Investigating the Interactions Between Carnivores and People in Cities

This post was written by Olivia Bradberry, an Urban Wildlife Institute intern who is investigating the causes and consequences of human-carnivore interactions in urban areas.

It’s 10 p.m. on a chilly Chicago night. I’m sitting in a car, watching a man in layers of warm clothes walk his small terrier next to an empty lot in Humbolt Park. The coyote I’m tracking suddenly appears, trotting across the road toward the man and his dog. I hold my breath, waiting for a confrontation.

The man, head buried in the collar of his jacket, doesn’t look up. The terrier keeps sniffing the ground. The coyote walks toward some train tracks beyond the empty lot. The parties pass within 10 feet of each other—they’re either oblivious or not showing obvious signs of caring. I’m shocked!

Then again, if I’ve learned one thing from my time researching city coyotes and other animals, it’s that people and animals often share space in cryptic and surprising ways. And, just as importantly, people’s reactions to these animals can vary a lot, from excitement to fear or even—well, nothing.

A coyote in a Chicago cemetery. Photo courtesy of Olivia Bradberry.

The Behavior of People Affects Wildlife

Our reactions and behaviors to situations like the one described above can greatly influence the lives of animals. What would you do in the above situation? Your response might affect where and how urban wild animals live, forage, or breed.

The process of encouraging wildlife in some places while discouraging them in others is called wildlife management. Wildlife management can include actions such as scaring animals away, removing food sources, reaching out to the public about animal health and safety, or even euthanizing animals. In some ways, we all take part in wildlife management, whether we realize it or not.

During my studies/work, I began to wonder where these varied attitudes toward wildlife came from and, on a larger scale, how would they play out affecting animal presence and health throughout the city, or in cities other than Chicago?

The Human Part of Human-Wildlife Interactions

These questions pushed me to pursue human dimensions research at the University of Connecticut as part of a large National Science Foundation-based study led by Lincoln Park Zoo scientists. One main assumption of the project is that human and animal behavior both contribute to human-wildlife interactions.

Often, when we study issues surrounding wildlife, we focus on species behaviors, their locations, and what they are eating. When we do that, we tend to miss important factors. Also relevant is how people feel about animals, how those feelings and beliefs developed, and what actions people are taking in response to what they observe. Human dimensions of wildlife, the social science that studies human perceptions about and decisions that affect wildlife, is quite important when considering urban human-wildlife interactions and wildlife management in cities.

Raccoons, as captured on a motion-activated wildlife camera.

That’s why I’m now interviewing different types of wildlife professionals who manage urban wildlife. Information learned from my interviews will be used in combination with wildlife camera data gathered by Lincoln Park Zoo and its partners to gain a more complete picture of why human-carnivore interactions happen, how they are managed in different cities, and how they affect both animals and people.

Hopefully, this research will help us figure out how we can decrease wildlife activity in areas where it is least wanted and how humans and wildlife might live side-by-side in safe ways.

Exploring Unique Urban Ecosystems

My research is focused in four U.S. cities—Chicago, Phoenix, San Francisco, and Washington, D.C. The research team chose to focus on coyotes (Canis latrans) and raccoons (Procyon lotor) because both animals are common across the country and in urban areas.

These cities, all represented in the zoo’s Urban Wildlife Information Network, have unique ecosystems and histories with coyotes and raccoons. Members of UWIN use the same research methods consistently in every city to collect and share data about urban wildlife, including pictures taken in each city by motion-activated cameras.

The interviews focus on management goals, descriptions of common raccoon and coyote interactions with humans, and descriptions of who normally calls about these animals and why. These topics provide an idea of scenarios that lead to human-wildlife interactions, and what motivates different management activities in response (e.g., public perceptions, manager protocols, or local laws). I also mapped locations that were described by participants (interviewees) as where people tend to call about raccoon and coyote sightings, which can be compared to information obtained from wildlife camera data.

The maps of where managers receive calls about wildlife (left) and where we see animals on cameras (right) may look very different, but each method can provide important perspectives on the instances of human-carnivore interactions in cities. The map on the left is a hypothetical sample of what the mapping information looks like.

This multi-city approach allows for assessments between cities with different cultures, infrastructures, ecosystems, and histories of raccoon and coyote presence to help us understand reasons behind responses to human-carnivore interactions.

What We’ve Learned So Far

Here are some of the things the research shows, based on preliminary results:

Resident reactions to raccoons and coyotes may be different based on the history and prevalence of each animal in each city.

In Chicago and Washington, D.C., where coyote sightings are still somewhat unexpected because coyotes began to live in the cities relatively recently, managers perceive that people tend to have more concerned or cautious reactions to the animal.

In Phoenix and San Francisco, where coyotes have been common for a longer time, managers perceive that people are less concerned.

In contrast, raccoons are commonplace in all the cities except Phoenix, and managers perceived people’s reactions to raccoons in Phoenix differently than in the other cities. Phoenix managers noted that some callers are surprised to see raccoons and wonder if the animal is “supposed” to be there. “People are not seeing these animals on a regular basis, and that’s one of the reasons that they call us…they’re shocked that there’s a raccoon,” one interviewee shared.

Raccoon climbing.

If people living in cities view themselves as a part of nature, their perceptions of wild animals may be more favorable.

 Some participants said that people who feel like they are part of an urban ecosystem expect to see wild animals. They are thus less likely to be disturbed by an animal’s presence and to call wildlife managers to remove the animal. “Some of the (people living in) more natural landscape feel like their area is more part of the natural habitat, and we tend to get a lot more friendliness towards wild animals in those… areas,” one participant explained.

Overall, interview participants use their own best judgment to respond to human-wildlife interactions, but choices related to human-wildlife interactions made by certain individuals can require managers to respond to some areas of the city more than others.

For example, some participants mentioned that the neighbors of people who feed wild animals (either purposely or by accident) are more likely to experience issues with wildlife themselves and call managers. Another example is that people with children or pets might be more concerned about safety of their family and, therefore, more likely to call managers after seeing a raccoon or coyote.

More Patterns Discovered Through Mapping

Interview participants noted that calls tended to originate from neighborhoods near natural areas, farms, and golf courses—places where coyotes and raccoons like to spend time because there’s more food and fewer interactions with humans.

Several participants also reported more calls from areas with bigger yards and more parks. By reviewing the motion-activated camera maps and directly hearing from residents themselves in other components of the project, we will continue to piece together patterns and answers that will help us see the ways in which humans and animals  interact with each other, and determine if lessons learned in one city can apply to others.

After all, animals are neighbors to humans in every city, whether we like it or not.

Live Wildlife Friendly With Lincoln Park Zoo

If you are looking to be the best neighbor possible to the coyotes, raccoons, and other animals that share your city, consider these actions: stash your trash; observe, don’t disturb; and protect important habitat. Learn more here.