King Island Cat Control Program 2010

King Island Cat Control Program 2010 King Island Cat Control Project June 2010

Report prepared by Jamie Cooper FERAL MANAGEMENT SOLUTIONS

Acknowledgements

Thanks to the committed people who gave up their valuable time, apologies if I haven’t listed you all.

Bear Alexander, Tom Blake, Tom Brooks, Nigel Burgess, Mavis Burgess, Graeme Conley, Nick Cooper, Jim Cooper, John Cross, Noela Cross, Shelley Davison, Eva Finzel, Katie Graham, Nick Johannsohn, Eli Jorgensen, Alan Lewis, Jen Milne, Raymond Perry , Robert Skipworth, Sharon Stanfield, Max Summers,

Abbreviations

IACRC Invasive Animals Cooperative Research Centre

KIC King Island Council

KIGBA King Island Game Birds Association

KINRM King Island Natural Resource Management Group

PWS Parks and Wildlife Service Tasmania

2 Contents Acknowledgements...... 2 Abbreviations...... 2 Contents...... 5 Summary...... 5 1. Program and literature review...... 6 1.1. KINRMG Cat Control Program 2005-2006...... 6 1.1.1. Assist the recovery of threatened fauna by reducing feral cat numbers in priority areas...... 6 1.1.2. Determine future priority control sites through collecting cat baseline data. 6 1.1.3. Raise community awareness of the need for restraining domestic cats from roaming and becoming feral...... 6 1.1.4. Removal of a large number of cats from the island by assisting the community to undertake control measures...... 6 1.2. The King Island Cat Management Plan 2008-2013...... 7 1.2.1. Priority species...... 7 1.2.2. Priority Areas...... 7 1.2.3. Priority Objectives and actions...... 7 Objective 1: Ensure King Island is well placed to receive funding, research projects and additional support from State and local government...... 7 Action 1.1 Develop working relationships with other State organisations and groups involved in cat management...... 7 Objective 2: Improve responsible cat ownership...... 8

3 Action 2.1 Adopt a local By-law to reflect the capacity of the anticipated Cat Management legislation for Tasmania...... 8 Objective 3: Improve our understanding of impacts of feral cats on native wildlife...... 8 Action 3.1 Undertake a dietary study of feral cats...... 8 Objective 4: Improve community understanding on the impacts of feral, domestic and stray cats on wildlife...... 9 Action 4.1 Enhance the education of local residents and agencies...... 9 Objective 5: Protect habitat of vulnerable species...... 9 Action 5.1 Undertake targeted trapping of feral and stray cats at key sites...... 9 Action 5.2 Engage experienced cat trappers from locally and abroad...... 9 1.3. Cat Management Legislation...... 10 1.3.1. Breeding and sale of cats...... 10 1.3.2. Microchipping and Desexing of Cats...... 11 2.3.3 Cat Management Facilities...... 11 2.3.3 Managing Stray and Feral Cats...... 12 2.3.4 Local Government...... 12 2. Communications Plan...... 13 2.1. Stakeholder consultation...... 13 2.2. Review of cat sighting sheets and data collection...... 13 2.3. Community awareness...... 13 3. Monitoring cat activity in the Orange Bellied Parrot habitat...... 13 3.1. Trapping of cats in the Sea Elephant area...... 13 4. Program Implementation...... 13 4.1. Priority areas identified and trapping logistics determined...... 13 4.2. Cage and Bait selection...... 14 4.3. Volunteer participation...... 14 5. Program results...... 15 6. Future suggested directions...... 17 7. Summary...... 19 References...... 20

4 Contents

Summary

The King Island Natural Resource Management Group, Feral Management Solutions and the King Island Game Bird Association with assistance from the community supported a short intensive feral cat control program undertaken from the 21st May 2010 to the 6th June 2010.

