Distribution of Coyote Species in an Urban or Human Transformed Area

Abstract
Changes in the natural geography adversely impact the existence of the wildlife. It is even worse when the development is about the creation of new cities, urban centers, agricultural and industrial sectors in Calgary. The Coyotes’ risk factor increases with every square meter encroachment of their natural habitats that happen to be forests. Coyotes are in danger in North America owing to their characteristics and small size in the wider wild dog family. Their shy and noninvolvement in human activities make them an accepted urban-carnivore in Calgary although their numbers are reducing gradually. By employing statistical analysis, this research result proofed coyote habitat distribution within the suburban and urban areas in Calgary, while they are facing gradual extinction, human conflict, and urban adsorption. People are the major killers of the species with many deaths occurring as a result of accidents, direct hunting, and poisoning. A comparison of the three modeling led to the LR model as the best predictor for habitat selection (ROC=0.913, Kappa=0.521, Corr=0.729, Sensitivity=0.767). If adopted, the results of this study can be used as a valuable tool in implementing conservation and management strategies for coyotes in the urban settings in Calgary.

Habitat Fragmentation
Habitat loss and fragmentation due to industrialization and urbanization are the primary threats to biodiversity and coyote population in Calgary today. According to Atwood (2006), multiple factors cause these adversities, but the greatest is the loss of habitat for the wildlife.

According to the research, many regions within and without Calgary have lost the natural ecology to urban centers, homesteads, and agricultural facilities. A defragmentation that begun with the introduction of suburban settings around the major companies and administration centers have now flown into all extents pushing the forested areas to the distant horizons. The research results indicate that only less than 30% of the natural forest is available today. However, it is about to be depleted with the recent rate of urbanization if proactive measures were not to be enacted.
As more forests are converted to secondary uses, habitats for the wild animals are lost. Just like the other wildlife, coyotes are sensitive to habitats and consider certain natural resources like water and ground cover for their survival. Habitat fragmentation influences them by splitting members into smaller groups and breaking the breeding units. With the reduction of the foraging ranges, access to prey and water sources, and increasing crowding and competition within the fragments, Coyotes have been exposed to all forms of risks (Riley et al., 2003; Sears, 2003). W The species have resulted to surviving in the urban settings, adjustment to breeding units and savaging without attacking humans and pets cannot be achieved. This is the primary cause of the massive reduction (Young and Malpeli, nd).
According to Soverel, Coops, White, & Wulder (2009), increasing urbanization in the Canada is linked to the reduced population densities of coyotes and their increasing dependence on human-related food items. Four forms of landscape fragmentation have led to this eventuality. These are natural wetland fragmentation, anthropogenic inequalities, natural catastrophes and adjustments due to modernization. Further, Poessel et al. (2013) found coyotes’ subsidization of diet with garbage, anthropogenic food items and domestic pets in urban areas as resulting from lack of enough prey within the natural habitats. Analyses conducted in the previous research indicate Calgary metropolitan cities’ defragmented ecology critical in determining the human-coyote survival and the future of the species. The degree of landscape fragmentation can provide valuable information for land use, conservation, and urban planning efforts.

References
Atwood, T. (2006). The influence of habitat patch attributes on coyote group size and interaction in a fragmented landscape. Canadian Journal Of Zoology, 84(1), 80-87. http://dx.doi.org/10.1139/z05-180
Poessel, S., Gese, E., & Young, J. (2016). Environmental factors influencing the occurrence of coyotes and conflicts in urban areas. Landscape And Urban Planning, 157, 259-269. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2016.05.022
Riley, S. P. D., Sauvajot. R. M., Fuller, T. K., York, E. C., Kamradt, D. A., Bromley, C., & Wayne, R. K. (2003). Effects of Urbanization and Habitat Fragmentation on Bobcats and Coyotes in Southern California. Conservation Biology, 17:566–576. http://dx.doi.org/10.1046/j.1523-1739.2003. 01458.x
Sears, Hilary J. et al., (2003). Landscape influence on Canis morphological and ecological variation in a Coyote-Wolf C. lupus × latrans hybrid zone, southeastern Ontario. Canadian Field-Naturalist 117(4): 591-600.
Soverel, N., Coops, N., White, J., & Wulder, M. (2009). Characterizing the forest fragmentation of Canada’s national parks. Environmental Monitoring And Assessment, 164(1-4), 481-499. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10661-009-0908-7
Young, S. & Malpeli, K. (n.d). Coyote Ecology and Conflicts with Humans across the Urban Wildland Gradient: Identifying the Potential Impacts of Changing Land Use (pp. 1-15).