Can fastidiousness kill the cat? The potential for target‐specific poisoning of feral cats through oral grooming

Read, John

doi:10.1111/j.1442-8903.2010.00558.x

Cited by 12 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Oral grooming has been trialled or used as a technique for delivering toxins for the control of rabbits (Hale and Myers 1970) and rodents (Morris et al 1983). Read (2010) also demonstrated the potential to deliver poison to feral cats through compulsive grooming, which circum vents their frequent aversion to consuming baits and other challenges of bait delivery of toxins including palatability and bait degradation issues. Avoiding a food-based deliv ery also improves target specificity by reducing significant non-target uptake (Algar et al 2007;Moseby et al 2011), a key requirement of acceptable pest animal control tech niques (Sanders and Maloney 2002;King et al 2007).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Dying to be clean: pen trials of novel cat and fox control devices

Read

Gigliotti²,

Darby³

et al. 2014

International Journal of Pest Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Predation by feral cats (Felis catus) and red foxes ( Vulpes vulpes) are key threatening processes for many endangered wildlife species. Toxin delivery through compulsive oral grooming is a potential mechanism to supplement existing control techniques for feral cats and red foxes, particularly when high prey densities reduce the uptake of toxic food baits by cats. We investigated the efficacy of different grooming traps by applying a gel containing toxic paraaminopropiophenone (PAPP) to the fur of feral cats and red foxes in experimental pens. Grooming behaviour and signs of poisoning in these animals were recorded by video. More cats interacted with "walk past" grooming traps triggered by sensor beams than with trap models that required the cat to enter a pipe or baited cage. After triggering a trap that had applied PAPP gel to their fur, 14 of 16 feral cats showed symptoms of anoxia, and 8 of these cats were dead by the following morning without exhibiting signs of distress. Seven of 12 foxes were observed to groom fur to which toxic gel had been applied and 3 of these ingested a lethal quantity of PAPP as a result. Our successful proof-of-concept trials support further development of grooming trap sensors and toxin delivery mechanisms to provide humane and targeted feral cat control, although this technique is unlikely to be as successful for fox control, given that foxes appear to not groom as fastidiously as cats.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Dying to be clean: pen trials of novel cat and fox control devices

Read

Gigliotti²,

Darby³

et al. 2014

International Journal of Pest Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Trapping and shooting can be effective for short‐term control when target predator densities are high but labor‐intensive and logistically prohibitive for sustained control at remote sites (Short et al , Rich et al ). Development and registration of new control devices with low labor costs and that do not rely on cats’ hunger are needed, and a tool exploiting cats’ unique grooming behavior is a very high priority of the Australian Threat Abatement Plan for Predation by Feral Cats (Denny and Dickman , Read , Commonwealth of Australia ). Such a tool could improve feral cat control in a range of settings including islands, restricted threatened species sites, and remote areas.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In addition to selecting safe doses of toxin for most nontargets, Felixer target specificity can also be achieved by restricting access by nontargets, arranging sensors in a pattern that prevents triggering by nontarget species, creating a sensor algorithm that selects targets based upon the timing and pattern that they intercept different sensor beams, and interspecific differences in grooming behavior (Read ). This study experimentally tested the efficacy of sensor arrays and algorithms to distinguish target from nontarget Felixer activations in the field to guide improvements in target specificity.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Target specificity of the felixer grooming “trap”

