Effects of Long-Term Exposure to an Electronic Containment System on the Behaviour and Welfare of Domestic Cats

Wombat Roadkill Was Not Reduced by a Virtual Fence. Comment on Stannard et al. Can Virtual Fences Reduce Wombat Road Mortalities? Ecol. Eng. 2021, 172, 106414

Simple Summary

Wildlife roadkill is a global problem. Devices that produce bright lights and loud noises are claimed to be effective deterrents, but there is no scientific evidence that they actually prevent collisions between vehicles and wildlife. A recent trial in Australia installed a light and sound system, marketed as a ‘virtual fence’, and tested it on bare-nosed wombats (Vombatus ursinus). The study concluded that the system was minimally effective but promising. We detected a number of conceptual and procedural flaws in that study. When we re-analysed their data, we found absolutely no evidence for the effect of the virtual fence on the roadkills of wombats.

Abstract

The roadkill of wildlife is a global problem. Much has been written about deterring wildlife from roads, but, as of yet, there is no empirical support for deterrents based on visual and/or auditory signals. A recent paper entitled ‘Can virtual fences reduce wombat road mortalities?’reported the results of a roadkill mitigation trial. The authors installed a ‘virtual fence’ system produced by iPTE Traffic Solutions Ltd. (Graz, Austria) and evaluated its effectiveness for reducing roadkills of bare-nosed wombats (Vombatus ursinus) in southern Australia. The authors recorded roadkills in a simple Before-After-Control-Impact design but did not conduct any formal statistical analysis. They also measured three contextual variables (vegetation, wombat burrows, and vehicle velocity) but did not link these to the occurrence of roadkills in space and time. The authors concluded that the iPTE virtual fence system was ‘minimally effective’, yet ‘appears promising’. Our analysis of their data, using standard inferential statistics, showed no effect of the virtual fence on roadkills whatsoever. We conclude that the iPTE system was not effective for mitigating the roadkills of bare-nosed wombats.

Cognitive and Composite Behavioural Welfare Assessments of Pet Cats between the Ages of 9-22 Months, Living in Single and Multi-Cat Households

Simple Summary

Although agonistic interactions between cats are often regarded clinically as a source of stress, there is currently limited research evidence regarding the welfare impact of keeping multiple cats as pets. The aim of this study was to compare welfare indicators between cats living in single and multi-cat households, as well as between cats living in multi-cat households where agonistic behaviour was/was not reported by owners. Indicators included a spatial judgment bias task (JBT) and the cat stress score (CSS). CSSs were higher in cats from single compared with multi-cat households. CSSs were lower for cats that showed a more ‘pessimistic’ response in the JBT, suggesting these cats appeared to be less stressed. JBT results did not vary depending on the presence of, or reports of agonistic behaviours between, cohabiting cats. These data suggest that mood states (as measured by the JBT) were not impacted by the social groupings investigated, and that cats from single-cat households showed more signs of stress (as measured by CSS) than those in multi-cat households. Alternative explanations cannot be discounted, particularly due to the narrow sample population and broad scope of husbandry conditions that were unaccounted for. Further research is warranted to explore the extent to which variables that could not be controlled may have confounded findings.

Abstract

Although agonistic interactions between cats are often regarded clinically as a source of stress, there is currently limited research evidence regarding the welfare impact of keeping multiple cats as pets. The aim of this study was to compare welfare indicators between cats living in domestic single and multi-cat households, as well as between multi-cat households where agonistic behaviour was/was not reported by owners. Indicators included a spatial judgment bias task (JBT), where longer latencies to ambiguous probes are interpreted as being related to a more ‘pessimistic’ mood state, and the cat stress score (CSS), where high scores are indicative of high stress levels. Of 128 focal cats between the ages of 9–22 months, 94 were from multi-cat households, 126 had useable CSS data and 42 had JBT results suitable for analysis. CSSs were significantly lower for cats showing a more ‘pessimistic’ response in the JBT. It is possible that the cats that appeared to be the most relaxed may have been showing inactivity relating to negative affective states and/or were the least active/food motivated, and therefore slower in the JBT. CSSs were significantly higher in cats from single compared with multi-cat households, and did not vary with reports of agonistic interactions in multi-cat households. JBT results did not vary depending on the presence of, or reports of agonistic behaviours between, cohabiting cats. These data suggest that cats from single-cat households may be more likely to show signs of acute stress than those in multi-cat households. Alternative explanations are possible. For example, lower CSSs in the multi-cat group may reflect ‘relief’ effects resulting from separating cats for the test period, or inactivity relating to negative affective states. Due to the narrow sample population and broad scope of husbandry conditions, the potential for confounding variables limits the degree by which results can be used to inform causation of the relationships identified. Further research is warranted to replicate this work and explore potential confounders.

Introducing a Controlled Outdoor Environment Impacts Positively in Cat Welfare and Owner Concerns: The Use of a New Feline Welfare Assessment Tool

There is much debate over the pros and cons of allowing cats to roam freely as opposed to keeping them confined indoors. We surveyed owners who implemented a commercial physical containment system to the outdoors to evaluate their characteristics and the apparent impact of this system on cat welfare and owner perceptions. As part of the latter aim, we also developed a new feline welfare assessment tool based on the mathematical relationship between different measures. The survey was circulated to customers over the preceding 2 years of ProtectaPet® between May and June 2019 and gathered 446 responses. Univariate analyses compared changes following installation on factors such as the amount of time the cat spent outside, other cats entering the owner's garden and owners' concerns about their cat outside. Principal component analysis was used to reduce 21 potential indicators of feline welfare into fewer variables. This resulted in 4 subscales, 2 relating to positive welfare and 2 relating to negative welfare. The effects of installation of the containment system and significant predictors of these four welfare subscales were assessed. The majority of respondents lived in an urban environment with a relatively small garden, had multiple cats and a history of feline trauma associated with a road traffic accident. As expected, the time spent outside significantly increased, while the frequency of other cats entering the garden and owner concern about leaving their cats outside significantly decreased. The 4 welfare subscales grouped into positivity, maintenance behaviors, health issues and fearfulness; installation of the system was associated with significant improvements across all of these. Time spent outside after installation had a significant effect on positivity and, to a lesser extent, maintenance behaviors. Overall, installation was associated with positive changes in both owner and cat quality of life, which seem to be particularly associated with an increased sense of security. This suggests that housing cats within a controlled outside environment with physical barriers can provide a practical solution for many of the problems associated with cats being allowed out.

Uncontrolled Outdoor Access for Cats: An Assessment of Risks and Benefits

Uncontrolled outdoor access is associated with a number of welfare concerns for companion cats, including increased risks of disease and parasites, injury or death due to traffic, predation or ingestion of toxic substances, and getting permanently separated from their owner. In addition, cats pose a threat to local wildlife due to predatory behaviors, and can sometimes be a nuisance to human neighbors. Despite these concerns, recent estimates suggest that many owners are still providing their cats with uncontrolled outdoor access, likely because it also offers welfare benefits by allowing cats to perform natural behaviors, such as hunting, exploring, and climbing. While some have suggested that outdoor access is necessary to meet cats' behavioral needs and to prevent related behavioral problems, others have recommended various environmental enrichment strategies that can be developed to meet these needs within an indoor environment or through supervised and controlled outdoor access. This review examines the welfare issues and benefits associated with outdoor access for cats, as well as what is currently known about peoples' practices, knowledge, and attitudes about the provision of outdoor access for cats.