territorial changes | Coyote Yipps

SF Coyote Territorial Map and Family Situations to Summer 2025

12 Aug 2025 3 Comments

by yipps:janetkessler in territorial changes, territoriality, territories in SF Tags: coyote territories, coyote territories in san francisco, territories

Updated 2025 map of coyote territories in San Francisco

Introduction: It might be fun to get to know something about your very own neighborhood coyotes! My documentation has always been on this very basic, primary building-block level, starting with the individual coyotes. And my information has also been conveyed, individually, to folks in the neighborhoods where I have been documenting the coyotes — after all, these were THEIR coyotes. Mine is very much a grass-roots endeavor. As you can see from the map, coyotes cover the entirety of the city of San Francisco, so you DO have them in your neighborhood.

I begin this posting by describing my approach — a *from-the-ground-up* approach. I then summarize some generalities and quirks about the different territories. Finally I list and sum up what the coyote situation is on each of the territories. And for a some, I even provide histories and links for further reading. Getting to know the whole picture will help you understand your own neighborhood coyotes better. I ask that you act as stewards for them: they are your neighbors and need support in the face of continued misinformation, sensationalism, and fear spread about them. Thanks!!

MY BACKGROUND AND APPROACH: How I came to know our SF coyotes. This is a question I have been asked, so here, I’m diving into it for you!

My friend Audrey saw this map when it fell to the floor and asked what it was. I told her it was my map of coyote territories in San Francisco. She enthusiastically responded that she maps her bird territories: that it began by her simply noticing the same scrub jay in various places and then seeing another scrub jay and where he went. One never appeared where the other appeared, and the two never appeared together. It’s from this that she began mapping some territories of the birds she watches. This is exactly how my studies began in 2007.

I’ve come to know the coyotes of San Francisco one at a time as unique individuals. Not anonymously, not as numbers, not just as a whole species. I give them names based on characteristics or events that will help me remember them — it’s easier than numbers, and it confirms their individuality. This is the cornerstone on which all my information is built.

I am able to distinguish and identify each coyote by its facial features, and sometimes by the way one carries itself or their behaviors. As I’ve stated so often before, each coyote is unique and distinguishable — as much as each human is — however, like in human families, there are family resemblances for which sometimes detective work is needed to tease out the differences! I am a self-taught naturalist and not an academic which gives me the freedom to follow leads I come up with without having to write them out in a proposal, or wait for peer review.

Academics rely on metrics. For many of them, if it can’t be measured by a human-made device or formula, it doesn’t exist. So, interestingly, my information doesn’t exist for some of them. Rather than lab work, statistics and numbers — which is their MO — my information comes from watching coyotes out-of-doors in real time and reveals what coyotes are like: it’s accessible, hands off and non-intrusive, not rarefied, real, and accurate, and can be verified with DNA from scat or photos — few academics know coyotes well enough to actually distinguish individuals, much less all the individuals and families in the city.

By watching and documenting them every single day (through a 650 mm equivalent lens), I’ve developed a very good understanding of them: their behavior, family life, individualized relationships (with its ups and downs), family structure (in its variations), along with their disaffinity for dogs, and their aversion to humans (though not necessarily *fear* of us). I’ve also developed easy guidelines for coexistence, based on real-encounters and seeing what works.

In turn, and by the same token, having the ability to identify individuals, and knowing their families and family dynamics, has allowed me to map their family territories and to follow their histories on those territories. What follows is a summary of their current territories and situations as of summer 2025 here in San Francisco. I’ve brought up to date a couple of their histories, and supplied links to their past stories (for two of the families).

Interestingly, years ago, the City brought in an *expert* who proclaimed that the city of San Francisco could only support 5 to at most 7 coyote families. Yet I’ve documented three times that many. This year, in 2025, I know 18 different nuclear families and the territories they exclusively claim, and I’ve seen the pups on 15 of those 18 territories — and there could be several more territories that I’ve missed.

Obviously, I’m not present 24-7 in any of the territories. In fact, most of the families I now see only glancingly every couple of weeks or even months. But others I’m more in-touch with, sometimes even seeing them daily for long stretches of time and then less frequently for equally long stretches of time.

When I see them, I might see them for as long as a couple of hours, morning and/or evening, OR I might simply cross paths briefly with a couple of them which gives me only a few minutes of catch-up observation time. The point is that none of these histories is complete. I’m presenting them as I have seen them through limited time frames. But it’s over 18 years of everyday observations that I’ve accumulated what I know about the nature and structure of family situations and their territories.

Here, I have updated my territorial map from when it was first posted in 2021 (and then updated in 2024). See: https://coyoteyipps.com/2021/07/14/territories-and-population-in-san-francisco/. There are 18 exclusive coyote-owned territories in San Francisco that I know of. Allowing for my missing some, I’ve rounded this out to 20. There could be a few more that I’ve missed, but there are not fewer. These territories cover the entirety of the city of San Francisco.

THE MAP I’ve created.

I’ve circled most territories in red, a couple in blue and an undefined couple in black. Some of these territories have remained fairly stable over the years — in terms of location and extent — however, they’ve all endured some form — minor or major — of disruption since I started studying them in 2007, so that in some cases, new families have taken over, or in other cases boundaries have been somewhat reconfigured, or territories have actually been divided. And I’ve even seen *shared* territories.

The 18 territories circled in red are confirmed territories. All 18 (except Territory #9) are claimed by an alpha mated pair. Most, but not all, have one to four yearlings, and so far, I’ve seen the pups in 15 of those territories, with litters ranging from 3 to 7 pups.

Before listing the territories and their current situations, here are some individual territorial generalizations and quirks I’ve noted.

Unusually, one of those territories overlaps slightly with another (Territories #10 and #11) — I haven’t figured out the dynamics here yet, but two different, adjacent families travel some of the same corridors regularly. In another, two adjacent families (Territories #4 and #5) appear to be on high alert at their shared border, apparently to maintain where it is.

The *boundary* between the families in Territory #13 and #14 has shifted since 2018 from substantially west of Crossover Drive, to substantially east of the same roadway, and now stands right at that point. Each family has pushed its boundaries — as do all coyote families — but then been pushed back by the adjacent family. It’s a continual process and I think is determined by the stronger physical strength or willpower of a family at any one time. I’ve heard the distressed vocalizations between adjacent families as they’ve worked out their boundaries, which makes me think that the sparring and boundary disputes or confirmations are mostly vocal and not physical. This of course isn’t always true: I’ve seen a number of blood-drawing battles, and an in-between approach where hostility was used to drive a newcomer away. See: https://coyoteyipps.com/2024/05/22/recent-territorial-shift-in-golden-gate-park/.

This year and last year, two of the territories, Territories #1 and #2, and Territories #3 and #4, were expanded, divided, reconfigured, and branched off by sibling-offspring of the original territory. In both cases, those sibling-offspring are now parents on what has become their own defined territory. Yes, inbreeding occurs routinely in coyote families with no visible adverse effects so far, unless weakened immune systems and mange can be linked to it. Each of the reconfigurations was caused by different circumstances and situations.

In the larger circled family, Territory #9, the alpha parents themselves disappeared at the beginning of this year, so there are no new pups there this year that I have seen. The parents’ disappearance appears to be due to mange: two coyotes with severe mange were seen sporadically in the territory for a while, but it’s extremely difficult if not impossible to identify a mangy coyote who I at one time knew when it was healthy, especially when I didn’t see the condition progress. I never did identify them in this condition first-hand. People sent me photos, but there were never enough pixels for me to actually identify them. As do many injured or sick coyotes, they avoided being out in the daytime during this vulnerable time. So, blatantly missing in 2025 from this territory are those parents who for six years had been the ever-present and very visible alphas, while the four yearlings born last year along with one two-year-old remain as the territorial owners, holding down the fort. This fivesome of siblings continues to patrol and mark the length of their territory to keep it safe for themselves. If another mated pair moved into a remote corner of the territory, they may have had pups, but I have not seen this.

Some of the territories involve sagas of long lasting family dynasties which are passed down over five generations (as in Territory #1 and Territory #3). Others are more short-lived, changing hands every couple of years, either peacefully ending their generational ownership of the land (as in Territory #9 in 2019), or forced out by a decisive territorial battle (as in Territory #3). In some cases, as in territory #14, the female has remained the alpha, while she has shuffled through a new male sometimes every year, sometimes every other year: death is often the cause, but so is *divorce*. The divorced male has frequently remained with the family and behaved like any other yearling. And one family, after years of occupying a territory, suddenly up and moved — BOTH alphas and a yearling — to a territory 5 miles away (from Territory #12 to Territories #6 and #13). This last one ended in divorce of the alphas with one moving back to the original territory, and the other remaining there, each with a new mate. I’ve seen a divorced and replaced male stay with the family as if he were a yearling.

