Search for: All records

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. 

Abstract Contributory science—including citizen and community science—allows scientists to leverage participant‐generated data while providing an opportunity for engaging with local community members. Data yielded by participant‐generated biodiversity platforms allow professional scientists to answer ecological and evolutionary questions across both geographic and temporal scales, which is incredibly valuable for conservation efforts.The data reported to contributory biodiversity platforms, such as eBird and iNaturalist, can be driven by social and ecological variables, leading to biased data. Though empirical work has highlighted the biases in contributory data, little work has articulated how biases arise in contributory data and the societal consequences of these biases.We present a conceptual framework illustrating how social and ecological variables create bias in contributory science data. In this framework, we present four filters—participation,detectability,samplingandpreference—that ultimately shape the type and location of contributory biodiversity data. We leverage this framework to examine data from the largest contributory science platforms—eBird and iNaturalist—in St. Louis, Missouri, the United States, and discuss the potential consequences of biased data.Lastly, we conclude by providing several recommendations for researchers and institutions to move towards a more inclusive field. With these recommendations, we provide opportunities to ameliorate biases in contributory data and an opportunity to practice equitable biodiversity conservation. Read the freePlain Language Summaryfor this article on the Journal blog. 

Abstract In the past decade, studies have demonstrated that urban and nonurban wildlife populations exhibit differences in foraging behavior and diet. However, little is known about how environmental heterogeneity shapes dietary variation of organisms within cities. We examined the vertebrate prey components of diets of coyotes (Canis latrans) in San Francisco to quantify territory‐ and individual‐level dietary differences and determine how within‐city variation in land cover and land use affects coyote diet. We genotyped fecal samples for individual coyote identification and used DNA metabarcoding to quantify diet composition and individual niche differentiation. The highest contributor to coyote diet overall was anthropogenic food followed by small mammals. The most frequently detected species were domestic chicken, pocket gopher (Thomomys bottae), domestic pig, and raccoon (Procyon lotor). Diet composition varied significantly across territories and among individuals, with territories explaining most of the variation. Within territories (i.e., family groups), the amount of dietary variation attributed to among‐individual differences increased with green space and decreased with impervious surface cover. The quantity of anthropogenic food in scats also was positively correlated with impervious surface cover, suggesting that coyotes consumed more human food in more urbanized territories. The quantity of invasive, human‐commensal rodents in the diet was positively correlated with the number of food services in a territory. Overall, our results revealed substantial intraspecific variation in coyote diet associated with urban landscape heterogeneity and point to a diversifying effect of urbanization on population diet.