The program’s aim was to build on the knowledge gained from previous control programs while considering available resources and community capacity. The implementation of this program had components that would investigate and potentially further develop programs for effective long term feral cat management for King Island. As part of the program a review of previous cat control activities including available literature and impending legislation was undertaken to provide direction to ongoing activities. A communications strategy was also developed and implemented to inform the local community of the program and promote participation. It was not the intention of this program to target domestic cats and microchip scanning was used identify these. The program intended to; Reduce the number of feral cats on King Island and help protect the unique, rare and threatened species that inhabit or visit King Island including the Critically Endangered Orange –Bellied Parrot. Provide further training for the community on cage trapping and monitoring of feral cats. Explore the potential use of feeding stations and permanent cages. Trial a number of new cage designs for improved catch effort. Collect stomach contents for dietary analysis. Continue to promote responsible cat ownership

5 1. Program and literature review 1.1. KINRMG Cat Control Program 2005-2006 This program undertaken in 2006 and delivered under a Threatened Species Network Community Grant by the King Island Natural Resource Management Group and was effective in removing 121 cats from King Island over a three month period. Surveys undertaken indicated that cats were widespread across the island including the Orange Bellied Parrot habitat around Sea Elephant. The program had a number of objectives 1.1.1. Assist the recovery of threatened fauna by reducing feral cat numbers in priority areas 1.1.2. Determine future priority control sites through collecting cat baseline data 1.1.3. Raise community awareness of the need for restraining domestic cats from roaming and becoming feral.

The program on review delivered a number of quality outputs including

1.1.4. Removal of a large number of cats from the island by assisting the community to undertake control measures. Although remaining cats are able to reproduce and continue to feed into the population, impacts would have been reduced particularly in some areas of significant biodiversity. 1.1.5. The collection and storage of data from the program and the development of a database and systems that will provide the basis for ongoing consistent data capture. The establishment of sand pads for identifying the presence or absence of cats indicated cats were widespread across the island.

6 1.1.6. Community awareness of the impacts of feral cats and the need for responsible cat ownership were promoted through a number of avenues with positive response. Twenty five domestic cats were desexed and a responsible cat ownership brochure was developed and distributed to 700 house holds.

1.2. The King Island Cat Management Plan 2008-2013 This document outlines the past and current strategies related to responsible cat ownership and conservation of high priority biodiversity assets through feral cat control. The document also highlights the social and economic impacts of cats including disease and related issues. It then provides direction to future management options including research and control.

A list of proposed management actions are identified including priority species for management, priority areas for management and management actions. 1.2.1. Priority species A number of vertebrate fauna were identified as being impacted upon by cats with one rare species of frog and a number of species of birds including the critically endangered orange bellied parrot. Other rare species vulnerable to predation include the Long-nosed potoroo, Swamp Antechinus and Eastern Pigmy Possum 1.2.2. Priority Areas A number of areas have been identified as requiring specific management with regard to cats. Any food or shelter availability needs to be minimised or eliminated where practicable to reduce the population increase and flow of cats into the surrounding environment. Other sites identified represent areas of high biodiversity or critical habitat for threatened species. 1.2.3. Priority Objectives and actions These were developed as a guide to the future direction of cat management on the island and were dependent on resourcing and funding availability.

7 Objective 1: Ensure King Island is well placed to receive funding, research projects and additional support from State and local government Action 1.1 Develop working relationships with other State organisations and groups involved in cat management Task 1.1.1 Maintain correspondence with the Tasmanian Cat Management Network, electing a local representative to disseminate information to the KINRM, PWS and King Island Council (KIC). Task 1.1.2 Initiate relationships with agencies and institutions with experience in cat management to provide strategic advice for cat management particularly in relation to feral cats. Task 1.2.3. Maintain local involvement in cat management, including research into predatory impacts of feral cats.

Objective 2: Improve responsible cat ownership The responsibility for managing individual domestic cats rests with the owner. Irresponsible cat owners and those that feed un- owned cats, play a major role in maintaining populations of stray cats in urban and rural areas (anon 1999). Responsible management of the domestic cat population aims to remove the source population of feral cats on King Island, and to enable easy identification of owned and un-owned cats Action 2.1 Adopt a local By-law to reflect the capacity of the anticipated Cat Management legislation for Tasmania. Objectives of the Draft Cat Management By–Law that was developed for King Island Council in August 2006 including ensuring that:  The cat is permanently identified so that it can be distinguished as a domestic cat;  The cat is de-sexed to avoid producing unwanted kittens;  The cats dietary, health and housing needs, and it’s general care are provided  The cat is confined within the boundaries of the owners property  Suitable boarding facilities are found when the cats owners are unable to attend to the cats needs such as while on holiday  There is a duty of care to neighbours and the community and  There is a duty of care to the environment Implement and enforce a restriction on the import of live cats with the aim of ensuring the new cat arrivals are de-sexed or 8 registered as breeding stock at a registered local cattery to comply with the upcoming Tasmanian cat management legislation.

