You can shoot eastern coyotes/coywolves from inside your home in Massachusetts

Ethics, safety, and fair chase hunting demands people should not be able to bait coyotes and engage in “recreational” hunting from their easy chair next to their window-

On this blog we have often talked about the disproportionate favoritism that hunters generally receive over other users of wildlife. Well, recently one of my radio-collared eastern coyotes/coywolves (a 41 pound adult female) was shot and killed on Cape Cod, Massachusetts. Suffice it to say, evidence pointed toward her getting shot on a bait pile within about 100 feet of a house. And it seemed pretty clear that she was shot from within a house. Naturally, I was furious and frustrated by this event having radio-tracked her for four years. However, what amazed me most was when I did some digging (with the help of others), I found that two laws actually allow this type of unethical hunting practice. They are

Northeastern coywolves. Copyright Jon Way

Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 269 SECTION 12E, and Chapter 131 SECTION 58 – I detail those below. Because baiting of these animals is legal (Massachusetts Hunting Abstracts) in Massachusetts and night hunting is legal, that means that someone can bait these animals in at night and shoot them from an open window within their house. Believe it or not, I am learning that this is not all uncommon and probably results in over half of the coywolves shot in Massachusetts every year. The only requirements are that: (1) the person has a $30 hunting license (no tag required to shoot them), (2) the person lives in a rural area where they are at least 500 feet from another house – 500 feet is not that far by the way, (3) or they live within 500 feet of a house but the neighbor(s) allows such activity.

In my opinion, this is a perfect example of how and why hunting laws are antiquated and not within favor of the vast majority of the public, let alone most of the hunting community that probably wouldn’t think this is fair chase or ethical. So, when we read about snaring of bears in Alaska, it is important to recognize that there are lax (for lack of a better word) game laws throughout the country. Hopefully a new and revitalized wildlife management agency, eventually with input from non-consumptive users (e.g., scientists, wildlife watchers) will change these laws to make such practices illegal. However, as most of us know, just about all state wildlife agencies are ultra-conservative so change is difficult, unless they want it. So, for example, it would take about 2 minutes to write a law stating: “It is illegal to bait an animal within 500 feet of a house for purpose of shooting animals/coyotes for recreational purposes.”

However, for all intents and purposes, the only laws the wildlife commission in Massachusetts seems to change are ones designed to increase hunting seasons (recently on deer, bear, and coyotes/coywolves) to support the one percent that participate in hunting. While this post is not intended as an anti-hunting rant, it is nonetheless significant that the state of Massachusetts permits gang hunting and driving deer where people section off large patches of pitch pine and scrub oak woods and blast whatever deer runs by (a practice known as “if it is brown, it is down”). My guess is that this is not the vision that most people get when they think of Massachusetts and wildlife. And, furthermore, you can probably guess my predicament, since these are the same people that issue research permits to simply study them. It would be cool, in my opinion, if we could generate a list on this blog of these type of hunting practices in each state or region of the country.

—–

Legal citation

Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 269 SECTION 12E, and Chapter 131 SECTION 58:

Chapter 269, Section 12E. Discharge of a firearm within 500 feet of a dwelling or other building in use; exceptions

Whoever discharges a firearm as defined in section one hundred and twenty-one of chapter one hundred and forty, a rifle or shotgun within five hundred feet of a dwelling or other building in use, except with the consent of the owner or legal occupant thereof, shall be punished by a fine of not less than fifty nor more than one hundred dollars or by imprisonment in a jail or house of correction for not more than three months, or both. The provisions of this section shall not apply to (a) the lawful defense of life and property; (b) any law enforcement officer acting in the discharge of his duties; (c) persons using underground or indoor target or test ranges with the consent of the owner or legal occupant thereof; (d) persons using outdoor skeet, trap, target or test ranges with the consent of the owner or legal occupant of the land on which the range is established; (e) persons using shooting galleries, licensed and defined under the provisions of section fifty-six A of chapter one hundred and forty; and (f) the discharge of blank cartridges for theatrical, athletic, ceremonial, firing squad, or other purposes in accordance with section thirty-nine of chapter one hundred and forty-eight.

Chapter 131, Section 58. Shooting upon or across highway; hunting near dwelling

A person shall not discharge any firearm or release any arrow upon or across any state or hard surfaced highway, or within one hundred and fifty feet, of any such highway, or possess a loaded firearm or hunt by any means on the land of another within five hundred feet of any dwelling in use, except as authorized by the owner or occupant thereof.

162 thoughts on “You can shoot eastern coyotes/coywolves from inside your home in Massachusetts

  1. Sounds like to me you have the core of a nice Op Ed to the Globe that could wake some of those Mass natives up. I would think a decently organized movement could reverse those rules in Mass pretty easily. After all, its not like you are talking about Maine or Idaho.

    1. Good points. Thanks jdubya. Hopefully it makes some headway sort of like the Killer Bee article (on Wildlife Services) went into the LA times.

      1. Jon-
        I have a contact at Mass Fish and Wildlife. You know this person also. He told me the STATUTE has been on the books for decades(even earlier than when coyotes started to occupy the state)to accomodate sheep farming, which used to be a major economic driver in the state.
        I guess there is one sheep farm near Falmouth that takes more than 50 coyotes alone a year….
        Another interesting point- the Mass statute requires of the 7 board members in the state- one has to be a representative from the farming industry and one (non-game wildlife biologist).
        The laws are the toughest in the country. With an estimated 10,000 coyotes in the state- hunters take around 400 a year and farmers take around 100 for depredation on sheep.

        1. Thanks William. Yes, but the practice of baiting coyotes to kill them and to be able to do that from your house is grossly abused. If baiting wasn’t allowed then coyotes wouldn’t come close to houses on average. It is the specific act of baiting coyotes to your house and then killing them at night which is truly the worst part of this and needs to change.

          By the way, I highly contest their 10,000 estimate and it is probably double what I would estimate with my peer reviewed data (I doubt more than 1 coywolf per mile can exist throughout the state).

          By the way, do you live in Mass.?

          1. Jon-

            I grew up in Leicester, Mass, and I still own property there. Due to my current job I live in NH.
            I find it interesting how Fish and Game Depts rationalize away the Ethics and Fair chase issues when there is a perception of “too many” of any one species…..
            I asked my contact why he would advocate for baiting of coyote and not black bear? It’s dangerous when one species appears to have more value than another…..
            Again- as Jdubya said the other day, with a concerted effort I’d bet the law could be changed. State regs are changed every year…. The statutes are old and outdated. In Mass there are only a handful of sheep farms remaining.
            Let me know if I can help- do you have a contact at the globe? You wouldn’t want to jeopardize your permit…..

          2. Hi William,
            Thanks for your contributions… There are groups that are aware of it and hopefully they can tackle it so I can stay out of the limelight (which is probably hard to do since we are communicating on a site read nationwide).

            I can tell you the reason for justifying baiting coywolves and not bear/bobcats. In 1996 voters passed the Wildlife Protection Act – essentially it got rid of all body (leg hold) grabbing traps. But it also specifically banned baiting bear/bobcats. I have no idea why it didn’t include coyotes. It also banned using hounds to chase bear/bobcats but not “coyotes”. So that is why baiting and hounding is still legal with “coyotes” – until, another referendum passes to ban it. Hopefully groups will take on this clearly needless practice by a super minority of people that kill lots of coyotes… I quick guess would be that 200 of the 400 that are killed annually in MA are baited in. Maybe even more than that…

          3. Jon,
            Is it ok to shoot a coyote if it’s trying to get at your chickens or barn cats? I mean, without baiting them, that would be kinda stupid to try to bring them in closer when you want them farther away! If I’m reading correctly, you are against recreational, not in protection of property, correct?

          4. DT,
            sorry for getting this so late. Yes, the law was intended for what you say (protecting property). But most people where I live don’t even have chickens and those that do seem to mostly be pro coyote so they use simple chicken coups (and now have to only really worry about fishers that came to the cape about 10 years ago).

            The use of bait and shooting from a house is an abuse of that law. And you are correct, the bait is to deliberately get them to your bathroom window so you can shoot one while taking a *&(&.

    2. The recently posted Boston Globe article “They shoot coyotes don’t they” had a poll of over 2000 residents, and the poll was around 60% to 40% supporting coyotes not being shot for “being coyotes”.
      I couldn’t even find this exception in the regs- it’s very vague. Some rich special interest probably lost a few cats back in the 70’s and here you go.

      My state rep and state senator are both “progressive liberals”. I’ll call them

  2. Alarms always sound when I hear a purported researcher refer to wildlife as “mine” such as “my tuna” or “my red-tail hawk” or in this case, “my coyote”. This kind of anthropomorphism completely discredits any authority the author may claim. While I am generally skeptical of attempts to manage wildlife where I live on Cape Cod, coyotes were never indigenous to Cape Cod in the past century and because of rampant overdevelopment, adverse interaction is inevitable.
    I suspect that if the author had put a radio collar on this animal, he must have been baiting it too, simply to a different end. Getting “furious” about it’s demise leads me to believe he considers these wild animals to be his pets, not a strong asset for a “part time post-doctoral”(?) worker. With all the damage coyotes do here to indigenous and non indigenous creatures, I can assure the author that if one of his friends come into my yard, I’ll try and put a hole in it too.

    1. I hope you are not my neighbor. Anyone who wants to “put a hole” into anything coming into their yard is far more dangerous to the neighborhood than a wild animal.

