By Seth Richardson
Coyotes are smart. Very smart. And they appear to be winning the evolutionary race in Metro Denver and in other big cities, where they have adapted quite nicely to urban living. The losers are over-bred, pampered, city-dwelling dogs and cats, and urban humans appear to be next on the menu. Their eyesight is excellent, their hearing remarkable, and their olfactory abilities outstanding. They are clever pack hunters with well-established tactical plans. And those plans now include humans and urban pets. I’m fine with that. They deserve their victory, if they can seize it, because urban humans and their pets have given up their right to evolutionary survival by giving up their ability to defend themselves against predators, both animal and human.
I can’t say I blame the coyotes, because in this case, it seems as if there is a free lunch, and it’s a classic case of knee-jerk urbanites being hoist on their own petard. Back in 1996 mostly-urban bunny-hugging “animal rights” sympathizers voted to pass a trapping ban in Colorado. Up until then, coyotes were kept reasonably under control, wary, human-averse and primarily rural by a significant trapping and hunting industry. Any rancher will tell you that rural coyotes don’t hang around when a human shows up. They beat it for cover as fast as they can because they’ve learned, over generations, that humans are dangerous top-of-the-food-chain predators that can kill coyotes from a long way off.
It’s actually kind of amusing to see all the hysteria and clamor for government to “do something” about urban coyotes when it’s the urban citizens who tied the hands of government and private individuals in the first place. These urban voters are beginning to receive in full measure that which they demanded more than a decade ago. Such is the law of unintended consequences.
But, lest I be accused of too much insensitivity to the plight of urbanites, I do have some suggestions. Here’s the primary one: when faced with an aggressive, and possibly rabid urban coyote or coyote pack, do what we out here in the country do: kill them.
“How do we do this” you ask? Simple. Get a gun, and when attacked, shoot. “But” you declaim, “the police tell me I can’t discharge a firearm in the city limits without breaking the law!” Poppycock, I reply. Ignore what the police tell you, they’re just trying to make their own jobs easier, not provide you with protection or accurate legal advice.
The simple legal truth (don’t believe me, go look it up) is that so long as you have a reasonable belief that you are in danger, you are permitted to shoot an animal in self-defense, anywhere in the state. I don’t know about you, but I certainly view an attack by a coyote to be placing me in danger, in no small part because it’s likely that the animal is rabid. And if it’s more than one, why, being attacked by a pack of vicious, aggressive coyotes is certainly a danger, and I doubt any reasonable jury would disagree.
Now, you do have to be quite careful when discharging a firearm in the city, because you ARE responsible for every bullet and where it ends up, and you’ll get no sympathy from me if you use your gun carelessly and hurt others or damage private property, so don’t think I’m calling for mindless gun-play in the parks, alleys and trails, I’m not.
In order to reduce the chances of stray bullets causing harm, I have a specific recommendation for those of you who decide that being a victim of an aggressive coyote is not something you care to allow: Buy a Taurus Judge pistol chambered in .45 Colt/ .410 shotshell. MSRP $569.00, available at a fine gun store near you.
This unique pistol is dual-chambered so that it can fire both a standard pistol round for self-defense against humans and large animals, and the .410 shotshell, which is effective at short range against humans and smaller animals, like coyotes. It’s a compromise firearm for sure, but loaded with two rounds of .410 birdshot and three rounds of .45 Colt pistol ammunition, it provides deterrence and protection against human attack while also allowing the user to defend against aggressive animals without so much worry about stray bullets causing harm. The harmful range of bird-shot from the pistol is probably less than 25 yards.
It’s impossible that even the most aggressive coyote is going to stick around after being peppered with birdshot. The spread pattern of the shot at 7 yards is well over six feet, which means that precise aiming is not necessary to get deterrent hits on the animal. Let it get within 4 yards or so and let him have it.
Oh, and make sure that if you shoot to protect your dog, you tell the jury (not the cops, remember your right to remain silent!) that you thought the animal was attacking YOU, because unfortunately, you’re not allowed to discharge a firearm to protect your pet in a city. Do remember the spread, and try not to shoot your dog too!
Of course, don’t forget to go to your local Sheriff and get your concealed handgun permit first. You wouldn’t want to get knicked for a concealed weapon violation while doing the right thing for society. For the best concealed handgun class I know of in the Denver Metro area, contact Rich Wyatt at Gunsmoke, 9690 West 44th Ave. Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80033, (303) 456-4545. He’s worth the trip north for Colorado Springs residents.