Objective 3: Improve our understanding of impacts of feral cats on native wildlife. Action 3.1 Undertake a dietary study of feral cats Task Facilitate a dietary analysis of feral cat diets with support from Deakin University and Cradle Coast NRM Utilise evidence gained from dietary studies and relevant scientific literature to direct targeted feral cat management for ecologically sensitive areas.

Objective 4: Improve community understanding on the impacts of feral, domestic and stray cats on wildlife. Action 4.1 Enhance the education of local residents and agencies Task Engage experts to provide training and advice in responsible cat ownership animal welfare and the complex issues associated with feral cat management. Objective 5: Protect habitat of vulnerable species Action 5.1 Undertake targeted trapping of feral and stray cats at key sites Task Establish a local cat working group to oversee the implementation and management of targeted cat trapping efforts. This effort should be based on information gathered through the dietary analysis and another sources to ensure that objectives of the trapping are met. Action 5.2 Engage experienced cat trappers from locally and abroad. Task Hold workshops locally to educate locals on best practice trapping, and of the legal issues relevant to feral and stray cat trapping and hunting. This will ensure a well educated, best practice trapping approach on the island.

9 1.3. Cat Management Legislation The Cat Management Act 2009 was passed by the Tasmanian parliament on 19th November 2009 and is expected to be proclaimed by July 2011. The legislation aims to  Promote the welfare and responsible ownership of cats, including the desexing and microchipping of domestic cats.  Provide for the effective management of cats, allowing for the humane handling and management of unidentified stray cats; and  Reduce the negative effects of cats on the environment. Before the Act can commence, a number of tasks need to be completed. This work includes developing new Cat Management Regulations, information resources and administrative processes. This will be done in consultation with groups representing animal welfare interests and local government, which all have been involved in the development of the Act. The Cat Management Act 2009 covers:

 The breeding and sale of cats  The microchipping and desexing of domestic cats,  The operation of Cat Management Facilities, including the reclaiming of lost cats and holding times for cats; and  The management of stray and feral cats.

10 1.3.1. Breeding and sale of cats  As a first step to reduce the number of cats that become unwanted and are euthanized each year, the legislation provides that only registered breeders are able to breed cats.  A member of an approved cat association will automatically be recognised as a registered breeder. Someone who wishes to breed “moggie” cats, or who is not a member of one of the associations, will be able to apply to be a registered cat breeder.  There will be no restriction on who can sell or give away cats; however, all cats sold or given away will have to be at least 8 weeks of age, microchipped and desexed prior to sale (unless a care agreement has been entered into)  Once legislation commences a person who breeds cats who is not a registered breeder, or who sells or gives away a cat that does not meet the sale requirements, could face a fine.  This aims to ensure that all new domestic cats are desexed and microchipped, unless being born from registered breeders.

1.3.2. Microchipping and Desexing of Cats

 The legislation aims to encourage responsible cat ownership, including microchipping and desexing of domestic cats. Owners that already have their cat desexed and microchipped already meet the requirements of the legislation.  While there is no direct penalty for failing to desex and microchip cats owned before the legislation commences, there will be a compulsory element phased in after four years: after that, it will be necessary for cats being reclaimed from a Cat Management Facility to be desexed and microchipped.  Uncontrolled breeding results in unwanted cats and each year thousands of cats are destroyed because there are not enough homes. Desexing your cat can assist in overcoming this problem.

2.3.3 Cat Management Facilities

 The legislation significantly clarifies the rights and powers of Cat Management Facilities (animal welfare shelters). Among other things, it specifies minimum holding times for cats, allowed cat owners time to look for lost pets, while also providing a framework for shelters dealing with unidentified, stray and feral cats.  Cat Management Facilities will be required to hold cats for at least 5 days if they are microchipped and 3 days if they are not microchipped, to provide time for owners to reclaim their cat.

11  Microchips, implanted under a cat’s skin, are about the size of a grain of rice and use a unique identification number to identify you as your cat’s owner. This makes it faster and easier for you to be reunited with your cat in the event that your cat is missing.  Cat owners may recognise that these holding times are consistent with those for dogs entering a Council Pound.