Read

Bowden²,

Hodgens³

et al. 2019

Wildl. Soc. Bull.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Felixer grooming "traps" provide a novel technique for controlling invasive red foxes (Vulpes vulpes) and feral cats (Felis catus) by ejecting a dose of poison onto the fur of a target animal, which is subsequently ingested through grooming. The Felixer achieves target specificity through a discriminatory sensor arrangement and algorithm as well as a dosing pathway and toxin, which together make feral cats and foxes more vulnerable than humans and nontarget wildlife. The toxin 1080 used in many pest control projects in Australia is derived from native plants, which renders Australian wildlife, including potential scavengers of poisoned carcasses, that have co-evolved with these toxic plants less sensitive than their nonnative counterparts to 1080 poisoning. We investigated the success of the Felixer sensor system in discriminating target cats and red foxes from nontargets under field conditions. All foxes and 82% of feral cats were correctly identified as targets. No people or medium-sized marsupials-including brush-tailed possums (Trichosurus vulpecula), bettongs (Bettongia spp.), bilbies (Macrotis lagotis), and western quolls (Dasyurus geoffroii)-were incorrectly assigned as targets, suggesting Felixers could provide safe and specific feral-predator control at many conservation sites, albeit not at sites with threatened endemic small felids or canids. A low false-positive detection rate was recorded in larger macropods and poultry that will be addressed with more sophisticated sensor positioning and algorithms in optimized Felixers, along with more careful installation. The low sensitivity of macropods and malleefowl (Leipoa ocellata) to 1080, and their reduced grooming behavior relative to feral cats, suggests these species will not be affected by Felixer deployment. Ó 2019 The Wildlife Society.

show abstract

“…Despite high exposure to multiple Spotted-tailed Quolls in the pen environments at Featherdale, where the possibility of incorrect activation was maximised, the Felixer devices we tested did not pose a potential risk to animals with body weights within the range of Feral Cats. Since early proof of concept work and subsequent refinement (Read 2010;Read et al 2014), the Felixer has proven to be largely target specific, activating primarily on Feral Cats and the Red Fox (Vulpes vulpes) (Moseby et al 2020). Collated field-based trials of the devices done in semi-arid and arid landscapes, demonstrated that most activations of Felixers were on those two target species (Read et al 2019).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The Felixer grooming trap (hereafter Felixer) is among the relatively recent and purported solutions to reducing Feral Cat numbers (https://thylation.com/felixerfaqs: website accessed 3 May 2023). The evolution of the Felixer from concept to field-ready and then operational device is described in Read (2010), Read et al (2014) and, most recently, Read et al (2019). The Felixer uses an array of lidar-based sensors to detect the shape and movement of a Feral Cat and sprays a lethal dose (8 mg) of 1080 toxic gel onto the fur from up to 4 m away.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Performance of Felixer devices when faced with captive‐held Spotted‐tailed Quolls: Do they pose a risk to an endangered marsupial carnivore?

Claridge,

Ballard,

Luck

et al. 2023

Eco Management Restoration

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SummaryFeral Cats are widespread and common across Australia, preying upon a wide diversity and large quantity of vertebrates and invertebrates. Curbing their impacts demands developing new control methods, as existing techniques are only usually partially successful. One such new method is the Felixer, a device that uses a combination of sensors to differentiate Feral Cats from other fauna before delivering a toxic gel to the fur of its target. Subsequently, this gel is then groomed and ingested. Before the Felixer can be more widely adopted, however, it is important to understand its target specificity. In a series of pen trials, we examined the ability of Felixer devices to discriminate Spotted‐tailed Quolls, a cat‐sized marsupial carnivore high on the list of species of concern. Over several weeks, multiple Spotted‐tailed Quolls were each individually placed in pens with Felixers programmed in photograph only mode to take photographs only when sensors were triggered. Overall, there were almost 4000 detection events where Quolls passed in front of these devices and photographs taken. Nearly 1300 of these detections showed Quolls in a perpendicular or side‐on position, ideally placed for the Felixer sensor arrays. Despite this exposure, there were no instances where the Felixer devices indicated that they would have activated on Quolls, had they been in lethal mode. This finding adds to recently published work in Tasmania, that also showed Quolls were highly unlikely to be incorrectly identified. Nevertheless, further studies of non‐target discrimination by the Felixer device on other species of native wildlife is vital before they are made fully operational. This is particularly the case on the eastern seaboard of the country where the device has not yet been widely used and much remains to be learned about how they perform when faced with different species.

show abstract

Can fastidiousness kill the cat? The potential for target‐specific poisoning of feral cats through oral grooming

Cited by 12 publications

References 13 publications

Dying to be clean: pen trials of novel cat and fox control devices

Dying to be clean: pen trials of novel cat and fox control devices

Target specificity of the felixer grooming “trap”

Performance of Felixer devices when faced with captive‐held Spotted‐tailed Quolls: Do they pose a risk to an endangered marsupial carnivore?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About