©2009 Altnews
Texas NFA Trust…
[...]Urban Evolution – The Broadside : Colorado Springs Gazette, CO[...]…
All of us in Colorado have the right to defend ourselves, against all animals, four-legged or two. Open carry is not only legal here in Colorado, it’s also more common than many people believe, and legal in 43 of our 50 united states. Just don’t attempt it in Denver (city or county), where our state supreme court wound up with a hung decision. Also keep an eye out for posted notices up entering buildings to ensure you don’t enter a place that’s posted against open carry. With a permit, concealed carry, however, is legal throughout the state, with the exception of a few small areas. Colorado is a “shall issue” state, which means unless you’re a convicted felon, habitual drunk, or mentally incompetant, your sheriff must issue you a permit within 90 days of application.
# Dave Says:
March 4th, 2009 at 6:25 pm e
“Attacks by multiple coyotes on dogs on leash are becoming alarmingly frequent”
“The only ones I have read about around C.S. have been solo attacks.”
So far. There’s nothing preventing the behavior from occuring here however, so people need to be prepared to react.
“I wouldn’t minimize the threat, because it’s impossible to distinguish between a rabid and non-rabid coyote. ”
“There are often behavioral indicators.”
Yes, but not indicators that an untrained individual being attacked by a wild animal are likely to be able to, or even need to discern. It’s perfectly logical to assume that any wild animal that attacks a human being may be rabid, as attacks on non-prey animals is one of the primary indicators of rabies.
People need not take the time to observe the behavior of an attacking animal to try to figure out why it’s attacking, the attack is sufficient justification to kill the animal.
This paradigm is well-established in police work, and if the family dog attacks the officer, the officer is fully justified in shooting it, as we have seen from time to time.
Humans have no “retreat to the wall” obligation when it comes to vicious animals.
“My policy is quite clear. If stalked by a wild animal, I consider it a potentially deadly, and certainly a harmful threat, and I will terminate the animal as soon as possible.”
“And you will stand a decent chance of jail time or a fine.”
Actually, I stand almost no chance at all of being convicted of anything. There are no laws which prohibit a person from killing a wild animal that is attacking. None.
“Take mountain lions for instance.”
“Quite a different threat from a coyote.”
True, but what’s valid for one species is valid for all. I don’t care if it’s a fox or a whitetail deer, if it attacks, I am justified in killing it to protect myself or another.
“Any coyote that stalks to within close pistol range is a threat ”
“Not really.”
You are entitled to your opinion, and no one asks that you defend yourself, but that decision cannot be, and is not imposed on anyone else. Each person has to make up their mind when they feel endangered by a wild animal and when to kill it. My post-shooting advice is, if asked (never volunteer information to the police), always state that you felt your life was in danger, and stick to it. Try not to shoot the animal in the back as it’s running away from you, however, because that can lead to legal problems, particularly if it’s classified as a big game animal. This has occurred in at least one lion shooting that I’m aware of. The person claiming that he was being threatened shot the lion with a rifle, from more than 50 yards away, as the animal was running away, and the forensic analysis by the DOW proved this.
“I recommended it for those who may have concerns about ricochet and stray rounds”
“Go for snake shot then, or maybe a frangible.”
Frangibles could be good idea, although they are expensive. Carrying a mixed load of frangible and expanding rounds can be effective. But remember that until a frangible round hits a solid object, it acts just like a regular bullet, so although frangibles don’t ricochet, a wild shot can be deadly. The point of the shot shell is that its lethal range is significantly reduced while also requiring less accuracy in shooting to be effective.
I of course recommend that anyone who carries a gun become and remain proficient with it, which will allow one to carry whatever handgun one prefers, but the Judge is still an option, particularly for older persons who may have good judgment but lesser physical ability.
“so long as the “print through” is unintentional, I doubt you’ll get more than perhaps a lecture from a cop”
“Unintentional exposure, including printing, will get a person more than a lecture. Even here in C.S.. It will usually result in revoking the permit and can result in criminal charges.”
Do you have any evidence to back up this assertion? Can you provide citations to statutes and case law that would indicate this is a substantial risk for inadvertent display of a concealed handgun?
We should distinguish between the “flasher” who intentionally reveals a concealed weapon inappropriately or as a threat, and the individual who unknowingly or unintentionally does so through “printing” or a “costume malfunction.”
The important distinction is intent. The laws regarding brandishing a weapon or disorderly conduct require intent to cause alarm or deliberate action. Accidental exposure of a lawfully-carried concealed weapon is not per se illegal because, as has been pointed out, open carry is legal in the State of Colorado. If no intent to alarm exists, the likelihood of a conviction is scant.
If you have some credible evidence to support your claim, please present it. We can even debate the subject if you’d like. If so, write to me privately and we’ll discuss it.
“Attacks by multiple coyotes on dogs on leash are becoming alarmingly frequent”
The only ones I have read about around C.S. have been solo attacks.
“I wouldn’t minimize the threat, because it’s impossible to distinguish between a rabid and non-rabid coyote. ”
There are often behavioral indicators.
“My policy is quite clear. If stalked by a wild animal, I consider it a potentially deadly, and certainly a harmful threat, and I will terminate the animal as soon as possible.”
