Of Rarity and Symbolism: Understanding the Human Perceptions of Charismatic Color Morphs

doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-3222187/v1

Download PDF

Research Article

Of Rarity and Symbolism: Understanding the Human Perceptions of Charismatic Color Morphs

https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-3222187/v1

This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License

Journal Publication

published 16 Apr, 2024

Read the published version in Human Ecology →

You are reading this latest preprint version

Coloration in wildlife serves numerous biological purposes, including sexual selection signaling, thermoregulation, and camouflage. However, the physical appearance of wildlife also influences the ways in which humans interact with them. Wildlife conservation has largely revolved around humans' propensity to favor charismatic megafauna, but human perceptions of wildlife species extend beyond conservation measures into our everyday interactions with individual wildlife. Our aesthetic appreciation for different species interplays with culture, lore, and the economic interest they carry. As such, one characteristic that may underpin and interact with social drivers of perception is the coloration of a particular individual. In this article we provide case studies illustrating the dynamism in interactions people have with conspicuously colored wildlife – i.e., individuals that vary from their species-typical coloration. We focus on melanism, leucism, and albinism across four species commonly thought of as pests in the United States: coyotes (Canis latrans), eastern gray squirrels (Sciurus carolinensis), white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus), and black-tailed deer (O. hemionus).

albinism

coloration

human perception

human-wildlife interactions

leucism

melanism

Human-wildlife interactions have been documented throughout history and across cultures via wildlife-centric art, lore, superstitions, and stories. For example, the oldest known drawing of wildlife is 45,000 years old and depicts social interactions among Sulawesi warty pigs (Sus celebensis) (Brumm et al. 2021). Furthermore, the value people place on different species – which can be mediated by past experiences, folklore, media, utility, and psychological perceptions – informs the ways we interact with wildlife (Linnell et al. 2003, Dickman 2010, Frank 2016, Wilkinson 2023). For instance, the reestablishment of wolves (Canis lupus) in Southern Scandinavia has incited concern amongst the public despite the infrequency of fatal attacks that have occurred in the last 300 years (Linnell et al. 2003). Thus, our interaction with wildlife deeply influences our appreciation of, and attitudes towards, different species ((Dickman 2010, Wilkinson 2023).

The connection humans have with wildlife can manifest into powerful decisions, both positive and negative, for wildlife. For instance, previous studies show that animals considered ‘attractive’ or ‘charismatic’, are often favored in conservation practices compared to those that are considered unappealing (Stokes 2007, Marešová and Frynta 2008, Marešová et al. 2009, Frynta et al. 2010, 2011, Landová et al. 2012, Lišková and Frynta 2013, Lišková et al. 2015). Moreover, Wilkinson (2023) recently highlighted the powerful role human connection to species or individuals can have for the conservation of wildlife and ecosystems. These studies have provided pieces of a framework for understanding public attitudes towards wildlife species and its potential for shaping the interactions between humans and wildlife. Consequently, the species which we ignore, consider a nuisance, attempt to domesticate, protect, and overexploit to extinction are deeply tied to our perception of wildlife (Perry et al. 2020, Schell et al. 2020, Basak et al. 2022). Yet, how coloration, which is vast and varied in the animal kingdom, may mediate the human perception and appreciation of animals has rarely been examined.

As a visual species, one of the first characteristics that humans perceive about a species is its physical appearance, including its color (Messmer 2000, Courchamp et al. 2006). Stories of wildlife in many cultures can vary with coloration (de Farias 2020). In European folklore, domestic black cats (Felis catus) are perceived as omens of misfortune (Jones and Hart 2020). Similarly, jaguars (Panthera onca) in Shipibo lore take on a variety of connotations which often varied based on coloration of the animal. Yellow jaguars are sometimes viewed as masculine, protective, diurnal, and/or more than human, whereas black jaguars were viewed as feminine, nocturnal, evil, associated with sorcery, and/or less than human (Saunders 1998). This intertwined connectivity of wildlife and people has strongly influenced our aesthetic appreciation of, and attitudes towards, different wildlife (Linnell et al. 2003, Dickman 2010, Frank 2016, Wilkinson 2023, Estien 2023).

While the coloration of wildlife may have important implications for humans such as facilitating spiritual/mystical connections, or aid in species identification, it also serves many important ecological roles (Mendoza et al. 2011, Legge and Robinson 2017, Castillo-Huitrón et al. 2020). Coloration in wildlife evolved as a form of inter- and intraspecific communication, thermoregulation, and camouflage from predator or prey (Caro 2005). While many species – especially mammalian species – often exist within a fairly finite range of colors (Caro 2005), sometimes individuals with rarer coloration can appear as a result of random mutations (Fertl and Rosel 2009, Kreling 2023). These individuals with altered coloration can be found throughout the animal kingdom (Caro 2005, McCardle 2012). While individuals with conspicuous coloration may be relatively rare within any given population, humans may value conspicuous colors differently based on a combination of biases and social paradigms (Duckitt et al. 1999). For example, individual animals with favorable color morphs (henceforth “charismatic coloration”) may experience opposing actions from people such as being trophy hunted (Johnson et al. 2010) or protected (Tarrant et al. 1997, de Pinho et al. 2014). In addition, Kreling (2023) speculated that in cities, charismatic coloration may become more prevalent due to higher exposure to mutagens and lower predation risk, thereby increasing the importance of understanding how humans interact with these individuals. While we understand many of the genetic and physiological factors that lead to coloration, little has been done to explore the underlying human preference for rare colorations among wildlife and how these perceptions alter human-wildlife interactions.

Here, we examine human attitudes towards wildlife with charismatic coloration. First, we discuss the social drivers that can influence how humans perceive the coloration of wildlife, focusing on the psychology of scarcity, symbolism and lore, and individualism. We then briefly discuss melanin-based colorations, focusing on melanism, albinism, and leucism; three rare colorations that have potential to influence how people interact with wildlife. Finally, we examine how human-wildlife interactions with charismatically colored individuals vary from those with default colorations (i.e., wildtype) through three case studies. Our three case studies focus on four species with different ecosystem roles that humans commonly interact with: (1) coyotes (Canis latrans), a highly plastic carnivore that holds a contentious relationship with human society due to instances of human-wildlife conflict, but also in their charismatic profile as urban carnivores, (2) eastern gray squirrels (Sciurus carolinensis), a ubiquitously urban mammal in many North American and European cities that are sometimes beloved by people, but also capable of causing structural damage that contributes to their perception as a nuisance, and (3, 4) white and black-tailed deer (Odocoileus sp.), an herbivore that often assumes the pest role in urban and suburban areas due to their propensity to cause property damage via garden grazing and vehicle collisions.

2.1. Psychology of Scarcity

One reasons that humans find some wildlife color morphs more appealing is because of their scarcity. The psychology behind scarcity is well-researched; human value placed on rare commodities may be due to an innate need for self-distinction (i.e., uniqueness theory, Fromkin & Snyder, 1980). Acquisition of scarce objects often promotes one’s social status or perceived uniqueness (Veblen 1899, Fromkin and Snyder 1980, Lynn and Harris 1997, Heffetz 2012). Thus, scarcity can encourage particular interest in the rare novelties within the natural world, thereby influencing the way we interact with various species.

