Coyote Killing Contests: Persistence of Differences among Oregonians
Open accessAbstract
Management practices of nonhuman animals in nature (“wildlife”) are globally controversial. In some places, individuals believe it should be up to individual landowners to “manage” wildlife. In others, wildlife is seen as belonging to everyone and should be respected, or least hunted ethically. Wildlife killing contests are legal in most U.S. states. Coyote killing contests take place in many of them and several states have enacted legislation to ban them. In Oregon, efforts have failed three times. This paper is a critical discourse analysis of testimonies in the 2021 Oregon hearings. Opposition to the bill is analyzed according to five psychological rationalizations to unpack the pro-contest arguments as an example of rural resistance. The findings suggest unpacking these as more productive for activist groups when creating strategies to counter pro-killing beliefs.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
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?
Residents of rural areas tend to show less polarization and a greater consensus on negative connotations, sometimes even engaging in coyote killing competitions.
“Residents of rural areas tend to show less polarization and a greater consensus on negative connotations, sometimes even engaging in coyote killing competitions (Merskin, 2022).”
From Of Rarity and Symbolism: Understanding Human Perceptions of Charismatic Color Morphs (2024) · cites this paper as Merskin, 2022
Section 2.1, “Coyote in Cultures” (page unavailable), describes persistent negative beliefs about coyotes in ranching and farming communities, and the paper examines rural supporters of coyote killing contests. It does not establish that rural residents are less polarized or have greater consensus; Section 6, “Conclusions” (page unavailable), discusses opposing views on the contests. (LLM, conf=0.84)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
Techniques of Neutralization: A Theory of Delinquency
Sykes, G. M., & Matza, D. (1957) · American Sociological Review · doi:10.2307/2089195 · Cited by 5,845 · cited 1× · see citing works
“While Sykes and Matza (1957) write of delinquency and law breaking, some of the fundamental concepts apply in the current study when considering the process of rationalization that accompanies an act that departs not only from norms of many people in general, but in particular to hunting community…”
BackgroundRojo, L. (2017) · doi:10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190212896.013.18 · Cited by 3,196
Human Culture and Large Carnivore Conservation in North America
Kellert, S., Black, M., Rush, C. R., & Bath, A. (1996) · Conservation Biology · doi:10.1046/j.1523-1739.1996.10040977.x · Cited by 447 · see citing works
The Value of Life: Biological Diversity and Human Society
Leahy, M. P. T. (1997) · Biodiversity and Conservation · doi:10.1023/a:1018358218144 · Cited by 394
The Relationship of Animal Abuse to Violence and Other Forms of Antisocial Behavior
Arluke, A., Levin, J., Luke, C., & Ascione, F. (1999) · Journal of Interpersonal Violence · doi:10.1177/088626099014009004 · Cited by 307 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Studies have repeatedly linked animal abuse to child and partner abuse as well as more psychopathic killing later in life (Arluke et al. 1999).”
BackgroundAmerican Attitudes Toward and Knowledge of Animals: An Update
Kellert, S. (1985) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-94-009-4998-0_11 · Cited by 276 · see citing works
The Archaeology of Animal Bones
O'Connor, T. (2000) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.38-2811 · Cited by 269 · see citing works
Social Ecology and Behavior of Coyotes
Bekoff, M., & Wells, M. C. (1986) · Advances in the study of behavior · doi:10.1016/s0065-3454(08)60193-x · Cited by 185 · see citing works
The effectiveness of selective removal of breeding coyotes in reducing sheep predation
Blejwas, K., Sacks, B., Jaeger, M., & McCullough, D. R. (2002) · doi:10.2307/3803178 · Cited by 90 · cited 2×
“This is despite research that demonstrates killing coyotes isn’t actually the best way to control them (Edwards 2019; see also Shivik 2014), and in fact mass killing stresses the pack and results in more pups (Blejwas et al. 2002).”
BackgroundGregg, J., & Quaife, M. M. (n.d.) · doi:10.2307/1898637 · Cited by 71
Felony or act of justice? – Illegal killing of large carnivores as defiance of authorities
Pohja-Mykrä, M. (2016) · doi:10.1016/j.jrurstud.2016.01.003 · Cited by 46 · cited 6×
“Research in Finland related to “rural identity and way of life” as defenses of current “management” practices as they pertain to wildlife and strategies concerning killing of large carnivores is applicable in the case of Oregon’s coyotes (Pohja-Mykrä 2016a, p. 439).”
BackgroundInfluentialIllegal killing of nongame wildlife and recreational shooting in conservation areas
Katzner, T., Carlisle, J. D., Poessel, S. A., Thomason, E. C., Pauli, B. P., Pilliod, D., Belthoff, J., Heath, J., Parker, K. J., Warner, K. S., et al. (2020) · Conservation Science and Practice · doi:10.1111/csp2.279 · Cited by 22 · cited 1× · see citing works
“The contests, by statements of wildlife officials, biologists, and those who consider themselves ethical hunters, are by their standards unethical (See Katzner et al. 2020).”
BackgroundPohja-Mykrä, M. (2016) · Crime Law and Social Change · doi:10.1007/s10611-016-9666-y · Cited by 18 · cited 6× · see citing works
“Research in Finland related to “rural identity and way of life” as defenses of current “management” practices as they pertain to wildlife and strategies concerning killing of large carnivores is applicable in the case of Oregon’s coyotes (Pohja-Mykrä 2016a, p. 439).”
