Effects of hide provision and regular petting on the behaviour of stray and surrendered cats in a quarantine shelter

  • Ms Sally Haynes, Australia
  • Professor Paul Hemsworth, Animal Welfare Science Centre, University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria 3010, Australia, Australia
  • This study examined the effects of hide provision and regular handling on the behaviour of 67 cats in a shelter. Cats were allocated to one of 4 treatments in a 2x2 factorial design: hide + petting, hide + no petting, no hide + petting or no hide + no petting. The hide consisted of a 3-sided box and petting, which involved offering the hand to be sniffed and, if allowed, gently stroking the cat's head between the ears, occurred on days 1-5 for 15 s. Postures and behaviours were observed on the first 6 days in the shelter. Two-way analysis of variance examined main effects, hide and petting, on postures and behaviours. Hides increased the proportion of time spent lying on days 1-3 (mean±s.e.m for hides vs no hides) (0.978±0.002 vs 0.875±0.002, F(1,63) = 10.107, P = 0.002; 0.930±0.002 vs 0.792±0.002, F(1,63) = 9.055, P = 0.004; 0.955±0.003 vs 0.819±0.003, F(1,56) = 9.634, P = 0.003, respectively) and lying with eyes closed on days 2-3 (0.302±0.034 vs 0.189±0.033, F(1,62) = 5.546, P = 0.022; 0.421±0.044 vs 0.281±0.043, F(1,55) = 5.229, P = 0.026, respectively). Hides decreased the proportion of time spent in or behind the litter tray on day 1 (0.022±0.037 vs 0.169±0.036, F(1,63) = 8.191, P = 0.006). When a hide was present, cats that were petted spent less time in the hide on days 2 and 4 than cats that were not petted (0.762±0.011 vs 0.969±0.009, F(1,31) = 5.703, P = 0.023; 0.67±0.018 vs 0.97±0.015, F(1,31) = 6.186, P = 0.018, respectively). The results of this study indicate that the provision of both hides and petting in a quarantine shelter may assist cats in adapting to the shelter environment.