As cities expand, the space for native wildlife shrinks. High-density development, limited green zones, and poor waste management force animals into closer contact with humans. In May 2025, two coyotes were killed in a Toronto neighborhood. This outcome highlights a deep flaw in how communities handle urban wildlife encounters. Lethal measures often mask the root causes of these conflicts and leave the actual problems unresolved.
Animal Alliance of Canada works to replace fear with education and practical community action . Lia Laskaris, CEO of Animal Alliance, advocates for modern, non-lethal methods to build safe, shared environments . We sat down with Laskaris to discuss the events in Toronto, the factors driving human-wildlife conflict, and how neighborhoods can take responsibility to protect local ecosystems.
Q: Last year the City of Toronto used non-lethal methods before resorting to lethal action. How do you assess the city’s current approach to urban wildlife management?
Lia Laskaris: In a city the size of Toronto, I would say the city’s overall approach to urban wildlife is good. Of course, there’s always things we can do better, especially our waste management and responsible pet ownership. These two factors in particular played a key role in the events we saw play out last year. There was quite a bit of garbage available for coyotes to scavenge. And there was dog poop and dogs running off leash, which compounded the problem. Another factor was that people were surprised to see coyotes in their neighbourhood and didn’t know how to react. Without that knowledge, it’s easy to be scared of them, so we saw quite a bit of fear, misinformation and a general lack of understanding about coyote behaviour. I can appreciate that people might be scared but that shouldn’t mean we can’t learn to coexist peacefully with them.
Q: Habitat loss and high population density were cited as major factors in the recent coyote deaths. How does ongoing construction directly alter coyote behavior and movement?
Lia Laskaris: We’re still learning how coyotes adapt to changing urban environments and navigate landscapes designed for people. While they are highly resilient, ongoing construction and disturbance can make these ecosystems much more difficult to occupy. As habitat shrinks and resources become scarce, coyotes may be forced to move into new areas—often into territories already occupied by other coyotes, which can lead to increased conflict. The timing of these disruptions is also critical: if disturbances occur during denning season, coyotes may be forced to abandon their dens at particularly vulnerable stages, affecting both their survival and reproductive success.
We often talk about the housing crisis for people, but we forget that the animals are facing an even more difficult housing crisis.
Q: Issues like feeding wildlife, improper garbage disposal, and dog waste draw coyotes into urban areas. What practical steps can residents take immediately to change this?
Lia Laskaris: I’m glad you asked this, because it highlights an important point: we all share responsibility for the environments we create. Simple, everyday actions can make a meaningful difference. Keeping neighbourhoods clean, securing garbage and compost, and properly disposing of pet waste all help reduce attractants for coyotes. Just as importantly, keeping dogs on a leash—except in designated, fenced dog parks—can significantly reduce the risk of negative interactions. These steps not only discourage coyotes from lingering in residential areas but also help create a safer, healthier community for everyone. Coyotes are canines, just like our domesticated companion dogs – they’re just as trainable. They take cues from us, so we have to make sure we’re giving them the right cues.
Q: Fear often drives the public demand for lethal force. How can city officials shift the public mindset from panic to informed, calm decision-making?
Lia Laskaris: That’s an important question, and one that applies to many public issues. In this case, the city made meaningful efforts by developing science-based educational materials, analyzing data, and hosting public seminars. It’s also important to recognize that, for the majority of residents, there were no direct conflicts with coyotes. City officials are often in a difficult position—they’re tasked with maintaining public safety while responding to strong public concern—so responsibility doesn’t rest solely with them. Residents and the media also play key roles in shaping public perception.
Language matters. In Animal Alliance’s nearly 40 years of work on human–wildlife coexistence, we’ve seen how easily certain species can be vilified and portrayed as inherently dangerous. Yet when we look closely at the factors driving changes in wildlife behaviour, we consistently find that lethal control is neither necessary nor effective. Addressing the underlying, human-caused stressors—such as food attractants and habitat disruption—leads to more durable solutions that are less divisive for communities and more cost-effective for taxpayers.
We encourage people to avoid scapegoating coyotes, as this only deepens misunderstanding and fear. Nonlethal mitigation strategies have proven effective time and again and should be prioritized. Ultimately, the best antidote to fear is education paired with evidence-based action. It’s worth noting that centuries of widespread coyote killing have not resolved the concerns people continue to have today.
Q: Lasting change requires a collective commitment. What does successful community cooperation look like when building a safe environment for both humans and wildlife?
Lia Laskaris: Successful community cooperation starts with shared awareness and consistent actions. Practical measures—such as clear educational signage, responsible pet ownership, and reducing wildlife attractants—are an important foundation. It also requires patience and understanding, particularly during sensitive periods in wildlife life cycles, when animals may be more visible or vulnerable. Without changes to human behaviour, negative interactions are likely to continue.
Too often, we’ve seen wildlife vilified when conflicts arise, regardless of the species involved. Fear and frustration can quickly build, placing pressure on decision-makers to act. However, responses rooted in fear rather than knowledge rarely produce lasting solutions.
In many ways, we already coexist with significant risks in urban life—such as traffic, which causes thousands of injuries and deaths to people each year—yet we’ve learned to navigate those risks. We can apply that same adaptability to living alongside coyotes. A successful approach to coexistence reflects a community that is informed, proactive, and compassionate—one that prioritizes both public safety and respect for urban wildlife.
When we addressed the Committee, we asked a simple but important question: What kind of city do we want to be? We should strive to be a compassionate one.
This conversation highlights that urban wildlife conflict is largely a human-made problem. Poor waste management, intentional feeding, and the steady loss of green space force coyotes into dangerous situations. Solving this requires more than reactive animal control. It demands active community education, behavioral changes, and strict enforcement of local environmental rules.
As cities grow, encounters with wildlife will only increase. Developing an informed, compassionate approach to these animals is a necessary part of modern urban planning. By prioritizing education and shared responsibility, organizations like Animal Alliance of Canada help communities build safer, more balanced environments for all species.
To learn more, visit http://animalalliance.ca/
