Lost Pet Research Archives - Lost Pet Research and Recovery

How to Select the Best Dog GPS Tracker

Danielle Robertson — Tue, 29 Jul 2025 19:00:15 +0000

This is not your typical dog GPS tracker comparison article or review. I have been involved in lost pet recovery work since 2009, and, yes, I will recommend what I believe are the best dog GPS trackers on the market today. But there is no best tracker that I recommend for every dog.

Lost Pet Research participates in affiliate referral programs including Amazon Associates. If you purchase anything via an affiliate link, I may receive a small commission at no cost to you. Learn more here.

The best GPS tracker for your dog will depend on several factors including:

Your dog: what size are they and what type of tracker and collar will work for them?
Your dog's behavior: why are they likely to go missing and how easy will it be to catch them once located?
Your behavior: how good are you at remembering to keep your tracker charged?
Your budget: what can you afford? There is the cost of the tracker and an annual subscription fee.
Your phone: does the tracker app get good reviews for your operating system?
Your location: what cell coverage do you have where you live and travel with your dog?

Use this article to help determine what is probably the best tracker for your dog, but in the end you will need to test the tracker out. I will provide some testing instructions and results of my own tests at the end of this article. Fortunately, many trackers come with a 30-day satisfaction guarantee return policy. Be aware that you may need to purchase the tracker directly from their site, and be sure to check out their current return policy.

Based on my research and discussions with other lost pet specialists, the best dog GPS trackers in the US are Fi and Tractive. So far, I have tested the Tractive Dog 6 and the Fi Series 3 and 3+. This article was last updated in June 2026 and I plan on doing new testing this fall including possibly the new Fi Mini.

Fi Series 3+ GPS Dog Collar & Tracker, 1-Mo Membership Included, Pink M | Live...

Tractive Smart Dog GPS Tracker | Live Pet Tracker with Virtual Fence | Vital...

Price not available

$79.00

Buy on Amazon

Fi Series 3+ GPS Dog Collar & Tracker, 1-Mo Membership Included, Pink M | Live...

Price not available

Buy on Amazon

Tractive Smart Dog GPS Tracker | Live Pet Tracker with Virtual Fence | Vital...

$79.00

Buy on Amazon

Last update on 2026-11-04 / Affiliate links / Images from Amazon Product Advertising API

Dog Size and GPS Tracker Design

To find the best GPS tracker for your dog, start with the size and design of the tracker. GPS trackers can be bulky, so you want to make sure you get one that isn't too big for your dog. However, larger trackers tend to have a longer battery life, which is one of the most important features of a GPS tracker.

Dog size and trackers available

GPS Tracker	Tracker Weight	Recommended Pet Size
Fi Mini	0.56 oz. (16g)	8+ lbs.
Tractive Cat Mini	0.88 oz. (25g)	6.6+ lbs.
Tractive Dog 6	1.4 oz. (39g)	9+ lbs.
Fi 3+	1.66 oz. (47g)	10+ lbs.
Tractive Dog 6 XL	2.5 oz. (70g)	44+ lbs.
Tractive Dog XL Adventure	4.1 oz. (115g)	55+ lbs

Table 1: Dog GPS tracker weight and recommended pet size.

There aren't any trackers for really tiny dogs, but the Tractive version for cats is advertised for 6.6 lbs and up. If purchasing for a dog, be sure to buy the older Cat Mini and not the new Cat 6 Mini, which is built into a cat safety collar. The Fi Mini is rated for dogs over 8 lbs, but it is actually lighter than the Tractive Cat Mini.

Dog GPS tracker design and collars

Dog GPS collars generally come in two designs: those that are integrated into the collar, and those that will attach to most collars. The Fi Series 3+ is integrated into the collar, which makes it less bulky. The Fi 3+ collar is made of heavy duty material, and is 3/4" wide for XS and S sizes and 1" wide for M, L and XL. The medium collar looked uncomfortably large on my small (35 lb) Australian Cattle Dog. However, I have since learned that other companies sell collars and harnesses that are compatible with Fi trackers.

Australian Cattle Dog (35 lbs) wearing Fi 3 with medium collar.

The only other issue I had with the Fi collar is that you have to make it quite snug or your dog could pull out of the collar if they got scared or excited. (My dog has done this since I last updated this article). For a skittish or reactive dog, I would recommend walking the dog with a separate martingale collar, or opting for a tracker that will attach to a martingale collar or harness. There are Fi compatible martingale collars for sale by Mimi Green and other sellers.

Australian Cattle Dog (35 lbs) wearing Tractive (front) and Whistle (left side) GPS trackers.

The Fi Mini and Tractive Dog 6 can attach to most collars or harnesses. If you have a favorite collar already, these may be the way to go. The only downside is that the tracker could get pulled off the collar if your dog wrestles with other dogs or runs loose through the woods. This seems uncommon, but I saw a few complaints in reviews for the Tractive.

Waterproof rating and durability

Other factors to consider, depending on your dog, are the waterproof rating and durability of the tracker. All the trackers had the same waterproof rating of IP68. This means that the device is completely dust-tight and protected against submersion in water (usually up to 1.5 meters deep for 30 minutes). Only the Fi 3+ had an IP68 +66K rating, which includes protection against high speed jets of water.

The Fi 3+ tracker is made of a stainless steel case and band attachment. The Tractive Dog 6 and Tractive Dog XL Adventure advertise a "bite-proof" fiberglass casing. Other trackers are less durable and may be damaged by chewing.

The Importance of Battery Life

Once you know what trackers will fit your dog, the most important factors to consider are:

Battery life. How long does the battery typically last, and how long does it last when in Lost Dog Mode?
Connectivity. Does the tracker have good cell coverage where you live and travel with your dog?
Accuracy. Does the tracker quickly connect and provide accurate locations of your dog, especially in Lost Dog Mode?

Long battery life is so important because if your dog goes missing, you will need to turn on Lost Dog Mode (called LIVE mode in Tractive). In this mode, the tracker takes more frequent locations, and this will drain the battery much more quickly, perhaps within hours and at most a couple of days.

Long battery life is most important if ...

Battery life is most important if your dog is skittish, has phobias, or is newly adopted because these dogs can take longer to catch when they go missing. When a skittish or panicked dog goes missing, they often enter "survival mode" and are likely to run from everyone and not even respond to their owner's voice. If you understand lost dog behavior, you may be able to lure your dog to you with calming signals. But many skittish and/or newly adopted dogs need to be caught using surveillance cameras and humane traps (or an enclosure trap). Trapping a skittish lost dog can take days or weeks even if you know where your dog is located.

IMPORTANT! If you have a skittish dog or one with phobias (such as fear of loud noises), make sure that you understand lost dog behavior before your dog goes missing. If you use your GPS to find your lost dog and approach them directly or call to them, you are likely to scare them away. If you keep doing this, you will drain your dog's GPS battery without catching them. You could also scare your dog out of a safe area and into somewhere dangerous like a busy road.

Some lost dog recovery groups don't recommend GPS collars for skittish dogs. And I agree that if you don't understand lost dog behavior, they are not a good idea. They can also lead owners to be less cautious and allow skittish dogs off lead because they think they can find and catch them if they run off. But having a skittish dog myself, I would never let her outside without a tracker.

Some trackers, like Tractive, also have a sound locating feature. If you have a skittish lost dog, NEVER use the sound feature to try to locate your dog. This could scare them and cause them to run away.

Some skittish or panicked dogs can be caught without a humane trap, but you need to know what you are doing. In particular, you may be able to use calming signals to get your lost dog to approach you. Learn more about lost dog behavior and calming signals here.

Once you have located your lost dog, turn off Lost Dog Mode to preserve battery life and try calming signals to get them to approach you. If this does not work, keep Lost Dog Mode off (unless your dog is in a dangerous area) to preserve battery life as long as possible. Contact a pet detective or other lost pet specialist as soon as possible for professional advice and/or on-site help to improve the chances of catching your dog quickly.

Longer battery life is also helpful if you are someone who probably won't remember to charge the tracker regularly. I have had many calls about lost dogs and cats wearing GPS trackers that weren't charged when the pet went missing.

Long battery life is less important if ...

If your dog is easy to catch once located, then battery life is somewhat less important. These are usually confident, friendly or even aloof dogs. These dogs tend to go missing because they get out of the yard to explore or take off after wildlife while on a hike. Most important, they are off having a good time and aren't scared.

That said, even an otherwise friendly, confident dog may go into survival mode if they experience a traumatic event. For example, if they are attacked by another dog or are in a car accident.

Types of battery life to consider

Whatever tracker you choose, make sure to check the stated battery life. Most trackers will state a battery life up to a certain number of days, weeks, or months. This may indicate estimated typical battery life or maximum battery life.

Maximum battery life. Most trackers use Wi-Fi when at home and allow you to set up one or more Safe Zones. If your dog primarily stays within Wi-Fi range, the tracker battery will last the longest because it is not using power to connect to satellites or send cellular data.
Typical battery life. This will depend on how active your dog is, where you live, and where you travel. If you spend a lot of time away from home, your average battery life will be much lower. Once you get your tracker, you should keep track of how long the battery tends to last on your dog.
Battery life in Lost Dog Mode. When set to Lost Dog Mode (or LIVE Mode), the tracker will increase the frequency of location updates, which will drain the battery quickly.

Other factors that can impact battery life include cellular coverage, GPS availability, and temperature. Poor cell coverage will use more battery. The GPS connects most easily outdoors and under a clear sky. If your dog is indoors (and not in a Safe Zone), the tracker will use more power trying to connect to GPS. Batteries also drain more quickly in very cold or hot temperatures

Battery Life Comparison

GPS Tracker	Stated Battery Life	Battery Life While Traveling*
Fi 3+	up to 3 months	1 to 3 weeks
Fi Mini	up to 2 months	1 to 3 weeks
Tractive Dog 6 XL	up to 42 days	up to 20 days
Tractive Dog XL Adventure	up to 30 days	up to 15 days
Tractive Dog 6	up to 14 days	up to 6 days
Tractive Cat 6 Mini	up to 7 days	up to 4 days
Tractive Cat Mini	up to 5 days	up to 2 days

Table 2: Battery life comparison for Fi and Tractive GPS trackers. *While Traveling means away from the base station, Wi-Fi and/or Safe Zones.

Most companies did not want to state or speculate on battery life in Lost Dog Mode. This is unfortunate since this is arguably the most important number. Fi 3+ states an estimated battery life of up to 2 days when in Lost Dog Mode on a fully charged device.

Battery Life Testing Results

I tested typical battery life for the Fi Series 3, Whistle and Tractive Dog 6. Keep in mind that my test is only accurate for my location (Pioneer Valley of western Massachusetts), my dog's activity, my traveling, and my phone (Samsung Android on AT&T).

Figure 1: Battery life test of Fi 3, Whistle Go Explore 2.0 and Tractive Dog 6 at home.

A few notes on my testing. The first day I was away from home for 12+ hours. The drop in battery life on 5/28, 29 and 31 was due to increased testing of Lost Dog Mode. All other days, my dog was at home and included 2 to 4 hours away from home each day. Whistle is now discontinued. I plan to add a new chart this fall with Fi 3+, Fi Mini and Tractive Dog 6.

I also ran two battery life tests while traveling on camping trips. On the first and last days I was driving for 1 to 2.5 hours. I was camping in areas with decent cell reception, but driving through areas with poor reception. I didn't test Lost Dog Mode so this is just default tracking mode drain on the battery when away from home.

Battery life tests of Fi 3, Fi 3+, and Tractive Dog 6 on two camping trips.

As predicted Fi had much better battery life than Tractive on both trips. But there is a lot of variability in the results between trips. In Test 1, the Fi 3 drained almost as much as the Tractive in Test 2. When traveling, you should expect more variability in battery life. The battery will drain more quickly if you are driving, your dog is very active or you are in an area with poor cell service.

I am still testing how quickly the battery will drain in Lost Dog Mode. I will update this article after more testing.

Battery Life Testing Suggestions

Once you get a tracker, you should keep track of your average battery life. Compare your results to the Battery Life Comparison Table (2). Also if possible, try taking your dog to any areas farther from home that you occasionally visit. See how quickly your battery drains on these trips. Lastly, try running Lost Dog Mode for at least 15 to 30 minutes somewhere that you regularly take your dog. How quickly does the battery drain? You can do this while walking your dog if you turn off Bluetooth on your phone.

Personally, I would only suggest completely draining the battery once. After that, you can do most battery tests to 50% power so you don't risk having an empty tracker if your dog actually goes missing. In fact, I would recommend charging your tracker at 50% power or even more frequently as a general rule. It's great that some trackers will last for weeks before needing to be charged, but the battery will drain very quickly if you have to use Lost Dog Mode for any length of time. It's best to be prepared and have a charged battery, especially if you have a skittish or newly adopted dog.

Best Dog GPS Trackers for Battery Life

The Fi Series 3+ and Fi Mini have by far the best battery life. However, if you have a large dog over 50 lbs, the Tractive Dog XL and XL Adventure also have relatively long battery life.

Use this Referral Link to receive $20 off a Fi Series 3+ or Fi Mini GPS collar and 1 month of free Fi Membership!

Tractive XL Smart Dog GPS Tracker | Live Pet Tracker with Virtual Fence | Vital...

Tractive Dog XL

Tractive Dog XL Adventure

Price not available

Buy on Amazon

Tractive XL Smart Dog GPS Tracker | Live Pet Tracker with Virtual Fence | Vital...

Tractive Dog XL

Price not available

Buy on Amazon

Tractive XL Smart Dog GPS Tracker | Live Pet Tracker with Virtual Fence | Vital...

Tractive Dog XL Adventure

Price not available

Buy on Amazon

Last update on 2026-11-04 / Affiliate links / Images from Amazon Product Advertising API

Cost of Dog GPS Trackers

With most GPS trackers, you need to purchase the tracker and then purchase a subscription plan. One exception is Fi, which has you purchase a membership plan and the collar is usually included (at least the first collar you purchase). Overall, Tractive GPS trackers tend to be cheaper, and often have discount codes and sales. Tractive also has the largest variety of plans available.

Costs, of course, are subject to change, but here's a comparison of costs from June 2026 from the companies' websites. You may be able to get a lower annual cost by purchasing several years in advance. Only Fi offered a six month plan.

GPS Tracker	Cost of Tracker	Cost of Annual Subscription	Total First Year*
Fi Mini	first collar free $20 activation fee	$189	$209
Fi Series 3+	first collar free $20 activation fee	$189	$209
Tractive Cat Mini	$49	$120	$169
Tractive Dog 6	$79	$120	$199
Tractive Dog XL	$89	$120	$209
Tractive Dog XL Adventure	$99	$120	$219

Table 3: Cost comparison of Fi and Tractive GPS trackers. *The total for the first year includes the cost of the tracker and a one year subscription. After the first year, you will only need to pay for the subscription until your tracker breaks, gets lost or you want to upgrade.