2.3.3 Managing Stray and Feral Cats

 Stray and feral cats pose significant threats to Tasmania’s native animals and to farm stock through the spread of Toxoplasmosis. The legislation therefore clarifies the powers necessary to continue controlling stray and feral cats in “prohibited areas”, which include land reserved mainly for the protection of natural values.  Prohibited areas include all reserved lands under the Nature Conservation Act 2002 including National Parks and Conservation areas, as well as land subject to conservation covenants, public reserves under the Crown Lands Act 1976 ; and private timber reserves, forest reserves and State forest under the relevant forestry legislation.  The rights of farmers with livestock and managers of rural properties in remote areas are also set out.  The Cat Management Act 2009 clarifies that a ‘farmer’, defined as a person carrying on primary production related to livestock on rural land or a person acting on behalf of such a person, may trap seize or humanely destroy any cat found on that land.  There are no requirements that the rural land be any distance from other properties, though of course other legislation such as the Firearms Act applies. This scenario is consistent with how farmers have been able to handle dogs found on their rural properties under the Dog Control Act.  In a separate scenario, a person who has land more than one kilometre from any place genuinely used as a place of residence may trap seize or humanely destroy a cat found on his or her private property. This case would relate to people who live or own land in remote areas.

12  In both cases the cat may be returned to its owner or taken to a Cat Management Facility (animal welfare shelter). Again, other legislation, particularly the Firearms Act and the Animal Welfare Act, would always need to be complied with.

2.3.4 Local Government

 Local Councils have no additional obligations under the legislation, but voluntary action is facilitated. Councils may declare council-controlled land as prohibited areas, or declare “cat management areas” to support local initiatives, following consultation with their community.  The legislation also clarifies the ability of Councils to make by-laws in relation to cat management.

2. Communications Plan 2.1. Stakeholder consultation Scoping meetings were undertaken with stakeholders to determine levels of participation. Representatives from a number of key supporting organisations were contacted and levels of resourcing were established.

2.2. Review of cat sighting sheets and data collection Cat sighting sheets from the previous program in 2006 were reviewed and to assist the cage trapping program were located in the towns and distributed to the community. The sheets were extremely useful in identifying individual cats and increasing our ability to catch them. The data collection was also reviewed to determine useful information that may assist in the delivery of the program. 2.3. Community awareness Previous cat programs indicated a high level of community support with 750 surveys sent out, 134 returned with only 2 not supporting the program. Prior to the 2010 program being undertaken a number of articles were placed in the King Island Courier to alert the community to the proposed control effort. A radio interview during the control program was undertaken with the Country Hour.

3. Monitoring cat activity in the Orange Bellied Parrot habitat 3.1. Trapping of cats in the Sea Elephant area. Trapping was undertaken by Nigel Burgess who volunteered his time for a number of months before the main trapping exercise occurred. This effort was 13 necessary due to the timing of the migration of the Orange Bellied Parrot which occurred during early autumn ahead of the most effective time for cat cage capture occurring in late autumn/winter. A monitoring camera was utilised to assist in the identification of any cats in the area that may have been trap shy. Nigel Burgess was successful in removing a number of cats from the area thus reducing the potential for predation of parrots.

4. Program Implementation

4.1. Priority areas identified and trapping logistics determined Priority areas for cat control containing significant biodiversity were identified from the King Island Cat Management Plan and from local knowledge obtained through interview. Cat locations and areas of high cat activity were obtained from the cat sighting sheets supplied to the community before the commencement of the program.

The layout of the road network on King Island and the ongoing commitment by a number of individuals in various areas indicated that a broad scale high intensity approach may be feasible. A large number of cages would be required to ensure a high percentage of cat exposure to cages. It was expected that a large number of cages would be available purchased through previous programs.

A logistics plan was drawn up following a meeting with participants. Inputs into the plan included:

 Timeframe of trapping program  numbers of cages available  numbers of participants,  areas participants lived  participants level of input and role  various areas trapping history  current cat location data  road distances  accessibility of sites  discussion on bait selection

Due to the smaller number of cages available than expected the trapping program was divided into two phases. The Southern half of the island was intensively trapped followed by the Northern half. This required a significant amount of work extra work but was expected to increase the capture rate and give more reliable indications of distribution.

4.2. Cage and Bait selection Standard treadle plate cages were used and proprietary cat food initially was selected for use as bait/attractant however due to the presence of blowflies and the exposure to moisture from intermittent rainfall the addition of kangaroo to the

14 cages was required to improve the length of bait serviceability. Kangaroo was also suspended in the cage to air dry and reduce the amount of fly strike. Due to the short nature of the program, cages were moved at relatively short intervals with cats possibly remaining wary of a new structure in their territory.