For example, rare species are generally considered to have greater value than abundant species (Leong 2009), which often results in greater tolerance, positive attitudes, and conservation support from the public (e.g., Kontsiotis et al. 2021). Rareness may also result in an increased consumption of particular species (e.g., pet trade), resulting in removal of individuals from the wild (Hall et al. 2008). However, when species become abundant or are perceived as “overabundant” by humans, the value of that species is typically reduced. This phenomenon, coined “the tragedy of becoming common”, can lead to disinterest and even intolerance by the public (Leong 2009). For instance, species that were once considered a valuable resource, such as Canada geese (Branta canadensis) and white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus), have been redefined as pests as their numbers and interactions with humans have grown (Zinn et al. 2000, Leong 2009). Similarly, perceptions of large carnivores, which walk a fine line between admiration and fear, can rapidly change as a function of population size (Zimmermann et al. 2001, Treves et al. 2013, Eriksson et al. 2015).

For wildlife with charismatic coloration, scarcity may influence the ways that humans perceive and subsequently interact with them (Kreling 2023). For some wildlife, the perceived rarity of these individuals promotes their conservation, protection, and preferential treatment by humans including legal protections (Flather and Sieg 2007). This, for example, can be observed in the naming of animals due to the novelty of their features. Individuals with charismatic coloration are often more easily distinguished from other members of the population due to their unique appearance. This allows people to detect repeated encounters with the same individuals, thus building a relationship with a specific member of the population (Wilkinson 2023). This may result in naming these individuals (Borkfelt 2011), which can build a collective sense of ownership or responsibility toward these individuals and fuel their protection as a consequence of their alternative coloration (Milstein 2011). In others instances, the perceived rarity of an individual’s appearance may promote their removal from wild populations (Courchamp et al. 2006, Hall et al. 2008, Palazy et al. 2012). In the same way that more ornate or larger-bodied individuals are preferentially removed by hunters as trophies, charismatically-colored individuals may also be perceived as more valuable, driving their consumption (Johnson et al. 2010, Darimont and Child 2014).

2.2 Symbolism and Lore

From an etymological perspective, the colors ‘white’ and ‘black’ have often symbolically opposed each other (Curta 2004, Cirlot 2006, Hunt 2006, Selnick 2012). In Western culture the color ‘white’ frequently carries more positive connotations than the color ‘black’ (Smith–McLallen et al. 2006). Terms such as “Black Monday,” “Black Plague,” “black cats,” and the “black market” all have negative or foreboding connotations. Mead & Baldwin (1971) argued that the basis of these differential associations between colors stem from early tribal fears of the night, the dark, the unknown, and the unseen, all of which are dispelled by the light of fire, the moon, or the sun (Mead & Baldwin, 1971). In regions that have been colonized by Europeans, the perceptions between light and dark have come to take on racialized connotations as well (Hunter 2007, 2013, Keith and Monroe 2016, Dixon and Telles 2017). In the United States, where systemic racism abounds, the perception of people with darker versus lighter skin may also influence the ways in which people view wildlife with darker or lighter pelage, a topic we explore in our case studies below (Hunter 2007, Pellow 2016, Keith and Monroe 2016).

Human perceptions of wildlife and coloration are further complicated by lore. The novelty of alternative colorations on wildlife can occasionally become enshrouded in stories and myths that suggest complex spiritual and symbolic interpretations of wildlife coloration (Prokop and Fančovičová 2013). For example, there are negative superstitions surrounding black cats in western world culture. Black cats crossing a path in front of you, for instance, might represent a foreboding omen of danger in the near future (Jones and Hart 2019). This superstition was influenced by religious beliefs in which black cats were portrayed as the beloved sinister companions or familiars of witches (Jones and Hart 2020). These internalized western beliefs manifest in a ‘black cat bias’ where the adoption rates of black cats is observed to be lower than cats with other colorations (Jones and Hart 2019). Furthermore, in stories relating to indigenous spiritualities animals can serve critical roles as spiritual messengers, it is said when the spirit bear meets you it carries an important message for you (Green 2009, Legge and Robinson 2017). The ‘spirit bear’, also known colloquially as the ‘Kermode bears’ or Moksgm’ol in the Tsimshian language are leucistic black bears (Ursus americanus kermodei) in the Great Bear Rainforest of British Columbia, Canada (Service et al. 2020, Clark et al. 2021, Henson et al. 2022). The Kermode bear also holds significance in the world building anthology told by the Kitasoo/Xai’Xais Nation, where Raven, the trickster (Wee’get) - creator of all living things fabricates the Kermode bear as a physical reminder of the ice and snow which once covered the land during the ice age (Carter 1966, Langlois 2017, Service et al. 2020). The reverence and cultural significance of this coat color polymorphism to the Kitasoo/Xai’Xais and Gitga’at First Nations resulted in the legal establishment of the ~ 1,000 km² ‘Kitasoo Bear Conservancy’, protecting Kermode bears while pushing for greater conservation of black bears within the Great Bear Rainforest ((Langlois 2017, Service et al. 2020)). These are merely two examples detailing how the perception of wildlife and coloration, influenced by lore and cultural symbolism, can positively or negatively impact animal species holding particular colorations.

Melanism

Melanism, or the hyper production of melanin occurs throughout the animal kingdom. This trait is controlled by the melanocortin 1 receptor (MC1R) and Agouti (ASIP) genes (Lamoreux et al. 2010) but similar colorations among individuals may also be conferred by different mutations within these genes (van Grouw 2013, Grouw 2017). The level of hyper melanin production varies depending on the specific mutations occurring, conferring a slight darkening in pelage or extreme darkening of pelage compared to wildtype individuals (Fig. 1).

Leucism & Albinism

The loss of melanin-based coloration is found throughout the animal and plant kingdoms and comes in two forms: leucism and albinism. Leucism is the hypo-production of melanin, causing a lightening of coloration (Fig. 1, Brito et al. 2016). Piebald is a form of leucism, wherein select areas of pelage are affected by leucism and are thus lighter than the rest of the body, often creating a mottled appearance (Oiso et al. 2013). Albinism is the absence of the production of melanin (Fertl and Rosel 2009). Albinistic wildlife show no trace of pigmentation in fur, feathers, scales, and even iris coloration (Fertl and Rosel 2009).

In the case studies below we examine how a combination of scarcity, symbolism, lore, and individualism interplay to influence the ways in which people view wildlife with charismatic coloration. We have decided to focus on four taxa (coyotes, eastern gray squirrels, and black-tailed and white-tailed deer) to demonstrate the ways that treatment of charismatically colored individuals differs from treatment of the wildtype individuals across predators and prey. These four taxa are often considered nuisance species within North America and Europe due to their commonness. Yet all four taxa have melanistic and leucistic forms, providing an opportunity to explore how charismatic coloration drives human perception of wildlife.

4.1 Coyotes

4.1.1 Melanistic

The social perception of coyotes has been largely contentious due anti-predator campaigns and ongoing conflicts with livestock and pets (Flores et al. 2008). Today, viewpoints toward coyotes are more polarized than ever, especially in urban and suburban areas, where some residents are celebrating their establishment in metropolitan areas and others are fearing for their pets and family (Oleyar 2010, Alexander and Quinn 2011, Flores 2016). While coyotes are found in nearly all ecosystems in North America (Mowry and Edge 2014, Caudill and Caudill 2015, Hody and Kays 2018)), observations of melanistic coyotes are uncommon. In the Eastern United States, melanistic coyotes are estimated to comprise 5–9% of the population (Gipson 1976, Caudill and Caudill 2015). This may be due to the increased hybridization of Eastern coyotes with domestic dogs (Canis familiaris) and wolves (Canis lupus) promoting a variation in pelage coloration (Gipson 1976, Anderson et al. 2009, Mowry and Edge 2014, Caudill and Caudill 2015, Hody and Kays 2018). Compared to more urban regions, rural areas tend to show less polarization towards coyotes and a greater consensus on negative connotations toward coyotes, sometimes even engaging in coyote killing competitions (Merskin 2022).

