Scottish Wildcat Action (SWA) Specialist Report - Conservation Breeding

This report should be cited as: Barclay, D. Senn, H. (2023). Scottish Wildcat Action final report: Conservation Breeding, NatureScot, Inverness.

Authors and institutions: David Barclay, Royal Zoological Society of Scotland
Dr Helen Senn, Royal Zoological Society of Scotland.

Year of publication: 2023

Keywords:

Breeding; captive; ex-situ; zoos; population; programme; studbook; management.

Background to SWA

The Scottish Wildcat Conservation Action Plan (SWCAP) was published in 2013 following the input of over 20 partner organisations. This led to the establishment of the Scottish Wildcat Action (SWA) project that ran from 2015-2020, funded by the Scottish Government, National Lottery Heritage Fund and others. SWA operated with a team of project staff managed by NatureScot, and associated work was carried out by various partner organisations. The overall work programme was steered by a group made up of ten of the partners. The International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Cat Specialist Group reviewed the work of the SWA, and other ongoing wildcat conservation work, and provided recommendations for future action (Breitenmoser et al., 2019). A wide range of topics relevant to wildcat conservation were covered during the SWA, and have now been published as a series of reports, of which this is one. These outputs will inform the next phase of wildcat conservation work in Scotland, including the SavingWildcats ‘SWAforLife’ project that runs from 2019-2026.

Wildcats hybridise with domestic cats and we use a combination of morphology and genetics to distinguish wildcats from domestic cats and their hybrids. The method applied is generally determined by the practicalities of management. For example, it is much easier to have high confidence in the pelage scores from a sedated cat, than from a camera-trap image taken at night. Genetic and pelage results can only be generated jointly in certain scenarios. Therefore, identifications under different situations have different levels of confidence associated with them. We therefore set different thresholds for identification of wildcats based on the ability to distinguish pelage and genetic characteristics in different situations. The confidence hierarchy, and the definitions used in this report, are given below.

A ‘wildcat’ in this report is defined as a cat with a 7PS pelage score of 17+ and that passes the genetic threshold for the genetic analyses. However, the thresholds for one can be reduced if it passes the other. See the scoring matrix in the main text for further details.

Background

For species whose wild populations are threatened by extinction, like that of the wildcat (Felis silvestris) in Scotland, captive breeding programmes can act as a vital conservation support tool. A captive (conservation) breeding programme was identified as a valuable resource in the Scottish Wildcat Conservation Action Plan (SWCAP) (Anon., 2013) under objective 3: “taking forward work to underpin a wider conservation programme”. Two projects were launched as part of a long-term “ex-situ” programme ensuring that captive populations of wildcats remained as an integral part of their conservation actions. Since 2015 Scottish Wildcat Action (SWA) partners the Royal Zoological Society of Scotland (RZSS) have managed the UK’s Wildcat Captive Breeding Programme, which is part of the wider European Associations of Zoos and Aquaria (EAZA) Felid Taxon Advisory Group (Felid TAG) as a Monitoring Programme (Mon-P). In the last five years RZSS, working closely with captive holders across the UK and with specialists in Europe, has implemented a range of population management techniques to develop the captive breeding programme and ensure it has the potential to support future wildcat reinforcement.

Summary of work

• Assessing genetic status of captive population: RZSS took over management of the Scottish Wildcat Breeding Programme in 2015. Between 2015 and 2017 captive samples were acquired from all fertile captive wildcats held in UK collections that were included in the Scottish Wildcat Studbook. Following genetic screening using the Wildcat Hybrid Scoring Protocol (Senn and Ogden, 2015), results were used to support population management decisions.
• Acquisition of more wildcats of known genetic status to increase genetic diversity of captive population: RZSS engaged with landowners and gamekeepers from 22 estates out-with the SWA Priority Areas (PAs) to assess sites for potential wildcat presence and to collaborate with landowners in the event of accidental trapping of suspected wildcats. To date, 13 suspected wildcats were screened to assess hybrid genetic status, pelage and disease. From the 13 suspected wildcats, only two have been kept and included in the conservation breeding programme.
• Update of captive husbandry guidelines: In 2016 RZSS published Wildcat Captive Husbandry Guidelines (Barclay et al. 2016) and disseminated these to all wildcat holders. The guidelines identified the recommended standards for captive wildcat management, housing, breeding, veterinary care and welfare. Following the publication of these husbandry guidelines, RZSS undertook further work to explore the additional management challenges relating to conservation breeding for reintroduction. This work will be refined further with input from international specialists as a support tool for future conservation breeding for release.
•  Captive breeding: Following breeding programme best practice guidance from the European Association of Zoos and Aquariums (EAZA) during the period from August 2015 to October 2019, the captive wildcat breeding population increased by 67.2% from 64 animals (24.40)[1] to 107 animals (47.60). This population growth was supported by new captive holders joining the breeding programme, which has increased the enclosure space for new wildcat breeding pairs. Annual breeding success from the five breeding seasons between 2015 and 2019 has resulted in an average annual offspring survival rate of 85%. Currently all wildcats in the breeding programme are available for continued breeding following the genetic and pelage assessments carried out in 2017 as detailed in the Wildcat Hybrid Scoring Protocol. Population management is undertaken using the Single Population Analyses and Record Keeping System (SPARKS) and Pedigree Analyses and Management Software (PMx), following best practice population management guidance (EAZA, 2019).

