Golf Courses as Potential Habitat for Urban Coyotes

Abstract

Wildlife increasingly live in and adapt to urban landscapes as natural habitat becomes urbanized. Many carnivores take advantage of undeveloped or open developed areas called green spaces, such as parks or cemeteries, to meet their requirements in urban areas. For instance, coyotes (Canis latrans) expanded their range across most of North America into metropolitan areas and even within highly developed areas, where home ranges of coyotes are associated with green spaces or areas that humans used least. Golf courses are a unique type of green space within urban landscapes that can provide cover and prey for coyotes, as well as limit human presence, especially at night and during the winter off‐season. We estimated selection of golf courses and urban green spaces by coyotes within the Chicago Metropolitan Area, Illinois, USA (2009 to 2012) that had access to golf courses (home range composed of >3% golf course; n = 30) using radiotelemetry. We found that coyotes selected for golf courses more at night and during the off‐season, indicating that they were responding to the decreased human presence during this time. Spatial status (resident vs. transient) and the amount of developed land in a home range did not influence selection of golf courses. Conversely, selection of urban green spaces was greater in the summer for transients and with proportion of developed land, but not influenced by time of day. However, there was considerable intra‐ and inter‐individual variability in coyote selection of both golf courses and urban green spaces. Individual variability could be driven by coyote characteristics (i.e., prey preferences, natal habitat, or social status) or by golf course and urban green space characteristics (i.e., landscaping, golfing hours, average human occupancy, or tolerance by personnel). © 2020 The Wildlife Society.

Habitat patch size and tree species richness shape the bird community in urban green spaces of rapidly urbanizing Himalayan foothill region of India

“…Both common and threatened species play significant role in urban ecosystem functioning and provides multitude of ecosystem services. For example, in an experimental study conducted across three towns of UK reported higher amount of carcass removal in the presence of three urban vertebrate scavengers than in their absence (Inger et al, 2016).Varying in size and shape green spaces in urban areas ranges from city parks, remnant forest patches, golf courses to cemeteries act as hotspots of biodiversity (Gallo et al, 2017;Wurth et al, 2020). Variety of green habitats in urban areas covered partially or completely by any type of vegetation under private or public ownership are collectively known as urban green spaces.…”

Predictors of Mammalian Diversity in the New York Metropolitan Area

“…First, we found that Shannon-Wiener diversity was higher in study sites where the dominant habitat was an urban natural habitat rather than a human-altered habitat. Although some mammals may thrive in human-altered habitats, like golf courses and cemeteries (Gallo et al, 2017;Wurth et al, 2020), most mammals tend to have higher persistence in urban natural areas, or habitats that consist of large patches of secondary growth forest and shrubs (Atwood et al, 2004;Baker and Harris, 2007). It has also been found that manicured lawns and artificial nocturnal illumination, as seen in parks, golf courses, and cemeteries, may limit dispersal (Mahan and O'Connell, 2005;Fitzgibbon et al, 2007).…”

Habituation and tolerance in coyotes (Canis latrans), a flexible urban predator

“…Understanding how animals habituate requires detailed data on individual and group‐level behavior, a challenging undertaking with species that have large home ranges, such as most carnivorans. Indeed, most of the work on urban coyotes has relied on tagging technology for tracking individuals (Breck et al, 2019; Gehrt et al, 2011; Gese et al, 1989; Poessel et al, 2013; Shivik et al, 1997; Thompson et al, 2021; Wurth et al, 2020). While remote telemetry and tagging yields high‐quality and fine‐grained data on animal movement and ecology, it is costly both in terms of budgets and impact to telemetered animals (Burrows et al, 1994; Hopkins & Milton, 2016).…”