When considering costs, you may also want to check the company's current warranty. How long is it and what does it cover? As of June 2026, Fi had a one year warranty, and Tractive offered a two year warranty. In addition they also offered Tractive Care for $24 annually, which may provide you with a free or discounted tracker if yours is lost, damaged or stolen.

Check the Ratings of the Tracker App

Most dog GPS trackers work with an app on your cell phone. Before selecting a tracker, take a quick look at the app ratings for your phone operating system. I had a lot of issues while testing the Whistle Go Explore 2.0. It's likely this was partly due to the Whistle app that I was using, which only had 2.1 stars in the Google Play store. Whistle has since been bought out by Tractive and discontinued.

Will the Tracker Work Where You Live and Travel?

The last factor to check before purchasing a dog GPS tracker is whether it is likely to work where you live and travel with your dog. Dog GPS trackers work by getting a location via satellites and then sending that location to your cell phone app using cellular data and/or Bluetooth. In order to receive that location, both the GPS tracker and your phone need cell coverage. Your phone can also work via Wi-Fi, but this will make tracking your dog much more difficult since you will need to stay in the Wi-Fi zone.

Fi Series 3+ works in the US, Canada and Mexico, but the Fi Mini only works in the US. The Fi Mini uses Verizon LTE-M and the Fi Series 3+ uses the AT&T LTE-M network. The LTE-M network (also called LTE Cat-M) is a low-power, long-distance cellular network that reaches farther than conventional networks like 4G, 5G, and LTE. To check your coverage for the Fi Mini, go to verizon.com/coverage-map and make sure to select "LTE" or "4G LTE" coverage. To check your coverage for the Fi Series 3+, go to AT&T's coverage map.

Please note that not every LTE tower has LTE-M enabled, so in some rural areas you might have LTE on your phone but the tracker still won't connect. The coverage maps don't currently distinguish LTE from LTE-M at the tower level, so they give you a reasonable approximation but not a perfect answer.

Tractive uses AT&T, Verizon and T-Mobile LTE networks in the US. Tractive is also the one popular US tracker that works in many other countries. With over 500 partners around the world, their trackers can connect to 2G and/or LTE (CatM1) cell networks in over 175 countries. You can check Tractive coverage at your address here.

IMPORTANT! If you live or primarily travel somewhere without cell phone reception, the dog GPS trackers discussed here will not work. You will need to purchase a tracker that works without cellular service like the Garmin Alpha 300i Handheld with Alpha TT25 Tracker or Dogtra Pathfinder 2.

Testing Tracker Connectivity and Accuracy

Once you have selected a dog GPS tracker based on design, battery life, cost, app ratings and cell coverage, you need to buy and test the tracker. Fortunately, many trackers offer a 30-day satisfaction guarantee. Be sure to check out their current refund policy before purchasing. You may need to purchase directly from the company, and the 30 days may start at purchase or at activation.

Don't wait until your dog really goes missing to find out how well your tracker works! I tested out the Fi Series 3 and Tractive Dog 6. I'll share my experience, but how well your tracker works will really depend on where you live and travel. This fall I plan to add updated tests with the Fi Series 3+ and Fi Mini.

Testing Safe Zone Alerts

Once you get your tracker, you should set up a Safe Zone (aka Power Saving Zone) right away. If your dog leaves this area, you will receive a notification on the tracker app. One important factor of a good GPS tracker is how quickly you get an alert that your dog has left their Safe Zone. This is also one way to get an idea of your connectivity.

Try taking your dog for a walk and record how long it takes before you get a notification that they have left their Safe Zone. Do this at least several times on different days to get an average. If you can't walk where you live, you can also drive, but the important factor to measure is time and not distance.

Results of my Safe Zone tests

I tested the Fi Series 3 and Tractive Dog 6. I live in an area with good cell phone coverage. Fi and Tractive usually took around 2 minutes (median). However, in 2 of 13 tests (15%), Fi took over 10 minutes to send an alert. Please note that these tests are with the older Fi 3 and not the newer Fi 3+.

GPS Tracker	Mean	Median	Range
Fi 3	4	2	1 to 12
Tractive Dog 6	3	2	2 to 5

Table 4: Test of Safe Zone alerts for dog GPS trackers. Shows the number of minutes before a notification was received that the dog had left the Safe Zone.

Testing Connectivity

Next you want to check connectivity both near your home and at locations that you frequently travel with your dog. This test can be done manually as part of the Lost Dog Mode test or you can use one of the following methods:

Fi has a GPS and LTE-M connectivity test built into the app. For step-by-step instructions, check out their support page.
Tractive has a method to check network and GPS connection built into the tracker itself. For instructions for the Tractive Dog 6, check out their support page. There's also a link from their page for other Tractive models.

In order to test connectivity manually, you need to be outside, away from your Safe Zone, and more than 30 feet away from your dog (beyond Bluetooth range). If you don't have a helper to hold your dog, you can just test with the collar. Alternatively, you can temporarily disable Bluetooth on your phone, but the app needs to think that you and your dog are separated. Be sure to turn off Lost Dog Mode when done so you don't drain the battery.

Once you are away from your dog (or just the GPS tracker), check the current location in the tracker app. If you are using Fi or Tractive, you will probably have an up-to-date location if there is any cellular coverage. Then turn on Lost Dog Mode (aka LIVE Mode) and measure how long it takes the tracker to connect and the app to provide an updated location.

Results of my connectivity tests

I tested the Fi Series 3 and Tractive Dog 6. I live in an area with good cell phone coverage, but I also traveled to a few areas with spotty coverage.

GPS Tracker	Mean	Median	Range	Failures
Fi 3	1:25	1:15	0:10 to 4:00	0 of 9
Tractive Dog 6	0:14	0:15	0:10 to 0:18	1 of 7

Table 5: Connectivity Test for dog GPS trackers. Number of minutes that it took the app to connect to the tracker and provide an updated location when Lost Dog Mode was turned on.

Tractive Dog 6 Test Results

The Tractive Dog 6 had by far the fastest connection speed with an average of 15 seconds. However, there was one test in rural Vermont with spotty cell coverage where it could not connect. It appears that Tractive will try to connect for about a minute before a pop up appears that states: "Connection Too Weak. Buildings or trees may be blocking coverage where your tracker is. Try again in a minute." I tried moving the tracker to another location that said my phone had service and was open to the sky, but it still would not connect.

Even though Tractive could not connect to Lost Dog Mode (called LIVE mode in Tractive), I was still getting some connection. Tractive accurately recorded our walk and other time spent in that area. So I could still get locations on my dog, but they were not updated as frequently. In default tracking mode, Tractive updates the location every 2 to 60 minutes depending on activity level of your dog. If your dog is moving, you will get more frequent updates. In Lost Dog Mode, Tractive updates locations every 2 to 3 seconds. You can learn more about the difference between Default Tracking and LIVE Mode here.

Tractive Dog 6 created an accurate track in an area with poor cell reception.

Fi Series 3 Test Results

The Fi Series 3 had a pretty consistent connection time of around 1 minute. The only time it took longer to connect to Lost Dog Mode was in a rural area of VT with spotty cell coverage. There it took 4 minutes to connect. Unlike Tractive, Fi will continue to attempt to connect to Lost Dog Mode for several minutes. If it cannot connect after 5 minutes, it gives you the option to cancel Lost Dog Mode.

Like Tractive, Fi also provided up-to-date locations in this area while in default tracking mode, but the walk recording was a little less accurate. When in default tracking mode, Fi updates locations around once every 5 minutes. In Lost Dog Mode, Fi provides "real-time" updates. I'm still testing this feature, but it seemed to provide location updates between 3 to 5 times per minute when moving depending on speed.

Fi 3 created a somewhat accurate track in an area with poor cell reception.

Testing Lost Dog Mode Speed and Accuracy

Finally, you should test your tracker in Lost Dog Mode to determine the speed and accuracy of locations once connected. Even if you have a well trained dog, I wouldn't recommend just releasing your dog in the woods and trying to find them. To find out how really accurate the GPS tracker is, you want to know exactly where your dog went and where the tracker app said that they went.

There are a few different ways to test out Lost Dog Mode. The best way is to have someone else walk your dog, put the tracker on their own dog or carry the tracker while you try to locate them. Then compare where they went with where the tracker recorded. Most important, how easy was it to find them? Fi provides step-by-step instructions on how to test Lost Dog Mode here. When testing with Tractive, you should set LIVE tracking duration to 30 or 60 minutes or it will turn off after 5 minutes (the default setting).

If you don't have someone to help you with the test, there are a few other options. Option 1: First turn off Bluetooth on your phone. Then turn on Lost Dog Mode, wait for it to connect and take your dog for a walk. After your walk, turn Lost Dog Mode off and check the Timeline (Fi) or History (Tractive) to see a recording of the walk. This will help you determine the accuracy and frequency of GPS locations. Fi provides step-by-step instructions on this method as well.

Option 2: Place the tracker somewhere where it won't be stolen then test out Lost Dog Mode and see how accurate it is. This is a good way to test whether the tracker app accurately determines your location as well as the tracker's location. Because if you don't know where YOU are, it is really hard to find your dog, especially if you are in the middle of the woods.

The second option can also be used to test out the Bluetooth tracking feature on Tractive. You have to be really close (usually within 30 feet) for Bluetooth to work, so this is most useful if your dog loses their tracker. Tractive also has a sound alert feature to help you pinpoint the location of a lost tracker.

Results of My Lost Dog Mode Tests

I tested the Fi Series 3 and Tractive Dog 6. These tests were conducted in areas with decent cell phone coverage.

Tractive Dog 6 Test Results

Tractive was the easiest to use and the most accurate. When using Lost Dog Mode (called LIVE mode in Tractive), the app shows your dog's location, your location and their path of travel. Tractive updates locations every 2-3 seconds in Lost Dog Mode so it provides a very detailed path of travel. The downside of course is that battery level drops quickly.

Once close, you can turn on Radar mode, which is the Bluetooth feature on Tractive. Since you have to be really close, Bluetooth probably isn't useful unless you are looking for a lost tracker. In this case, Tractive has the best features since Bluetooth will even work in the Safe Zone if your dog loses their tracker at home. There is also a sound feature on Tractive to help you pinpoint the location, but it's not very loud.

Tractive Dog 6 GPS track during Lost Dog Mode test.

Fi Series 3 Test Results

Fi 3 overall worked well, but was a little more difficult to navigate than Tractive and had some glitches. When in Lost Dog Mode, the Fi app shows your dog's location and your location, but it doesn't show their path of travel. During this test, my location did not update frequently, so it was difficult to tell where I was. However, Fi has the option to get directions in Google Maps. When I did this, my location was updated. This is a good backup option to check where you are, but your dog's location will not update when in Google Maps.

Fi 3 Lost Dog Mode test.

In the Fi app, your dog's path of travel is recorded under the Timeline, but you can't view it until you turn off Lost Dog Mode. The path of travel recorded by Fi during the Lost Dog Mode test was less accurate than Tractive. There were a few glitches where the location jumped around. Overall, I have found that Fi tracks are sometimes very accurate and other times have some inaccurate locations that cause the track to jump around.

Fi uses Bluetooth, but doesn't have a separate Bluetooth tracking feature like Tractive. When you get close, your icon will appear attached to your dog's icon in the app. This can make locating them more difficult if they are hiding, but you could try switching to Google Maps for a (hopefully) more accurate location.

Fi 3 GPS track recorded during Lost Dog Mode test.

My Recommendations

If cost is not an issue, I definitely recommend the Fi Series 3+ or Fi Mini (though I haven't tested this one yet). Fi has by far the best battery life and was generally accurate. It provided location updates 3 to 5 times per minute in Lost Dog Mode and at least every 5 minutes in regular tracking mode. But don't forget, you will still need to test the tracker to make sure that it works for your dog. Fi Series 3+ uses AT&T while the Fi Mini uses Verizon.

Use this Referral Link to receive $20 off a Fi Series 3+ or Fi Mini GPS and 1 month of free Fi Membership!

With the exception of battery life, the Tractive Dog 6 was a great tracker. If anything, it was more accurate and updated lost dog locations more frequently than the Fi 3. Tractive also updates locations every 2 to 60 minutes in default tracking mode, so you don't need to waste battery life using Lost Dog Mode unless you really need it. If you have a larger dog, I would probably recommend one of the Tractive Dog XL trackers for improved battery life (though I did not get to test these). The Tractive trackers are more budget friendly and frequently have sales. Tractive is also the only tracker that works in many countries other than the US.

If you have a skittish dog, I would recommend Fi over Tractive. When a skittish dog goes missing, they often go into "survival mode" and are likely to run from everyone and not even respond to their owner's voice. Many skittish, panicked and/or newly adopted dogs need to be caught using surveillance cameras and humane traps (or a large enclosure trap). This can take days or weeks even when you know the location of your lost dog. Long battery life is essential. That said, the Fi Series 3+ collar itself is not great for skittish dogs because they might pull out of it. I would recommend walking a skittish dog on a separate martingale collar or buy a Fi compatible martingale collar or the Fi Mini.

Sources and Notes

Fi product and support pages. Support pages were detailed and updated.

PC Magazine Review of the Fi Smart Dog Collar Series 3.

Tractive product and support pages. Support pages were detailed and updated. Some useful pages include:

The post How to Select the Best Dog GPS Tracker appeared first on Lost Pet Research and Recovery.

Effective Long-term Lost Pet Search Methods

Danielle Robertson — Tue, 02 Apr 2024 16:09:32 +0000

When a dog or cat is missing for months or even years, the most effective search methods are not necessarily the same as those used in the first few days or weeks. This is especially true when there are few to no confirmed sightings of the missing pet.

This article is meant to help provide guidance on the most effective search methods for conducting a long-term search. Some of these methods work best if maintained over time such as online posting and posters. Others are perhaps new ideas to try when nothing else has worked so far.

I will be writing an accompanying article on how long to search and advice on keeping motivated.

Table of Contents

How Long is a Long-term Search?

Most Effective Advertising Methods

Online Posting and Social Media

Posters

Flyers

Postcards

Creative Advertising Methods

Other Effective Search Methods

Microchips

Keep in Touch with Animal Control, Shelters, Rescues, Feral Cat Feeders, Veterinarians, etc.

Surveillance or Wildlife Cameras

Work with a Lost Pet Recovery Team

Physical Searches

Search Dogs

How Record Keeping Aids in a Long-term Search

About This Research

How to Learn More or Contribute to this Research

How Long is a Long-term Search?

