The efficacy of collar-mounted devices in reducing the rate of predation of wildlife by domestic cats
-
Published source details
Nelson S.H., Evans A.D. & Bradbury R.B. (2005) The efficacy of collar-mounted devices in reducing the rate of predation of wildlife by domestic cats. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 94, 273-285.
Published source details Nelson S.H., Evans A.D. & Bradbury R.B. (2005) The efficacy of collar-mounted devices in reducing the rate of predation of wildlife by domestic cats. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 94, 273-285.
Actions
This study is summarised as evidence for the following.
Action | Category | |
---|---|---|
Use collar-mounted devices to reduce predation Action Link |
||
Use collar-mounted devices to reduce predation by domestic animals Action Link |
-
Use collar-mounted devices to reduce predation
A replicated, randomised and controlled study across the UK between April and August 2002 (Nelson et al. 2005) found that for a total of 89 cats, fewer birds were returned by those fitted with a collar and bell (41% reduction and 74 birds) or a collar with a ‘CatAlert™’ sonic device (51% reduction and 59 birds) than by cats with a plain collar (117 birds). The difference between bell and ultrasound was not significant. A second replicated and randomised study between May and September 2003 found that, for a total of 67 cats, the number of birds returned by cats was not significantly affected by whether cats were wearing collars with one bell, two bells or ‘CatAlert™’ sonic devices. In both trials, the authors note that collars were easily lost, with a total of 55 sonic device, 39 one-bell, 16 two-bell and 21 plain collars lost (and replaced) over the study. The authors also note that that this study does not support the assertion that cats can learn to adapt hunting to render bells less effective.
-
Use collar-mounted devices to reduce predation by domestic animals
A replicated, randomized, controlled study in 2002–2003 in the UK (Nelson et al. 2005) found that fewer mammals were brought home by domestic cats Felis catus fitted with a bell or a sonic device on their collar than by cats wearing a plain collar, but the type of device did not matter. In 2002, fewer mammals were returned by cats equipped with a bell (120) or a ‘CatAlert™’ sonic device (111) than by cats wearing a plain collar (181). In 2003, the average number of mammals returned was similar for cats equipped with one bell (0.07 mammals/cat/day), two bells (0.07 mammals/cat/day) or a ‘CatAlert™’ sonic device (0.05 mammals/cat/day). Between April and August 2002, 68 cats were fitted with each of the three types of collar (a bell, a sonic device or a plain collar) for one month at a time, in a random order. Owners recorded live prey items and collected dead items for identification. Between May and September 2003, 67 cats were fitted with a collar with either one bell, two bells or a sonic device. Owners recorded all prey items, and identified them to species wherever possible. Sonic devices were set to ‘permanently on’.
(Summarised by: Ricardo Rocha )
Output references
|