    2. Ralph-
      You can block my comments all you want. I get exasperated listening to these mental defectives playing GOD, makng judgements about which species have more value than others based on this narrow minded cultural stereotype….I feel bad for people like Somsai and Elk 275. This post from good ole Fritz proves we have idiots in Mass as well. He can’t help being an arrogant snob from the Cape.

    3. Fritz, the fact that you are most likely white automatically makes you a hypocrite for saying that an animal that came here on its own four legs is non-native. Second, this animal may not quite be non-native. If we had red wolves here historically (not gray wolves), then this eastern “coyote” has native wolf genes and is in fact a rightful wild resident of the area, certainly as much as any non-Native American/Wampanoug.

      Your lack of knowledge to wildlife research is astounding. Just about all people I know refer to their study subjects as a “my animal” in this context. You spend lots of money to collar it ($300) and thousands to track it – that does not remotely make it a pet in any way.

      1. Jon-
        There isn’t medication, counseling, or any rational discussion to convince these people about tolerance of animals – or predators in general. What ails them in way deep down in their DNA…..You’d get nowhere trying to reason with them. You’d have about as much success as talking to a fern in your living room…..Hopefully after another few generations we can purge the accumulated dumbness out of their sysytem….

        1. William,
          Talking to a fern/plant in your house can be beneficial. For a while people wondered why but it is really symbiotic – you talk to them and give them CO2 which they need to survive; in turn, they give you Oxygen which we need to breathe.

          But, yes, talking to some can be a waste of time but hopefully not always.

      2. Jon, I readily accept that I am not an indigenous American although my family has lived in Orleans since the 1600’s. I also did not say that coyotes are non-native only that they are not indigenous to the Cape. They are clearly as native now as pitch pines.
        What I object to is not that you call coyotes yours, but rather that you give them human names and clearly are moved by their plight here. This can only lead to non objective research.
        Further, when I say I’d “put a hole” in a coyote, I would have to do it by hand because I don’t hunt and I don’t own a gun. I strongly advocate for stronger laws controlling hand guns. I have had a coyote attack me and my pet in my yard, (which it killed), and there are clearly times when coyotes have become aggressive in residential areas. It’s a natural event. While I guess we could all pack up and go somewhere else, I don’t see that happening any time soon.
        Lastly, I have seen a radio collar on a a distressed coyote 6 years ago here on the Cape. I don’t know who’s collar it was but it was so deeply embedded into it’s flesh that it’s head had swelled to twice it’s normal size. It was close to the most gruesome thing I had ever seen. It deeply affected me.
        I don’t see coyotes as good or bad, simply as another wild creature. I question my place in the world by the effects I will leave behind when I’m gone. I don’t advocate baiting or shooting to control population as it’s not effective. If someone has chickens or sheep etc., then I guess they should protect them though. My experience has led me to these observations and now I’ve been called an arrogant snob, an idiot, a hypocrite, and oddly, a fern. I’m sorry that the coyote situation on the Cape isn’t discussed in more objective terms on both sides of the issue.
        Thank you. Sincerely.

        1. Fritz-

          Read your first post.
          Then read your second post. It seems like it was written by a totally different person.
          “I can assure the author that if one of his friends comes into my yard, I’ll try to put a hole in it too”
          We hear this nonsense from people in Idaho, Wyoming and Montana all day long.
          Coyotes are hard enough to hunt with weapons- that would be quite a trick to put a hole in him by hand. Related to Kung Fu by chance?

          1. I assure you that I am the same person and while it would be next to impossible to kill a coyote without a gun, this one was quick enough to grab my cat from underfoot and make off with it before I knew what happened. I can understand peoples frustration at the numbers of them in their neighborhood.
            By the way, any suggestion as to where to post a photo of this animal with the collar? It isn’t pretty.

          2. I could kill one with a bow, perhaps you meant to say, it would be nearly impossible without a weapon.

          3. Fritz-

            Why don’t you start with Mass Fish and Wildlife. They offer the permits, and might be able to do something to help the coyote. No one likes to lose pets- they are members of our families- so I understand your frustration. I have many cats- and they all used to be outside cats- I was just lucky years ago that I never lost one to a coyote. My brother did. Once they become indoor cats, they adapt. If possible, leave greater access to attics and basements, weather permitting……
            Jon- is there anyone other than you doing research study in the Cape Cod area?

          4. William (Bill?),
            I don’t want to help this coyote or hurt it. My initial impetus for entering this fray was only to point out that researchers should not become an advocate or emotionally attached for any notion of how they think the situation “should” be. If you want to be an advocate, fine, be one. I have NO problems with that. If you want to do research, thats fine as well. The two invalidate each other when one blurs that boundary. That is my main point and something every first time science fair high school student should know. It was made clear to me in school and college. I have read some of what Jon has written and it seems rife with this conflict, well illustrated above. I don’t hold any ill feelings toward this or any other coyote; it was just doing what they do. Just like me. And one is not better or worse than the other. Calling me or any one else names is not a reaction that will help come to a policy vis a vis coyotes that works for everyone.

          5. Fritz:

            There definitely is a line between advocacy and science, but the two are not mutually exclusive–and being an advocate certainly does not invalidate your science. The whole field of conservation biology evolved as a “crisis discipline” that took as a fundamental premise, the notion that the conservation of biological diversity “trumps” other management outcomes (this could be construed as a type of advocacy). Likewise, nearly every “wildlifer” is an advocate for the species they research and many are also advocates of hunting (a use of those wildlife). More fundamentally, scientists, as citizens, are also entitled to have views about how the resources in which they are part owners should be managed.

            Certainly advocacy can be problematic for scientists; but most of us work hard to keep these endeavors separate.

        2. Fritz, you can email me the picture if you’d like. I don’t know of anyone else that has radiocollared “coyotes” on the Cape besides myself; however I have never choked one to death (or nearly so). Maybe it was an illegal snare? Feel free to go to my website (click on my name here) and email me the pic and I’ll let you know what I think.

          As per naming animals, I have heard from both sides of the coin on that. People insist that I name them to give the study meaning (which I agree with), others (like MA Wildlife) prefer I don’t. However, this has nothing to do with the science that I (or others) produce. I have 30 peer reviewed publications to this research and that wouldn’t change if I did or didn’t name them. Remember peer review is the gold standard to science…

          Thanks for your comments/concerns. Losing a pet can be traumatic. Figuring out how to avoid that from happening is probably a goal of both the pro and anti-coyote folks… I can assure you (and I am not saying that you suggest this) that shooting them will not solve that problem as others will just take their place….

          1. Jon,
            Am going to send these pics to you. You do not have to let me know what you think about them. The picture is not as graphic as I recall but excavating it from it’s neck sure was. Please note that the inside diameter of the collar is 3 and 1/4 inches and it is clearly not a snare. Is there any way to post them here so we can all see?

          2. Fritz,
            Thanks for sending me that picture. As I emailed you, and for the record here, that was one of my study subjects, which happened to have a radio-collar (see I didn’t write “my collared coyote”). It was shot on Great Island along with 20-50 a year that are killed there for no other reason than being a coyote. The animal was collared for 3+ years, was healthy and robust when killed with 1-2 companion(s). These animals have 4 inch fur during the winter-time and so even a loose collar would appear snug. The MSPCA even wrote a letter about this at the time that the caretaker of Great Island tried to dis-credit my research. It is hard for me to begin to think where you could see this animal looking like it was strangled given its health and the low quality of the picture. Most here might be concerned on why people are allowed to participate in a mass slaughter of these animals.

        3. Fritz, regarding researchers naming animals; it would seem to me that in order to do any meaningful research it would be absolutely necessary to be able to identify individual animals. You can’t just go, “You know, the one with the light spot on it’s chest…No,no,the other one, the heavier one with the light spot, the male!” Sure, you can use numbers as they do for wolves in Yellowstone, but the numbers become the name. If it’s an emotional attachment that you worry about, I can assure you that numbers such as 302m or 253m will elicit just as much of an emotional response from Yellowstone researchers as if they had been named Charlie or Buster. It is unavoidable if you are watching an animal day after day for years, possibly from birth to death, that you are going to establish some emotional attachment no matter what you call it. There would be something wrong with you if you didn’t.

          1. Thanks Alan. Well put…. The diff’ce with my work is that I study these animals near people so they get the opposite negative reaction. In other words, most don’t care if people were devastated when 302 died b.c it was in a national park (and yes that # meant as much as any name: I saw him on 5-6 of my trips to the park and even had an attachment to him). However, the animals I study are near people and sometimes cause problems. Therefore, I believe, more find it objectionable b.c of that. Altho many are certainly on my side (ie, naming animals) as well in that they see the animals living near them as important individuals and are saddened when they hear of one dying for whatever reason.

            You make some very good points. Mainly, what would be the point of doing the research if you didn’t care about it. No research/science is 100% objective. That is why you publish in journals – to try and get some of the bias out of a given study and presented objectively. By the way, Fritz’s comment (naming animals) applies to sci journals. Some reviewers hate it (probably more old school) while others could care less as long as the science/study is sound.

          2. I live on the edge of a small city so I see wildlife frequently on my walks. There is a family of deer that live in the woods north of where I live and my wife and I see them frequently, a doe and two fawns. I tried not to give them names because I didn’t want to get attached to them if one got hit by a car, or poached (hunting isn’t allowed so close to the city). One day my wife saw the doe while we were out for a walk and said “Look, there is Daisy.” That was the end of holding off giving her a name. She has been around for a couple of years so of course we developed an emotional attachment to her and we cherish seeing her new fawns each year. We always say that she is the luckiest deer in the area because she has great habitat to live on with few roads, yet she is protected from hunting. It is encounters like this that make me wonder how some people are able to be so cold and see animals as nothing more than a target or trophy. I guess that my DNA is different because it is easy for me to form an emotional attachment with any living being and see them as being more than a “resource” for us humans.

