So, Rap:

Agreed! Damn near anything has more validity than Blog-O-Pedia.

However:

1. , the problem is rarely with the animals but with the humans who interact with them.

Uh yeah, that's what I said. Several times. You're obviously still having problems comprehending the English language.

2.We're not talking about Australia. Wake up. Strike two

3. The article on California doesn't signify, the western coyote has had no cross-breeding with the grey wolf; nothing whatsoever to do with the current discussion. In addition, the California situation is a perfect example where the relentless spread of yuppie suburbia into wild areas impinges upon the wild animals concerned. Perfect example of why humans are the problem, not the coyotes. That and idiootic humans not respecting or knowing bugger-all about the resident population of wildlife..

4. From your Vermont article Quote : statistics indicate that the chances of being attacked by a coyote are far less that that of being attacked by a domestic pet. Guess you missed that. Statistics would also indicate that you're more likely to be struck by lightening twice on the same day and/or be abducted by space aliens than that of being attacked by a coyote.

5. An anamolous cougar in Chicago - assuming the tabloid story is true, also has nothing to do with the point under discussion.

6. .None of the things you've posted address the point I raised, that it is more likely for a person to be killed or injured by a domestic dog, horse, or goat than by a wolf, coyote, ort the mythical Coy-Dog or Coy-wolf.

Strike five, you're out. But thanks for playing.

And hey, just stay out of the woods, weenie - it ain't safe for the likes of you out there.