A couple of the territories I’ve kept pace with solely through field cameras (Territory #6): it’s enough to capture some behaviors, including the arrival of pups, and shows turnover when it occurs.

In two instances — within one, and next to another territory — I’ve circled areas in blue. These have been claimed by loners who haven’t seemed to interact almost at all with members of the larger territory — at least for extended periods of time. For example, at the very western end of Territory #14, there has been one loner individual with mange who has hung out there for 2 years. He actually was (is?) part of the larger family but seems to have split off a couple of years ago to that farthest outpost within the territory. A younger brother of his would visit him sporadically, but otherwise there was no real interacting between him and that family that I saw. Having said this, beginning in mid-July, 2025, for the first time in two years, I saw that family’s alpha female — Mom — in this outpost area and now I’m seeing the rest of her family there, so temporary situations seem to exist in these territories, and I wonder if the loner has been a sentinel holding the territory for the family? Also, I’m wondering if the family moved back to that area because of the huge concerts going on in Golden Gate Park in August: there is tall cyclone fencing throughout the park and the noise and crowds are tremendous during the weekends. In the other blue circled territory, Fort Funston, there is one individual that has hung out alone regularly — no other coyotes ever appear there, just him. The same situation may exist here — I don’t know the *why* of these situations, just that they exist.

I’ve summed up a bunch of dispersal stories in this posting: https://coyoteyipps.com/2020/10/04/some-dispersal-routes-and-family-situations-over-the-last-several-seasons/.

The thin black circles are where I have not kept up — so these are unconfirmed territories, and there may be several more. There are never enough hours in a day for me, one person, to keep up, though I’ve generously been sent sightings and sometimes facial photos from some of my very loyal supporters which has helped me immensely! I don’t know the situations for the thin black circles except that coyotes have been seen sometimes regularly and sometimes sporadically in these areas. I have not zeroed in on them enough to identify them or their relationships, though I know they are there.

🐾 Interlopers and Floaters. We also have had a few interlopers over the last few years — these are, unusually, loners without territories, living on the edges of others’ owned territories.. One was lame and old and possibly this is why he was allowed to stay; he did quite a bit of roaming. Also, I’ve seen mangy individuals and pairs hanging around the periphery of claimed territories, sometimes for several months before finally moving on. And occasionally an unknown coyote — unknown to me — turns up in someone’s backyard which I can’t identify: I assume these are dispersing youngsters who haven’t found homes within the city and will probably have to move south and out of the city. I often don’t identify pups until I see some kind of permanence in their situation, which should explain why some of the coyotes are unknown to me.

In summary, some of the territories have been geographically stable for years, and some have been slightly — but never drastically — reconfigured. However, some of the famlies on them have changed — in some, there has been a turnover. Most are claimed by mated pairs and most of these had pups this year.

As for population size, please remember that population numbers fluctuate over a year’s time and indeed have increased somewhat over the years incrementally. Like a breathing bellows: population grows during the pupping season, and then shrinks back down based on low pup survival rate, those killed by cars in the city (this comes to about 25 to 30 per year) and dispersals of the older youngsters. The adult population hovers under 100. Rounding this out, the ballpark numbers come to just about 20 breeding pairs or 40 individual breeding adults, plus an average of two yearlings on each territory (some of course have none, and some more) — these yearlings have remained to help raise the next litter and will soon disperse. In addition, there are just about that same number of pups born this year as there are adults — the pups who surmounted their low survival rate and being hit by cars, also will disperse sometime during their second year, and — as far as I have seen — they will most likely head south and out of the city because, most territories are already taken in the city itself.

BTW, I read a Chronicle article stating that sightings reported to our Animal Control Department had increased to 600. I mean, really, what does this mean? It doesn’t at all reflect anything about the population size, family structure, territories, or even “encounters” with dogs. Sightings are reported randomly by some people and not others — in fact most people don’t report their sightings. If reported sightings have increased, it would be due to many factors, including easier ways to report these, and being recently prompted to do so on social sites such as NextDoor. Starting with the COVID shutdown in 2019, many more people acquired dogs and started using the parks: more eyes out there translates into more sightings and possibly more reported encounters because of that increase in dog numbers. Let’s see, to put this in perspective: there are 365 days in a year, so even if the number of sightings were double what was reported, it would mean 3 sightings a day throughout the entire city. I myself — one person — see more than this every single day. But that number: *600* makes it falsely appear that there are many more coyotes or encounters, and that we’re being overrun by them. Not so.

THE TERRITORIES and SOME HISTORIES that I’ve documented, with photos of the reigning alphas.

🐾 Territory #1 includes five full neighborhoods including the highest hills in San Francisco. This is where my coyote family documentation began in 2007, with a coyote named Myca, who *owned* both Twin Peaks and its vast surroundings. [For a 2024 summary, see: https://coyoteyipps.com/2024/11/25/long-term-territorial-stability-recently-disrupted-but-retained]. And, by the way, DNA testing in 2019 showed that all of San Francisco’s coyotes (up through 2019) descended from just four original founders who began repopulating the City in 2002. [More on that: https://coyoteyipps.com/2020/02/28/my-sf-coyote-dna-study-continues/] and [https://coyoteyipps.com/2013/04/26/history-for-the-record-how-coyotes-arrived-in-san-francisco/]

Chert had been our long-time alpha here since 2014. In the vacuum left by her death last year (2024), her offspring Chevy and Bibs — sibling littermates — now three years old — paired up and claimed part of the land. This spring, they had their first litter. Meanwhile, Scowl (Chert’s son-turned-mate for 2 years before he left her) returned with his new mate, Bonus, to reclaim the other portion of Chert’s territory. The once-unified territory now has two households:

Scowl & Bonus hold the larger Territory #2.
Chevy & Bibs command Territory #1.

Through all the upheaval, the land has remained in the same family line for nearly two decades:

Myca (2007) → Maeve (2009–2013) → Silver (2009–2021) → Chert (2013–2024) → Scowl (2019–present) → Chevy & Bibs (2022–present) — with new pups born in 2025 to both branches.

I’ve followed and photographed all of them across these 18 years.

One last note: I continue to see Scowl regularly interacting with other coyotes whom I suspect are his dispersed offspring. I catch these interactions on infrared cameras. Although I can’t identify them individually, the presence of more than just the one family suggests that some family bonds endure, even after dispersal.

🐾 Territory #3

Territory #3 was claimed in 2016 by Scout who dispersed from Territory #1 at nine months of age. Most dispersals I’ve seen here in San Francisco have taken place later than that, during the second year of life. Territory #3 had been unoccupied since the previous alpha was killed by a car a couple of years earlier. You can follow Scout’s running story on my blog, or here is a fairly complete summary: https://coyoteyipps.com/2022/12/21/scout-winter-solstice-catch-up/; https://coyoteyipps.com/2023/04/23/scout-moving-on/. Her update to 2025 can be read here: https://coyoteyipps.com/2025/05/05/scouts-saga-continues-an-update/

The Long Reign of Scout, in short. Scout’s story spans nearly a decade. Born in Territory #1, she dispersed at just nine months to vacant Territory #3, holding it as a solitary queen for three years before being seen with a male companion. Challenges came — most notably a half-year battle with a stronger female who tried to take her land in 2019 — but Scout persisted and regained control of her territory. Over the years, she raised litters with two different mates, shifting den sites and even expanding temporarily into nearby ground in 2022 (to Territory #4). Through all of it, she kept her grip on Territory #3 for nine straight years.

A Daughter’s Coup in 2025. This year, at age ten, Scout met the challenger she could not drive out: her own two-year-old daughter, Lapis, born in 2023. Lapis refused to disperse, standing her ground even under her mother’s repeated attempts to intimidate her. Eventually, the standoff ended with Scout’s departure — her own daughter had taken over the territory — poetic, in a way, after what Scout herself had endured.

Scout has moved back to Territory #4, where she had pupped in 2022, and has been steadily expanding that range. Her push has forced the current resident family there — the mange stricken Clip, Dude, and their two yearlings — to shrink back to a reduced Territory #5. They, too, had pups this year, but the mange has weakened them, and may be the cause for them giving up the expanded area they used to occupy.

Back in Territory #3, Lapis now rules alongside her littermate-turned-mate Bold. The pair became parents this spring, marking the fifth generation of the Territory #1 line — the same lineage that produced Bibs and Chevy in Territory #1. And, as with Scowl in Territory #2, there is regular visiting between some of the individuals in Territory #3 and Territory #2.

______________________________________

In territory #6, change has been constant. [For their earlier history, see: https://coyoteyipps.com/2021/01/10/family-interrupted-update]. Since I first began observing this territory in 2014, one family after another has taken over. In 2024, Clipped and Tubetail and their yearlings all showed up with mange. Nevertheless, Clipped was lactating heavily this spring, showing that she had given birth to pups this year. However, in June of this year, 2025, when their pups would have been only 2 months old — a new family of coyotes suddenly moved in and this family is no longer there. I wonder if the pups got mange and might not have survived? This is a family I keep track of with only a field camera at a hole in the fence which has been frequented daily by all family members, allowing me to see the changes and growth of families without being there.

