Talk:Coyote attack

Which of the following "Iffy Cases" qualify as true "coyote attacks"?
This section in a nutshell: '''Which of the following rise to the level of a true "coyote attack on a human"? Please give your opinions at the bottom of this section:'''

Background: The WP:RS for all these cases, (Timm, et. al., "Coyote Attacks, an Increasing Suburban Problem") list any event classified as an "attack" by local authorities, whose policy it is to list "incidents when one or more coyotes made physical contact with a child or adult, or attacked a pet while in close proximity to its owner" (p.1). It is not clear whether or not this article should follow suit, as some of these cases (see, for an extreme example, incident "R.", below) might not rise to the level of what a likely reader is to understand to be the defintion of a "Coyote Attack". Others, perhaps incident "F.", seem more likely be seen by a likely reader as a true coyote attack on a human. The points of view of more Wikipedians are therefore requested.

"Iffy" Cases
“Charged and took food”

A. Jan. 1997 San Juan Capistrano Coyote charged adult female, took purse containing lunch.

B. Jan. 1997 San Juan Capistrano Coyote charged adult female and took purse.

“Behaved Aggressively”

C. Oct. 2000 Oildale Pair of coyotes treed woman’s pet cat, then turned aggressively on her.

D. May 2003 Woodland Hills Coyote acted aggressively toward man after he intervened during its attack on his dog.

E. July 2001 Thousand Oaks Five coyotes attacked large dog in yard, and aggressively threatened residents attempting to rescue dog; would not leave area despite two visits by sheriff.

F. Sept. 2001 Lancaster Man walking encountered 4 coyotes, which crouched, circling him, attempting to attack. Fought off with walking stick, hitting one square across the face. (Morning)

Jumped on, bit backpack, and retreated

G. Jan. 1997 San Juan Capistrano Coyote jumped on back of man, biting his backpack. Was knocked off and retreated.

Attacked dog leashed to human

H. Aug. 1999 San Antonio Heights Three coyotes attacked and killed dog being walked on leash by elderly man.

I. May 2000 Dublin area Coyote killed small dog while woman was taking it for walk.

J. July 2001 Encinitas Coyote attacked and took dog, while it was being walked on leash by woman. (4 PM)

K. July 2002 Canoga Park Woman walking 2 large dogs accosted by 3 coyotes; fell backward and fended coyotes off.

L. Aug. 2002 Mission Hills Coyote approached couple walking dog, attempting to snatch dog out of man’s arms; left only after being kicked. (4 AM)

M. July 2003 Alta Loma Coyote grabbed her small dog while woman was walking it; she was able to rescue it.

Killed dog in proximity of owner

O. Nov. 1999 Hollywood Hills Coyote attacked and killed pet dog in man’s presence; coyote would not leave. (Morning)

P. Nov. 2002 Carbon Canyon Coyote came into trailer park and took dog in presence of its owner. (3 PM)

Q. May 2003 Woodland Hills Coyote came into residence to attack small pet dogs. (2 PM)

"Sniffed and pawed at" sleeper

R. June 2001 Frazier Park 22-yr-old female camp counselor sleeping in open awakened by coyote sniffing and pawing at her head. (2 AM)

Comments on "Iffy Cases"

 * I think cases simply involving curious coyotes which paw or bear their teeth at people shouldn't be included. Coyotes are so numerous that such incidents would probably clutter the article in a truly bloated way. There doesn't appear to be anything unusual about coyotes checking people out or displaying impetuous behaviour. However, the serious attacks are certainly noteworthy, and should be retained.Mariomassone (talk) 06:49, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
 * I tend to agree but think I should probably add that Timm, et. al. defend listing "any physical contact" or "attacked a pet while in close proximity to its owner" incidents as "coyote attacks on humans" by saying that it is not they who made those rules, but the local authorities whose policy it is to categorize such incidents in that way. I do agree with you, if I understand your opinion correctly, that just because Timm et. al. felt obligated to follow suit, it doesn't necessarily mean that we should have to do so as well if it's not clear a coyote attacked a person. Surely, a sniff and a few taps with a paw at a sleeping camper does not amount to an attack from very many people's point of view, (I'm trying to establish that, hence my request for comment, it's not just me that see that incident that way).  Also, if a coyote attacks a dog and a person is nearby, not even attached by leash, I don't think I'm alone in precieving that as an attack on a dog, not a person, and therefore outside of the scope of this article.
 * However, please look again just to be sure that none of the short list above, some of which are on the higher up chart and some of which are not, are clearly not coyote attacks on humans. For example, the Lancaster event, if you came upon that scene, would you not feel you were looking at a coyote attack on a human?  Here was a man surrounded by multiple coyotes with no evidence of a dog or food with him that could have been the coyote's goal, swinging his stick to keep them at bay for an extended period until he managed to hit enough coyotes squarely enough to drive them off without injury.  Doesn't that look like a coyote attack, albeit a failed one?  Also consider the San Juan Capistrano events.  If they were perpetuated by humans, we would call them "muggings".  And surely a mugging is an attack, do you agree, even though the goal is theft and the person left unharmed?  Should we either include all such SJC "muggings" or none of them, or is there reason to include some but not others?
 * Finally, if we are going to deliberately leave off incidents listed by Timm et. al., shouldn't we tell the reader that we have done so and why?
 * Thank you for your kind attention to this matter. I want to get this chart right before placing it in the mainspace, so please if you would, do look it over and edit or comment as you would. It's my first chart and I'm just learning.  How might it be improved?  How about the article?  It's new and probably needs work.  Chrisrus (talk) 18:01, 17 August 2012 (UTC)


