A moral panic over cats

Using applied social science disciplines to implement creative outdoor cat management solutions and avoid the trap of one-size-fits-all policies

In the United States, policy conflicts have prevented successful population-level management of outdoor cats for decades. Wildlife conservation professionals have sought widespread use of humane dispatch (i.e., lethal culling applied humanely), whereas cat welfare professionals have promoted trap-neuter-return (TNR) (cats are trapped, neutered, and returned to the outdoors). These conflicts represent a policy panacea trap, which we argue drives many conservation conflicts. In these situations, the focus on defending a one-size-fits-all policy fails to account for the value differences that shape the different understandings of the problem and desired outcomes associated with each policy, as well as complexities in the social-ecological system. Over the past 5 years, a group of wildlife conservation and cat welfare professionals codeveloped a set of products that have started to be used to help organizations break out of the policy panacea trap. We used a case study to illustrate how efforts grounded in applied social science disciplines, such as science communication, social-ecological systems, and conservation marketing, can help identify a more robust set of policy options tailored to local management and cultural contexts for successful implementation. Shifting the focus to embrace a shared understanding of the broader system helped us identify areas for collaboration, broaden the policy toolbox, and allow space for policy tools originally framed as opposing panaceas. This work helped prepare all parties to have difficult but productive discussions and address shared policy needs. We suggest that many value-based conservation conflicts would benefit from similar efforts that use applied social science to transform how conflict is addressed, moving beyond policy panaceas that end in stalemate to develop shared understandings of context-specific policies, and to identify opportunities for creative cooperation that yield real conservation progress.

Counting the Capital's cats: Estimating drivers of abundance of free-roaming cats with a novel hierarchical model

Free-roaming cats are a conservation concern in many areas but identifying their impacts and developing mitigation strategies requires a robust understanding of their distribution and density patterns. Urban and residential areas may be especially relevant in this process because free-roaming cats are abundant in these anthropogenic landscapes. Here, we estimate the occupancy and density of free-roaming cats in Washington D.C. and relate these metrics to known landscape and social factors. We conducted an extended camera trap survey of public and private spaces across D.C. and analyzed data collected from 1483 camera deployments from 2018 to 2020. We estimated citywide cat distribution by fitting hierarchical occupancy models and further estimated cat abundance using a novel random thinning spatial capture-recapture model that allows for the use of photos that can and cannot be identified to individual. Within this model, we utilized individual covariates that provided identity exclusions between photos of unidentifiable cats with inconsistent coat patterns, thus increasing the precision of abundance estimates. This combined model also allowed for unbiased estimation of density when animals cannot be identified to individual at the same rate as for free-roaming cats whose identifiability depended on their coat characteristics. Cat occupancy and abundance declined with increasing distance from residential areas, an effect that was more pronounced in wealthier neighborhoods. There was noteworthy absence of cats detected in larger public spaces and forests. Realized densities ranged from 0.02 to 1.75 cats/ha in sampled areas, resulting in a district-wide estimate of ~7296 free-roaming cats. Ninety percent of cat detections lacked collars and nearly 35% of known individuals were ear-tipped, indicative of district Trap-Neuter-Return (TNR) programs. These results suggest that we mainly sampled and estimated the unowned cat subpopulation, such that indoor/outdoor housecats were not well represented. The precise estimation of cat population densities is difficult due to the varied behavior of subpopulations within free-roaming cat populations (housecats, stray and feral cats), but our methods provide a first step in establishing citywide baselines to inform data-driven management plans for free-roaming cats in urban environments.

The Law and the Pussycat: Public Perceptions of the Use of Municipal Bylaws to Control Free-Roaming Domestic Cats in Canada

Domestic cats (Felis catus) face contradictory public perceptions. In 2019, we examined public perceptions toward cats within the City of Prince George, British Columbia, Canada, using an online survey (1,464 responses) to assess perceptions toward free-roaming cats and the use of bylaws to address concerns. Perceptions were dependent on cat-ownership status; a majority of non-cat and former owners were concerned about free-roaming cats, current cat owners less so. There was considerable support for mandatory identification. Cat owners were not supportive of bylaws restricting free-roaming of cats, although this was supported by non-owners. Concerns include the negative impact on caring for a pet cat, and the fear that such bylaws would increase abandonment. Cat owners were not enthusiastic about fines for roaming cats, while non-cat owners were. There was considerable concern around including neutering cats as part of planned cat management. Our research also found nuanced concern for the impacts of management on impoverished owners, the welfare of cats and a recognition that it was the humans, rather than the cats, who should be the focus of active and thoughtful intervention.