_______________________________________

Territory #7 has been far more stable. Alpha parents Pipa and Blondie have been in place here since 2019, raising litters every year. I watched Pipa grow up in Territory #8 where she was born in 2017, and I watched Blondie grow up in Territory #9 where he also was born in 2017. This year, in 2025, four of their yearlings have stuck around to help raise the newest litter of three pups. It’s one of the larger families.

____________________________________________

In territory #8, Wired and Sparks have ruled since 2021, after Wired’s first mate, Puff disappeared. Less than two years before this, when Puff was Wired’s mate, Puff and Wired battled the old, widowed previous owner of the territory, Petra, driving her out and replacing her. This year the family consists of Wired, her mate Sparks of 4 years, one yearling, Cricket, and Wired had SEVEN pups this year! Cricket’s brother, Spider, is the coyote who was tragically shot in Crissy Field in September 2024 for grabbing three small unleashed dogs. An earlier write-up of this territory can be found here: https://coyoteyipps.com/2023/07/08/sparks-update/, and an update to that can be found here: https://coyoteyipps.com/2024/05/01/catching-up-on-sparks/.

___________________________________________

Territory #9 saw an abrupt change in 2025 when long-time alphas Cai2 and Stumpf disappeared early in the year, leaving four yearlings and one two-year old behind. These five youngsters are holding down the fort well without any alphas over them. Galileo, the yearling female, very well might become the next alpha female there unless the territory is invaded and taken over by a stronger pair. The story is a continuing one, as are they all.

_____________________________________

Territories #10 and #11 share an arrangement: two families whose borders actually overlap. Mango & Heart had pups this year as revealed by Heart’s swollen mammary glands in the spring, while Scrub & Cactus along with their yearling, Sand, own the territory right next to AND overlapping theirs. For now, they manage to coexist and share some of their corridors.

____________________________________________

*Monte was killed in 2021, his grand-offspring are still on Territory #12, but not as alpha parents*, *and Territory #13.*

The once wide-ranging “gypsy” bloodline that anchored territory #12 is gone. Its most notable member, Monte (aka Carl), is gone (see photo), but the lineage continues elsewhere through their offspring, in Territory #13, and in Territory #12. You can read their story and see photos here: https://coyoteyipps.com/2020/05/15/till-death-do-us-part/. Monte was shot by the City in 2021 for bearing his teeth to a child in his denning area. His and Ma’am’s son, Cape, remained there with his young mate Vida (born in Territory #1), but both parents were killed by cars within a few months of each other in 2022, leaving 7 month old pups behind who indeed remained there for a while. The daughter, Bonus, in fact paired up with Scowl (after he divorced Chert) and raised one litter of pups on this territory in 2024. The territory has been vacant since Bonus and Scowl returned to Territory #1 in 2025. But we are beginning again to see occupants here this summer!

__________________________________________

Territory #13. Fille and Flick are the alpha parents here, with two yearlings. They had four pups this year. Last year, three members of this family were tragically shot by the City in the Botanical Garden when a young day-camper was nipped by one of them. For years this had been a denning area, yet there were no signs, education, or precautions in place. Denning areas are notoriously protected by all members of a coyote family. In this case, a child in a butterfly costume went into the bushes where a coyote was resting, as she hurried away upon seeing the coyote, she tripped and fell, and that’s when she was nipped “on the bum” as her mother said. Three coyotes were shot for this, including a three month old pup. Fille was shot, but managed to survive the ordeal. Both Fille and Flick were born on this territory from a line that extends back in time through Tarn & Monte, and Pink & OM, so this territory is another one encompassing a family saga. https://coyoteyipps.com/2024/10/30/catastrophic-handling-of-the-botanical-garden-coyote-incident-is-examined-by-dan-noyes-of-abc-news-october-29-2024-with-sound/

__________________________________________

Territory #14. The alpha parents Amber and Scarf controlled the territory as of April, along with their two yearlings, Splash and Dew. In fact, Amber has held the territory for many years, shuffling through males fairly regularly. Amber’s two-year-old son, Archer, has kept to himself at the very western end of the park over the last two years — could this be because he and only he became afflicted with mange? I don’t know. Amber and Scarf had four pups this year, however, sometime in April Scarf seems to have disappeared. Am I just not seeing him, or is he really gone? I don’t know. New fellow, Polo, is hardly ever seen, but he was at the densite guarding, so he seems to have taken over the alpha male role. Also, one pup was found dead in July and I’m hoping the loud and crowded summer concerts are not behind his death.

_____________________________________________

Territory #15. Brick who has been the alpha dad for a number of years (along with him previous mate, Eyes), has a new mate this year, Poppy; both have been afflicted with mange and Poppy is encumbered with a continuing limp. I don’t know what happened to Eyes or to her offspring who are no longer around. And I’ve not seen any pups this year, but that doesn’t mean there aren’t any. I will update as I find out more.

_________________________________________

Territory #16. Alphas Mak & Mari own this territory alone, without any yearlings. Both of them have different degrees of mange, with HER case being the worst of the two. I assume there are pups, but I have not seen them. Mari continues with her long-time limp.

_________________________________________

Territory #17. Pico, the alpha female on this territory was nursing pups through May, but no pups or yearlings have been sighted and I’ve not seen (or even been able to identify) Dad — he appears not to be around any longer. I’ll update as I find out more.

_________________________________________

Territory #18 A thriving family with pups continues to claim this territory, but my observations have been minimal at this location. I will update with photos soon.

___________________________________________

?? Unnumbered question marks: Coyotes are seen here pretty regularly, but I haven’t had time to confirm who those coyotes are or their relationships.

____________________________________________

Taken together, these territories each have elements of stability and change, with the two weighted differently for each territory — some families appear to be deeply rooted and entrenched on their territories while others may last only a couple of seasons before changes are seen — all are part of the quiet, ongoing family life of the city’s wild residents of which few people are aware beyond the encounters they report.

These are the alpha parents in the city this year (2025) — a summary of images seen throughout this posting. NOT depicted are about the same number of yearlings who will soon disperse. The new crop of pups born this year number close to the total number of adults (yearlings and alphas).

© All information, maps, and photos in my postings come from my own original and first-hand documentation work which I am happy to share, with permission and with properly displayed credit: ©janetkessler/coyoteyipps.com.

Scout’s Saga Continues: an update

05 May 2025 Leave a comment

by yipps:janetkessler in Scout, territorial changes, territoriality, territoriality Tags: coyote territoriality

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Janet Kessler (@coyoteyipps)

An Increase of Interlopers in SF

27 Apr 2025 Leave a comment

by yipps:janetkessler in territorial changes, territoriality, territories in SF Tags: coyote interlopers in San Francisco

Hello Readers! Please be aware that I do most of my postings on Instagram lately. That is the better place to find updated photos and information generally about our San Francisco coyotes. It turns out that I’m using a *theme* on this blog which is no longer supported by WordPress. I will continue to write longer articles on this blog and I will work on transferring my materials to a new theme or new location, but I’m not a techy and this may take me awhile. Please email me directly if you have suggestions for an easy transfer of this site. Thanks, and I hope you will continue learning through my Instagram account. Janet

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Janet Kessler (@coyoteyipps)

Long-term Territorial Stability — Recently Disrupted but Retained

25 Nov 2024 Leave a comment

by yipps:janetkessler in territorial changes, territorial stability Tags: animals, wildlife

Summary: I’ve spent a lot of time filling in family details here, but the gist of what I’m saying is that we’ve had a single, long-term, nuclear family, owning one of the territories here in San Francisco, generationally now for four generations. At the beginning of this year, 2024, disruption was caused in the family’s tight hold of the territory when an alpha male, Scowl, left and the aging alpha female, Chert, headed into her twilight years, even contracting a severe case of mange at the end of her life. Another family came in and pupped here, but they did so without kicking out the resident offspring or weakened alpha female who had been here so long. Now, as winter 2024 approaches, that “intruder” family appears to have left, and it’s Chert’s offspring who again — without Chert — seem to have control over the territory: they are fourth-generation owners (and I’m not talking about 4th litter owners, I’m talking about a territory passed down from mother to son to his daughter and now to her daughter = four generations). This is the history of one territory over 20 years.

Our long-term alpha female, Chert, is no longer around, having reached the ripe old age of eleven and a half years. A daughter and son appear to be the new alphas in the territory — so we are stable again. But Chert’s last waning months led to a disorganized territorial situation!