For example, coyotes in rural and suburban areas of Georgia, USA are generally perceived negatively, with 43% of people surveyed agreeing that coyote populations should always be reduced and generally supporting lethal removal if they thought there were coyotes near their houses (Billodeaux 2007). Despite general negative attitudes towards coyotes in the area, one coyote gripped the hearts of residents in the Atlanta suburb of East Cobb, Georgia. A local coyote nicknamed “Carmine,” garnered the attention of many media outlets for his uncharacteristically dark coat and bold behavior (Fig. 2). Carmine’s unique coloration allowed him to be easily identified within the coyote population and his name allowed for easy communication about his whereabouts and activities within the community. Carmine was described as friendly and approachable, even engaging in play with local domestic dogs (Chapman 2020). Scientists found that six percent of Carmine’s genome was of domestic dog ancestry which may have some influence on his behavior and coloration (Monzón et al. 2014, Mowry et al. 2021). Carmine’s unique physical appearance and placid behavior was an alluring spectacle for people in the metro Atlanta, but after a resident’s small dog was grabbed by Carmine, people became wary of a coyote roaming through their neighborhood (Dillon 2020). Some residents wanted Carmine lethally removed and threatened to do so themselves, while many others opposed capture at all, even if capture would end in relocation (Chapman 2020). However, once Carmine became too friendly with neighborhood dogs and began sneaking into people’s houses for food, he was trapped by local wildlife authorities and relocated to a sanctuary. The psychology of scarcity likely contributed to Carmine’s relocation e because Georgia law mandates euthanization of any trapped coyote, thus his rare coloration allowed him to override the law.

4.1.2 Leucistic

The presence of leucistic coyotes is less well documented than melanistic morphs. Leucistic coyotes occasionally appear on camera traps but are rarely included in scientific literature (Young 1951, López-González 2011, Brockerville et al. 2013, Arroyo Arce et al. 2019). Still, there are multiple accounts of leucistic individuals in the Eastern United States (Fig. 3). Recently, rare, white-phased animals have been discovered in a new northeastern population of the coyote in insular Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada. In the interest of understanding the causative gene and mutation of white coats in coyotes, researchers sequenced the three type-switching genes (Mc1r, Agouti, CBD103) in white and dark-phased animals from Newfoundland (Brockerville et al. 2013). Out of the > 6,000 adult coyotes submitted to the Newfoundland Labrador’s Wildlife Division of the Department of Environment and Conservation in collaboration with local hunters and trappers, six white coyotes were identified throughout the course of the investigation. In addition, with the extirpation of Newfoundland’s original wolf population in the 1930s, coyotes exploited the vacant niche by expanding their distribution to include all regions and habitats of insular Newoundland (Brockerville et al. 2013). As a consequence of their range expansion their potential impact on native wildlife became a concern with the wildlife department. This sparked collaboration with local hunters and trappers to document aspects of diet, condition, and reproduction of the growing population (Brockerville et al. 2013). Genetic analysis of these leucistic coyotes found likely introgression with a golden retriever (Brockerville et al. 2013). Evidence of socializing among a male golden retriever and a group of coyotes further support this hypothesis (Brockerville et al. 2013). The authors suggest that this leucism might provide a selective advantage by allowing the white coyotes to blend in with the snow while hunting during winter (Brockerville et al. 2013). Alternatively, this coloration may make them more susceptible to hunters.

4.2 Eastern Gray Squirrels

4.2.1 Melanistic

In Marysville, Kansas, USA ‘home of the black squirrels,’ melanistic squirrels are the town’s official mascot since 1972. These squirrels even received an official anthem in 1987 titled the “Black Squirrel Song”. Although there is speculation on the origin of the charismatically colored squirrels, it’s rumored they were released from a carnival in 1912 (Immink 2020). In Marysville, black squirrels are even treated as a priority where they are given the right-of-way at all traffic crossings (Article 1. General Provisions: City Mascot 1987). The city code of Maryville states; “The black squirrel is designated as ‘Marysville City Mascot’ and hereafter shall be accorded all the rights and privileges inherent to such designation, including the freedom to trespass on all city property, immunity from traffic regulations, and the right of first choice to all black walnuts growing within the city”. In addition, the city also holds the capacity to fine and imprison people who willingly maim, or kill black squirrels, or deliberately entrap without authorization within the city (Article 1. General Provisions: Black Squirrel Day 1987). As the popularity of Marysville’s squirrels grew, so too did the interest in these squirrels from out of towners. In 1973, several of these black squirrels were taken in the attempt to establish a breeding population in Hobbs, Texas, USA, but succumbed to the event of interspecific killings by fox squirrels (Sciurus niger). Despite the failed attempt in Hobbs, Marysville is not the only ‘black squirrel town.’ London, Ontario, Canada considers its own black squirrel population as a prized social commodity. The town even celebrates with a song, ‘The Black Squirrels of London.’ Additionally, Kent State University in Kent, Ohio, USA hosts an annual squirrel festival for the melanistic variant that has been celebrated for nearly 40 years. The black squirrels found in Kent were introduced; in this case 10 were trapped in London and released on the university’s campus successfully establishing themselves in the area.

But why have these towns gone to such lengths to have and protect their melanistic squirrel populations? Afterall, Eastern gray squirrels are extremely common across the United States and are currently expanding their range (Benson 2013, Creley et al. 2019). They are also regionally considered to be pest species -- viewed as nuisances through stealing food from bird feeders or begging for food from people (Benson 2013). While the ubiquity of Eastern gray squirrels across the United States reduces their novelty, the emergence of a variation in their pelage coloration may change the way they are received by people in society (Clark 2018). These chance encounters by people with this unique color morph may gradually modify the collective response a community might have towards the introduction of a new colored animal in the area (Chardonnet et al. 2002, Pearce et al. 2017). Therefore, capitalizing on the idea of rarity associated with these traits, these towns have all made these locally prolific melanistic squirrels into tourist attractions, becoming important sources of economic gain (Skavronskaya et al. 2020a, 2020b).

4.2.2 Leucistic

The Albino Squirrel Preservation Society, founded at the University of Texas, Austin, was founded in 2001 to bring attention to the potentially dwindling numbers of albino, and leucistic, Eastern gray squirrels (The Albino Squirrel Preservation Society 2001). While the club was initially founded in Texas, its popularity led to chapters around the world. Though founded with an air of humor, the creed of the club states, ‘I pledge to uphold the objects of the Albino Squirrel Preservation Society, to foster compassion and goodwill towards albino squirrels, and to dedicate myself to the protection of all squirrels, especially those that are albino,’ (The Albino Squirrel Preservation Society 2001). In addition to pledging allegiance to the albino squirrels, club members are encouraged to feed and give preferential treatment to these charismatically colored individuals. Though the club and international chapters seemingly closed their doors in 2003, the creation of such an organization highlights the intrinsic interest that people show for wildlife of alternative coloration and a willingness to give these individuals special treatment.

