People or predators? Comparing habitat‐dependent effects of hunting and large carnivores on the abundance of North America's top mesocarnivore

Variation in animal abundance is shaped by scale‐dependent habitat, competition, and anthropogenic influences. Coyotes Canis latrans have dramatically increased in abundance while expanding their range over the past 100 years. Management goals typically seek to lower coyote populations to reduce their threats to humans, pets, livestock and sensitive prey. Despite their outsized ecological and social roles in the Americas, the factors affecting coyote abundance across their range remain unclear. We fit Royle–Nichols abundance models at two spatial scales in a Bayesian hierarchical framework to three years of data from 4587 camera trap sites arranged in 254 arrays across the contiguous USA to assess how habitat, large carnivores, anthropogenic development and hunting regulations affect coyote abundance. Coyote abundance was highest in southwestern USA and lowest in the northeast. Abundance responded to some factors as expected, including positive (soft mast, agriculture, grass/shrub habitat, urban–natural edge) and negative (latitude and forest cover) relationships. Colonization date had a negative relationship, suggesting coyote populations have not reached carrying capacity in recently colonized regions. Several relationships were scale‐dependent, including urban development, which was negative at local (100‐m) scales but positive at larger (5‐km) scales. Large carnivore effects were habitat‐dependent, with sometimes opposing relationships manifesting across variation in forest cover and urban development. Coyote abundance was higher where human hunting was permitted, and this relationship was strongest at local scales. These results, including a national map of coyote abundance, update ecological understanding of coyotes and can inform coyote management at local and landscape scales. These findings expand results from local studies suggesting that directly hunting coyotes does not decrease their abundance and may actually increase it. Ongoing large carnivore recoveries globally will likely affect subordinate carnivore abundance, but not in universally negative ways, and our work demonstrates how such effects can be habitat and scale dependent.