Re-Thinking Felid–Human Entanglements through the Lenses of Compassionate Conservation and Multispecies Studies

Simple Summary

Felids have long and complex historical associations with humans, ranging from fear and persecution to worship and care. With many felid species in widespread decline, re-thinking the messy entanglements of feline predators and human societies is a necessary step for fostering coexistence as current conservation frameworks that rely on the separation of people from nature are failing felids. Here, we explore two distinct but related interdisciplinary fields that, when put into dialogue with one another, offer novel perspectives and insights on felid–human relationships and conservation initiatives more broadly. We identified numerous similarities and emergent properties within compassionate conservation and multispecies studies, despite these fields arising from the sciences and social sciences and humanities respectively. Combined, reorientation of conservation values and practices to be morally inclusive of individual animals and their subjective experiences has the potential to support cohabitation and tolerance for felids, promoting multispecies flourishing.

Abstract

With many felid species in widespread decline, re-thinking the messy felid–human entanglements is a necessary step for fostering coexistence as current conservation frameworks centered on human exceptionalism and widespread violence toward wild animals are conspicuously failing felids. This paper argues for fostering a critical awareness of how we understand our relationships with nonhuman animals, particularly in the context of conservation. We bring two distinct but related interdisciplinary fields into a dialogue to critically question the values and conceptual assumptions that frame the practices of felid conservation today. Compassionate conservation and multispecies studies share many synergies and conceptual overlaps despite emerging from different academic domains. We identified four key areas for further exploration: (1) A shift in emphasis from practices of killing to the underlying assumptions that make forms of killing permissible and ethically unproblematic. (2) Re-engagement with individuals, not just species, in conservation settings. (3) Unsettling human exceptionalism through an emphasis on the agency of animals and an ethic involving compassion. (4) Acknowledging the ways in which humans co-become with other animals and cultivating relationships of multispecies cohabitation and flourishing.

Compassionate Conservation is indistinguishable from traditional forms of conservation in practice

Animal welfare and ethics are important factors influencing wildlife conservation practice, and critics are increasingly challenging the underlying ethics and motivations supporting common conservation practices. “Compassionate Conservationists” argue that all conservationists should respect the rights of individual sentient animals and approach conservation problems from a position of compassion, and that doing so requires implementing practices that avoid direct harm to individual animals. In this way Compassionate Conservationists seek to contrast themselves with “Traditional Conservationists” who often express consequentialist decision-making processes that ostensibly aim to dispassionately minimize net animal harms, resulting in the common use of practices that directly harm or kill some animals. Conservationists and other observers might therefore conclude that the two sides of this debate are distinct and/or that their policy proscriptions produce different welfare outcomes for animals. To explore the validity of this conclusion we review the ethical philosophies underpinning two types of Compassionate Conservation—deontology and virtue ethics. Deontology focusses on animal rights or the moral duties or obligations of conservationists, whereas virtue ethics focusses on acting in ways that are virtuous or compassionate. We demonstrate that both types permit the intentional harm and killing of animals when faced with common conservation problems where animals will be harmed no matter what the conservationist does or does not do. We then describe the applied decision-making processes exhibited by Compassionate Conservationists (of both types) and Traditional Conservationists to show that they may each lead to the implementation of similar conservation practices (including lethal control) and produce similar outcomes for animals, despite the perceived differences in their ethical motivations. The widespread presence of wildlife conservation problems that cannot be resolved without causing at least some harm to some animals means that conservationists of all persuasions must routinely make trade-offs between the welfare of some animals over others. Compassionate Conservationists do this from an explicit position of animal rights and/or compassion, whereas Traditional Conservationists respect animal rights and exhibit this same compassion implicitly. These observations lead to the conclusion that Compassionate Conservation is indistinguishable from traditional forms of conservation in practice, and that the apparent disagreement among conservationists primarily concerns the effectiveness of various wildlife management practices at minimizing animal harm, and not the underlying ethics, motivations or morality of those practices.