Most pet detectives considered a search long-term when the pet was missing for 2-4 months or more. However, I wouldn’t be surprised if most lost pet owners consider a search long-term when their pet has been missing for even a few weeks. Unfortunately, many pet owners are likely to give up their search before it becomes long-term. But there are that special minority that will persist in searching for months or even years.

Most Effective Advertising Methods

Advertising is probably the single most effective long-term search method. This can include online posting, posters, flyers, banners or media coverage.

Online Posting and Social Media

Posting and searching online or on social media are among the easier search activities to maintain long-term and can be effective.

Post on Local Community Sites

Make sure that you are posting and regularly checking any local community sites and not just lost pet sites. People often post sightings of found or loose dogs or cats on community sites before posting them on lost pet sites.

Examples of Local Community Sites

Community Facebook groups or pages in your town and surrounding towns
Nextdoor.com
Neighbors App by Ring (does not require a Ring camera)
Reddit communities
Some communities (most often apartment complexes or HOAs) may have an email list

Example search of Facebook Community Groups for Granby, MA

Post on Local and Regional Lost Pet Groups or Pages

Posting to local and regional lost pet groups and pages is also important. Find these by searching Facebook (e.g. "lost pet" plus your state or region). The people that admin or visit these sites are also more likely to keep an eye out for found pets on community sites. One of my longest lost cat searches was found after almost two years when someone who was feeding the cat posted to a local Facebook group. The owner did not see the post, but a local admin for a lost pet group saw the post and contacted the owner.

Facebook is probably most effective, but don't forget to check for other local and regional posting sites. Craigslist (both the "lost + found" and "pets" sections) and Kijiji in Canada are ones to try.

Post on National Lost Pet Sites

Don't forget to also post on national lost pet sites. There were fewer reports of these sites leading to recoveries, but they do occasionally work. Some sites will also share their posts to their own local and regional Facebook pages.

Create a Lost Pet Facebook Page

Some people even create a Facebook page or group specifically for their lost pet. This can make it easier to provide updates and engage followers to continue keeping an eye out. You can also pay to advertise from your page by boosting posts to people that live in the area the pet is missing. Learn more here. If you create a Facebook page, don’t forget to include a link on your posters and flyers.

Posters

In general, well-designed posters are one of the more effective methods for finding a lost pet. However, it can sometimes take a long time for the right person to see your poster AND your lost pet. Just because you aren’t getting a lot of calls from your posters, doesn’t necessarily mean that they aren’t working. That said, the first most important step is to make sure that your posters are designed correctly so that people are noticing them. Learn more here.

I’ve had several lost cat cases where it took 5-6 weeks to get the first sighting, so I always recommend keeping posters up for a minimum of 6 weeks. Several other cases took as long as six months for the posters to work.

One such case was Jerry, an outdoor-access cat that went missing when a neighbor trapped him and then released him at a park 1.6 miles away. In January/February they put up 40 large posters and 64 small posters over a 1 mile radius around where Jerry was released. In June, they finally got the call they were waiting for. A woman visiting her mother saw one of the posters and called to report that her mother had been feeding a similar looking cat for several months.

If possible, keep posters up for many months or even years. If you can’t keep lots of posters up, then repost periodically and/or at least keep a few up near the point last seen and at some nearby locations with lots of traffic. If posters on public property are not allowed or are removed, then get permission to put a few larger signs on private property.

Some other suggestions for keeping posters noticeable:

Replace old looking posters with nice new ones.
Change the wording to “Still Missing” so people know that you are still looking, and these aren’t just old forgotten signs.
Change the colors or style of the posters.
Change the size of the posters. Larger is usually better, but switching to smaller posters may be an option if larger ones are being removed.
Add a large, specific reward. Note that this is only recommended in cases without sightings. You never want to do anything to encourage people to chase a lost dog.

Sometimes a lack of sightings may indicate that the lost pet has left the search area. Consider expanding the poster area as well.

Flyers

Some people use the terms posters and flyers interchangeably. The main difference here is that flyers are meant to be read at close range. They are most often distributed door-to-door or posted where people walk.

Flyers were less often mentioned as an effective long-term search method. Although flyers are one of the more effective initial search methods, it may be that fewer people try these methods long-term because they require more time and energy. They also must be repeated periodically because people don't necessarily save the flyers.

Example lost cat flyer

While the most labor-intensive, actually going door-to-door and talking to people can often achieve the best results. People will often tell you things when they wouldn’t make the effort to call or text. I’ve had more than a few cases where people had seen the lost cat but hadn’t bothered calling in a sighting. In a few of these cases, we even found the cat still on that person’s property.

If you haven’t distributed flyers door-to-door, this may be a useful step even if your pet has been missing for weeks or months. This is especially true of lost indoor-only cats because they are frequently still close to home.

If you have already distributed flyers, consider a second distribution of flyers and/or expanding your flyer area.

Other creative ways to distribute flyers:

Distribute flyers at events such as garage sales or fairs. This can be done with just the flyer or attach the flyer to water bottles or snacks.
Ask a food delivery business to include flyers with their deliveries.

The biggest drawback with flyers is that most people probably don't save them. So if they see your pet weeks or months later, they often have no way to contact you. Consider adding a note to flyers or posters asking people to take a photo with their phone so they have it on hand if they see your missing pet.

Postcards

If distributing flyers is too time consuming, you might consider mailing postcards instead. These can get expensive, often starting around $500 – 1,000 in my experience. If you can’t afford postcards, perhaps try to find a business that will sponsor your mailings by including your lost pet posting on their own advertising mailer.

Creative Advertising Methods

In some cases, finding a lost pet is not about maintaining search methods, but about trying something new. These advertising methods aren’t for everyone, but they can generate a lot of attention.

Car tagging or a car wrap.
Intersection alerts.
Banners or billboards. Banners can be as simple as duct tape on a tarp or they can be professionally designed.

Media Coverage

This method can be very effective if you can create a compelling story such as something interesting or emotional about the missing pet, the situation under which they went missing or the recovery methods being used. One woman in New Zealand found her cat by dressing up in a cat costume and standing at an intersection with a large lost cat sign. A newspaper story covered the event leading to a sighting of her cat after six months.

Other Effective Search Methods

Microchips

When all other search methods fail, a lost pet may eventually find their way home due to a microchip. There are many stories in the news of lost pets found months or even many years after they went missing. Make sure that your pet’s microchip is properly registered and that your contact information is kept current. If possible, give permission for the microchip company to give out your contact information so that you are easier to contact.

Keep in Touch with Animal Control, Shelters, Rescues, Feral Cat Feeders, Veterinarians, etc.

At the very least, keep checking found pets at shelters and rescues even if just online. Check Petfinder.com and other adoption pages as well as Facebook pages for local shelters and rescues. My longest lost cat case was recovered after three years due to a found cat posting on a shelter page. Read Cosmo's story here.

Animal Control Officers, shelter staff and volunteers, feral cat feeders, veterinarians and admins for lost pet pages are all people that see a lot of lost, found, stray and adoptable pets. If you can get them to help you look, this is much more effective then just you looking, especially since not all found pets are posted online.

Try to create a relationship with shelters, rescues or feral cat feeders. Call or visit regularly so that they know you are still searching. Encourage staff or volunteers to join your lost pet's Facebook group if you have one. Perhaps go as far as to become a volunteer. If that’s not possible, consider helping at events or donating gifts periodically.

Surveillance or Wildlife Cameras

This is more often a long-term search method for lost cats since they are usually in a smaller area than lost dogs. Not having sightings with lost cats is much more common. Surveillance or Wi-Fi cameras are recommended around the home for a minimum of several months. Lost indoor-only cats often return home at some point, usually in the middle of the night when no one is around. Outdoor-access cats have also been reported coming home after months missing. Surprisingly, some of these outdoor-access cats even visited their yard, but did not alert their owners that they were back.

Cameras can also be used to verify potential sightings or be placed in locations where a lost pet is more likely to show up. This could be near a potential shelter or food source such as an abandoned building or a feral cat feeding station. I once found a missing indoor cat after six weeks with a camera placed at a local feral cat feeding location. Prior to this, there were no verified sightings.

Surveillance camera photo of Leo at feral cat feeding station after six weeks missing.

There is some disagreement among pet detectives on the most effective methods of using wildlife cameras. Some will keep them in a single location for longer periods of time while others will move them around every few days to try lots of different potential locations.

Work with a Lost Pet Recovery Team

This may not be an option for everyone, but it is much easier to maintain a long-term search with the support of a team. This tactic is more commonly seen with lost dog searches. If possible, work with an experienced Lost Pet Recovery Team. When a team is not organized or uses questionable search methods, this can actually decrease the chances of finding your lost pet.

Physical Searches

In general, physical searches are not very effective after a lost pet has been missing for several months with no sightings. Escaped indoor-only cats or displaced outdoor-access cats are a possible exception. These cats may still be relatively close to home months after they escape. The longest time that I had a successful physical search was for an indoor-only cat nearly two months after he escaped. I saw him during the search and he was caught 10 days later.

Search Dogs

A scent-specific tracking dog could be used in certain situations in a long-term lost pet search. A search dog might be used to determine whether a lost pet is still in the original search area or near a previous sighting. This is more likely to work with lost indoor or displaced outdoor-access cats since they don’t usually travel as far. If you are getting sightings but have been unable to verify them with surveillance cameras, a search dog may be able to help verify if they are your lost pet.

Be aware that there is a lot of debate and little research on how long a scent trail lasts. The goal here is to verify whether the lost pet was recently in the search area or near a sighting and not to follow a months old track. In these cases, you definitely want an experienced search dog with a good negative trail indication. This means that if the dog can’t find a scent trail, they won’t go for a walk. The longer a pet has been missing, the more likely you are to get false tracks by poorly trained search dogs.

How Record Keeping Aids in a Long-term Search

Keep detailed records of search activities and potential sightings. Even if you don’t do so in the initial (often more frantic) part of your search, it’s never too late to start keeping records. These records can help you keep track of what search activities you have already done, determine what activities have been most effective, and figure out what else could be done.

Some items to keep in your records:

A search map showing locations and dates of potential sightings, feeding stations, security cameras, and traps.
Locations and dates of posters and flyers.
A list of sites and dates where you posted online.
Names, phone numbers, and sources of possible sightings (e.g. from a Facebook post or a call from a poster).

About This Research

This article is based on my 15 years experience in lost pet recovery along with surveys and discussions with pet detectives, pet trackers, lost pet specialists, etc. Data was collected via surveys, Facebook posts, and a Missing Animal Response Network members meeting. This article is based on preliminary research and data collection is ongoing.

Learn more at LostPetResearch.org.

How to Learn More or Contribute to this Research

If you have found a missing pet after a long-term search, please consider sharing your story in the comments and/or completing this short survey about your experience.

If you want to be sure that you receive updates on lost pet research projects like this one, join the Lost Pet Research Group or follow Lost Pet Research and Recovery on Facebook.

The post Effective Long-term Lost Pet Search Methods appeared first on Lost Pet Research and Recovery.

Cat Feeding Station Best Practices to Avoid Coyotes

Danielle Robertson — Tue, 18 Apr 2023 18:46:31 +0000

Cat feeding stations are commonly used to feed feral cat colonies and outdoor/barn cats. They are also frequently used to help locate a missing cat. When searching for a lost cat, the feeding station is often set up with a surveillance camera to verify that the cat is present before setting a humane trap.

There is a lot of disagreement around the use of cat feeding stations since they can attract other wildlife including predators that may harm cats. In particular, coyotes are a potential threat to cats in most areas of the US. Some pet detectives will never or rarely use a feeding station due to the potential risks involved. However, there are also potential risks to not providing food if the cat cannot be found and caught quickly.

Coyote visits cat feeding station

When used for feral cats, most Trap-Neuter-Return (TNR) sites recommend feeding the cats once a day at a set time, and only leaving the food out for 30 minutes. Any remaining food and bowls should be picked up to avoid attracting any wildlife. Unfortunately, this is not practical when using a feeding station for a lost cat. Many lost cats only come out at night and generally avoid human activity. It often takes several days and sometimes a week or longer of setting a feeding station before the lost cat appears on camera.

What can be done to reduce coyote activity around a cat feeding station? If you are in a hurry for the answer, skip to "what we can learn from this study."

Table of Contents

What We Can Learn from Published Research Studies on Feral Cat Feeding Stations

Study Methods

Study Results

What we can learn from this study

Study Limitations

Using Elevated Platforms for Cat Feeding Stations

Other Potential Methods to Protect Cats from Coyotes at a Feeding Station

Use of Coyote Deterrents

Reduce Coyote Access to the Food

Provide Escape Routes or Secure Shelter for the Cat

Future Research

Literature Researched

What We Can Learn from Published Research Studies on Feral Cat Feeding Stations

I was only able to locate a single study on coyotes and cat feeding stations: Confluence and Implications of Cats, Coyotes, and Other Mesopredators at a Feral Cat Feeding Station (Mitchell et al. 2022).

Study Methods

This study focused on a single TNR cat colony in Rhode Island, US. Over the course of two years, three different feeding methods were employed. Visits of cats, coyotes, raccoons, and skunks were measured at the feeding station using a wildlife camera.

Method A: Large quantities of food at ground level. Between 3-5 lbs of dry food was heaped in a large salad bowl or two "deli" trays. This method was also what was used prior to the start of the study.

Method B: Large quantities of food elevated. An on-demand gravity feeder was secured on top of a one-meter-high table. Animals had to climb or jump onto the table and then push open a flap at the bottom of the feeder storage bin to access the food. The feeder was never left empty.

Method C: Small quantities of food at ground level. Between 1.25-1.5 lbs of dry food was placed in a bowl on the ground.

In all cases, food was placed out on Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays between 8:00 and 8:30am.

Study Results

The following animals visited the cat feeding station: cats (64% of visits), raccoons (22%), coyotes (9%), and skunks (5%). Blue jays, turkeys, mice, squirrels, grey fox, red fox, and opossums were also present but were not measured.

Boxplot from "Confluence and Implications of Cats, Coyotes and Other Mesopredators at a Feral Cat Feeding Station" (Mitchell et al. 2022)

Overall, cats visited the feeding stations less when coyotes, raccoons and skunks were present. The most cats and fewest coyotes visited when large amounts of food were placed on an elevated platform.

Method A: When large amounts of food were placed on the ground, cats visited mostly during the day. Coyotes, raccoons and skunks primarily visited at night. During this time, 30% of the feral cats disappeared from the feeding station.

Method B: When large amounts of food were placed on an elevated feeding station, more cats visited at night. Raccoons also ate from the feeding station. Coyotes and skunks were not recorded.

Method C: When small amounts of food were placed on the ground, cats visited throughout the day and night. Cat activity was highest when the food was put out in the morning. Coyote and raccoon visits were minimal at night, and no skunks appeared. The food was generally gone before night.

