Cats are rare where coyotes roam

Kays, Roland; Costello, Robert; Forrester, Tavis; Baker, Megan C.; Parsons, Arielle W.; Kalies, Elizabeth L.; Hess, George R.; Millspaugh, Joshua J.; McShea, William J.

doi:10.1093/jmammal/gyv100

Cited by 57 publications

(63 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…We quantified vigilance of deer by evaluating their head position as an indication of vigilant (head up, eyes are above the shoulder), non‐vigilant (head down, eyes even to or below the knees) or neutral (eyes are above knee, but below shoulder) behavior. To avoid complications of social interactions, we only scored images of solitary deer separated by at least 1 min (Kays et al ., ). For each park, when possible, we scored at least 100 deer (23 parks), drawing from a subset of randomly selected sites (11–39 sites, mean 23.6).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Deer on the lookout: how hunting, hiking and coyotes affect white‐tailed deer vigilance

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Predators affect prey directly by removing animals from the population and indirectly by modifying prey behavior. Humans have extirpated apex predators from many ecosystems, and the extent to which smaller predators, or humans themselves, can ecologically replace apex predators remains uncertain. White‐tailed deer Odocoileus virginianus in the Eastern United States were released from their two most important predators a century ago following the extirpation of cougars Puma concolor and wolves Canis lupus. We studied the extent to which perceived predation risk from humans and a newly arrived mesopredator, the coyote, Canis latrans affects deer behavior, predicting that deer will be most vigilant in areas hunted by humans which also have the highest levels of coyote activity. We quantified deer vigilance rates in 33 natural areas of which 15 allowed hunting, across six states by evaluating the head posture of 3470 deer photographed at unbaited camera traps. We documented wide variation in coyote activity (0–2.5 detections/day) and human activity (0–306 detections/day), but contrary to our predictions, did not find strong positive relationships between deer vigilance and either of these predators. Deer vigilance was lower in areas with high levels of human recreation, suggesting that deer become habituated to the presence of humans. Vigilance increased across the fall season in both hunted and non‐hunted populations, which suggests that increased vigilance may be associated more with mating behavior or environmental factors other than hunting. Our results show that variation in coyote and human activity does not significantly impact the vigilance behavior of white‐tailed deer year‐round, suggesting that deer rely on other risk‐avoidance behaviors or neither are functioning as apex predators in the region.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Deer on the lookout: how hunting, hiking and coyotes affect white‐tailed deer vigilance

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A species was then considered detected at a camera trap during a given date if at least 1 photograph was obtained on that date, and was considered undetected otherwise. See Kays et al (2015) and McShea et al (2016) for additional details.…”

Section: T H E M U L T I V a R I A T E B E R N O U L L I D I S T R I mentioning

confidence: 99%

A multispecies occupancy model for two or more interacting species

et al. 2016

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary Species occurrence is influenced by environmental conditions and the presence of other species. Current approaches for multispecies occupancy modelling are practically limited to two interacting species and often require the assumption of asymmetric interactions. We propose a multispecies occupancy model that can accommodate two or more interacting species. We generalize the single‐species occupancy model to two or more interacting species by assuming the latent occupancy state is a multivariate Bernoulli random variable. We propose modelling the probability of each potential latent occupancy state with both a multinomial logit and a multinomial probit model and present details of a Gibbs sampler for the latter. As an example, we model co‐occurrence probabilities of bobcat (Lynx rufus), coyote (Canis latrans), grey fox (Urocyon cinereoargenteus) and red fox (Vulpes vulpes) as a function of human disturbance variables throughout 6 Mid‐Atlantic states in the eastern United States. We found evidence for pairwise interactions among most species, and the probability of some pairs of species occupying the same site varied along environmental gradients; for example, occupancy probabilities of coyote and grey fox were independent at sites with little human disturbance, but these two species were more likely to occur together at sites with high human disturbance. Ecological communities are composed of multiple interacting species. Our proposed method improves our ability to draw inference from such communities by permitting modelling of detection/non‐detection data from an arbitrary number of species, without assuming asymmetric interactions. Additionally, our proposed method permits modelling the probability two or more species occur together as a function of environmental variables. These advancements represent an important improvement in our ability to draw community‐level inference from multiple interacting species that are subject to imperfect detection.

show abstract

“…For example, Balogh et al (2011) reported 83 that domestic cats were responsible for 47% of known predation events on radio-tracked 84 fledglings, and Flockhart et al (2016) estimated a free-ranging cat density of up to 49 85 cats/ha in Guelph, Canada. Cats in urban areas tend to have smaller home ranges than 86 those in rural or wild landscapes (Horn et al 2011, Hall et al 2016, Hanmer et al 2017 Horn et al 2011, Gehrt et al 2013, Kays et al 2015, Elizondo and Loss 94 2016. Clearly, more research is necessary to better explain the habitat selection and space 95 use of free-ranging cats in urban areas.…”

Section: Introduction 53 54mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…iting suburban nature preserves, and fewer still take a landscape-scale approach (Kays 101 and DeWan 2004, Morgan et al 2009, Kays et al 2015. Further, while anthropogenic 102 factors have been linked to cat population parameters (e.g.…”

Section: Introduction 53 54mentioning

confidence: 99%

Anthropogenic factors influence the occupancy of an invasive carnivore in a suburban preserve system

Vanek

Rutter

Preuss

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Domestic cats (Felis catus) are one of the world’s most damaging invasive species. Free-ranging cats kill billions of wild animals every year, spread parasites and diseases to both wildlife and humans, and are responsible for the extinction or extirpation of at least 63 species. While the ecology and conservation implications of free-ranging cats have well studied in some locations, relatively little is known about cats inhabiting urban nature preserves in the United States. To address this knowledge gap, we used camera traps to study the occupancy and activity patterns of free-ranging cats in 55 suburban nature preserves in the Chicago, IL metropolitan area. From 2010–2018 (4,440 trap days), we recorded 355 photos of free-ranging cats across 26 preserves (ψnaïve = 0.45) and 41 randomly distributed monitoring points (ψnaïve = 0.18). Cats were detected every year, but rarely at the same point or preserve, and cats were largely crepuscular/diurnal. Using single-season occupancy models and a “stacked” design, we found that cat occupancy increased with building density and detectability was highest near the urban/preserve boundary. Based on our top-ranked model, predicted occupancy within individual preserves ranged from 0.09 to 0.28 (ψmean = 0.11) and was poorly correlated with preserve size or shape. Overall, our results suggest that free-ranging cats are rare within suburban preserves in our study area, and that these cats are most likely owned or heavily subsidized by people (which pose different risks and management challenges than truly feral cats). We discuss the conservation and management implications for urban natural areas.HighlightsWe surveyed for domestic cats across 55 suburban preserves from 2010-2018.We modeled occupancy and detectability as a function of urban covariates.Cat occupancy was low overall and best predicted by building density.The risk to native species is highest near preserve boundaries bordered by built environments.

show abstract

Cats are rare where coyotes roam

Cited by 57 publications

References 14 publications

Deer on the lookout: how hunting, hiking and coyotes affect white‐tailed deer vigilance

Deer on the lookout: how hunting, hiking and coyotes affect white‐tailed deer vigilance

A multispecies occupancy model for two or more interacting species

Anthropogenic factors influence the occupancy of an invasive carnivore in a suburban preserve system

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About