New cage designs were trialed but arrived late in the program so insufficient time was available to fully investigate their effectiveness. Further trials will be undertaken with these traps in programs started in North East Tasmania. The results of these will be made available.

4.3. Volunteer participation

Over 25 volunteers participated in the program and enabled the Island to be broad scale intensively trapped.

Significant support to the program was contributed by the King Island Game Bird Association. All volunteers contributed time to check cages and were able to trap a number of roads allowing further trapping to be conducted at more remote high value conservation areas.

5. Program results

 Cats were widespread across the island but where localised trapping efforts were underway populations were reduced.

 Cat prints were located on all beaches surveyed

 Cat prints were present at regular intervals along Martha Lavinia beach to the Sea Elephant River. ( Orange Bellied Parrot habitat)

 All feral cats captured were in good health and condition

 Consistent trapping by individuals such as Nigel Burgess in the Sea Elephant (OBP) area has the ability to maintain extremely low densities of cats.

 Although only minor trapping was undertaken in Currie, observations indicated a large movement of domestic/stray cats within the town boundary after dark.

 Cats may be present and exposed to cages but did not trap.

 The opportunity to shoot cats could be an option particularly in remote areas of the coastline but should be restricted to trained personnel with appropriate firearms licences operating under the National guidelines CAT001 for shooting of cats.

15  A number of committed individuals present on the island are committed to reducing the threat of feral cats on the environment.

 The use of bait stations would not be worthwhile due to the amount of road kill but permanent cages should be maintained at sites where cats may be attracted such as the King Island Dairy, Currie waste management facility, Red Hut Rd Abattoir and the main abattoirs.

 Remote cameras were a useful tool in identifying the presence or absence of cats particularly in high biodiversity conservation areas.

 The program delivery required a 4wd and ATV for effective access to sites.

 Community based annual broad scale high intensity trapping programs are feasible with moderate funding on King Island and are an option for keeping cat densities low.

 Cages were located at 167 locations across King Island

 Significant numbers of cats were present at Stokes Point, Cataraqui Point and Red Hut Rd.

 Grassy Harbour penguin colony had a low level of cat activity and cameras did not identify cat presence.

 Thirty six cats were captured during the intensive program with stomach’s collected and currently undergoing analysis. These 36 cats with an average weight of 2 kg consume around 2.6 tonne of food per annum. Although road kill may make a high percentage of the cats diet in some areas the hypothetical potential for 36 cats if they made a <200 g kill each day (Honey Eater 20g, Superb Wren 10g, Mouse 25g, Brown Quail 91g) would be consumption of around 13,000 prey species per annum.

 Tabby was the predominant colour of cats captured.

 All data was collated and entered into the database.

16 6. Future suggested directions

The King island Cat Management Plan 2008-2013 outlines strategic overall direction for the management of domestic and feral cats on King Island and outlines a number of objectives and tasks to be implemented over the life of the strategy due to be reviewed in 2013. Cat management is relatively new in Tasmania with many programs only being implemented over the past few years. Responsible cat ownership is slowly being adopted by the community and continued effort needs to be maintained to change community attitudes on the management of domestic, stray and feral cats. Information also on new techniques, technology and better understanding of program resourcing, coordination and logistics has been gained recently. This has enabled some community control programs to be implemented more effectively on a larger scale. Some further considerations to improve the program effectiveness could include;

 New cage designs are currently being developed that will increase the capture rate of cats and these may be useful on potentially cage wary cats.

 Checking cages every 24 hrs under National guidelines is necessary for animal welfare considerations but is time consuming and expensive. New

17 cages being developed have trigger alarms that indicate door release and cage monitoring could be managed remotely.

 Permanent cages should be installed at all sites identified as priority areas that support cat populations in the King Island Cat Management Plan 2008-2013.

 Further trials on bait selection focussing on bait longevity would be worthwhile. The climate on King Island is not conducive to long bait life in the cage due to moisture and fly strike. The replacement of degraded baits in cages to ensure maximum attraction to cats is time consuming but essential to maximise the capture of cats. Although some hungry cats may be attracted to degraded baits, most cats prefer prey fresh.

 Control of cats in priority conservation areas should be incorporated into an annual intensive island wide program that will to give a landscape wide approach. Travelling from the major centres to these areas given transport and time would be more effective if trapping occurred on the route. If these areas are identified for cat control then control efforts by individuals living close to the site would be more efficient. An area that would be given special status is the OBP area at Sea Elephant as trapping there is linked to the migration of the Orange Bellied Parrot.

