IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/rsocxx/v16y2021i1p127-139.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The rules we make that coyotes break

Author

Listed:
  • Shelley M. Alexander
  • Dianne L. Draper

Abstract

We used mixed-methods to explore human experiences and motivations towards co-existence with coyotes in the Foothills Parklands of Alberta, Canada. Traditionally agricultural, this is one of Canada’s fastest urbanising landscapes, offering insight into a plurality of viewpoints and feedback loops related to the social construction of and co-existence with coyotes. Invoking theories of place and transgression, we provided a new lens on the problem of human–coyote entanglements. We interviewed 60 respondents (27 males; 33 females) on 48 properties (agricultural = 23; rural residential = 25). We posed closed- and open-ended questions exploring experience, perception, beliefs, sentiments and actions. Selected data were analysed here. Our word analysis neatly depicts the tension surrounding human engagements with coyotes. Respondents articulated critical distances reflecting ‘home place’. When coyotes transgressed the boundaries of the latter, respondents considered this un-natural behaviour or a biosecurity threat punishable by death. Landuse type, gender and prior depredation did not predict coyote killing. However, female respondents appeared more likely to view killing as ‘OK’ after a depredation event. Understanding motivations for killing requires further analysis and is essential to realising co-existence.

Suggested Citation

  • Shelley M. Alexander & Dianne L. Draper, 2021. "The rules we make that coyotes break," Contemporary Social Science, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(1), pages 127-139, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:rsocxx:v:16:y:2021:i:1:p:127-139
    DOI: 10.1080/21582041.2019.1616108
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/21582041.2019.1616108
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/21582041.2019.1616108?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:rsocxx:v:16:y:2021:i:1:p:127-139. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/rsoc21 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.