Amalee Webb 1

Anthropogenic causes of Wild Animal Admittance to Rehabilitation

Centers
Anthropogenic causes of Wild Animal Admittance to Rehabilitation Centers
Abstract
There are anthropogenic impacts on everyones local wildlife across the country
that have been overlooked because the causes have become commonplace. Many patients
at Brukner Nature Centers (BNC) wildlife rehabilitation center suffer from
anthropogenic reasons of admittance. Twenty-six percent (26%) of patients admitted into
BNCs rehabilitation facility from 2006 to 2014 suffered from human caused injuries.
Which, that figure may be a low estimate as many patients do not come in with a clear
history behind their injuries. In order to analyze what type of an impact humans have on
their local ecosystems through BNCs data, nine years of records were filtered through to
separate each cause of admittance and to see what anthropogenic cause had the biggest
impact on the local wildlife. By tallies alone cat attacks were the leading anthropogenic
cause of admittance. Dog attacks were the second leading cause of anthropogenic
admittance at 594 cases vs. cat attacks at 743 cases. Patients suffering from a cat attack
had a significantly lower chance of survival than dog attack victims (t=2.8, P=0.01). This
can be explained by the fact that cats teeth are sharper than a dogs teeth, creating deep
puncture wounds that can be easily infected by the plethora of bacteria that reside inside a
cats mouth. Actual cat predation counts may be more than three times higher than rates
measured by prey that was returned to owners. So the full picture of how many animals
are being preyed upon by the feral cat population is still unknown, however one could
imagine it is an ever growing, massive problem. There is enough supporting evidence
that our domestic pets have become a burden on our government and a hindrance to our

local wildlife to thrive. These animals were introduced to our ecosystems by us, and they
are now posing a problem, it is our responsibility to clean up our mess.
There are a number of solutions to domestic pet overpopulation, many which will
be disputed over on ethics and efficacy. But the problem should begin with implementing
responsible pet ownership, and holding communities responsible for stray/feral cat
populations with proper education on management methods.

Introduction
When the topic of the human impact on the environment is discussed it will most
likely take form in the light of our oil consumption and the current atmospheric carbon
dioxide level. The discussion will go on to include how it attributes to global warming,
the rising seas and inevitably the impact on wildlife. However, there are other
anthropogenic impacts on everyones local wildlife across the country that have been
overlooked because the causes have become commonplace.
Brukner Nature Center (BNC) is a privately funded organization promoting the
appreciation and understanding of wildlife conservation through presentation, education
and rehabilitation. BNC is located in Troy, Ohio and serves the greater Miami Valley
area. Through the year BNC takes in over one-thousand injured and orphaned wildlife.
BNC admits a wide variety of native mammals, birds, reptiles and amphibians. For a
comprehensive list refer to Appendix I. Patients suffer from a range of injuries from
impact injuries, entanglement in litter, domestic animal attacks, natural predator attacks
to orphaned animals. One of the most startling realizations is how many cases are
anthropogenic. Twenty-six percent (26%) of patients admitted into BNCs rehabilitation

Amalee Webb 3
Anthropogenic causes of Wild Animal Admittance to Rehabilitation
Centers
facility from 2006 to 2014 suffered from human caused injuries (Appendix II). These
causes may have been direct or indirect, but human causes nonetheless. The twenty-six
percent (26%) is a low estimate of the total anthropogenic cases as thirty-percent (30%)
of the total patients that were admitted to the rehabilitation center had unknown causes to
their injuries. For example, a couple brings in a litter of eastern gray squirrels who are
neonates. The pair explains that they dont know the history behind why the nest was
down on the ground, but after failed attempts of reuniting the babies with the mother they
decided to bring the neonates in. However, in reality tree trimmers tore down the nest.
This would be a case were the patient admittance was marked down as orphaned, but in
actuality it was an anthropogenic cause that put the animals into that situation.
The first step to solving a problem is realizing that there is a problem. As humans
we seem to be unaware of how big of an impact we have on our local ecosystems. This
study should serve to be a wake up call for all.

