C620 Managing Predator Problems

Managing Predator Problems: Practices and Procedures for Preventing and Reducing Livestock Losses COOPERATIVE EXTENSION SERVICE Kansas State University, Manhattan Contents Introduction . 3 Causes of Loss . 3 Livestock Factors . 3 Sheep . 3 Cattle . 3 Poultry . 4 Swine . 4 Predator Factors . 4 Coyotes . 4 Dogs . 5 Other Predators . 6 Facility Factors . 6 Pastures . 6 Corrals . 6 Buildings . 6 Management Practices . 6 General Husbandry Practices . 6 Corralling Sheep at Night . 6 Carrion Removal . 6 Pasture Selection . 8 Shed Lambing . 8 Record-Keeping . 8 Variable Grazing . 8 Predisposing Factors . 8 Fencing . 9 Electric Fences . 9 Conventional Fences . 11 Predator FrighteningDevices . 15 Lights . 15 Propane Exploders . 15 Bells . 15 Vehicles . 16 Aggressive Livestock . 16 Radios . 16 Shepherds . 16 Guard Dogs . 16 Experimental Predator Deterrents . 17 Repellents . 17 Aversive Agents . 17 Electromagnetic Devices . 17 Predator Removal . 17 Management Systems—Summary . 17 Predator Damage Management Checklist . 18 Acknowledgements . .. 18 Selected References . 19 Introduction Causes of Loss For many years, Kansas Extension Specialists have Livestock Factors worked closely with livestock producers to help them re- There are a number of factors relating directly to duce predator losses. Over the years, we have had the op- livestock that can have an important bearing on portunity to observe a wide variety of livestock manage- predation losses. The relative importance of these factors ment practices and their associated predation problems. will vary depending upon the type of livestock being con- Certain livestock management practices have been found sidered. to be consistently associated with high predator losses Sheep whereas other practices are commonly associated with low losses. Both season and location of lambing can have major impacts on the severity of coyote predation on sheep. The The purpose of this publication is to share with the highest predation losses of sheep in Kansas typically oc- producer those management practices that have been cur from late spring through September. In 1975-76, the found to be effective in reducing predator losses and to 100 southcentral Kansas sheep producers in Meduna’s help producers avoid practices that lead to increased study, (representing about 20% of the sheep produced in losses. In addition, a variety of nonlethal predator the state) reported an annual loss to predators of 0.9 per- damage control methods are discussed. The primary em- cent of both sheep and lambs. In 1974, the USDA phasis is on reducing sheep losses to coyotes and dogs. Economic Research Service estimated coyote losses in Less detailed discussions are devoted to other types of Kansas to be 3.2 percent of lambs and 3.4 percent of livestock and other predators. stock sheep, based on a questionnaire survey of a sample This publication draws upon our own experiences; of Kansas sheep producers. In that survey only 356 of ap- the experiences of other specialists, researchers, mana- proximately 2,700 sheep producers in Kansas (l3%) gers and producers; and on the results of a Master’s were sent questionnaires and responses were obtained study at Kansas State University entitled, “Relationships from only 146 of those contacted (41% response rate). In Between Sheep Management and Coyote Predation” by Kansas, much lambing occurs between October and De- Robert L. Meduna. That study was conducted in 1975-76 cember, whereas in most of the western United States, in cooperation with 100 southcentral Kansas sheep pro- lambing occurs between February and May. By going to ducers. a fall lambing program, some Kansas sheepmen have not only been able to take advantage of high spring mar- Some of the information in this booklet is based on a ket prices for lambs, but have also avoided having large statistical comparison of management practices em- numbers of lambs on hand during those periods of time ployed by Kansas sheep producers and their levels of that predation losses are typically highest. Lambing in predation loss. However, statistical studies, conducted sheds or lots helps to avoid potential problems from the with a large number of different managers under a seasonally high fall coyote populations. variety of uncontrolled conditions, must be interpreted In general, large flocks of sheep tend to have a with some caution. It is impossible to examine one higher total predator loss in terms of numbers than livestock management factor individually, while holding smaller flocks. However, on a percentage basis, the all other factors constant. Also, differing levels of proportion of sheep lost to predators averages less in the management can influence not only predation losses, but larger flocks. This suggests that larger operators are able other predisposing factors or sources of loss such as star- to spread their predation risk over a larger number of vation, disease, parasitism, and weather. Then too, cer- sheep and, proportionately, are able to reduce their tain locales may traditionally have high predation losses, losses, despite the fact that they may actually lose more