Guidance for management of free-roaming community cats: a bioeconomic analysis

OBJECTIVES

This study used computer simulation modeling to estimate and compare costs of different free-roaming cat (FRC) management options (lethal and non-lethal removal, trap-neuter-return, combinations of these options and no action) and their ability to reduce FRC population abundance in open demographic settings. The findings provide a resource for selecting management approaches that are well matched for specific communities, goals and timelines, and they represent use of best available science to address FRC issues.

METHODS

Multiple FRC management approaches were simulated at varying intensities using a stochastic individual-based model in the software package Vortex. Itemized costs were obtained from published literature and expert feedback. Metrics generated to evaluate and compare management scenarios included final population size, total cost and a cost efficiency index, which was the ratio between total cost and population size reduction.

RESULTS

Simulations suggested that cost-effective reduction of FRC numbers required sufficient management intensity, regardless of management approach, and greatly improved when cat abandonment was minimized. Removal yielded the fastest initial reduction in cat abundance, but trap-neuter-return was a viable and potentially more cost-effective approach if performed at higher intensities over a sufficient duration. Of five management scenarios that reduced the final population size by approximately 45%, the three scenarios that relied exclusively on removal were considerably more expensive than the two scenarios that relied exclusively or primarily on sterilization.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

FRCs present a challenge in many municipalities, and stakeholders representing different perspectives may promote varying and sometimes incompatible population management policies and strategies. Although scientific research is often used to identify FRC impacts, its use to identify viable, cost-effective management solutions has been inadequate. The data provided by simulating different interventions, combined with community-specific goals, priorities and ethics, provide a framework for better-informed FRC policy and management outcomes.

Colorful Collar-Covers and Bells Reduce Wildlife Predation by Domestic Cats in a Continental European Setting

In many areas, domestic cats are the most abundant predators of small vertebrates. Due to the potential impact on prey populations by cats, there are calls to investigate the effectiveness of visual and acoustic cues as measures to reduce the cat’s hunting efficiency. In this study, we complement previous studies on the efficacy of Birdsbesafe collar-covers (BBScc) in a so far not investigated Continental European setting and explore the effectiveness in combination with a bell. We also evaluate the tolerability of these devices by the cat and the acceptance by their owners. With a randomized and comparative citizen science-based approach we collected data from 26 households with 31 study cats, which were wearing either a BBScc or both a BBScc and a bell. The BBScc reduced the number of birds brought home by 37% (probability of reduction of 88%). The number of mammals brought home was reduced by 54–62%, but only with the additional bell (probability of reduction of >99%). About one fourth of the birds that could be dissected were found to have collided with a hard object prior to having been brought home by the cats. Our results are in line with previous findings from Australia, the United States, and the United Kingdom and highlight the great potential of visual and acoustic cues in reducing hunting success in domestic cats also in Continental Europe. On the other hand, our result show that the number of prey brought home by cats overestimates their hunting bag, if scavenging is not considered. The majority of cat owners reported that their cats habituated quickly to the BBScc. However, frequent scratching in some cats indicates that some individuals may not habituate. Most participating cat owners had a positive attitude toward the BBScc and said that they were willing to use it after the study. However, cat owners reported that their social environment (e.g., neighbors, family, friends) was relatively skeptical, which indicates a need for communication. To conclude, commercially available devices with visual and acoustic stimuli are straightforward and effective ways to mitigate the potentially harmful effect of domestic cats on wildlife.

Estimating the Population of Unowned Free-Ranging Domestic Cats in Denmark Using a Combination of Questionnaires and GPS Tracking

The present study aimed (1) to estimate the size of the population of unowned free-ranging domestic cats in Denmark using a questionnaire survey combined with a GPS-tracking survey, and (2) to estimate the distribution of the population across different habitats. The questionnaires were circulated in 94 randomly selected parishes ranging across seven kinds of habitat. Using responses from five of the habitats, we estimated the population of unowned free-ranging cats nationally. In the other two habitats, questionnaire data were collected in a simpler way. The territory of 59 owned cats was estimated with GPS tracking to assess home ranges. Home range area was calculated using 95% Brownian bridge kernel density estimation (0.033–0.077 ± 0.011–0.023 km2, median ± SE). We estimated a population of unowned free-ranging cats in Denmark of 89,000 ± 11,000 (SE), with a mean density of 2 ± 0.3 (SE) cats per km2, living primarily in rural habitats. Approximately one-third of the cats were estimated to be socialised and two-thirds unsocialised. Our method may be suitable for use in other temperate areas facing problems with unowned free-ranging cats.

