•  
  •  
 

Publication Date

8-19-2026

Context. Coyotes have confounded lethal-control efforts for over a century, initially as they preyed on livestock the Midwest rangelands in the early 1900s. In the past century, coyotes have expanded their range across the US into rural, suburban, even urban areas in the eastern US where populations are increasing along with calls for management from communities.  Here we examine anthropogenic food subsidy reduction as a possible management tool for coyotes. Compelling explanations for coyote territory-size variation have both a food-availability component and a contender pressure, or competition, component. These factors also influence pack group-size. Ultimately, competition for limited food resources may determine the density of the coyote population.

Aims.  To explore this idea, we examined the effects of anthropogenic food resource availability on coyotes in urban, suburban, and rural areas in Rhode Island, USA.

Methods. We GPS-collared and tracked 16 coyotes that were, and 15 coyotes that were not, heavily dependent on large, reliable anthropogenic food subsidies.  Anthropogenic subsidies used by coyotes included livestock or deer carcass dumps, farms with small free-range livestock, commercial restaurant garbage, and feral cat colonies.  We compared territory sizes for coyotes living in packs that exploited anthropogenic food subsidies vs. those that did not.

Key results. In all cases, the territory sizes of resident coyotes with no detectable anthropogenic food subsidies were 59% larger ( = 11.9 km2) than those of coyotes with territories containing large reliable anthropogenic subsidies ( = 7.5 km2, 95% MCP home range; Wilcoxon test p=0.009).  The total area for high-use regions, or core areas, of unsubsidized coyotes also was 71% larger ( = 3.6 km2) than those with no detectable subsidies ( = 2.1 km2, 95% LSCV contours, p=0.005).  In five cases we were able to remove or add subsidies during the tracking periods of individual coyotes and achieved the same result: territory sizes were smaller when food subsidies were present and larger when subsidies were absent.

Conclusions. Heavily food-subsidized coyotes defend smaller territories.  Coyote territories expand to support the group if subsidies are removed, or are absent.  Related research shows adult pack size stays relatively constant though these changes. It follows that the density of coyote packs, or reproductive groups, should increase when large reliable anthropogenic food subsidies are present and decrease when subsidies are removed.

Management implications.  Reducing or eliminating anthropogenic food subsidies where they occur in communities with mixed rural-urban landscapes will very likely lower coyote population density. It is a non-lethal strategy for sustainable management of coyotes that leverages their inherent ability to adjust population size based on available food.

DOI

10.15365/1932-7048.1401

Download

Share

COinS