Coyotes inhabit the sagebrush flats and foothills up to at least 4000
feet all along the Pacific base of the San Gabriels. This species seems
most common at the foot of the range where large dry washes prevent
man from occupying the land immediately adjacent to the foothills, and
are the dominant carnivores of the coastal sage belt. Repeated
observations have indicated that although many individuals range into
the higher foothills they seldom are found deep in the major canyons or
chaparral slopes. Coyotes rarely occur at 3000 or 4000 feet in San
Antonio Canyon where it cuts into the realm of heavy chaparral; yet on
steep foothill slopes and ridges, which are adjacent to the flat land,
these animals range up to at least 4000 feet. Being hunters primarily of
rather open land many coyotes go into the foothills only to find daytime
refuge, traveling down dirt roads, ridges, and firebreaks, to forage at
night in the sage flats. Coyote feces from the foothills, at about 3500
feet, contained predominantly the remains of such food items as
cottontails, chickens, and jack rabbits. These animals could have been
found only in the flats. This is additional evidence that coyotes do the
major part of their hunting at the base of the range.
Observations of coyote tracks and trapping records have shown that these
animals hunt mostly in the more open parts of the sage flats. Coyotes
frequent areas of scattered brush, sandy areas, wash channels, and old
roads, and seemingly shun dense brush. Many coyotes actually hunt for
rabbits in the citrus groves near the foothills. On several evenings I
traced their howling to orange groves, and Mr. Kenneth Hill of Upland
told me of often seeing coyotes in his orange groves at night.
The forage beats of several coyotes were discovered in connection with
trapping specimens of these animals. In January, 1952, two coyotes,
probably a mated pair, traveled nightly from the slopes immediately west
of Evey Canyon, at about 3100 feet, down into the sagebrush adjacent to
the west side of San Antonio Wash, at about 1700 feet elevation. The
route led down open ridges, then for about one half mile across a level,
cultivated plateau, and then swung over the eroded banks near the
lowermost point of the plateau onto the level sage flats. The distance
covered by this route from the foothills down to the flats was somewhat
more than a mile, with about a 1400 foot difference in elevation between
the daytime retreat and the nocturnal forage area. Another route,
seemingly used by only one coyote, was somewhat longer. This animal
followed fire breaks and ridges from above Thompson Canyon down onto a
fire road, and then into the lower end of Palmer Canyon where it entered
the flats. This route covered about three miles in coming from the
foothills to the flats. Feces of this coyote often contained the
remains of white leghorn chickens which had been found at a refuse pile
near several chicken ranches one-half mile from the base of Palmer
Canyon.
Although no definite idea could be gained of the population density of
coyotes in the area, it was clear that in certain localities they were,
as carnivores go, abundant. After one large male was obtained in the
flats at the base of Cobal Canyon, at least two other individuals were
heard howling in this immediate area, and their tracks were noted
repeatedly on dirt roads. One night early in January, 1952, immediately
west of the head of San Antonio Wash, the voices of six coyotes could be
picked out separately from a chorus of coyote howls which came from
several different directions in the wash.
Many field examinations of coyote feces left the impression that
chickens and lagomorphs made up the bulk of the coyote's food on the
coastal slope. To check this a study of 39 sets of scats collected at
various localities on the coastal slope was made in the laboratory, the
results being shown in Table 10. Remains of one of the three species of
rabbits, cottontails, jack rabbits, or brush rabbits, occurred in 72 per
cent of the feces examined. Cottontails, it will be noted, were preyed
upon more heavily than any other wild species, remains of this form
being found in 33 per cent of the feces. The prevalence of chicken
remains in coyote feces does not imply that these animals were killed by
the coyotes. All of the chickens could have been found dead in the
refuse piles of the many chicken ranches. In addition, the chickens were
raised in wire cages above the ground where they were nearly
invulnerable to predation. That coyotes may at times kill deer in this
area was suggested by the finding of tracks in the sand in San Antonio
Wash which clearly indicated that a deer had been closely pursued by a
coyote. The tracks were lost in a stretch of brush so the outcome of the
chase could not be determined. Near the mouth of Lytle Creek Canyon, in
November, 1951, coyote feces contained mostly remains of grapes from
nearby vineyards. Also, above Cucamonga, coyotes were found to be
feeding heavily on grapes. This must be a rather unsuitable form of
nourishment for coyotes, for many of the grapes in the feces appeared
nearly unaltered despite their trip through the alimentary canal.
