The Status of the Virginia Cooperative Coyote Damage Control

Program - Fiscal Year 2000

Chad J. Fox, United States Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, Wildlife Services, 105 B Ponderosa Drive, Christiansburg, Virginia 24073. 540-381-7387

                                                       EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

 USDA-APHIS-Wildlife Services (WS) provided direct control services to 122 livestock farms in twenty-four western counties in federal fiscal year (FY) 2000.  During FY 2000, 337 sheep, 33 calves, and 178 goats were reported and verified killed by coyotes in Virginia. This represents a 25% decrease in reported sheep predation, a 51% decrease in reported calf predation, and a 29% decrease in reported goat predation from FY 1999.  Increased state funding in 1999 resulted in more staff to serve livestock producers with predation problems.  The increased level of service resulted in a $64,953 savings to livestock producers in Southwest Virginia and the New River Valley regions.  WS has kept the average number of sheep killed by coyotes per farm to less than 6 per year for four consecutive years.  Preventative control was conducted on 50 livestock farms with historic coyote predation and WS removed coyotes before livestock depredation occurred, thus these farms had no losses in FY2000.  In FY2000, WS removed 204 coyotes on farms to stop coyote predation on livestock.    

Funding for FY2001 has increased to $228,000, which includes $85,000 from the Virginia Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, $121,000 from USDA-Wildlife Services, and $22,000 from the Virginia Sheep Industry Board.  Current funds provide for 3.8 staff years in FY2001. The USDA-Wildlife Services appropriation was increased for FY2001 due to a Congressional Directive from efforts by sheep producers in Virginia=s 6^th Congressional District.  This $86,000 directive will be used to place a second coyote specialist position in the 6^th District.

Coyote specialist positions are located in Southwest Virginia, Highland County, the Alleghany Highlands and Shenandoah Valley, and part-time in the New River Valley.

 Increasing requests for service and an expanding coyote population are placing increased demands for more service to assist livestock producers and accomplish program goals to reduce coyote, dog, and fox predation on livestock.  To meet the current demand for services the Virginia Cooperative Coyote Damage Control Program requires an additional 2.2 staff years.

INTRODUCTION

 The United States Department of Agriculture - Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service - Wildlife Services (WS) serves Virginia livestock producers suffering coyote predation on livestock by providing technical assistance, direct control, education, and research.  This status report summarizes WS=s accomplishments, funding, and goals during FY2000 in each of these areas.

 Coyote depredations were recognized as a potentially serious threat to Virginia's livestock industries in the early 1980's.  As a result, the Virginia Cooperative Coyote Damage Control Program(VCCDCP) was created in 1990 by a Cooperative Service Agreement between the Virginia Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services (VDACS) and WS.  The VCCDCP is funded by sheep producers and state and federal funding (Table 1). The program provides necessary technical and operational assistance in identifying, controlling, and abating coyote predation to livestock.

 The VCCDCP uses and recommends an Integrated Predator Management (IPM) approach to solving livestock predation problems.  This approach to predator management uses improved husbandry practices, predator resistant fencing, predator frightening devices, livestock guardian animals, and predator removal.  The implementation of IPM on Virginia farms was accomplished through technical assistance, educational programs, and operational programs.

 Table 1.  Sources of funding for the Virginia Cooperative Coyote Damage Control Program in Federal Fiscal Year (FY) 2000 (October 1, 1999 - September 30, 2000) and FY 2001 (October 1, 2000 - September 30, 2001).

______________________________________________________________________________  Source                                                                                               FY2000           FY2001

Virginia Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services                   $85,000        $85,000

VA Sheep Industry Board                                                                    $22,000           $22,000

United States Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant

Health Inspection Service, Wildlife Services                                            $35,000         $121,000

________                                                                                                                    _______

Total                                                                                                   $142,000        $228,000

______________________________________________________________________________

                                                     PROGRAM ACCOMPLISHMENTS

 Technical Assistance

 Technical assistance was provided to producers through personal consultations on the farm and written/telephone consultations.  Coyote predation management information was disseminated to 85 producers.  WS provided 286 leaflets on using guard animals, non-lethal and lethal methods producers can implement, and information to evaluate predator killed livestock.  

