At the present time the coyote ranges over almost all of Washington, except for the highest parts of the mountains and the dense forest areas of western Washington. According to available information it was not found about Puget Sound or the Olympic Peninsula until relatively recent times. Some old trappers are of the opinion that coyotes did not come into western Washington until the timber wolves became rare there. The scarcity of the timber wolves seems to coincide with settlement, clearing and lumbering. Probably coyotes did not become common in western Washington until lumbering provided extensive clearings and open areas more suitable to them than forest. Certainly coyotes and wolves existed together in eastern Washington.
It is difficult to determine whether coyotes were completely absent from western Washington in the early days or simply scarce. The glacial prairies of the Puget Sound area provide suitable habitat for coyotes and coyotes are abundant there at the present time. If coyotes were present at all in western Washington in the early days it is reasonable to suppose that they would have been common on the prairies. Yet I was told by an old trapper who had lived near Scotts Prairie, Mason County, for many years, that he had never seen or heard coyotes there until about 1910. Although a coyote might be mistaken for a small wolf, the call, as this trapper pointed out, is distinctive.
The principal habitat requirement of the coyote seems to be extensive areas of open country. This it finds in the desert area of the Columbian Plateau, the open forests of northeastern Washington and the eastern Cascades, and in the extensive timbered and burned-over lands in western Washington. In summer coyotes range well up into the Hudsonian Life-zone of the Cascade and Olympic mountains. Their principal range is lower, in the Transition and Upper Sonoran life-zones.
The coyotes are both nocturnal and diurnal. In the vicinity of human habitations they are most active at night. In the heat of the day they take refuge in brushy areas or small gullies. Many actions of the coyote are doglike, and were it not for the large, round, bushy tail, a coyote might easily be mistaken for a dog. The tail is carried in a drooped position with the tip bowed slightly backwards. When badly frightened and running at full speed the tail is stretched out straight behind. The ordinary gait is a purposeful trot with the head held erect, the ears pricked up, and the legs moving smoothly and effortlessly. Near Moses Lake, Grant County, I watched a coyote trot along the side of one of a series of small sand dunes. At the report of the small shotgun fired at it, the coyote's dignified trot changed to terrified bounds, its feet dug into the dune, throwing showers of sand into the air, as it crossed several successive dunes in full flight before turning to take advantage of the shelter of a draw between two dunes. A coyote chased by an automobile attained a speed of 43 miles an hour for a short distance ([Zimmerman], 1943: 400).
I have not watched a coyote stalk game, but as described to me it creeps up to within a few yards of its prey and catches it with a sudden dash. In hunting a jack rabbit, the coyote is said to pursue it, taking advantage of short cuts, until close enough to seize it.
Better known than the coyote itself is its howl—several doglike barks, each successive one of a series shorter and higher pitched, the last one ending in a long, drawn-out howl. In the winter of 1936 the coyotes near Cottage Lake, King County, were especially vociferous. They ordinarily began to howl about 9 p.m., but could be induced to howl earlier by imitating their call. Their howling was a signal for all nearby ranchers' dogs to howl in reply. In the desert areas of eastern Washington I heard coyotes most often just at dusk or at dawn.
The coyote is principally carnivorous, feeding on any mammals and birds easy to kill. It willingly eats carrion, even when much decayed. Large insects such as grasshoppers and crickets are eaten when they are abundant and easily caught. Fruit and berries are eaten when available.
[Sperry] (1941) reported on the analysis of the contents of 8,339 coyote stomachs from various places in the United States, 1,186 of the stomachs being from Washington. The following information is from his report on all of the 8,339 stomachs: rabbits formed one-third of the food; Microtus was found in 7 per cent of the stomachs; Peromyscus in 6 per cent; Neotoma in 4 per cent. Reithrodontomys were found in 53 of the 8,339 stomachs and in insignificant numbers. Onychomys occurred in 11 of the 8,339 stomachs; Clethrionomys in 8. Ondatra occurred in 8 of the 8,339. Two muskrats were in stomachs obtained from Washington. Citellus (exclusive of beecheyi, lateralis, and saturatus) were found in 4 per cent and were locally important; Citellus beecheyi occurred in 84 stomachs, including 1 from Washington; Citellus lateralis and saturatus occurred in 50 stomachs, including 5 from Washington. Marmota were found in 1 per cent of the stomachs. They were included in stomachs from Washington but the number was not reported. Tamias (= Eutamias) were found in 43 stomachs from western United States and were present in 1 per cent of the 1,186 stomachs from Washington. Sciurus and Tamiasciurus occurred in 33 stomachs. Included were 3 Tamiasciurus douglasii, a Tamiasciurus hudsonicus, and a Sciurus griseus from Washington. Glaucomys occurred in 6 Washington-taken coyotes, of a total of 11 from the entire United States. Perognathus occurred in 3 per cent of the stomachs, and 274 individuals were represented. They were found in 10 per cent of the 1,186 Washington stomachs. Thomomys occurred in 4 per cent of the stomachs examined and in 7 per cent of the stomachs from Washington. Erethizon appeared in 2 per cent of the stomachs (135 records), including some from Washington. Aplodonta occurred in only 11 stomachs, all taken in Washington. Locally, it is concluded, mountain beavers are important coyote food. House mice occurred in but five stomachs, including 2 from Washington. Zapus did not occur in coyote stomachs from Washington. Domestic sheep and goats formed 7 per cent of the food of Washington coyotes. Calves occurred in 3 stomachs of coyotes from Washington. Pigs occurred in 8. Deer formed 3 per cent, by volume, of coyote food in Washington. A part of the stock and deer reported was doubtless carrion.
One shrew was found in the stomach of a coyote from Washington, and two stomachs contained moles. A house cat was eaten by one Washington coyote, and another coyote had eaten a raccoon. Birds occurred in 13 per cent of the stomachs examined but formed only a small part by volume. Poultry formed one-fourth of this volume. Reptiles formed 0.08 per cent of the food eaten by coyotes and occurred in 3 per cent of the stomachs. A coyote from Washington had eaten a garter snake. No frogs were found in coyote stomachs. A coyote from Washington had eaten a salamander. Another had eaten a fish. Insects formed 1.08 per cent of the total food eaten by coyotes. Fruit formed 3.63 per cent. Carrion constituted 25.2 per cent of the total food eaten.
It is extremely difficult to draw conclusions regarding the economic value of any species. Much depends on the outlook of the individual, his occupation, the locality where the animal occurs and local conditions there. Furthermore it is impossible to understand and fairly weigh all the factors involved.