Chert’s 2-year old son and daughter are behaving like the alphas now

A Little History: Chert’s story actually goes back to 2013 when she was born, and her family’s goes back to 2004 in this park. But it was in 2009 that I started focusing on the relationships of the individuals living on this territory at the time, and figuring out the extent of that territory. The territory is average in size for an urban territory. However, territories here in the city of San Francisco and most urban areas run less than half the size of rural ones, possibly due to a ready supply of food — it turns out that human refuse figures larger than thought [Tali Caspi, details TBP]. The territory covers four of what I call *pods* or *hubs* towards the center of the city — these are substantial parks — and only one family has owned it, generationally, for all that time: nuclear family members are the only ones ever seen throughout the extent of the territory, with the exception of very temporary suitors or dispersers. In San Francisco, we have approximately 20 territories — each about the size of the Presidio — each occupied by one family.

Above is the early genealogy I put together, showing how the family evolved: it shows that there has been plenty of inbreeding within this one territory. Dr. Ben Sacks, the geneticist at UC Davis assured me that inbreeding was not a problem as long as new blood eventually entered the scene, and it always has eventually.

In 2009, the territory was owned by a family that consisted of the Maeve, the alpha female, Toughy was the alpha male and there were two male pups — Silver and Bruno. Toughy’s life ended suddenly and brutally when he ingested rat poison before his offspring were weaned. A small dog suffered the same fate at the same location.

Maeve taught me a lot about coyotes, but mostly about the alphas total awareness and control of their territories: she knew every dog and their human, and she knew which dogs — most were off leash — were troublemakers. She would sit high on a knoll and watch the early morning activity, while at the same time keeping her eyes on something in the distance: it took me awhile to see that those were her pups over there hidden in the bushes.

*Maeve with her two sons, Silver and Bruno in 2009*

As these two pups grew older, they started their own little forays throughout the park. Over time, I watched these best buddies become arch enemies. It very obviously involved vying for the attention and affection of their mother. Bruno just wanted to get along, but Silver did not want him around and in the end drove him out with bites causing yelps of pain from Bruno. Silver then hung around and for two years romanced his mother who finally accepted him as her mate when he turned four. So for three years, we had no pups in the park, and a very young alpha male, yet this same family continued to own and control it.

In 2013, Silver and Maeve produced a litter of three pups. This was Silver’s first litter and Maeve’s second: Chert, Gumnut and Pinecone. Pinecone was not very social and kept to himself. I think he had a somewhat antagonistic personality because he was actually driven away by his father and Chert. I wondered if Chert might have been retaliating from some sort of mistreatment by him: yes, coyotes keep score!

Chert on the left and her long-time mate Silver. They were together for 7 years until he passed away.

So the two remaining pups, Gumnut and Chert, became inseparable best buddies. I thought they were going to disperse and find a new territory together, but it was not to be. Their father, Silver, had other plans. Silver began breaking up the bond between the two: he incessantly put Gumnut down and hovered between the two siblings to keep them apart, all the while showing great fondness for Chert and putting up with her teasing naughtiness which normally might have elicited harsh disciplinary action. At the same time, Gumnut became extremely submissive — he was doing everything he could to remain on the territory and close to Chert — he wasn’t allowed to show any dominance over Chert — or Silver would land on him by forcing him onto is back in submission. Of course, this caused Chert to value Gumnut even more.

In the Spring of 2015 a singleton pup was born to Chert. Gumnut was still around, hanging in there: his affection for Chert had not waned. But that summer was the last time we saw Gumnut — he had been driven out by his father. The family now consisted of Chert, Silver and the singleton pup I named Scout. Of high interest is how inordinately severe Silver was on Scout: it seemed whenever he saw her, he charged at her aggressively and forced her on her back. Chert would console her whenever Silver was not around, until one day in January of 2016, at just 9 months of age, Scout had had enough and left home. Another point of interest: I normally see Dads driving male youngsters off, and mothers dealing with the daughters — not so here.

This is the earliest I’ve seen a youngster disperse — most don’t do so until after their first birthday. Could Silver tell that Scout wasn’t his own offspring? [Monica Serrano, details TBP]

Although the relation was not mutual to begin with and had been forced, with Bruno gone, Chert and Silver remained committed long-term mates and owners of the territory through Silver’s old age. Chert stuck with him until his end, which was January 2021. They produced litters throughout the years with some of them dispersing to become alphas within the city: Sparks ended up as alpha male in the Presidio; Vida ended up as alpha female in the Buena Vista Area; Scout at Bernal, Gumnut ended up as alpha male in the Lake Merced area [Monica Serrano, details TBP].

After Silver, passed away, there was a vacancy: suddenly Rookie, an older male appeared on the territory in 2021. He was not liked by Chert or her yearlings, as could be seen by their their distressed vocalizations, and then over time, keeping their distance from him and not including him in their grooming sessions. Of consequence is that the six offspring produced that year had light colored eyes, just like Rookie’s. But Rookie knew he was not liked. He didn’t fit in and he ended up abruptly leaving and moving on to Golden Gate Park for one year (before leaving again — I’ve not seen other instances of this).

While Rookie was still with the family, Chert began grooming one of her yearlings as her next mate: this was a strong message to both: Rookie: “you, go”, and to the yearling: “you stay”. Scowl was one of seven pups born in 2019 to Chert and Silver. To get Scowl to stay she began lavishing constant attention on him. Indeed, he stayed, becoming the alpha male and father on that territory for two years, and producing two litters with his mother, Chert.

Chert (2013 to 2024) turned to her son Scowl as a mate a year after her long-term mate died, and right after her unhappy pairing with Rookie that lasted less than a year (2019- )

But after two years, and actually even before two years, he was feeling wanderlust. [I wrote a posting on changing mates which you can find HERE if you are interested.] Today’s posting is focused on the long-term ownership of a territory and its disruption when the strong hold by the alphas is in someway disrupted.

Scowl left Chert after raising two litters with her. He paired up with a two-year-old female only one mile away: here is one of the four pups they produced in 2024

Scowl left Chert and the territory at the beginning of 2024, this year. I’ve wondered if his instinct to disperse finally caught up with him, or possibly if Chert was losing her pull through diminished hormones: this last is a thought I had without any proof. He appeared in a territory only one mile away where he paired up with a daughter of the previous alphas from that territory, Vida and Cape at Buena Vista who had both been killed by cars in 2022 before their pups were grown. But interestingly, the Buena Vista territory remained in the family with their offspring, which is not always the case: I’ve seen territorial takeovers by absolute newcomers after an intense territorial battle when strong alphas aren’t around. But this did not happen here.

Above: Chert’s 2024 suitors — HERE is a posting I wrote about changes in mates — in fact, most coyotes — in spite of their famously being known for *mating for life* — appear to go through a number of mates in their lifetimes, some of them long-term and some less so.

Back to Chert and what happened to her territory: Chert must have had enough luring hormones because she attracted five suitors in early 2024 after Scowl left (actually, one before he left). The first three were quickly driven away. The next — Rags — had mange. He was accepted and hung around for several week. Unfortunately, months later we noticed that he had passed his mange on to the rest of the family — it’s highly contagious.

Bottom row: family after driving Rags out; top left: the steely stare for emphasis letting Rags know he can’t come back; middle above: rags hurrying away; top right: rags looking back, knowing he has to go.

Then, several weeks after accepting Rags into the family, yet another new suitor appeared: this was Tawny — a new fellow for that time frame, but he looked familiar to me and could have been a returned family member from way back in time who I had lost track of — familiarity would have caused her to choose him, Tawny, over Rags. I then watched as Tawny, Chert and her yearlings viciously drove Rags out. I’ve seen this before: the guy forced to leave looks back knowing that he must go, and he never returns. But even this new arrangement — Tawny and Chert — didn’t seem to last long as I’ve not seen Tawny since before any pups were born.

Chert, Bibs, Tug and Root all came down with mange. It probably led to Chert’s death. To show how disfiguring mange can be, I’m showing here images of Chert without (above) and with mange (directly below) — Chert’s case is one of the worst I’ve seen. In the center column, Bibs is seen without and then with mange: she recovered. Then Tug on the right: before and now with mange. [To see the drastic change in appearance in dogs from mange, click HERE]

Unfortunately, mange spread through the family. Come June, we saw in this territory, Bibs (Chert’s two-year-old daughter who now had mange) with another female who was so disfigured by mange that I could barely identify her except by some minor markers — her eyes and face were completely crusted over. This would be Chert — based on her behavior and sticking to her favorite hangouts — mange really changes their appearance. BOTH females — Chert at 11 years of age and Bibs, now two years old — were lactating. I’ve seen this double-lactating phenomenon before, suggesting the daughter was either a wet-nurse or, potentially, it was an actual double-denning situation. What appears to lead to this double-lactating condition is a disruption in the alphas: and indeed that happened here with Scowl leaving and Chert aging. Tawny, Rags AND Scowl had all been around during mating season, and NONE of them were around to raise the pups, so I don’t know who the father was, but both Chert and Bibs were definitely lactating. However, another thought occurred to me: I wonder if in their reproductive cycle, their teats might enlarge even when they haven’t produced pups and aren’t lactating. If anyone has information on this, I would love to learn about it!