How Serious Are Health-Related Welfare Problems in Unowned Unsocialised Domestic Cats? A Study from Denmark Based on 598 Necropsies

Free ranging unsocialised domestic cats are widely believed to suffer from a high load of welfare problems. We assessed the validity of this belief by performing necropsies on the corpses of 598 unsocialised cats, originating from all parts of Denmark, that had been euthanised by two Danish cat welfare organisations. We selected a number of variables for health-related cat welfare that could be assessed through necropsy (e.g., gross lesions, ectoparasites and body condition) or by laboratory analysis (e.g., infection with feline immunodeficiency virus (FIV), and by feline leukaemia virus (FeLV)). Each finding was classified as having either a major or minor welfare impact on the cat. More than 83% of the cats had no major finding, and 54% had no finding indicating a welfare issue at all. More than 83% of the cats had a body condition within normal range. Only 0.3% were emaciated. The most common finding was infestation with ectoparasites, with 15.9% infected with lice, 12.3% with fleas, 4.7% with ticks, and 6.7% with ear mites. FIV and FeLV were detected in 9.2% and 1.2% of the cases, respectively. The most common lesion related to the cats’ teeth. Overall, unsocialised cats in Denmark have a moderate level of health-related welfare problems.

A critical review of the compassionate conservation debate

Compassionate conservation holds that compassion should transform conservation. It has prompted heated debate and has been criticized strongly. We reviewed the debate to characterize compassionate conservation and to philosophically analyze critiques that are recurring and that warrant further critical attention. The necessary elements of compassionate conservation relate to the moral value of sentient animals and conservation and to science and conservation practice. Although compassionate conservation has several nontraditional necessary conditions, it also importantly allows a degree of pluralism in values and scientific judgment regarding animals and conservation practice. We identified 52 specific criticisms from 11 articles that directly critique compassionate conservation. We closely examined 33 of these because they recurred regularly or included substantial questions that required further response. Critics criticized compassionate conservation's ethical foundations, scientific credentials, clarity of application, understanding of compassion, its alleged threat to conservation and biodiversity. Some criticisms, we found, are question begging, confused, or overlook conceptual complexity. These criticisms raise questions for critics and proponents, regarding, for example, equal versus differential intrinsic moral value of different sentient animals (including humans), problems of natural and human-caused suffering of wild animals and predation, and the acceptability of specific conservation practices within compassionate conservation. By addressing recurring and faulty critiques of compassionate conservation and identifying issues for compassionate conservation to address, this review provides a clearer basis for crucial ongoing interdisciplinary dialogue about ethics, values, and conservation.

Perspectives of Canadian and American Cat Owners on Provision of Uncontrolled Outdoor Access for Owned Domestic Cats

While uncontrolled outdoor access can increase opportunities for cat physical and mental stimulation, it can also increase risks of injury and illness, and result in predation of wild birds and small animals. In Canada and the United States, it is often recommended to keep cats indoors, but many owners still provide some level of outdoor access. The objectives of this study were to use a cross-sectional survey to explore the attitudes and practices of cat owners in Canada and the United States toward outdoor access and to identify factors that influence the provision of uncontrolled outdoor access. A convenience sample of cat owners (N = 7,838) were recruited to complete an online survey, and a mixed logistic regression model was used to examine associations between cat and owner-related factors, and uncontrolled outdoor access for cats, with province/state included as a random effect. In total, 57% of owners kept their cats indoors, and 43% provided some form of outdoor access, with 21% of total owners providing uncontrolled outdoor access. Provision of uncontrolled outdoor access was associated with factors related to cat characteristics (e.g., sex, breed, presence of health, and behavioral issues), the home environment (e.g., living with other pets, types of enrichment provided), owner perspectives on outdoor access (e.g., level of agreement with potential benefits and consequence of outdoor access), and owner demographics (e.g., gender, education, area of residence). For cats with uncontrolled outdoor access, few owners reported their cats having a collar or a microchip, suggesting a need to increase education about precautionary measures to protect the welfare of outdoor cats. Results reveal how owners are caring for their cats in terms of providing outdoor access and generate hypotheses for future research to examine the influence of the owner-pet bond and educational programs on owner practices around providing outdoor access.