 Opportunistic trapping by organisations such as Parks and Wildlife could be undertaken by various organisations where activities are being undertaken for more than a day at a particular site.

 The use of the cat specific toxin would be a useful addition to the control program and the availability of this tool should be monitored.

 The development of “CAT MONTH” held for one month in winter annually that implemented a broad scale high intensity approach. This annual community based program would have a number of benefits but would require coordination and some resourcing. The annual focus would allow for further integration of the program into the community and would allow for more effective preparation and coordination, important to the program’s success. Cage trapping for one month would have some benefits in that cages could be set in areas for a significant period of time potentially allowing the capture of cage wary cats.

The approach would be to:

o Promote the event and get a broad scale cross community/industry/local govt support. o Apply for funding o Identify a coordinator with the relevant skills and licences and equipment.

18 o Identify individuals travelling sections of road regularly that would be willing to participate by checking cages as a drive by. Areas needing volunteers may be advertised in the paper. o Identify householders who are willing to assist by monitoring nearby cages and notifying coordinator of capture. o Cages would be set by a coordinator/volunteer so as to be visible from the car at slow speeds and information on any animal capture would be passed on to a coordinator. The coordinator would then check the cage and process any feral cats caught and rearm the cage. o Identify gap areas within the island that may require coordinator trapping input or cages with trigger alarms. o Gather and reallocate cages owned by the KINRMG within the month to ensure appropriate distribution across the landscape. These could be released back to active cat trappers after the month. o Source additional cages required to support the program (potentially 200 to 300 cages) o Promote and support the humane trapping of stray and feral cats within the towns during the month. All microchipped cats to be released back to their owners. This should be based on the new legislative framework. o The removal of all non-desexed cats is a priority and farmers or landholders keeping cats for theoretical rodent control may be given rodent bait stations and an information leaflet on effective rodent control. The new legislation may be required to enforce this but significant community consultation and information dissemination is required before this action occurs. o The coordinators role apart from an organisational role would be to collect samples from cats for analysis and to ensure all data is collected appropriately and entered into the database.

7. Summary

The continued implementation of cat management on King Island under the strategic plan will be assisted by the introduction of cat legislation that outlines the roles and responsibilities of individuals and the community. It also gives clear guidelines in the management of stray and feral cats. Cat management programs can be expensive and time consuming to implement and require the support of the whole community to be successful. Everybody has a role to play in the implementation of the program, cat owners need to be responsible and have their cat’s desexed, microchipped and confined at night.

19 The community has a responsibility in not feeding or sheltering feral and stray cats so reproductive ability is limited and the dispersal of cats into the environment is reduced. This includes organisations or industries that naturally attract cats in their operations. Government has a role to play by supporting community efforts with appropriate regulatory activity. Eradication is not feasible with the current resources available but with an annual broad scale high intensity trapping program combined with the adoption of new techniques and strategies, cat populations could be maintained at low levels.

References Abley, A. (2006). TSN Community Grant Final Report-King Island Cat Control Project,. Currie: KIng Island Natural Resource Management Group. Anon. (1999). Threat Abatement Plan for Predation by Feral Cats,. Canberra: Biodiversity group, Environment Australia. Denny, E. A., & Dickman, C. R. (february 2010). Review of cat ecology and management strategies in Australia. Sydney: University of Sydney. Dickman, C. R. (1996). Overview of the impacts of feral cats on Australian native fauna. Canberra: Australian Nature Conservation Agency. DPIPWE. (2009). The Cat Management Act . Hobart: DPIPWE. Fisher, P., Algar, D., & Johnston, M. (2001). Current and future feral cat management for conservation outcomes. Sydney: Proceedings of the Veterinary Conservation Biology, Wildlife Health and Management in Australasia. Fisher, P., Marks, C., & Johnston, M. (2001). New techniques for feral cat management:Biological,chemical or fertility control. Melbourne: 12 th Austalasian Vertibrate Pest Conference. Forsyth, D. M., Robley, A. J., & Reddiex, B. (2005). Review of methods used to estimate the abundance of feral cats. Melbourne: Arthur Rylah Institute for Environmental Research, Dept of Sustainability and Environment. Nogales, M. A., & Martin, e. a. (2003). "a review of feral cat eradication on islands". Conservation Biology . 20 21