The OTHER, intruder family: Amberson (Dad) on the left; Eyes (Mom above right seems to have recovered from mange); Two of their pups were found dead.

The alpha disruption appears also to have led to a weakening of Chert’s family’s hold on the territory: strong alphas have absolute control over their territory, but with aging and illness, and no alpha male around, this might not be possible. So yet another pair of non-related, foreign/intruder coyotes came in and took up residence in the main hub of the territory — within just several hundred feet of where Chert and Bibs were, where they had their litter of pups. Interestingly, Chert and her daughter and younger brother were not driven out by them, conceivably because the newcomers themselves were not a strong pair, and were not familiar with the situation: they had arrived shortly before their pups were born, perhaps having been driven out from another area and desperate for a denning site. The female of this pair also had mange. I don’t know how mange in parents affects their offspring, but two of their very young pups were seen with neurological disorders and eventually found dead.

So a sort of *coexistence* existed between these two families in the same hub that lasted through the early summer, with vocalizations between them confirming their presence to each other. And in another hub or pod of the territory — where I had only ever seen Chert and her family — an ADDITIONAL new litter surfaced, reported to me, but I didn’t have time to check them out,. This should tell us a lot about disruption of the alphas. As winter approaches in late November, I’m only seeing ONE pup occasionally, and frankly I don’t know whose it is.

Yearlings from Chert’s last two litters retain the territory. It looks like Chevy and Bibs, two year old littermates have formed a pair bond. Their littermate Root is still there. Tug is still there, but with a hefty mange condition.

Things seem to have returned to normal now that winter is fast approaching, with just Bibs and two littermate brothers — Chevy, who appears to have become her mate and one other, Root — along with a younger brother, Tug, now living on the main hub of that territory and one additional pup born this year whose parents I’ve not been able to yet identify. This could change quickly and I’ll update if it does.

© All information and photos in my postings come from my own original and first-hand documentation work which I am happy to share, with permission and with properly displayed credit: ©janetkessler/coyoteyipps.com.

Denning Challenges and Choices. And Good Moms. By Walkaboutlou

03 May 2023 1 Comment

by yipps:janetkessler in care for the young, coyote behavior, coyote parenting, coyote resilience, denning, dens, intelligence, mother coyote behavior, parenting, ranching coyotes, territorial changes

Hi Janet,

I wanted to share with you a student’s observations and leanings. Which lead to more questions.

Kinky Tail continues to raise her very active litter. There are 7 now..so either there was a miscount originally or 2 have disappeared. They think 2 pups have disappeared because there is a local golden eagle who for years has been seen with coyote pups, fox kits and feral cats. It seasonally comes to this area during lambing and calving times. It has been seen daily flying over den areas.

That well may have encouraged Kinky to move pups as well as..ticks. Locally we’ve seen plague level numbers of ticks. And Kinkys grooming times with pups seemed very long last week. Her last den area was absolutely infested with 3 species of ticks. Ugh.

Now however, Kinky moved pups to a rendezvous of log piles, poison oak bushes, and grazing cattle.

The student says she doesn’t believe the location was randomly picked.

The abundance of poison oak keeps people out except rarely riders of horse or quads passing thru. Ranch folk.

The grazed range grass is short and doesn’t hold high tick densities compared with long grasses or brush areas.

And finally, having an entire cow to scavenge 2 miles away after move means less animals near pups (scavengers galore) and Kinky doesn’t have to hunt the longer grass fields for voles. Which mean tick pick up. She has the cow or many dozens of caches. Also discovered was she visits an orchard and gleans old fallen Apple’s from last Fall.

This Student feels Kinky’s choice of den was premeditated and thought carefully out. It has minimal tick numbers. Humans rarely come and pass quickly. It’s open with vast vistas and hillsides yet has hiding places for pups. The Longhorns don’t encourage canine visitors. It’s close to dead cow but far enough pups don’t meet scavengers.

She also is study wild turkey brood site selections and says the studies lend to each other. Wild Turkey Hens need to sit on eggs around 28 days. The picked site is obviously paramount. A poorly picked site is disastrous. There are hens that pick poorly or lose patience or dedication and leave eggs too long as well. Then there are hens that cover eggs while minimally foraging for bugs and food and rush back fast. How a Hen Broods means Everything. And not all hens are good moms.

She says it’s same for Coyote. Some mothers are functional but rather minimal. Or make bad choices. Some..seem to be absolutely dedicated mothers. She feels most coyote are very dedicated Moms.

So how much is choice and thought when picking a site to hide and raise your kids? She feels Kinky Tail is neighborhood cognizant.

In her words “No wolf gang signs. No noisy dog parties. No bad nosy people. Riding thru people that she’s known since pup and plenty of longhorns and poison oak seem the latest mood and pic”

Kinky is doing well. She has 7 very active very fat pups. She’s busy busy busy. By day she stays at den. At night it’s cow scavenging, cow caches and long long drinks. And some nights old apples. She grooms her pups even as she comes home bedraggled. Growls briefly but playfully at Mate as he leaves for day shift.

Real Estate Realities are working out for Kinky.

Lou

Updates on KinkyTail and RIP Slim Jim, by Walkaboutlou

22 Nov 2022 4 Comments

by yipps:janetkessler in coyote behavior, territorial changes, Territorial fighting, territoriality

Hello Janet,

I’ve recieved updates on Kinkytail and as well news of Slim Jim’s peaceful death.

The 4 biology students who also are rancher’s kids and grandkids have really kept up especially with Kinkytail’s life. They have goals as not only biologists but to turn several vast ranches into one enormous bison operation. Great kids and very observant.

Slim Jim was observed end of October very slow and wobbly. He slept in open spots not caring it seemed but usually in middle of bison or out on rocks. His daughter Kinky seemed to visit him regularly. He was seen stiffly yet successfully hunting voles though nearly 100% blind. He also..every day..still tossed sticks about briefly in play.

Early on in November Slim seemed to vanish. His vocalizations weren’t heard. And Kinkytail howled for days…one of the observer’s said “that’s stress. Thats loss”.

On Nov 9th Slim Jim was found curled inside a rounded hay bale in fields. He seemed to have passed in sleep. He had a small stick in paws.

He was examined by the students and cremated on his land on ranch. He weighed 38 lbs and seemed in reasonable condition. All of his remaining 7 teeth were worn very low. His neck and upper spine vertebrae were deformed it seemed by traumatic injury…(likely the wolf attack nearly 2 years ago) but he healed and was mobile. If a human..wheelchair and canes would have been needed. Slim carried on. His cataracts were thick. Glimmers of light likely seen and shadows. Age likely 12-14 years. A tooth was removed to age in lab.

The indomitable Kinkytail

Rest well Slim Jim. In his long life we only knew his latter years.His mate and pups were killed by wolves and he was injured badly. His surviving daughter Kinkytail not only survived with him..but grew up ultra advanced. Some call her mean and ruthless type. Kinky got her Mate early in life and pupped as yearling. She then came back to her old place and Slim (again). She fetched her Father when she pupped. He babysat. She seemed to check on Slim often in his little pocket of quiet. Currently..she has banished a daughter pup. She is driving off her Mate it seems. He seemed “lackluster” in helping defend turf or following passing wolves or dogs or seeing off coyote visitors.

Older pic of Many Blows. His swelling is now reduced. He is a very scarred but powerful veteran coyote.

She is being visited often by Many Blows..an older veteran coyote who had swollen jaw months. Many Blows had 2 younger female follower..whom Kinkytail has routinely chased off. They have not been seen recently. And Many Blows keeps chasing the lackluster but confused Mate..and Kinkytail watches in approval.

Kinkytail grew up in enormous litter of two combined litters. Her older sister returned when widowed and bore her litter with her and Kinkys mom. So…

Kinky grew up with huge litter. Which attracted wolves. Her Mom and littermates wiped out, she stuck with injured Dad and grew up fast. Very intense little coyote.

Bad Ears Pack…making incursions but kept at bay.

Kinkytail will spot you and bark miles away. She trails wolves when they pass through and escorts them out. At distance. She accepts the students who watch her..and disappears on other humans.

Same with ranch dogs. She knows the locals. Including my pack. Chases strange dogs off her land.

She has an intensity and toughness surpassing any so far. Especially for one so young. She seems very strategic. All summer she has resisted the incursions and scouting of the Bad Ear Pack. All of them bear her tooth marks. It’s thought with a powerhouse like Many Blows Kinky Tail will do very well in future.

It’s always guessing with the coyote. Wild lives are tenuous and can change in literal heartbeats. But..Kinky Tails aura is no guesswork. And Slim Jim’s life was a great one indeed.