for reasons other than management, which are difficult total sheep than a smaller producer. or impossible to quantify. At least in some instances, a At the present time, there are no documented dif- “good” livestock manager may have higher predation ferences in the vulnerability of various breeds of sheep to losses than a “poor” manager. However, by taking coyote or dog predation, although there has been very lit- proven and prudent preventive measures (where physi- tle research in this area. In general, sheep have been cally and economically feasible), livestock producers can bred for meat and wool production and ease of handling, help to assure that their predation losses will be mini- not for defensive behavior or aggression. It appears that mized for their particular locality. most sheep are relatively easy prey for coyotes, although This publication should prove especially useful to coyotes will selectively kill lambs in mixed flocks and new producers who are just getting set up, but it also may single out and attack sheep that exhibit disabilities. contains information that should be of interest to established producers. Not all of the suggested Cattle management practices in this booklet will be applicable Cattle losses to predation are much less common, to every operation, situation or locale. However, this proportionately, than sheep losses, although individual publication can serve as a source of ideas that can be in- calves are usually worth more than individual lambs. corporated into new or existing livestock production Less than one-half of one percent of all calves in the systems. Great Plains were believed killed by predators in 1978, 3 according to a U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service report. In weaning. Coyotes apparently are attracted by the in- general, it appears that most calf predation is done by a cessant squealing of the newly-weaned pigs which, if in few coyotes who learn a killing technique and tend to an accessible lot or pen, are vulnerable to predation. “specialize.” There is little information available on the suscep- Predator Factors tibility of various breeds of cattle to predation. Longhorn cattle are reputed to be effective at protecting their calves Coyotes and themselves from predation but there is no objective Coyotes are the number one predator of livestock in research data to support this claim. Breeds of cattle or Kansas and in most of the western United States. In crossbreeds that tend to have calving complications also general, individual coyotes will range over areas about tend to have more predation problems. 3 to 5 miles on a side (10 to 25 square miles) and those The age of cattle is often related to the severity of a ranges usually overlap to varying degrees. predation problem. First-calf heifers seem to suffer a Kansas coyotes are accustomed to human odor. disproportionately large share of the calf loss to They are active primarily at night but may venture close predators. Heifers are generally more prone to calving to farmsteads even in broad daylight if terrain or cover complications and tend to be poorer mothers than older are adequate for concealment. In Kansas, coyotes nor- cows, thus giving coyotes more opportunity to prey on the mally go under or through fences whenever possible. calves. The age of the calf is also very important. Most However, they are capable of jumping or climbing over calves killed by coyotes are less than one week old. Calves fences and will do so under some circumstances. over 3-4 weeks of age are seldom bothered unless they are Not all coyotes kill livestock. Those coyotes which sick or injured, although attacks on large, healthy calves are killing livestock are usually referred to as “offending by groups of 2 or more coyotes have been reported. Older animals.” It is desirable, when using lethal control cattle are attacked by coyotes only under very unusual methods, to direct those methods at offending animals. and rare circumstances. Calving paralysis is the most Of course, there is no way to look at any individual common cause of predator-inflicted injury or death to an coyote through a rifle scope or in a trap and be able to adult cow. This paralysis gives a coyote an opportunity to tell whether or not it is an offending animal. However, in feed on the unborn caIf and, sometimes, part of the cow a damage situation, control methods can be con- as well. centrated in and around the damage area and along Seasonal variations in calf losses basically follow the coyote travel routes to and from the area. When this is peaks of the calving season. Most losses of calves are done, there is reasonable assurance that the offending reported in the late winter and spring with a peak in coyote(s) will be among the first few coyotes captured. March. Time after time, we have worked with producers ex- periencing coyote problems who, after capturing one or a Poultry few coyotes, had no more predator problems for months Poultry losses to predators have been greatly or even years afterwards, despite the continued presence reduced by the adoption of confinement production of coyotes in their vicinity.

Load more