TABLE 10.--RESULTS OF EXAMINATIONS OF THIRTY-NINE SETS OF COYOTE FECES
FROM THE PACIFIC SLOPE OF THE SAN GABRIEL MOUNTAINS. FECES WERE
DEPOSITED IN AUTUMN AND WINTER (SEPTEMBER TO FEBRUARY).
===================================================================
| Number of |
| sets of feces | Percentages
Food item | which contained | of occurrence[A]
| food item |
------------------------------+-----------------+------------------
chicken | 18 | 46.2
------------------------------+-----------------+------------------
Sylvilagus audubonii | 13 | 33.3
------------------------------+-----------------+------------------
Lepus californicus | 10 | 25.6
------------------------------+-----------------+------------------
Sylvilagus bachmani | 5 | 12.8
------------------------------+-----------------+------------------
Odocoileus hemionus | 5 | 12.8
------------------------------+-----------------+------------------
rodents (unidentified) | 5 | 12.8
------------------------------+-----------------+------------------
Dipodomys agilis | 4 | 10.3
------------------------------+-----------------+------------------
Neotoma species | 3 | 7.7
------------------------------+-----------------+------------------
Mephitis mephitis | 3 | 7.7
------------------------------+-----------------+------------------
Carrion beetle | 2 | 5.1
------------------------------+-----------------+------------------
passerine bird | 1 | 2.67
------------------------------+-----------------+------------------
bot fly larva | 1 | 2.67
------------------------------+-----------------+------------------
snail shell | 1 | 2.67
------------------------------+-----------------+------------------
scorpion | 1 | 2.67
------------------------------+-----------------+------------------
Jerusalem cricket | 1 | 2.67
------------------------------+-----------------+------------------
sheep hair | 1 | 2.67
------------------------------+-----------------+------------------
Lynx rufus | 1 | 2.67
------------------------------+-----------------+------------------
Kitten of wildcat or housecat | 1 | 2.67
------------------------------+-----------------+------------------
Lophortyx californica | 1 | 2.67
------------------------------+-----------------+------------------
grapes | 1 | 2.67
------------------------------+-----------------+------------------
grass | 1 | 2.67
------------------------------+-----------------+------------------
[Footnote A: This is an expression, in percentage, of the number of sets
of feces which contained the particular food item out of the total of
thirty-nine sets examined.]
The six coyotes taken on the Pacific slope are fairly uniform in
coloration; the occurrence of white tipping on the tails of most of the
specimens, instead of the usual solid black tip, is notable. Three
skins, those of a male and two females, have patches of white hairs at
the tips of the tails; two skins, of a male and a female, show only
scattered white hairs at the tips of the tails; and the skin of one
female has a solidly black-tipped tail. An additional female, trapped
by David Leighton in Thompson Canyon, had a large patch of white hairs
at the tip of the tail. Grinnell, Dixon, and Linsdale (1937:501) mention
that only an occasional individual (female?) has a white-tipped tail.
Weights are available for four specimens: two coyotes trapped in San
Antonio Wash, a male and a female, weighed 20.5 and 23.2 pounds
respectively; a female from the mouth of San Antonio Canyon weighed 21.6
pounds; and a large male from the mouth of Thompson Canyon weighed 29.3
pounds.
_Specimens examined._--Total, 6, distributed as follows: Los
Angeles County: Live Oak Canyon, 3000 ft., 1; mouth of San
Antonio Canyon, 2000 ft., 1; 4 mi. N Claremont, 1600 ft., 2; 4
mi. NE Claremont, 1600 ft., 1; 3 mi. NE Claremont, 1600 ft., 1.
TABLE 11.--CRANIAL MEASUREMENTS OF CANIS LATRANS OCHROPUS FROM THE
COASTAL SLOPE OF THE SAN GABRIEL MOUNTAINS.
======================================================================
| Four females | Two males
| Averages Extremes | Averages Extremes
----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------
Condylobasal length | 180.67 174.2-183.3 | 188.35 179.2-197.5
----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------
Palatal length | 91.57 88.0-95.0 | 97.15 91.6-102.7
----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------
Zygomatic breadth | 90.15 88.9-92.0 | 95.60 88.8-102.5
----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------
Interorbital breadth | 29.12 27.9-29.9 | 31.45 28.1-34.8
----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------
Length of | |
maxillary toothrow | 85.00 80.4-89.80 | 88.00 83.4-92.6
----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------
Length of | |
upper carnassial | 18.30 17.8-19.0 | 18.70 18.1-19.3
----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------
=Canis latrans mearnsi= Merriam