  3. There are always some ways to go around some laws. This practices bring groups to try to change them, in other cases nobody do anything about it. I hope in this case things change.

  4. I’m torn here in Michigan. We don’t permit baiting, but there is trapping. Most of my fellow hunters just shoot on sight, and have never considered any other thoughts – it is obviously the right thing to do. I am an exception – coyotes in my neighborhood have been a good thing I think (less cats), and they’re interesting and beautiful and all that too. Getting hunters and non-hunters to have more complicated thoughts was my hope, rather than diddling around about the methods of killing. Pitching how non-sporting a method is may work, but do I want to stoop to it, when it has no reference to any ecological or economic or even cruelty goals? Lessons appreciated – it’s hardly ever discussed around me.

  5. Jon,

    Just for clarification, did the rural residence near where this coyote was shot have livestock of any kind? Did the coyote have any history of livestock depredation?

    Barb,

    Expect to see an increase in Coyote trapping this year as the prices for hides have gone up significantly. 3 years ago trappers were lucky to get 20.00 a hide, the expectation is that they will be north of 80.00 a hide this year. Same with Bob cats, last year a a big tom from the rockies could fetch north of 700.00. From what I understand, the chinese have taken a liking to coyote pelts.

    1. Hi Ryan,
      Good questions. Not a sheep within miles of there. The collared female lived throughout suburbia for years and was killed on a golf course that barely has any people (besides walkers) this time of year. So, no – no history of livestock depredation – maybe the occasional outdoor house cat but not livestock.

    2. Jon,

      What about chickens, ducks, geese, or turkeys? That is what we typically lost to coyotes over the years.

  6. Saw a big coyote the other day in a neighbor’s pasture. (Just a pasture away where a dead cow has been laying for a couple of weeks now – same neighbor who’s had problems with wolves in the past)

    One thing I’ve noticed over the years, when you do see a coyote near the roads here, they don’t hang around if you slow down, to get a better look.

    They are considered “fair game” 24/7 -365 days of the year – despite the significant role they play when it comes to rodent control – mice, gophers, ground squirrels etc.

    1. Nancy- Coyotes know that humans are rotten to the core. They are smarter than the average redneck.
      So your neighbor had livestock down for two weeks? That’s a surprise….He’d be right out there if wolves started feeding on the dead carcass……Lets play out the rest of the scenario. He plays the “victim card” and screams about the “cattle killin” wolves…..WS is called in- he says wolves did it- WS says “looks like we got a depredashun here”
      Sound about right?

  7. Jon,

    I am not looking for a skirmish here, but is the “shooting from inside your house” really an element of the issue here, or is your characterization designed to elicit an “Oh my!” indignant response, since it may not be perceived as some as “fair chase”?

    If the point of shooting on one’s own land from in or outside a house was to rid an area of a perceived unwanted predator or pest, even though this was one of your research subjects, does fair chase even apply? I don’t know of any laws, nearly anywhere in any state, that prohibit that part of the equation – shooting from within one’s house, or from the porch stoop, easy chair or couch.

    Allowing or prohibiting baiting typically is set forth in state wildlife laws (by species usually), and there maybe a limitation on how close one is to another residence when shooting is allowed/prohibited. There may be limitations on what kind of firearm is allowed, for example just a shotgun because the pellets/slug don’t carry far as an aerodynamic bullet from a rifled barrel.

    My grandfather used to bait and shoot rats and raccoons that got into his grain bins or killed chickens on his small dairy farm that was not far from encroaching housing where he had homesteaded nearly 60 years earlier (not a house in sight then). I think some of that was even done from a kitchen window.

    We, in WA, also have the ability to identify rural “No Shooting” zones usually under a county ordinance. The folks in a local area at the fringe of farm land with residential areas nearby can petition the County for such designation of a geographically delineated area, and if successful, signs go up designating it as such. The sheriff investigates and cites violators. I would presume such designations could be made by ordinance in any county in any state in the US.

    1. WM,
      You raise many issues starting with your comment:
      1. “to rid an area of a perceived unwanted predator or pest, even though this was one of your research subjects” – many people don’t classify these animals as predatory and the fact that most do is really a violation of the Public Trust and North American Model since most predators (cats, rats excluded) are native to North America.

      2. Yes, it absolutely violates fair chase. I would hope that is obvious. So, if the state of MA says that eastern “coyotes” area valuable furbearer (which they do) then they should employ fair chase measures and baiting and shooting from inside a house (esp. with the 2 coupled together) I would think don’t classify as fair chase with the majority of hunters let alone general public.

      3. Many areas around here are residential and 500 feet is not far away (about 150 meters). This would certainly be the opposite of a homesteader without houses in sight.

      4. Then we deal with ethical and humane issues about killing a social, intelligent animal for fun who we are discovering has an important ecological role like its larger cousin, the wolf – but I’ll stay away from this topic for this thread at least.

      1. Sorry, 1st paragraph should state that most state wildlife agencies treat them as pests (not most of the general public).

    2. WM – I’m sure Jon will be responding but just so you know, in the 20 years I’ve lived in the same location in Montana, coyotes seldom cross my property. Know this because I get my two dogs out daily around the property and coyote tracks are pretty obvious, especially in winter.

      I’m thinking because I have nothing to attract them, my chickens don’t run loose, and maybe my dogs – marking “their” property lines – might also have something to do with it?

      Baiting an animal (that otherwise would not normally come close to your home) certainly would elicit an “Oh my!” indignant response, since it may not be perceived as some as “fair chase”……. from someone like me.

      If these people get their “jollies off” baiting & sitting by an open window, shooting wildlife, then they are truely a “bottom of the barrel” example of humanity.

    3. Jon,

      Just so I understand your view, re your item #2 above, if a deer, elk, pheasant or quail wanders on to your property and you happen to be in your house, you should not be able to harvest the wild animal (assuming it is otherwise legal to do so and is not baited, for purposes of this hypothetical), from within the house because it violates a tenet of fair chase?

      If you believed it did violate “fair chase”, would you then have to expose yourself to the animal outside the house, have it acknowledge your presence, or even go as far as to chase it off your property and await its return or stalk it some distance before you could shoot it?

      If, an elk/deer appears outside your tent while legally hunting this species(it has not happened to me, but one hears stories about this sort of thing all the time), and you are standing in its doorway when you see it, must you exit the tent, stand boldly, or wave your arms so the animal sees you before meeting a “fair chase” standard?

      I am just trying to understanding what bright line(s) “fair chase” might have in this context.

      And one last mind bender, how is a house or tent any different from any other form of “camouflage” or blind often used in the legal pursuit of harvesting wildlife? Again, I am having a hard time making the legal/ethical distinction.

      ______

      And, I had intended to mention this earlier, notwithstanding this discussion, I am truly sorry you lost your research animal. I do find the circumstances (as much as the facts have been disclosed) to be distasteful- Collared animal, bait and all.

      1. Thanks for your comment WM,
        Yes I would regard shooting any animal from a permanent structure violating fair chase. I think that is completely different than hunting from a tree stand or ground blind. To me there is an obvious difference. But especially doing it with bait I don’t know how that could remotely be considered fair chase. The animal can’t smell you if you are shooting from inside so it doesn’t have a chance. So yes, I adamantly would think that shooting from your easy chair thru an open window violates fair chase.

        Shooting from a tent, I wouldn’t regard that as fair chase either but wouldn’t put it into the same category as “house hunting”. And then again, unless you are baiting them I don’t know why most animals would be hanging around houses in the first place except in certain situations (like leaving the woods during hunting season to escape a hunter).

        1. My ears hurt from thinking about anyone shooting from their house. There would be some serious muzzle blast bounding off the walls.

        2. I have dozens of animals that hang around my house all the time, currently there are 11 deer within 25 yards of my home, during the spring, they drop fawns in the front yard and they hide their fawns in the two thickets I have here. One of them is less than 10 yards for the back door. Wildlife hang around homes all the time.

        3. ++…I don’t know why most animals would be hanging around houses in the first place except in certain situations… ++

          Over the course of many years I have seen deer, elk, bears and even coyotes cruise through or remain around the strangest places, including houses, out buildings and orchards both during and outside hunting seasons – call it food conditioned or habituated, or just a convenient place to hang out. Probably the oddest was when I was taking a SCUBA diving class. We were meeting at this guy’s house for the written PADI diver certification exam, in a densely populated residential area of Boulder, CO. It was summer, and pretty hot, Rainbird impact sprinkler going in the yard – “pfft, pfft.” I was in the bathroom, and heard a scraping noise outside the house. There was a huge 5 point mule deer buck bedded down in the shade, mist from the sprinkler drifting his way and keeping him cool, its body and head up against the house, antlers occasionally scraping the siding, making an odd sound.

