Core area?

[Mudcat]

Is this just another name for home range? Also, what identifies a core area.

Best regards,

Mudcat

[walkercoonhunter(Aaron L.)]

mudcat i would think the core area would be a area where all the animals would have to cross to get from place to place..like a field with a valley in it between 2 ridges...thats what i would call a core area...

[Mudcat]

Thanks,

I had never heard of it till I read it on this forum.

Mudcat

[trappnman]

A Logan study among a couple of others, defines core are as the area in which that coyote spends at least 60% of their time.

The point was this- coyotes react to stimulus in their core area differently that they do outside of their core area.

In areas in which they were familar with things (core) they wotrked sts more caustiously, less aggressivelty and inded, even reacted differently to various odors.

Outside of the core area- call it non familar or fringe- the coyote works visuals and odors much more agressively.

The summation was that scent stations, while long thoguht to be equal in their appeal- instead have their success DIRECTLY influenced by where they are placed- ie core or fringe.

One could (and I do) easily draw the concluson that sets in core areas are worked both less and less agressively.

Making that old saying- "Its easier to catch a travelling coyote than a homebody" in perspective and gives scientific truth to what many have long suspected.

So not only do travel routes bring you into contact with MORE coyotes..the coyotes work the sets "better"

[Mudcat]

Dr. Bruce Leopold of Mississippi State University in Starkville, MS, and his students conducted a six-year study using radio transmitters to track about a dozen different coyotes. They learned that coyotes didn't remain in a designated area and basically acted like nomads.

"Too, something that really surprised us were the number of radio transmitters we lost," Leopold says. "When we put a radio transmitter on any type of animal, we usually assumed we'd be able to recover that transmitter because animals generally had a home range they stayed within. But when we put transmitters on coyotes, we learned that there was a high likelihood that we might never see that transmitter again. Coyotes had a much-larger home range than scientists once have believed they had. Some of the coyotes we put transmitters on had a home range of at least 12,000 acres, and many just disappeared. Even on a 30,000-acre study area, the coyotes and the collars both seemed to vanish. In previous studies, we radioed both bobcats and raccoons. These animals for the most part were very predictable and would almost always be located in areas where they'd been before. However, we never could accurately predict where or when a coyote would show up.


"Our research has shown that coyotes are generalists and take advantage of a wide variety of habitats and food sources. Since they're not stationary or territorial, you never can predict where they'll be. We've seen coyotes range 4 or 5 miles in a single day, and they often cover 10,000 acres in a month. We've also had some of our radio collars returned from coyotes that have been taken 12 miles from their capture-and-release point. Although I don't know if this tendency is shared with western and northern coyotes, I think we can document that southeastern coyotes are nomadic. At Mississippi State, we've also observed that you may find coyotes in any type of habitat. However, young pine and young hardwood stands, both of which are home to a large number of rabbits, rats and fruits, tend to be the best places to capture our study animals. Other research studies tend to indicate that generally female coyotes stay within the same 5 to 8 miles, whereas mature males may have a territory as large as 30 or 40-square miles, which they patrol regularly if the food source remains stable. But if the food source changes, coyotes will move great distances. A number of young males have been known to travel and relocate more than 100 miles away from their original birthplaces. This information may explain why we have so many coyotes all over the United States and why their territory seems to be increasing."

A small study regarding Mississippi yotes. One thing for sure is, this month I have seen an influx of yotes into some areas that were once barren.

Best regards,

Mudcat

[Vanmeer]

very interesting reading! thank you.

[bobwendt]

my actual field experiece indicates the exact opposite of the logan study. I find coyotes working sets much more aggresively in their core area, and erratically in the fringes or wandering areas. Same as a dog defends his yard but is submissive if off his home turf. This is one of those deals where research just doesn`t stack up with what I see as a trapper where making a catch is my #1 goal. The whys are interesting but don`t pay bills or put fur on the board. I believe most research is done by folks in the offseasons and may not actually be applicable to real life trapping , which is my goal.

[trappnman]

Well Bob- I suggest you actually READ the study before commenting on it.

I've met and worked with several wildlife researchers- to think they are unknowledgeable about the animal they are studying is absurd. When you basically LIVE with that animal for 2-3 years....you pick up a few "practical" facts... our otter study- 2 fulltime guys, 3 years. Our coyote study- 1 fulltime guy, 1 or two techs for 3 years. I WISH I had their in depth knowledge....