Methods
Wildlife rehabilitation at Brukner Nature Center begins with donors bringing an
animal into the facility. The patient is then examined and deemed whether or not that
patient should be admitted, euthanized, or put back out into the wild. There are a variety
of different cases where the animal seems orphaned but can be reunited with the mother,
or is in fact old enough to survive on its own. In those cases the animal would not be
admitted and the donor would place the animal back where they found it. In certain cases
the animals physical state is too critical and to prevent a slow painful death, euthanasia
on arrival (EOA) would be chosen.

Once a patient is admitted, it is given a thorough medical exam where the injuries
are assessed and patient care is determined. BNC works with Troy Animal Hospital for
advanced medical advice and procedures. BNC provides supportive care for the animal
until it can be released back into the wild. It is also noted how the animal came to be in
that situation. The variety of different reasons of admittance are classified into the
following thirteen categories: natural predator attack, cat attack, dog attack, entrapment,
projectile injury, hit by vehicle, impact injury, captive, orphaned, suspect poison, young/
fledgling, unknown, and other.
The data records of BNCs rehabilitation for 2006-2014 were assessed and were
filtered through looking at the reasons of admittance to uncover any patterns over the
years. Anthropogenic reasons of admittance were highlighted in this study.
Anthropogenic causes of admittance to BNCs rehabilitation center are as follows: cat
attacks, dog attacks, projectile injuries, entrapment, impact injury, hit by vehicle, captive
and suspect of poison. Each years patient records were separated into reasons of
admittance. The reasons were then totaled for each cause of admittance. The success
rates, animals released back out into the wild, were then calculated for the anthropogenic
causes of admittance. If the animals were eventually transferred to a different facility for
rehabilitation their data was not included in this study. If for some reason the data record
did not have a reason of admittance associated with the patient, then that data was not
included either. Some of the records had multiple reasons of admittance. For example a
fledgling bird who is learning how to fly on the ground was attacked by a cat, the record
shows the reason of admittance to be cat attack and young/fledgling. That instance was
totaled with the cat attacks and not the young/fledgling because the reason that bird was

Amalee Webb 5
Anthropogenic causes of Wild Animal Admittance to Rehabilitation
Centers
admitted was because of the cat and not because it was abandoned by its parental unit.
Any record that had multiple reasons of admittance was judged and totaled with the
actual cause.
Results

Anthropogenic Reasons for Admittance to BNC Rehab 2006-2014

Suspect Poison
Captive
Impact Injury
Hit By Car
Projectile Injury
Entrapment
Dog Attack
Cat Attack
Other Predator
0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

Number of Patients

Graph A Comparative representation of patient numbers separated into the

anthropogenic causes of admittance at BNC wildlife rehabilitation facility. Natural
predator attacks were included to allow one to compare natural predator attacks with
domestic animal attacks. Cat and dog attacks were the leading anthropogenic causes of
admittance.

Cat
Attacks
Total
Patients
Birds
Mammals
Dog
Attacks
Total
Patients
Birds
Mammals

Success rates
2006
2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

19.18 20.69
%
%
17.65
% 9.09%
21.05 25.45
%
%

30.14
%
10.34
%
44.19
%

17.39
%
15.38
%
17.95
%

19.10
%
17.14
%
20.37
%

16.00
%
17.24
%
15.22
%

15.29
%
16.13
%
14.81
%

10.42
%
8.70
%
12.00
%

20.83
%

48.78%

34.04
%
22.22
%
35.29
%

37.31 33.90
%
%
30.00
% 0.00%
38.60 33.93
%
%

27.59
%
30.77
%
27.03
%

15.91 25.00 29.51

%
% %
44.44
19.98
% 7.69% %
8.57 27.27 30.72
%
% %

22.22%

0.00%
23.26
%
29.17%
8.33%

36.36%
53.33%

2014 Avg.
18.56
%
20.00
%
17.54
%

Table B Success rates for domestic animal attacks and comparative success rates for bird
and mammal victims
T-Tests
Cat attack victims had a significantly lower rate of survival vs. dog attack victims (t=2.8,
P=0.01).
The number of cat attacks vs. dog attacks was not significantly different. However there
was a slight trend of more cat attacks (t=1.7, P=0.1).
Discussion
Graph A shows during the years 2006 to 2014 cat attacks were the leading
anthropogenic cause of admittance. Dog attacks were the second leading cause of
admittance at 594 cases vs. cat attacks at 743 cases. . Running a t-test on the data showed
only a trend of cats having a higher average of victims over dogs (t=1.7, P=0.1).
However over time the tally shows that cats did in fact have more of an impact on the
greater Miami Valley ecosystems than dogs did from 2006 to 2014. Speculation on why
cats have a bigger impact than dogs could be the fact that cat owners, who allow their

18.53
%
14.63
%
20.95
%

Amalee Webb 7
Anthropogenic causes of Wild Animal Admittance to Rehabilitation
Centers
cats outside, allow the cats to free-roam the neighborhood, unsupervised. Whereas dog
owners typically monitor their dogs, or have them enclosed to one area while outside. In
a study conducted by the University of Georgia, they attached KittyCams to 60 outdoor
house cats near Athens, Georgia. The study found that 30 percent of the sampled cats
were successful in capturing and killing prey, and that those cats averaged about one kill
for every 17 hours outdoors or 2.1 kills per week (K. Loyd et al., 2013). The study also
found that cats only brought 23 percent of their kills back to a residence. The implication
that most of the cat attack victims at BNC were brought in by donors, who had their cat
bring them the victim, shows that the cat statistics in BNCs study may be only the tip of
the iceberg for this growing problem. Actual cat predation counts may be more than three
times higher than rates measured by prey that was returned to owners. In addition to
BNCs data, most studies researching the ecological impact from cat predation were
based on prey returns. This would imply that their results would have been a low estimate
of the ecological impact. There is an estimated total of 117157 million free-ranging cats
in the United States (N. Dauphnie et al., 2009). Given the large numbers of cats and
considering the numbers of avian prey returned to owners, a minimum of one billion
birds killed by cats annually in the United States is a conservative estimate, and the actual
number is likely much higher, and that is not including mammals, reptiles or amphibians
(N. Dauphnie et al., 2009). Reaching consensus on a precise estimate of the number of
animals killed annually by cats presents a challenge, but as noted in The Wildlife
Societys position statement on feral and free-ranging cats: Extensive popular debate
over exact numbers or types of prey taken is not productive. The number of cats is

undeniably large. Even if conservative estimates of prey taken are considered, the number
of prey animals killed is immense (TWS 2006).
The vast amount of animals taken out of our ecosystems not only affects that
species population numbers, but also limits the populations of other animals that depend
on those animals as prey. Adding cats into an ecosystem creates an imbalance. Because
they form a domestic species distinct from their wild ancestral species, domestic cats are
considered to be a non-native, species in all environments in which they occur. Because
of their ability to overwhelm existing native species and natural ecosystem processes in
environments in which they have been introduced, domestic cats are moreover classified
as invasive species. It should be emphasized that the invasive species label applies
exclusively to outdoor cats, rather than pet cats kept indoors or otherwise kept under
control by their owners.
Predators in nature tend to be uncommon with respect to prey populations. Wild
predators are reliant on their prey, and will naturally decline with a declining prey base.
Cat predation of birds is different than that by any native predator, perhaps most notably
because outdoor cats are maintained in numbers far above natural carrying capacity.
There are also a number of other important ways in which cats are distinct from native
predators that may multiply their negative effects on bird and other wildlife populations
(Coleman et al. 1997, Brickner 2003). To add insult of injury, patients suffering from a
cat attack had a significantly lower chance of survival than dog attack victims (t=2.8,
P=0.01). This can be explained by the fact that cats teeth are sharper than a dogs teeth.
Their teeth are piercing and make relatively deep puncture wounds. When the bite is on
an appendage the wound may easily pierce a joint or the membrane sheath around a