          Another time, south of Alpine, WY, in winter, I was staying with friends. I walked over to a table below a window to grab a magazine. I looked over to see the eyes of a young bull moose about five feet directly in front of my face. He was just looking at me thru the glass. Snow was about 4 feet deep with drifts to 10 feet. The wind had blown the snow away from the foundation and the moose was bedded down in the exposed grass, up against the wall of the daylight basement. Nearly scared me to death. My hosts laughed and casually said, “Oh yeah, he’s here most of the winter, just hanging out when he’s not out feeding in the adjacent draw.” No baiting at all in either of these instances, just opportunist wildlife. And, we have all seen the videos of black bears coming into a yard to climb a tree and chow down on apples, peaches or cherries.

          I have also seen elk in orchards during winter, crunching expensive aluminum sprinkler pipes under foot left on the ground near the barn or in the field, or rubbing their heads on the risers. This stuff happens all the time. You just don’t hear much about it.

          ___

          For the most part, I agree with you about the “fair chase” scenarios, except maybe the elk/deer that might be seen from the tent.

  8. There you go.. what a sport it must be!! Shoot an innocent coyote for food??? I grew up hunting with my father for food on the table. The wildlife had a chance to get away at least. If we didnt get it, we didnt eat. Our Eco system depends on ALL WILDLIFE. Why can’t humans co exist with all wildlife.. 🙁

  9. Jon I think you are confusing hunting with “cleaning up” the neighborhood. Fair chase doesn’t apply when ridding oneself of urban skunks, coyotes, geese, coons or the like. Many of these animals make bad neighbors and an opportunistic shot might come from the house…
    What you are describing isn’t hunting so it should not be used to bad mouth or alter hunting regs.

    1. Hey this comment is for big Jeff’s comment on cleaning up the neighborhood.These so called urban pests are here in the urban environment because we have created habitat and food for them. If you really want to clean up the neighborhood keep small pets indoors,clean disgarded trash, and scare them away if you see them on your property. The key is to make them has uncomfortable as possible. Another point worth noting is at on point this was there home and we so kindly evicted them because we believe we have the power to do so because we are the so called intelligent species.If this is so then I am sure we can come together with more humane, ethical, and non-lethal ways at controlling and coexisting with our wild neighbors.Remember we SHARE this planet together. Maybe if you want to clean up your neighborhood better you should go out shooting all the criminals out there sprayin graffiti and vandalizing property. I bet you could do that from yor home too. Another thing who are to be the neighborhood trash man? Oh yeah please tell me the difference of hunting and ridding one’s self of bad neighbors. Matter of fact my neighbor gets a little loud sometimes so maybe I should….Ridiculous!

      1. You should allow a few skunks in your home/yard. They’re great to have around, especially with pets and kids!

    2. “Cleaning up the neighborhood?” Ridding “oneself of urban, pesky wildlife and/or the like?

      Are you serious Jeff? Guessing you have no clue as to what inhabited that neighborhood before the dozers moved in.

    3. I couldn’t disagree with you any more. What the hell does “cleaning up” mean? Maybe it could mean keep your trash clean (inside) or not attracting animals to your neighborhood.

      Shooting animals to “clean them up” is lazy, slob hunting and there is no need for that, especially if you are deliberately attracting them to be shot. Your comment, in fact, doesn’t make any sense…

      1. To a whole culture of people- his comment makes perfect sense. Extremely ignorant

        1. I may be wrong but my definition of a “bad neighbor” would be the idiot that thinks it is okay to blast away at animals from their house. What happens when the bullet misses the target and travels through the “neighborhood” and strikes something other than what it was intended for? It is just like the slobs that leave garbage unsecured in bear country and get pissed off when a bear is attracted to it. Of course guess who pays the price? It is certainly not the slob whose mess drew the bear to the area in the first place. It is always the bear or any other unfortunate animal that does what it does naturally. The same thing goes for idiots that build their home on the edge of wilderness and bitch when a deer comes in and nibbles on their flowers or bushes. Then they want all the deer in the area eradicated because one ate their frickin petunias. I guess all wildlife should be eradicated because it inconveniences them.

          1. A little too much ego, selfishness and alot of unintelligence -and presto- the modern day wildlife hater.

      2. I haven’t ever shot anything in my neighborhood, but you all have to admit there are some creatures that are not compatible with dense human housing, kids, dogs etc…When the urban coyote bites someone or kills a pet, it is seen by most reasonable folks as a nuisance. We have fox, coyotes, moose, an occasional cougar, wolf and/or bear passing through our neighborhood—I haven’t shot any nor would I, but in the right situation it would certainly be understandable.

        1. The only creatures in my neighborhood that are not compatible with “dense human housing” usually have mullets and drive giant pickup trucks with ear splitting exhaust.

      3. The cleaning up comment was really referring to geese—they produce a lot of crap if you have ever been out. There are a lot of urban wildlife issues. I keep my trash in, and my dogs are big enough that coyotes and foxes aren’t issues, but skunks? raccoons? opposums? Not exactly what I want around my home.

  10. All I can say is why? For entertainment. For the so called hunter within. Predator control for fear of depleating deer so WE can hunt them for SPORT and maybe a little meat. Dont understand it. The only good I take from this article is the wily coyote will persist and will be here but who is the say a hundred years from now we humans dont come up with more gruesome, effective, and unethical ways to kill that maybe even the greatest predator in are human dominated world cant overcome. Keep the faith and keep up the great work mr way you are the real hero in my mind!

  11. Coyote hunting here in New York State is allowed from Oct 1 – Mar 25. The season is not set with any protection of the coyote in mind. The season is set so that the pelts are prime and worth selling. Hunting is allowed day or night, with or without lights, with no bag limits.

    I am fairly certain that as long as you are 500 feet from the nearest occupied dwelling you can shoot anywhere you want on your own property including from inside a house.

    Recently this became an issue for me when a neighboring farmer allowed a hunter to shoot coyotes on his land adjacent to my 130 acres. While I don’t have the details, I have been told that the hunter called in and shot 5 coyotes and a bobcat. I am furious! Bobcats are protected in this zone and I have never even seen one. A bobcat was accidentally trapped near here about 15 years ago and that’s about it.

    I have notified the local game warden and it is being investigated. I don’t know if it was an intentional killing or he was shooting at the eyes or was he just shooting at dark moving creatures?
    Either way it is clearly a violation. I am told that the eyes of a coyote and a bobcat are very different color. Many predator hunters use various night vision devices.

    The real issue is night predator hunting. Electronic predator calls are also an issue. The obvious issue of wolves being shot under these liberal coyote hunting rules especially with the large size of coyotes here and the hybrid issue. I was actually surprised recently when NY DEC protested the possible delisting of the the gray wolf in the Northeast.

    I would like to see predator hunting for coyotes stopped or strictly limited. Not only is it an issue of fair chase that perpetuates the idea that predators are worthless creatures that deserve to be slaughtered, but that shooting at night can only lead to abuse and indiscriminate shooting of other species.

    1. Dave-

      Unfortunately, NY doesn’t have the greatest track record with wildlife. I remember when Gov Pitiless pitiful Pataki had an oportunity to ban canned hunting with a bill from the legislature…..He vetoed it to protect the slob hunting industry’s jobs

  12. Jon I’m afraid you misunderstand the difference between game animals and varmints. Varmints are often legal to shoot at any time under any circumstances, it’s considered a civic duty. Unlike game, one doesn’t eat varmints.

    The director of a wildlife preserve out here asked me to come shoot coyotes.

    You might want to do a search on the North American Model of Wildlife Conservation. Shooting song doggies isn’t unethical, nor is baiting.

        1. As I have stated many times in the past, I don’t hunt wolves or coyotes, don’t approve of making a contest out of it, but when it comes to ethics, which are a moral issue, who’s ethics do we base the ethical or unethical statements on?

          Ethics are based on upbringing, geographical location, religious beliefs and host of other criteria. What do we use as a middle ground starting point?

          1. I also don’t care to hunt anything that I’m not eating, especially something that looks like a dog, , , but.

            But too many people don’t hunt coyotes or bear and there is an overpopulation in many places that is having an affect on the number of calves and does produced. Like it or not I understand the reason that there is a need to hunt predators.

            I’d think that soon predator hunting might become more of a civic duty than before. We are only entering the middle stages of the repopulation of predators in the American West.

          2. You make some good/interesting points here SB. But for cultures (say in parts of WY) to hate another species like coyotes is just plain wrong. It is very reminiscent of racism (to a degree). The reason why I have stated that I support some type of federal Canid/Carnivore Conservation Act isn’t to end all coyote/wolf hunting but to make them a valuable part of our wildlife heritage and enact sane, reasonable laws like all our other wildlife have (seasons, bag limits, fair chase hunting). That would be a good middle ground in my opinion.

        2. IDhiker, count me in, too. Only “varmint hunters” consider themselves as performing a “civic duty” to kill what isn’t typically eaten. No one else does.

          1. I’m more concerned with what the wildlife biologists at my state fish and game think. If they encourage the hunting of a certain species and I was able to do so, I would. When in doubt I just ask them informally. They are very educated and familiar with all of the latest science.

    1. “Shooting song doggies isn’t unethical”

      Only to those who lack ethics, which obviously applies too you.

      1. Shooting song dogs is legal in most western states and whether it is ethical is up to the shooter or his/her critic. Shooting wolves is legal in Montana and Idaho, shooting mountain lions is legal in most western states, shooting bears is legal. When the law allows it, it is legal, ethics are an individual brief. It is up to that individual to determine what there course of action they want to take.

        One of my favorite spring past time is shooting gophers (Richardson Ground Squirrels) there is no law against shooting gophers. I have no ethical problem shooting them and have no intention to stop. I apologize to no one.