Lou

Vida Eliminated — with input by Walkaboutlou

14 Sep 2022 2 Comments

by yipps:janetkessler in coyote behavior, territorial changes, Territorial fighting, territoriality, territoriality

[The first part of this is re-posted from my Instagram account, and then I explore a coyote territorial “takeover” scenario with input from Walkaboutlou].

Vida was a three-year-old first-time mom who suddenly went missing on July 25th, and we’ve not seen her again. She was a tiny and easy-going coyote who minded her own business and stayed away from people and dogs in her park. She was an absolutely ideal neighbor.

She had two four-month old pups whom she would not have just left. No, something happened — but what? There have been no DOA coyotes picked up by Animal Care and Control since then, so she doesn’t appear to have been hit by a car. The one hint as to what might have happened is the incredibly intense distressed coyote vocalizations every night around midnight close to her denning area over the period when she went missing, the kind I’ve been hearing, not after a simple chase by a dog, but after a much more intense and relentless hot pursuit by a powerful dog bent on “getting the coyote”, as I’ve recently posted.

I can’t help but think of the possibility that her disappearance might have been due to such foul play. The disturbing vocalizations went on intensely for many nights and pointed to violent upheaval of some type. I know it sounds far fetched — and this would be a worst-case scenario — but I wouldn’t put her disappearance past someone with a hunting dog who hates coyotes — maybe even brought into the city by a seriously disgruntled park-going individual. More than once I’ve heard several individuals say they were going to shoot the coyotes — take the law into their own hands because they didn’t like the law — the law didn’t suit them. The law, BTW, here in San Francisco, is that you can’t harm or harass wildlife.

There are a number of humans who are outraged and outspokenly livid that trails were closed by the Park Department this denning season, having been closed off to keep both dogs and coyotes out of each other’s way and to curtail conflict. In their minds, “whole sections of parks were turned over to the coyotes.” The people who think this way are not many, but they sure are vocal, loud, and self-righteous about it. They are individuals who feel THEY have a handle on how things “should be” and are unable to accept anything different — anything inconvenient to them. I want to point out to them that until the 1920s, Bald Eagles were considered vermin and shot on sight for hunting small animals and as a dire threat to children — they were one of those animals that “shouldn’t be here”.

I have seen large dogs sicced on coyotes by their owners in other SF parks — I was there and stopped it. What I do know is that Vida is gone and there were intensely distressed vocalizations tied into her disappearance, and then another female suddenly appeared and filled her niche. Fortunately, last I saw, Dad was still regurgitating food for the pups, picked up by a field-camera, so they are continuing to be taken care of. Vida has never reappeared.

As I said, I don’t have absolute proof that dogs were involved, I’m just speculating, as a possible scenario, based on my observations of the overall situation and all the input I’ve received. On the face of it, that’s the most likely scenario of what happened. But I want to interject another script or storyline possibility, no matter how unlikely, to show the breadth and depth of coyote behavior more than anything else.

A full month after Vida disappeared, my field camera in the area captured a pummeling fight between two female coyotes. The aggressive victor of the fight turned out to be none other than Libe, the new alpha female in the territory — the one who replaced Vida. I had no trouble identifying her. As I watched the video clip a thought passed through my head: What IF the smaller coyote had been Vida? This potentiality came to mind because the smaller, losing coyote had a similar size and body configuration as Vida. In spite of that, in Vida’s case, there appear to be too many negating factors: Vida has always been easy for me to identify, but I was unable to in the clip; the fight happened a full month after Vida stopped appearing, whereas if she had been forcefully driven away she would have tried repeatedly to reclaim her territory and family, but she didn’t — coyotes are intensely tied to their families; and she would have been more the aggressor rather than simply putting up a defense as might a dispersing coyote, as seen in the video — in the video it’s Libe who is doing all the pummeling.

So, more as a point of interest, I want it to be known that “takeover” situations — i.e. “stealing” — though exceptionally rare when there are pups, appear to be remotely possible.

Duking it out

I asked my friend, Walkaboutlou, who has revealed his deep understanding of coyotes from years of first-hand interest and observations, if he had ever heard of, or thought it possible, that an outsider single female could come in and fight and oust a mother with four-month-old pups from her territory? Could this happen? Do coyotes “steal” each other’s families? Ever? Commonly? I’ve never seen it. I myself had seen single coyotes ousted from territories, but in those cases, there were no pups and there was no mate, and I’ve seen the territories of older coyotes who have lost their mates taken over forcefully by a more robust and younger coyote pair.

Hi Janet,

I’m not a canine behaviorist professional in domestic or wild canids. However I always say …

Almost anything is possible.

I’ve seen seemingly stable and generational coyote packs that all have degree of relatedness and various affiliations too. Most areas are extremely fluid because coyote typically on average live rather fast lives. If you only have a few years to live, hold a place and have some pups hopefully … you live intense.

The ranching family I know who has known their coyote packs decades has mentioned take overs or changes. Sometimes a male or female is “driven” out. And their mate leaves with them.

Other times … it seems some mates are determined to stay in territory, and join the victor. Much like cats. The territory holds them more than the bond.

I think any outcome or dynamic is possible. The contact calls and stress vocalizations would happen with dog aggression, or coyote take over. Its upheaval.

I also know some coyote depart like ghost never to be seen again if they lose territory. And others are very stubborn to relinquish old stomping grounds.

However … the intensity of take over merits … usually … short term stuff. It’s usually just so stressful to both hunt and survive the usual … AND wage battles for turf it’s usually too much to maintain any length of time.

That being said … a Mother of pups and with mate is rarely usurped so early. It would be very interesting to know the history of challenger and her relationship with the current male. Some coyote …(like some people) don’t care about property rights, laws … or bonds. They see a place. A territory. A pack. And say…MINE. Take it or leave it. I’m coming in. You are leaving or submitting. Its mine.

It seems harsh. But many coyote feel impelled to take actions asap especially in areas where territory isnt easy to find.

I think there are outsider females and males that absolutely will take over everything. They may drive out the whole family. Or just the same sex target. (Mother, Daughters)

Fascinating stuff.
Lou

BTW, the new female, Libe, two years old I would say, had been living in an adjacent territory as a loner for at least a year. That adjacent territory was not ideal in that it was entirely on the urban residential grid, composed of 25×100 foot lots with houses and apartments, and little open space in addition to small backyards, whereas Vida’s territory had it all: neighborhoods to trek through, a vast wild open space, a mate, pups. Libe trekked through her urban territory daily, usually at night, dawn or dusk, and kept away from people and dogs but allowed herself to be seen without any fear. I had seen her trekking right up to the periphery of Vida’s territory within a month of Vida’s disappearance, and may have been entering and assessing the situation. The only real interactive “behavior” of hers that I’ve ever seen is that fight in the field camera where she showed her mettle: she was pretty darn spunky and in control there. But recently she also has shown a spunky defiance towards dogs, challengingly occupying their play-space for short spells.

So, what I’m saying here is that Vida was most likely brutally eliminated/killed by a dog. BUT, almost anything is possible in the coyote world, as stated by Lou, including for an outsider coyote to come in and steal — lock, stock and barrel — what belonged to another coyote. Another circumstance diminishing that latter possibility here is that Vida and her mate were extremely supportive, playful, and affectionate with each other. It seems he would have defended her. But maybe not?

Territories: Closer Quarters in San Francisco

09 Jul 2022 4 Comments

by yipps:janetkessler in coyote behavior, territorial changes, territoriality

The territories I’ve mapped here in San Francisco — just under 20 of them — have all encompassed large parks, or fragments of various smaller parks. You can see the map and read about my methods here. These territory sizes and configurations have, with minor exceptions, remained incredibly stable, some for 20 years from the time coyotes first re-appeared here in San Francisco in 2002, and some newer ones I became aware of in 2014, since that time.

Each territory has always harboured one family: mom, dad, possibly one or two yearlings born within the previous two years, and any pups born within the year (always in March/April). All except the alpha parents eventually disperse so that the territory remains in control of just one breeding parent pair, the same pair usually, over many years. Eventually, absolute newcomers or even offspring of these territorial parents, have taken over the territories no longer defendable by the aging alphas, who also may just pick up and leave — in either case, the territory remains in the hands of one mated pair of coyotes and eventually their offspring. There have been minor variations to this prototype, such as a family of three siblings who remained on a territory after their parents disappeared.

This, with just a few deviations, is the standard I’ve been seeing as long as I’ve been documenting them. However, more recently, over the last couple of years, I’ve seen some bigger variations pop up.

For example, in three of the territories during the last two years, not only the alpha female, but also a much younger two-year-old female — a daughter of the alpha female in one case, and likely the same situation in the others — both produced offspring, apparently sired by the same alpha male. I don’t know if this is a trend, an anomaly, or a simple standard variation that only now is occurring.