What we can learn from this study

Based on this study, an elevated feeding platform works best if you want to maximize cat activity at the feeding station while minimizing coyote activity. This also allows you to more safely provide a large quantity of food. With more food present, some food will be available at all hours. This increases the chances of getting all cats in the area (and hopefully the lost cat) to make an appearance at the feeding station.

The second best option was only providing small amounts of food on the ground during the day. This may also reduce coyote activity at the feeding station unless you live in an area where coyotes are frequently active during the day. However, if this method were used for a lost cat, the food could easily be gone well before the cat shows up (usually in the middle of the night).

Another interesting finding of this study was how long it took before all cats in the area showed up on camera. With large quantities of food, it took 3-5 days to get an accurate estimate of the number of cats in the area. In contrast, with small amounts of food, it took 8-11 days. This is something to take into consideration when you determine how long to leave up a feeding station before concluding that the lost cat is not present.

Study Limitations

Unfortunately, this seems to be the only study on cat feeding stations and interactions with wildlife (at this time). The study was conducted on a single feeding station in Rhode Island in a suburban area. Since coyote activity is highly variable throughout the country, this study really needs to be replicated in other areas. In areas with significant daytime coyote activity, the results might differ.

During the study 40% (8/20) of cats disappeared and most occurred during Method A when large amounts of food were on the ground. During this time coyote visits were highest (14% of visits). The researchers conclude that the missing cats were killed by coyotes, but they never found any cat remains. It certainly is possible that the cats were killed by coyotes, but it is also quite possible that they left for other reasons.

Using Elevated Platforms for Cat Feeding Stations

The elevated cat feeding station used in the this study was described as "an
“on-demand” gravity feeder secured on top of a one-meter-high table... Animals had to climb or jump on the table and push open a flap at the bottom of the feeder’s storage bin to access dry food. Feeders could hold up to 3.2 kg (7 lb) of food; the feeder was never left empty" (Mitchell et al. 2022). I reached out to the authors to try and get a photo or illustration of the elevated feeding station, but I never heard back.

For those interested in using an elevated platform, I found the following resources. These include designs that will limit raccoons, opossums, skunks, and coyotes. In general, minimal elevation (even 1-2 feet) will usually exclude skunks. On the other hand, raccoons can climb just about anything, but they aren't great jumpers.

A minimally elevated cat feeding station may exclude skunks but not other wildlife.

The Ark Workshop offers a variety of cat feeding stations for sale.
For a more permanent structure, here are the building instructions for a raccoon proof feeder courtesy of Shawdowcats.net.

When setting up a feeding station for a lost cat, you probably want something more portable. I sometimes just use a folding table with a box on top to protect the food from the weather. With a large enough table, a trap can also be set up if needed. This set-up works to keep skunks out, but usually not raccoons or opossums. I haven't yet had a coyote show up at an elevated feeding station, so I can't say from personal experience how well this works to exclude coyotes. If anyone else would like to share their elevated feeding station designs, please email photos to info@lostpetresearch.com.

Cat feeding station on a folding table. This will avoid skunks but likely not raccoons or opossums.

One concern that I sometimes have with elevated cat feeding stations is whether it might also exclude some cats. In my experience, not all cats are great jumpers and some cats, in particular old or overweight cats, might have difficulty reaching the platform.

Other Potential Methods to Protect Cats from Coyotes at a Feeding Station

Below are some additional suggestions, but most have minimal to no research that I am aware of. However, I am planning to do additional journal research on these topics.

Use of Coyote Deterrents

There are a lot of coyote deterrents on the market. Unfortunately, many things that will scare a coyote, like loud noises, flashing lights or spraying water, are also likely to scare off a lost cat. The methods listed below are some of the less intrusive coyote deterrents, but it is still possible that they would scare away a cat.

Wolf Urine

Some researchers have found that wolf urine works to discourage coyote activity even in areas where wolves are not present (Wauson and Rogers 2021). In order to be effective, the urine must be applied in a perimeter and reapplied frequently. This study used dispensers that needed to be re-filled every nine days (despite the online instructions stating every 33 days). They also recommend applying the urine high enough to simulate a large wolf. The Predator Pee Store also promotes wolf urine as a feral cat repellent, but I haven't found any research to support its effectiveness.

Predator Deterrent Lights

Nite Guard and Predator Guard are among companies selling predator deterrent lights. These products have one or two small red lights that flash and supposedly simulate the eyes of a larger predator. I haven't yet found any studies to support whether they work or not. There is also the question of whether these would scare a cat if they actually work.

No products found.

Fladry

Fladry consists of a line of brightly colored flags hung along a fence or perimeter. The flags moving in the wind are supposed to scare wolves and other predators from entering livestock pastures. There is some evidence that this works for wolves (at least for a month or two), but at least one study found that it did not work for coyotes (Davidson-Nelson and Gehring 2010). As with other tools, there is some concern that fladry might scare a lost cat as well.

Reduce Coyote Access to the Food

If the coyotes cannot access the cat food, they are less likely to continue visiting the feeding station. This is what this research study found when they put the cat food on an elevated platform. Theoretically, this would also work if the food was made inaccessible in other ways such as placed inside or under something where coyotes could not fit.

Provide Escape Routes or Secure Shelter for the Cat

Alternatively, the food could be placed on the ground, but near suitable escape routes or secure shelter for the cat. This could be near a shed or deck that a cat could hide underneath, but a coyote would not fit. If no natural escape routes are present, one site recommends using 12 inch x 6 foot PVC pipes. These need to be secured in place so they won't roll. The cat may need to be encouraged to investigate the pipe with treats or they might not use it in an emergency.

If you are making more of a long-term feeding station, you might consider building a cat house as an escape shelter and/or for secure sleeping. This should have a door that is just big enough for the cat and a coyote can't enter or get their head inside. For my feral cat shelter I placed a large cinderblock at the entrance to create a secure hallway. (There are no coyotes in my yard, but my feral cat frequently uses the shelter to escape my puppy.) The Feralvilla provides a safe design that has a ground floor entrance and then a second floor sleeping area.

Feral cat house with cinderblock door for protection from dogs and coyotes.

Providing the cat with something to climb is another option. However, I've seen a number of Youtube videos where cats attempting to climb were pulled down by coyotes. In general it seems like cats are not able to climb quickly enough.

These methods seem less than ideal, since the coyotes are likely to continue to visit the feeding station if food is readily available.

Future Research

Clearly more research is needed on this topic. If you use one of these methods or an alternative method to reduce coyote activity around cat feeding stations, please describe it in the comments or email photos to info@lostpetresearch.com. Future research projects will be posted at LostPetResearch.org.

Literature Researched

Davidson-Nelson, S.J. and T.M. Gehring. 2010. Testing Fladry as a Nonlethal Management Tool for Wolves and Coyotes in Michigan. Human-Wildlife Interactions: 4(1): Article 11.

Mitchell, N.C., M.W. Strohbach, M.N. Sorlien, and S.N. Marshall. 2022. Confluence and Implications of Cats, Coyotes, and Other Mesopredators at a Feral Cat Feeding Station. Society & Animals 30: 721-741.

Wauson, M, and W. Rogers. 2021. A test of gray wolf urine to reduce coyote depredation rates on loggerhead sea turtle nests. Journal for Nature Conservation 63: article 126050. Read a full copy of the thesis here.

The post Cat Feeding Station Best Practices to Avoid Coyotes appeared first on Lost Pet Research and Recovery.

Lost Pet Research Projects

Danielle Robertson — Mon, 03 Apr 2023 23:08:33 +0000

This year I'm planning to focus on lost pet research projects and blog articles. At this point I have way too many ideas and I want to see what YOU are most interested in learning about. I'm also hoping to gauge interest in research participation, which would be necessary for some projects. If you have any suggestions, feel free to leave a Comment at the end of this article or Contact me here.

This article has now been updated on the new LostPetResearch.org website.

Visit LostPetResearch.org

Lost Pet Research Blog Articles

The Lost Pet Research Blog is home to my current research articles. Most of these articles are based on research studies published in the scientific literature. There are a range of topics, but so far most relate to lost cat behavior and coyotes. These articles go back as early as 2011 and some could probably be updated with new research.

Possible future topics that I am considering:

Characteristics of cat remains from coyote attacks.
How much can raptors (eagles, hawks, and owls) lift?
Updated research on cat home ranges and movements.
Updated research on effective tracking devices.

Current Published Lost Pet Research Studies

At this time there are very few published studies related directly to lost pet recovery. The existing studies also have a number of shortcomings.

Biased samples in Lord studies (in Lost Pet Statistics article see notes under Literature Cited for examples).
Most lost cats were found by returning home on their own. This may indicate that most people are not using effective search techniques.
Most studies didn’t separate data between indoor and outdoor access cats.

Search Methods Used to Locate Missing Cats and Locations Where Missing Cats are Found

See notes under Limitations and Errors in the Study.
This study used complicated statistics.
This study used a long and complicated survey, which appears to have resulted in errors in completion.
Only 24% of people received assistance from a pet detective or volunteer lost pet recovery group. Is there a difference between found stats from people that received professional help and those that did not?

Lost and Found Pet Statistics Research

These type of research projects would require participation from pet detectives, lost pet consultants, lost pet trappers, etc.

Case Logs

Does anyone currently collect case data in a systematic method?
Does anyone conduct statistics on their data?

Found Pet Survey

This survey would only include data from pets that were lost and then found.

Option 1: Full length survey

Issues with this method. As a survey becomes longer and more complex, fewer people will complete the survey and they are more likely to make errors.
Could be completed by pet owner or by pet detective.

Option 2: Short surveys on different topics

This is the option that I lean towards. Shorter surveys are more likely to be completed and with fewer errors. In order to do these surveys we could need to determine what are the most important lost pet demographics?

Some possible research topics:

Dogs and cats in car accidents. How far from the accident are they found?
How often do escaped indoor cats return home or to the point of escape?
Distance from location lost to location found alive.
Where are remains found? Distance from home? What is found?
What advertising methods work best?

Connect with other businesses for research on lost and found pet data

These options would require me to contact various pet-related businesses and see if any of them are interested in participating.

Pet tracking device companies. Look at GPS data on where lost cats/dogs travel and are found.
Amber alert services. How often do these services directly lead to recoveries? I suspect this info may be difficult to get since these companies want people to think that their services are very effective even if they are not.
Microchip companies. What percentage of microchipped dogs/cats are reported lost? Do they collect any information on found statistics?
Shelters. Some shelter data is publicly available.

Collaborating with other researchers:

I would try to connect with Universities or other research groups for collaboration on projects. This is something that MARN has done in the past.

Previous collaboration on Missing Cat Project.
Guelph research study on cat personalities and their territories
Could also try and connect with predator study groups

Citizen Science Research Experiments

These types of research projects would be much more complex to set up and carry out.

Cat litter experiment - Does dirty cat litter attract predators or other animals?
Scent lure experiment - Do certain scent lures really work for attracting lost dogs or cats?
Movement patterns of displaced cats - Perhaps collect GPS data on newly moved outdoor-access cats

How to learn more and/or participate

If you are really interested and don't want to miss out on anything, I would suggest signing up for the Lost Pet Research Newsletter and/or the Lost Pet Research Facebook group. However, I will also post updates to MARN Facebook groups and my Lost Pet Research Facebook page.

Watch for updates:

On MARN Facebook groups.
On my Lost Pet Research Facebook page.
On my new Lost Pet Research Facebook Group. This is primarily aimed at people interested in participating in the research. But feel free to sign up if you just want to make sure that you don't miss out on anything.
Lost Pet Research Email list: Sign Up HERE
I am planning to put most surveys and research information on my other website LostPetResearch.org so it doesn’t get lost in all the information on my business website.

Additional ideas for short surveys and discussions on tools, techniques, and results

Favorite search/capture equipment

Cameras
Cat traps
Dog traps
Nets
Snappy Snare
Other must have tools

Search and Recovery Techniques

Poster design and placement
Flyer design and placement
Trap placement and set-up

Specialized search/capture equipment: use, efficacy and design

Drones
Net guns
Enclosure traps
XL box traps
Drop nets
Drop traps
Collarum
Infrared or thermal imaging

Loss Prevention and Recovery Tools and their effectiveness

Bluetooth (e.g. Airtag)
GPS
Radio-tags
ID Tags
Microchips

Business/volunteer tools and systems for client and case management

Client management
Case management and record keeping
Volunteer management
Setting rates

The post Lost Pet Research Projects appeared first on Lost Pet Research and Recovery.

Lost Pet Statistics

Danielle Robertson — Thu, 14 Mar 2019 16:10:19 +0000

Lost Pet Statistics Infographic by PurringPal

How Many Pets Go Missing?

If you have ever tried to research lost pet statistics, you have probably seen the statement that 1 in 3 pets (30%) will go missing in their lifetime. Most prominently, this statement appears on the homepage of the HomeAgain microchip company. Various other sites attribute this statement to the ASPCA or AHA but fail to provide an exact source. To date, I have been unable to find any actual research to back up the 1 in 3 pets will go missing statistic.

The only published research study on lost pet rates found that between 11-16% of dogs and 12 - 18% of cats are likely to go missing at least once in five years.

Weiss et al. 2012

The first research on lost pet statistics was conducted by the ASPCA in 2010 (Weiss et al. 2012). They surveyed pet owners and found that 14% of dogs and 15% of cats in the study went missing once in a five-year period. Since their study had a small sample size, they used statistics to calculate that in the US pet population, between 11-16% of dogs (1 in 6 to 9) and 12-18% of cats (1 in 5 to 8) will go missing in a five-year period. Unfortunately, they made no attempt to calculate or discuss how this lost pet statistic relates to the lifetime of the pet. If a dog or cat lives 10, 15 or 20 years, does the chance of them going missing increase or stay the same?

In reality, there are many variables that contribute to the likelihood of an individual pet going missing. At this point, there isn’t any published research on what characteristics increase the chances of a pet going missing. You might think that indoor-only cats are less likely to get lost than an outdoor-access cat, but the available research indicates that this may not be true. Lord et al. (2007a) found that 41% missing cats were indoor-only cats, and approximately half of survey participants in the Huang et al. (2018) study reported a missing indoor-only cat (unpublished data).

How Many Lost Cats Are Found?

