Free-ranging Cats (eBook)

Behavior, Ecology, Management

Stephen Spotte (Autor)

eBook Download: EPUB

2014
John Wiley & Sons (Verlag)
978-1-118-88402-7 (ISBN)

Infos

Feral and stray domestic cats occupy many different habitats. They can resist dehydration for months by relying exclusively on the tissue water of their prey allowing them to colonize remote deserts and other inhospitable
places. They thrive and reproduce in humid equatorial rainforests and windswept subantarctic islands. In many areas of the world feral cats have driven some species of birds and mammals to extinction and others to the edge, becoming a huge conservation concern. With the control of feral and stray cats now a top conservation priority, biologists are intensifying efforts to understand cat behaviour, reproductive biology, use of space, intraspecies interaction, dietary requirements, prey preferences, and vulnerability to different management
strategies.
This book provides the most comprehensive review yet published on the behavior, ecology and management of free-ranging domestic cats, whether they be owned, stray, or feral. It reviews management methods and their progress, and questions several widely accepted views of free-ranging cats, notably that they live within dominance hierarchies and are highly social.

Insightful and objective, this book includes:

• a functional approach, emphasizing sensory biology, reproductive physiology, nutrition, and space
  partitioning;
• clear treatment of how free-ranging cats should be managed;
• extensive critical interpretation of the world’s existing literature;
• results of studies of cats in laboratories under controlled conditions, with data that can also be
  applied to pet cats.

Free-ranging Cats: Behavior, Ecology, Management is valuable to ecologists, conservation scientists, animal behaviorists, wildlife nutritionists, wildlife biologists, research and wildlife veterinarians, clinical veterinarians,  mammalogists, and park and game reserve planners and administrators.

Dr Stephen Spotte is a marine scientist and an adjunt scientist at Mote Marine Laboratory (Sarasota, Florida). He is an author or co-author of more than 80 scientific papers and has written 18 books.

Inhalt

Preface xi

Abbreviations and symbols xvii

About the companion website xix

1 Dominance 1

1.1 Introduction 1

1.2 Dominance defined 1

1.3 Dominance status and dominance hierarchies 6

1.4 Dominance-submissive behavior 10

1.5 Dominance in free-ranging cats 15

2 Space 19

2.1 Introduction 19

2.2 Space defined 20

2.3 Diel activity 23

2.4 Dispersal 26

2.5 Inbreeding avoidance 27

2.6 Home-range boundaries 31

2.7 Determinants of home-range size 33

2.8 Habitat selection 41

2.9 Scent-marking 43

3 Interaction 49

3.1 Introduction 49

3.2 The asocial domestic cat 49

3.3 Solitary or social? 52

3.4 Cooperative or not? 58

3.5 The kinship dilemma 61

3.6 What it takes to be social 66

4 Reproduction 72

4.1 Introduction 72

4.2 Female reproductive biology 72

4.3 Male reproductive biology 84

4.4 The cat mating system: promiscuity or polygyny? 88

4.5 Female mating behavior 91

4.6 Male mating behavior 93

4.7 Female choice 96

5 Development 98

5.1 Introduction 98

5.2 Intrauterine development 98

5.3 Dens 100

5.4 Parturition 100

5.5 Early maturation 104

5.6 Nursing 108

5.7 Weaning 109

5.8 Survival 111

5.9 Effect of early weaning and separation 113

5.10 Early predatory behavior 114

6 Emulative learning and play 116

6.1 Introduction 116

6.2 Emulative learning 116

6.3 Play 121

6.4 Ontogenesis of play 125

6.5 What is play? 130

7 Nutrition 137

7.1 Introduction 137

7.2 Proximate composition 138

7.3 Proteins 139

7.4 Fats 148

7.5 Carbohydrates 150

7.6 Fiber 155

7.7 Vitamins 156

8 Water balance and energy 158

8.1 Introduction 158

8.2 Water balance 158

8.3 Energy 162

8.4 Energy needs of free-ranging cats 166

8.5 Energy costs of pregnancy and lactation 172

8.6 Obesity 178

9 Foraging 181

9.1 Introduction 181

9.2 Cats as predators 182

9.3 Scavenging 185

9.4 When cats hunt 189

9.5 Food intake of feral cats 189

9.6 How cats detect prey 190

9.7 How cats hunt 200

9.8 What cats hunt 205

9.9 Prey selection 207

9.10 The motivation to hunt 210

10 Management 214

10.1 Introduction 214

10.2 Effect of free-ranging cats on wildlife 215

10.3 Trap-neuter-release (TNR) 224

10.4 Biological control 233

10.5 Poisoning and other eradication methods 237

10.6 Integrated control 241

10.7 Preparation for eradication programs 245

10.8 "Secondary" prey management 247

References 251

Index 293

Rezensionen

"In this context, a new book published by Wiley, Free-ranging Cats: Behavior, Ecology, Management (by Stephen Spotte), provides a comprehensive and objective insight on the key topics related to the management of feral cats, addressing some fundamental issues for a correct analysis of the problem, including a review of the available information on the species' behavioral, biological and ecological features." (Nature Conservation, 15 December 2014)

