Suchergebnisse

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. 

SIMPLE SUMMARY: Trap-Neuter-Return (TNR) is advocated as an effective, humane and ethical solution to problems caused by stray cats living in close association with human habitations. In Australia, TNR has previously been rejected by the Federal Government and the Australian Veterinary Association as an inappropriate management strategy for stray cats. Despite this, and public support for the control of cat numbers and legislative initiatives, calls persist for widespread trials of TNR. We review TNR literature that report empirical data to assess whether TNR resolves problems caused by stray cats and whether cats released under TNR would have a good quality of life. We identify ten ethical and welfare challenges that any cat control program must consider, particularly if cats are to be returned to urban environments. Simply, the weight of these data indicate that TNR cat management is unlikely to solve the problems in most cases and is unethical on animal welfare grounds. We argue instead for a holistic approach to reducing cat numbers using targeted adoption, early-age desexing and community education initiatives. ABSTRACT: Trap-Neuter-Return (TNR) programs, in which stray cats are captured, neutered and returned to the environment are advocated as a humane, ethical alternative to euthanasia. We review the TNR literature in light of current debate over whether or not there should be further TNR trials in Australia. We revisit the problems arising from stray cats living in association with human habitation and estimate how many stray cats would have to be processed through a scientifically-guided TNR program to avoid high euthanasia rates. We also identify 10 ethical and welfare challenges that have to be addressed: we consider the quality of life for stray cats, where they would live, whether the TNR process itself is stressful, whether TNR cats are vulnerable to injury, parasites and disease, can be medically treated, stray cats' body condition and diet, and their impacts on people, pet cats, and urban ...

Many healthy adult cats are euthanised annually in shelters, and novel approaches are required to reduce euthanasia rates. Waiving adoption fees is one such approach. However, concerns that less responsible owners will be attracted to free events persist among welfare groups. We evaluated evidence for differences in cat fate, health, and adherence to husbandry legislation via a case-study of a free adoption-drive for cats ≥1 year at a Western Australian shelter. Postadoption outcomes were compared between free adopters and a control group of normal-fee adopters. The free adoption-drive rehomed 137 cats, increasing average weekly adoptions by 533%. First-time adopters were a significantly larger portion of the free cohort, as a result of mixed-media promotions. Both adopter groups selected cats of similar age; sex and pelage. Post-adoption, both groups retained >90% cats, reporting near identical incidences of medical and behavioural problems. Adopters did not differ in legislative compliance regarding fitting collars, registering cats, or allowing cats to roam. The shelter reported satisfaction with the adoption-drive, because in addition to relieving crowding of healthy adults, adoption of full-fee kittens increased 381%. Overall, we found no evidence for adverse outcomes associated with free adoptions. Shelters should not be dissuaded from occasional free adoption-drives during overflow periods.

Context Predation is one of the key contributors to mortality in freshwater turtles. Confirming the identity of predators is an important step towards conservation management action. Throughout Australia, the red fox (Vulpes vulpes) is suspected to apply significant and unsustainable predation pressure to turtle populations, killing adults and depredating nests; however methods for confirming this are limited. Aims The present study used a range of methods to confirm predation of oblong turtle (Chelodina colliei) nests and adults by the introduced red fox. Methods First, depredated adult carapaces, and turtle egg-shell fragments from excavated nests were swabbed and analysed for trace DNA. Second, we used artificial turtle nests, monitored by camera traps, to analyse seasonal changes in the behaviour of foxes around sites where turtle nests are present, including over the nesting season. Last, we used scat analysis to identify the prevalence of turtle remains in fox diet. Key results Predominantly fox DNA was recovered from both adult carapaces and depredated eggs. In addition, camera traps recorded only foxes depredating artificial nests. Despite this evidence that foxes kill adults and excavated nests, we found that turtle remains were only a small part of the diet of foxes at this study site (hatchling or turtle egg shell were present in only 4% of 230 scats sampled). The diet of these foxes was largely anthropogenic-sourced foods, such as fruit (e.g. figs, grapes, melons; 81% of scats), sheep carrion (41%) and rodents (36%). Conclusions We conclude that DNA analysis, camera trapping and scat analysis are effective methods of identifying foxes as predators of adult turtle, and their nests. Furthermore, we found that anthropogenic foods (orchard crops, livestock or synanthropic species) may subsidise greater fox population size than might occur in their absence, thereby increasing potential pressure on these freshwater turtles. Implications Our findings give credence to the argument that foxes are effective predators of turtle adults and nests. In addition, the high proportion of anthropogenic food sources in the diet of foxes, and potential subsidisation, is an important consideration for land managers.

Context Invasive species are a major cause of biodiversity loss across much of the world, and a key threat to Australia's diverse reptile fauna. There has been no previous comprehensive analysis of the potential impact of the introduced European red fox, Vulpes vulpes, on Australian reptiles. Aims We seek to provide an inventory of all Australian reptile species known to be consumed by the fox, and identify characteristics of squamate species associated with such predation. We also compare these tallies and characteristics with reptile species known to be consumed by the domestic cat, Felis catus, to examine whether predation by these two introduced species is compounded (i.e. affecting much the same set of species) or complementary (affecting different groups of species). Methods We collated records of Australian reptiles consumed by foxes in Australia, with most records deriving from fox dietary studies (tallying >35 000 samples). We modelled presence or absence of fox predation records against a set of biological and other traits, and population trends, for squamate species. Key results In total, 108 reptile species (~11% of Australia's terrestrial reptile fauna) have been recorded as consumed by foxes, fewer than that reported for cats (263 species). Eighty-six species have been reported to be eaten by both predators. More Australian turtle species have been reported as consumed by foxes than by cats, including many that suffer high levels of predation on egg clutches. Twenty threatened reptile species have been reported as consumed by foxes, and 15 by cats. Squamate species consumed by foxes are more likely to be undergoing population decline than those not known to be consumed by foxes. The likelihood of predation by foxes increased with squamate species' adult body mass, in contrast to the relationship for predation by cats, which peaked at ~217 g. Foxes, but not cats, were also less likely to consume venomous snakes. Conclusions The two introduced, and now widespread, predators have both compounding and complementary impacts on the Australian reptile fauna. Implications Enhanced and integrated management of the two introduced predators is likely to provide substantial conservation benefits to much of the Australian reptile fauna.