A common adage is “you can’t manage what you can’t measure.” How applicable this saying may be to wildlife conservation and management is debatable; however, understanding the “where,” “who,” and “why” of human-wildlife conflict can help managers evaluate and prioritize incident response and conflict mitigation efforts. It is critical to note that no tracking or reporting system is capable of effectively capturing all human-wildlife incidents. The format and functionality of the tracking system, how the system is advertised to the public, and who manages the system are all important factors in the accessibility, utility, and success of each tracking system. Here, we examine three different systems for tracking reported human-coyote incidents and encounters in California: 1) the Wildlife Incident Reporting system, operated by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife; 2) Coyote Cacher, operated by the University of California - Agricultural and Natural Resources Cooperative Extension; and 3) iNaturalist, a citizen science initiative, operated by a non-governmental organization. We find that because each system offers different incentives to the public (and poses different potential challenges or barriers to reporting), each receives a significantly different volume of coyote reports. Each system provides a unique perspective of reported human-coyote conflicts in California. Understanding these differences and being cognizant of the inherent or potential limitations of a reporting system are crucial for integrated, scientifically defensible, and robust wildlife management, effective policy development, and informed decision-making.

Understanding residents’ perceptions and expectations surrounding wildlife species that some may consider “vertebrate pests” is an important element in developing socially acceptable, yet ecologically appropriate and scientifically sound, management strategies. Coyotes are a native wildlife species that are sometimes viewed as vertebrate pests. Human-coyote conflicts in southern California illustrate the importance of incorporating the social sciences, particularly knowledge of human behavior, communication and education, in a coyote management strategy. The California Department of Fish and Wildlife has developed Wildlife Watch as a community-based approach to coyote management across eight cities in Los Angeles and Orange Counties. Wildlife Watch (based on the Neighborhood Watch national crime prevention program) uses conservation-oriented principles to empower local communities, agencies, and residents to remove wildlife attractants and to exclude or deter coyotes from neighborhoods. Here, we outline the main components of Wildlife Watch and use case studies of successful programs to identify three common components: 1) multiple methods for residents to report human-coyote encounters and/or sightings (e.g., online, phone), 2) a clearly written policy that all incident reports receive an acknowledgement or response from the city, and 3) strong support from the city’s police department. An adaptive community-based program, like Wildlife Watch, offers a valuable toolkit to managers for navigating the diverse array of human perceptions, values, and attitudes regarding vertebrate pest species and human-wildlife conflicts.