"The breadth and depth of the book, along with its well thought out points, make it a must have for anyone working on issues related to free-ranging cats. It is a well written and easy to follow book that can easily be referenced for specific topics." (The Journal of Wildlife Management, 2015)

Textauszug

Chapter 1
Dominance

1.1 Introduction

The concept of dominance appears often in the animal behavior literature. When defined at all its meaning and usage are often inconsistent, making any comparison of results among experiments ambiguous. How we think of dominance necessarily influences findings obtained by observation (Syme 1974). Perhaps because domestic cats are asocial (Chapter 3), their expressions of dominance seem strongly situation-specific (Bernstein 1981, Richards 1974, Tufto et al. 1998) rather than manifestations of a societal mandate, making dominance–subordinate relationships less predictive of reproductive success and other fitness measures.

My objectives here are to define and describe dominance behavior and try to evaluate its relevance in the lives of free-ranging cats. Much experimental work on dominance and subordination in laboratory settings has only peripheral application to cats living outdoors. Consequently, I seriously doubt that watching cats crowded together in cages yields anything except measures of aberrant behavior, not at all unusual when circumstances keep animals from dispersing (Spotte 2012: 221–227).

The dominance concept has done little to enlighten our understanding of how free-ranging cats interact, its utility seemingly more applicable to animals demonstrating true sociality. As I hope to make clear, agonistic interactions between free-ranging cats are mostly fleeting, situational, and the consequences seldom permanent because neither participant has much to gain or lose. Baron et al. (1957) and Leyhausen (1965) used relative dominance when referring to how vigorously an individual dominates subordinates, meaning that some cats are more dominant than others in relative terms, perhaps by not allowing subordinates to usurp them even momentarily at the food bowl if a subordinate growls or by refusing to share food. That measurements of relative dominance, situational dominance, or dominance by any category have utility in assessing the interactions of free-ranging cats is doubtful. Food is not highly motivating. Small groups of cats, whether captive (Mugford 1977), feral (Apps 1986b), or stray (Izawa et al. 1982), seldom fight over food or anything else, raising the question of whether the “dominance” observed during arena tests and based on food motivation is not mostly an artifact of experimental conditions. As Mugford (1977: 33) wrote of laboratory cats fed ad libitum, “Less than 1% of total available time was accounted for by feeding, so it would be difficult for any single dominant animal to retain exclusive possession of the food pan. …”

1.2 Dominance defined

The most useful definition of any scientific term consists of a simple falsifiable statement devised to reveal some causal effect in nature beyond mere description and data analysis. Flannelly and Blanchard (1981: 440) made clear that “dominance is not an entity, but an attempt to describe in a single word the complex interactions of neurology and behavior.” This is important to remember and useful conceptually, although difficult to wrestle into falsifiable hypotheses if the only available method of testing involves observation without manipulation of the subjects or conditions.

Any definition necessarily encompasses agonism (Drews 1993), which some consider a synonym of aggression, but properly interpreted and applied includes both dominance and submission (Spotte 2012: 40–42). Drews employed the terms dominant and subordinate to indicate relative rank in either a dyad (a group of two individuals) or more complex hierarchy (i.e. triad or higher). It follows logically that dominance behavior and submissive behavior denote specific responses (e.g. striking with a forepaw, sibilance, aggression, fleeing). Thus a subordinate owes its rank—as perceived by us—to behaving submissively when encountering a dominant conspecific.

Gage (1981) proposed studying dominance in either of two ways. One approach starts by proposing a theory that not only identifies the concept but encompasses conditions necessary to realize its application (functional definition). This step is followed by derivation of a testable hypothesis derived from theory that includes a definition. Empirical results then force acceptance or rejection of the null hypothesis of no difference along with the definition. The free-ranging cat literature largely ignores functional definitions. However, to qualify as scientific the design of an experiment is obliged to take a functional approach because all testable hypotheses must be grounded in theory. Descriptions not based on this principle leave no means of explaining the observations.