 Direct Control Services

 During Federal Fiscal Year 2000 the VCCDCP  provided direct control services to 122 livestock producers reporting livestock losses to predation or livestock producers with historic losses (Table 2).  This represents the second highest number of farms receiving direct control services in a single year.  WS provided direct control services to 67 sheep farms, 33 cattle farms, and 22 goat farms in FY2000.   The VCCDCP uses preventative control, which removes coyotes before losses occur because it minimizes overall livestock losses to predators.  Preventative control is implemented primarily from January through April.  Of the 122 livestock producers assisted, fifty farms with historic coyote predation losses had coyotes removed to prevent livestock predation.  These 27 sheep farms, 20 cattle farms, and 3 goat farms with historic losses had no livestock killed by predators in FY2000 because of preventative control.  Corrective control is the implementation of coyote removal methods after the livestock producer reports losses.  Corrective control was implemented at 72 farms to stop chronic coyote predation on livestock in FY2000.

 Table 2.  Livestock depredations reported to or verified by WS on farms receiving assistance from the Virginia Cooperative Coyote Damage Control Program in FY2000.

______________________________________________________________________________                                                                                                # of farms                     % change

Resource                 Damage Type             Total FY2000         reporting losses^A           from FY99

Sheep                                                                                                                                                     Predation                           337                       40                        -25%

Cattle                                                                                                                                                         "                                      33                       13                        -51%

Goats                                                                                                                                                         "                                    174                       19                        -29%

______________________________________________________________________________  A.  Seven farms had a combination of sheep, goats, or cattle killed by coyotes.

 Methods used by WS

 Integrated Predator Management is the use of any or all practical and legal methods simultaneously or sequentially.  Livestock producers are better able to implement nonlethal methods such as fencing, shed lambing, and husbandry.  Livestock producers can implement some lethal methods, however, they request assistance from WS when the predation can not be stopped.  Sometimes livestock producers request WS to implement lethal methods as preventative control.  WS primarily implements a mix of lethal methods to alleviate predation on livestock (Table 3).  Coyotes may be removed by WS using snares, leghold traps, modified padded-jaw leghold traps, shooting, calling and shooting, decoying with dogs and shooting, M-44 sodium cyanide ejectors, or Livestock Protection Collars.

 M-44's are the method of choice for preventative control.  M-44's are better able to continuously work during bad weather and freezing and thawing soil conditions common during January through April than traps or snares.

 Where appropriate, WS uses non-lethal methods to resolve livestock predation.  Infrequently, strobe-sirens, a non-lethal method, are used until lambs are moved to market or lethal methods can be implemented.  Sometimes WS places guard dogs to protect livestock.  WS placed one guard dog in FY2000.

 Table 3.  Lethal methods used by WS and coyotes removed to protect livestock from predation in Virginia during FY2000.

______________________________________________________________________________

Number of farms                                  Number of coyotes

Method used                                                                                                                method was used                                  captured per method

M-44                                                                                                                                                               87                                                        106 (52%)

snares                                                                                                                                                               51                                                          62 (30%)

leghold traps                                                                                                                                         42                                                          36 (18%)

Livestock Protection Collar                                                                                             5                                                            0

calling and shooting                                                                                                                     2                                                            0

______________________________________________________________________________

Sheep

 WS has been able to consistently keep sheep losses to an average of approximately 5 sheep per farm for four consecutive years (Table 4).  These lower sheep losses are primarily due to the implementation of preventative control, use of M-44's, and prompt reporting by sheep producers.  The average number of sheep killed by coyotes per sheep producer receiving WS assistance  during FY2000 was 5 sheep/farm.  

 Table 4.  Average number of sheep killed by coyotes per sheep producer on farms receiving assistance from Virginia Cooperative Coyote Damage Control Program.

______________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________

 Goats

 Goat losses on farms which reported goat predation by coyotes in FY2000 decreased 29% from FY1999.  These lower goat losses are primarily due to the implementation of preventative control and prompt reporting by goat producers.   The number of goats killed by coyotes was reduced from an average of 19 goats per farm in FY1999 to 9 goats per farm in FY2000.

 Cattle

 Cattle losses on farms which reported calf predation by coyotes in FY1999 decreased 51% from FY1999.   These lower calf losses are primarily due to the implementation of preventative control and M-44's.  Twenty of the 33 cattle farms (61%) received preventative control because cattle producers felt coyotes were a threat due to historic coyote predation, coyotes were seen chasing cattle, or coyotes killed cattle, sheep, or goats on adjacent property.

