Coyote tracks are frequently encountered, yet distinguishing them from similar tracks left by foxes, bobcats, or domestic dogs can be perplexing. Dog tracks, in particular, are ubiquitous and commonly mistaken for those of coyotes. This guide provides insights into accurately identifying Coyote Prints and differentiating them from potentially confusing look-alike tracks.
Let’s first address the distinction from felines, specifically bobcats. The bobcat track illustrated below is a right front print, oriented upwards in the frame. Similar to coyotes, bobcats possess four toes and an undivided middle pad. However, unlike coyotes and other canines, bobcat tracks exhibit asymmetry. They feature a leading toe (the second from the left in the image) and a trailing toe (the rightmost one), with the middle pad skewed outwards. A simple symmetry test helps highlight this difference: Imagine a vertical line bisecting the track’s center and mentally fold the right half onto the left. They won’t align. Now, apply the same test to the subsequent image, a coyote front print, also oriented upwards. You’ll observe a near-perfect match when folding one half onto the other, indicating symmetry.
Alt text: Asymmetrical bobcat right front paw print, showing distinct leading and trailing toes for wildlife tracking enthusiasts.
Alt text: Symmetrical coyote right front paw print, demonstrating even toe distribution for coyote print identification.
While both the bobcat and coyote prints shown are clear and complete, variations in conditions can sometimes make bobcat tracks, especially rear prints, appear more symmetrical, and conversely, canine tracks might occasionally present an asymmetrical appearance. Fortunately, additional characteristics aid in distinguishing between them. A crucial feature is the configuration of ridges between the toes and the middle pad. In coyote tracks, these prominent ridges form an X shape, with a dome at the X’s center. In contrast, the major ridges in bobcat tracks do not form an X; they resemble a compressed H or a partially rotated, kinked C-shape. Another distinguishing factor is the relative size of toes and pads. Bobcat tracks display toes that are small relative to the overall track size, with a large middle pad. Coyote tracks exhibit the opposite: larger toes and a smaller middle pad in proportion to the track. In the coyote print example, delicate claw marks are visible, two closely positioned ahead of the leading toes and a fainter one on the left outer toe. Claw marks are absent in the bobcat photo. While cats can extend claws for better grip, claw impressions are considerably less frequent in bobcat tracks compared to coyote or other canine tracks. Bobcat prints also tend to be rounder, while coyote prints are more oval or egg-shaped, key features for accurate coyote print identification.
Next, consider the red fox, whose tracks can overlap with coyote tracks at the smaller end of the coyote size spectrum. The following image depicts a red fox front print, oriented towards the right. It shares similarities with the coyote track in symmetry and the presence of the canine X and dome. However, certain features differentiate it from coyote. The fur covering the fox’s paw underside leaves striations in the toes and middle pad impressions. This hair wears down as seasons progress, potentially becoming less noticeable in late summer and fall, but a fresh, thick fur growth develops in early winter. Red fox tracks in snow often appear blurry due to this dense hair. Coyote toes and middle pads are bare year-round, resulting in smooth surfaces and sharp outlines in their toe and pad impressions.
Alt text: Red fox left front paw print showing hair striations and chevron on middle pad for distinguishing fox tracks from coyote tracks.
Within the middle pad of the red fox print, a curved indentation is visible (vertically oriented in the photo), created by a ridge of tough skin protruding through the fur. This bar or chevron, present on the front foot and rarely on the rear foot, is unique to the red fox. When visible, it definitively distinguishes red fox tracks from coyote tracks. Observing the preceding coyote track image, you can confirm the absence of this bar. This chevron is a key indicator in red fox paw print identification.
Differentiating coyote prints from domestic dog prints often presents the greatest challenge. The sheer variability among dog breeds means no absolute criteria exist, and many dog tracks are similar in size to coyote tracks. The image below showcases the rear (left) and front (right) prints of a coyote, oriented to the right. As is typical in canines, the rear track is smaller than the front. Notice the absence of claw marks, except for faint, closely spaced marks ahead of the leading toes of the front foot. Both front and hind tracks exhibit an oval outline, and their middle pads are small relative to the overall track size, crucial characteristics for coyote paw print recognition.
Alt text: Coyote front and rear paw prints comparison, highlighting size difference and minimal claw marks for accurate coyote track analysis.
Comparing these coyote tracks with the dog tracks in the subsequent image reveals clear distinctions. The dog’s front track (above) is rounder and possesses a larger middle pad. The claw marks in the front print are more robust and visible ahead of all four toes. The dog’s rear print (below), while slimmer than the front, still exhibits a prominent middle pad and claw marks ahead of all four toes. These are important differences when learning about dog vs coyote print identification.
Alt text: Domestic dog front and rear paw prints, illustrating rounder shape, larger middle pad, and prominent claw marks, contrasting with coyote prints.
Dog tracks resembling the front print shown below (oriented upwards) are even simpler to identify. The large middle pad and thick claw marks serve as strong indicators, but the most striking feature is the splaying of the inner and outer toes. Many dogs have “floppy” feet. Due to their often less active lifestyles, their feet lack the muscle tone of wild canines, leading to greater toe spread. The inner and outer toes and claws may point outwards rather than directly forward. Dogs that engage in ample exercise, such as the one that created the tracks in the preceding photo, might not exhibit this toe splaying.
Alt text: Domestic dog front paw print with splayed toes and large middle pad, typical characteristics for distinguishing dog tracks, especially in less active breeds.
Varying environmental conditions can alter the appearance of coyote tracks, introducing complexity to identification. The coyote front track (facing right) in the next image doesn’t appear as neat and compact as the coyote tracks previously shown. Claw marks are visible ahead of all four toes, the inner and outer toes are not as tightly tucked behind the leading toes, and the claw marks are more divergent. This particular coyote was trotting on soft, damp sand, causing its toes to spread slightly for added support. However, the track still retains key coyote characteristics, such as the small middle pad and delicate claw marks, distinguishing it from dog tracks, even under varying conditions.
Alt text: Coyote front paw print on soft sand showing slight toe spread but retaining key coyote track features like small middle pad for track identification in varied terrains.
Faster movement can have an even more pronounced effect on tracks. The print below (a front print, pointing right) was created by a galloping coyote. The toes are spread, claw marks are deep, and the middle pad appears asymmetrical. Yet, even this distorted track still exhibits coyote-specific traits rather than dog traits. The claws remain sharply pointed, and the middle pad is small relative to the overall track size, even in a gallop coyote print.
Alt text: Coyote front paw print from a gallop showing toe spread and deep claw marks, yet still exhibiting key coyote characteristics for advanced track identification.
There will inevitably be instances where definitive identification proves challenging. Tracks may be distorted, degraded, or incomplete. Even when reaching only a tentative conclusion, valuable observation and learning remain possible. The more we grapple with these challenging situations, the more adept we become at confidently recognizing coyote tracks when we encounter them. Continuous practice and observation are key to mastering coyote print identification in the field.
