Change the Humans First: Principles for Improving the Management of Free-Roaming Cats

McLeod, Lynette J.; Hine, Donald W.; Driver, Aaron B.

doi:10.3390/ani9080555

Cited by 34 publications

(56 citation statements)

References 67 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We need to broaden the discourse about cat impacts and management to include pets. This discussion needs to include multiple sectors of the community (McLeod et al 2019), so as to avoid polarising the public in the manner that has been singularly divisive and counterproductive in places such as the USA (Marra and Santella 2016).…”

Section: Conclusion: Opportunities For Better Pet Cat Managementmentioning

confidence: 99%

We need to worry about Bella and Charlie: the impacts of pet cats on Australian wildlife

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research and management attention on the impacts of the introduced domestic cat (Felis catus) on Australian fauna have focussed mainly on the feral population. Here, we summarise the evidence for impacts of predation by pet cats on Australian wildlife. We collate examples of local wildlife population decline and extirpation as a result, at least in part, of predation by pet cats. We assemble information across 66 studies of predation by pet cats worldwide (including 24 Australian studies) to estimate the predation toll of pet cats in Australia, plus the predation pressure per unit area in residential areas. We compared these estimates to those published for feral cats in Australia. The per capita kill rate of pet cats is 25% that of feral cats. However, pet cats live at much higher densities, so the predation rate of pets per square kilometre in residential areas is 28–52 times larger than predation rates by feral cats in natural environments, and 1.3–2.3 times greater than predation rates per km2 by feral cats living in urban areas. Pet cats kill introduced species more often than do feral cats living in natural environments, but, nonetheless, the toll of native animals killed per square kilometre by pet cats in residential areas is still much higher than the toll per square kilometre by feral cats. There is no evidence that pet cats exert significant control of introduced species. The high predation toll of pet cats in residential areas, the documented examples of declines and extirpations in populations of native species caused by pet cats, and potential pathways for other, indirect effects (e.g. from disease, landscapes of fear, ecological footprints), and the context of extraordinary impacts from feral cats on Australian fauna, together support a default position that pet cat impacts are serious and should be reduced. From a technical perspective, the pet cat impacts can be reduced more effectively and humanely than those of feral cats, while also enhancing pet cat welfare. We review the management options for reducing predation by pet cats, and discuss the opportunities and challenges for improved pet cat management and welfare.

show abstract

Section: Conclusion: Opportunities For Better Pet Cat Managementmentioning

confidence: 99%

We need to worry about Bella and Charlie: the impacts of pet cats on Australian wildlife

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In addition, further work is warranted on this question as this understanding is important for development and implementation of management strategies for reducing or preventing wild dog and cat predation on wildlife, and reducing potential conflicts between different normative groups [33,34]. The first two principal components in our model explained only just over half of the total variance in the seven variables used in that analysis.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 93%

“…Importantly, respondents' degrees of acceptance in these categories varied markedly, showing Shackleton and colleagues' [34] point that there is variability within normative groups as well as between. The most common responses were low acceptance for both categories (32% of respondents) and low acceptance for the first but high acceptance of the second (42%; Table 6).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 95%

“…They suggested conflict management around competing values occur prior to escalation, as well as to de-escalate conflict. Shackleton et al [34] offered a conceptual framework that accounts for human value changes over time and space. In particular, they noted a need to focus on the individual, as individual values vary within groups, such as agriculturalists or wildlife protectionists, as much as between groups (noting also that groups' and individuals' values can co-construct each other).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Beliefs and Attitudes of Residents in Queensland, Australia, about Managing Dog and Cat Impacts on Native Wildlife

Carter

Paterson²,

Morton³

et al. 2020

Animals

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many humans have created close relationships with wildlife and companion species. Notwithstanding that companion species were at some point themselves wild, some wild (i.e., feral) and domesticated (owned) dogs and cats now have significant impacts on wildlife. Many strategies exist to control the impact of dogs and cats on wildlife, but the successful implementation of management initiatives is tied to public opinions and the degree of acceptability of these measures. This paper reports the findings of a survey assessing the beliefs of residents in Queensland, Australia, about dog and cat impacts on wildlife, and their attitudes towards various strategies and options for controlling wild (i.e., feral) and domesticated (owned) dogs and cats. The responses of 590 participants were analysed. Our respondents collectively grouped strategies into those that directly cause wild dog and cat deaths and those that allow wild dogs and cats to live a ‘natural’ life, which is a variation on past research where respondents grouped strategies into lethal and non-lethal methods. Community acceptability of strategies that directly cause wild dog and cat deaths (each assessed using five-category Likert scores) was lower amongst females and respondents aged 34 years or less. Gender expectations in most places and cultures still predominately suggest that women are more ‘caring’, supportive of animal welfare, and perhaps cognizant that wild dogs and cats are also sentient creatures and appreciate the problematic tension between controlling wild and companion species. Age-related differences may reflect the changing social values of communities at different points in time. There was high support for regulations that enforce responsible pet ownership but not for the importance of pet-free suburbs, which the majority of respondents considered unimportant. These important variations in beliefs and attitudes require careful management within each community for the success of any program to control wild dogs or cats.

show abstract

“…Adoption is, of course, only part of the solution. It needs to be applied in conjunction with strong measures to increase responsible ownership, together with education programs targeted to the needs of individual communities to raise awareness and compliance (e.g., [39][40][41][42]). The suggestions of some authors to encourage positive behaviour change towards unowned cats and to use TNR to encourage positive views of neutering [43] are of limited value in Australia, where concern about the environmental effects of cats is high [44] and the problem is less one of promoting a positive view of neutering and more encouraging people to neuter their cats before puberty [45][46][47].…”

Section: Declarations Of Interestmentioning

confidence: 99%

Response to Wolf et al.: Furthering Debate over the Suitability of Trap-Neuter-Return for Stray Cat Management

Calver

Crawford

Fleming

2020

Animals

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To continue dialogue over proposed Australian trials of Trap-Neuter-Return (TNR), we applied a framework requiring identification of areas of agreement, areas of disagreement, and identification of empirical data collection required to resolve disagreements. There is agreement that Australia has a problem with stray cats, causing problems of impacts on wildlife, nuisance, disease transmission (including public health issues and exchange of diseases between stray cat and pet cat populations), poor welfare outcomes for stray cats, and an emotional burden on staff euthanising healthy stray cats. There is disagreement on whether (i) current measures are failing, leading to unacceptably high euthanasia levels, (ii) some contributors to the debate misunderstand TNR, (iii) TNR trials will reduce urban cat populations and associated problems, (iv) TNR is an ethical solution to cat overpopulation, and (v) some contributors to the debate promulgated misinformation. Although not everyone agrees that TNR trials should proceed, as a hypothetical exploration, we propose an experimental approach explicitly comparing TNR to alternatives. Trials could only be considered if other detailed and well-funded attempts at stray cat control focusing across an entire Local Government Area (LGA) prove ineffective.

show abstract

Change the Humans First: Principles for Improving the Management of Free-Roaming Cats

Cited by 34 publications

References 67 publications

We need to worry about Bella and Charlie: the impacts of pet cats on Australian wildlife

We need to worry about Bella and Charlie: the impacts of pet cats on Australian wildlife

Beliefs and Attitudes of Residents in Queensland, Australia, about Managing Dog and Cat Impacts on Native Wildlife

Response to Wolf et al.: Furthering Debate over the Suitability of Trap-Neuter-Return for Stray Cat Management

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About