Unanswered Questions and Hypotheses about Domestic Cat Behavior, Ecology, and the Cat-Human Relationship

Simple Summary

Over the last three and a half decades, many studies have been published about cat behavior and cat–human interactions (many by the author and his former team of assistants and university students); these have been summarized in recent review articles. Although we have learned much about domestic cats and their relationships with people, there are still many unanswered questions of interest to scientists and the lay public. The author has briefly referred to the past results and formulated the unanswered questions (some as hypotheses), even suggesting possible ways to answer or test them. Although the author is now retired, his intent is to encourage young researchers beginning their academic careers to take up the torch and work on this fascinating companion animal species.

Abstract

After recent publication of several reviews covering research results from the last 35 years of domestic cat studies, a number of important unanswered questions and hypotheses have arisen that could interest active researchers, especially those beginning their academic careers. Some sections of this paper concern methodologies that have yielded new insights and could provide more in the future; other sections concern findings and interpretations of those that need further testing. First, hypotheses arise from combining subjective (or psychological) assessments of cat and human personality traits and observational (ethological) studies of cat–human interactions: e.g., do owners with high attachment to their cats interact differently with them than owners with low attachment levels? New analytical methods of dyadic interaction observations open the door for testing further hypotheses. In particular, the Theme^® (Noldus bv, NL) program could be used to determine if there are differences between cat breeds in interaction patterns with people, which is not only of interest to owners but also therapists employing cats in their practices. Cat breed differences have been found using subjective ratings, but these need to be corroborated by direct observational data from the home setting and/or non-invasive colony observations, since ratings based on anthropomorphic projections might not be reliable. This should be done before searching for the genetic basis of such differences. Reliable information on breed differences is also needed before prescribing certain breeds for animal-assisted interventions. A model has predicted that the degree of socialization as a kitten affects cats’ responses to positive and negative experiences with unfamiliar humans and their formation of feline–human relationships later on. This needs to be tested in an ethically approved manner on cats of known socialization status and has enormous consequences for cat adoptions from animal shelters. Observations of human–cat interactions have yielded many correlations, which can be tested by non-invasive manipulations of human behavior in the home setting. Examples of these will be given and are of general interest to the cat-owning public. A review of first findings on social cognition in cats has resulted in further unanswered questions and hypotheses. Finally, two aspects of domestic cat ecology will be considered (effects on wildlife and space utilization), which are of great interest to the public and conservationists alike.

Raiders of the last ark: the impacts of feral cats on small mammals in Tasmanian forest ecosystems

Feral individuals of the cat Felis catus are recognized internationally as a threat to biodiversity. Open, non-insular systems support a large proportion of the world's biodiversity, but the population-level impacts of feral cats in these systems are rarely elucidated. This limits prioritization and assessment of the effectiveness of management interventions. We quantified the predatory impact of feral cats on small mammals in open, non-insular forest systems in Tasmania, Australia in the context of other factors hypothesized to affect small mammal densities and survival, namely the density of a native carnivore, co-occurring small mammals, and rainfall. Change in feral cat density was the most important determinant of small mammal density and survival. We calculated that, on average, a 50% reduction in feral cat density could result in 25% and 10% increases in the density of the swamp rat Rattus lutreolus and long-tailed mouse Pseudomys higginsi, respectively. Low-level culling of feral cats that we conducted on two of our four study sites to experimentally alter feral cat densities revealed that swamp rat survival was highest when feral cat densities were stable. We conclude that feral cats exert downward pressure on populations of indigenous small mammals in temperate forest systems. However, alleviating this downward pressure on prey by culling a large proportion of the feral cat population is difficult as current methods for reducing feral cat populations in cool temperate forest systems are ineffective, and potentially even counterproductive. We suggest using an adaptive approach that regularly and robustly monitors how feral cats and small mammals respond to management interventions that are intended to conserve vulnerable prey species.