          1. That is your opinion but gopher hunting is a very big springtime activity in this part of Montana. Ranchers who allow no one to hunt will welcome the gopher hunter, homeowners in Bozeman spend thousands of dollars every year killing them. IYHO I might be somewhat psycho, I doubt it.

          2. Let’s take a poll and see how many think that people that kill for fun have a screw loose. I think you lose. Even animals don’t do that.

          3. Elk could careless whether he loses or not. The sporting goods stores around here are getting in there spring inventory of 17 HMR, 17 Mach2, 22 Mag and 22 long rifle.

          4. I’ll bet the farm it would lose outside this blog, in society in general and by a large margin.

          5. “Elk could careless whether he loses or not.”

            The mentally ill generally have no concept of what losing means, so your comment comes as no surprise.

          6. Timz,

            Might not be as one sided as you think, gophers actually account for a major part of horse loss every year, both domestic as well as wild populations.

          7. ++I’ll bet the farm it would lose outside this blog, in society in general and by a large margin.++

            I could care less about what the general society thinks and most people around here feel the same way. I care whether it is legal.

          8. He didn’t say he was doing it to help horses, he said it was a favorite pastime. Big difference.

          9. Timz,

            You will find in Montana, that gropher hunting is perfectly accepted and eliminating the threat to horses, both wild as well as domestic is one of the biggest reasons. So I would say, poll away, in the areas that gophers are present in high populations, I think you will find yourself on the loosing end. There are a heck of allot of horse lovers out there

          10. Society at large is more than a bunch of necks in Montana. Still would bet the farm I win not “loose” in society as a whole. That’s twice you’ve made that mistake, perhaps your not as smart as you would lead us all to believe. BTW, how’s that lawsuit going that prevents you from using your real name. Been going on 6 or 7 years now has it not?

          11. Awe,

            I see Timz is back to his true form, Lawsuit is going just fine Tim, won another point today, it is up to Ralph to tell to use my real name, not you. I have given indications of my real name as well as others that post on this blog, but you, I don’t think so, you are a little scary Timz.

            It really irks some of you, that you can’t just have it your way in this world doesn’t it Tim..

          12. Timz

            Who is society at large? When I think of society at large, I think of the “people of Wal Mart” 99% could care less about shooting gophers in Montana. Goggle “the people of Wal Mart” that is a large portion of society at large.

          13. Actually I’ve known your real name for over a year now, maybe I’ll start using it so we don’t have to have this conversation again.

          14. But I will add, society as a whole, that is interesting, the wolves were delisted by a couple of those necks you are talking about, now weren’t they Tim. The louder you get, the more you loose.

            The majority of society don’t even know or care about these issues, take a poll of New Yorkers and see if they swerve to miss the ground squirrels around Central Park, I will there a couple of years ago, and it was amazing, the amount of squirrel remains were on the streets!

          15. “Who is society at large? When I think of society at large, I think of the “people of Wal Mart” 99%”

            What a shock, you think of Wal-Mart. Thanks for proving my point, your an imbicile.

          16. Tim,

            You can call me by what ever name you want, I can guarantee you, you don’t know my name. As far as “having this conversation” you are the one that has the burn, not me. Using Tim, is pretty generic, One of the most common names in the US, so nobody really knows who you are either.

          17. “The louder you get, the more you loose.”

            That’s three times. I’ll send you a link to a dictionary.

          18. Yup, the argument is going downhill, now we are point out grammatical and spelling errors, then calling names.

            Same direction every single time Tim!

          19. I read somewhere that sometimes wolves kill for fun. I’ve seen cats and other felines play with their food, sometimes consuming it, sometimes not. They obviously did not have a mother like mine. She told me to never play with my food.

          1. I said ranchers welcome gopher hunters. I have a friend who has a section of land west of Bozeman and the gophers have destoryed an irrigation ditch. The gophers built holes in the ditch until it did not hold water and required thousands of dollars to rebuild.

            I you ever had a horse/mule step in a gopher/badger hole and panic; I had it happen twice last fall. I am a good rider and was able to control the situation, I doubt if you could.

          2. “I am a good rider and was able to control the situation, I doubt if you could.”
            Oh no, I would die knowing my life was incomplete. Me thinks you spend a little to much time around farm animals.

    2. It seems from the comments I’ve read here, the word “varmint” isn’t in our vocabulary. Coyotes/wolves/bobcats/skunks/raccoons all have significant value to many people – and I DON’T mean for their pelts!
      Let’s at least be honest, it’s a word that was coined to rationalize killing for the sake of killing and nothing more. Most of the time these animals have done nothing that can be perceived as wrong. They are what they are, only the “elite” refuse to accept this, therefore give themselves permission and even justify why they have to kill everything that lives and breathes.

  13. Jon, I am sorry that you lost the collared coyote you were studying for several years. And if you should refer to it as “my” coyote, that is fine with me and should not be mistaken for being anthropomorphic (such a big word for such a little head at times). Most of us understand that after studying this coyote – or any creature – for an extended period, it’s human nature for there to be some emotion attached to the loss.
    I fail to understand why there is not a HUGE penalty for shooting collared animals. Are they just plain stupid…blind…indifferent? I feel certain that research biologists such as yourself are compensated either directly or indirectly from taxpayer’s monies. Why is there no mention of this in the laws? This really needs to be addressed. Clearly, an animal that has been collared is also being studied by a wildlife professional, yet as things stand, some yahoo can come in and POOF!…blow the research away and not be penalized?
    Keep up your wonderful work!

    1. Joan,
      Thanks for your comments after the 20-30 useless comments of SaveBears and Timz bantering back and forth….
      Mass Wildlife has made it clear that they have no desire to better protect the animals and have been downright forthright in stating that those people are the ones that pay them (with their $30 hunting license). Pretty incredible.

      And thanks for the comment about “my coyote”. The only other way to say that would be to state “a coyote that happened to have a radio-collar that I studied” or the “radio-collared coyote that I studied”. If anything, “my coyote” is short-hand for studying that particular species.

    2. Hi Joan,
      I’m sorry if you had to go look up anthropomorphism in the dictionary but the term fits here as no other might.
      As for fining people for shooting collared animals, I would be happy to send you this photo of the one I’m referring to. It is so dug into it’s neck as to be virtually invisible. The farmer that shot it had just lost a dozen Dorset sheep to this pack. We are NOT living in a vacuum down here on the Cape. There is no wild habitat for these coyotes to inhabit with no human interaction and to think that some won’t get shot is not practical and simply naive. Cape Cod has been so over-developed that water quality, nitrogen intensity, air pollution, and species depletion are all serious problems. I have spent many months of my life walking Monomoy never having any problem coming home with my boat loaded with trash which I do every time. Balloons, water bottles, etc. and even on several occasions, full 5 gallon pails of used motor oil washed up on the Sound side. Shooting coyotes is not high on my list of nasty human behavior when I look at it on a macro level!
      Fritz

  14. We aren’t allowed to hunt from inside houses in Michigan. Perhaps the logic is that it is too good a way to hide that you are hunting something you shouldn’t be. For instance shooting turkeys out my back door might tempt me (with arrow). I have no doubt folks shoot nice bucks from their upstairs windows rather often (rifles), but technically it isn’t permitted.

    Call me ignorant, and all the other nasty things that make exchanging ideas and information so difficult, cause I do not permit groundhogs (our local marmot species) to repeatedly beat up my gardens. Once every 5 years a superchuck appears. Usually trap and transport, but once I shot one who was just too smart for me. Moving them seems so nice but doesn’t mean they will be OK. My neighbor with chickens, ducks, turkeys kills raccoons too. Both are still very abundant around me, as evidenced by road kills, but the coyotes might be helping a bit with that. We actually hope they might take out some fawns too, cause we have too many deer (in our opinion). Farmers welcome sharpshooters to kill groundhogs on their fields in my area.
    PS: My Yorkshire terrier (Owlbait) and I both think these animals eatable.

    1. rork,

      I just looked over the 2011 MI hunting regulations and could not find a prohibition against hunting/shooting within your own house as you suggest (I found the Safety Zone provision, which requires written permission to shoot within 450 feet of the owner’s building, but if it is your building/land it kind of begs the question of needing permission). Perhaps you could direct me to the correct provision.

      http://www.statehuntandfishregs.com/MIHUNT2011/

      1. WM: I grew up in Michigan, and have the same understanding of the regs as rork; that is, a house was considered an illegal blind. However, it’s been a long time since I’ve hunted in Michigan, and since I would never hunt from my house (or anyone else’s), I never bothered to look.

    2. Sorry WM.
      I can’t direct you, after an hour of trying to find the wording myself. I conclude I was full of error, and apologize for not double checking my facts first. I had thought houses were illegal blinds, but could not find that spelled out – my memory sucks I guess.

      1. That’s OK rork. I appreciate the effort you took to confirm. Most of us here have been wrong or a little loose on the facts, and it is noble of you to say so.

        The fact is, for some, shooting from inside a house is intuitively unethical. However, West of the Missippi River, and maybe south of the Mason-Dixon, or north of NY I bet it happens alot and is not considered unethical, or a violation of fair chase (legally or ethically), especially if the objective of the act is to put meat on the table, or ridding of an unwanted predator (no disrespect to Jon Way or his study subjects intended).

        If anyone finds a hunting regulation/proclamation that specifically prohibits hunting/shooting from within one’s house please note it up, and include the language and cite link. I could find none in the MO regs, so no need to look there. I have not checked here in WA to verify what I believe is the case, yet, but will when I have time.

