Do Pet Cats Deserve the Disproportionate Blame for Wildlife Predation Compared to Pet Dogs?
introduced
native
pet cat
pet dog
pet-related legislation
predation
wildlife
Journal
Frontiers in veterinary science
ISSN: 2297-1769
Titre abrégé: Front Vet Sci
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101666658
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2021
2021
Historique:
received:
28
06
2021
accepted:
08
09
2021
entrez:
11
11
2021
pubmed:
12
11
2021
medline:
12
11
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Concerns about the impact of pet dogs and cats on native wildlife populations have shaped pet control legislation, despite there being scant research of their impact in urban areas. Using an online questionnaire, we obtained data from 662 Australian dog and cat owners who had observed their pets capture prey in the previous 6 months. Of the pets observed to catch prey, dogs caught a median of 2 mammals, 2 birds, 2 reptiles, and 3 amphibians, whereas cats caught a median of 3 mammals, 2 birds, 4 reptiles, and 2 amphibians. Of mammals caught by dogs and cats, 88 and 93%, respectively, were identifiable as introduced mice, rats, and rabbits. Of pets that caught prey, a substantial proportion caught native animals (62% of dogs and 47% of cats). However, median numbers of native animals caught per dog (2) or cat (3) over 6 months were low. Small skinks and lizards comprised the greatest proportion for dogs and cats, but dogs also caught larger native prey (e.g., possums, kangaroos, and wallabies). Most birds caught by dogs and cats were common or introduced (dogs: crested pigeons and lorikeets; cats: noisy miners and rosellas). To design measures that will effectively protect Australia's native wildlife, thorough understanding of the role dogs and cats play in Australian urban ecosystems is required. These findings can inform that understanding, and assist with development of management strategies for urban dogs and cats, and as well as directing resources to efforts that will most protect urban wildlife.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34760957
doi: 10.3389/fvets.2021.731689
pmc: PMC8572848
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
731689Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2021 Franklin, Rand, Marston and Morton.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
JM was employed by Jemora Pty Ltd. The remaining authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Références
Ecology. 2008 Mar;89(3):818-28
pubmed: 18459344
Animals (Basel). 2019 Jul 16;9(7):
pubmed: 31315191
Front Vet Sci. 2019 Mar 04;6:57
pubmed: 30886852
Animals (Basel). 2020 Jul 16;10(7):
pubmed: 32708752
Oecologia. 2000 Mar;122(4):500-504
pubmed: 28308342
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2007 Dec 26;104(52):20862-5
pubmed: 18083843
Nat Commun. 2013;4:1396
pubmed: 23360987
Animals (Basel). 2017 Jun 02;7(6):
pubmed: 28574465
J Am Vet Med Assoc. 2003 Jan 1;222(1):42-6
pubmed: 12523478
PLoS One. 2016 Apr 06;11(4):e0151962
pubmed: 27050447
Vet J. 2014 Sep;201(3):269-74
pubmed: 24980808
Animals (Basel). 2018 May 17;8(5):
pubmed: 29772788
J Appl Anim Welf Sci. 2002;5(4):285-98
pubmed: 16221079
PLoS One. 2012;7(7):e40622
pubmed: 22808210
PLoS One. 2019 Jan 23;14(1):e0206958
pubmed: 30673712
J Appl Anim Welf Sci. 2002;5(1):15-28
pubmed: 12738586