If your cat goes missing, what are the chances that they will be found? You may have heard the lost pet statistic that only 1 to 5% of lost cats are found. This fortunately is NOT true and is a misinterpretation of return-to-owner (RTO) rates. RTO rates are the percentage of pets that are returned to their owners after they have been brought to a shelter. Sadly, very few cats ARE returned to their owners once they end up in a shelter. Various studies found RTO rates of 1.5 to 4.5% for cats. Likely reasons for this low RTO rate include:

Very few cats have ID tags
Microchips are often not registered or kept up-to-date
Owners tend to wait longer to check the shelter and don’t check them as often as for a lost dog
Many towns/cities have short or nonexistent minimum stray holds for cats
Animal Control in smaller towns may not pick up stray cats, so they end up taken to rescues or shelters farther from where they were found
Unless a cat is sick or injured, most people tend to assume a loose cat lives somewhere nearby and is not lost, so they are not reported or brought to a shelter
A cat may be missing for weeks or months before they are taken to a shelter

Research studies report that between 53-84% of lost cats are found (Table 1). The range in values is partly due to the potential bias of the different study methods. The least biased study is probably Weiss et al. (2012) which found that 75% of missing cats in the study were found and therefore statistically 63- 84% of lost cats in the US are found.

If you work with a lost pet tracker or pet detective, you may find that their recovery rates are lower then these. This is most likely because many people wait to contact a pet detective or tracker until after their cat has been missing for several days or a week or longer. In some cases, they have even been using search techniques that are detrimental to finding their lost cat. Many lost cats can be found without professional help, but make sure that you are using proven search methods and not just trying everything you can find on the internet.

One interesting lost pet statistic that has not be published is the difference in recovery rates between lost indoor-only cats versus outdoor-access cats. While both types of cats may be equally likely to go missing, indoor-only cats are much more likely to be found (Table 2). My case records show a similar trend with around 75% of lost indoor-only cats being found versus only 33% of lost outdoor-access cats. When an indoor-only cat goes missing, they are likely hiding in fear and are usually not too far from home. On the other hand, when an outdoor-access cat goes missing it usually means that something happened to prevent the cat from coming home. These cats may be trapped, injured and hiding or deceased nearby. Or they may be displaced and lost farther from home, which makes them much more difficult to find.

How Are Lost Cats Found?

Weiss et al. (2012) and Lord et al.( 2007a) both determined that most cats were found because they returned home on their own (45-72%). Weiss et al. (2012) also found that 30% (18-44%) were found in the neighborhood. Lord et al. (2007a) found that 11% of cats were found due to neighborhood signs, but they did not even ask specifically about doing a neighborhood search. All other search methods were less then 2%. See Table 4. Please understand, these results do NOT suggest that the best search method is just to wait until your cat comes home. All of these studies had relatively low recovery rates, and many cats were never found. What these studies strongly suggest is that most people don’t know how to effectively search for a missing cat and use ineffective methods.

I would recommend reading this blog article: Review of “Successful Search Methods Used to Locate Missing Cats and Likely Locations Where Missing Cats are Found." This study used a more complex method than simple percentages and looked at what search methods owners actually found useful in their search. In particular they found evidence that a physical search increased the likelihood of finding a missing cat alive (Huang et al. 2018).

How Many Lost Dogs are Found?

Lost dogs have a much higher recovery rate than lost cats. Research studies found that between 71- 97% of lost dogs were recovered (Table 3). Weiss et al. (2012) used statistics to estimate that between 86 to 97% of lost dogs in the US are found. Dogs also have higher return-to-owner (RTO) rates if they are brought to a shelter. RTO rates were between 10 to 30% (HSUS online).

More dogs are likely found at the shelter because:

Significantly more dogs have ID tags (48-89%) compared to cats
Owners tend to check the shelter sooner and check back more frequently
Most towns/cities have minimum stray holds for dogs (though these may be as short as 2-3 days)
Many towns have some sort of Animal Control Officer that will attempt to pick up loose dogs
People are more likely to report or try to catch a loose dog

How are Lost Dogs Found?

Weiss et al. (2012) found that most dogs (38-59%) were found by searching the neighborhood. This was followed by 13-29% returned home on their own. Nine to 23% were found due to an ID tag or microchip. Only 2-12% were found by visiting or calling animal control/shelter. This study used a random phone survey so is less biased then other studies.

Lord et al. (2007b) found that most lost dogs were found due to a call or visit to an animal agency/shelter (34.8%). This was followed by 25.5% found due to a license or ID tag and 15.2% found due to neighborhood signs. Only 7.6% of dogs returned home on their own. The results from this study are somewhat biased because they found survey participants by contacting people that had reported their pet lost to the shelter or had posted a lost pet ad in the newspaper. This likely led to an underestimate of lost dogs found in the neighborhood or due to ID tags.

They also found that owners were significantly more likely to recover their lost dogs when they called or visited an animal agency, and posted signs in the neighborhood. Dogs wearing a license and ID tag when lost were more likely to be recovered. Dogs believed stolen were less likely to be recovered, even though the search effort was not different.

Literature Cited with Abstracts, Notes and Tables

Do you still want to learn more about lost pet statistics? The following articles were researched to write this article. This bibliography includes abstracts (summaries), additional notes, and tables.

Huang, L., M. Coradini, J. Rand, J. Morton, K. Albrecht, B. Wasson, and D. Robertson. 2018. Search methods used to locate missing cats and locations where missing cats are found. Animals 8(1): 5. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani8010005

Abstract: Missing pet cats are often not found by their owners, with many being euthanized at shelters. This study aimed to describe times that lost cats were missing for, search methods associated with their recovery, locations where found and distances travelled. A retrospective case series was conducted where self-selected participants whose cat had gone missing provided data in an online questionnaire. Of the 1210 study cats, only 61% were found within one year, with 34% recovered alive by the owner within 7 days. Few cats were found alive after 90 days. There was evidence that physical searching increased the chance of finding the cat alive (p = 0.073), and 75% of cats were found within 500 m of the point of escape. Up to 75% of cats with outdoor access traveled 1609 m, further than the distance traveled by indoor-only cats (137 m; p ? 0.001). Cats considered to be highly curious were more likely to be found inside someone else’s house compared to other personality types. These findings suggest that thorough physical searching is a useful strategy, and should be conducted within the first week after cats go missing. They also support further investigation into whether shelter, neuter and return programs improve the chance of owners recovering missing cats and decrease numbers of cats euthanized in shelters.

Visit the Lost Pet Research blog for a full review of this article.

Lord, L.K., T.E. Wittum, A.K. Ferketich, J.A. Funk, and P.J. Rajala-Schultz. 2007a. Search and identification methods that owners use to find a lost cat. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association 230(2): 217-220.

http://www.localpethealth.com/Portals/0/searchmethodsusedtofindlostcats.pdf

Abstract: Objective: To characterize the process by which owners search for lost cats and identify factors associated with time to recovery. Design: Cross-sectional study. Sample population: Owners of 138 cats lost in Montgomery County, Ohio, between June 1 and September 30, 2005. Procedures: A telephone survey was conducted. Results: 73 of the 138 (53%) cats were recovered; median time to recovery was 5 days (range, 0.5 to 81 days). Most cats (48 [66%]) that were recovered returned home on their own or were found in the neighborhood (5 [7%]); most other cats were recovered through posting of neighborhood signs (8 [11%]) or calling or visiting an animal agency (5 [7%]). The highest success rate for any of the search methods that were used was only 12% (posting neighborhood signs). Only 26 of the 138 (19%) cats had some type of identification at the time they were lost (ie, identification tag, rabies tag, or microchip). Owners allowed 82 (59%) cats to spend at least some time outdoors. The percentage of sexually intact cats recovered by their owners (4/16 [25%]) was significantly lower than the percentage of neutered cats recovered (69/122 [57%]). Conclusions: Results suggest that the percentage of lost cats recovered by their owners is low, possibly in part because of the lack of use of traditional identification methods and the general acceptance that cats may roam. Veterinarians can help educate owners about the importance of identification and the need to keep cats indoors.

Table 1 from Lord et al. 2007a

Notes:

Biased sample – only included owners of lost cats that either placed an advertisement in the lost-and-found portion of the local newspaper or that contacted one of the county’s 3 animal agencies.
53% (73/138) recovered. Conclude that traditional search and identification methods are largely ineffective.
35% of all cats returned home on their own. 66% of found cats returned home on their own.
Median recovery time = 5 days (range 0.5 to 81 days)
See Table 1 for how found. Most found cats (66%) returned home on their own.
66% (73) found at home, 29% (21) were found less than 1 mile from home, 3% (2) were found 1-5 miles from home, and 3% were found more than 5 miles from home.
The percentage of sexually intact cats recovered (25%) was significantly lower than the percentage of neutered cats recovered (57%) (P = 0.02).
41% (56) of lost cats were indoor-only cats.
Lost before: 78% of cats had never been lost before, 17% had been lost 1-5 times previously, and 5% had been lost more than 5 times before.
Identification: 10% of cats were wearing ID tag, 6% wearing rabies tag, and 7% had a microchip. Overall, 14% were wearing some type of visible ID and 19% had any type of ID. Only 1 cat recovered due to ID tag. Having identification did not increase the likelihood that the cat was recovered. (Probably because so many cats returned home on their own.)
Shelters: Only 7% of cats were found by calling or visiting an animal agency. RTO rate in this county was 1.5% for cats. No mandatory hold period, but most held for 72 hours. Medium time to visit/call shelter was 3 days, and median time between visits was 8 days.

Lord, L.K., T.E. Wittum, A.K. Ferketich, J.A. Funk, and P.J. Rajala-Schultz. 2007b. Search and identification methods that owners use to find a lost dog. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association 230(2): 211-216.

Abstract: Objective: To characterize the process by which owners search for lost dogs and identify factors associated with time to recovery. Design: Cross-sectional study. Sample Population: Owners of 187 dogs lost in Montgomery County, Ohio, between June 1 and September 30, 2005. Procedures: A telephone survey was conducted. Results: 132 of the 187 (71%) dogs were recovered; median time to recovery was 2 days (range, 0.5 to 21 days). Dogs were recovered primarily through a call or visit to an animal agency (46 [34.8%]), a dog license tag (24 [18.2%]), and posting of neighborhood signs (20 [15.2%]). Eighty-nine (48%) dogs had some type of identification at the time they were lost (ie, identification tag, dog license tag, rabies tag, or microchip). Owners had a higher likelihood of recovery when they called an animal agency (hazard ratio, 2.1), visited an animal agency (1.8), and posted neighborhood signs. Dogs that were wearing a dog license tag also had a higher likelihood of recovery (hazard ratio, 1.6). Owners were less likely to recover their dogs if they believed their dogs were stolen (hazard ratio, 0.3). Conclusions: Results suggest that various factors are associated with the likelihood that owners will recover a lost dog. Both animal agencies and veterinarians can play a role in educating dog owners on the importance of identification tags, licensing, and microchips and can help to emphasize the importance of having a search plan in case a dog is lost.

Table 1 from Lord et al. 2007b

Notes:

At the time of the study, each county had a dog warden and a dog license was required. Required to hold unlicensed dogs for 3 days and licensed dogs for 14 days.
RTO 19%
Biased sample – only included owners of lost dogs that either placed an advertisement in the lost-and-found portion of the local newspaper or that contacted one of the county’s 3 animal agencies.
71% of dogs recovered.
Median recovery time was 2 days (range 0.5 to 21 days)
See Table 1 for Methods found.
8% returned home, 71% found less than one mile, 14% were found 1-5 miles, and 7% were found more than 5 miles from home.
54% had never been lost before, 28% had been lost 1-5 times previously and 18% had been lost more than 5 times before.
ID: 43% were wearing some type of ID tag, and 48% had some form of identification. Only 8% had a microchip. 53% of dogs with ID were found vs 35% of dogs without ID.
Shelters: 28% of dogs were found by calling or visiting a shelter. Median time to call or visit was 1 day (0-14 day range). Owners that found their dogs visited or called the shelter sooner and checked more frequently than those that did not.
Significance: Owners were significantly more likely to recover their lost dogs when they called an animal agency, visited, and posted signs in the neighborhood. However, posting signs did not become effective until the dog was lost for > 7 days. Dogs wearing a license when lost were more likely to be recovered. Dogs believed stolen were less likely to be recovered, but search effort was not different.

Lord, L.K., T.E. Wittum, A.K. Ferketich, J.A. Funk, and P.J. Rajala-Schultz. 2007c.

Search methods that people use to find owners of lost pets. Journal of the American

Veterinary Medical Association 230(12): 1835-1840.

Abstract: Objective: To characterize the process by which people who find lost pets search for the owners. Design: Cross-sectional study. Sample Population-188 individuals who found a lost pet in Dayton, Ohio, between March 1 and June 30, 2006. Procedures-Potential participants were identified as a result of contact with a local animal agency or placement of an advertisement in the local newspaper. A telephone survey was conducted to identify methods participants used to find the pets' owners. Results: 156 of 188 (83%) individuals completed the survey. Fifty-nine of the 156 (38%) pets were reunited with their owners; median time to reunification was 2 days (range, 0.5 to 45 days). Only 1 (3%) cat owner was found, compared with 58 (46%) dog owners. Pet owners were found as a result of information provided by an animal agency (25%), placement of a newspaper advertisement (24%), walking the neighborhood (19%), signs in the neighborhood (15%), information on a pet tag (10%), and other methods (7%). Most finders (87%) considered it extremely important to find the owner, yet only 13 (8%) initially surrendered the found pet to an animal agency. The primary reason people did not surrender found pets was fear of euthanasia (57%). Only 97 (62%) individuals were aware they could run a found-pet advertisement in the newspaper at no charge, and only 1 person who was unaware of the no-charge policy placed an advertisement. Conclusions: Veterinarians and shelters can help educate people who find lost pets about methods to search for the pets' owners.

Weiss, E. M. Slater, and L. Lord. 2012. Frequency of Lost Dogs and Cats in the United

States and the Methods Used to Locate Them. Animals 2: 301-315.

http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/2/2/301

Abstract: A cross-sectional national random digit dial telephone interview was conducted between September and November 2010. There were 1,015 households that had owned a dog or cat within the past five years. Of these 817 households owned dogs and 506 owned cats. Fourteen percent of dogs (95% Confidence Interval (CI): 11–16%) and 15% (95% CI: 12–18%) of cats were lost in the past five years. No owner demographic variables were associated with losing a pet. Ninety three percent (95% CI: 86–97%) of dogs and 75% (95% CI: 64–85%) of cats were recovered. For dogs, searching the neighborhood and returning on their own were the most common methods of finding the dog; 14% were found through an identification tag. For cats, returning on their own was most common. Dogs were more likely than cats to be lost more than once. Cats were less likely than dogs to have any type of identification. Knowledge of the successful methods of finding dogs and cats can provide invaluable help for owners of lost pets. Since 25% of lost cats were not found, other methods of reuniting cats and their owners are needed. Collars and ID tags or humane trapping could be valuable approaches.