  15. JB –
    Thanks for your description of the field of conservation biology — I have not discussed it much with others, but have developed impressions mostly from literature in the field, and it is interesting to get your take on what it is about. It is definitely a bit different realm and my impressions from what I read in it are pretty conflicting and complex to I won’t try to get into it here. Some in science may steer around it but I feel it is important to keep exposed to research and thinking there, but definitely don’t try to form a rounded perspective solely around it. As a “crisis discipline”, I find the severe focus in some cases on the precautionary principle to be somewhat open-ended, and need to look more at the distribution of probabilities and most probable outcomes. However, most of the papers I read in the field are not those dealing with momentous things like extinction but more about effects of human use of resources on populations and ecosystems, and in a few cases I see some pretty hand-waving arguments for sweeping policy change that involve substantial societal cost.

    1. I agree–sometimes the conservation biologists take the precautionary principle too far; and there is definitely a tendency to downplay (or fail to acknowledge) significant societal costs. What I envy about conservation biology is that their aim (bias) is stated explicitly; that is, all else being equal, they’re going to push for outcomes that promote greater biodiversity. In contrast, management professions (i.e., forestry, fisheries, wildlife, recreation) are forced to deal in messy trade-offs, where the potential costs and benefits of management actions are not born nor accrued equally.

  16. Hi Jon,
    Thanks for your email. I don’t know how you came to the conclusion that seeing two dead animals doesn’t bother me. Be that as it may, I can assure you that seeing this collar removed from the neck of this poor animal was difficult to watch, the flesh was raw. It was interesting that in hindsight, you said you might have had it a notch looser so I’m now assuming that it was you that put it on this animal. While I get no pleasure in killing animals, I am not a vegan and have made my peace with it. It should be done quickly and humanely. I have no reason to believe that these two coyotes suffered outside of the aforementioned collar. The same cannot be said of the 12 Dorset sheep that the pack of coyotes that these two were with, drove through a fence and destroyed. If you need pictures of these, let me know. I will now reiterate; I am not a hunter, I eat meat, (one of these sheep was destined for my dinner table which is why I was there), I fish. I have no problem, either with you wanting to nurture the coyote population on Cape Cod, or the farmer that shot these two coyotes. No pun intended but I don’t have a dog in this fight. But having you compare peoples dogs to these animals is way out of bounds.
    A quick story; when I lived in Bethel,Maine back in the seventies there were packs of dogs that had been peoples pets that became feral packs at night. They would kill other dogs, deer, and livestock. When the problem got out of hand, townspeople would go out and kill these dogs. It upset me at the time seeing these regular dogs shot but I came to understand that this was part of finding balance with man and his environment. You may not agree with this approach but it is an extension of our existence on this planet from burning fossil fuels to overtaxing water supplies to human overpopulation. Following your train of thought I might as well give up and leave this place. As I mentioned in an earlier post, I don’t see that happening any time soon. It would simply be moving the problem of our being here to another location. We’re running out of other locations!
    Respectfully, Fritz Lauenstein

  17. Jon, You didn’t mention there were sheep involved, that changes the game. Play fair, Regards DC

    1. DC,
      you don’t know what you are talking about. Sheep weren’t within miles of the death of the collared animal. Fritz is bringing up/rehashing a story from 6 years ago and 10-15 miles away, the nearest place that I know of that has sheep. A completely diff’t story.

      Fritz, my comments on GI have nothing to do with people per se but the fact that so many coyotes are shot in such of a small area. Obviously that is not working out if sheep keep getting killed. I would gain nothing (that I can think of) from doing a necropsy on them unless I had a study question or wanted to do genetic samples. Maybe aging them or something…

  18. Fritz,
    I don’t have to justify my research in front of you, or others, since you are hearing 2nd (or 3rd) hand from this animal and a supposedly tight collar. However, I received the collar (and I highly doubt that she killed 12 sheep and bet that they were just observed near them) and there was no blood or any mark on it meaning that once again the collar did not affect the animal even if appearing tight to you on a blurry picture.

    The problem in society is for folks like yourself to have an opinion (which is more than fine) but to think that your comments are equally as valid as a scientist who has studied a given issue. The importance of top predators is documented the world over to be very important to maintaining ecosystem health and so I would disagree that people shooting them for fun is a minor issue given other environmental woes that you mention.

    And by the way, for all of the people that live on the Cape, the environment is fairly healthy given that we tackling the issues such as Nitrogen and Phosphorous pollution and some of the other environmental contaminants and trying to address these problems. The fact that we have many seals and now sharks on our waters suggests that our local environment is doing pretty well even if you find plenty of trash on your outings (which usually come from places off-Cape).

    1. Hi Jon,
      Thank you for your condolences on the sheep I lost last night. The twelve that were killed six years ago were not ripped apart like the photos I sent this morning, but rather driven out through fencing onto thin ice where when gathered together as they will do, they broke through and drowned.
      Just as an aside, I am certain that the farmers on Great Island gain NO pleasure killing these animals. Just as you think my opinions on this issue are not as important as yours, I have asked them and they don’t speak of these animals the way you suggest. I never asked, but have you ever spoken with them? You’ve made some pretty damning statements that don’t jive with the people I’ve met. I’ve been assured that all coyotes that have been killed have been properly tagged and turned in to the State. I would NOT support preventing them from protecting their flock and I don’t see the State of Mass. from stopping them either. Given that, It might behoove you requesting the bodies to do necropsies, study what they’ve been eating, age, measurements, etc.. I’m not a researcher with a Masters degree in Biology, (though my brother is), but this would surely be a treasure of data that is presently going to waste. You might have to get past your emotions to do this the way whale researchers study dead whales. Did you really put an obit in the Patriot for one of these animals?
      By the way, thanks to you, my new nickname is “Fern” and I’m not too happy about it. Thanks for noticing the slant DC.
      Fritz

      1. Fritz-
        I was the one that coined the term “fern” for you. I take back that characterization. From your latest illogical posts, we will call you “cactus” going forward….
        Calling you “fern” is giving you way too much credit.
        I find it facinating- your ability to get inside Jon Way’s head and tell him how he reacts to things and how in your demented world view he should react to things!

  19. Jon Way, is it just me or is there a dispute going on between you and Fritz, beyond your posts here?

  20. It is a waste of time Nancy. He emailed me pictures of a supposed strangled coyote from wearing a collar. It was not the one that I wrote the story about. The animal was robust and fit and died near supposedly a bunch of sheep. Yet apparently the collar strangled the animal according to Fritz. See story above.

    That was not the case and, personally, I have wasted too much time on this pointless conversation. But most of it has been posted here in one of the threads.

    1. I never said the animal died from the collar. Not once. It was killed by a farmer after losing 12 Dorset sheep. (see above). I went there the next day to see the lost sheep. I witnessed the collar being removed. That’s all. I have said this before and I repeat; I do not have any truck with Jon and I support his efforts to learn about these coyotes. I simply find his rhetoric in the posts and article above to be not consistent with objective field work that I have read in the past. That’s all. He has, in this conversation, given so many disparaging remarks and misinformation to warrant a challenge. Anyone who would like to see the photos that I have provided to Jon need only ask me.
      Jon, I am certain that you are right that there are more coyotes killed there than could live in the territory. As long as the animals keep killing sheep, chickens, and pets they’ll continue to be shot and as I’m sure you’re well aware, nature abhors a vacuum and they’ll keep coming and I don’t need a PhD to understand why. Your suggestion vis a vis guard dogs have been tried with little success. The trick here is to find a rational balance between man and wildlife. Sorry to “waste your time”. I would have thought such an esteemed researcher would have appreciated a productive debate. Go ahead and teach us all something that we can’t see for ourselves. And no , Nancy, there is nothing else going on here. I’ve never met Jon and only happened upon this thread as this issue has affected me personally.

      1. Fritz,
        We don’t we both give it a rest as this is not productive for either side (and DC, at least Fritz can attach his name here and his some context to this story). As a biologist, I am welcome to have an opinion, and many biologists don’t speak up for what they believe in. I have not said any “disparaging remarks and misinformation” since this post originated NOT from Great Island but in Barnstable.

        However, I do find it offensive to shoot many coyotes from bait piles, esp. from houses – that was the point of the post until you chimed in and the post (with my help) went on a tangent off the focused topic. By the way, if coyotes/coywolves had respectable hunting seasons with bag limits and the animal was treated as a valuable wildlife species, then I wouldn’t have a problem with them being hunted. It is just the way it is done in many areas, and that was the point of the post. My reason for posting had nothing to do with protecting sheep or Great Island. Why don’t we both quit it, though, as this bantering back and forth is going nowhere (esp. when folks like DC chime in mid-way through making a comment that has nothing to do with our conversation).

  21. Nancy, Its obvious to me and I hope others, Mr. Way cannot take any criticism. I wonder if he has ever spoken to the people on Great Island, my guess is no. He should speak with them, assuming he hasn’t. How does Jon have any idea about how many sheep have been killed or if one of his collared animals was involved if he’s never talked to anyone on Great Island? What kind of science is this, Jons way or no way. Yikes get the facts before you publish an article.. Go back to school..Concerned DC

    1. DC, Fritz, guessing from your posts, you both know each other and got an axe to grind with not only coyotes but with Jon’s research?