Coping With Human-Cat Interactions Beyond the Limits of Domesticity: Moral Pluralism in the Management of Cats and Wildlife

Although human interactions with cats are often even typically analyzed in the context of domesticity, with a focus on what sorts of interactions might make both people and cats "happy at home," a large number of cats in the world live, for one reason or another, beyond the bounds of domesticity. Human interactions with these more or less free-living cats raise deeply controversial questions about how both the cats and the people they interact with should be sensibly managed, and about the moral imperatives that ought to guide the management of their interactions through the laws and public policies regulating both human interactions with pets and with wildlife. We review the geography of human interactions with cats living beyond the bounds of domesticity. We acknowledge the contributions made to ideas about how to manage cats by the animal protection movement. We review the tensions that have emerged over time between advocates for the eradication of free-living cats, because of the impacts they have on native wildlife species, and those who have imagined alternatives to eradication, most notably one or another variant of trap-neuter-return (TNR). The conflict over how best to deal with cats living beyond the bounds of domesticity and their wildlife impacts raises the prospect of stalemate, and we canvass and critique possibilities for moving beyond that stalemate.

When all life counts in conservation

Conservation science involves the collection and analysis of data. These scientific practices emerge from values that shape who and what is counted. Currently, conservation data are filtered through a value system that considers native life the only appropriate subject of conservation concern. We examined how trends in species richness, distribution, and threats change when all wildlife count by adding so-called non-native and feral populations to the International Union for Conservation of Nature Red List and local species richness assessments. We focused on vertebrate populations with founding members taken into and out of Australia by humans (i.e., migrants). We identified 87 immigrant and 47 emigrant vertebrate species. Formal conservation accounts underestimated global ranges by an average of 30% for immigrants and 7% for emigrants; immigrations surpassed extinctions in Australia by 52 species; migrants were disproportionately threatened (33% of immigrants and 29% of emigrants were threatened or decreasing in their native ranges); and incorporating migrant populations into risk assessments reduced global threat statuses for 15 of 18 species. Australian policies defined most immigrants as pests (76%), and conservation was the most commonly stated motivation for targeting these species in killing programs (37% of immigrants). Inclusive biodiversity data open space for dialogue on the ethical and empirical assumptions underlying conservation science.

I Am a Compassionate Conservation Welfare Scientist: Considering the Theoretical and Practical Differences Between Compassionate Conservation and Conservation Welfare

Compassionate Conservation and Conservation Welfare are two disciplines whose practitioners advocate consideration of individual wild animals within conservation practice and policy. However, they are not, as is sometimes suggested, the same. Compassionate Conservation and Conservation Welfare are based on different underpinning ethics, which sometimes leads to conflicting views about the kinds of conservation activities and decisions that are acceptable. Key differences between the disciplines appear to relate to their views about which wild animals can experience harms, the kinds of harms they can experience and how we can know about and confidently evidence those harms. Conservation Welfare scientists seek to engage with conservation scientists with the aim of facilitating ongoing incremental improvements in all aspects of conservation, i.e., minimizing harms to animals. In contrast, it is currently unclear how the tenets of Compassionate Conservation can be used to guide decision-making in complex or novel situations. Thus, Conservation Welfare may offer modern conservationists a more palatable approach to integrating evidence-based consideration of individual sentient animals into conservation practice and policy.

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

The 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.

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

Simple Summary

For free-roaming cat management to be effective, people—including land managers, conservationists, cat lovers and the general public—need to be sufficiently empowered and motivated to accept and implement management actions. Research in the social and behavioural sciences has shown that engaging everyone and gaining consensus can be incredibly challenging. This paper describes an integrative framework based on the behavioural literature to design better, equitable and ethically acceptable interventions for free-roaming cat management.

Abstract

In Australia, free-roaming cats can be found in urban and rural areas across the country. They are inherently difficult to manage but it is frequently human behaviour that demands the most attention and is in most need of change. To the frustration of policy makers and practitioners, scientific knowledge, technological developments, and legal and institutional innovations, often run afoul of insufficient public capacity, opportunity and motivation to act. This paper demonstrates how the behavioural science literature can provide important insights into maximising the impact of free-roaming cat control activities within an ethical framework that prioritises acting “with” all stakeholders, rather than “on” stakeholders. By better understanding how human values, attitudes and beliefs are shaped, practitioners can more effectively and respectfully interact with how people interpret the world around them, make choices and behave. This literature also has much to say about why certain types of media and marketing messages elicit behaviour change and why other types fall flat. Finally, in addition to explaining the behavioural science and its implications, this review provides researchers, policy makers and engagement specialists with an inclusive, practical framework for conceptualising behaviour change and working to ensure land managers, cat owners and the general public can agree on and adopt best practices for managing free-roaming cats.