An official website of the United States government
Abstract Global change is increasing the frequency and severity of human‐wildlife interactions by pushing people and wildlife into increasingly resource‐limited shared spaces. To understand the dynamics of human‐wildlife interactions and what may constitute human‐wildlife coexistence in the Anthropocene, there is a critical need to explore the spatial, temporal, sociocultural and ecological variables that contribute to human‐wildlife conflicts in urban areas.Due to their opportunistic foraging and behavioural flexibility, coyotes (Canis latrans) frequently interact with people in urban environments. San Francisco, California, USA hosts a very high density of coyotes, making it an excellent region for analysing urban human‐coyote interactions and attitudes toward coyotes over time and space.We used a community‐curated long‐term data source from San Francisco Animal Care and Control to summarise a decade of coyote sightings and human‐coyote interactions in San Francisco and to characterise spatiotemporal patterns of attitudes and interaction types in relation to housing density, socioeconomics, pollution and human vulnerability metrics, and green space availability.We found that human‐coyote conflict reports have been significantly increasing over the past 5 years and that there were more conflicts during the coyote pup‐rearing season (April–June), the dry season (June–September) and the COVID‐19 pandemic. Conflict reports were also more likely to involve dogs and occur inside of parks, despite more overall sightings occurring outside of parks. Generalised linear mixed models revealed that conflicts were more likely to occur in places with higher vegetation greenness and median income. Meanwhile reported coyote boldness, hazing and human attitudes toward coyotes were also correlated with pollution burden and human population vulnerability indices.Synthesis and applications: Our results provide compelling evidence suggesting that human‐coyote conflicts are intimately associated with social‐ecological heterogeneities and time, emphasizing that the road to coexistence will require socially informed strategies. Additional long‐term research articulating how the social‐ecological drivers of conflict (e.g. human food subsidies, interactions with domestic species, climate‐induced droughts, socioeconomic disparities, etc.) change over time will be essential in building adaptive management efforts that effectively mitigate future conflicts from occurring. Read the freePlain Language Summaryfor this article on the Journal blog.
more »
« less
Social-ecological drivers of metropolitan residents’ comfort living with wildlife
IntroductionHuman-wildlife coexistence in cities depends on how residents perceive and interact with wildlife in their neighborhoods. An individual’s attitudes toward and responses to wildlife are primarily shaped by their subjective cognitive judgments, including multi-faceted environmental values and perceptions of risks or safety. However, experiences with wildlife could also positively or negatively affect an individual’s environmental attitudes, including their comfort living near wildlife. Previous work on human-wildlife coexistence has commonly focused on rural environments and on conflicts with individual problem species, while positive interactions with diverse wildlife communities have been understudied. MethodsGiven this research gap, we surveyed wildlife attitudes of residents across twelve neighborhoods in the Phoenix Metropolitan Area, AZ to ask: how do the environments in which residents live, as well as their values, identities, and personal characteristics, explain the degree to which they are comfortable living near different wildlife groups (coyotes, foxes, and rabbits)? ResultsWe found that residents who were more comfortable living near wildlife commonly held pro-wildlife value orientations, reflecting the expectation that attitudes toward wildlife are primarily driven be an individual’s value-based judgements. However, attitudes were further influenced by sociodemographic factors (e.g., pet ownership, gender identity), as well as environmental factors that influence the presence of and familiarity with wildlife. Specifically, residents living closer to desert parks and preserves were more likely to have positive attitudes toward both coyotes and foxes, species generally regarded by residents as riskier to humans and domestic animals. DiscussionBy improving understanding of people’s attitudes toward urban wildlife, these results can help managers effectively evaluate the potential for human-wildlife coexistence through strategies to mitigate risk and facilitate stewardship.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 1832016
- PAR ID:
- 10475897
- Publisher / Repository:
- Frontiers
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Frontiers in Conservation Science
- Volume:
- 4
- ISSN:
- 2673-611X
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
Neighborhood ethnicity is related to mammal occupancy and activity across a desert metropolitan areaAbstract Cities support abundant human and wildlife populations that are shaped indirectly and directly by human decisions, often resulting in unequal access to environmental services and accessible open spaces. Urban land cover drives biodiversity patterns across metropolitan areas, but at smaller scales that matter to local residents, neighborhood socio‐cultural factors can influence the presence and abundance of wildlife. Neighborhood income is associated with plant and animal diversity in some cities, but the influence of other social variables is less well understood, especially across desert ecosystems. We explored wildlife distribution across gradients of neighborhood ethnicity in addition to income and landscape characteristics within residential areas of metropolitan Phoenix, Arizona, USA. Utilizing data from 38 wildlife cameras deployed in public parks and undeveloped open spaces within or near suburban