In the second approach (structural definition), observable states of dominance are tacitly assumed to exist outside theory, an operational definition is proposed, and tests are conducted to determine whether the term as defined has merit. The most complete structural definition is from Drews (1993: 308), who did not offer a functional counterpart: “Dominance [italics added] is an attribute of the pattern of repeated, agonistic interactions between two individuals, characterized by a consistent outcome in favour of the same dyad member and a default yielding response of its opponent rather than escalation.” A consistent winner is therefore dominant, the consistent loser subordinate. This winner–loser format describes how agonistic encounters are resolved and assessed observationally by an investigator.

Drews' definition, along with the majority of others he reviewed, demonstrates that the animal behavior literature (including that portion dealing with free-ranging cats) is almost entirely data-driven, descriptive, and relies on structural definitions. In the absence of hypothesis testing, the causal basis of dyadic asymmetry and dominance hierarchies (see later) can only be inferred. To make inductive inferences is to step outside the boundaries of structurally-based experimentation and attempt to explain function, an impossible undertaking. When induction takes precedence, accounts of structurally based experiments morph into general, or universal, statements (Popper 1968: 27), none of which can ever be valid.

Some combination of signals is necessary before dominance ranks or hierarchies can assemble in sustainable configurations. Communication can be defined as “an association between the sender's signal and the receiver's behavior as a consequence of the signal” (Spotte 2012: 33). Assuming agonism is a form of communication—that is, measurable in terms of signal and response—then dominance considered within communication's restricted context is one animal's attempt to influence another's behavior (also see Krebs and Dawkins 1984, Maxim 1981, Smuts 1981). My purpose here is to ascertain how this is possible and attempt to assess the different manifestations.

Operationally, the individual signaling first (i.e. the cat attempting to influence how the other responds) can be either the dominant or subordinate member of a dyad. For example, crouching is considered submissive male behavior. If so, a male that crouches on encountering another male signals submission, announcing his subordinate status. The dominant male then has two choices: ignore the signal or respond by signaling his dominance. The latter behavior acknowledges respective status, although in either case the dominant-subordinate relationship likely has been established even between cats meeting for the first time (Cole and Shafer 1966), and any chances of aggression are diminished. The dominant male's first option (passive disregard) is evidence that “Subordinance-acknowledging … is not always prompted by dominance-confirming, and either of them can serve as a signal or response” (Spotte 2012: 41).

As mentioned, an agonistic encounter produces a so-called “winner” and “loser,” one animal emerging dominant, the other subordinate. A fight might serve to establish a dominant-subordinate relationship initially. However, mutual acknowledgement of status is what sustains the relationship over time, and perpetuation without change is based on recognition and familiarity. Fighting is rare afterward, and a stable relationship from both sides of the agonistic divide has been established. Dominant-subordinate status can be established quickly in dyadic contests. Cole and Shafer (1966) tested eight cats in 10 round-robin trials (28 combinations) and noted that in 82% of dyads the relationship became apparent during the first trial.

Dominance is conceptually fuzzy like “stress” and “species.” As Hinde and Datta (1981: 442) emphasized, “If dominance is used to describe the directionality of interactions, it explains that directionality no more than the ‘migratory instinct’ explains migration.” Familiarity makes dominance especially difficult to assess (de Boer 1977b). Landau's (1951: 1) rigorous mathematical analysis led to this conclusion: “The hierarchy is the prevalent structure only if unreasonably small differences in ability are decisive for dominance.” Thus, “If all members are of equal ability, so that dominance probability is ½, then any sizable society is much more likely to be near the equality than the hierarchy; and, as the size of the society increases, the probability that it will be near the hierarchy becomes vanishingly small.” In...

Produkt-Details

• Erscheint lt. Verlag: 16.7.2014
• Sprache: englisch
• Themenwelt: Naturwissenschaften ► Biologie ► Ökologie / Naturschutz
• Themenwelt: Naturwissenschaften ► Biologie ► Zoologie
• Themenwelt: Naturwissenschaften ► Geowissenschaften ► Geologie
• Themenwelt: Technik
• Schlagworte: Ökologie / Tiere • Animal ecology • Areas • Behavior & Behavioral Ecology • Biowissenschaften • Birds • Conservation Science • Control • Dehydration • Different • Domestic • equatorial • exclusively • feral • Habitats • huge conservation • Humid • Islands • Katze • Life Sciences • many • months • Naturschutzbiologie • Occupy • Ökologie / Tiere • Prey • Rainforests • reproduce • species • Subantarctic • tissue • Verhalten, Verhaltensökologie • Verhalten, Verhaltensökologie • Water • World
• ISBN-10: 1-118-88402-7 / 1118884027
• ISBN-13: 978-1-118-88402-7 / 9781118884027