Additionally, five separate towns in the United States and Canada claim themselves as the ‘Home of the White Squirrels’. In celebration of the leucistic squirrels of Brevard, North Carolina, USA the town hosts an annual ‘White Squirrel Weekend (Heart of Brevard 2023). The town even boasts the White Squirrel Shoppe which sells leucistic squirrel-related paraphernalia and gifts. In 1986, Brevard declared the city a sanctuary for all squirrels, prohibiting people from killing or bothering the squirrels within city limits (City Designated Squirrel Sanctuary 1980). The original pair of leucistic squirrels were rumored to have been introduced from a carnival in 1949. It is possible that the collective protection of all squirrels is an attempt to ensure the repeatability of the recessive trait responsible for the leucistic phase coloration in squirrels. The town of Olney, Illinois, USA also provides protections for its squirrel population in order to protect the high frequency of leucistic squirrels. For example, in Olney, it’s recognized that failing to yield to albino squirrels when they are actively crossing busy roads leading to either their harm or death can result in a $750 fine (City of Olney, Illinois 2002). Similarly, Marionville, Missouri, USA also gives some protection to leucistic squirrels and fines anyone who tries to capture one. The White Squirrel Committee hosts an annual Squirrel Homecoming, Christmas parade, and White Squirrel Festival in Kenton, Tennessee, USA (City of Kenton, TN 2023). Exeter, Ontario, Canada also hosts a White Squirrel Festival, and the squirrel has served as the town’s mascot since 1986. Additionally, Tallahassee, Florida, USA hosts a population of leucistic squirrels that tourists can view on the Florida State University Campus and at the Tallahassee Museum of History and Natural Science (Florida State University 2020). These squirrels are noteworthy enough to visitors that multiple reviews of the Tallahassee Museum on TripAdvisor encourage visitation of the site to see the leucistic squirrels.

4.3 White-tailed & Black-tailed Deer

4.3.1 Melanistic

Melanistic white-tailed deer are exceptionally rare in most places in the United States but occur at higher frequencies in central Texas (Baccus and Posey 1999). There, the hunting of melanistic deer is common and these individuals are viewed as prized trophies due their rarity (Traweek and Welch 1992, Smith 2011). While multiple state laws exist to protect albinistic or leucistic white-tailed deer (Wisconsin Admin N.R. 1940, Illinois General Assembly 1983, Iowa General Assembly 1987) and other leucistic wildlife (Stencel and Ghent 1987) no such ordinances or statutes exist for melanistic deer. The lack of laws concerning melanistic individuals may be the result of multiple and likely intertwining social phenomena. The rarity of these morphs may promote hunting in order to obtain these prized trophies while their rarity may prevent the creation of laws to protect individuals if they do not persist at high enough densities to be perceived and advocated for by the public. Despite their opposing results, both hunting and protecting charismatically colored individuals demonstrates humans' innate fascination and reverence for these creatures.

While protective laws may not exist for melanistic deer, there are a few examples where melanistic deer have been cherished within particular communities, rather than hunted for their rarity. In Moab, Utah, USA a local celebrity black-tailed mule deer nicknamed ‘Coal’, succumbed to chronic wasting disease in December of 2019 (Utah Division of Wildlife 2020). After his death, the Department of Wildlife Resources commented, “This unique deer touched a lot of people’s lives in this area. Coal is responsible for putting smiles on a lot of faces during his life. The community will feel his absence.” To commemorate his life, the community crowdfunded enough money to preserve Coal and commissioned a taxidermist to mount the bust which is now on display at The Division of Wildlife State Building (Fig. 4). The plaque below the mount states that Coal was ‘Moab’s very own Melanistic Deer.’ This statement, in addition to having an individual name for the animal, indicates a level of community pride and ownership toward the animal individual.

4.3.2 Leucistic

In European folklore, white stags took on a variety of symbology. A common theme throughout British, French, and Brittany ballads is white deer that change form into sisters or lovers of hunters (Cartmill 1996). Irish stories present a hero with a white stag who helps lead them to a crown (Cartmill 1996, Selnick 2012). Leucistic and albino deer have also historically represented supernatural phenomena. For example, in early settler-American lore, the ghost of Virginia Dare is said to roam Roanoke Island as a white doe (Cartmill 1996). In many regions the killing of leucistic or albino animals is attributed with bad luck (Wiltse 1900, Cartmill 1996).

In Wisconsin, USA current regulation from the Department of Natural Resources prohibits the hunting and harvesting of leucistic and albino white-tailed deer, even with state approved permits and tags for the species (Wisconsin Admin N.R. 1940). However, prior to the regulation’s permanent ratification in 2015 this ordinance was removed in 2008 to effectively manage chronic wasting disease (Protect the White Deer 2023). Subsequently, the discourse surrounding the conservation and protection of these individuals elicited strong responses among people within Wisconsin. An individual in Verona, Wisconsin said, “These deer are a Wisconsin treasure, and we should feel privileged they have made their home here. Killing them would be no different than killing a bald eagle. Because there are so few, I have to wonder why they are not on an endangered species list” (Protect the White Deer 2023). Similarly, another individual in DeForest, Wisconsin states, “My friends and I are avid hunters. I want to protect these rare animals. They are rare for a reason. They have disadvantages in life, so we need to keep them protected” (Protect the White Deer 2023). Here we see a case where the social perception of alternatively colored wildlife influences public opinion towards management interests. Wisconsin is not the only state with such protections; several other states within the United States (e.g., Oklahoma and Tennessee) also prohibit the harvesting of white-tailed deer with varying levels of piebald, albinistic, or leucistic coloration (Oklahoma General Assembly 2009, Tennessee General Assembly 2014).

In addition to protecting leucistic and albinistic individuals via state laws, many towns have also shown strong reverence for these individuals. For example, in the town of Unionville, Tennessee, USA a celebrated resident albino deer was fatally struck by a car in 2011. What followed was a shared community mourning for their cherished icon (Organ 2013). Another town, St. Ansgar, Iowa, USA coined itself “The Home of the Albino Deer.” From 1980–1988, an albino deer frequently roamed the area of St. Ansgar until its death where it was then preserved and since remains housed in a glass case for viewing as a local attraction at White Deer Park (Fig. 5).

As human-wildlife interactions increase due to urbanization and habitat degradation, understanding how human-wildlife relationships are shaped by human values, attitudes, culture, and previous experiences with wildlife is crucial. Previous research has explored the role of social factors in shaping perceptions, and new research is beginning to merge both social and ecological factors to understand how they work together to inform perceptions (e.g., Wilkinson et al. 2021, McInturff et al. 2021). However, minimal work has focused on how the coloration of species or individuals changes the ways they are perceived or treated by people.

Our case studies reflect that the human social perceptions of charismatic color morphs often lie in stark contrast to how wildtype individuals are treated (Kreling 2023). We show that a key component to the protection or community advocacy of conspicuously colored animals was being able to differentiate an individual from others in the population and the naming of these individuals (Birke 2009, Borkfelt 2011, Milstein 2011). Although in scientific research, the naming of animals has been a debated topic, thought to have both benefits and drawbacks (Birke 2009, Borkfelt 2011, Wilkinson 2023), the naming of animals by the public holds powerful implications for conservation and overall persistence of particular species and even entire ecosystems. For example, although not a charismatic color-morph, the public attachment to and appreciation of P-22, a mountain lion monitored in Los Angeles, California, led to many conservation policies (Wilkinson 2023). The naming of individuals seems to shift narratives, perceptions, and the overall tolerance for pest and unwanted species. Across North America, coyotes are often persecuted, trapped, and removed even when no tangible conflict is occurring (Arthur 1981, Kellert 1985, Kitchen et al. 2000, Breck et al. 2019). However, in the instance of the coyote named Carmine who was displaying conflict-prone behavior, this named individual was relocated to a wildlife sanctuary, even when local law mandated any trapped coyotes be euthanized. Similarly, after his death, the community memorialized Coal and prominently displayed him in a government building. His recognizability and name allowed community members to form lasting impressions of the animal as well as communicate information about the animal more efficiently (Birke 2009, Borkfelt 2011, Milstein 2011).

Presentation of charismatic coloration may also change how wildlife is normally perceived as a nuisance or “pest” species. In North America, squirrels and deer cause varying amounts of damage to urban infrastructure, residential housing, and agriculture, requiring costly management (Flyger et al. 1983, Conover 2001, McCleery et al. 2007). The dense populations of deer in urban and suburban areas result in numerous deer-vehicle collisions, causing severe injuries and death (Conover et al. 1995, Gilbert et al. 2017). Especially in urban and suburban areas, wildlife that become habituated to people may be increasingly seen as pests, losing their “wildness” and becoming tamer (Leong 2009). Yet, we see in multiple cases, wildlife with charismatic coloration is not treated as pests, but celebrated and often memorialized. In this way, these individuals are perhaps regaining some of the historic folkloric awe that was generated during the romantic era (Colpitts 2010).

Unlike squirrels and deer, there is an added layer of complexity which may skew the response to these coyotes. Coyotes are a predatory species and predators often invoke fear -- whether that be loss of life, livelihood, or economic gain (Knowlton et al. 1999, Elliot et al. 2016). This fear of predators can be overt and explicit, subtly changing our views on these species (Clinchy et al. 2011, Prokop and Fančovičová 2013, Mobbs et al. 2015, Nyhus 2016). With this added layer of contention, we may predict that predators with charismatic coloration may not be as welcomed or celebrated as prey species with charismatic coloration. Indeed, we see that for the melanistic coyote Carmine, residents expressed concern for themselves, their pets, and their family and called for Carmine’s euthanization. However, we also see that with this coloration, some residents expressed concern for the safety of Carmine and preferred him to be relocated. While most coyotes with this bold behavior would often be euthanized by management agencies (Timm et al. 2004, Baker and Timm 2017, Breck et al. 2017), management ultimately circumvented the law and kept Carmine alive, relocating him to a wildlife sanctuary.

This perspective highlights how wildlife with charismatic coloration is treated differently than their wildtype counterparts due to a variety of psychological and social factors – specifically the psychology of scarcity, lore, and individual interactions. We highlight human connections with individual wildlife as a potential way to increase tolerance of the species as a whole (Wilkinson 2023). Future research should consider investigating the implicit biases humans have towards colorations of particular wildlife (e.g., leucistic squirrel versus melanistic squirrel), and how that may change by ecological niche (e.g., melanistic predator compared to melanistic prey). Finally, with a recent uptick in research in wildlife coloration (Leveau 2021, Cosentino and Gibbs 2022, Kreling 2023), we highlight that participatory science platforms, such as iNaturalist, may become critical in understanding the spatial distribution, abundance, and presence of these charismatic color morphs. However, we caution the use of community-gathered data as individuals may be more inclined to report individuals with charismatic coloration compared to those of regular coloration (Husby 2017, Zbyryt et al. 2021, Carlen et al. 2023 In Review). While the application of community-gathered data certainly holds merit, biases in these observations could cause misinterpretations of the data (Carlen et al. 2023 In Review). As such, the nature of human perception is complex and easily impressionable, influenced by the conditions of society, history, culture, and psychosocial factors (Dickman 2010). Therefore, effectively understanding the reasons why people perceive and respond to novel colorations in wildlife can be used to cultivate greater human-wildlife coexistence and foster stewardship for the animals we collectively share space with.

Ethical Approval

Not applicable

Competing Interests

The authors highlight there are no competing interests.

Author Contributions

TDW, LAC, & EJC conceived the idea. TDW and SESK drafted the manuscript. All authors contributed to discussions, and revisions, and wrote the final manuscript.

Funding

T.D.W. was supported by the National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship under Grant No. DGE-2146752. S.E.S.K. was supported by the Graduate Research Opportunity Enhancement fellowship at the University of Washington Seattle. C.E.W. was supported by Schmidt Science Fellows, in partnership with the Rhodes Trust. C.O.E. was supported by University of California, Berkeley’s Chancellor Fellowship and the National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship under Grant No. DGE-2146752. E.J.C. was supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No. DBI-2109587 and the Living Earth Collaborative at Washington University in St. Louis.

Availability of Data and Materials

Not applicable

Alexander, S. M., & Quinn, M. S. (2011). Portrayal of Interactions Between Humans and Coyotes (Canis latrans): Content Analysis of Canadian Print Media (1998–2010). Cities and the Environment, 4(1), 1–24.
Anderson, T. M., vonHoldt, B. M., Candille, S. I., Musiani, M., Greco, C., Stahler, D. R., Smith, D. W., Padhukasahasram, B., Randi, E., Leonard, J. A., Bustamante, C. D., Ostrander, E. A., Tang, H., Wayne, R. K., & Barsh, G. S. (2009). Molecular and Evolutionary History of Melanism in North American Gray Wolves. Science, 323(5919), 1339–1343.
Arroyo Arce, S., Corrales Gutiérrez, D., Espinoza, D., Muñoz, D., Araya Gamboa, M., Chávez, Ramos, & Salom, R. (2019). Pérez. A leucistic female Canis latrans (Carnivora: Canidae) in Costa Rica. UNED Research Journal 11(3).
Arthur, L. M. (1981). Coyote Control: the Public Response. Journal of Range Management, 34(1), 14–15.
Article 1. General Provisions: Black Squirrel Day (1987).. Page Ord. 1027, Sec. 5; Code 1987, 1-120.
Article 1 (General Provisions: City Mascot. 1987. Page Ord. 1027, Sec. 2, 3, 6; Code 1987). 1-119.
Baccus, J. T., & Posey, J. C. (1999). Melanism in white-tailed deer in central Texas. The Southwestern Naturalist, 44(2), 184–192.
Baker, R. O., & Timm, R. M. (2017). Coyote attacks on humans, 1970–2015: implications for reducing the risks. Human–Wildlife Interactions, 11(2), 3.
Basak, S. M., Hossain, M. S., O’Mahony, D. T., Okarma, H., Widera, E., & Wierzbowska, I. A. (2022). Public perceptions and attitudes toward urban wildlife encounters–A decade of change. Science of the total environment, 834, 155603.
Benson, E. (2013). The Urbanization of the Eastern Gray Squirrel in the United States. Journal of American History, 100(3), 691–710.
Billodeaux, L. (2007). May 15. The Presence and Public Perception of Coyotes (Canis latrans) in Suburban and Rural Areas of Western Georgia. Thesis.
Birke, L. (2009). Naming Names — or, What’s in It for the Animals? Humanimalia, 1(1), 1–9.
Borkfelt, S. (2011). What’s in a Name?—Consequences of Naming Non-Human Animals. Animals, 1(1), 116–125.
Breck, S., Poessel, S., & Bonnell, M. (2017). Evaluating lethal and nonlethal management options for urban coyotes. USDA Wildlife Services - Staff Publications.
Breck, S. W., Poessel, S. A., Mahoney, P., & Young, J. K. (2019). The intrepid urban coyote: a comparison of bold and exploratory behavior in coyotes from urban and rural environments. Scientific reports, 9(1), 2104.
Brito, J., Valdivieso-Bermeo, K., Brito, J., & Valdivieso-Bermeo, K. (2016). First records of leucism in eight species of small mammals (Mammalia: Rodentia). Therya, 7(3), 483–489.
Brockerville, R. M., McGrath, M. J., Pilgrim, B. L., & Marshall, H. D. (2013). Sequence analysis of three pigmentation genes in the Newfoundland population of Canis latrans links the Golden Retriever Mc1r variant to white coat color in coyotes. Mammalian Genome, 24(3), 134–141.
Brumm, A., Oktaviana, A. A., Burhan, B., Hakim, B., Lebe, R., Zhao, J., Sulistyarto, P. H., Ririmasse, M., Adhityatama, S., & Sumantri, I. (2021). Oldest cave art found in Sulawesi. Science Advances, 7(3), eabd4648.
Caro, T. (2005). The Adaptive Significance of Coloration in Mammals. BioScience, 55(2), 125–136.
Carter, A. L. (1966). Somewhere between. No Title).
Cartmill, M. (1996). A View to a Death in the Morning: Hunting and Nature Through History. Harvard University Press.
Castillo-Huitrón, N. M., Naranjo, E. J., Santos-Fita, D., & Estrada-Lugo, E. (2020). The importance of human emotions for wildlife conservation. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 1277.
Caudill, G., & Caudill, D. (2015). Melanism of Coyotes (Canis latrans) in Florida. The American Midland Naturalist, 174(2), 335–342.
Chapman, G. (2020). April 6. The hunt for Atlanta’s friendly black coyote (p. 8). Atlanta News & Opinion.
Chardonnet, P., des Clers, B., Fischer, J., Gerhold, R., Jori, F., & Lamarque, F. (2002). The value of wildlife. Revue scientifique et technique-Office international des épizooties, 21(1), 15–52.
Cirlot, J. C. (2006). Dictionary of symbols. Routledge.
City Designated Squirrel Sanctuary (1980).. Page Code 1980, § 4–9.
City of Kenton, T. N. (2023). White Squirrel Festival. Website.
City of Olney, Illinois (2002). City of Olney, Illinois Squirrel Protection. Page 520 Ill. Comp. Stat. Ann. 5/2.28 (LexisNexis 2012).
Clark, A. (2018). A nice surprise? Predictive processing and the active pursuit of novelty. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences, 17(3), 521–534.
Clark, D., Artelle, K., Darimont, C., Housty, W., Tallio, C., Neasloss, D., Schmidt, A., Wiget, A., & Turner, N. (2021). Grizzly and polar bears as nonconsumptive cultural keystone species. Facets, 6(1), 379–393.
Clinchy, M., Schulkin, J., Zanette, L., Sheriff, M., McGowan, P., & Boonstra, R. (2011). The Neurological Ecology of Fear: Insights Neuroscientists and Ecologists Have to Offer one Another. Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience 5.
Conover, M. R. (2001). Resolving Human-Wildlife Conflicts: The Science of Wildlife Damage Management. CRC Press.
Conover, M. R., Pitt, W. C., Kessler, K. K., DuBow, T. J., & Sanborn, W. A. (1995). Review of Human Injuries, Illnesses, and Economic Losses Caused by Wildlife in the United States. Wildlife Society Bulletin (1973–2006) 23(3):407–414.
Cosentino, B. J., & Gibbs, J. P. (2022). Parallel evolution of urban–rural clines in melanism in a widespread mammal. Scientific Reports, 12(1), 1752.
Courchamp, F., Angulo, E., Rivalan, P., Hall, R. J., Signoret, L., Bull, L., & Meinard, Y. (2006). Rarity value and species extinction: the anthropogenic Allee effect. PLoS biology, 4(12), e415.
Creley, C. M., Shilling, F. M., & Muchlinski, A. E. (2019). An Ecological Niche Model to Predict Range Expansion of the Eastern Gray Squirrel in California. Bulletin of the Southern California Academy of Sciences, 118(1), 58–70.
Curta, F. (2004). Colour perception, dyestuffs, and colour terms in twelfth-century French literature. Medium ævum, 73(1), 43–65.
Darimont, C. T., & Child, K. R. (2014). What enables size-selective trophy hunting of wildlife? PloS one, 9(8), e103487.
Dickman, A. J. (2010). Complexities of conflict: the importance of considering social factors for effectively resolving human–wildlife conflict. Animal conservation, 13(5), 458–466.
Dillon, D. (2020). February 6. Rare black coyote has people watching their pets more closely. Fox 5 Atlanta. Cobb County.
Dixon, A. R., & Telles, E. E. (2017). Skin Color and Colorism: Global Research, Concepts, and Measurement. Annual Review of Sociology, 43(1), 405–424.
Duckitt, J., Wall, C., & Pokroy, B. (1999). Color bias and racial preference in White South African preschool children. The Journal of genetic psychology, 160(2), 143–154.
Elliot, E. E., Vallance, S., & Molles, L. E. (2016). Coexisting with coyotes (Canis latrans) in an urban environment. Urban Ecosystems, 19(3), 1335–1350.
Eriksson, M., Sandström, C., & Ericsson, G. (2015). Direct experience and attitude change towards bears and wolves. Wildlife Biology, 21(3), 131–137.
Estien, C. O. (2023). A More Intimate Ecology: Reframing the Relationship between the Researcher and the Research(ed). EcoEvoRxiv:1–31.
de Farias, S. A. (2020). The inescapable effects of superstition and sacrifice on crimes against wildlife. Psychology & Marketing, 37(12), 1656–1663.
Fertl, D., & Rosel, P. E. (2009). Albinism. Pages 24–26 Encyclopedia of marine mammals. Elsevier.
Flather, C. H., & Sieg, C. H. (2007). Species rarity: definition, causes and classification. Conservation of rare or little-known species: Biological, social, and economic considerations:40–66.
Flores, D. (2016). Coyote America: A Natural and Supernatural History. Basic Books.
Florida, S. U. (2020). January 27. White Squirrels.
Flyger, V., Leedy, D., & Franklin, T. (1983). Wildlife Damage Control in Eastern Cities and Suburbs. Wildlife Damage Management Conference.
Frank, B. (2016). Human–wildlife conflicts and the need to include tolerance and coexistence: An introductory comment. Society & Natural Resources, 29(6), 738–743.
Fromkin, H. L., & Snyder, C. R. (1980). The search for uniqueness and valuation of scarcity: Neglected dimensions of value in exchange theory. Social exchange: Advances in theory and research:57–75.
Frynta, D., Lišková, S., Bültmann, S., & Burda, H. (2010). Being attractive brings advantages: the case of parrot species in captivity. PloS one, 5(9), e12568.
Frynta, D., Marešová, J., Řeháková-Petrů, M., Šklíba, J., Šumbera, R., & Krása, A. (2011). Cross-cultural agreement in perception of animal beauty: boid snakes viewed by people from five continents. Human Ecology, 39, 829–834.
Gilbert, S. L., Sivy, K. J., Pozzanghera, C. B., DuBour, A., Overduijn, K., Smith, M. M., Zhou, J., Little, J. M., & Prugh, L. R. (2017). Socioeconomic Benefits of Large Carnivore Recolonization Through Reduced Wildlife-Vehicle Collisions. Conservation Letters, 10(4), 431–439.
Gipson, P. S. (1976). Melanistic Canis in Arkansas. The Southwestern Naturalist, 21(1), 124–126.
Green, J. (2009). Gyawaaglaab (Helping one another): Approaches to best practices through teachings of Oolichan fishing. Wicihitowin Aboriginal social work in Canada:222–233.
van Grouw, H. (2013). What colour is that bird? British Birds.
van Grouw, H. (2017). The dark side of birds: melanism—facts and fiction. Bulletin of the British Ornithologists’ Club, 137(1), 12–36.
Hall, R. J., Milner-Gulland, E., & Courchamp, F. (2008). Endangering the endangered: the effects of perceived rarity on species exploitation. Conservation Letters, 1(2), 75–81.
Heart of Brevard. (2023). White Squirrel Weekend 2023. North Carolina Main Street Community.
Heffetz, O. (2012). Who sees what? Demographics and the visibility of consumer expenditures. Journal of Economic Psychology, 33(4), 801–818.
Henson, L. H., Service, C., Stronen, A. V., Moody, J., Housty, W., Reece, D., vonHoldt, B., & Darimont, C. T. (2022). Genetic evidence to inform management of rare genetic variants and gene flow: Balancing the conservation of the rare “Spirit bear” allele and population genetic diversity across a complex landscape. Conservation Science and Practice, 4(11), e12769.
Hody, J. W., & Kays, R. (2018). Mapping the expansion of coyotes (Canis latrans) across North and Central America. ZooKeys(759):81–97.
Hunt, D. (2006). Colour Symbolism in the Folk Literature of the Caucasus: TOPICS, NOTES AND COMMENTS. Folklore, 117(3), 329–338.
Hunter, M. (2007). The Persistent Problem of Colorism: Skin Tone, Status, and Inequality. Sociology Compass, 1(1), 237–254.
Hunter, M. (2013). The Consequences of Colorism. In R. E. Hall (Ed.), The Melanin Millennium: Skin Color as 21st Century International Discourse (pp. 247–256). Springer Netherlands.
Husby, M. (2017). Colour aberrations in Eurasian Magpies Pica pica in Europe. Ornithological Science, 16(2), 111–119.
Illinois General Assembly (1983). Illinois general assembly determing the protection of white-tailed deer. Page 520 Ill. Comp. Stat. Ann. 5/2.24 (LexisNexis 2012 & Supp. 2022).
Immink, J. G. (2020). May 15. Road Culture. Travel.
Iowa General Assembly (1987). Iowa general assembly determining the protection of white-tailed deer. Page Iowa Code Ann § 481A.124 (West 2018).
Johnson, P. J., Kansky, R., Loveridge, A. J., & Macdonald, D. W. (2010). Size, rarity and charisma: valuing African wildlife trophies. PloS one, 5(9), e12866.
Jones, H. D., & Hart, C. L. (2020). Black cat bias: Prevalence and predictors. Psychological reports, 123(4), 1198–1206.
Keith, V. M., & Monroe, C. R. (2016). Histories of Colorism and Implications for Education. Theory Into Practice, 55(1), 4–10.
Kellert, S. R. (1985). Public perceptions of predators, particularly the wolf and coyote. Biological Conservation, 31(2), 167–189.
Kitchen, A. M., Gese, E. M., & Schauster, E. R. (2000). Changes in coyote activity patterns due to reduced exposure to human persecution. Canadian journal of zoology, 78(5), 853–857.
Knowlton, F. F., Gese, E. M., & Jaeger, M. M. (1999). Coyote depredation control: an interface between biology and management.
Kontsiotis, V. J., Triantafyllidis, A., Telidis, S., Eleftheriadou, I., & Liordos, V. (2021). The predictive ability of wildlife value orientations for mammal management varies with species conservation status and provenance. Sustainability, 13(20), 11335.
Kreling, S. E. (2023). So overt it’s covert: Wildlife coloration in the city. BioScience, 73(5), 333–346.
Lamoreux, M. L., Delmas, V., Larue, L., & Bennett, D. (2010). The Colors of Mice: A Model Genetic Network. John Wiley & Sons.
Landová, E., Marešová, J., Šimková, O., Cikánová, V., & Frynta, D. (2012). Human responses to live snakes and their photographs: evaluation of beauty and fear of the king snakes. Journal of environmental psychology, 32(1), 69–77.
Langlois, K. (2017). October 26. First Nations Fight to Protect the Rare Spirit Bear from Hunters. National Geographic.
Legge, M. M., & Robinson, M. (2017). Animals in Indigenous Spiritualities: Implications for Critical Social Work. Journal of Indigenous Social Development 6(1).
Leong, K. M. (2009). The tragedy of becoming common: landscape change and perceptions of wildlife. Society and Natural Resources, 23(2), 111–127.
Leveau, L. (2021). United colours of the city: A review about urbanisation impact on animal colours. Austral Ecology, 46(4), 670–679.
Linnell, J. D. C., Solberg, E. J., Brainerd, S., Liberg, O., Sand, H., Wabakken, P., & Kojola, I. (2003). Is the Fear of Wolves Justified? A Fennoscandian Perspective. Acta Zoologica Lituanica, 13(1), 34–40.
Lišková, S., & Frynta, D. (2013). What determines bird beauty in human eyes? Anthrozoös 26(1):27–41.
Lišková, S., Landová, E., & Frynta, D. (2015). Human preferences for colorful birds: Vivid colors or pattern? Evolutionary Psychology, 13(2), 147470491501300200.
López-González, C. (2011). Registro de un coyote (Canis latrans) blanco en el Desierto Chihuahuense de Durango, México. Acta zoológica mexicana, 27(3), 871–873.
Lynn, M., & Harris, J. (1997). The desire for unique consumer products: A new individual differences scale. Psychology & Marketing, 14(6), 601–616.
Marešová, J., & Frynta, D. (2008). Noah’s Ark is full of common species attractive to humans: The case of boid snakes in zoos. Ecological Economics, 64(3), 554–558.
Marešová, J., Landová, E., & Frynta, D. (2009). What makes some species of milk snakes more attractive to humans than others? Theory in Biosciences, 128, 227–235.
McCardle, H. (2012). Albinism in wild vertebrates.
McCleery, R. A., Lopez, R. R., Silvy, N. J., & Kahlick, S. N. (2007). Habitat Use of Fox Squirrels in an Urban Environment. The Journal of Wildlife Management, 71(4), 1149–1157.
McInturff, A., Miller, J. R. B., Gaynor, K. M., & Brashares, J. S. (2021). Patterns of coyote predation on sheep in California: A socio-ecological approach to mapping risk of livestock–predator conflict. Conservation Science and Practice, 3(3), e175.
Mendoza, E., Martineau, P. R., Brenner, E., & Dirzo, R. (2011). A novel method to improve individual animal identification based on camera-trapping data. The Journal of Wildlife Management, 75(4), 973–979.
Merskin, D. (2022). Coyote Killing Contests: Persistence of Differences among Oregonians. Journalism and Media, 3(2), 292–308.
Messmer, T. A. (2000). The emergence of human–wildlife conflict management: turning challenges into opportunities. International Biodeterioration & Biodegradation, 45(3–4), 97–102.
Milstein, T. (2011). Nature Identification: The Power of Pointing and Naming. Environmental Communication, 5(1), 3–24.
Mobbs, D., Hagan, C. C., Dalgleish, T., Silston, B., & Prévost, C. (2015). The ecology of human fear: survival optimization and the nervous system. Frontiers in Neuroscience 9.
Monzón, J., Kays, R., & Dykhuizen, D. E. (2014). Assessment of coyote–wolf–dog admixture using ancestry-informative diagnostic SNPs. Molecular Ecology, 23(1), 182–197.
Mowry, C. B., & Edge, J. L. (2014). Melanistic Coyotes in Northwest Georgia. Southeastern Naturalist, 13(2), 280–287.
Mowry, C. B., Wilson, L. A., & vonHoldt, B. M. (2021). Interface of Human/Wildlife Interactions: An Example of a Bold Coyote (Canis latrans) in Atlanta, GA, USA. Diversity, 13(8), 372.
Nyhus, P. J. (2016). Human–wildlife conflict and coexistence. Annual review of environment and resources, 41, 143–171.
Oiso, N., Fukai, K., Kawada, A., & Suzuki, T. (2013). Piebaldism The Journal of Dermatology 40(5):330–335.
Oklahoma General Assembly (2009). Protection of the albino white-tailed deer. Page Okla. Stat. tit. 29, § 5-414 (2009, Supp. 2012).
Oleyar, C. M. (2010). How Misinformation Fosters Urban Human-Coyote Conflicts. Proceedings of the Vertebrate Pest Conference 24(24).
Organ, M. (2013). December 22. Hunters, beware: Rare albino deer protected by Tennessee law. The Tenneseean.
Palazy, L., Bonenfant, C., Gaillard, J., & Courchamp, F. (2012). Rarity, trophy hunting and ungulates. Animal Conservation, 15(1), 4–11.
Pearce, J., Strickland-Munro, J., & Moore, S. A. (2017). What fosters awe-inspiring experiences in nature-based tourism destinations? Journal of sustainable tourism, 25(3), 362–378.
Pellow, D. N., & TOWARD A CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE (2016). STUDIES: Black Lives Matter as an Environmental Justice Challenge. Du Bois Review: Social Science Research on Race 13(2):221–236.
Perry, G., Boal, C., Verble, R., & Wallace, M. (2020). “Good” and “bad” urban wildlife. Problematic Wildlife II: New Conservation and Management Challenges in the Human-Wildlife Interactions:141–170.
de Pinho, J. R., Grilo, C., Boone, R. B., Galvin, K. A., & Snodgrass, J. G. (2014). Influence of aesthetic appreciation of wildlife species on attitudes towards their conservation in Kenyan agropastoralist communities. PloS one, 9(2), e88842.
Prokop, P., & Fančovičová, J. (2013). Does colour matter? The influence of animal warning coloration on human emotions and willingness to protect them. Animal conservation, 16(4), 458–466.
Protect the White Deer (2023). Protect the White Deer: The White Buck. Advocacy.
Saunders, N. J. (1998). Icons of power: feline symbolism in the Americas. Psychology Press.
Schell, C. J., Dyson, K., Fuentes, T. L., Des Roches, S., Harris, N. C., Miller, D. S., Woelfle-Erskine, C. A., & Lambert, M. R. (2020). The ecological and evolutionary consequences of systemic racism in urban environments. Science, 369(6510), eaay4497.
Selnick, C. N. (2012). White sow, white stag, and white buffalo: The evolution of white animal myths from personal belief to public policy. Georgetown University.
Service, C. N., Bourbonnais, M., Adams, M. S., Henson, L., Neasloss, D., Picard, C., Paquet, P. C., & Darimont, C. T. (2020). Spatial patterns and rarity of the white-phased ‘Spirit bear’ allele reveal gaps in habitat protection. Ecological Solutions and Evidence, 1(2), e12014.
Skavronskaya, L., Moyle, B., & Scott, N. (2020a). The experience of novelty and the novelty of experience. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 322.
Skavronskaya, L., Moyle, B., Scott, N., & Kralj, A. (2020b). The psychology of novelty in memorable tourism experiences. Current Issues in Tourism, 23(21), 2683–2698.
Smith, R. P. (2011). Deer Hunting. Stackpole Books.
Smith–McLallen, A., Johnson, B. T., Dovidio, J. F., & Pearson, A. R. (2006). Black and White: The Role of Color Bias in Implicit Race Bias. Social Cognition, 24(1), 46–73.
Stencel, J. E., & Ghent, A. W. (1987). Analyses of Annual Surveys of White and Gray Squirrels (Sciurus carolinensis) in Olney, Illinois, 1977–1986. The American Midland Naturalist, 118(2), 251–257.
Stokes, D. L. (2007). Things we like: human preferences among similar organisms and implications for conservation. Human Ecology, 35, 361–369.
Tarrant, M. A., Bright, A. D., & Ken Cordell, H. (1997). Attitudes toward wildlife species protection: Assessing moderating and mediating effects in the value-attitude relationship. Human Dimensions of Wildlife, 2(2), 1–20.
Tennessee General Assembly (2014). Protection of the white-tailed deer. Page TN Code § 70-4-130 (2014).
The Albino Squirrel Preservation Society (2001). The Albino Squirrel Preservation Society. Organization.
Timm, R. M., Baker, R. O., Bennett, J. R., & Coolahan, C. C. (2004). Coyote attacks: an increasing suburban problem.
Traweek, M., and R. Welch (1992). April. Exotics in Texas. Texas Parks and Wildlife Department.
Treves, A., Naughton-Treves, L., & Shelley, V. (2013). Longitudinal analysis of attitudes toward wolves. Conservation Biology, 27(2), 315–323.
Utah Division of Wildlife. (2020). January 27. Rare black deer in Moab area died of chronic wasting disease. Utah Division of Wildlife News.
Veblen, T. (1899). Mr. Cummings’s Strictures on" The Theory of the Leisure Class. Journal of Political Economy, 8(1), 106–117.
Wilkinson, C. E. (2023). Public interest in individual study animals can bolster wildlife conservation. Nature Ecology & Evolution, 7(4), 478–479.
Wilkinson, C. E., Brashares, J. S., Bett, A. C., & Kelly, M. (2021). Examining Drivers of Divergence in Recorded and Perceived Human-Carnivore Conflict Hotspots by Integrating Participatory and Ecological Data. Frontiers in Conservation Science 2.
Wiltse, H. M. (1900). the Southern Field of Folk-Lore. The Journal of American Folklore, 13(50), 209–212.
Wisconsin Admin, N. R. (1940). Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources. Page Wis. Admin. Code N.R. § 10.02(3) (2022).
Young, S. (1951). The clever coyote: its history, life, habits economic status and control. Stackpole Co., Harrisburg.
Zbyryt, A., Mikula, P., Ciach, M., Morelli, F., & Tryjanowski, P. (2021). A large-scale survey of bird plumage colour aberrations reveals a collection bias in Internet-mined photographs. Ibis, 163(2), 566–578.
Zimmermann, B., Wabakken, P., & Dötterer, M. (2001). Human-carnivore interactions in Norway: How does the re-appearance of large carnivores affect people’s attitudes and levels of fear. Forest Snow and Landscape Research, 76(1), 1–17.
Zinn, H. C., Manfredo, M. J., & Vaske, J. J. (2000). Social psychological bases for stakeholder acceptance capacity. Human Dimensions of Wildlife, 5(3), 20–33.

