At last, some hard data.
Interesting bits from the study:
-- They were surprised at how many coyotes lived inside Chicago.
-- Zero bites from coyotes and 2000 - 3000 dog bites per year.
-- What makes nuisance coyotes? Feeding them.
(My note: pretending to be food is not equivalent to giving food, and in fact has the opposite effect. Conditioning to false info, I.e. calling, is so common that among humans we have a name for it: bait and switch. None of us like it, canines nor people).
Beyond that info, the tracking studies were fascinating.
The only HUGE goof I saw in the study was pre-European distribution of coyotes: they left out all of WA, Oregon, BC, Alberta and most of Saskatchewan, Idaho, etc. I have no doubt that coyotes were present in those places, based on
Aboriginal languages and mythology. Some of the Interior Salish tribes of BC for example have the core of their mythology built around coyote, linked to local geographical features, and have an ancient word for the critter. You can almost always tell when people didn't have a pre-European word for something. Then the word is usually borrowed from another language. A word borrowed from a European language is a dead giveaway of course.
I have thought for years that on the subject of pre-European range of coyotes, biologists should track Native language and stories for a far more accurate idea of where coyotes lived before Columbus. Don't know if that is strong enough material for doctoral work or not. It is so obvious surely someone has done it, but I've been surprised at how often something obvious has never been done.
Interesting read. Thanks posting the link.