        Calf predation by coyotes are a growing concern among producers, particularly in southwest Virginia.  Sixty-nine percent of all cattle losses reported to WS where from southwest Virginia.  The National Agricultural Statistics Survey (NASS) of cattle predator loss indicated an increasing number of coyote/calf predation in Virginia from 700 calves in 1991 to 900 calves in 1995 (Table 5). A  recent NASS survey of only WS clients reported 95 cattle killed by coyotes on 174 cattle farms in 1998.  Current funding levels limit the ability of the program to respond to this increasing demand for service from cattle producers.

 Table 5.  National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS) estimates of cattle losses from coyotes and dogs in Virginia^a.

______________________________________________________________________________                     Year               Coyotes                        Dogs

          1991              700                              1000

          1995              900                               800

^aSource:  National Agricultural Statistics Service (1992, 1996)

Impacts on coyote populations

 Direct Control services resulted in the removal of 204 coyotes by WS personnel during FY2000 compared to the previous high recorded in FY1999 when 284 coyotes were removed (Table 4).  While this was a 28% decrease in the number of coyotes removed by WS, the number of farms requesting direct control decreased from 153 in FY1999 to 122 in FY2000 while the overall livestock loss rate decreased 25% for sheep, 29% for goats, and 51% for cattle also.

 Coyote populations in Virginia have not stabilized and continue to grow each year. WS assisted 372 different livestock producers with coyote predation from 1990 - 2000.  In FY2000, an additional 51 new farms were assisted with livestock predation.  As coyote populations continue to grow in Virginia more farms will ask for assistance with predation problems.  Similar increases in coyote harvest have been documented by hunter harvest surveys made by the Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries (Table 6).  The coyote harvest has increased from 1,295 in the 1993-94 hunting season to over 6,000 in the 1998-1999 hunting season. 

 Table 6.  Number of Coyotes harvested by hunters in Virginia during recent hunting seasons.

______________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________

Education

 The VCCDCP has used the media as a means of educating livestock producers and the public.  Eleven newspaper articles were published, two radio interviews and two TV interviews were given.  WS also conducted 13 educational programs to educate livestock producers and the public about coyote damage management activities.  Thirteen educational programs were presented and attended by 559 people (Table 7).

Research

 Five Livestock Protection Collar (LPC) projects were conducted by Virginia WS personnel during FY2000 to reduce coyote predation losses on sheep.  LPC=s are only used in specific situations under near ideal conditions.  During FY2000 those ideal conditions did not occur for efficient use of the LPC.   The LPCs were placed on 34 sheep for an average of 7 head of sheep per project (range: 3-12).  Of the 34 collared animals none were attacked by coyotes.    The farms where LPC=s were used, predation on sheep by coyotes was stopped by a combination of other control methods before any LPC=s were punctured.

 Even though LPCs accounted for 0% of all coyotes removed by Virginia WS personnel during FY2000 they are a valuable tool and provide a selective and effective addition to the integrated coyote management program conducted by Virginia WS.   In the past, some coyote predation problems would have been difficult and time consuming to solve without LPCs.  LPC=s can be invaluable due to livestock interference with other methods, concerns adjacent landowners have about some methods, and concerns for pet dogs or guard dogs. 

 Table 7.  Educational programs presented by WS personnel under the Virginia Cooperative Coyote Damage Control Program in FY2000.

                                                                                                                                                        Requests Cooperator/Organizations/Governments            # of Participants

Highland County Sheep and Wool Producers                                    55  

Highland County Public Meeting                                                      80

Highland County Board of Supervisors                                                  12

Rockingham County Extension                                                                                                              50

Carroll/Grayson County Sheep and Goat Producers                                                      28

Tazewell County Board of Supervisors                                                                                      49

Russell County Board of Supervisors                                                                                                    38

Bland County Board of Supervisors                                                                                                      28

Virginia Trappers Convention                                                                                                                            40

Old Dominion Sportsmens Club (Wise County)                                                             24

Tri-County Forestry and Wildlife Assc. (Roanoke area)                                    85

Warren County Extension                                                                                                                                 10

Virginia Tech Sheep Production Class                                                                                                                           60                                   

     Total for FY2000                                                                                                                                                    559                      

FUNDING

 Historically and presently, Highland County has some of the highest predation rates and highest sheep populations in Virginia.  Reducing livestock predation in Highland County will take a new turn because additional federal funding was secured by lobbying efforts from Highland County Sheep producers and Highland County Board of Supervisors.   Lobbying efforts by Highland County secured an additional $86,000 funding for the VCCDCP.  The coyote specialist will work almost exclusively in Highland County because of the political efforts of the Highland County Sheep producers.

