Different types of cats
Stray cats should not be confused with feral cats. They are by definition different things, one group depending on human habitation and the other not.
Stray population size is limited in effect only by the availability of food. Stray cat numbers are always quick to escalate to the stage where they maximally exploit available food resources. Although domestic cats are considered obligate carnivores, almost any kind of animal protein, whether fresh, preserved, processed or carrion will suffice. Provided some breeding males and females are available, it needs only minimal carelessness in waste food or the misplaced generosity of just one person, to trigger a dramatic boost in resident stray cat numbers.
The size if the range of female strays is generally accepted to be a function of food availability and food dispersion, while the range of males is a function of their access to females. Implicit in the definition of strays is the particular kind of dependency they have on human suburban habitation. Even though they donít belong to anyone in particular, they are maintained by scavenging and thieving for a living.
The struggle to survive under conditions of the feast or famine style is grim when the food supply periodically dries up for one reason or another. Twenty or thirty stray cats can do it easy while a reliable food supply holds up, with females pregnant or with kittens at foot. The same cats are in deep trouble when the open waste bins are covered. When things go badly for strays, it goes without saying that people are likely to be distressed by the sight and plight of diseased, socially stressed and starving animals.
The territorial and sexual activity of stray cats is a notorious source of public annoyance. While desexed pet cats cause little neighbourhood concern, entire adult cats have historically been a source of intense suburban nuisance. Entire roaming cats are the main cause of all types of council cat problems. Stray male cats have a universal and well earned reputation for being noisy, smelly, aggressive and intrusive animals, and stray female cats, for being pathetically pregnant all the time.
The careless breeding of pet cats and the irresponsible displacement of unwanted kittens contributes to stray cat populations in most areas of human habitation. Entire free-roaming adult pets are the interface between the pet and the stray components of domestic cat populations. Breeder cats, if not kept permanently restricted from roaming, will effectively behave as strays. They are an integral part of the stray cat problem and should be classified and dealt with accordingly.
Contrary to popular belief, feral cat population densities are probably not increased by recruitment from domestic pet sources. Stray cats tend to be locally sustained and they tend therefore to remain tied to their original domestic source. Feral cats, on the other hand, tend to be found in remote and stable populations. Access to food and shelter is a more likely population driving force than is the recruitment of immigrant strays from adjacent areas of human habitation.
For the purposes of cat management by local government, genuine feral cats are not really an issue at all. It is debatable that they do any harm to anything anyway and they are by their definition only found in areas remote from habitation. Although the term feral crops up frequently, it is mostly used incorrectly. Councils can forget about feral cats when dealing with urban and suburban cat problems. They are an emotive and distracting side issue.
The subject of farm cat behaviour was dealt with extensively by Kerby and Macdonald as was the behaviour of colony cats by Natoli and De Vito. While the behaviour of farm cats and colony cats varies depending on the circumstances and the purpose of their maintenance, particular people are centrally involved in the management of the lives of both these types. This fact sets them aside from stray and feral cats.
While neither farm nor colony cats are owned in the usual sense of the term, both types enjoy some degree of custodial management by either farmers or carers (cat lovers). In both cases, the people get something out of their association with the cats. The farmers get farm vermin control, and the carers get a subtle psychological reward. In both cases, the cats get something out of their association with the people as well. Usually it is food and shelter.
As is the case with strays, food is the main driver of local farm and colony cat population size. In the absence of significant attrition from culling and/or disease and provided sufficient, regularly supplied and appropriate food is made available, group size may go as high as 50 individuals and population density can approach 2000 per square kilometre.
The main differences between farm/colony cats and strays relate to a degree of proprietorial assumption. For these cats a kind of ownership of the cats is assumed by somebody eg. they may be individually named and particular individuals in the colony or group may be watched out for.
Two views can be advanced for how colony cats should be managed. Neville argued for semi-official management of colonies eg. providing carers with food and methods to limit breeding (eg. medications or access to desexing services). Nevilleís experience was that, with this sort of management, the nuisance these cats caused was reduced to an acceptable level.