Another change: an entrenched family spatially expanded their territory up to and onto the border of another, so that actually two standard coyote families are now denning in the same large park, although in separate and exclusive territories — 1/5th of a mile apart — and both families had pups.

Another example occurred three years ago when a yearling male dispersed from Glen Canyon into a border of the Presidio and made this his permanent home. He was recovering from a broken arm when he first moved there, and possibly that’s why the resident coyote pair allowed him to stay there. Now he appears to be an integral, though non-related — member of the family. He has either moved into the alpha male position, or he simply helps guard and babysit the new litter, and is there for them at their evening rendezvous when the parent/s are not.

So these examples point to closer-than-seen-before living quarters for the coyotes. Is this because the territorial market is saturated? Sounds oddly familiar, doesn’t it?? A couple of years ago I saw a temporary reconfiguration of three separate family territories into just one owned by one of the three families for over a year. The other families had members die or simply disappeared from my radar possibly from old age, but now, again, it is divided into three separate territories and owned by three separate families.

And here’s more. Until recently, with the exception of a few dispersing youngsters who’ve never hung around for long, the coyotes I’ve seen in the neighborhoods have been those that owned the adjacent or nearby parks, be they large parks or a series of fragmented parks. But now I’m seeing that this is not always the case, whereby more coyotes over the last few years have been carving out territories in the interstices between the fairly stable park-centered territories. These have sprung up within our residential neighborhoods, especially those with plenty of small garden plots or small plots of denser shrubbery, or with a large lawn nearby such as Dolores Park, or barren hills such as Hawk Hill and Turtle Hill. When you see a coyote — and it’s always the same coyote — trekking regularly on the same peripheral route daily, or twice daily, for more than a couple of months, it’s probably an indication that they are claiming/defining the territory.

An example of a fairly newly carved territory involves the small, young female coyote depicted below. She does not “return” to any of the territorial parks I’ve mapped, and anyway she doesn’t belong to the families in those parks. I don’t know where she came from — I’m not able to keep up with all dispersals and origins. Her main area encompasses a handful of square blocks, some with and some without abundant street plantings to help conceal her. She covers this terrain twice a day — sometimes more often — stopping routinely at her known food sources, marking along the way, and taking in who is around (in terms of people, dogs, wildlife) and what is happening: she’s been doing this for at least three months that I have seen and possibly, from what I’ve hear, for almost a year. I and others have spotted her as far away from this main area as a mile, which would encompass a large enough space to be a territory.

Intermittently a larger male coyote has been seen alone and even apparently with her in the same area. I thought he was a dispersing youngster, but if others have seen him around, then maybe a relationship is brewing?? Be that as it may, she did not produce pups this year. Maybe this male is a suitor who will be moving in?? I’ve added his photos at the bottom.

The two photos below are of her occasional male friend.

Finding Scout

18 Jun 2022 6 Comments

by yipps:janetkessler in coyote behavior, territorial changes

Scout is one of the coyotes — a 7-year-old — whose life I’ve been following and whose story I’ve been telling. However, she has pretty much been off of my radar for the last six months: she all but disappeared from her territory during that time-frame. I knew she was not far away because she appeared regularly in her old territory, even if only briefly, in the dead of night, with her mate, Scooter, and sometimes one of her yearlings: I have been able to capture this because of a field camera I put out in her old territory. And, through the field camera, I’ve been able to capture a little about her continued story. Here is an update and summary of her story.

Update: What the field camera showed about Scout was her rounded shape back in March and then in April her losing that roundness and gaining the lactating tits of a nursing mom. Ahh, so Scout had another family — her third litter. But she had them elsewhere, not in her old long-time claimed territory — the territory she had battled for so valiantly when an intruder tried taking it from her in 2019. Few coyotes, once established in a claimed territory, move away, so this is an unusual situation. Of additional interest is that she returns almost nightly to her old territory where several of her yearling pups still remain.

These are field camera photos taken at the old territory, showing Scout fat to the left, Scout svelte again in the middle, and Scout lactating to the right — the camera is on a path she habitually frequented and apparently still does.

Video allowing me to identify her

I kept my eyes and ears open for any clues as to her new location. People told me about coyotes they had seen, but either they didn’t have photos, or the photos were not of Scout. One lady I met told me she had taken some videos of a coyote on the street and offered to share them with me. I sent her my email, asking to see the videos, but she forgot to check her messages until just a week ago, six months after our exchange! So a week ago I saw the video to the right where I was able to identify Scout! I then spent several mornings talking to more and more people where the video had been taken, and within a few days who should I come across but Scout herself!

I gasped, and Scout saw me. She of course must know who I am from my documenting her movements and behaviors over the last seven years. She stopped and looked at me, knowing I would not approach, and then she lay down for a few minutes, allowing me time to watch her. After a few minutes, her mate, who is much more flighty and wary, appeared and then fled when he saw a group of people nearby. But he stopped when he saw Scout watching me — her calmness seemed to calm him. After a few minutes, he must have beckoned her because she turned to go with him: he and she are a tight team, and work and communicate seemingly telepathically as a unit. It’s really nice to observe this!

Scout and Scooter at their new location a few days ago. Please remember that I don’t reveal locations for the coyotes’ sake: for their privacy and security, but I wanted to share Scout’s continuing story, which many people have followed on my blog.

Over the next few days I found that they were there with one of their yearling sons born last year, Cyrano. Over those next few days, I observed them patrolling the surrounding area and I observed some of their food sources: pizzas left out for them, I saw them hunt and eat gophers, and a cat (yikes!). There are ducks not far away and squirrels all over the place in the immediate area, and I know they trek over 2 miles each night to mark their territory as they search for and return to food sources they know about: for example, they’ll return to fruit trees, once ripened, until the fruit is gone.

To the left is a one-year-old son who migrated with them to their new location, and to the right is one of their new pups — I’ve counted two (there may be more) in the litter born this last April.

And I even glimpsed two pups hanging around what must be their densite. I make it a practice to stay away from dens, but this year I literally and inadvertently tripped over a handful of them. These particular dens are minimally hidden and placed where anyone would walk. If there had been predators around, these pups would have perished long ago. Then again, maybe the coyotes comprehend that there are no real predators around. Loose dogs could injure them, but most are not actively looking for them as prey to eat.

There’s plenty of food in the area

*The den is a hollow under a fallen tree*

Parents patrol the streets and fields — they know everything about their territories.

*They visit their old territory at night where this, their two-year-old offspring appears to be holding down the fort!*

A little background for those who haven’t followed her story here. Scout was the first *litter* if you want to call it that — she was a singleton pup — born in 2015 to a young 2-year-old mom and that 2-year-old’s 6-year-old father. Yes: inbreeding. There was a lot in that family. There are stories about her birth family on my blog.

I watched Scout grow up as a defiant little rascal — her father was constantly chasing her and throwing her on her back because of her defying him. I guess she had had enough of it by 9-months of age, because that’s when she dispersed. It’s one of the earliest dispersals I’ve seen — most take place between 1 and 2 years of age. I last observed her in her birth territory in January of 2016, and two weeks later, in February, she had appeared where she would remain for the next six years. It was a vacant territory 1.6 miles away from her birthplace. There had been territorial coyotes there before, but the last alpha was killed by a car, and not until Scout arrived was that vacancy refilled. Luck was with her, considering that the majority of dispersing youngsters move south and out of the city due to a lack of territorial vacancies within the city, and on top of that, while dispersing, many, many get hit and killed by cars. Cars are their chief killers in cities.

Scout remained a loner for three more years. Remembering that coyotes are highly social, this must have been difficult for her. She filled the void by watching humans and their dogs. Some people fed her. Some people fed her from cars. This caused her to hang around, wait for food, chase cars. If she saw you eyeing her, she would perform — she seemed to like attention, which most coyotes do not: she would start playing with a stick, or a ball, or do zoomies — almost in imitation of all the dogs she had been watching. She seemed to smile more often than other coyotes I see — maybe she was imitating her human and dog neighbors?? There was one dog she hated and would bark at when he came into sight, there were other dogs she ran from, and others she would test: people thought she was playing with their dogs, but I could see it was simply *testing* behavior.

Finally, into her 4th year at this territory, a strapping young fellow appeared and both she and he hit it off. This was a fellow I had watched grow up in North Beach, over four miles away. He was dispersing now, at 1.8 years of age. Their immediate friendship was amazing to watch: this previous loner was now smitten with the company of another coyote. They walked around together gazing in each others eyes (I’m not kidding), they played and cuddled and teased each other. They hunted together and howled together and she looked after him and would get worried when she felt he was endangered. Rightly so: he ended up acquiring a broken ankle (diagnosed by my wildlife vet based on videos I sent her) after being chased by a dog. I had to convince everyone to please leave that coyote alone, that the injury would heal on its own, which it did. Several people went so far as to hire a trapper so they could *fix* the coyote. People simply didn’t realize how powerful nature is as a healer. But also removing a coyote from his social situation would have been absolutely detrimental for both him and Scout, disrupting the relationship and opening the way for another coyote to take his place, which his absence would have done.

