Widespread mesopredator effects after wolf extirpation
Abstract
Herein, we posit a link between the ecological extinction of wolves in the American West and the expansion in distribution, increased abundance, and inflated ecological influence of coyotes. We investigate the hypothesis that the release of this mesopredator from wolf suppression across much of the American West is affecting, via predation and competition, a wide range of faunal elements including mammals, birds, and reptiles. We document various cases of coyote predation on or killing of threatened and endangered species or species of conservation concern with the potential to alter community structure. The apparent long-term decline of leporids in the American West, for instance, might be linked to increased coyote predation. The coyote effects we discuss could be context dependent and may also be influenced by varying bottom-up factors in systems without wolves. We make recommendations for ecological research in light of ongoing wolf recovery in parts of the West. Strong ecological effects of wolf repatriation may not occur outside of large reserves where wolves are prevented from achieving ecologically effective densities because of wolf hunting or wolf control programs. Finally, we advocate for more studies relating to the management of coyotes that compare exploited and unexploited populations and evaluate the influence of anthropogenic food subsidies on coyote densities.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Coyote depredation after wolf extirpation has been linked to declines of jackrabbit, cottontail, and pygmy rabbit populations, among others.
“coyote depredation after wolf extirpation has been linked to the decline of jackrabbit Lepus spp., cottontail Sylvilagus spp.and pygmy rabbit Brachylagus idahoensis populations, among others (Ripple et al. 2013).”
From A continental scale trophic cascade from wolves through coyotes to foxes (2015) · cites this paper as Ripple et al. 2013
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 91 · Cited by 179
- Authors
- Ripple, W. J., Wirsing, A. J., Wilmers, C. C., & Letnic, M.
- Affiliations
- Oregon State University (US)
- University of Washington (US)
- University of California, Santa Cruz (US)
- UNSW Sydney (AU)
- Corresponding author
- Ripple, William J.
- Venue
- Biological Conservation
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2013-04
- Volume
- 160
- Pages
- 70-79
- ISSN
- 0006-3207 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2017799189
- Cited by
- 179
- References
- 91
- Citations by year
- 2026: 9 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 17 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 14 · 2016: 18 · 2015: 18 · 2014: 17 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 1
- FWCI
- 16.79
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Biological Conservation (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Science Foundation
- Australian Research Council
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Wildlife Ecology and Conservation
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Animal Ecology and Behavior Studies
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Rangeland and Wildlife Management
- Keywords
- mesopredator release, coyote, wolf reintroduction, coyote predation, threatened species, predator-prey interactions, competition (biology), American West, coyote management, anthropogenic food subsidies, bottom-up control
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review