From Table 1 of Weiss et al. 2012

Notes:

14% (11-16%) of dogs and 15% (12-18%) of cats went missing at least once in the past 5 years.
93% of dogs in the study (86-97% in US population) and 75% of cats in the study (63-84% in the US population) were found
Not a set definition for "lost"; owners were allowed to define lost in their own way. Best interpretation would be any time that the owner was concerned about the absence of the pet.
Dogs were more likely than cats to be lost more than once. P=0.05
Cats were less likely than dogs to have any type of ID or even a collar. 11% (6-19%) of dogs and 56% (44-68%) of cats had no form of ID when lost (P<0.001)
Found that lost neutered pets, those belonging to respondents with more education, and lost cats belonging to respondents with higher income were more likely to be found.
Most dogs were found by searching the neighborhood (49%, 38-59%). Followed by 20% (13-29%) returned home on their own. Only 6% (2-12%) were found by visiting or calling animal control and 15% (9-23%) were found with in ID or microchip.
Most cats returned home on their own (59%, 45-72%). Followed by 30% (18-44%) found in the neighborhood. Only 2% (0.04-10%) were found due to ID or a microchip and the same were found due to visiting or calling animal control.

RTO Rates from Various Studies:

1.5% for cats and 19% for dogs in Montgomery County, OH. No animal control laws at county level for cats.
3% for cats in San Mateo County, CA. Increased to 4.5% when ID and licensing of cats was required.
5.2% in Honolulu where cats are required to wear ID.
10-30% ROI for dogs and 5% for cats in US (HSUS online)

The post Lost Pet Statistics appeared first on Lost Pet Research and Recovery.

Review of “Search Methods Used to Locate Missing Cats and Locations Where Missing Cats Are Found”

Danielle Robertson — Sun, 29 Jul 2018 18:15:49 +0000

This is a review of a research paper published in Animals (2018) on “Search methods used to locate missing cats and locations where missing cats are found,” which was a collaboration between researchers at the University of Queensland (Australia), Missing Pet Partnership, Missing Animal Response Network, and Lost Pet Research & Recovery.

Table of Contents

Study Methods

Results and Discussion

Demographics of Cats

Circumstances Preceding and Leading to Cats Going Missing

Probabilities of Being Found Alive by Time Since Lost

Search Methods Used, Perceived Useful Methods, and Associations with Cat Being Found Alive – Table 5

Distances to Where Cat was Found

Locations Where Cats were Found

Cats’ Demeanor When Found

Notes

*Categories of Effectiveness for Search Methods

Limitations and Errors in Study Design

Errors in Paper Results and Discussion

Literature Reviewed

Study Methods

This study was conducted from June through August 2016 using an online questionnaire on Survey Monkey. Participants were recruited using a convenience sample, including snowballing. This just means that the survey link was shared online including Facebook and anyone that wanted to participate could fill out the survey. The survey allowed multiple entries by the same person in case they lost more than one cat or their cat went missing more than once. The questionnaire included 47 questions relating to 1) basic history of the lost cat, 2) circumstances in which the cat went missing, 3) search methods used to locate the cat, and 4) circumstances in which the cat was found. Statistics were completed by a hired statistician using Stata (version 14, StataCorp, College Station, TX, USA).

Results and Discussion

There was A LOT of data collected in this study. View the full article to see summary tables of the results. I’m including the results below that I thought were most interesting in the study and in some cases grouping the results slightly differently then the final publication. I’m also including my personal interpretation of the results and a few unpublished results that I found interesting.

Demographics of Cats

A total of 1,210 lost cats were analyzed in this study. Half of cats in the study had gone missing within the last two years. Most (59%) were from the US followed by Australia (20%) and Canada (14%), and 77% lived in residential areas consisting primarily of houses with yards. There were slightly more male cats (57%) than females (43%) and most cats were adults 1-7 years (67%) and spayed/neutered (96%). About half (46%) of cats had a microchip, but only 19% had a collar with an ID tag. The paper reports that most cats were acquired from a shelter or rescue (33%) or from a family member or acquaintance (18%). However, if you combine “found as a stray in a public location” and “appeared as a stray at my home,” then many cats were also found as “strays” (20%). (see Table 2)

In the six months prior to going missing, most cats (46%) were allowed outdoors unsupervised (e.g. “outdoor-access”), followed by 28% strictly indoor-only, 23% primarily indoor (e.g. allowed outside supervised, on-leash or in an enclosure), and 3% outdoor-only. Of the strictly indoor-only cats, 22% had previously escaped and another 42% had some previous outdoor-experience. (see Table 2)

Circumstances Preceding and Leading to Cats Going Missing

Most (93%) cats went missing from a familiar location while only 7% went missing from an unfamiliar location or while being transported. About 1/3 each went missing while indoors (37%), outdoors (25%) or were outdoor-access cats that just disappeared (31%) (Table 4). Most cats that were lost outdoors, went missing while not being supervised (64%). Not surprisingly, most indoor cats (indoor-only and primarily indoor) went missing while indoors (68%) while 17% went missing while outdoors such as on a leash or while supervised (unpublished data). Most cats that went missing indoors escaped out an open door or garage (74%) while 22% escaped from windows or balconies. Very few cats escaped while being transported (2%), and most of these escaped from a cat carrier (52%). Only 5% of cats were lost from an unfamiliar location with most of these went missing after a move to a new home (51%) or while at a friend’s or pet sitter’s home (34%). (see Table 4)

Probabilities of Being Found Alive by Time Since Lost

This analysis looked at the probability of a lost cat being found alive depending on how long they were missing.

34% were found alive by day 7
50% were found alive by day 30
57% were found alive by day 61
61% were found alive by one year

This suggests that owners of lost cats should search for a minimum of one month and up to two months. After that time, the chances of the cat being found alive only increase by a very small amount. Further analysis is needed into how long people searched for their missing cats. If people that did not find their cat are giving up “too soon,” then they will skew the results towards shorter successful recovery times. Preliminary analysis shows that people “searching continuously” did so for a median of 21 days, versus 91 days for people “searching on and off” and those no longer searching (unpublished data).

Median time lost for cats found alive was 6 days vs 21 days for cats found deceased. (Figure 1)

Search Methods Used, Perceived Useful Methods, and Associations with Cat Being Found Alive – Table 5

Survey respondents were offered six possible search methods: 1) physically did a search, 2) advertised, 3) contacted a facility or sought professional help, 4) used a trapping technique, 5) identification device (e.g. microchip), or 6) waited for the cat to come home (this included putting out food or leaving a door open) (Table 5). Respondents could select all the methods that they used and indicate the ones that helped the most (if they found their cat).

*If you would like an explanation of how I grouped the search methods into different categories of effectiveness, please see the Notes section at the bottom.

Physical Search

A physical search was the most common method used (96%) and there was evidence that a physical search increased the likelihood of finding a lost cat alive (p=0.071; a p value of less than 0.05 is generally considered statistically significant). Where a physical search was conducted, 59% of cats were found alive and 2% were found deceased.

Most Effective Methods:

Spoke with neighbors and asked them to look or assist in the search for my cat
Walked around the area at night, using a flashlight or spotlight
Asked and received neighbors’ permission to search their property using a slow methodical search
Searched my yard or the immediate area

Moderately Effective Methods:

Walked around the area during daylight hours
When looking for my cat, I searched slowly and methodically
Searched indoors

Least Effective Methods:

Drove around the area
While looking for my cat, I called its name

Advertising

Advertising was used 74% of the time with 54% of cats found alive and 2% found deceased. Significantly fewer cats were found alive when advertising was used (p<0.001). However, this does not mean that advertising decreases the chances of finding a lost cat. This statistic probably exists because more people start advertising after their cat has been gone for a while and probably try more advertising methods the longer the cat has been missing.

Most Effective Methods:

Distributed missing cat fliers
Mounted giant (22"x24") neon missing cat posters
Mounted small (8.5"x11") white missing cat posters

Moderately Effective Methods:

Used social media such as Facebook to spread the word that my cat was missing
Mounted small (8.5"x11") neon missing cat posters
Used an automated phone call alert system
Posted fliers in local businesses
Posted a lost pet advertisement in a newspaper

Least Effective Methods:

Mailed lost pet postcards
Posted an advertisement in online classifieds
Searched online for postings of found and adoptable cats
Posted on missing pet online database

Contacted a Facility or Sought Professional Help

About half (57%) of people contacted a facility or sought professional help. Of these 51% found their cat alive and 2% deceased. Most of these people (83%) called shelters, rescue groups or a municipal animal facilities while only 53% visited these facilities. About half contacted veterinarians (61%) or the police or animal control (50%). Only 24% received assistance from a pet detective or volunteer lost pet recovery group. Statistically fewer cats were found alive when owners sought professional help (p<0.001). This is probably due to people not seeking professional help until their cat had already been missing for a longer time, which decreased the likelihood of the cat being found in general. In fact, getting assistance from a pet detective or volunteer lost pet recovery service/group was one of the most helpful recovery methods (70% of people that hired a pet detective indicated that it was a search method that helped the most in finding their cat).

Most Effective Methods:

Received assistance from a pet detective or volunteer lost pet recovery service/group

Moderately Effective Methods:

Used an animal communicator or a pet psychic to tell me where my cat was located??

Least Effective Methods:

Visited shelters, rescue groups, or municipal animal facility
Contacted veterinarians
Called shelters, rescue groups, or municipal animal facility
Contacted animal control or the police department
Contacted microchip company such as Home Again or 24PetWatch

Used a Trapping Technique

Only 20% of survey respondents used a trapping technique. Of these 63% found their cat alive while 2% found them deceased. Trapping techniques are usually only effective for escaped indoor-only cats and displaced (lost away from home) outdoor-access cats, so it’s not surprising that only a small number of people used a humane trap. For those that used a humane cat trap, it was the single most helpful search method in the entire study (72% of people that used a humane trap or drop trap indicated that it was a search method that helped the most in finding their cat).

Most Effective Methods:

Used a humane trap or drop trap to capture my cat and bring it back home
Used a digital wildlife camera, video baby monitor or other surveillance camera to confirm my cat was hiding nearby

Least Effective Methods:

Used a “house as trap” method – open door, porch garage, or entry point that was monitored (baby monitor, driveway alarm, sat and watched door) which allowed me to see when my cat came home.

Identification Device

Most (62%) cats had an identification device with a microchip being most common (61%). Of cats wearing identification, 52% were found alive and 2% found deceased. Not enough cats were wearing a GPS or radio-tracking device for their effectiveness to be analyzed.

Most Effective Methods:

Identification tattoo**

Moderately Effective Methods:

Collar with ID tag

Microchip

In this study, microchipping did not lead to more cats being found. Since most cats were found outside (83%), not many found cats may have been scanned for microchips. There is also a known problem that many people do not properly register their microchips or keep their contact information up to date.

Waited

The effectiveness of waiting was compared to other methods but it was not analyzed by itself. Methods of waiting included:

Just waited for the cat to come back home
Left a way for my cat to come home such as an open door, porch or garage
Left food out to entice my cat
Used scent luring (article of clothing, dirty cat litter or scent of another cat) to attract my cat

Distances to Where Cat was Found

For cats found alive, the median distance traveled was 50 meters (164 feet) with a maximum of 25 km (15.5 miles). Of these cats, there was a significant difference (p<0.001) between the distance traveled by indoor-only cats versus outdoor-access cats. Distance traveled by outdoor-only cats was not significantly different. (See Figure 2 and Figure 3)

Median (average) distance traveled:

Indoor-only cats = 39 m (128 ft)
Outdoor-access cats = 300 m (984 ft)
Outdoor-only cats = 183 m (600 ft)

Based on the median and 75%th percentile (i.e. 75% of cats were found at or below this distance), I would suggest the following search areas.

Indoor-only cats = at least 39 m and up to 137 m (128-450 ft) radius from location lost
Outdoor-access cats = at least 300 m and up to 1600 m (approximately 1,000 feet – 1 mile) radius from location lost
Outdoor-only cats = at least 183 m and up to 1600 m (600 ft – 1 mile) radius from location lost

Only 17 cats found deceased had a recorded distance. For deceased cats, the median distance found was 200 m (656 ft) with a maximum of 5 km (3.1 miles). Deceased cats may show a farther distance traveled because cats found deceased close to home may never be considered “missing” and their owners were less likely to participate in this study. Analysis of deceased cats was limited due to the small sample size.

Locations Where Cats were Found

Most cats found alive where found outside (83%). Of these, 20% were found in someone’s yard, 19% were found waiting outside their own home, 16% were found hiding under vegetation or shrubbery, and 10% were found under a patio, deck or porch. Only 1% were found up a tree. Eleven percent of cats were found in someone else’s home while 4% were found somewhere in their own home. Most cats found in a neighbor’s house were either in the garage (28%), the basement (13%) or hiding behind/under furniture (22%). Only 2% of cats were found inside a public building. This would presumably include shelters and rescues, but that specific question was never asked. (See Table 6)

Cat owners were asked to rank how strongly their cat matched four cat personalities: 1) curious/clown cat, 2) aloof cat, 3) cautious cat, and 4) very timid/fearful cat. Cats considered very curious were most likely to be found in someone else’s house (p=0.005). (See Figure 4)

Cats’ Demeanor When Found

Most cats appeared scared (50%) when found, while 30% were quiet but alert and 25% were friendly/relaxed. Only 10% hissed or acted in the manner of feral cat. A quarter (25%) of cats were meowing when found and 9% were sick or injured. These results would be more informative if they were sub-categorized as indoor-only and outdoor-access cats.

Notes

*Categories of Effectiveness for Search Methods

I seperated search methods into three categories of effectiveness: “Most Effective Methods,” “Moderately Effective Methods,” and “Least Effective Methods.” These were based on the assigned % values in Table 5 under the far right column: “Where this method was used and the cat was found alive, % of those cats where this method helped the most (No./Denominator). I assigned them using the following values:

Most Effective Methods = 50% or more
Moderately Effective Methods = 40% to 49%
Least Effective Methods = less than 40%

Here is an explanation from the research paper of what these values mean: “The relative time taken to find the cat alive due to the particular search method, relative to the time taken to find the cat alive by other methods or waiting, is shown in the right-hand column in Table 5 (‘Where this method was used and the cat was found alive, % of those cats where this method helped the most’). A high percentage indicates that the particular search method was generally more rapid in resulting in the cat being found alive relative to the time that the alternative other methods and types and /or just waiting collectively took to result in the cat being found alive.”