 * RfC comment: the word "attack" is vague: none of these seems to be exactly an attack on humans, but on the other hand, per No personal attack policy people are banned for something much less offensive. Probably the article should be renamed to something more precise, so that such questions don't rise in the future. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 14:58, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for replying! But if you would, which ones on the list just above, specifically, should be on the chart on top, which is slated for inclusion into the article?  I've just added an identifying letter on each in the hopes of making it easier for commenters to do this.  Chrisrus (talk) 16:33, 19 August 2012 (UTC)


 * None of them. These seem obviously too trivial to include in the article. There's no particular reason that our inclusion criteria should be the same as the inclusion criteria of our sources - that is left to our editorial judgement. We normally follow the sources, true, but there's definitely room for a little WP:IAR here. Also, it would be interesting to see how other sources define a coyote attack, if those other sources exist. Maybe there could be one for Mexico in the Spanish language? Anyway, we should feel free to use editorial discretion in thinking up our inclusion criteria, as long as we apply them consistently. — Mr. Stradivarius  (have a chat) 11:38, 8 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your kind reply. It has made me feel better about omitting many of these from the mainspace. I did include the Capistrano "muggings" because I felt they illustrated when taken together one cohesive notable event: coyotes that seemed to have begun taking up mugging adults as a way of making a living, but have omitted most of the rest of these.  I will check into whether such things have occurred in Mexico or Central America, thanks for the idea.  Chrisrus (talk) 13:14, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

new attack
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/story/2012/09/21/ns-coyote-new-waterford.html

On September 21, 2012, a sixteen-year old New Waterford, Nova Scotia girl was attacked by a coyote while she was walking to school. She had heard some growling in the bushes, but, seeing nothing, she continued walking and was hit from behind and knocked down. Just at that moment, a car happened along, and the motorist sounded his horn, scaring the coyote away. The Department of Natural Resources hired a professional to trap the animal.

new attack
http://bc.ctvnews.ca/man-attacked-by-coyote-warns-others-1.967876

new attack
http://www.kens5.com/news/Austin-teen-says-coyote-attacked-him-near-his-home-174361701.html

new attack
http://www.floridatoday.com/article/20121026/NEWS01/310260030/Coyote-shot-dead-after-attack-Malabar

new attack
http://www.oregonlive.com/pacific-northwest-news/index.ssf/2012/12/northwest_news_coyotes_attack.html

A man was attacked Friday by coyotes outside his home in Kent and spent most of the evening in the emergency room, KOMO news reports.

Faron Scarberry, who moved to Kent about two weeks ago, said three coyotes attacked him while he was with his dog in his backyard.

They come up toward my face, and I kind of blocked them and pushed them away, and that's when the one grabbed me by the leg," he says.

Scarberry spent most of the night in the emergency room - diagnosed with a coyote bite and scratches. He got 24 rabies shots in his leg and two in his hip.

Scarberry's home is backed by a wooded area.

Washington Department Fish and Wildlife Sgt. Kim Chandler says coyotes are pretty hungry this time of year because of the lack of fruit, which they rely upon in their diet. The coyotes start to look at other animals, such as cats and small dogs, as sources of food.

Chandler advises keeping pets inside and preventing the coyotes' access to garbage.

