Search

Following publication of the original article [1], the authors identified an error in Table 2. The correct table is given at: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10340-021-01444-6

Reducing the damage caused by feral cats (Felis catus) to wildlife, livestock and human health is a key objective for many land managers and human health agencies globally. The lack of safe and efficacious lethal control tools in many regions, however, makes the control of feral cats and their impacts challenging. We performed a baiting trial in central Queensland to measure the efficacy and safety of Eradicat®, a feral cat bait currently approved for use only in the state of Western Australia, as a potential tool for the broadscale control of feral cats in eastern Australian environments. We used camera traps, cat-borne GPS collars and chemical residue analysis to monitor mortality and changes in feral cat populations following baiting. We also used camera traps and bird count surveys to monitor the response of key at-risk non-target species, specifically wild dogs (Canis familiaris), common brush-tailed possums (Trichosurus vulpecula) and 10 bird species at risk of consuming baits. Feral cat abundance reduced significantly (29–40%) following baiting, with reductions observed across 83% of the site. There were no significant changes in wild dog, possum or potentially bait-consuming bird populations following baiting. Our findings suggest that Eradicat® could potentially be a safe and efficacious tool for the landscape control of feral cats at some sites in eastern Australia. Future research is required to test the safety and efficacy of Eradicat® at other sites in eastern Australia, as suites of non-target species will vary among sites in different environments.

Feral cats pose a significant threat to wildlife, agriculture and human health through predation, disease transmission and competition with native animals. Controlling feral cats and their impacts, however, is challenging. New and emerging 1080-based feral cat baits have shown promising results in western and central Australia, however the safety of these new baits for non-target species in eastern Australia, where many native animals are more sensitive to 1080 than their western conspecifics, has not been assessed. We investigated the uptake by non-target animals of 499 toxic Eradicat® baits across five different eastern Australian environs, and the uptake of non-toxic Eradicat® and Hisstory® baits at an additional two sites. Using field-based observations of species eating or removing baits, we determined that 13 non-target species (eight mammals, four birds, one reptile) were at high risk of individual mortality, with individuals of 11 of those 13 species (four birds, seven mammals) observed consuming enough toxic Eradicat® in a single visit to ingest a lethal dose of 1080. Feral cats (the target species) consumed only 3.1% of monitored baits, which was only 52% of the 31 baits they encountered. We recommend undertaking targeted population monitoring of species identified at high risk of individual mortality, to determine whether Eradicat® baits present a population-level risk to these species. Our findings suggest that the small-sized Eradicat® baits present a greater risk to non-target species in eastern Australia than the larger traditional 1080-based meat baits used for the control of wild dogs and foxes. Our study highlights the importance of performing risk assessments for different bait types, even when the same toxin is used, and of performing site-specific non-target risk assessments of new baits such as Eradicat® to assist developing guidelines for their safe and effective use in different environs. This article is protected by copyright. All rights res

Context: Feral cats threaten wildlife conservation through a range of direct and indirect effects. However, most studies that have evaluated the impacts of feral cats on species of conservation significance have focussed on direct impacts such as predation; few studies have considered the indirect impacts of cat-borne disease. Toxoplasma gondii, a cat-borne parasite, causes both acute and latent disease in a range of wildlife species, and macropods are particularly susceptible. Kangaroo Island is Australia’s third largest island and supports a high density of feral cats and high seroprevalence of T. gondii in multiple species, relative to the mainland. This suggests that Kangaroo Island has a high environmental contamination with the parasite and a high risk of infection for other species.Aims: We aimed to describe T. gondii seroprevalence in culled and road-killed macropods, so as to assess the effects of island versus mainland location, sex, species and behaviour.Methods: Macropod sera were tested for T. gondii IgG antibodies using a commercially available modified agglutination test.Key results: The seroprevalence of T. gondii in culled western grey kangaroos (Macropus fuliginosus) was significantly higher on the island (20%, 11/54 positive) than on the mainland (0%, 0/61 positive). There was no difference in T. gondii seroprevalence between culled and road-killed (21%, 21/102 positive) kangaroos from the island. The seroprevalence of T. gondii was significantly higher in female (32%, 12/38 positive) than in male (13%, 8/60 positive) kangaroos, but we observed no sex effect in tammar wallabies (Macropus eugenii), and no effect of species.Conclusions: The higher T. gondii seroprevalence in insular macropods supports previous reports of higher T. gondii exposure in other Kangaroo Island fauna. The lack of difference in T. gondii seroprevalence between culled and road-killed kangaroos suggests that T. gondii-positive animals are not more vulnerable to road mortality