Limitations and Errors in Study Design

The study did not differentiate between successful methods for finding Indoor-only versus Outdoor-access Cats

In my experience, the behavior for an escaped indoor-only cat is quite different from a missing outdoor-access cat. These differences are also recognized by the Missing Animal Response Network. Different search strategies are suggested based on the outdoor experience of the cat, the location lost and circumstances of disappearance. This study did find a difference in the distances traveled for indoor-only versus outdoor-access cats. However, there was not enough funding to conduct a statistical analysis which subdivided the search strategies used and determine which search methods were most effective for indoor-only versus outdoor-access cats. In my mind, this is a large limitation in the application of the study results to actual lost cat cases.

I did an analysis myself of the recovery rates of indoor-only versus outdoor-access cats (unpublished data). For indoor-only cats (including those that had some outdoor experience such as allowed outdoors supervised or were previously outdoor cats) 71% of cats were found versus only 45% of cats that were allowed outdoor unsupervised. These results might be biased if people were more likely to complete the survey if they had lost AND found their cat rather those still searching or never found their cat.

How many cats were found in a Shelter, Rescue Group or Municipal Animal Facility?

“Found in a shelter/rescue group or municipal animal facility” was not included as an option for a specific type of location found. This was an oversight in creating the survey. Only 2% (9) of people selected the option, “found inside a public building,” and after reviewing the study results, I was only able to find 3 entries where a cat was found in a shelter and 1 found at a vet (1% total; unpublished data).

Effectiveness of Tattoos and Microchips for Finding Lost Cats

**Only 4 out of 6 people indicated that a tattoo was a primary method in recovering their cat. This method is listed as a “Most Effective Method” for finding a lost cat, but this outcome may be the result of a very small sample. Moreover, when I reviewed the results, I only found one case were the tattoo directly related to the cat being recovered AND this cat also had a microchip.

For 40 out of 86 microchipped cats (47%), participants selected that a microchip was “a primary method or resource that helped you the most” to find your cat. However, when I reviewed these survey entries, I found that only two (and possibly up to 6) people indicated that their cat was actually found due to a microchip being scanned (unpublished data). This suggests that people may have indicated what they thought were successful methods for finding a lost cat and not just what helped them find their missing cat.

Possible Bias in Distances Traveled and Deceased Cats Found

Only around 58% of lost cats were found (unpublished data). If cats were closer to home (or location lost), they were probably more likely to be found. Likewise living cats are probably easier to find than deceased cats. This may biases the results for distances traveled by lost cats and proportion of cats found deceased. The 42% of cats not found might have traveled farther away or could be deceased both of which would make them harder to find. The longer a cat is lost, the more likely they are to be adopted by a new family (remember 20% of people adopted their cat as a stray). Other lost cats might eventually be integrated into the feral population or brought to a shelter or rescue group after their owner has stopped looking. If these cat don’t have a registered and up-to-date microchip, they will never be reunited with their families. Interestingly, anecdotal evidence from microchipped cats found months to years after they go missing shows that many lost cats are still within 1 mile of their home when found.

Bias of Survey Respondents – Mostly Cat-Loving People that Lived in the Suburbs

The results of this study may be skewed by the characteristics and demographics of the people that completed the study. Nearly 90% of survey respondents strongly agreed with statements that they were attached to their cat and regarded them as a family member. People with a stronger human-pet bond might search more thoroughly and longer then the general population. Most cats (77%) lived in a house, townhouse, or condo with a yard/garden. Therefore, the results of this study pertain mostly to cats lost by people that currently live in this type of location/dwelling.

Possible Errors in Recall from Survey Respondents

While 50% of respondents had lost their cat in the last two years. The range was 4 days (5th percentile) to 14 years (95th percentile) ago. This likely led to some recall errors which may have effected the results of the study.

Errors in Paper Results and Discussion

Most Successful Search Strategies

When reviewing the research paper recently, I noticed an apparent error that had been overlooked. In the results section, it states “Relative to other methods or waiting, the most rapid relative times taken to find the cat alive using a physical search strategy were when the search methods included ‘spoke with neighbors and asked them to look or assist in the search for my cat’, ‘walked around the area at night, using a flashlight (or spotlight)’, ‘asked and received neighbors’ permission to search their property using a slow methodical search’ and ‘searched my yard or the immediate area’.” However, in the discussion section, it states “More specifically, the most successful physical search strategies were ‘searched my yard and the immediate area’, ‘while I was looking for my cats, I called its name’, ‘walked around the area during daylight hours’ and ‘spoke with neighbors and asked them to look or assist in the search for my cat’.” Based on Table 5, the latter methods are in fact the most common search methods and not the most successful. In fact, two of these (italicized above) were among the least successful search strategies.

Missing Data on Search Dogs

Table 5 of the published study states that no one used a trained search dog. However, when I reviewed the unpublished data, I found 41 people used search dogs. Of those that used search dogs, 54% of cats were found alive, 5% were found dead, and 41% were not found. This does not mean that the search dogs found 54% of lost cats. It only means that in 54% of the cases were a search dog was used, the cat was eventually found alive. So unfortunately (do to this error), the study does not tell us anything about the perceived effectiveness of search dogs.

Literature Reviewed

Liyan Huang, Marcia Coradini, Jacquie Rand, John Morton, Kat Albrecht, Brigid Wasson, and Danielle Robertson. 2018. Search Methods Used to Locate Missing Cats and Locations Where Missing Cats Are Found. Animals 8(1): 5.

The post Review of “Search Methods Used to Locate Missing Cats and Locations Where Missing Cats Are Found” appeared first on Lost Pet Research and Recovery.

Research Studies on Lost Pet Behavior and Recovery

Danielle Robertson — Sat, 06 Jan 2018 00:45:00 +0000

Unfortunately, there are few research studies on lost pet behavior. This is a list of citations and abstracts of published research papers related to lost pet behavior and recovery. There are links to a few of the papers. You may be able to find other papers by visiting your local college or university and checking their online journal databases.

Huang, L., M. Coradini, J. Rand, J. Morton, K. Albrecht, B. Wasson, and D. Robertson. 2018. Search methods used to locate missing cats and locations where missing cats are found. Animals 8(1), 5.

Abstract: Missing pet cats are often not found by their owners, with many being euthanized at shelters. This study aimed to describe times that lost cats were missing for, search methods associated with their recovery, locations where found and distances travelled. A retrospective case series was conducted where self-selected participants whose cat had gone missing provided data in an online questionnaire. Of the 1210 study cats, only 61% were found within one year, with 34% recovered alive by the owner within 7 days. Few cats were found alive after 90 days. There was evidence that physical searching increased the chance of finding the cat alive (p= 0.073), and 75% of cats were found within 500 m of the point of escape. Up to 75% of cats with outdoor access traveled 1609 m, further than the distance traveled by indoor-only cats (137 m; p < 0.001). Cats considered to be highly curious were more likely to be found inside someone else’s house compared to other personality types. These findings suggest that thorough physical searching is a useful strategy, and should be conducted within the first week after cats go missing. They also support further investigation into whether shelter, neuter and return programs improve the chance of owners recovering missing cats and decrease numbers of cats euthanized in shelters

Lord, L.K., W. Ingwerson, J.L. Gray and D.J. Wintz. 2009. Characterization of animals with microchips entering animal shelters. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association 235(2): 160-167.

Abstract: Objective: To characterize animals with microchips entering animal shelters and the process used to find owners. Design: Cross-sectional study. 7,704 microchipped animals entering 53 animal shelters between August 2007 and March 2008. Procedures: Data for animals with microchips were recorded by participating animal shelters and reported monthly. Results: Of 7,704 animals, strays accounted for slightly more than half (4,083 [53.0%]), with the remainder classified as owner-relinquished animals (3,225 [41.9%]) and other (396 [5.1%]). Of 3,425 stray animals for which animal shelters reported that the owner was found, a higher percentage of dog owners (2,191/2,956 [74.1%]) than cat owners (298/469 [63.5%]) was found. For 876 animals for which the owners could not be found, the main reasons were incorrect or disconnected telephone number (310 [35.4%]), owner did not return telephone calls or respond to a letter (213 [24.3%]), and animal was registered to another group (151 [17.2%]). Of 1,943 animals for which animal shelters contacted a microchip registry, 1,129 (58.1%) were registered in the database. Purebred neutered dogs whose owner information was in the shelter database registry or microchip registry had a higher likelihood that the owners would be found. Conclusions and Clinical Relevance: The high rate for return of microchipped dogs and cats to their owners supported microchipping as a valuable permanent pet identification modality; however, issues related to registration undermined its overall potential. Bundling of microchip implantation and registration, point-of-implantation data registration, use of annual compliance and update reminders, and providing access to all registries are potential solutions.

Lord, L.K., T.E. Wittum, A.K. Ferketich, J.A. Funk, and P.J. Rajala-Schultz. 2007. Search and identification methods that owners use to find a lost cat. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association 230(2): 217-220.

Lord, L.K., T.E. Wittum, A.K. Ferketich, J.A. Funk, and P.J. Rajala-Schultz. 2007. Search and identification methods that owners use to find a lost dog. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association 230(2): 211-216.

Lord, L.K., T.E. Wittum, A.K. Ferketich, J.A. Funk, and P.J. Rajala-Schultz. 2007. Search methods that people use to find owners of lost pets. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association 230(12): 1835-1840.

Abstract: Objective: To characterize the process by which people who find lost pets search for the owners. Design: Cross-sectional study. Sample Population-188 individuals who found a lost pet in Dayton, Ohio, between March 1 and June 30, 2006. Procedures-Potential participants were identified as a result of contact with a local animal agency or placement of an advertisement in the local newspaper. A telephone survey was conducted to identify methods participants used to find the pets’ owners. Results: 156 of 188 (83%) individuals completed the survey. Fifty-nine of the 156 (38%) pets were reunited with their owners; median time to reunification was 2 days (range, 0.5 to 45 days). Only 1 (3%) cat owner was found, compared with 58 (46%) dog owners. Pet owners were found as a result of information provided by an animal agency (25%), placement of a newspaper advertisement (24%), walking the neighborhood (19%), signs in the neighborhood (15%), information on a pet tag (10%), and other methods (7%). Most finders (87%) considered it extremely important to find the owner, yet only 13 (8%) initially surrendered the found pet to an animal agency. The primary reason people did not surrender found pets was fear of euthanasia (57%). Only 97 (62%) individuals were aware they could run a found-pet advertisement in the newspaper at no charge, and only 1 person who was unaware of the no-charge policy placed an advertisement. Conclusions: Veterinarians and shelters can help educate people who find lost pets about methods to search for the pets’ owners.

L.K. Lord, B. Griffin, M.R. Slater, and J.K. Levy. 2010. Evaluation of collars and microchips for visual and permanent identification of pet cats. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association.

Abstract: Objective: To determine the percentage of pet cats still wearing collars and having functional microchips 6 months after application. Design: Randomized controlled clinical trial. Procedures: 538 client-owned cats were randomly assigned to wear 1 of 3 types of collars: plastic buckle, breakaway plastic buckle safety, and elastic stretch safety. Each cat was fitted with the assigned collar, and a microchip was inserted SC between the scapulae. Owners completed questionnaires about their experiences and expectations of collars at enrollment and at the conclusion of the study. Results: 391 of the 538 (72.7%) cats successfully wore their collars for the entire 6-month study period. Owners’ initial expectations of the cats’ tolerance of the collar and the number of times the collar was reapplied on the cats’ necks were the most important factors predicting success. Type of collar likely influenced how often collars needed to be reapplied. Eighteen (3.3%) cats caught a forelimb in their collar or caught their collar on an object or in their mouth. Of the 478 microchips that were scanned at the conclusion of the study, 477 (99.8%) were functional. Conclusions: Most cats successfully wore their collars. Because even house cats can become lost, veterinarians should recommend that all cats wear identification collars since they are the most obvious means of identifying an owned pet. For some cats, collars may frequently come off and become lost; therefore, microchips are an important form of backup identification. Owners should select a collar that their cat will tolerate and should check it often to ensure a proper fit.

Weiss, E. M. Slater, and L. Lord. 2012. Frequency of lost dogs and cats in the United States and the methods used to locate them. Animals 2: 301-315.

The post Research Studies on Lost Pet Behavior and Recovery appeared first on Lost Pet Research and Recovery.

Cat Homing Behavior Survey Results

Danielle Robertson — Thu, 29 Dec 2016 18:29:57 +0000

Since there is so little information on cat homing behavior, I started a research survey in 2013. These are the survey results as of July 2018. If your cat has ever displayed homing behavior, please consider taking this very short survey. To take the survey, click here.

Homing Definition

Some lost cats are able to find their way home using homing behavior. Homing is the inherent ability of an animal to navigate towards an original location through unfamiliar areas. Cat homing ability is poorly understood, but it may be due to an “unusual sensitivity to the geo-magnetic field of the earth which enables [the cat] to keep a compass fix on their home region regardless of distance and direction traveled” (Beadle 1977).

This survey only includes cats that went missing from a location that was unfamiliar to the cat and the cat traveled back to a location where they were familiar. Possible homing scenarios include:

You move to a new home and your cat travels back to your previous home.
You are traveling with your cat or visiting a strange location (e.g. the vet’s office or a friend’s home) and your cat escapes and travels back to your home.
Your cat accidentally travels in a vehicle (e.g. gets into a contractor’s truck or a moving van) and gets out at a different location and then travels back home.
Someone intentionally takes your cat and dumps it somewhere and it finds its way back home.
You adopt a new cat and it travels back to its previous home.

Arguably, if a cat goes missing from their home and eventually returns home, they may also be using a homing behavior to find their way back home. However, these are not included in the survey because there is no way to differentiate these situations from other reasons that cats return home (such as being temporarily trapped or hiding in fear), and there is often no way to determine where and how far the cat traveled while lost.

Characteristics of cats that displayed homing behavior

Outdoor Experience

Table 1: outdoor experience of cats that displayed homing behavior

Nearly all of the cats that displayed homing behavior were allowed outdoors (67% outdoor-access) or lived strictly outdoors (25% outdoor-only). Only 7% of cats were described as indoor-only and some of these may have had previous outdoor experience. Although I have heard of a few instances of indoor-only cats displaying homing behavior, this seems very rare. (Note: Escaped indoor-only cats will frequently return to their point of escape, which could possibly be a homing behavior, but the current survey only focused on cats that traveled from an unfamiliar location to a familiar location.)

Age When Lost

Table 2: age when lost of cats displaying homing behavior

Most (58%) cats were adults at the time they became lost followed by 34% young adults. Without more data for comparison, this could indicate any of the following. There could be fewer kittens and/or senior cats in the cat-owned population or they are less likely to go missing away from home. It could also mean that kittens and/or senior cats have poorer homing ability or they have equal homing ability, but they may be less likely to successfully travel home.

