Desires and Management Preferences of Stakeholders Regarding Feral Cats in the Hawaiian Islands

Feral cats are abundant in many parts of the world and a source of conservation conflict. Our goal was to clarify the beliefs and desires held by stakeholders regarding feral cat abundance and management. We measured people's desired abundance of feral cats in the Hawaiian Islands and identified an order of preference for 7 feral cat management techniques. In 2011 we disseminated a survey to 5407 Hawaii residents. Approximately 46% of preidentified stakeholders and 20% of random residents responded to the survey (1510 surveys returned). Results from the potential for conflict index revealed a high level of consensus (86.9% of respondents) that feral cat abundance should be decreased. The 3 most common explanatory variables for respondents’ stated desires were enjoyment from seeing feral cats (84%), intrinsic value of feral cats (12%), and threat to native fauna (73%). The frequency with which respondents saw cats and change in the perceived abundance of cats also affected respondent's desired abundance of cats; 41.3% of respondents stated that they saw feral cats daily and 44.7% stated that the cat population had increased in recent years. Other potential environmental impacts of feral cats had little affect on desired abundance. The majority of respondents (78%) supported removing feral cats from the natural environment permanently. Consensus convergence models with data from 1388 respondents who completed the relevant questions showed live capture and lethal injection was the most preferred technique and trap‐neuter‐release was the least preferred technique for managing feral cats. However, the acceptability of each technique varied among stakeholders. Our results suggest that the majority of Hawaii's residents would like to see effective management that reduces the abundance of feral or free‐roaming cats. Deseos y Preferencias de Manejo de las Partes Interesadas con Respecto a los Gatos Ferales en las Islas Hawaianas.     

Feral Goat Eradications on Islands

Abstract:  Introduced mammals are major drivers of extinction. Feral goats ( Capra hircus ) are particularly devastating to island ecosystems, causing direct and indirect impacts through overgrazing, which often results in ecosystem degradation and biodiversity loss. Removing goat populations from islands is a powerful conservation tool to prevent extinctions and restore ecosystems. Goats have been eradicated successfully from 120 islands worldwide. With newly developed technology and techniques, island size is perhaps no longer a limiting factor in the successful removal of introduced goat populations. Furthermore, the use of global positioning systems, geographic information systems, aerial hunting by helicopter, specialized hunting dogs, and Judas goats has dramatically increased efficiency and significantly reduced the duration of eradication campaigns. Intensive monitoring programs are also critical for successful eradications. Because of the presence of humans with domestic goat populations on large islands, future island conservation actions will require eradication programs that involve local island inhabitants in a collaborative approach with biologists, sociologists, and educators. Given the clear biodiversity benefits, introduced goat populations should be routinely removed from islands.     

Critical Assessment of Claims Regarding Management of Feral Cats by Trap–Neuter–Return

Abstract:  Many jurisdictions have adopted programs to manage feral cats by trap–neuter–return (TNR), in which cats are trapped and sterilized, then returned to the environment to be fed and cared for by volunteer caretakers. Most conservation biologists probably do not realize the extent and growth of this practice and that the goal of some leading TNR advocates is that cats ultimately be recognized and treated as "protected wildlife." We compared the arguments put forth in support of TNR by many feral cat advocates with the scientific literature. Advocates promoting TNR often claim that feral cats harm wildlife only on islands and not on continents; fill a natural or realized niche; do not contribute to the decline of native species; and are insignificant vectors or reservoirs of disease. Advocates also frequently make claims about the effectiveness of TNR, including claims that colonies of feral cats are eventually eliminated by TNR and that managed colonies resist invasion by other cats. The scientific literature contradicts each of these claims. TNR of feral cats is primarily viewed and regulated as an animal welfare issue, but it should be seen as an environmental issue, and decisions to implement it should receive formal environmental assessment. Conservation scientists have a role to play by conducting additional research on the effects of feral cats on wildlife and by communicating sound scientific information about this problem to policy makers.     

A comparison of cat‐related risk perceptions and tolerance for outdoor cats in Florida and Hawaii

Risk perceptions and attitudes toward animals often explain tolerance for wildlife and management preferences. However, little is understood about how these relationships vary across different geographic regions and stakeholder groups. To address this gap in knowledge, we compared differences in acceptance capacity, risk perceptions, perceived enjoyment from outdoor cats, and experiences with outdoor cats among 3 groups (general public, conservation community, and animal‐welfare community) in Hawaii and Florida, two states with large conservation challenges. We combined independently collected data from Florida and Hawaii, to determine how perception of the risks presented by outdoor cats, group membership, and state of residence influenced people's tolerance for outdoor cats. Florida respondents were significantly more tolerant of outdoor cats and less concerned about cat‐related risks than Hawaii respondents (p < 0.05). In both states, animal‐welfare group members reported greater enjoyment seeing cats and perceived a smaller increase in the cat population and lower levels of risk than other groups (p < 0.05). All groups exhibited similar relationships between acceptance capacity and enjoyment and the perceived increase in the cat population. Our results suggest public tolerance for cats varied due to the influence of local or geographical concerns, but that strongly held beliefs, risk perceptions, and feelings about cats explained more of the variance in stakeholder tolerance.     