 The new federal funding for Highland County will allow for an additional wildlife specialist  position located in Rockingham County to cover the Shenandoah Valley and surrounding counties west of the Blue Ridge and south to Lexington. There are now 3 full-time coyote specialist and one part-time coyote specialists.  The full-time specialist located in Russell County serves 12 southwestern Virginia Counties, the full-time specialist located in Highland County serves primarily Highland County, and the full-time specialist located in Rockingham County serves 10 Shenandoah Valley region counties.  The part-time coyote specialist  located in Montgomery County serves 8 counties in the New River Valley.

 The Virginia legislature appropriated an additional $50,000 to the Virginia Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services in July 1999 for the VCCDCP.  This increased funding resulted in an increase of staff years from 1.5 to 2.3.  The increased staff years directly resulted in a reduction in livestock losses in Southwest Virginia and the New River Valley regions where the funding was used.  In Southwest Virginia, monetary damages from reported livestock predation were reduced from $90,583 in FY1999 to $29,705 in FY2000.  In the New River Valley monetary damages from reported livestock predation were reduced from $7,000 in FY1999 to $2,930 in FY2000. 

 Table 8.  Value of livestock lost to predation by county in Virginia during Federal Fiscal Year 2000 compared to Federal Fiscal Year 1999.

______________________________________________________________________________

County                                                                                                                                         FY2000 ($)                  FY1999 ($)                             Benefit

Southwest Region

Bland                                                                                                                 450                           3,225                           2,775

Buchanan                                                                                             2,910                           2,085                              -825

Dickenson                                                                                                                                3,185                           8,670                           5,485

Grayson                                                                                                                                   1,650                           1,088                              -562

Lee                                                                                                                                                         455                           3,520                           3,065

Russell                                                                                                                                                 8,025                           7,755                              -270

Scott                                                                                                                                                    3,400                         15,920                         12,520

Smyth                                                                                                                                                      900                           4,370                             3,470

Tazewell                                                                                                                                   1,000                         11,425                         10,425

Washington                                                                                                                              4,965                         11,945                           6,980

Wise                                                                                                                                                    2,375                         18,520                         16,145

Wythe                                                                             390                           2,060                             1,670

sub-total                                                                                                                                  29,705                        90,583                         60,878

New River Valley

Botetourt                                                                                                                                         0                              470                                 470

Carroll                                                                                                                                                   690                               360                             -330

Floyd                                                                                                                                                          0                           1,050                           1,050

Giles                                                                                                                                                        450                              540                                90

Montgomery                                                                                                                                430                           3,080                           2,650

Nelson                                                                                                                                                                         1,360                                  0                          -1,360             

Pulaski                                            0                           1,500                           1,500

sub-total                                                                                                                                   2,930                           7,000                           4,070

TOTAL                                                                                                                                                            32,635                         97,583                         64,953

______________________________________________________________________________

GOALS FOR FY 2001

 Three educational programs will be offered to sheep and goat producers interested in learning about guard animals.    Jeff Green, the USDA-Wildlife Services guarding dog specialist, will share his expertise on management and use of guard dogs.  Laurie Guthrie, a guard llama expert from Texas will share her research and expertise on the use of llamas to protect livestock from coyote and dog predation.   These guard animal programs will be offered in February 2001 in Wytheville, Monterey, and Weyer=s Cave.

 All farms requesting WS assistance will be responded to within 3 business days.  Any farm in Highland County with a predation problem will be responded to within 2 days when the coyote specialist is on duty.   The goal is to have a wildlife specialist return the phone call requesting assistance and if necessary arrange a site visit to evaluate the predation problem.

 Sheep losses will be held at an annual average of 5 or fewer animals lost per farm.   WS has met this goal two of the last four FY years (1998 and 2000) and kept losses below 6 sheep per farm two other FY years (1997, 1999) (Table 4). The predation rate in Highland County will be held at an average loss of three sheep killed per farm.

Literature Cited

 National Agricultural Statistics Service. 1999. Livestock wildlife damage survey results. Washington, DC.

 National Agricultural Statistics Service. 1996. Cattle predator loss. Washington, DC.

 National Agricultural Statistics Service. 1992. Cattle and calves death loss.  Washington, DC.