      1. Nancy,

        I don’t know the story between Fritz and Jon, But being a biologist, I have an axe to grind with quite a few biologists, they have decided going with the flow is the best, which is so far not working out. Biologists are suppose to tell the truth, unfortunately in this country the truth is dictated by the political power in Washington. To bad people have not figured that out!

        1. Just trying to put the pieces together from what I’ve read SB and its WAY past my bedtime, so hopefully some answers in the am!

          1. Nancy,
            Why do you think there’s an axe to grind? I’ve put my name on what I wrote. I don’t know anyone in this conversation. I live on Cape Cod and have had several experiences with coyotes. They are beautiful to look at AND one killed my cat and some sheep that I had an interest in. That’s it. No axe to grind, no powers in Washington, no name calling, but geez, it seems like it’s impossible to have an informed and deliberative conversation on this subject. Jon has gone so far as to regret my loss and suggest that guard dogs may be a solution but has also suggested that the people who shoot coyotes are bloodthirsty wild eyed killers and in my conversations with them, that is simply not the case. In trying to bridge the divide, I have been called names and had my motives mis – assigned.
            Fritz

          2. Fritz,

            I hope this exchange with Jon Way does not sour you to the forum. Lots of viewpoints and passions crop up along the way.

            I find your accounts refreshing, because quite few folks who participate or just monitor the conversation on this forum need real accounts of what goes on in the predator – prey world at the interface with human activities.

            I have said before here, some of the folks that read about this stuff, and formulate their opinions on their perception of the real world need to personally have an out of pocket loss, or have a pet killed by a predator to begin to understand the tension involved in tolerating them.

            Stick around and keep the conversation honest.

          3. Agreed WM,
            Different viewpoints are important and it is important to also realize that comments will often be taken out of context on a non-personal format such as a blog – both for and against a given blogger (me included).

            I have no problem communicating with Fritz in the future and it will probably be less personal and more factual without “losses” associated to both responders (collared animals, pets).

            But again many of us (including me) take a blog like this too personal on occasion when it is just that – a blog… Overall, the job of this blog is serving its purpose – ie, raising awareness about wildlife in this country…. That is ultimately most of our goal of participating in forum.

  22. WM – all sorts of wildlife are slaughtered by the millions each year, just for being in the wrong place, at the wrong time – tolerant them?

    What is tolerance? It is the consequence of humanity. We are all formed of frailty and error; let us pardon reciprocally each other’s folly – that is the first law of nature.
    Voltaire

    1. Nancy,

      I sense Voltaire, an Eighteenth Century philosopher of French nobility, penned his thoughts with a full stomach and flush bank account. If I am not mistaken his focus for those thoughtful lines may have been advocating the need for religious tolerance and civil liberties in a backward France.

      No doubt he did not have full benefit of his contemporaries like John Locke across the English Channel, though he did visit England while he was in exile. Nor did he have the benefit of the thoughts to come from Jeremy Bentham, or even John Stewart Mill, who focused keenly on the nature of man, and his quest for happiness.

      For a very long time I thought Bentham’s Utilitarian theories explained the nature of man.

      And, then later there would have been the contribution of Abraham Masilow (psychologist who studied the hierarchy of human needs).

      I sense some here are happiest with more wolves and coyotes, while ranchers, farmers and hunters might be happier with fewer. Where is the equilibrium point where each is happiest (or least unhappy) in co-existence?

      I guess tolerance is the word applied to each with opposing views, with the hope that each can find some middle ground to tolerate the other. So far I haven’t seen very much from your contributions to this forum that would suggest you would move any to close the gap.

      1. “So far I haven’t seen very much from your contributions to this forum that would suggest you would move any to close the gap”

        How ironic you should say that WM.

        Perhaps it has something to with the “hitmen” (WS) that just 20 minutes ago, cruised by in a (our tax dollars at work) helicoper. I don’t know if they located their “target” but there were a number of gunshots as it hovered and swept back and forth over a stand of aspens across the way.

        My guess is the dead & rotting cow in my neighbor’s pasture, finally drew in something bigger than coyotes, crows and magpies or maybe, because calving season is just around the corner, its time to tidy up the area, again.

        I’ve seen this attempt at wildlife management dozens of times over the years, hard to “close the gap” when your an eye wittness to this waste of life and money…….

        1. I have spent many hours in helicopters and use to be in change of a Hughes 500C in Alaska. How do you hear gun shots over the thump, thump of the rotor blades.

          1. Elk – its amazing how sound travels around here, there was no mistaking the BOOM, BOOM, BOOM over the sound of the helicopter. Unless the copter had a backfire problem going on, they were definately gunshots. I hear BOOMS all the time around here during hunting season.

            I first heard and then saw the copter going up the valley, it was a few minutes later when I heard the first series of BOOMS, grabbed my binoculars and went outside. Located the copter hovering over the aspens, after a couple more BOOMS.

            Guessing you don’t see that kind of aerial display around Bozeman?

        2. Nancy,

          ++hard to “close the gap” when your an eye wittness to this waste of life and money…….++

          I haven’t spent alot of time looking at the MT annual wolf reports, but I have the ones for ID. Do you have any idea how very few of the wolf management units across the entire state have been the target of WS control actions?

          If they are thumping wolves in a few small areas there is probably a pretty good reason linked to past depredation events.

          And, if there is a(are) dead cow(s) in YOUR neighborhood as you suspect, confirm it, and then pick up the phone and make a friendly call the neighbors, or let MTGFP know, and have them make the call. Maybe the housekeeping will improve. If it doesn’t, at least you can say you tried.

          On the other hand, you may be right about the calving being around the corner. So, if there is no control the rancher absorbs the additional labor and capital cost for prevention, and maybe gets some reimbursement for the cows he/she loses, after a costly investigation. Some money could be saved for the reimbursements if there are preventive measures taken, now. Would you rather hear the chopper now or in a couple months doing the very same thing, plus MT maybe having to pay for more dead cows from wolf kills?

          Nancy, you do realize they do the shooting in the GL, as well, and will likely be doing it in Eastern OR, after this court stay is withdrawn?

          I think one of the worst things wolf advocacy groups could do in Eastern OR is oppose the removal of the Imnaha pack which according to ODFW has 22 confirmed livestock kills (30 according to WS), and the recent probable mule kill. The best PR they could have gotten would have been to go along with the kill order, and wait for the next pack to show up, hoping it doesn’t start in with a quick history of depredation as the Imnaha. By the way, when they showed up, I was rooting for them to be successful in their migration. Not so much now.

          I guess it depends on whose money and whose life, eh?

          1. “And, if there is a(are) dead cow(s) in YOUR neighborhood as you suspect, confirm it, and then pick up the phone and make a friendly call the neighbors, or let MTGFP know, and have them make the call. Maybe the housekeeping will improve. If it doesn’t, at least you can say you tried”

            WM – The cow is less than 30 feet from the road so no need to confirm it. Two years ago it was a dead bull (obvious from the road also) This ranch has had confirmed wolf depredations in the past and I’m afraid calling him or any of my ranching neighbors and counseling them about the pitfalls of leaving dead cows laying around, would be like suggesting ways on how they could better raise their kids. Get my drift?

            To my knowledge, there are no laws preventing ranchers from leaving dead cows laying around (although I have seen an increase in dead calves in the local dumpster over the past few years)

            I’m sure F&G has already attempted to make ranchers aware of how attractive a dead cow is to predators, afterall they’ve attracted coyotes in for years.

          2. Nancy,

            If you feel strongly about the issue, why not make the suggested call(s) anyway. Maybe even call WS, playing dumb and being curious about the helicopter and what it might have been doing. At least you will know, and they will know someone is watching.

            Seems to me unless you do that sort of thing you lose the high ground when it comes time to complain about it.

  23. Getting to the point: shooting from inside your house to something outside is not safe. Is there any movement to ban this? Putting out the garbage after 12:00pm can result in death if your neighbor is trigger happy.

    1. Hi Eloise,
      I hear your point and in fact I’m very uncomfortable around guns and find handguns in particular to be rampant and a frequent cause of both accidental and purposeful violence in our culture. That having been said, the persons to which I have referred to and know, seem responsible and as safe as can be expected. They do not live in proximity to others, have never harmed other people and use long guns to shoot coyotes and a handgun to kill any livestock that may be injured or diseased in the most humane fashion available to them. They keep these weapons locked in a secure safe and follow Massachusetts firearm laws at great expense. I got into a debate with them on this subject as I do know persons that are not so diligent. Specifically in regards to shooting from inside to outside, I certainly wouldn’t do that because I have neighbors close by. These people don’t.
      In regards to baiting which was, indeed, Jon’s original subject, just having an annual average flock of 50 sheep is in itself baiting as they are an easy prey for coyotes. To take a killed carcass from one out of the fencing and watch it until the coyote(s) come in for another meal is the most efficient and humane way of killing the coyote that is in the immediate area, while granted, it may be offensive to some. Poisoning is inhumane, snaring is illegal and also inhumane, trapping is ineffective and has been tried as has keeping dogs, living with the damage makes raising sheep not worth it. I can’t speak to the coyote that Jon mentioned in the beginning of this article as I don’t know the person that shot it. I only speak from what I’ve seen and experienced.
      Perhaps you can illuminate me; do I sound like a “demented cactus” as William called me above. If I’ve been out of line or offensive in my remarks, please let me know and I apologize ahead of time.
      Fritz

    2. Making the statement that shooting from inside your house is dangerous is not correct, I could shoot out of anyone of my windows or doors and never run the risk of hitting more than my own door frame, my closest neighbor is over a mile away and I live in a depression, so not going to hit the neighbors house or dogs, or horses!

