First population assessment of the black forest cat in Madagascar's rainforests

Farris, Z. J., Boone, H. M., Karpanty, S., Murphy, A., Ratelolahy, F., Andrianjakarivelo, V., & Kelly, M. J. (2016). Feral cats and the fitoaty: first population assessment of the black forest cat in Madagascar’s rainforests. Journal of Mammalogy, 97(2), 518-525.

Despite exceptionally high levels of biodiversity and endemism found in Madagascar, much of its wildlife remains little studied, particularly the carnivore community. The recently described, little-known black forest cat (locally known as “fitoaty”) is believed to be restricted to NE Madagascar and has been investigated only through village surveys and anecdotal accounts. From 2008 to 2012, we photographically sampled 7 forest sites with varying degrees of degradation and fragmentation across Makira Natural Park with the goals of: 1) estimating landscape occupancy for fitoaty (Felis spp.), 2) identifying variables influencing fitoaty occupancy, and 3) comparing fitoaty and feral cat (Felis spp.) occupancy across the landscape. We observed higher occupancy for fitoaty, minimal co-occurrence between fitoaty and feral cats (n = 2 sites), and strong divergence in habitat use. We provide the 1st assessment of fitoaty morphology, including comparisons with anecdotal reports, and the 1st population assessment of Madagascar’s exotic cat community with insights into factors associated with carnivore population trends in Madagascar. We suggest the described fitoaty is a phenotypically different form of the feral cat, but additional research is needed. Targeted management plans are needed to diminish the spread and potential negative effects of invasive cats across this important biologically diverse ecoregion.

Change in the probability of occupancy for Fitoaty (black) and Felis spp. (gray) in response to: a) small mammal trap success and b)  distance to village (km). Photographic sampling was conducted across the Masoala-Makira landscape from 2008 to 2012

Human-cat relationship in an oceanic biosphere reserve

Medina, F. M., Nogales, M., Farnworth, M. J., & Bonnaud, E. (2016). Human-cat relationship in an oceanic biosphere reserve: The case of La Palma Island, Canary archipelago. Journal for Nature Conservation.

Removal of feral cats from island environments is a useful mechanism by which their ecological impact on endangered species can be reduced or ended. Nevertheless, because cats are anthropogenic in their origins, social perceptions of management practices play a large role in their implementation. Four-hundred questionnaires were delivered (386 were returned) with 100 going to each of the following: local residents; environmental workers; tourists; and, hunters. Questions explored respondents’ knowledge about island biodiversity and invasive species as well as attitudes towards cat population management methods. Habitat destruction and introduction of invasive species were considered the main threats for the conservation of island biodiversity. Most respondents considered cats to have a negative impact on biodiversity and sterilization campaigns were considered most appropriate for cat population control. Several free sterilization campaigns have been conducted in La Palma Island Biosphere Reserve in order to reduce free-ranging cats and were well received by local people. This research, which combined concepts of management, ecology and social sciences, provides valuable insights which may to be applicable on several other islands where cats and people are present and in conflict with conservation priorities.

US public opinion on humane treatment of stray cats

Chu, K., & Anderseon, W. M. US Public Opinion on Humane Treatment of Stray Cats. 2007. Alley Cat Allies: Bethesda, MD, 6.

An overwhelming majority of Americans believe that leaving a stray cat outside to live out his life is more humane than having him caught and put down, according to a nationally representative survey conducted for Alley Cat Allies by Harris Interactive in April and May 2007. These results reveal a significant disparity between the public’s humane ethic and the operating policy of most U.S. animal pounds and shelters.
 The current animal control policy is that it is more humane to kill a stray cat now than let him live out his life outdoors; however, this policy rests on untenable bases. While those bases will be discussed in detail below, what is most salient to note is that the socalled humane ethic of the animal control and sheltering system ends more cats’ lives than does any other documented cause of death.

Urban cat ownership in Baltimore

Childs, J. E. (1990). Urban cats: their demography, population density, and owner characteristics in Baltimore, Maryland. Anthrozoos: A Multidisciplinary Journal of The Interactions of People & Animals, 3(4), 234-244.

