ShareThis Page
Outdoors

Bob Frye: Coyotes, foxes learn to co-exist

Everybody Adventures
| Saturday, March 3, 2018, 12:41 a.m.
Red foxes generally haven't fared well when coyotes enter the scene. The species are capable of living side by side in urban and suburban landscapes, however, according to one study.
Pixabay
Red foxes generally haven't fared well when coyotes enter the scene. The species are capable of living side by side in urban and suburban landscapes, however, according to one study.

Maybe you were the older brother who liked to dish out noogies. Maybe you were the younger sibling who had to endure them, at least until you caught up, size-wise.

In the end, you learned to live together.

Urban coyotes and red foxes apparently are learning to do the same.

Easy living appears to be the reason why.

Traditionally, coyotes and foxes have not co-existed well. Matt Lovallo, chief of the game mammals section for the Pennsylvania Game Commission, said surges in coyote populations over the last 30 years generally have coincided with a decline in fox numbers.

The larger predator traditionally outcompetes his smaller cousin at best, and preys on him at worst, Lovallo said.

There appears to be a new deal in place, though.

Researchers from the University of Wisconsin-Madison trapped and tagged coyotes and red foxes in the Midwest. The study area was 27 square miles and included the university campus, surrounding neighborhoods, commercial districts and some natural areas.

They followed 11 coyotes and 12 red foxes over two years, monitoring things like home ranges and habitat usage.

Their work recently appeared in the journal PLOS One.

What they found is — where food is abundant around people — the species coexist.

They didn't necessarily roam the same portions of the suburbs at the same times. Coyotes preferred areas with more undeveloped space, including woods, grassland and emergent wetlands. Red foxes, on the other hand, stuck to moderately and highly developed areas.

In some ways, the habitat preferred by the coyotes was better, in that it offered less risk from people. Collisions with vehicles are the No. 1 mortality for coyotes in the study, for example.

Less-developed areas preferred by coyotes had less of that traffic.

That's evidence that as the apex predator in that environment, coyotes still were determining where foxes could go, researchers concluded.

"Foxes largely avoided areas that were preferred by coyotes, even though foxes frequently used similar areas within their home ranges, suggesting that on the landscape level, a degree of interspecific spatial partitioning may be occurring," they wrote in their paper.

But their territories sometimes did overlap.

And it looks as though the two species are learning to share space.

Food is the reason. There's just enough of it to go around.

"More abundant resources appear to allow both species to display smaller home ranges, which may allow for these two traditionally competitive species to coexist within urban environments with a similar dynamic to rural coyotes and red foxes, but on a smaller scale with potentially less competitive interactions," researchers said.

Bob Frye is the everybodyadventures.com editor. Reach him at 412-216-0193 or bfrye@535mediallc.com. See other stories, blogs, videos and more at everybodyadventures.com.

Article by Bob Frye, Everybody Adventures,

http://www.everybodyadventures.com

Copyright © 535media, LLC

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.

click me