Coyotes live longer in densely populated human areas

Urban coyotes are thriving in cities, but not for the reasons one might expect. A recent study reveals that human-related factors, rather than access to natural habitats, have a stronger impact on their survival. 

Researchers tracking coyotes in Chicago discovered that densely populated human areas are linked to longer coyote lifespans, overturning the conventional belief that wildlife fares better in more natural settings.

Human presence plays a surprising role

“What we found was really interesting, in that the societal characteristics seem to play a much more important role in predicting coyote survival time than the environmental characteristics,” said Emily Zepeda, the study’s lead author and a postdoctoral scholar at The Ohio State University. 

“And then we found this positive effect of human population density on survival time. Both of those things are unexpected because we usually associate human activity with detrimental effects on wildlife.”

The Urban Coyote Research Project

The study, recently published in the journal Urban Ecosystems, stems from the Urban Coyote Research Project, a long-term study of coyote ecology in the Chicago Metropolitan Area. 

This research, led by wildlife ecologist Stan Gehrt, has monitored the behavior and ecology of Chicago’s estimated 4,000 coyotes, offering rare insights into how they adapt to urban life.

Tracking coyote survival

For this study, researchers analyzed movement data from 214 coyotes tracked between 2013 and 2021. Using the length of time each coyote was monitored as a proxy for survival, they evaluated societal and environmental factors such as neighborhood income, human density, road density, and proximity to parks.

The findings revealed that human population density positively influenced coyote survival. Coyotes in areas with low human density tended to have shorter lifespans, while those in densely populated areas lived longer. Interestingly, the interaction between income and density also played a role. 

In low-density areas, income had little effect on survival, likely due to the lack of human presence. However, in moderate- to high-density neighborhoods, coyotes in lower-income areas were 1.5 times more likely to survive to age two than those in wealthier areas.

Resources and competition in urban settings

The researchers theorize that higher human population density provides urban coyotes with essential resources like food and shelter, helping them endure harsh conditions such as Chicago winters. 

“We’ve hypothesized that population density may have a positive effect because it’s actually providing resources like human-related structures or food that allow coyotes to weather the harsh conditions of the winter, which is a major mortality factor for Chicago coyotes,” Zepeda explained.

However, these benefits may come at a cost in higher-income areas, where vegetation and better waste management can attract more coyotes, leading to increased competition and disease transmission. 

“There might be more individuals in those areas, but survival time may be shorter there,” Zepeda said. “You might die younger in an area where there are a lot of competitors.”

Adaptability of coyotes

Surprisingly, the study found no significant link between natural habitats and coyote survival. Parks and nature preserves, often assumed to be ideal environments for coyotes, did not seem to offer a survival advantage. 

“Anecdotally, we see really high densities of coyotes in nature preserves and urban parks. That’s often where you see coyotes in the city if you see them at all,” Zepeda said.

The researchers speculate that this finding could result from a variety of factors, including limitations in how habitat types are classified on city maps or more frequent hunting and trapping in natural areas. 

Alternatively, it may highlight the adaptability of coyotes, which seem capable of thriving in urbanized environments despite their preference for natural habitats. 

“It could speak to how adaptable they are that they might prefer natural habitat, but at least in terms of survival, they can do just as well in more urbanized areas,” Zepeda added.

Societal factors and urban ecosystems

This study adds to growing evidence that societal factors affecting human populations also influence urban ecosystems. The presence or absence of humans, combined with the conditions in which they live, may overshadow natural influences on wildlife survival. 

Gehrt’s long-term research emphasizes the importance of understanding these dynamics as urban areas expand.

As urban ecosystems continue to evolve, studies like this provide critical insights into how wildlife interacts with human populations. 

Further research could explore specific societal factors – such as waste management practices or public attitudes toward coyotes – and their influence on urban wildlife.

By better understanding these relationships, cities can develop strategies to foster coexistence between humans and animals, creating urban environments where both can thrive.

—–

Like what you read? Subscribe to our newsletter for engaging articles, exclusive content, and the latest updates.

Check us out on EarthSnap, a free app brought to you by Eric Ralls and Earth.com.

—–