Imperilled paws: how conservation biologists can use pet cats’ health and welfare rather than their impacts on wildlife to argue for their containment

Michael C. Calver; Heather M Crawford; Christopher A Lepczyk; Duncan E Farrow; Patricia A Fleming

doi:10.1016/j.gecco.2026.e04067

Back

Imperilled paws: how conservation biologists can use pet cats’ health and welfare rather than their impacts on wildlife to argue for their containment

Journal article

Open access

Peer reviewed

Imperilled paws: how conservation biologists can use pet cats’ health and welfare rather than their impacts on wildlife to argue for their containment

Michael C. Calver, Heather M Crawford, Christopher A Lepczyk, Duncan E Farrow and Patricia A Fleming

Global ecology and conservation, Vol.66, e04067

2026

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gecco.2026.e04067

Appears in Open Access via Read & Publish Agreements

Files and links (1)

pdf

Published12.65 MBDownload View

Open Access CC BY V4.0

Abstract

animal welfare

Felis catus

free-ranging cats

free-roaming cats

infectious disease

pet cats

trauma

Debating impacts of owned cats Felis catus on wildlife diverts attention from improving cat health and welfare, which may also protect wildlife. We present a narrative review of the health and welfare consequences of indoor or outdoor cat husbandry. Roaming cats, especially young males, face substantial risks of traumatic injury and infectious disease, plus lesser risks of poisoning and abuse. A cat may die 10 or more years prematurely, while the cohort of outdoor cats has approximately 70–80% of the lifespan of the cohort of indoor cats. Owners also incur veterinary expenses for injuries to roaming pets, which sometimes cause lifelong, chronic conditions. There are also data-based claims for greater quality of life for contained cats, plus more satisfying bonds between cats and owners. Containment, however, may cause obesity, diabetes or behavioural problems, while solutions including environmental enrichment, exercise, and correct feeding, plus containment logistics, may strain owners’ time and finances. Contained cats are also unlikely to express all cat behaviour. We conclude that, based on health and welfare, the advantages of containment are considerable and the disadvantages often remediable. This conclusion supports existing arguments that including health and welfare in husbandry decisions benefits cats and wildlife conservation.

Details

Title: Imperilled paws: how conservation biologists can use pet cats’ health and welfare rather than their impacts on wildlife to argue for their containment
Authors/Creators: Michael C. Calver - Murdoch University, Centre for Terrestrial Ecosystem Science and Sustainability
Heather M Crawford - Murdoch University
Christopher A Lepczyk - Auburn University
Duncan E Farrow - Murdoch University, School of Mathematics, Statistics, Chemistry and Physics
Patricia A Fleming - Murdoch University, Centre for Terrestrial Ecosystem Science and Sustainability
Publication Details: Global ecology and conservation, Vol.66, e04067
Publisher: Elsevier B.V.
Number of pages: 26
Identifiers: 991005861092107891
Murdoch Affiliation: School of Mathematics, Statistics, Chemistry and Physics; Centre for Terrestrial Ecosystem Science and Sustainability; School of Environmental and Conservation Sciences
Language: English
Resource Type: Journal article

UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

This output has contributed to the advancement of the following goals:

Source: SDGs in the Output

Metrics

46 File views/ downloads

61 Record Views

4 Times Cited - Web of Science

InCites Highlights

These are selected metrics from InCites Benchmarking & Analytics tool, related to this output

Collaboration types: Domestic collaboration; International collaboration
Citation topics: 3 Agriculture, Environment & Ecology; 3.232 Veterinary Sciences; 3.232.1375 Human-Animal Bond
Web Of Science research areas: Biodiversity Conservation; Ecology
ESI research areas: Environment/Ecology