Next Article in Journal
Effects of Oxidative Stress and Antioxidant Activity in Plasma and Uterine Fluid During Early Postpartum on Subsequent Reproductive Performance of Japanese Black Cows
Previous Article in Journal
In Vitro Assessment of the Effectiveness of Mineral Adsorbents in Sequestering Boar Taint Compounds
 
 
Comment published on 29 January 2026, see Animals 2026, 16(3), 417.
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

A Purr-Suasive Case for Sterilization: How Sterilizing Working Cats Supports Dairy Farmers’ Wellbeing, Improves Animal Welfare, and Benefits the Environment

1
Australian Pet Welfare Foundation, Kenmore, QLD 4069, Australia
2
School of Veterinary Science, The University of Queensland, Gatton, QLD 4343, Australia
3
The Far South Coast Branch, Animal Welfare League New South Wales, Bega, NSW 2550, Australia
4
School of Psychology and Public Health, La Trobe University, Bendigo, VIC 3552, Australia
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Animals 2025, 15(6), 766; https://doi.org/10.3390/ani15060766
Submission received: 24 December 2024 / Revised: 10 February 2025 / Accepted: 18 February 2025 / Published: 7 March 2025
(This article belongs to the Section Human-Animal Interactions, Animal Behaviour and Emotion)

Simple Summary

Farmers must control rodent populations, as they cause substantial damage to machinery and pose health risks to humans and livestock. Working cats are often farmers’ preferred method of controlling rodent populations, as they are cheaper, safer, and more efficient than poison baits. However, without management, cat populations can increase, creating concern for their impact on wildlife and the environment, as well as for animal and human wellbeing. Farmers’ options for cat management are often limited by time and financial constraints, leading to the use of lethal methods. Our study aimed to investigate the impact of lethal cat management methods on farmers, their experiences with a free cat sterilization program, and their views on a Barn Cat Program, whereby healthy poorly socialized cats in shelters and pounds would be vaccinated, sterilized, and made available to farmers instead of being euthanized. The results of our study demonstrate that farmers had a relationship with working cats and that using lethal cat management methods negatively impacted their wellbeing. Farmers had a positive experience with the cat sterilization program, stating that it reduced the cat population and their impact on wildlife, improved cat behavior and welfare, and benefited farmers’ wellbeing. Farmers also supported the idea of a Barn Cat Program and gave suggestions for how best to promote it to other farmers. We recommend funding be provided to support farmers in managing cats by sterilization, as it improves cat welfare and behavior, reduces working cat populations and their impact on wildlife, and benefits farmers’ wellbeing.

Abstract

Rodents on farms are a substantial issue due to the damage they cause to produce and infrastructure, and the risk they pose to food safety. As a result, farmers need to control rodent populations around farms. In a previous study, farmers indicated a preference for working cats, stating that they are a more efficient, safer, and cheaper alternative to rodenticide baits, and they provide companionship. However, farmers’ options for managing cat populations are often limited to lethal methods because of time and financial constraints. Through semi-structured interviews, this study explored the impacts of lethal cat management methods on farmers, their experience with a free cat sterilization program, and their views on a Barn Cat Program, whereby healthy stray cats would be vaccinated, sterilized, and made available to farmers. Our results indicated that farmers had a relationship with the cats on their farms and that using lethal methods to manage these cats had a negative impact on farmers’ wellbeing. Farmers supported the free cat sterilization program, as it reduced the cat population and their impact on wildlife, improved cat behavior and welfare, and benefited farmers. Farmers also generally supported a Barn Cat Program and gave suggestions on how best to promote it to other farmers. Funding should be provided for cat sterilization programs, as they support farmers, who value cats for rodent control and companionship, improve cat behavior and welfare, and reduce working cat populations and their impact on wildlife.
Keywords: free-roaming cats; One Welfare; dairy farms; rural cat management; sterilization; rodent control; Australia; cat cull impacts; Barn Cat Program; animal welfare free-roaming cats; One Welfare; dairy farms; rural cat management; sterilization; rodent control; Australia; cat cull impacts; Barn Cat Program; animal welfare
Graphical Abstract

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Crawford, C.; Rand, J.; Forge, O.; Rohlf, V.; Bennett, P.; Scotney, R. A Purr-Suasive Case for Sterilization: How Sterilizing Working Cats Supports Dairy Farmers’ Wellbeing, Improves Animal Welfare, and Benefits the Environment. Animals 2025, 15, 766. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani15060766

AMA Style

Crawford C, Rand J, Forge O, Rohlf V, Bennett P, Scotney R. A Purr-Suasive Case for Sterilization: How Sterilizing Working Cats Supports Dairy Farmers’ Wellbeing, Improves Animal Welfare, and Benefits the Environment. Animals. 2025; 15(6):766. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani15060766

Chicago/Turabian Style

Crawford, Caitlin, Jacquie Rand, Olivia Forge, Vanessa Rohlf, Pauleen Bennett, and Rebekah Scotney. 2025. "A Purr-Suasive Case for Sterilization: How Sterilizing Working Cats Supports Dairy Farmers’ Wellbeing, Improves Animal Welfare, and Benefits the Environment" Animals 15, no. 6: 766. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani15060766

APA Style

Crawford, C., Rand, J., Forge, O., Rohlf, V., Bennett, P., & Scotney, R. (2025). A Purr-Suasive Case for Sterilization: How Sterilizing Working Cats Supports Dairy Farmers’ Wellbeing, Improves Animal Welfare, and Benefits the Environment. Animals, 15(6), 766. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani15060766

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop