A moral panic over cats

Lynn, William S.; Santiago‐Ávila, Francisco J.; Lindenmayer, Joann M.; Hadidian, John; Wallach, Arian D.; King, Barbara J.

doi:10.1111/cobi.13346

Cited by 48 publications

(46 citation statements)

References 65 publications

(139 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, scientific articles are unlikely to change the behavior of pet owners per se. Given the full-blown denial of the negative impacts of cats, which is also supported by published position papers (Lynn et al, 2019), the behavior of cat owners might be difficult to change, even in a biodiversity hotspot such as the Mediterranean basin. Cat welfare, including the increased risk of disease contraction in free-roaming individuals (Frenkel et al, 1970;Slater, 2004) and predation by wild carnivores (Sogliani and Mori, 2019), should thus be considered as effective methods to encourage cat owners to keep domestic cats under controlled conditions (McDonald et al, 2015).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

License to Kill? Domestic Cats Affect a Wide Range of Native Fauna in a Highly Biodiverse Mediterranean Country

Mori

Menchetti

Camporesi³

et al. 2019

Front. Ecol. Evol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Amongst domestic animals, the domestic cat, Felis catus, is widely considered to be one of the most serious threats to wildlife conservation. This is particularly evident for island ecosystems, as data for mainland countries are often lacking. In Italy, the European country that is richest in biodiversity, cats are very popular pets. In this work, we aimed at assessing the potential spectrum of wild vertebrates that may be killed by free-ranging domestic cats, and we considered our results within the context of their conservation status and IUCN threat category. We collected data on the impact of cats both through a citizen science approach (wildlife predations by 145 cats belonging to 125 owners) and by following 21 of these 145 cats for 1 year and recording all of the prey they brought home. Domestic cats may kill at least 207 species (2042 predation events) in Italy; among those, 34 are listed as "Threatened" or "Near Threatened" by the IUCN and Italian Red Lists. Birds and mammals such as passerines and rodents were reported to be the groups most commonly killed by free-ranging cats. When considering this diet in functional trait space, we observed that the class occupying the largest functional space was that of birds, followed by mammals, reptiles, and amphibians. Thus, the largest impact was on the functional structure of mammal and bird communities. The use of a collar bell did not affect the predation rate of cats, and the number of prey items brought home decreased with increasing distance from the countryside. We provided strong evidence that free-ranging domestic cats may seriously affect the conservation of threatened and non-threatened wildlife species, which are already suffering from population declines due to other causes, e.g., habitat loss. The mitigation of the impacts of domestic cats on wildlife requires dissemination projects promoting responsible cat ownership, as well as a restriction of free-ranging behavior, particularly at nighttime.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

License to Kill? Domestic Cats Affect a Wide Range of Native Fauna in a Highly Biodiverse Mediterranean Country

Mori

Menchetti

Camporesi³

et al. 2019

Front. Ecol. Evol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The principle mandates action to protect the environment when there is a scientifically plausible but unproven risk” [31]. Importantly, however, a recent paper by Lynn et al [32] concluded that “it is important to understand that precaution is not simply a rationale for action in the face of scientific uncertainty … The principle of precaution is not a way to sidestep complex questions of science or ethics and thereby resolve the debate over cats one way or the other. It is instead a powerful tool for thinking through and weighing how one ought to respond to cats in varying ecological and social circumstances in light of the ethical and scientific complexities at hand”.…”

Section: Misinformation Regarding Impacts On Urban Wildlife Populamentioning

confidence: 99%

Reply to Crawford et al.: Why Trap-Neuter-Return (TNR) Is an Ethical Solution for Stray Cat Management

Wolf

Rand

Swarbrick

et al. 2019

Animals

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Simple SummaryMuch controversy surrounds the management of Australia’s unowned urban cat population. The longstanding practice of trapping and killing urban stray cats and kittens that are not reclaimed or adopted has proven ineffective at reducing their numbers. In addition, it has been shown that shelter staff tasked with the repeated killing of healthy animals often face severe mental health consequences. A growing body of scientific evidence from Australia and elsewhere indicates that a non-lethal alternative, trap-neuter-return (TNR), can be effective at reducing urban stray cat numbers. TNR has also been associated with declines in feline intake and euthanasia at animal shelters. A large-scale trial of TNR in Australia is warranted and needed urgently. An extensive yet fundamentally flawed argument against such a trial is presented in a recently published article, “A Case of Letting the Cat out of the Bag—Why Trap-Neuter-Return Is Not an Ethical Solution for Stray Cat (Felis catus) Management,” by Crawford et al. In the text that follows, we provided a rebuttal to the Crawford et al. paper and argued that TNR is an ethical, scientifically sound solution for the management of Australia’s urban stray cats.AbstractThe recently published article, ‘A Case of Letting the Cat out of the Bag—Why Trap-Neuter-Return Is Not an Ethical Solution for Stray Cat (Felis catus) Management,’ by Crawford et al. warrants rebuttal. The case presented in the paper, opposing the initiation of TNR trials in Australia, ignores peer-reviewed evidence which substantiates the effectiveness of TNR at reducing unowned urban cat numbers. In addition, the paper’s authors offer a number of unrealistic recommendations, which are little more than a rebranding of the failed status quo. Urban stray cats have long been considered a problem across Australia. Current practice calls for the trapping and killing of thousands of healthy urban stray cats and kittens each year with no apparent effect on the total population. In contrast, the literature offers numerous examples, including two recent studies in Australia, of reductions in urban stray cat numbers where TNR has been implemented. TNR has also been associated with reduced feline intake and euthanasia at shelters, which improves both animal welfare and the well-being of shelter staff. A large-scale trial of TNR in an urban Australian context is scientifically justified and long overdue.

show abstract

“…The above steps only reduce suffering by predators but do not eliminate them. Therefore, a clear, logical ethical argument that balances current, ongoing harms against future reductions in harm should be attempted and subjected to independent review, as recommended and practiced in other contexts and wildlife management situations (Lynn, 2018;Santiago-Avila et al, 2018b;Lynn et al, 2019).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Predator Control Needs a Standard of Unbiased Randomized Experiments With Cross-Over Design

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Rapid, global changes, such as extinction and climate change, put a premium on evidence-based, environmental policies and interventions, including predator control efforts. Lack of solid scientific evidence precludes strong inference about responses of predators, people, and prey of both, to various types of predator control. Here we formulate two opposing hypotheses with possible underlying mechanisms and propose experiments to test four pairs of opposed predictions about responses of predators, domestic animals, and people in a coupled, dynamic system. We outline the design of a platinum-standard experiment, namely randomized, controlled experiment with cross-over design and multiple steps to blind measurement, analysis, and peer review to avoid pervasive biases. The gold-standard has been proven feasible in field experiments with predators and livestock, so we call for replicating that across the world on different methods of predator control, in addition to striving for an even higher standard that can improve reproducibility and reliability of the science of predator control.

show abstract

A moral panic over cats

Cited by 48 publications

References 65 publications

License to Kill? Domestic Cats Affect a Wide Range of Native Fauna in a Highly Biodiverse Mediterranean Country

License to Kill? Domestic Cats Affect a Wide Range of Native Fauna in a Highly Biodiverse Mediterranean Country

Reply to Crawford et al.: Why Trap-Neuter-Return (TNR) Is an Ethical Solution for Stray Cat Management

Predator Control Needs a Standard of Unbiased Randomized Experiments With Cross-Over Design

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About