A door-to-door questionnaire survey of 430 households in two areas of Baltimore showed significant differences in cat ownership that were attributable to racial composition. Overall, 29.9% of white households owned a mean of 1.9 cats per cat-owning household, compared to 6.8% of black households owning a mean of 1.0 cat per cat-owning household. The mean age of cats was 3.9 yrs and 1.8 yrs in white and black households, respectively. In contrast, dog ownership in the two areas was nearly identical, with 25.6% of white and 29.1% of black households owning a mean of 1.5 and 1.3 dogs per dog-owning household, respectively. Overall, 62.8% of owned cats were spayed/neutered, 51.8% had received a vaccination in the last year, and 34.7% had been wormed during their lifetimes. A total of 31.6% of households allowed their cats to free-range; 42.5% of the 87 owned cats were in this category. The estimated densities of owned free-ranging cats were 7.0 and 2.8 cats per hectare, for the two areas. Driving counts of free-ranging animals in the two areas suggested a larger population of stray or feral cats in the location with lower reported cat ownership.

Acceptability of proposed cat regulations in Australia

Lilith, M., Calver, M., Styles, I., & Garkaklis, M. (2006). Protecting wildlife from predation by owned domestic cats: application of a precautionary approach to the acceptability of proposed cat regulations. Austral Ecology, 31(2), 176-189.


While it is undeniable that owned domestic cats Felis catus (Mammalia: Felidae) kill large numbers of wildlife, it is contentious if this has significant impacts on wildlife populations. Under the precautionary principle such uncertainty does not preclude measures to reduce putative risk, but action should follow consultation with stakeholders. To initiate such consultation for the City of Armadale, Western Australia, we surveyed urban and rural residents to determine their opinions regarding putative impacts of owned cats on wildlife and the acceptability of proposed regulations. Key statements accepted by 70% or more of respondents, irrespective of their residence, gender or cat ownership status, included: (i) there is a need to regulate owned domestic cats; (ii) the presence of cats in nature reserves is harmful to wildlife; (iii) cats not owned by licensed breeders should be desexed; and (iv) local councils should be empowered to restrict the maximum number of cats per household. Seventy per cent or more of owners agreed to keep their cats on their property from sunset to sunrise and to register them if these measures became compulsory. All groups except urban men also indicated 70% or greater willingness to keep their cats on their property constantly if required. However, fewer than 40% of owners supported empowering local councils to enforce cat-free zones. In this community, cat regulation excluding cat-free zones should enjoy support. Similar approaches should be effective wherever the environmental impacts of owned domestic cats are debated, because compliance with such regulations should be high.

Perceptions on outdoor cats

Wald, D. M., Jacobson, S. K., & Levy, J. K. (2013). Outdoor cats: Identifying differences between stakeholder beliefs, perceived impacts, risk and management. Biological Conservation, 167: 414-424.

Conflict over the management of outdoor cats has contributed to debate between animal welfare and wildlife advocates and stymied efforts to control outdoor cats. We distributed a mail survey to a random sample of participants in Trap-Neuter-Return programs for outdoor cats, Audubon Society members and the public across four counties in Florida (N = 1363) to identify differences between these stakeholders’ perceptions and support for the management of outdoor cats. We used a perception of risk framework to evaluate group differences in attitudes and beliefs about outdoor cats, perceptions of positive and negative impacts, ecological risk perceptions, and support for management options. Multivariate Analysis of Variance results indicated significant differences between groups across all of our measured scales. Discriminant Function Analysis helped identify two distinct groups; explaining 79% and 21% of the variance between groups. Group membership was predicted by cat ownership, attitudes toward and beliefs about outdoor cats, perceived impacts, risk perceptions, and management attitudes. This research is the first to explore differences in cognitions and preferences related to outdoor cat management with three important stakeholder groups. To reduce response bias, our survey included both positive and negative impact items and neutral terminology. Our findings suggest that surveys, based solely on public opinions about outdoor cats, do not reflect the diversity of opinion of all relevant stakeholder groups.