      1. SB,

        ….and, of course it is not illegal in MT, …or any other state that anyone has been able to show on this forum to date.

        That also requires that good judgement be used whenever firearms are involved – being sure one is shooting in a safe direction and only at an identified and legal subject/target.

        1. I know of no law preventing a person from shooting from their home as long as the target is legal and identified as such, you have to know your surroundings, you have to make sure you are shooting in a safe direction and posing no threat to your neighbors, you have to be sure of your backstop.

          Now when it comes to human invaders/targets, we in Montana have adopted the Castle Doctrine.

          Those not familiar with the surroundings others live in, should not make broad ranging statements on what is safe and not safe.

          1. And of course SB, the original point of the article would be to question whether this is ethical and appropriate. I know you aren’t lumping that into your statement but this comment thread has gone way off topic, including from me…

          2. I’m pretty certain its legal here if you are over 1/2 mile from a road as I am. This season, I spent considerable time in the woods deer hunting and brought in smaller animals (does and a young buck — which would be really small by mule deer standards), although I called in one large buck that gave me the slip. However, sometime during the season in late-November when I wasn’t looking, a rutting buck that left a large track inflicted a rub on a willow tree 23 feet from my front door so extensive that it will probably end up killing it. I guess if I had seen it, there would have been a decision to make whether to shoot from the door, but I probably would have crept out the back door and circled around. Baiting deer is illegal here, but I wouldn’t consider providing a place to rub its antlers baiting.

          3. Jon,

            As I have stated many times in the past, ethics are a moral issue, which is unique to each individual, law is a societal issue, that we are all bound by, unless we change that law. Ethics vary greatly. They are based on upbringing, goals, geographic, living environment and a host of other things.

            Now that said, just because I can, with no fear or reprisal, does not mean I shoot out doors or windows in my home, however if I chose to do so, it is not dangerous.

  24. Hey Jon,
    After all that has been written here, I decided to go back and make sure that I didn’t mis-read anything into your article above. I had printed out the original and now the existing article above has the section about the “property manager” on Great Island, Yarmouth … DELETED!
    You have called me a hypocrite and questioned my education and ability to comment on this issue. I have indeed not finished college however in my immediate family there are at least 7 graduate degrees, one a doctor, and I grew up around the dinner table where academic and ethical and intellectual standards were not only stringent but drilled into us constantly. That your original article that I am now holding in my hand is different than the one above without any notification to me or anyone else that I can see makes me furious. Please,please let me know if I am missing something here because if I am not, this is exactly the kind of thing that I started out saying, that scientific methodology MUST be followed or one’s research becomes worthless. Worthless. Do you go and change peer reviewed work after publication as well? Tell me that this is not so. Please. I have spent a couple of hours now in this thread having a conversation that I ONLY joined because it included comments to which I am privy, namely, the aforementioned property. As I said, I don’t know anything about the coyote killed that you began with. Now it has disappeared and to someone who read this entire thread would be left wondering, “why is Fritz even commenting on this”.
    If I am mistaken here, please let me know, and I’ll apologize. If not, this kind of nonsense is beyond the pale and you need to address it. You have cast a wide net and made specific charges towards at least one person by name and position. You need to make yourself familiar with a completely different part of the Massachusetts General Laws before your next post. And please don’t ask me to “give it a rest”.
    Fritz

    1. Hi Fritz,
      I called your perspective of calling eastern coyotes non indigenous a hypocritical comment. I didn’t say you were a hypocrite and I don’t care that you did or didn’t finish college.

      However, throughout this thread you have first accused me of not being objective and that is problematic, then you presented a very disturbing image of (for lack of better word) a bubble head coyote that was far from that. I am responding to your comments and not taking them out of thin air.

      Following this, I asked Ralph to remove the Great Island reference since it was one sentence to be used as an example of how wildlife can be mismanaged. Clearly with our comment thread it wasn’t a needed or relevant comment to make a point in the article that had nothing to do with GI. And half of the comment thread has nothing to do with the intended statement “that you can shoot coyotes from inside your home”. While a couple of collared animals have been killed on Great Island in the past (including the tight collared one you referenced), again, this wasn’t the point of the article and it still isn’t -hence why it was deleted.

      And to be clear, Fritz, this is a website – not a peer reviewed one and stuff is updated all the time on the website. My point is still taken without that sentence that is obviously causing unnecessary tangents (however, as you know, the sentence is accurate as check stations can prove many come from GI every year)…

      You say: “As I said, I don’t know anything about the coyote killed that you began with.” That would precisely be why the one sentence was deleted, because the entire post is about something that we aren’t discussing right now. I agree with Ralph, that I have no problem having him delete the comments to this as they are not a useful representation of the topic.

      1. To All,
        Well I do have a problem with it. That is why I jumped in in the first place and now you’ve redacted it. This is a form of deceit and rewriting that should not be tolerated. You publicly denigrated people on this website and then redacted it with no explanation, notice, or apology to them or the people in this conversation. You are a Phd graduate from Boston College? Do you not see the problem with this? My understanding is that you were a teacher at a public institution. Is it this kind of discourse that led to your leaving? I’ve asked around now, and have been told you no longer have a permit to trap and radio collar these animals. Is this true and why?
        Saying falsehoods and flagrantly misleading people and then saying that this is excused because it’s not a peer reviewed format? This is a public forum and you have made yourself a public figure. I’ll be watching for your public speaking engagements to see if this is the kind of dog and pony show you put on in person.
        I did not open up this forum and frankly, have spent a fair amount of time considering the issues here because of you. My grandfather taught me to think long and hard before opening my mouth and taking a stand on something as there is always someone on the other side of an issue that could get hurt. I do my homework and clearly you have not done yours. You owe said “property manager”, my sheep farming acquaintance, a big apology and I mean it. Not for their actions but for what you have said about them. Again, in your last post, you have accused them of mismanaging wildlife. You clearly know not of what you speak.
        I understand, now, you wanting to “give it a rest” and calling this a “pointless conversation” now but you’ve dug yourself into a deep hole, sir. And to anyone reading this or who has participated in this conversation and indeed, to the editors of this website, think about what I am saying here. If this is the way of conducting intellectual inquiry by someone with these esteemed academic credentials, then either he has left the reservation or we’re all in trouble. Please, please read my ORIGINAL post. It contains a challenge that has not been answered and is at the core of my understanding of scientific research.
        And yes, I am now angry as you can tell from the tone of this post.
        Fritz Lauenstein
        Artist

        1. Fritz, this will be the last time I respond to this post as you are making more damning accusations every time you write a post. I did not public denigrate anyone, I simply made a comment that large numbers are shot there per year. It is hard for me to fathom how you are reading between the lines since I never mentioned anyone by name and just used it to illustrate my point how wildlife is allowed to be treated. Yet again you are missing the main point of my message…

          Your original post is about anthropomorphizing animal feelings and I have stated here and elsewhere that I do have feelings for the animals I study and that I strongly believe that I can still collect objective data on the subjects. I will ignore all of the challenges that you assert on this last post except to formally invite you to any talk I give. I give them all around (incl. your neck of the woods) the area quite often as I list on my website and yes I am trying to revamp my research (collaring and tracking) as we speak.

          Good day…

        2. And to be clear, you claim I “Say falsehoods and flagrantly misleading people”. That is absolutely not the case since many people can verify the number of animals killed on GI per year – which yet again is not the point of the article and why it was redacted…

          1. Jon,
            Sending an apology to my personal email is NOT adequate. You need to apologize here, where you spoke originally. I will accept it on good faith but cannot speak for the other party.
            Your decision not to participate in future conversation is certainly your choice but it speaks volumes about your constitution.
            To Mr. Maughan; it seems as if you may want to clarify your editorial guidelines as I have found them wanting.
            Sincerely,
            Fritz Lauenstein
            Glass Artist

    2. Fritz,

      I have found the way that you have gone about your posts refreshing and I personally would like to thank you for not stooping to the level of name calling, even though you have had a few things lobbed in your general direction.

      Jon,

      I know this started out as a close to the heart thing, losing an animal you’ve been following and I have a feeling it’s been equally hard to not let emotions rise too high. I don’t know if I could do that type of research and not get emotionally involved with the subject I was studying. Probably one of the many reasons I’m not a researcher, heh heh.

      1. Thanks DT,
        Yes, it is difficult doing research on a study subject that is not viewed so positively by much of the population – and to try to reach a middle ground I raised the issue of a particularly offensive (to many) hunting mehthod…. As I said earlier, I would be glad to talk with Fritz in the future about any Wildlife (or other) issues. However, I think this thread has reached a dead end and I think your comment sums up both of our positions nicely. thanks again…

        1. Fritz,
          Hopefully this will clear the air so we can now move on to other things (slightly edited from my email to you):

          Yes, I do wish I had never included that 1 sentence on the original post and I apologize for using it initially (ie, before the edit). However, the sentence was accurate in that lots of animals (coyotes) are killed there annually. I never public denigrated anyone and can’t see where I mention anyone by name on any of the posts here?. But, yes, I apologize and wish it was never there in the first place as that clearly wasn’t the focus of the article and created this unnecessary distraction…

  25. Fritz, WOW!!! Just looked at your work online and will be visiting your shop in June when on vacation, beautiful work..DC

  26. This thread is a bit out of hand right now, and I need to deal with it, but I have errands to run, so comments are closed for a while.

    Webmaster

Comments are closed.