Amalee Webb 9
Anthropogenic causes of Wild Animal Admittance to Rehabilitation
Centers
tendon. Joints and tendons have closed spaces, and are thus great growing places for
bacteria. And the mouths of cats are home to many types of bacteria. One of the first
steps BNC takes with cat attack victims is to put the animal on antibiotics to help with
reduce the spread of infection, however sometimes the patient has already lost their battle
for survival.
It is our responsibility to take care of the Earth we call home. Humans impact
their local ecology in a number of ways. Many of our negative impacts we didnt realize
were an issue. The first step to solving a problem is realizing that there is a problem.
There is enough supporting evidence that our domestic pets have become a burden on our
government and a hindrance to our local wildlife to thrive. These animals were
introduced to our ecosystems by us, and they are now posing a problem, it is our
responsibility to clean up our mess.
There are a variety of ways to approach removing invasive domestic species from
local ecosystems. Many of the methods are often disputed. This paper does not serve to
argue one method over the other, but rather to serve as an educational tool. The biggest
initiative that should take place is responsible pet ownership. Our companion animals
belong indoors/under the control of the owner and should be spayed or neutered. We need
a shift in cultural thinking to convince people to keep their pets indoors. This could be
enforced by educational materials made available to the public. One way to pave the way
for this initiative in the future is to weave this educational material into the school
systems. Culture change can begin with a new generation. In addition to keeping our pets
indoors, getting pets spayed and neutered should also be a part of the education. Adopt,

dont shop. This could be enforced by legislation regulating pet shops to maintain a
proportion of their animals to be rescues from a local animal shelter.
Gaining control over owned pets is not the end of this problem. There are large
feral cat colonies that account for the other half of the issue. The solution to this problem
is to remove all feral/stray cats. However this is where many begin to dispute the best
way to extradite feral cats. Nonlethal methods include frightening devices, exclusion,
trapping and live-capture with removal, repellents, habitat modification and fertility
control. These methods should be deliberated first because the public largely accepts
most and the methods help decrease the feral cat carrying capacity. The number of feral
cats that will move into the area also will be reduced. Lethal methods, such as kill
trapping, trapping with euthanasia, and shooting should also be considered. These
methods offer an immediate decline in the population and may be required when feral
cats are over abundant and causing significant negative impacts. People who are very
sympathetic to cats will be opposed to capture and removal and lethal methods of control.
Controlling feral cat populations should be discussed in community meetings and
resolutions should be made based on sound research-based information and public
sentiment. A productive first step would begin with education materials being brought to
community leaders and requiring communities to begin feral cat management. Without
the community seeing the neighborhood cat as a problem, the issue will persist, and our
wildlife will suffer.

Amalee Webb 11
Anthropogenic causes of Wild Animal Admittance to Rehabilitation
Centers

Special Note from the Author

I recognize this is a difficult and divisive topic, and some will dispute the ethics
and efficacy of feral cat management discussed in this paper. However, it is important to
see the bigger picture and realize the fragile balance of our ecosystems is much more
important to preserve than the life of the neighborhood cat. This paper provides both
lethal and nonlethal options that should serve to inform communities so that they can
make an educated choice.
Acknowledgments
Special thanks belongs to Brukner Nature Center for providing the records and
data used in this research. Their rehabilitation center and staff also provided education
that contributed to this study.
References
Brickner, I. 2003. The impact of domestic cat (Felis catus) on wildlife welfare and
conservation: a literature review with a situation summary from Israel. Tel Aviv
University report.
Coleman, J. S., S. A. Temple, S. R. Craven. 1997. Cats and wildlife: A conservation
dilemma. University of Wisconsin Cooperative Extension Publications.
N. Dauphnie, R. J. Cooper. 2009. Impacts of Free-ranging Domestic Cats (Felis Catus)
on Birds in the United States. Fourth International Partners in Flight Conference
p. 205219.
K. Loyd, S. M. Hernandez, J. P. Carroll, K. J. Abernathy. G. J. Marshall, Warnell. 2013.
Quantifying free-roaming domestic cat predation using animal-borne video
cameras. Biological Conservation 160, p.183189

TWS (THE WILDLIFE SOCIETY). 2006. Final TWS position statement: feral and freeranging domestic cats. [Online.] Available at: <http://bexaraudubon.org/Misc
%20Downloads/Feral%20Cats/Feral%20&%20Free%20Ranging%20Cats%20%20TWS%20Position%20Statement.pdf> (20 July 2015).

