Public perspectives on the management of urban coyotes

In recent years there has been much attention to coyote (Canis latrans) management in urban areas in the USA. Many urban wildlife managers are searching for ways to reduce and prevent human–coyote conflict that are both effective and acceptable to their constituents. This article presents the findings of research that surveyed two neighboring suburbs in the Denver, Colorado metropolitan area that differed in their management approaches to coyotes, both formally and informally. These findings provide an interesting case study with comparative power for urban/suburban locations where human–coyote conflict is active and well-publicized, and where different management policies themselves spark controversy. Using a mixed methodology approach, this study demonstrates that formal management plans do not completely describe the on-the-ground reality of management efforts. This is a critical because many urban wildlife populations are managed across multiple jurisdictions, and capturing local-level effects is necessary to have a complete understanding of these populations. A survey of residents of both towns demonstrated that specific beliefs and attitudes are important predictors in determining the likelihood of supporting broad-based lethal control over policies that emphasize hazing and education. It also shed light on the differences between the towns that might have driven the differing policies. In addition, understanding how people make use of local green spaces and their own yards, as well as identifying potential barriers to people modifying their property so as to reduce conflict (by example for installing a fence in areas pets are let off-leash) can inform managers’ goals and actions.