Conservation or politics? Australia's target to kill 2 million cats

Tim S. Doherty, Don A. Driscoll, Dale G. Nimmo, Euan G. Ritchie, Ricky John Spencer

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

2 Citations (Scopus)
2 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

The Australian Government's 5-year Threatened Species Strategy contains four priority action areas and associated targets. Here, we argue that the well-publicized target to cull 2 million feral cats has a weak scientific basis because: (1) reliable estimates of Australia's cat population size did not exist when the target was set; (2) it is extremely difficult to measure progress (numbers of cats killed) in an accurate, reliable way; and, most importantly, (3) the cull target is not explicitly linked to direct conservation outcomes (e.g., measured increases in threatened species populations). These limitations mean that the cull target fails to meet what would be considered best practice for pest management. The focus on killing cats runs the risk of distracting attention away from other threats to biodiversity, most prominent of which is widespread, ongoing habitat loss, which has been largely overlooked in the Threatened Species Strategy. The culling target is a highly visible symbol of a broader campaign around feral cat research and management in Australia, rather than a direct indicator of conservation action and success. We are concerned that progress toward the 2 million target could be misinterpreted as progress toward conserving threatened species, when the link between the two is not clear.

Original languageEnglish
Article numbere12633
Pages (from-to)1-6
Number of pages6
JournalConservation Letters
DOIs
Publication statusE-pub ahead of print - Jan 2019

Fingerprint

politics
threatened species
cats
culling
habitat loss
pest control
culling (animals)
population size
pest management
habitat destruction
biodiversity

Cite this

Doherty, T. S., Driscoll, D. A., Nimmo, D. G., Ritchie, E. G., & Spencer, R. J. (2019). Conservation or politics? Australia's target to kill 2 million cats. Conservation Letters, 1-6. [e12633]. https://doi.org/10.1111/conl.12633
Doherty, Tim S. ; Driscoll, Don A. ; Nimmo, Dale G. ; Ritchie, Euan G. ; Spencer, Ricky John. / Conservation or politics? Australia's target to kill 2 million cats. In: Conservation Letters. 2019 ; pp. 1-6.
@article{66210502b4f34a48a56d1c6b73a616b6,
title = "Conservation or politics? Australia's target to kill 2 million cats",
abstract = "The Australian Government's 5-year Threatened Species Strategy contains four priority action areas and associated targets. Here, we argue that the well-publicized target to cull 2 million feral cats has a weak scientific basis because: (1) reliable estimates of Australia's cat population size did not exist when the target was set; (2) it is extremely difficult to measure progress (numbers of cats killed) in an accurate, reliable way; and, most importantly, (3) the cull target is not explicitly linked to direct conservation outcomes (e.g., measured increases in threatened species populations). These limitations mean that the cull target fails to meet what would be considered best practice for pest management. The focus on killing cats runs the risk of distracting attention away from other threats to biodiversity, most prominent of which is widespread, ongoing habitat loss, which has been largely overlooked in the Threatened Species Strategy. The culling target is a highly visible symbol of a broader campaign around feral cat research and management in Australia, rather than a direct indicator of conservation action and success. We are concerned that progress toward the 2 million target could be misinterpreted as progress toward conserving threatened species, when the link between the two is not clear.",
keywords = "biodiversity conservation, environmental policy, evidence-based policy, extinction, feral cats, invasive species, pest management, threatened species conservation",
author = "Doherty, {Tim S.} and Driscoll, {Don A.} and Nimmo, {Dale G.} and Ritchie, {Euan G.} and Spencer, {Ricky John}",
year = "2019",
month = "1",
doi = "10.1111/conl.12633",
language = "English",
pages = "1--6",
journal = "Conservation Letters",
issn = "1755-263X",
publisher = "John Wiley & Sons",

}

Conservation or politics? Australia's target to kill 2 million cats. / Doherty, Tim S.; Driscoll, Don A.; Nimmo, Dale G.; Ritchie, Euan G.; Spencer, Ricky John.

In: Conservation Letters, 01.2019, p. 1-6.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Conservation or politics? Australia's target to kill 2 million cats

AU - Doherty, Tim S.

AU - Driscoll, Don A.

AU - Nimmo, Dale G.

AU - Ritchie, Euan G.

AU - Spencer, Ricky John

PY - 2019/1

Y1 - 2019/1

N2 - The Australian Government's 5-year Threatened Species Strategy contains four priority action areas and associated targets. Here, we argue that the well-publicized target to cull 2 million feral cats has a weak scientific basis because: (1) reliable estimates of Australia's cat population size did not exist when the target was set; (2) it is extremely difficult to measure progress (numbers of cats killed) in an accurate, reliable way; and, most importantly, (3) the cull target is not explicitly linked to direct conservation outcomes (e.g., measured increases in threatened species populations). These limitations mean that the cull target fails to meet what would be considered best practice for pest management. The focus on killing cats runs the risk of distracting attention away from other threats to biodiversity, most prominent of which is widespread, ongoing habitat loss, which has been largely overlooked in the Threatened Species Strategy. The culling target is a highly visible symbol of a broader campaign around feral cat research and management in Australia, rather than a direct indicator of conservation action and success. We are concerned that progress toward the 2 million target could be misinterpreted as progress toward conserving threatened species, when the link between the two is not clear.

AB - The Australian Government's 5-year Threatened Species Strategy contains four priority action areas and associated targets. Here, we argue that the well-publicized target to cull 2 million feral cats has a weak scientific basis because: (1) reliable estimates of Australia's cat population size did not exist when the target was set; (2) it is extremely difficult to measure progress (numbers of cats killed) in an accurate, reliable way; and, most importantly, (3) the cull target is not explicitly linked to direct conservation outcomes (e.g., measured increases in threatened species populations). These limitations mean that the cull target fails to meet what would be considered best practice for pest management. The focus on killing cats runs the risk of distracting attention away from other threats to biodiversity, most prominent of which is widespread, ongoing habitat loss, which has been largely overlooked in the Threatened Species Strategy. The culling target is a highly visible symbol of a broader campaign around feral cat research and management in Australia, rather than a direct indicator of conservation action and success. We are concerned that progress toward the 2 million target could be misinterpreted as progress toward conserving threatened species, when the link between the two is not clear.

KW - biodiversity conservation

KW - environmental policy

KW - evidence-based policy

KW - extinction

KW - feral cats

KW - invasive species

KW - pest management

KW - threatened species conservation

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85061977728&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85061977728&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/conl.12633

DO - 10.1111/conl.12633

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:85061977728

SP - 1

EP - 6

JO - Conservation Letters

JF - Conservation Letters

SN - 1755-263X

M1 - e12633

ER -