BackgroundInfluentialSimone Weil: Portrait of a Self-exiled Jew
Nevin, T. R. (1991) · doi:10.5860/choice.29-5053 · Cited by 15
von Essen, E., & Allen, M. (2017) · doi:10.1007/s10612-017-9358-7 · Cited by 11 · cited 1×
“Studies of rural resistance, human–wildlife conflict, and resistance to change document these tensions not only in the United States (Bonnie et al. 2020) but also in Nordic nations (von Essen and Allen 2017), Sweden (Dalerum 2021), and Finland (Pohja-Mykrä 2016a, 2016b).”
BackgroundSocioeconomic characteristics of suitable wolf habitat in Sweden
Dalerum, F. (2021) · Ambio · doi:10.1007/s13280-021-01524-y · Cited by 9 · cited 2×
“Studies of rural resistance, human–wildlife conflict, and resistance to change document these tensions not only in the United States (Bonnie et al. 2020) but also in Nordic nations (von Essen and Allen 2017), Sweden (Dalerum 2021), and Finland (Pohja-Mykrä 2016a, 2016b).”
Backgroundvon Blon, & John, L. (1920) · doi:10.1038/scientificamerican03061920-246 · Cited by 1 · cited 4×
“Scientific American, June 1.”
BackgroundInfluential
Flagged first, then by citations
34 of the 51 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.
Research works printed but not linked: 5
- Blejwas, Karen M., Benjamin N. Sacks, Michael M. Jaeger, and Dale R. Mc-Cullough. 2002. The effectiveness of selective removal of breeding coyotes in reducing sheep predation. Journal of Wildlife Management 66: 451-62.
- Ferris, Bob. 2013. Wolf hatred is a gateway to bigotry. Earth Island Journal. January 17. Available online: https://www.earthisland.org/ journal/index.php/articles/entry/wolf_hatred_is_a_gateway_to_bigotry/ (accessed on 31 March 2022).
- Keefover-Ring, Wendy. 2009. War on Wildlife: The U.S. Department of Agriculture's 'Wildlife Services'. WildEarth Guardians. Available online: https://wildearthguardians.org/press-releases/group-calls-for-end-to-the-war-on-wildlife/ (accessed on 31 March 2022).
- Pohja-Mykrä, Mari. 2016b. Felony or act of justice? Illegal killing of large carnivores as defiance of authorities. Journal of Rural Studies 44: 46-54.
- Shivik, John A. 2014. The Predator Paradox-Ending the War with Wolves, Bears, Cougars, and Coyotes. Boston: Beacon Press.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Of Rarity and Symbolism: Understanding Human Perceptions of Charismatic Color Morphs
Williams, T. D., Kreling, S. E. S., Stanton, L. A., Wilkinson, C. E., Estien, C. O., Schell, C. J., & Carlen, E. J. (2024) · Human Ecology · doi:10.1007/s10745-024-00492-7 · Cited by 10 · see citing works
“Residents of rural areas tend to show less polarization and a greater consensus on negative connotations, sometimes even engaging in coyote killing competitions (Merskin, 2022).”
Green, A. R., Chakrabarti, S., Shivakumar, S., Hughes, C., Banerjee, S., Kinyanjui, M. W., Mbizah, M., Ohrens, O., & Thiemkey, A. R. (2024) · Conservation Biology · doi:10.1111/cobi.14402 · Cited by 9 · see citing works
Theriophobia: “problem bears,” leisure, and living in bear country
Harmon, J. T. (2023) · World Leisure Journal · doi:10.1080/16078055.2023.2287222 · Cited by 4
“That many of these practices are deemed socially acceptable, like coyote-killing contests, or the lifting of restrictions on when it is acceptable to hunt bears, only demonstrates the beastly nature of humans as it relates to non-human animals (Merskin, 2022; Nierenberg, 2023).”
Zoofolkloristics: Imagination as a Critical Component
Pribac, T. B., & Kaučič, M. G. (2024) · Animals · doi:10.3390/ani14060928 · Cited by 2 · see citing works
University wildlife students’ intention to support predator killing contests
Meeks, A., Serenari, C., & Self, A. (2025) · Human Dimensions of Wildlife · doi:10.1080/10871209.2025.2576079
“Animals targeted by the more than 600 estimated contests occurring in the state each year include rattlesnakes ( Crotalus atrox) , coyotes ( Canis latrans) , and bobcats ( Lynx rufus) (Adams & Thomas, 2008; Bird, 1993; Merskin, 2022; Vogel, 2021).”
Freeman, C., & Almiron, N. (2022) · Journalism and Media · doi:10.3390/journalmedia3030028
- Authors
- Merskin, D.
- Affiliations
- University of Oregon (US)
- Corresponding author
- Merskin, Debra
- ORCID
- Merskin, Debra
- Venue
- Journalism and Media
- Publisher
- MDPI AG
- Published
- 2022-04-15
- Volume
- 3
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 292-308
- ISSN
- 2673-5172 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W4223941701
- Cited by
- 6
- References
- 51
- Citations by year
- 2025: 1 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 1
- FWCI
- 5.09
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Journalism and Media (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Geography, Planning and Development › Geographies of human-animal interactions
- Social Sciences › Law › Animal Law and Welfare
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Wildlife Ecology and Conservation
- Keywords
- wildlife management, wildlife ethics, legislative opposition, rural resistance, animal rights activism, hunting ethics
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