While not near the coyotes caught as some, I do have a neat little twist in that the collored cooytes for the study down here- were taken and released right smack in the middle of my line. So information gathered is both general and specific to me.

I found several interesting things- but one fact stood out- I caught more coyotes in non core territories than I did in core territories.

How do I know? Simple- locations of the coyotes on a consistent basis after being released.

Interesting study in MS- our study here showed the opposite- that you pretty much could go to the farm on which that coyote was caught- and he was there.

We did find a strange triangle type pattern- that a coyote would travel pretty consistently between 3 areas during a night (if he travelled)- each area being 2+ miles apart. So a coyote would be at: A,B,B,C,C,C,A,A,B,B,A,A, throughout the night.

Or the other pattern was- stay in the same place all night.

We lost track of very few collars. One interesting thing- a small female was caught in the fall- never moved all winter- in Jan travelled 19 miles one night (linear) and was killed by a car.

[bobwendt]

just telling what I have seen with about 25 years of serious coyote trapping under my belt. Won`t cloud the issue with stating numbers of coyotes trapped in real life traplines, but it is in the thousands, not dozens as in collaring studies. Simply just stating the research doesn`t match up what I see actually trapping core areas. core being defined by say mile radius of the spring den ,or where return howls are consistently received by singles, pairs or family units at other times of the year. You mention ms. was just the opposite as the mn. research. Maybe the mn. research is the odd man out and not other areas of the country. Of course I have never worked mn. coyotes, but dang near everywhere else east andwest and south, and it doesn`t match up with the mn stuff. I`ll concede the mn. research could be dead on for mn. if you`ll concede it may be the only place in the u.s. where that research is accurate as to relating to real life trapping.

[ChrisB]

Chris

[coyote]

I'm pretty much staying out of this (as I don't really know anything about the subject), but one thing I DO know, based on my forestry backround...

folks sometimes get themselves in trouble (bad decisions) because they look at one study and automatically apply the conclusions to THEIR area. generally, the researchers are careful enough to stipulate right up front that their conclusions should NOT be taken as "good" in other areas.

That doesn't stop some folks from making that leap.

[trappnman]

btw- to be clear- the core are is NOT in this study defined as the den area or any area by the den- it doesn't exclude it, it just doesn't limit it to that.

For the purpose of this study- the definition was clear:

The core area, pfor the purposes of this study, is defined as THAT AREA IN WHICH A COYOTE SPENDS AT LEAST 50% OF HIS TIME


What exactly did I say about the minnesota study that you disagree with?

an isolated research study might or might not be applicable across all the states- but when studies in areas as diverse as Long Island to the Dakotas- and everywhere in between- come up with the same results and yes, the same conclusions...perhaps we might at least consider that there is SOME truth to them?

Remember I said I CAUGHT more coyotes on travel lanes- NOT that I found them easier to catch.

Heres the link to the study-

www.aphis.usda.gov/ws/nwrc/is/01pubs/01-25.pdf

[Mudcat]

Remember the software that law enforcement can now use that can narrow the location of a serial killers home, based upon the hunting patterns of African lions. It would seem that predators would be bolder in their home ranges to seeing change or a set. I am not doubting the Logan study, but I believe you cannot blanket apply any study to what yotes will do in other areas. They seem to have no rhyme or reason to their travels in my part of the country. The Mississippi study backs up what my friends who trap the delta have been telling me for sometime. They mainly setup fish ponds because any wandering yote will generally check these areas.

Best regards,

Mudcat

[Mudcat]

What was the ratio of males vs females in the Logan study? My computer is super slow will try to read it when I figure out what is wrong with this thing.

Best regards,

Mudcat

[trappnman]

you mississippi study is the only study that I have ever read or seen that concludes coyotes are not territorial.

If I'd doubt any study....

I've been down this road before- I really do not care if anyone likes research or reads it or pays attention to it- I do and will continue to do so. I only responded to this post because you asked.

[trappnman]

The Logan study was based on previous work done by many from the 50's to the 90's.

one such study used 28 territorial females as their group, others used different mixes. I believe the wild part of the study (Texas) coyotes were spotted from a plane and darted and collared randonly- what the mix is I don't know off hand

[Mudcat]

I appreciate the response Steve. Just trying to increase my knowledge about the coyote and to contribute to this forum.

