Coyote investigative behavior following removal of novel stimuli

Journal of Wildlife Management

Volumn 71, Issue 2, 2007, Pages 587-593

  Heffernan, Daniel J ^a,c   Andelt, William F ^a   Shivik, John A ^b  

^a Department of Environmental and Radiological Health Sciences   (United States)

^b UTAH STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c NONE   (United States)

Author keywords

Attractant; Behavior; Canis latrans; Coyote; Novel stimuli; Scent station; Vision

Indexed keywords

BEHAVIORAL RESPONSE; CANID; OLFACTORY CUE; VISUAL CUE;

NORTH AMERICA; TEXAS; UNITED STATES;

CANIS LATRANS;

EID: 53949091457     PISSN: 0022541X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2193/2005-505     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Andelt, W. F. 1985. Behavioral ecology of coyotes in south Texas. Wildlife Monographs 94.
2. Bekoff, M., and M. C. Wells. 1986. Social ecology and behavior of coyotes. Advances in the Study of Behavior 16:251-338.
3. Bowen, W. D., and I. McTaggart-Cowan. 1980. Scent marking in coyotes. Canadian Journal of Zoology 58:473-480.
4. Bullard, R. W. 1982. Wild canid associations with fermentation products. Industrial and Engineering Chemistry Product Research and Development 21:646-655.
5. Curio, E. 1976. The ethology of predation. Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg, Germany.
6. Fox, M. W. 1971. Behaviour of wolves, dogs and related canids. Harper and Row, New York, New York, USA.
7. Gese, E. M., and S. Grothe. 1995. Analysis of coyote predation on deer and elk during winter in Yellowstone National Park, Wyoming. American Midland Naturalist 133:36-43.
8. Harris, C. E., and F. F. Knowlton. 2001. Differential responses of coyotes to novel stimuli in familiar and unfamiliar settings. Canadian Journal of Zoology 79:2005-2013.
9. Heffernan, D. J. 2002. Evaluation of multiple cues for increasing attraction of coyotes. Thesis, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, USA.
10. Kimball, B. A., J. R. Mason, F. S. Blom, J. J. Johnston, and D. E. Zemlicka. 2000. Development and testing of seven new synthetic coyote attractants. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry 48:1892-1897.
11. Kleiman, D. 1966. Scent-marking in the Canidae. Symposia of the Zoological Society of London 18:167-177.
12. Linhart, S. B. 1981. Field evaluation of techniques for reducing coyote predation on livestock. Pages 1826-1838 in J. A. Chapman and D. Pursley, editors. Worldwide Furbearer Conference Proceedings. Worldwide Furbearer Conference, Inc., 3-11 August 1980, Frostburg, Maryland, USA.
13. Linhart, S. B., and F. F. Knowlton. 1975. Determining the relative abundance of coyotes by scent station lines. Wildlife Society Bulletin 3: 119-124.
14. Mason, J. R., and R. J. Burns. 1997. Coyote responsiveness to novel visual stimuli. Journal of Wildlife Research 2:6-8.
15. Montgomery, K. C. 1955. The relation between fear induced by novel stimulation and exploratory behavior. Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology 48:254-260.
16. Phillips, R. L., F. S. Blom, and R. M. Engeman. 1990. Responses of captive coyotes to chemical attractants. Proceedings of the Vertebrate Pest Conference 14:285-290.
17. Reiger, I. 1979. Scent rubbing in carnivores. Carnivore 2:17-25.
18. Roughton, R. D., and M. W. Sweeney. 1982. Refinements in scent-station methodology for assessing trends in carnivore populations. Journal of Wildlife Management 46:217-229.
19. Ruggiero, L. F., C. D. Cheney, and F. F. Knowlton. 1979. Interacting prey characteristic effects on kestrel predatory behavior. American Naturalist 113:749-757.
20. Sacks, B. N., M. M. Jaeger, J. C. C. Neale, and D. R. McCullough. 1999. Territoriality and breeding status of coyotes relative to sheep predation. Journal of Wildlife Management 63:593-605.
21. Schneirla, T. C. 1965. Aspects of stimulation and organization in approach-withdrawal processes underlying vertebrate behavioral development. Advances in the Study of Behavior 1:1-74.
22. Scrivner, J. H., R. Teranishi, W. E. Howard, D. B. Fagre, and R. E. Marsh. 1987. Coyote attractants and a bait delivery system. Pages 38-55 in J. S. Green, editor. Protecting livestock from coyotes: a synopsis of the research of the Agricultural Research Service. U.S. Department of Agriculture Sheep Experiment Station, Dubois, Idaho, USA.
23. Sequin, E. S., M. M. Jaeger, P. F. Brussard, and R. H. Barrett. 2003. Wariness of coyotes to camera traps relative to social status and territory boundaries. Canadian Journal of Zoology 81:2015-2025.
24. Sheppe, W. 1966. Exploration by the deer mouse, Peromyscus leucopus. American Midland Naturalist 76:257-276.
25. Shivik, J. A. 1998. Brown tree snake response to visual and olfactory cues. Journal of Wildlife Management 62:105-111.
26. Stokes, A. W., and D. F. Balph. 1965. The relation of animal behavior to wildlife management. Transactions of the North American Wildlife and Natural Resources Conference 30:401-410.
27. Turkowski, F. J., M. L. Popelka, and R. W. Bullard. 1983. Efficacy of odor lures and baits for coyotes. Wildlife Society Bulletin 11:136-145.
28. Turkowski, F. J., M. L. Popelka, B. B. Green, and R. W. Bullard. 1979. Testing the responses of coyotes and other predators to odor attractants. Vertebrate Pest Control and Management Materials, American Society for Testing and Materials Special Publication 680:255-269.
29. Wells, M. C. 1978. Coyote senses in predation: environmental influences on their relative use. Behavioural Processes 3:149-158.
30. Wells, M. C., and M. Bekoff. 1982. Predation by wild coyotes: behavioral and ecological analyses. Journal of Mammalogy 63:118-127.
31. Wells, M. C., and P. N. Lehner. 1978. The relative importance of the distance senses in coyote predatory behaviour. Animal Behavior 26:251-258.
32. Windberg, L. A. 1996. Coyote responses to visual and olfactory stimuli related to familiarity with an area. Canadian Journal of Zoology 74:2248-2253.