For four months, everything went smashingly well, with Scout paying less attention to people, dogs, and cars, and spending more time learning to be the social coyote she was meant to be, and then suddenly everything was turned upside down for her: another powerful little female showed up who decided to fight for Scout’s territory. There was a skirmish under a car and blood spurted out. The intruder had been radio-collared and tagged only a month or so earlier in the Presidio. Unfortunately, the radio-collar gave that intruder, I call her Wired, an advantage: it served as protective armor. I next saw Scout with bloody gashes on her neck and forehead. And then I saw her flee as she was pursued throughout a lot of the city by this single-minded female intruder. I followed their trajectory into Diamond Heights, Dolores Heights, Noe Valley, McLaren. Scout attempted to return to HER territory several times, but each time she was repulsed by Wired. This exile lasted about 6 months, and then suddenly one day, Wired was no longer around. It turned out that Wired had found a better territory in the Presidio, which is where she has been living with her mate born and dispersed from North Beach. They’ve had several litters of pups.

So, I think to her great surprise, Scout found herself returning to her territory without having to face Wired. She carefully allowed herself to become more and more visible and then more and more at ease there. That was in June of 2019. That fall, a new male appeared. Although the relationship was nothing like her first love (!), her bond and devotion to him, and his for her, has grown. In 2020 they had their first litter of four pups, three of whom survived to adulthood. In 2021 they had a second litter of 6 pups, one of whom was killed by rat poison and one by a car. You can read about all this here.

It is during the fall of 2021 that everyone who knew her started seeing less and less of Scout and Scooter. They stopped their sentry duty where they had been seen daily for years. Everyone began to see them more sporadically and for shorter periods of time. And then I noted, they no longer appeared at all, except in the deep of night caught on a trap camera. That was six months ago.

Addendum: I can speculate on what might have contributed to her move based on what I know was going on, but of course we’ll never know for sure if these were contributing factors. *The huge number of dogs in her old territory didn’t seem to be an issue earlier on, but as Scout got older they may have become more of a problem for her — harder for her to deal with. *Last summer one of her pups born last year died of rat poisoning and we noticed that she herself became slow and lethargic at that time — and it’s shortly after this that we stopped seeing her so often: might she have ingested a less-than-lethal dose of the same rat poison that killed one of her sons? It’s something that might have influenced her to move. *Then, a large fenced-in area — and therefore dog-free refuge which she often retreated to — became a construction zone so she no longer had a totally safe place to go, especially if there were to be more pups. *Most of the holes under the fence of that sanctuary were boarded up at the time construction began: she might have feared total blockage and so had to find a new place. *Most importantly, a vacancy would have to have occurred in her new territory, and in fact, a coyote was picked up DOA, hit by a car not long before she moved. *The new territory is much wilder and has water nearby — it’s definitely a *step up* for her, which may also have contributed to her deciding to move. *Might she have wanted to leave her old territory to a youngster? This is actually what has happened, but was this by design? We don’t know. *Lastly, although I won’t know until all the DNA results are in from my population study, I have a feeling that her mate, Scooter, was probably originally from the new park — was born there — and it possibly is because he led her back there that they moved there. All these things were going on and may have contributed to the move, but ultimately, we simply don’t know why she moved, keeping her toe in the old territory, so to speak, by visiting almost every night.

A Territorial Issue

27 Dec 2021 Leave a comment

by yipps:janetkessler in territorial changes, territoriality

Most of the coyote territories I know have been pretty stable over long stretches of time — years and years: the same owners have occupied the same areas for a while and there have been no indications of change. I’ve seen some territories occupied over a span of 13 years by successive generations of the same family: when an older mate passed away, the remaining mate paired with a new mate — sometimes their own offspring — and continued on the land.

I’ve also seen sequential families, one after another on various territories: either the previous owners left of their own accord — I get the impression this happens when their reproductive years are over — or the weaker older pair (and sometimes only one is left) is driven off by a younger, stronger pair. Still, what remains on any one territory has always been one alpha pair with youngsters who are born there and eventually leave. Intruders don’t remain, and interlopers have been few — I counted only one last year.

*The long-time resident pair* *who are not happy with the situation* *on THEIR territory*.

However, I’ve been watching an exception this season. Interestingly, it seems that every generality about coyotes has exceptions. I’ve been seeing recent newcomers in one of the territories who now have passed through repeatedly and regularly. One is an older, scraggly fellow. Will he be allowed to stay as an interloper because he is old and unattached and therefore not a reproductive threat to the residents? I have seen very few interlopers to date here in San Francisco. We’ll have to wait to see.

In addition, there has been a new pair of coyotes that has been passing through that same territory regularly over the last month. The resident pair appears not too happy about this, marking and kicking up the ground angrily when they detect the odors of these intruders.

The long-time resident pair on this territory has two yearlings, and a number of 9-month-old pups born this year remain who all occupy that space. I’ve never seen coyote pairs share their territories — it’s unlikely to continue for long. In the end, only one pair will claim and remain in the area to raise their pups, and I would assume it will be the long-time resident pair, but of course I don’t know this — they’ll be living out their own stories and I hope to witness them to tell the tales.

These recent observations have been made entirely through field cameras which I put out only at night. I have not recorded what has gone on in this area during daylight hours, but I’m pretty sure the same thing, even if less frequently, as at night. Identifying individuals with infrared light, which is what the field cameras use, is very different from identifying them under natural light, but I’ve learned how to do so, and I can definitely identify all of these coyotes in this video. I put the field cameras out because in-person sightings have become more and more rare for me. I was hoping the cameras would at least let me know who was around, and they’ve done a little bit more than that!

The video consists of a number of the very short field-camera captures. You’ll see the older scraggly fella who is always alone, the intruder pair who look perfectly benign to me, but hey, they ARE intruding, and the angry resident pair revealing their wrath/disgust at the situation by sniffing, marking and kicking up the ground angrily — “How dare they come into our home!” Note that the resident coyotes have had these reactions in the past, but very irregularly, which I’ve attributed to the dogs who come through regularly during daylight hours. In other field cameras that I leave out all day, I’ve seen this reaction always to dogs who are also considered intruders by the coyotes. In this case, the reactions always occurred shortly after the newcomers had passed through.

A Territorial Changeover

16 May 2019 3 Comments

by yipps:janetkessler in territorial changes Tags: coyote territorial changes

: Brother

: Sister

: Dominant male

Although I know territories which have been in the same coyote families for over 12 years, I also know territories with coyote ownership turnover. One dynasty ends, usually because the tenants can no longer defend their turf in the face of aggressive or continued intruders, be it due to old age, death of a mate, or even dispersal of youngsters who might have helped defend the area: youngsters can be forced out by parents who want room for their next litters, or they move on due to their own inner drives. Or maybe the territory just no longer has the resources necessary to support a coyote family.

Although I’ve seen coyotes move on to greener pastures and thrive after leaving a long-term territorial occupation, here is a case where the move did not bode well for the coyotes who left: within two months, we saw the departed pair wandering around the fringes of a shopping center, looking ragged, thin, angry and snarly. Their health had plummeted and and we feared their lives were coming to an abrupt end. We haven’t seen them again.

What happened to the territory of this departed pair? In this case, a female daughter and her younger brother were left behind — I’ve written about them before. After several months of seeing no one else there, two new males arrived and befriended the almost-3 year old female. It appeared that the female and stronger male might be bonding: both went off together for several months and we thought their life-long partnership was sealed. We saw younger brother a few times while she was gone but then he, too, left.

Female daughter before heading off with her beau

But then the female daughter returned, looking anxious and desperate, with constant darting glances of fear — her behavior was very different from what it had been previously. The two new male coyotes were with her, but it certainly didn’t look anymore like she was part of a “pair”. And then one day after a number of weeks, this female appeared no more.

The two males remain here and so, now, does their shy sister. These three are related — either two younger and one older sibling, or even a father and his two offspring: the two younger ones always move out of the way for the older one who seems to be a bit of a tyrant — from a territory only about half a mile away. I had been struck by the strong family resemblance between them and coyotes I had seen on the next territory over. Yes, family resemblances are amazing in some coyote families and have been the first “link” in leading me to further identify where certain coyotes came from and family connections! Reviewing my photos from that territory, I found these coyotes to be one and the same as those. I haven’t been back to their old territory to find out what’s going on there. These three would have abandoned their territory for the same reasons I listed above.

That they all came over together from one place is interesting. So they are still all “family” members, it’s just that there is no mated pair among them. Let’s see how their story develops over time!

© All information and photos in my postings come from my original and first-hand documentation work which is copyrighted and may only be re-used with proper credit.