No competing interests reported.

Download PDF

Journal Publication

published 16 Apr, 2024

Read the published version in Human Ecology →

Editorial decision: Revision requested
18 Feb, 2024
Reviews received at journal
16 Feb, 2024
Reviewers agreed at journal
20 Jan, 2024
Reviews received at journal
01 Sep, 2023
Reviewers agreed at journal
28 Aug, 2023
Reviewers invited by journal
02 Aug, 2023
Editor assigned by journal
02 Aug, 2023
Submission checks completed at journal
02 Aug, 2023
First submitted to journal
31 Jul, 2023

You are reading this latest preprint version

Of Rarity and Symbolism: Understanding the Human Perceptions of Charismatic Color Morphs

Status:

Journal Publication

Version 1

Abstract

Figures

1. Introduction

2. Perceptions of Charismatic Coloration

2.1. Psychology of Scarcity

2.2 Symbolism and Lore

3. Charismatic Colorations: Melanism, Leucism, and Albinism

4. Case Studies

4.1 Coyotes

4.1.1 Melanistic

4.1.2 Leucistic

4.2 Eastern Gray Squirrels

4.2.1 Melanistic

4.2.2 Leucistic

4.3 White-tailed & Black-tailed Deer

4.3.1 Melanistic

4.3.2 Leucistic

5. Discussion

Conclusion

Declarations

References

Additional Declarations

Status:

Journal Publication

Version 1