Webb however takes a less sanguine view of colony cats in her excellent presentation to UAM4 in Melbourne. She paints a glum picture of the typical colony of about 20 cats, undernourished, diseased, entire and unhandleable. Life expectancy of colony cats is about 3 to 4 years compared with 7 to 15 years for owned cats. Wilson and his colleagues found a similar scene when they studied rubbish dump cats, with the majority of cats ill from Toxoplasmosis, Feline Immunodeficiency Viral Disease (feline AIDS), Gingivitis and Upper Respiratory Tract Viral Disease (cat flu).
Webb argues strongly against the Neville approach of maintaining colonies with the help of a carer. Even with carers and access to desexing services, most colonies contain many sick cats, which in itself is an animal welfare issue. In any case, the cats are still around causing problems by threatening owned cats. As time goes on, the colonies become more dependent on their carers, and also more trapshy. If the carer leaves, the cats often starve because they are impossible to capture for relocation or euthanasia. Meanwhile the need to desex new arrivals never goes away as new entire cats regularly join the colony. Missing even one entire female can create a new population explosion. All this feeding, and desexing, and supervision is a costly business. One wonders if anyone really benefits: cats, carers, veterinary supervisors, or the public who are footing the bill.
Instead, Webb outlines a clear approach for preventing replenishment of colonies and reducing existing colonies. Wilson and his colleagues made similar recommendations on dealing with rubbish tip colonies. They concluded that populations at rubbish tips could be controlled by six-monthly trapping and euthanasia of all trapped cats. They warned that such a plan would need to be integrated with a plan to control other pests, such as rats and mice. An alternative method for controlling rubbish dump colonies might be to cover all dumped food daily.
Because colony and farm cats tend to be urban or rural in location rather than suburban, they are less of a quality-of-life issue than strays. However they canít be ignored because there is a potential for linkage between these types.
If the people who accept custodial responsibility for these cats (neutering, feeding and general caring including attention to health), behave like owners, then to all intents and purposes these cats can be included and considered in the bigger picture of overall cat management as part of the pet category. But most do not fit this category. Without the neutering and full care commitment, they have to be considered strays and dealt with accordingly.
Very few impounded or surrendered cats are reclaimed by owners. For example, at the RSPCA Fairfield Refuge in Brisbane, 13,745 unwanted or unowned cats were handled in 1991/92. Of these, only 0.45% were reclaimed by owners. Apparently, the same kind of thing happens elsewhere as well. Duncan reported similar statistics from Melbourne, Canberra and Sydney. At present, it would appear that in every community, a large population of non-pet (stray) cats exists.
The collection and disposal of fairly large numbers of such stray cats by councils and animal welfare agencies all over Australia and New Zealand has, for a long time, been unavoidable. Although the public generally seem unconcerned by this mass destruction (possibly through ignorance of the fact), the people who have to do the killing find the going very tough. They fervently wish that someone would find an answer to spare them this role.
Duncan commented that 97% of pet cats in her Warringah study were desexed. Kelly reported 92% of South Australian pet cats were desexed. These and other similar findings lead to the conclusion that high numbers of unclaimed cats that have to be destroyed each year must be the progeny of stray rather than pet cats. The collection and removal of stray cats is easily justified on the grounds of animal welfare if nothing else.
Contrary to popular opinion, night curfews for domestic pet cats appear unlikely to have an overall effect on wildlife predation. On the subject of night curfews, Duncan reported how her survey data from the Warringah area indicated that the preying patterns of pet cats kept mainly inside at night were not different from those kept mainly outside at night. Turner and Meister pointed out how, contrary to popular opinion, cats are not particularly nocturnal animals though they can spread out their activity times over full 24-hour periods. Duncan, did however conclude that night curfews were definitely in the best interests of the health and welfare of the cats themselves.
It is important to note that even if night curfews for pet cats did offer some tangible advantage in terms of wildlife security, the enforcement of night curfew constraints (or any constraints for that matter) on pet cats would be pointless while stray cat populations exist in the same localities. Once again, the need to deal with strays appears to be a high priority objective in the rational approach to municipal cat management.
Those are the different types of cats and there are lots more cats out there that need homes. :'(
)Big Thanks)