Quantifying Eradication Success: the Removal of Feral Pigs from Santa Cruz Island, California

Abstract:  A major challenge facing pest-eradication efforts is determining when eradication has been achieved. When the pest can no longer be detected, managers have to decide whether the pest has actually been eliminated and hence to decide when to terminate the eradication program. For most eradication programs, this decision entails considerable risk and is the largest single issue facing managers of such programs. We addressed this issue for an eradication program of feral pigs ( Sus scrofa ) from Santa Cruz Island, California. Using a Bayesian approach, we estimated the degree of confidence in the success of the eradication program at the point when monitoring failed to detect any more pigs. Catch-effort modeling of the hunting effort required to dispatch pigs during the eradication program was used to determine the relationship between detection probability and searching effort for different hunting methods. We then used these relationships to estimate the amount of monitoring effort required to declare eradication successful with criteria that either set a threshold for the probability that pigs remained undetected (type I error) or minimized the net expected costs of the eradication program (cost of type I and II errors). For aerial and ground-based monitoring techniques, the amount of search effort required to declare eradication successful on the basis of either criterion was highly dependent on the prior belief in the success of the program unless monitoring intensities exceeded 30 km of searching effort per square kilometer of search area for aerial monitoring and, equivalently, 38 km for ground monitoring. Calculation of these criteria to gauge the success of eradication should form an essential component of any eradication program as it allows for a transparent assessment of the risks inherent in the decision to terminate the program.     

Eradication of Invasive Mammals on Islands Inhabited by Humans and Domestic Animals

Abstract: Non‐native invasive mammal species have caused major ecological change on many islands. To conserve native species diversity, invasive mammals have been eradicated from several islands not inhabited by humans. We reviewed the challenges associated with campaigns to eradicate invasive mammals from islands inhabited by humans and domestic animals. On these islands, detailed analyses of the social, cultural, and economic costs and benefits of eradication are required to increase the probability of local communities supporting the eradication campaign. The ecological benefits of eradication (e.g., improvement of endemic species’ probability of survival) are difficult to trade‐off against social and economic costs due to the lack of a common currency. Local communities may oppose an eradication campaign because of perceived health hazards, inconvenience, financial burdens, religious beliefs, or other cultural reasons. Besides these social challenges, the presence of humans and domestic animals also complicates eradication and biosecurity procedures (measures taken to reduce the probability of unwanted organisms colonizing an island to near zero). For example, houses, garbage‐disposal areas, and livestock‐feeding areas can provide refuges for certain mammals and therefore can decrease the probability of a successful eradication. Transport of humans and goods to an island increases the probability of inadvertent reintroduction of invasive mammals, and the establishment of permanent quarantine measures is required to minimize the probability of unwanted recolonization after eradication. We recommend a close collaboration between island communities, managers, and social scientists from the inception of an eradication campaign to increase the probability of achieving and maintaining an island permanently free of invasive mammals.     

Drivers of Seabird Population Recovery on New Zealand Islands after Predator Eradication

Eradication of introduced mammalian predators from islands has become increasingly common, with over 800 successful projects around the world. Historically, introduced predators extirpated or reduced the size of many seabird populations, changing the dynamics of entire island ecosystems. Although the primary outcome of many eradication projects is the restoration of affected seabird populations, natural population responses are rarely documented and mechanisms are poorly understood. We used a generic model of seabird colony growth to identify key predictor variables relevant to recovery or recolonization. We used generalized linear mixed models to test the importance of these variables in driving seabird population responses after predator eradication on islands around New Zealand. The most influential variable affecting recolonization of seabirds around New Zealand was the distance to a source population, with few cases of recolonization without a source population ≤25 km away. Colony growth was most affected by metapopulation status; there was little colony growth in species with a declining status. These characteristics may facilitate the prioritization of newly predator‐free islands for active management. Although we found some evidence documenting natural recovery, generally this topic was understudied. Our results suggest that in order to guide management strategies, more effort should be allocated to monitoring wildlife response after eradication. Conductores de la Recuperación de Poblaciones de Aves Marinas en Islas de Nueva Zelanda después de la Erradicación de Depredadores     

Importance of Assessing Population Genetic Structure before Eradication of Invasive Species: Examples from Insular Norway Rat Populations

Abstract:  Determining the inter-island migration abilities of pest species and delimiting eradication units enable more viable long-term eradication campaigns because recurrent colonization from neighboring islands is avoided. We examined the genetic structure of the invasive Norway rat ( Rattus norvegicus ) to identify gene flow between islands and delimit population units at different geographical scales. We investigated variation in eight microsatellite loci in rat populations from 18 islands, representing five archipelagos off the Brittany coast (France). Although most of the islands are isolated from each other, short genetic distances, weak F_ST values between close islands, and a high level of cross-assignment showed that individuals collected on different islands could represent a single population unit. A Bayesian clustering method also supported the existence of high levels of gene flow between some neighboring islands. Thus, the statement "one island equals one population" can be false when inter-island distances are less than a few hundred meters. Genetic studies enable the definition of island clusters among which migration may occur that should be considered eradication units. To avoid reinvasion and to minimize ecological and economic costs, rats on all islands in an eradication unit should be eradicated simultaneously. We suggest that the genetic monitoring we performed here can be applied for management of any pest.