Predation by feral cats is considered to be the most significant factor in Australia’s recent mammal extinctions. Feral cats also threaten livestock, wildlife and human health by spreading diseases. Effective control of feral cats is difficult to achieve at the landscape scale using traditional management approaches such as trapping, shooting and exclusion. Dingoes may be a broad scale control of invasive mesopredators such as feral cats and foxes. Camera traps were used to investigate the spatial and temporal activity of dingoes and feral cats across two different land tenures. The presence and activity of cats were both unrelated to dingoes and models suggested that dingoes had no effect on the probability of cat presence on either land tenure. Contrary to predictions, the probability of detecting a cat was significantly higher in areas occupied by dingoes than in dingo-free areas, while dingoes had no effect on the detectability of cats on agricultural land. Feral cats and dingoes exhibited marked overlap in both spatial and temporal activity across both sites, indicating coexistence between these predators.

Feral cats (Felis catus) are notoriously difficult to control using traditional management approaches such as baiting, reportedly due to their preference for hunting live prey. Many factors, however, can potentially influence the success of feral cat baiting programs. As baiting efficacy is rarely measured, the factors contributing to low baiting success are often assumed, but poorly understood. We used a combination of camera traps and cat-borne GPS collars to measure the efficacy of two feral cat baiting programs at Taunton National Park (Scientific) in central Queensland. We trialled a fresh meat bait (the Queensland 'Curiosity 1080 Cat Bait', ~125 g fresh kangaroo meat, 6 mg 1080) during winter 2016, and a chipolata-style meat bait (Eradicat®, ~20g kangaroo mince, chicken fat and flavour enhancers, 4.5 mg 1080) during winter 2017. Track-based ground baiting using Curiosity baits was ineffective, with only 11% of collared cats killed and no observed reduction in population-level feral cat abundance across the site. Low track use by cats and rapid removal of baits by non-target species contributed to low bait encounter rates by cats. In addition, palatability of baits rapidly declined due to meat-ant infestations and bait desiccation. Aerially deployed Eradicat® baits were more effective, with 40% of collared cats killed, and a similar significant reduction in population-level feral cat abundance across the site. The key factors contributing to the observed differences in efficacy were compared and evaluated. We discuss the implications of our findings and recommend approaches to improve the efficacy of feral cat baiting programs.

Context: Feral cats (Felis catus) impact the health and welfare of wildlife, livestock and humans worldwide. They are particularly damaging where they have been introduced into island countries such as Australia and New Zealand, where native prey species evolved without feline predators. Kangaroo Island, in South Australia, is Australia’s third largest island and supports several threatened and endemic species. Cat densities on Kangaroo Island are thought to be greater than those on the adjacent South Australian mainland, based on one cat density estimate on the island that is higher than most estimates from the mainland. The prevalence of cat-borne disease in cats and sheep is also higher on Kangaroo Island than the mainland, suggesting higher cat densities. A recent continental-scale spatial model of cat density predicted that cat density on Kangaroo Island should be about double that of the adjacent mainland. However, although cats are believed to have severe impacts on some native species on the island, other species that are generally considered vulnerable to cat predation have relatively secure populations on the island compared with the mainland.Aims: The present study aimed to compare feral cat abundance between Kangaroo Island and the adjacent South Australian mainland using simultaneous standardised methods. Based on previous findings, we predicted that the relative abundance of feral cats on Kangaroo Island would be approximately double that on the South Australian mainland.Methods: Standardised camera trap surveys were used to simultaneously estimate the relative abundance of feral cats on Kangaroo Island and the adjacent South Australian mainland. Survey data were analysed using the Royle–Nichols abundance-induced heterogeneity model to estimate feral cat relative abundance at each site.Key results: Cat abundance on the island was estimated to be over 10 times greater than that on the adjacent mainland.Conclusions: Consistent with predictions, cat abund

Camera traps are being used increasingly for wildlife management and research. When choosing camera models, practitioners often consider camera trigger speed to be one of the most important factors to maximise species detections. However, factors such as detection zone will also influence detection probability. As part of a rabbit eradication program, we performed a pilot study to compare rabbit (Oryctolagus cuniculus) detections using the Reconyx PC900 (faster trigger speed, narrower detection zone) and the Ltl Acorn Ltl-5310A (slower trigger speed, wider detection zone). Contrary to our predictions, the slower-trigger-speed cameras detected rabbits more than twice as often as the faster-trigger-speed cameras, suggesting that the wider detection zone more than compensated for the relatively slower trigger time. We recommend context-specific field trials to ensure cameras are appropriate for the required purpose. Missed detections could lead to incorrect inferences and potentially misdirected management actions.