Appendix
I.
Species Admitted to BNC Rehabilitation Center 2006-201

Amalee Webb 13
Anthropogenic causes of Wild Animal Admittance to Rehabilitation
Centers
Mammal
Beaver
Big Brown Bat
Common Muskrat
Coyote
Eastern Chipmunk
Eastern Cottontail
Eastern Gray Squirrel
Fox Squirrel
Gray Fox
Hoary Bat
Little Brown Bat
Long Tailed Weasel
Mink
Northern Long Eared
Bat
Raccoon
Red Bat
Red Fox
Red Squirrel
Southern Flying
Squirrel
Striped Skunk
Virginia Opossum
White-Tailed Deer
Woodchuck
Bird
American Bittern
American Coot
American Crow
American Goldfinch
American Kestrel
American Red Start
American Robin
American Tree Sparrow
American Woodcock
Bald Eagle
Baltimore Oriole
Barn Swallow
Barred Owl
Belted Kingfisher
Black & White Warbler
Black Billed Cuckoo
Blue Gray Gnatcatcher
Blue Jay

Broad Wing Hawk

Brown Creeper
Brown Headed Cowbird
Brown Thrasher
Canada Goose
Caroline Chickadee
Cedar Waxwing
Chimney Swift
Chipping Sparrow
Common Grackle
Common Loon
Common Moorhen
Common Nighthawk
Common Yellowthroat
Coopers Hawk
Dark-eyed Junco
Downy Woodpecker
Eastern Bluebird
Eastern Meadowlark
Eastern Phoebe
Eastern Screech Owl
Eastern Wood Peewee
Golden-Crowned
Kinglet
Gray Catbird
Great Blue Heron
Great Horned Owl
Green Heron
Hairy Woodpecker
Hermit Thrush
Herring Gull
Horned Grebe
Horned Lark
House Finch
House Wren
Indigo Bunting
Killdeer
Lincoln's Sparrow
Magnolia Warbler
Mallard
Merlin
Mourning Dove
Northern Bobwhite
Quail
Northern Cardinal
Northern Flicker

Amalee Webb 15
Anthropogenic causes of Wild Animal Admittance to Rehabilitation
Centers
Northern Mockingbird
Northern Saw-Whet
Ovenbird
Piebilled Grebe
Pileated Woodpecker
Purple Finch
Purple Gallinule
Purple Martin
Red Necked Grebe
Red Tailed Hawk
Red Winged Blackbird
Red-bellied
Woodpecker
Ring Necked Duck
Ring-Billed Gull
Ring-Necked Pheasant
Rose Breasted Grosbeak
Ruby Throated
Hummingbird
Ruddy Duck
Sandhill Crane
Scarlet Tanager
Sharp Shined Hawk
Song Sparrow
Sora
Swainson Thrush
Tennessee Warbler
Tree Swallow
Tufted Titmouse
Turkey Vulture
Virginia Rail
Whip-poor-will
White Breasted
Nuthatch
White Crowned
Sparrow
Wild Turkey
Willet
Wood Duck
Yellow Bellied
Sapsucker
Yellow Billed Cuckoo
Yellow Warbler
Yellow-rumped Warbler
Reptile

Black Rat Snake

Eastern Box Turtle
Eastern Milk Snake
Garter Snake
Map Turtle
Midland Painted Turtle
Musk Turtle
Northern Water Snake
Red Eared Slider
Snapping Turtle
Spiny Softshell Turtle
Spotted Salamander
Amphibian
American Bullfrog
American Toad
Green Frog
Leopard Frog

II.
Reason

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

To

Other Predator

17

15

13

11

17

17

12

23

23

14

Cat Attack

72

87

73

69

89

75

85

96

97

74

Dog Attack

36

48

41

94

67

59

88

47

114

59

Entrapment

10

12

23

10

21

10

Projectile Injury

15

Hit By Car

38

68

31

32

50

47

48

66

53

43

Impact Injury

29

34

31

20

32

24

27

25

43

26

Captive

26

23

31

35

20

39

42

45

26

Orphaned

466

302

449

388

403

422

395

442

515

37

Suspect Poison

Young/ Fledgling

53

172

130

138

115

114

146

127

142

11

Unknown

118

90

149

52

65

59

71

61

56

72

Other

121

48

45

226

120

119

71

117

106

97

Yearly Totals

992

881

993

1071

1005

962

1008

1059

1215

91

Reasons of Admittance to BNCs rehabilitation center 2006-2014