Sex and Spay/Neuter Status

Table 3: sex and neuter status of cats that displayed homing behavior

Slightly more (63%) male cats displayed homing versus females (37%), and more cats (62%) were spayed or neutered compared to unfixed (38%). In order to determine if these numbers are meaningful, we also need to know the ratio of owned male vs female cats and the percentage spayed or neutered. According to the 2017-2018 APPA National Pet Owners Survey, 93% of owned cats in the US were spayed/neutered. This may indicate that unfixed cats might be more likely than average to display homing behavior, but statistical analysis is still needed.

Cat Personality and Boldness

Cat owners were asked to rate the personality of their cat on a scale of 1 (very shy) to 5 (very bold). They were asked to do this for their cat’s behavior at home, especially in response to strangers in the home, and away from home (if known). Cats that displayed homing behavior were rated nearly evenly across all personality types. Thus, shy cats appear just as likely to display homing behavior as bold cats. Statistical analysis is still needed to test these results.

Circumstances of Homing

Table 4: how cats where lost and where they were found

Most (55%) homing incidents took place when a cat was lost away from home. This included 22% accidental transport (e.g. cat accidentally climbed into car), 19% lost from a location away from home (e.g. lost from the vet’s office or while on vacation), 8% due to intentional disposal (i.e. when someone intentionally takes a cat and dumps it somewhere else) and 5% lost in transit (e.g. lost while traveling with cat). Almost all cats lost away from home traveled back to their current home, but a few traveled back to a previous home.

The next highest incidence of homing (29%) occurred when the owner moved to a new home and their cat traveled back to the previous home. In a similar situation, 13% of homing cases involved recently adopted cats that traveled back to their previous home. A few cats did not fit into any category. Cats in the “other” category included a few cats that were found by rescuers and were returned to their owners, but then traveled back to the rescuer’s home. Also, one older cat left home when sick and traveled back to a previous home.

Seventy-six percent (76%) of cats were reported either very familiar or familiar with the location that they homed back to. Twenty-six percent (26%) lived there more than 5 years and 50% lived there for 2-4 years. Only 25% of lost cats homed back to a location where they had lived for less than 1 year.

Time, Distance and Speed Traveled

The survey results found that lost cats were missing from 8 hours up to 2.5 years and traveled 0.2 miles up to 80 miles (0.3-129 km). Only five people reported long distances traveled (80 miles in 3 months, 52 miles in 2.5 years, 38 miles in 6 months, 30 miles in 10 days, and 20 miles in 21 days). Since this small data set will skew the averages, I calculated the average days lost and distances traveled for several categories (see Table 4). Hopefully more people will submit survey results for long distance homing and these can be analyzed in more detail in the future.

Most cats (90%) were lost for an average of 5 (median) to 7.5 (mean) days. This average jumped to 12.2 (mean) days if you looked at cats missing up to four months. The average distance traveled was 2 miles (mean) up to approximately 4 miles (mean). Distances traveled were self-reported by the owner and/or measured as straight-line distance between start and end locations. Therefore, actual distance traveled by the missing cat is an unknown distance longer than the reported distance, and occasionally owner’s may over-estimate distance traveled possibly by using distance traveled by car. I found that owner’s reported distance tended to be 60% farther than the straight-line distance that I measured.

Table 5: days lost and distances traveled by cats displaying homing behavior

The average speed of travel was 1.0 mile per day (1.6 km/day). This average may be a useful to estimate possible distance traveled by a missing cat that may be displaying homing behavior. However, this is not likely an accurate estimate of actual travel speeds of missing cats because we don’t know the actual distance traveled by the cat and the cat may not have been immediately found once it returned to the home area. A few cats traveled as fast as 4-7 miles in single day, and one cat traveled 2 miles in 4 hours (a rate of 12 miles/day).

These speeds are considerably slower than those reported by Herrik (1922) in a study where they intentionally transported a cat between one to three miles from home to test her homing behavior (see article Homing Ability of Lost Cats). This cat traveled an average speed of 0.095 to 0.26 mph (0.15 to 0.4 km/hr) which converts to 2.28 to 6.24 miles/day (3.7 to 10 km/day). Two factors may account for these faster speeds. This cat had kittens near weaning age and may have been highly motivated to travel home quickly. Also, in all but one case, the cat was able to travel home in less than 12 hours and possibly in as few as four hours. Therefore, she may have been able to sustain a higher average rate of speed.

Possible obstacles encountered while traveling

Table 6: areas traveled by cats displaying homing behavior

As part of the survey, I asked people if their cat likely traveled through the following types of areas – Urban (city), Suburban, Rural (country), over a 2-lane highway, over a 4-lane highway, or across a stream or river. Forty-five percent (45%) reportedly crossed a 2-lane highway while 22% crossed a 4-lane highway.

Thirty-eight percent (38%) reportedly crossed a stream or river. In some cases, I could view a map of potential travel routes, and most water crossings appeared to be streams or creeks. However, 16% of cats (where I was able to map the route on Google maps) appeared to have crossed streams/rivers that may have been up to 50 feet wide, and 7% crossed rivers up to 100-300 feet wide.

How to use this information when searching for a lost cat

Unfortunately, there isn’t any research on how frequently cats display homing behavior. Precht and Lindenlaub (1954) found that at distances of 3.1 miles (5 km) or less, only 60% of cats appeared able to determine the direction of their home, but most cats were unable to do so at greater distances. The results of this survey found that the majority (73%) of homing excursions were 5 miles (8 km) or less and 88% were 10 miles or less. Therefore, only 12% were distances greater than 10 miles. It is certainly possible that more cats attempt to home from farther distances but they may be less successful at getting there.

Based on the results of this survey, homing behavior may be more likely if the missing cat:

is between 7 months and 10 years old
was allowed outdoors at their home or lived outdoors
was lost within 5 miles of their home or a previous home
lived at their home or a previous home for at least 2 years

Some cats do travel across 2-lane and 4-lane highways and streams/rivers so don’t rule out the possibility of homing due to these potential obstacles. However, other cats may attempt to travel home, but may be stopped by these obstacles. If you think that your cat might display homing behavior, use Google Maps to draw a line between the location lost and your home (or a previous home). Place posters along this route. Check for any potential obstacles such as 4-lane highways or rivers/streams along the route home and place additional posters in the neighborhoods near these potential obstacles.

A few important notes – please read if your cat is missing

Please keep in mind that there are many reasons why an outdoor-access cat might go missing from a new home and many cats that get lost away from home do not attempt to travel back home. In fact, many of them do not travel far from their point of escape. Although cats are capable of traveling 1.0 mile or more per day from where they go missing, in most situations lost cats do not travel far (less than one mile is common), and they may circle around back towards the point of escape rather than traveling in a linear direction. If your cat goes missing and fits one of the possible homing scenarios above, then consider homing as a possibility, but make sure that you understand typical lost cat behavior and follow all the suggested search actions including large florescent lost cat posters in the neighborhood where they went missing and a physical search of all property for at least 3-5 houses in all directions from the point last seen. And in some cases a surveillance camera and feeding station and/or humane trap near the point of escape may be necessary.

For more information on lost cat behavior and recovery, see Pet Detective Services and Lost Pet Resources.

If you are moving to a new home or traveling with your cat, consider purchasing a radio-tracking device or GPS collar for your cat. Learn more in this article.

Literature Cited

Beadle, M. 1977. Chapter 14: The Little Differences in The Cat: History, Biology, and Behavior. New York, New York: Simon and Schuster. Reviews the available scientific research on cat homing behavior as well as psi-trailing.

Herrick, F.H. 1922. Homing Powers of the Cat. The Scientific Monthly 14(6): 525-539.

Precht, H., and E. Lindenlaub. 1954. Uber das Heimfindevermogen von Saugetieren. I. Versuche an Katzen. Z. Tierpsychologie 11: 485. I was unable to find an English translation of Precht and Lindenlaub (1954), so I had to rely on the summary of the study written in Beadle (1977).

The post Cat Homing Behavior Survey Results appeared first on Lost Pet Research and Recovery.

Missing Cat Study

Danielle Robertson — Wed, 15 Jun 2016 18:08:17 +0000

Missing Pet Partnership has partnered with the University of Queensland, Australia, to conduct the first-ever Missing Cat Study. Lost cats that are not found by their families are a major contributing factor to worldwide feral, shelter, and homeless cat populations. In 2011 a preliminary, non-scientific study by Missing Pet Partnership determined that the majority (93%) of escaped indoor-only cats were found within a 3-house radius of their escape point, hiding in fear. A scientific study is needed to verify these preliminary findings and to help educate animal welfare, veterinarian, and animal shelter staff how to properly advise cat owners where and how to search for a missing cat. Missing Pet Partnership is excited to announce that we’ve partnered with the University of Queensland (Australia) to conduct the first-ever Missing Cat Study. Through an on-line survey, this study will interview cat owner/guardians who’ve lost a cat and identify the typical distances that lost cats travel, how they behave when lost, and the most effective recovery methods. If you’ve ever lost a cat, please help us by participating in the below survey (Survey is Closed). Thank you for helping MPP to help save the lives of cats!

Reprinted from Missing Pet Partnership

The Missing Cat Study Has Been Published!

Abstract: Missing pet cats are often not found by their owners, with many being euthanized at shelters. This study aimed to describe times that lost cats were missing for, search methods associated with their recovery, locations where found and distances travelled. A retrospective case series was conducted where self-selected participants whose cat had gone missing provided data in an online questionnaire. Of the 1210 study cats, only 61% were found within one year, with 34% recovered alive by the owner within 7 days. Few cats were found alive after 90 days. There was evidence that physical searching increased the chance of finding the cat alive (p= 0.073), and 75% of cats were found within 500 m of the point of escape. Up to 75% of cats with outdoor access traveled 1609 m, further than the distance traveled by indoor-only cats (137 m; p ? 0.001). Cats considered to be highly curious were more likely to be found inside someone else’s house compared to other personality types. These findings suggest that thorough physical searching is a useful strategy, and should be conducted within the first week after cats go missing. They also support further investigation into whether shelter, neuter and return programs improve the chance of owners recovering missing cats and decrease numbers of cats euthanized in shelters

The post Missing Cat Study appeared first on Lost Pet Research and Recovery.

Homing Ability of Lost Cats

Danielle Robertson — Thu, 10 Jan 2013 17:05:53 +0000

Note: This article focuses on a few very old research papers on cat homing behavior. For more recent research, check out my Cat Homing Behavior Survey Results. This new research includes information on how to determine whether your lost cat is likely to display homing behavior.

Photo by Greg Saulmon/Courtesy of Masslive.com

One of the most fascinating, but perhaps least understood behaviors of the domestic cat is their ability to find their way home from an unknown location. This behavior is known as “homing” and is well documented in pigeons and some other animals. Anecdotally, I have heard numerous stories of homing in lost cats. However, I was only able to locate two research papers on cat homing ability, and they were both quite old (Herrick 1922 and Precht and Lindenlaub 1954).

Herrick (1922) tested the homing powers of a single cat by transporting her to seven different locations between one and three miles from her home. He ensured that she was highly motivated to return home because she had a litter of kittens close to weaning age. At each location, the cat was transported by car in a gunny sack and then placed under a wooden box. The researchers opened the box remotely and then observed the cat’s behavior until she was out of sight. Then they waited for her to return home to her kittens. In a final (8^th) trial they took her 16.5 miles away, and she did not return home.

While the ethics of such a study are highly suspect, the results were quite interesting. In all seven trials, the cat returned home within 4 to 78 hours of being released. This calculates as an average traveling speed of 0.09 mph to 0.26 mph (0.14-0.42 km/h). There is a minimum and maximum time because in most cases the researchers only checked for the cat’s return every few hours. Herrick (1992) assumed that the cat was likely to only travel at night and estimated a traveling speed of 0.11 mph (0.18 km/h). Prior to the start of this study, Herrick (1992) measured the homing of another cat, which traveled 4.6 miles in 38 hours. This gives an average traveling speed of 0.12 mph or 0.25 mph if only traveling at night (0.19-0.40 km/h).

Not only was the cat able to find her way home in each instance, but she appeared to know the correct direction to travel as soon as she was released from the box. In four of the trials, the cat started heading directly towards home as soon as she was released from the box, but she was then disturbed by people and hid in a fence-row or woods and was lost from sight. In one trial, she escaped prematurely and disappeared, and in another she started in the wrong direction but corrected and disappeared from sight traveling directly towards home. Only in trial #7 where she was anesthetized for the trip out, did the cat head off in the wrong direction.

Precht and Lindenlaub (1954)* tested the ability of cats to correctly orient towards home at various distances. The cats were carried in sacks and placed in the center of a maze which led to six equally spaced exits. The majority of cats did not wander around the maze, but instead quickly chose an exit (though they were not actually allowed to leave the safety of the maze). They found that the cats’ homing sense was only fair and directly related to their distance from home. At distances of 3.1 miles (5 km) from home, 60% of the cats chose the exit that faced the direction of their home, and at greater distances, they did not appear to know the direction of their home.

Homing ability is poorly understood (even in pigeons), but it may be due to an “unusual sensitivity to the geo-magnetic field of the earth which enables [the cat] to keep a compass fix on their home region regardless of distance and direction traveled” (Beadle 1977). Perhaps not all cats have the same level of sensitivity, and other factors may affect a cat’s homing ability. Precht and Lindenlaub (1954) found that cats that were returned home between maze tests were more successful at orienting home then those kept in the lab between tests, and young cats there were raised in the lab had no homing sense at all. Herrick (1922) suggests that all cats probably possess a homing ability to some degree, but that many lost cats do not return home due to diversions or accidents that inhibit or prevent their homing behavior. He concludes that the use of homing ability is determined by the experience and the physiological state of the cat at that time.

Based on stories in the news, some cats clearly have a powerful homing instinct and the determination to travel home over long distances. However, this is likely only a minority of lost cats. For examples of some of these amazing homing feats, see Lost Cats Found.

Since there is so little information available on the homing behavior of cats, I created a survey to collect data on cases of homing in lost cats. If you have ever had a cat travel home from an unknown location (even a few miles), please consider taking this very short survey. For more information, see the Cat Homing Behavior Survey or click here to take the survey. This survey is ongoing, but I wrote an article on the preliminary results.

Check out the results of the Cat Homing Survey here!

Literature Cited

Herrick, F.H. 1922. Homing Powers of the Cat. The Scientific Monthly 14(6): 525-539.

Precht, H., and E. Lindenlaub. 1954. Uber das Heimfindevermogen von Saugetieren. I. Versuche an Katzen. Z. Tierpsychologie 11: 485.

*I was unable to find an English translation of Precht and Lindenlaub (1954), so I had to rely on the summary of the study written in Beadle (1977).

There is even a macabre campfire song written about a cat that kept returning home despite his owner’s attempts to get rid of her.

The post Homing Ability of Lost Cats appeared first on Lost Pet Research and Recovery.