More on this
http://www.komonews.com/news/local/Kent-man-attacked-by-coyotes-in-his-own-backyard-185180232.html?tab=video&c=y

http://www.dailycamera.com/news/boulder/ci_22300164/coyote-bites-boulder-jogger-skunk-creek-trail-further

Article in The Economist
FYI Urban coyotes: Dogged persistence.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 01:51, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

New Attack
http://www.9news.com/news/local/article/324031/222/2-coyotes-shot-killed-after-boy-attacked-

Coyote attack on video
FYI here.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 15:31, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

Maine Man Attacked By Coyote While Turkey Hunting, May 2008
My name is Blaine Cardilli and I was reviewing the 'Coyote Attacks' page via a Facebook link. My account is verifiable but is not on your list. If anyone is interested in getting the details for adding to the Wikipedia page on 'Coyote Attacks' I have supplied my email in my account. In Summary, I was calling turkeys with a friend when an adult coyote jumped me from behind, biting through 3 layers of clothing into my left arm. No stitches were necessary but I have photos of the shirt and arm. A doctor visit triggered an investigation by Maine CDC and I underwent (9) rabies shots. Date of attack: May 22, 2008, 10:00am, Waldoboro, Maine

Thank you. Blaine Cardilli — Preceding unsigned comment added by Countryboyinmaine (talk • contribs) 22:13, 26 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Thank you for this information. I Googled your name and the word "coyote" and found this independant report: http://mainehuntingtoday.com/news/2008/05/27/maine-hunter-and-outdoor-writer-attacked-by-coyote/.  We can use this to cite the attack.


 * One question: where did it happen? I understand there's not going to be a very specific location, but if you could name the location as best you can, it would help.  Chrisrus (talk) 19:02, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

Attack in NJ
FYI NBC report.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 09:12, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

Another incident
FYI NBC News.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 13:50, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

Look what I found
http://www.summitdaily.com/magazines/exploresummitweekender/23672134-113/this-week-in-summit-county-history-rabid-coyotes Chrisrus (talk) 19:18, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

Those cited to Timm, et. al., vs. those not so cited.
The reason for that California sections is that all of them were cited to Timm, et. al.

It was not to separate all Californian items from the rest.

For example, the table in the "on adults" section that are all cited to the same source, Timm, et. al.

That is the reason they are on a separate table.

It's to separate them from the attacks not so cited. The others are cited to individual press reports and such.

Those not cited to Timm, et. al., are not often sourced to peer-reviewed scholarly papers such like Timm, et. al.

Instead, we know about them generally from local media reports, such as local TV or radio stations or newspapers.

This is a good reason to keep them separated from those sourced from Timm et. al.

Please don't do it in the way that you're doing it. You are mixing the attacks we know from Timm, et. al. with those that are just from media reports.

The reason they were separated in the first place is not to distinguish Californian attacks from those of other regions.

There is no reason that I can think of to separate this list into Californian attacks and non-Californian attacks.

There is a reason to keep the Timm, et. al. sourced attacks from the media reported attacks.

That reason is, so we can cite all the Timm, et. al. attacks once, not over and over and over again citing so many different attacks to the same source.

It was easier that way for the readers to see that we got all these items from this one source, and easier for us to manage.

There is supposed to be a little intro saying the following attacks come from Timm et al and these others come from media reports.

---

However: 1. Should this be divided into one section for attacks on adults and another for children? 2. Should this list be divided into Californian vs. non-Californian? 3. Should this list be divided into US vs. Canada? 4. Should this list be divided at all? 5. Should it be compiled into one big list that could be set into a table that could allow the readers to search by victim age, name, gender, location, and so on, by clicking the top of the list?

What are your opinions? Chrisrus (talk) 03:22, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

Use of the word "mauled"
This word often seems inappropriate for many of the attacks so characterized. I know for certain the February 27, 2017, attack in Roswell, GA, was a bite on the leg - the man was not "mauled." The bitten man managed to hold the sick coyote down for 20 minutes - had the man been "mauled" he would have bled out and died in 20 minutes. Instead, he went to the hospital, was not admitted, did not need stitches and the wound later shown on the news - not a mauling. I'm changing that one and any others that I can check the original story to see it it uses the term "maul." Samatva (talk) 01:13, 9 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Is the word in the original sources?
 * I tend to agree, but it depends.
 * I tend to agree because, I donno about anyone else but when I personally hear it, I get the idea of ripping and tearing, not just biting, so even if the source uses it, if it's clear that that's not what happened, then, we might want to avoid using it if we don't have to. Chrisrus (talk) 20:41, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

Stillwater attack: coyote or dog?
This May 2017 Stillwater attack, is it clearly a coyote attack or were they dogs? Chrisrus (talk) 20:42, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

Should we list everything?
Should this article be attempting to be a comprehensive list of every coyote attack? I suggest WP:NOTNEWS would argue against that. Why don't we drop the lists and focus the article on the general issue? Bondegezou (talk) 13:54, 11 April 2019 (UTC)