And you will stand a decent chance of jail time or a fine.
“Take mountain lions for instance.”
Quite a different threat from a coyote.
“Any coyote that stalks to within close pistol range is a threat ”
Not really.
“I recommended it for those who may have concerns about ricochet and stray rounds”
Go for snake shot then, or maybe a frangible.
“so long as the “print through” is unintentional, I doubt you’ll get more than perhaps a lecture from a cop”
Unintentional exposure, including printing, will get a person more than a lecture. Even here in C.S.. It will usually result in revoking the permit and can result in criminal charges.
Dave: I generally agree with you, but the problem seems to be getting worse, and in a number of cases simply yelling at the coyotes has not been effective. Attacks by multiple coyotes on dogs on leash are becoming alarmingly frequent and harsher measures are called for. I wouldn’t minimize the threat, because it’s impossible to distinguish between a rabid and non-rabid coyote. Discretion is the better part of valor when it comes to wild animals that approach you. My policy is quite clear. If stalked by a wild animal, I consider it a potentially deadly, and certainly a harmful threat, and I will terminate the animal as soon as possible.
Take mountain lions for instance. If you CAN shoot a mountain lion with a handgun, you SHOULD shoot it, and keep shooting it till it’s dead. The reason is that if it’s close enough to you to shoot, it’s been stalking you and is considering eating you, and if it’s close enough to shoot, you are less than one second away from being attacked, because a mountain lion can jump 40 feet horizontally in one second. See it, identify it, check the backstop as you draw, and fire. Don’t delay, don’t think about it, you ARE in danger.
Any coyote that stalks to within close pistol range is a threat and needs to be terminated without delay because it’s either rabid, which one should presume, or it’s a dangerous habituated predator that poses a real and present danger to CHILDREN. If YOU let it escape, you’re just pushing the problem off on the next person, who may have a small child and no gun. Do a public service and kill the coyote so others are not at risk.
I agree with you that a .38 revolver or even a .22 with snakeshot would suffice to dissuade most coyotes, but if one is going to go to the trouble of getting a CCW permit and carrying a handgun, one ought to be prepared for any level of threat up to and including a lethal threat by another human, or even a mountain lion.
As I said, the Judge is a compromise firearm. I recommended it for those who may have concerns about ricochet and stray rounds (which are quite legitimate) but still want a way to protect themselves against the lesser threat of coyotes while still maintaining a high degree of personal protection against larger threats.
The .38 and .22 snakeshot rounds are simply not good enough to be a persuasive deterrent to a determined (or coked-up) human attacker, while a .410 shotshell loaded with buckshot can be lethal and is certainly disabling if fired at the face, and the .45 Colt round is more than sufficient to terminate any threat that doesn’t respond to the shotshells.
As for your concerns about “printing through”, by and large it’s not so much an issue for law enforcement, although there have been instances, particularly in Denver, where CCW permitees have been harassed by police, as it is an issue for the individual when entering places of public accommodation. It’s a “don’t ask, don’t tell” situation in most places these days, with a few gun-ban businesses (like Hollywood Theaters) that post their property (and need to be boycotted for doing so).
The essence of concealed weapons is that they are concealed, of course, so one must take care to do so, but so long as the “print through” is unintentional, I doubt you’ll get more than perhaps a lecture from a cop, unless you’re in Boulder, of course, where they’ll call the SWAT team out.
In many Springs neighborhoods, including mine, we would welcome more coyotes (and bobcats) to control the rabbit population. There seems to be a pretty good correlation between a fall in coyote/bobcat sightings and a rise in rabbit sightings, and vice versa. The deer seem oblivious to both, and to humans – that’s another topic.
“And if it’s more than one, why, being attacked by a pack of vicious, aggressive coyotes is certainly a danger, and I doubt any reasonable jury would disagree.”
Well, considering that coyotes rarely do things in packs, especially hunt (usually pairs or solo)….
Even if a coyote loses its fear of people, yelling, challenging it, and a decent stick will alomost always solve the problem. We aren’t talking about timber wolves, we are talking about coyotes, most of which awill be taken out of a fight with a decent punt from a boot. The only fear I would have of coyotes is IF one is rabid.
BTW, a very important part of legal concealed carry is the “Concealed” part. That means the handgun must not be visible and must not visibly “print” through pants, jackets, shorts, what have you. If it does, you can go to jail. The Judge you mention is a pretty beefy revolver and extra care would have to be taken to ensure that it does not print when concealed. Not to mention its weight. Really, a small five shot .38 revolver loaded with snakeshot would be every bit as effective and would actually be safer from ricochets while being much easier to keep concealed. Heck, even a little .22 revolver with snakeshot would be ample protection.
Hey
An excellent CCW/basic pistol course is offered right here in the Springs. Contact: Paradise Sales, 630-7070.