Distribution characteristics of unmanaged cat colonies over a 20 year period in Auckland, New Zealand

Aguilar, Glenn; Farnworth, Mark J.

doi:10.1016/j.apgeog.2012.11.009

Cited by 39 publications

(31 citation statements)

References 52 publications

(51 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Importantly, our distance‐based approach overlaps an independent estimate based on a randomized survey of citizens and aligns with previously published parameters. Our map of predicted population density avoids spatial‐biases that may arise in non‐randomized data collection schemes (Aguilar & Farnworth, , ; Reading, Scarlett & Berliner, ) or homeowner‐based surveys that are restricted to residential areas (Sims et al ., ; Murray et al ., ) and, therefore, provides managers with unbiased information for targeting interventions to address abundant cats in urban areas.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Predicting free‐roaming cat population densities in urban areas

Flockhart

Norris

Coe

2016

Animal Conservation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although free-roaming cats can have a significant impact on the environment, and substantial resources have been invested to find humane alternatives for managing free-roaming cat populations, there are no empirical estimates of free-roaming cat population size in medium to large cities. In addition, little is known about factors limiting free-roaming cat population size and distribution. Using Guelph, ON, Canada (pop: 120 000; 86.7 km 2 ) as a case-study, we apply replicated distance transect sampling and likelihood-based hierarchical modelling to compare humanmediated landscape patterns of land use, distance to roads, distance to wooded areas, building density and socio-economic status to explain the abundance of freeroaming cats. We then derive an empirical estimate of total population size and present a spatially explicit prediction of free-roaming cat density across an entire city. Cat abundance was highest in residential areas and lowest in commercial and institutional areas, negatively related to median household income, and positively related to distance from woods and building density. Total population size was estimated to be 7662 (95% bootstrap CI: 6145-9966) for Guelph; free-roaming cat density varied from 0 to 49.4 cats per ha. Our estimate overlapped with an independent estimate of indoor-outdoor cats (11 927; 95% CI: 6361-20 989) derived from random surveys of city residents, which implies our distance transect methodology was relatively robust and unbiased. Our approach used simple geographical information that is readily available for most urban areas in North America and can be applied broadly to inform cat management in urban areas. Finally, our results suggest that free-roaming cat density in cities could be determined by bottom-up processes (e.g. enhanced food availability in residential areas) as well as top-down processes (e.g. enhanced susceptibility to coyote predation near wooded areas) which are typically reserved to explain wildlife populations in natural environments.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Predicting free‐roaming cat population densities in urban areas

Flockhart

Norris

Coe

2016

Animal Conservation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Mandatory de-sexing, micro-chipping, and registration of cats are suggested key components of responsible companion cat ownership [ 27 , 28 ]. While these methods do not directly reduce predation levels, they do reduce the chance that companion cats will contribute to stray and feral populations through breeding, abandonment, or becoming lost [ 8 , 29 , 30 ]. Trap-Neuter-Return (TNR) programmes capture stray cats, de-sex and vaccinate them, and then return them to their capture site.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Survey of Public Opinion on Cat (Felis catus) Predation and the Future Direction of Cat Management in New Zealand

Walker

Bruce

Dale

2017

Animals

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Simple SummaryThe need to balance the benefits of cat ownership with the prevention of wildlife predation in New Zealand evokes strong and opposing views. This paper evaluates public concern for wildlife predation by four categories of cats; owned cats, managed-stray cats, unmanaged-stray cats, and feral cats. In addition, public support for a National Cat Management Strategy and a range of management techniques are investigated. Although the participants expressed concern regarding wildlife predation by all four categories of cats, the highest levels of concern were predation by feral cats, followed by unmanaged stray cats, then managed stray cats, and finally owned cats. The large majority of participants were found to support the implementation of a National Cat Management Strategy. Management techniques for owned cats that obtained public support included; cat exclusion zones, limits on ownership numbers, microchipping, Council registration, and de-sexing. Trap-Neuter-Return (TNR) was the favoured management technique for managed stray cats, while TNR and lethal management techniques were equally favoured for unmanaged stray cats. Lethal control methods were favoured for feral cats. The findings presented in this paper will be useful to consider during the development of legislation relating to cat management and predation in New Zealand.AbstractCat predation is a prominent issue in New Zealand that provokes strong and opposing views. We explored, via 1011 face-to-face questionnaires, public opinion on (a) support for a National Cat Management Strategy (78% support); (b) concern regarding predation of wildlife by owned and un-owned cats (managed stray, unmanaged stray, and feral cats); (c) the acceptability of management techniques for owned cats; and (d) the acceptability of population management techniques for un-owned cats. The highest concern was expressed regarding the predation of non-native and native wildlife by feral cats (60 and 86% repectively), followed by unmanaged stray cats (59 and 86% respectively), managed stray cats (54 and 82% respectively), and finally owned cats (38 and 69% repectively). Limits to the number of cats owned and cat restriction zones received high levels of support (>65%), and compulsory microchipping, Council registration, and de-sexing were supported by the majority (>58%). Public support of population control methods for unowned cats was explored, and the influence of participant demographic variables on responses is described. These findings provide insight into public opinion regarding the management of cats in New Zealand, which should be considered during the development of legislation in this area.

show abstract

“…brushtail possums: Potts, 2009). Others represent companion animals that may are strongly associated with human habitation in New Zealand (Aguilar & Farnworth 2012;Aguilar & Farnworth 2013) but may also be socially problematic (e.g. domestic cats: Farnworth, Dye & Keown, 2010) with a potential to impact upon native fauna if not controlled.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Understanding Attitudes Toward the Control of Nonnative Wild and Feral Mammals: Similarities and Differences in the Opinions of the General Public, Animal Protectionists, and Conservationists in New Zealand (Aotearoa)

Farnworth

Watson

Adams

2013

Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Lethal control is used extensively in New Zealand to control nonnative nonhuman mammals. Respondents were surveyed about 8 mammal groups considered pests and their attitudes toward their control and pest status. They also identified the most appropriate method of control for the 8 different mammals. Information was gathered from 3 groups of respondents: nonhuman animal protectionists, conservationists, and the general public. Conservationists routinely rated all animal groups as more severe pests than the general public or animal protectionists, who provided the lowest scores. Rats, stoats, brushtail possums, and rabbits were identified as the 4 most serious pests by all 3 groups. Conservationists were 5.7 and 2.6 times more likely to prefer a lethal method of control than protectionists and the general public, respectively. For all 3 groups an increase in pest score for a given animal saw a decline in importance placed upon the animal's welfare. This relationship was strong for the general public but weak for conservationists and animal protectionists. Understanding aspects of potentially opposing viewpoints may be invaluable in supporting the development of new welfare-focused control methods.

show abstract

Distribution characteristics of unmanaged cat colonies over a 20 year period in Auckland, New Zealand

Cited by 39 publications

References 52 publications

Predicting free‐roaming cat population densities in urban areas

Predicting free‐roaming cat population densities in urban areas

A Survey of Public Opinion on Cat (Felis catus) Predation and the Future Direction of Cat Management in New Zealand

Understanding Attitudes Toward the Control of Nonnative Wild and Feral Mammals: Similarities and Differences in the Opinions of the General Public, Animal Protectionists, and Conservationists in New Zealand (Aotearoa)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About