Shifts in Attitudes Toward Coyotes on the Urbanized East Coast: The Cape Cod Experience, 2005–2012

Jackman, Jennifer; Rutberg, Allen T.

doi:10.1080/10871209.2015.1027973

Cited by 24 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 48 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Value orientations and specific beliefs have been shown to influence risk perception (Slimak & Dietz, 2006), and findings here are consistent with this research. Sponarski et al (2015) also found that tolerance for coyotes increased with time, and similar findings were obtained from a longitudinal study in Cape Cod (Jackman & Rutberg, 2015). Risk perception is an adaptation to danger (Taylor, 1998) and can be explained through personal or learned experiences (Johansson et al, 2012).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 73%

Modeling Perceived Risk from Coyotes Among Chicago Residents

Sponarski

Miller

Vaske

et al. 2016

Human Dimensions of Wildlife

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article examined the influence of urban homeowners' general wildlife value orientations (i.e., mutualism, domination) and their specific positive beliefs about coyotes on perceived risk from coyotes. Data were obtained from a mail survey of residents in the Greater Chicago Metropolitan Region during 2012 (n = 1,624, response rate = 34%). As predicted, general wildlife value orientations were related to specific positive beliefs about coyotes. Mutualism had a positive relationship with these beliefs, and domination had a negative relationship. As specific beliefs became more positive, perceived risk decreased. Although mutualism was not related to perceived risk, a significant and positive relationship was observed between domination and perceived risk. Residents with a domination orientation were more fearful of coyotes. The two value orientations explained 64% of the variance in specific positive beliefs, and both domination and these beliefs accounted for 20% of the variance in perceived risk. Implications for managing coyotes in an urban setting are discussed.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 73%

Modeling Perceived Risk from Coyotes Among Chicago Residents

Sponarski

Miller

Vaske

et al. 2016

Human Dimensions of Wildlife

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Over 30 years ago, a national level survey of public attitudes about coyotes found them among the least liked animals (Kellert, 1985). Increasingly recent research has found improved perceptions toward coyotes (Stevens et al, 1994;Vaske and Needham, 2007;Jackman and Rutberg, 2015). Jackman and Rutberg (2015) found that mean acceptance of coyotes shifted from negative to positive (in a scale of −2 to +2, −0.28 in 2005 to 0.19 in 2012) and support for eradication of coyotes dropped from 18% in 2005 to 6% in 2012.…”

Section: Do Stakeholders Consider Risks Tolerable?mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Increasingly recent research has found improved perceptions toward coyotes (Stevens et al, 1994;Vaske and Needham, 2007;Jackman and Rutberg, 2015). Jackman and Rutberg (2015) found that mean acceptance of coyotes shifted from negative to positive (in a scale of −2 to +2, −0.28 in 2005 to 0.19 in 2012) and support for eradication of coyotes dropped from 18% in 2005 to 6% in 2012. They also reported decreases in mean acceptance of lethal coyote control from 2005 to 2012 (0.01 to −0.31 in a −2 to +2 scale).…”

Section: Do Stakeholders Consider Risks Tolerable?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Are We Coexisting With Carnivores in the American West?

Lute

Carter

2020

Front. Ecol. Evol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Human-carnivore coexistence is an oft-stated goal but assumptions about what constitutes coexistence can lead to goal misalignment and undermine policy and program efficacy. Questions about how to define coexistence remain and specific goals and methods for reaching coexistence require refining. Co-adaptation, where humans adapt to carnivores and vice versa, is a novel socioecological framework for operationalizing coexistence but has yet to be comprehensively examined. We explored co-adaptation and two additional coexistence criteria through analysis of three case studies involving large carnivores in the American West, each addressing differing approaches on how and what it means to coexist with carnivores: Mexican gray wolves (Canis lupus baileyi) in Arizona and New Mexico, grizzly bears (Ursus arctos horribilis) in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem and coyotes (Canis latrans) throughout the American West. We used a multiple case study design that analyzed within and across cases to understand coexistence broadly. For each case, we asked (1) are landscapes shared in space and/or time, (2) is co-adaptation occurring and (3) do stakeholders consider risks tolerable? To identify whether coexistence criteria are met, we investigated peer-reviewed published articles and news media and conducted key informant interviews. We found clear evidence to support land-sharing between humans and coyotes and limited spatial overlap between humans and grizzly bears and Mexican gray wolves. Co-adaptation was variable for wolves, possible with bears and clearly evident with coyotes. Tolerable risk levels are likely achievable for bears and coyotes based on the available literature assessing risk perceptions and tolerance. But disagreement regarding risk management is a driver of conflict over wolves and persistent barrier to achieving coexistence among diverse stakeholders. Patterns in coexistence criteria did not emerge based on taxonomy or geography but may be influenced by body size and behavioral plasticity. The common key to coexistence with each considered carnivore may be in more equitable distribution of costs and benefits among highly diverse stakeholders. Better understanding of these three coexistence criteria and innovative tools to achieve them will improve coexistence capacity with controversial carnivores on public and private lands in diverse American West contexts and beyond.

show abstract

“…Past studies of perceptions of wildlife among the general population focused largely on the effects of socio‐demographic factors, with gender, age, pet ownership, and rural–urban childhood backgrounds having emerged as the most commonly studied factors (Clark et al ). Among these socio‐demographic factors, gender was a strong predictor of wildlife attitudes; women exhibited stronger emotional attachment to animals than men did, whereas men were more willing to exploit wildlife and support lethal management of coyotes ( C. latrans; Kellert , Kellert and Berry , Tucker and Bond , Jackman and Rutberg ). With the exception of some invertebrate and pest taxa, pet owners view most wildlife species in a more positive light than do non–pet owners (Bjerke et al ).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Hunting interacts with socio‐demographic predictors of human perceptions of urban coyotes

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recent research suggests hunting participation interacts with other variables (e.g., birdwatching participation) to shape attitudes about wildlife. We build on this research by evaluating how hunting participation interacted with key variables to predict affectual attitudes toward coyotes (Canis latrans), support for coyotes on the landscape, and support for coyote management approaches in urban North Carolina, USA. We conducted surveys of urban hunters and nonhunting urban residents during 2015, and modeled relationships between respondent attributes and perceptions of coyotes. Among nonhunters, men liked coyotes more than women did, but the relationship was reversed among hunters. Similarly, men supported killing coyotes more than women did, but the difference was less pronounced among hunters. Pet owners liked coyotes and opposed killing coyotes more than non-pet owners did, but those differences disappeared among hunters. Having a rural background predicted lower tolerance for coyotes among hunters but not nonhunters. Finally, age was negatively related to support for lethal coyote management among hunters but positively related to support among nonhunters. Participation in hunting may moderate how socio-demographic variables predict perceptions of coyotes and change or reverse previously described relationships between these variables and perceptions of wildlife.

show abstract

Shifts in Attitudes Toward Coyotes on the Urbanized East Coast: The Cape Cod Experience, 2005–2012

Cited by 24 publications

References 48 publications

Modeling Perceived Risk from Coyotes Among Chicago Residents

Modeling Perceived Risk from Coyotes Among Chicago Residents

Are We Coexisting With Carnivores in the American West?

Hunting interacts with socio‐demographic predictors of human perceptions of urban coyotes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About