Will an artificial scent boundary prevent coyote intrusion?

Abstract

AbstractHighly territorial species such as coyotes (Canis latrans) use scent‐marks to delineate boundaries, and it has been suggested that canids may be repelled from areas by using human‐placed scent‐marks. To evaluate the potential of artificial scent‐marks as an area repellent, we first established treatment and control plots within the Welder Wildlife Refuge in southern Texas, USA. There, we used Global Positioning System collars with 15‐min acquisition rates on 3 coyotes to evaluate differential coyote response to artificial scent‐marks and control areas within coyote territories. Second, to directly evaluate behaviors, we observed the responses of 8 coyotes to control and treatment plots within 1‐ha pens at the Predator Research Facility in Logan, Utah, USA. In treatment conditions, a technician walked the boundary of the simulated territory and sprayed coyote urine. In control conditions, a technician walked along the boundary but did not distribute artificial scent‐marks. In the field, coyotes visited treatment plots more than control plots (P = 0.09) and traveled within treatment plots more than control plots (P = 0.05). In direct observations, coyotes investigated treated boundaries and spent more time at them (P = 0.001). Coyotes also visited the interiors of treatment areas nearly twice as often as control areas (P = 0.013). Sample sizes were limited, but based on these results, we cannot recommend using artificial territories (delineated with human‐placed coyote urine) to repel coyotes from areas where resource protection is needed. © 2011 The Wildlife Society.