"We recorded the number of times each individual was located with another pack member at the beginning of each observation bout as a measure of the level of disassociation from the pack. We examined the influence of food resources on dispersal by recording the number of carcasses(elk, mule deer and bison) each coyote was observed to visit and the length of time spent feeding on the carcass…. We also measured each coyote’s capture rate of small mammals."(1027)

"The social rank and level of dominance in the pack hierarchy influenced whether a coyote dispersed or stayed."(1032-33)

During the second winter of study: "Dispersers were dominant in an average of 8% of their interactions with other pack members, and philopatric animals were dominant in an average of 37% of their interactions…. In packs with two surviving pups of the same sex (i.e. Bison and Druid packs), the dominant pup stayed and the subordinant pup dispersed."(1033)

During the third winter of study: "Philopatric animals were dominant in an average of 35% of their interactions with other pack members, and dispersers were dominant in an average of 11% of their interactions."(1034)

"In the third winter, dispersing coyotes captured small mammals at about half the rate attained by philopatric pups and betas."(1039)

"A common characteristic among all dispersing coyotes on our study area was that they were low-ranking pups or beta animals in their packs. They spent little time with other pack members, were almost always subordinate when interacting with other coyotes and had little access to ungulate carcasses."(1039)