Best regards,

Mudcat

[Dhat]

Have to agree with bob on this one. Ive always had best luck setting on large amounts of sign which would most likely be core area since so much sign is there. get right in there with em. i dont know for sure but even if he is not as interested in the core area he is going to have that much more exposure to your sets since he spends so much time in that area. i know dealing with livestock kills alot where they are coming in from other areas and killing that he is alot easier to catch where he is coming from or in between there and where he is killing than it is to catch him where he is killing. the majority of these cases in my experience the coyote is not living where he is killing just comes to kill leading me to believe this is not a core area. Still even with things ive seen i set traps on sign and couldnt care less whether he is at home(core) or on vacation( noncore) when i catch him. I mean research is great to read and interesting but i think some people get too wrapped up in research and in some cases would be better of if they hadnt read it and started worrying about it.

[3n]

Here is the best explanation to core area I've seen.
"his is the way i see it.....spring and summer coyotes have a protected area for the family setup....house/food/water....no company allowed...signs are put up....vocal talk is welcomed...late fall/winter....it's everbody for their self...no real boundaries...open house."
Texas Wolfer

[trappnman]

I have to honestly say, that on this subject I agree with TC35 100%- research PLUS experience equals knowledge.

The trouble with practical experience- is that what seems to be cause and effect- many times is not.

A perfect, perfect excample"I made a cooyte set and lure it well...didn't catch a coyote for 5 days"

Well- the standard answer for years was "too much human scent, too much lure, set had to air out..."

Ah....maybe...but probably not.

I found that when I paid attention to the visual aspect of the set- to make sets that blended in and didn't alarm coyotes in and off themselves- why, my overnight success on day 1 checks improved.

Then I did a little test one year- kept track of next day success on fresh sets in 1)sets made before noon and 2) sets made from noon til dark. Had no statistical difference in next day catches- a set made at 8 in the morning was as likely to have a next day coyote as one made at dark.

and then to read a Logan study showing how coyotes react to visuals...

Research isolates and either comfirms or denys.

Saying you set on lots of tracks- and then saying thats the core area and you catch coyotes easier there..is it?


And Please, please- by distorting the definition of core area- we are changing the study! It really would be interesting to debate this study with someone that had....read the srudy...

would not a pair of coyotes over a territory leave fewer tracks than doz in a travel area- or what about traveling coyotes? Many studies show that MOST coyotes do indeed not claim territory- not to the degree the MS study did- but in that 50-60%.

So- saying you set on sign means nothing viv a vis core/fringe.

And whoever mentioned that occurances with the trap is a factor- of course you are right- its a big factor. By this I mean number of trips by the trap before working it and getting caught- it could be dozens!

The point of the study wasn't that you couldn't catch coyotes in familar territory- it was that coyotes work stimulus differently in familar territory over unfamilar territory.

and bring in a 3rd area like 3N mentioned- basically social areas. Perhaps HERE is where coyotes can be caught the easiest. A large number of coyotes (from overlapping or adjoining territorys or ranges (a different kettle of fish to be sure) -non familar to all...more yotes per trap night.

Our study here showed that.

so what practical info does this convey to the trapper- simply this- that to trap smarter, to use less traps to take the same amount of animals....there are clues available as to WHAT type of areas provide certian responses, what TYPE of areas many studies have shown to be more susceptible to success...

Heres whats odd to me- I'm as self taught a coyote trapper as any man out there. I trapped coyotes a dozen years- including mty best season ever- with never talking to a coyote trapper, with never seeing a cooyte set, with nothing but a book by Tom Miranda 5-6 years into it. Trust me when I say- I learned what I learned the hard way- no instructions, no videos, no nothin'.

Coyotes fasinate me. For everthing I learn, I have a question. Out on thel ine- i'd notice patterns and make observations. Funny, much of what I learned went against what I began to read and see starting 4 years ago when I got on the internet and joined my first trapping association. Still never have seen anyones coyotes set but mine...but anyhoo...

When I have an observation and a theroy- and I read a study that 1) backs up my theroy with FACTS (not observations or guesses as to cause and effect) and 2) comes to the same conclusions I did...

I learn 1 more piece of the puzzle...I get a little better....I CAN trap smarter, not harder.

But...each to their own...