Feral cat (Felis catus) populations are notoriously difficult to control. While coordinated 1080 baiting programs are the most cost-effective option for the broad scale reduction of wild dogs (Canis lupus familiaris), feral pigs (Sus scrofa) and foxes (Vulpes vulpes), the use of 1080 baits to specifically target feral cats is currently restricted and largely untested in eastern Australian environs. We performed a feral cat baiting trial in Taunton National Park (Scientific) in central Queensland to (1) test the efficacy of the Queensland ‘Curiosity 1080 Cat Bait’, and (2) measure the uptake of baits by target and non-target species. Over 14 days, 54% of 50 individually monitored baits were removed by non-target species, with 46% removed in the first 4 days. Most baits were taken by birds, with corvids removing more than half of all baits taken. Cameras used to monitor baits did not detect any feral cats consuming or removing baits, although several cats were detected interacting with baits. The lack of bait uptake by feral cats together with movement data obtained from cat-borne GPS collars suggests that track-based baiting operations using current deployment protocols for the Queensland ‘Curiosity 1080 Cat Bait’ are unlikely to be effective at controlling feral cat populations in these environs. We discuss the implications of our findings and recommend approaches to improve the efficacy of feral cat baiting programs in eastern Australia.

Feral cats (Felis catus) threaten many native species through predation, competition and the spread of disease (Department of Environment 2015). Managing feral cats and their impacts, however, is difficult. Effective monitoring and management strategies require a sound knowledge of how feral cats utilise their environment, although key aspects of habitat use will often vary in different environs. We fitted GPS collars to 9 feral cats (5 male, 4 female) at Taunton National Park in central Queensland to investigate how they utilise their environment. We calculated home ranges for each cat using 12 hourly fixes from May to July 2016. Habitat utilisation within each home range was assessed to identify if cats showed preference for particular vegetation type or landscape features. On average, home ranges of males were around three times larger than those of females, with spatial overlap evident, both between and within sexes. While the larger home range of males is consistent with other studies, home ranges of both sexes were substantially larger than those of feral cats in similar environs. Our findings highlight the importance of obtaining site-specific ecological information to ensure local monitoring and management strategies are effective. Extrapolating from studies in similar environs may inadvertently lead to inappropriate management outcomes.

Feral cats (Felis catus) are notoriously difficult to control effectively using traditional management approaches. Dingo (Canis lupus dingo) reintroductions have been proposed as a novel approach to the broadscale control of invasive mesopredators such as feral cats and foxes (Vulpes vulpes). However, the ability of dingoes to suppress feral cats and protect species threatened by cat predation remains unresolved. We used camera traps to investigate the spatial and temporal activity of sympatric dingoes and feral cats in Taunton National Park, home to the only significant remnant wild population of the endangered bridled nailtail wallaby (Onychogalea fraenata). Feral cats and dingoes exhibited marked overlap in spatial and temporal activity across the park, indicating coexistence between these predators at this site. There was no evidence of dingoes excluding cats from any areas, with cat activity higher in areas where dingoes were active. Time and distance between individual predator detections were negatively related, suggesting within-night avoidance of dingoes by cats. However, cats remained active, abundant and widespread across the park, with evidence of cats hunting and breeding successfully in areas occupied by dingoes. These findings suggest that feral cats can coexist with dingoes, without significant suppression of cat abundance or fitness. Proposals to reintroduce dingoes should be evaluated on a site-by-site basis, as the ability of dingoes to suppress feral cats and protect species of conservation significance will likely be context dependent.

Feral cats threaten wildlife, livestock and humans through predation, competition and disease. Controlling feral cat populations and their impacts over broad scales, however, is challenging. We performed a feral cat baiting trial in Taunton National Park (Scientific) in central Queensland to (1) test the efficacy of the Queensland 'Curiosity 1080 Cat Bait', and (2) measure bait uptake by target and non-target species. Over 14 days, 54% of 50 monitored baits were removed by non-target species, with 46% removed in the first 4 days. Most baits were taken by birds, with corvids removing more than half of all baits taken. Cameras used to monitor baits did not detect any feral cats consuming or removing baits, although several cats were detected interacting with baits. The lack of bait uptake by feral cats together with movement data obtained from cat-borne GPS collars suggests that track-based baiting operations are unlikely to be effective at controlling feral cat populations in these environs. We discuss the implications of our findings and recommend approaches to improve the efficacy of feral cat baiting programs in eastern Australia.