Search

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 (Felis catus) 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 nontarget species in eastern Australia, where many native animals are more sensitive to compound 1080 (sodium fluoroacetate) than their western conspecifics, has not been assessed. We investigated the uptake of 499 toxic Eradicat® baits by nontarget animals across five different eastern Australian environs and the uptake of nontoxic Eradicat and Hisstory® baits at an additional two sites. Using field-based observations of species eating or removing baits, we determined that 13 nontarget species (eight mammals, four birds, and one reptile) were at high risk of individual mortality, with individuals of 11 of those 13 species (seven mammals, four birds) 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 nontarget 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 nontarget risk assessments of new baits such as Eradicat to assist developing guidelines for their safe and effective use in different environs. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2021;00:1-21. © 2021 State of Queensland. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management © 2021 SETAC.