clearcut size is @ 100 acres leaving plenty of room inside a deer's homerange to use adjacent habitat until the clearcut "hairs back up". Although certain time frames after clearcutting and planting are poor habitat for deer (first 2 years, 10-15 years of age), so is 500 acres of closed-canopy hardwood forest, something I see a lot of in the name of deer habitat.



I agree 100% with your point. I firmly believe that coyote predation on fawns is higher in "poor habitat" than "good habitat". The more grassy cover in large blocks the better IMO. No, I do not know of any research to back this up at this time. I also believe that we can do more to increase fawn survival and herd health through habitat management than shooting and trapping coyotes.

Dr. Ditchkoff, thanks much for the info. It's good to see you posting again.

I was thinking in terms of a Bounty payed to licensed trappers for coyote pelts, but I do see your solid point. A Bounty probably wouldn't be a good idea, generally, and I've subsequently changed my mind on this possible solution.

If coyote fur ever increases in value as fox did in the late-1970's and early 80's, I think we would see a reduction, or at least a halt in the growth of the coyote population, via trapping. ('supply and demand') Even if fur prices increased, it would take a concerted and vigorous effort State-wide to realize positive results.

Hope all is well with you, Dr. D. !

predator control is site specific just like habitat mgmt - positive results can be realized by removing the majority of your coyotes from one area - 70% plus need to be removed to have an impact - this will have an immediate impact on your fawn survival - predator control is just another tool that can be used to optimize wildlife production on your property - the problem with predator control is that's it's not as easy as controlled burning or planting food plots - there's very few trappers in our state capable of reducing coyote numbers by 70% in one area - the fur market will never be the answer for coyotes - southern coyote fur is poor quality and didn't bring much even when the market peaked in the 80s

Thanks. I've been busy and haven't been on here much. Also, while I do browse posts during hunting season, most posts during hunting season tend to revolve around hunting and I try to keep my posts to biological topics where I feel that I can better contribute to the discussion. While I am a hunter, that's not my area of expertise.

Anybody ever think of what the hog population might do if coyotes were reduced by 70%? Coyotes are one of the few critters that can catch and kill piglets and pigs will catch and eat fawns Just sayin' We don't want to be like politicians and forget that there are always other alternative consequences to our actions.

Great point!!! We have some very interesting data that shows that deer sightings on camera go way down when pigs are in the area. We haven't had the time to analyze the data in detail, so I don't have any specifics.

That is a fact. Hogs do prey on fawns and they can smell them and catch them. Hogs probably eat more babies than coys do. Fawn survival is dramatically reduced in areas with hogs. Again, I didn't read this somewhere, I've SEEN it.

Hogs eat about everything they can chew. And that is about everything except zippers, buttons, and bolts.

How will a bounty on a female hog help anything?

People ought to shooting them for eatin and for common sense reasons without having to pay em to do it.

When you see hogs, it should be OPEN FIRE!! and commence firing till the the threat is eliminated.

If fawns have no scent, how do hogs smell them?

Hogs can smell anything. They find truffles 3 feet under ground.

Everything has a smell, BTW.

Good LORD BFB how do you know the will not eat your zipper? I hope you haven't let them try

In this case, maybe we all as hunters should reevaluate or in the least, entertain and discuss the predatory benefits of coyotes instead of emphasizing the negatives. Perhaps trapping or thinning out coyotes in overpopulated areas, only, should be encouraged. Maybe we are viewing the coyote 'problem' in the wrong manner.

After solid Biological study/studies are completed would be optimal.

Just a thought...

Don't know if anyone has
thought of this yet , but since
the DCNR cannot afford to pay a bounty
on coyotes, maybe it can give someone
a free hunting license if they turn
in a certain number of dead coyotes,
like maybe 3 or 5......just a thought...
and yes that would decrease license
revenue which the DCNR cannot afford
to lose.....but is an idea worth discussing.

just kill them when you see them even if it ruins the hunt for the day.never can tell when they will come back.got 6 this season last one i even shot while hunting during the rut killed it anyways.only way to do it.

i try