neighborhoods, we estimated occupancy and activity patterns of common mammal species, including species native to the Sonoran Desert (coyote [Canis latrans] and desert cottontail rabbit [Sylvilagus audubonii]), and non‐native domestic cat (Felis catus). Neighborhood ethnicity (percentage of Latino residents) appeared to exhibit a negative relationship with occupancy for coyotes and cottontail rabbits. Additionally, daily activity patterns of coyotes occurred later in the evenings and mornings in neighborhoods with higher proportions of Latino residents, but activity was unaffected by differences in neighborhood income. This study is one of the first to show that social‐ecological mechanisms associated with patterns of neighborhood ethnicity as well as income may help to shape wildlife distribution in cities. These findings have implications for equitable management and provisioning of ecosystem services for urban residents and highlight the importance of considering a range of social covariates to better understand biodiversity outcomes in urban and urbanizing areas.more » « less
-
Negative interactions between people and wildlife pose a significant challenge to their coexistence. Past research on human–wildlife interactions has largely focused on conflicts involving carnivores in rural areas. Additional research is needed in urban areas to examine the full array of negative and positive interactions between people and wildlife. In this study, we have conducted interviews in the desert metropolis of Phoenix, Arizona (USA), to explore residents’ everyday interactions with wildlife where they live. Our multifaceted approach examines interactions involving physical contact and observational experiences, as well as associated attitudinal and behavioral responses and actions toward wildlife. Overall, the qualitative analysis of residents’ narratives identified two distinct groups: people who are indifferent toward wildlife where they live, and those who appreciate and steward wildlife. Instead of revealing conflicts and negative interactions toward wildlife, our findings underscore the positive interactions that can foster human wellbeing in urban areas. The holistic approach presented herein can advance knowledge and the management of coexistence, which involves not only managing conflicts but also tolerance, acceptance, and stewardship. Understanding diverse human–wildlife interactions and managing coexistence can advance both wildlife conservation and human wellbeing in cities.more » « less
-
Abstract Wildlife conservation depends on supportive social as well as biophysical conditions. Social identities such as hunter and nonhunter are often associated with different attitudes toward wildlife. However, it is unknown whether dynamics within and among these identity groups explain how attitudes form and why they differ. To investigate how social identities help shape wildlife‐related attitudes and the implications for wildlife policy and conservation, we built a structural equation model with survey data from Montana (USA) residents (n = 1758) that tested how social identities affect the relationship between experiences with grizzly bears (Ursus arctos horribilis) and attitudes toward the species. Model results (r2 = 0.51) demonstrated that the hunter identity magnified the negative effect of vicarious property damage on attitudes toward grizzly bears (β = −0.381, 95% confidence interval [CI]: −0.584 to −0.178,p < 0.001), which in turn strongly influenced acceptance (β = −0.571, 95% CI: −0.611 to −0.531,p < 0.001). Our findings suggested that hunters’ attitudes toward grizzly bears likely become more negative primarily because of in‐group social interactions about negative experiences, and similar group dynamics may lead nonhunters to disregard the negative experiences that out‐group members have with grizzly bears. Given the profound influence of social identity on human cognitions and behaviors in myriad contexts, the patterns we observed are likely important in a variety of wildlife conservation situations. To foster positive conservation outcomes and minimize polarization, management strategies should account for these identity‐driven perceptions while prioritizing conflict prevention and promoting positive wildlife narratives within and among identity groups. This study illustrates the utility of social identity theory for explaining and influencing human–wildlife interactions.more » « less
-
Reduced human activity to mitigate the spread of the COVID-19 pandemic was accompanied by reports of unusual wildlife sightings in highly developed areas. Such experiences with urban nature may have helped residents cope with the stress of the pandemic and increased public interest in urban wildlife; however, this may depend on the species residents encountered. In this study, we surveyed Chicago, Illinois, USA residents during a stay-at-home order to understand if residents in more affluent or greener neighborhoods saw more wildlife species. We also evaluated whether encounters with pest and non-pest species were associated with residents’ values about wildlife. Of 593 responses included in our analyses, respondents in higher-income and greener neighborhoods were more likely to perceive increased wildlife sightings and respondents in higher-income areas reported observing a higher number common birds and mammals. Support for seeing wildlife in residential areas was associated with seeing passerine birds and not seeing rats during the stay-at-home order. Our results suggest that perceived increases in wildlife sightings were common during a stay-at-home order, especially for affluent residents, and that residents’ perceptions depended on the species encountered. Understanding how changes in human behavior modifies human-wildlife interactions can help mitigate human-wildlife conflict and foster positive engagement with local wildlife.more » « less
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript1.0
- Journal Article:
- https://doi.org/10.3389/fcosc.2023.1248238
