The primary difference that is a sure bet whether or not it's a fox or coyote which the RU-vidr failed to mention: Look at the legs. If the legs look as if they are wearing black socks - You are looking at a FOX. BOOM!
A few days ago, I had a run in with a coyote while walking home from a coffee shop. I didn’t know how to identify at the time so I think it was a coyote but I have seen foxes in the area too
The entire description in this video is narrated. Why not show pictures to demonstrate the physical differences, and play audio recordings to let viewers hear the difference between the sounds each makes?
I have never mistaken a Red Fox or Grey Fox for a coyote and have never heard anyone claim they had a hard time telling. LOL. I thought from the title, this would be about the sound.difference. THAT would have been something to discuss not go on about the difference in color and size and habits
Sorry to sound so irritable, but I can't refrain from a little bit of (hopefully constructive) criticism: There's already a droning quality to the voice over that just gets annoyingly drawn out when, in a video meant to help people distinguish two animals, you lapse into long-winded, vacuous, and self-evident phrases like "In order... to tell these two canids apart... you will... need to know... what each of them... looks like..." Seriously, why are you stating the painfully obvious, at a snail's pace, a full minute into a video that we've already established is about distinguishing the two animals? This is a potentially informative video, but I fear your audience is by that point pulling their hair out waiting for you to say something actually informative...
Repetitive info. Better to show the images of coyote vs. fox side-by-side for comparison, instead of slide with words. When talking about sound, better to use the actual sounds than talking about it.
