San Francisco supervisors hear planning for citywide coyote monitoring after spike in sightings

San Francisco supervisors heard detailed presentations on March 24 about rising coyote sightings, a recent dog fatality and agency plans to reduce human–coyote conflicts while collecting better data.

Chair Supervisor Norma Yee opened the hearing by saying the city has seen “increasing reports of coyote sightings and interactions in our residential neighborhoods” and noted a recent attack in front of a home that killed a pet. The hearing asked three city and federal partners to report on current responses and next steps.

The Presidio Trust’s wildlife staff, identified in testimony as Jonathan, described coyotes’ recolonization of the city after an absence since about 1925 and urged managers to treat the animals as a long-term, self-sustaining presence. “Translocating an animal is not an option,” Jonathan told the committee, saying state law and ecological dynamics make moving coyotes impractical; he added that “the only option at this point is lethal removal” but that it is used only after rigorous, case-by-case review and individual identification.

Jonathan urged targeted, evidence-based actions: identifying active den sites (the Presidio confirmed one active den last year), posting heavy signage, offering alternative trails during the March–September pupping season and using selective hazing or barriers to disrupt problem animals’ access. He described a 2016 Presidio pilot to tag and monitor individuals with ear tags and temporary GPS collars to collect population, diet and movement data and to engage citizen scientists through platforms such as iNaturalist.

Virginia Donahue, executive director of the Department of Animal Care and Control (ACC), said ACC has computerized a sightings database and reported 69 sightings so far this year. Donahue emphasized public education and “coexistence” strategies used in other cities, and warned that lethal removal can open habitat that other coyotes will fill. Quoting a peer agency, she said, “when you kill a coyote, two come to the funeral,” as a caution against broad removals.

Lisa Wayne, the Recreation and Park Department’s open-space manager, described habitat across more than 220 parks and stressed steps already in place: staff trainings, targeted trail closures near active sites, temporary fencing and installation of bear-resistant trash containers to reduce food sources. Wayne said park staff work with ACC to investigate incidents and consult experts to determine whether a coyote is exhibiting normal or abnormal behavior.

Agencies also outlined short-term tools and requested limited funding for outreach. Donahue said Rec and Park loaned ACC $15,000 to start hazing and outreach; ACC requested $20,000–$40,000 in the next year’s budget for public education and hazing materials. Staff are pursuing an app through a Mayor’s Office innovation challenge to collect sightings and send hazing guidance.

Public testimony showed deep divisions. Some residents and neighborhood representatives demanded stronger removal or legal changes; others, including wildlife-control professionals and researchers from UC-affiliated programs, urged evidence-based coexistence and targeted responses. Rebecca Dimitrick of Humane Wildlife Control urged a comprehensive plan that reserves lethal control for cases involving human injury, not property loss. In contrast, several pet owners recounted recent attacks and urged more aggressive removal strategies.

Lieutenant James from the California Department of Fish and Wildlife told the committee that a tagging program would require a state permit and that the permit application process is administered by departmental biologists; he offered to consult the agency’s field biologists and provide examples of nearby permit precedent.

Supervisors asked whether the Presidio pilot could be expanded citywide. The committee requested that staff consult the Presidio Trust about expansion feasibility and costs, explore who could tag and monitor coyotes, and return with a report in the coming months. Procedurally, the committee voted to excuse Supervisor London Breed from voting for the remainder of the meeting, continued the item to the call of the chair and adjourned.

What happens next: agencies will pursue the pilot’s monitoring and tagging options, seek the requested outreach funding through the budget process, and report back to supervisors on costs and feasibility for a broader citywide program.