Survey on feral cats and cat colonies in USA

Peterson MN, Hartis B, Rodriguez S, Green M, & Lepczyk CA (2012) Opinions from the Front Lines of Cat Colony Management Conflict. PLoS ONE 7(9): e44616. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0044616

Outdoor cats represent a global threat to terrestrial vertebrate conservation, but management has been rife with conflict due to differences in views of the problem and appropriate responses to it. To evaluate these differences we conducted a survey of opinions about outdoor cats and their management with two contrasting stakeholder groups, cat colony caretakers (CCCs) and bird conservation professionals (BCPs) across the United States. Group opinions were polarized, for both normative statements (CCCs supported treating feral cats as protected wildlife and using trap neuter and release [TNR] and BCPs supported treating feral cats as pests and using euthanasia) and empirical statements. Opinions also were related to gender, age, and education, with females and older respondents being less likely than their counterparts to support treating feral cats as pests, and females being less likely than males to support euthanasia. Most CCCs held false beliefs about the impacts of feral cats on wildlife and the impacts of TNR (e.g., 20% believed feral cats harmed bird populations, 70% believed TNR eliminates cat colonies, and 18% disagreed with the statement that feral cats filled the role of native predators). Only 6% of CCCs believed feral cats carried diseases. To the extent the beliefs held by CCCs are rooted in lack of knowledge and mistrust, rather than denial of directly observable phenomenon, the conservation community can manage these conflicts more productively by bringing CCCs into the process of defining data collection methods, defining study/management locations, and identifying common goals related to caring for animals.

Human attitudes towards proposed cat legistalion

Grayson, J., Calver, M., & Styles, I. (2002). Attitudes of suburban Western Australians to proposed cat control legislation. Australian veterinary journal,80(9), 536-543.

Objective To determine the knowledge, attitudes and practices of cat-owners and non-owners in suburban Perth, Western Australia, on issues relating to proposed local government regulation of cat-ownership.

Design The 1261 respondents to a mailed survey were ranked on issues regarding restrictions on cat-ownership and cat roaming (control scale), attitudes to wildlife in suburbia and putative impacts of cats on wildlife (wildlife scale), knowledge of cat behaviour and husbandry (knowledge scale) and attitudes and practices regarding cat sterilisation (sterilisation scale). Age, gender and cat-ownership status of the survey respondents were explored to see if any of these factors influenced the position of respondents on the scales.

Results Cat-owners, particularly female owners, scored significantly higher on the knowledge scale than non-owners, whilst non-owners scored significantly higher than cat-owners on the control and wildlife scales. Women were more likely to favour compulsory sterilisation of pet cats than men, but men were more willing to implement controls on cat-ownership. Age was also a significant factor, with older people more willing to implement controls. Analysis of specific questions showed that both cat-owners and non-owners agreed that there was a need for cat control legislation and supported measures such as compulsory sterilisation, registering of cats, restricting cats' ability to roam and stipulating a maximum number of cats per property. Nevertheless, both groups rejected the idea that local governments should enforce cat-free zones.

Conclusion Cat legislation that avoids or educates about the contentious issue of cat-free zones should receive solid community support.

Loss of wildlife to domestic cats

Paton, D. (1991). Loss of wildlife to domestic cats. In Potter, C. (ed), The Impact of Cats on Native Wildlife: Proceedings of a Workshop held on May 8-9 1991. ANPWS, Canberra

Questionnaires asked people how many animals they thought their cat(s) had killed in the previous 12 months. Of the 3000 questionnaires distributed, 709 were returned, covering 700 cats in Adelaide suburbs, in country towns and in rural areas. The majority of the questionnaires (88%) came from members of birders' associations.

• Cats in rural areas were reported to catch over twice as many prey as suburban cats. 
• The average number of prey reported caught per year was 30. 
• Suburban cats (the majority of cats) were reported to catch less, and rural cats (far fewer in number) caught more. 
• Bells were ineffective 
• Most preys were non native