Table 2. Guidance on scoring the 7PS pelage system (Kitchener et al., 2005). Scores of 1 are indicative of a domestic cat and scores of 3 indicative of a wildcat.

No.	Character	Score 1	Score 2	Score 3
1	Extent of dorsal line	Absent / covers entire tail	Continues onto tail	Stops at base of tail
2	Shape of tail tip	Tapered to a point	Intermediate	Blunt
3	Distinctness of tail bands	Absent / joined by dorsal line	Indistinct or fused	Distinct
4	Broken stripes on flanks & hindquarters	> 50% broken / no marking	25–50% broken	< 25% broken
5	Spots on flanks & hindquarters	Many / no marking	Some	None
6	Stripes on nape	Thin / no stripes	Intermediate	4 thick stripes
7	Stripes on shoulder	Indistinct / no stripes	Intermediate	2 thick stripes

Means of verification for successful delivery of this action was measured by both the recording of samples (including individual genetic scores) in the database (RZSS, 2019b) and in the recording of genetic scores in the Scottish Wildcat Studbook (Barclay, 2019) to support an updated studbook, which in turn supports future breeding recommendations.

2.2 Acquire more wildcat of known genetic status to increase the diversity of the captive population

Wherever possible, zoos and aquariums should strive to have self-sustaining animal populations (EAZA, 2019). However, sustainability can be restricted by several factors, including population size, reproduction, survival rates and the genetic status of the population. When populations are small and relatively closed, they can have a range of genetic problems that can affect overall health and usefulness of the population (Wilcken et al., 2005). Therefore, maximising the genetic health and adaptability of a population requires maintaining as much as possible of the genetic diversity that was present in the wild-born founders of a captive population (Putman and Ivy, 2013).

In order to increase the genetic diversity of the captive wildcat population, and thus increase its overall health, sustainability and value as a conservation tool, RZSS collaborated with a range of conservation stakeholders to source additional wildcats that met the necessary (genetic and pelage) criteria for inclusion in the conservation breeding programme.

At the time of action and implementation (2014), there was a lack of clarity over the accepted taxonomy of wildcats in Scotland. While some considered wildcats in Scotland a separate subspecies, Felis silvestris grampia, many felt there was insufficient evidence that the population in Scotland is a distinct subspecies, but instead viewed it as synonymous with Felis silvestris silvestris from mainland Europe. Without a consensus on taxonomy, the option of importing new genetic stock (founders) from the European captive population was put on hold. Instead we decided to focus on the potential for wild capture of wildcats in Scotland from areas where no other conservation action was in place and where threats were known to exist. As a European Protected Species with full legal protection in Scotland the live-capture, removal, possession and sampling of wildcats (Felis silvestris) is restricted by law. Following a best practice approach and adhering to necessary legal mechanisms, an application to NatureScot’s Species Licensing department was submitted.

Following this application for a Wildcat Animal License, RZSS engaged with several private estates and landowners out-with the SWA Priority Areas (PAs). Through direct communication with gamekeepers and land managers, discussions were held to assess sites for potential wildcat presence, opportunities for camera-trapping surveys, accidental captures, sightings and potential for live capture. RZSS undertook the development of an RZSS SWCAP Trapping Plan (Appendix 3 – SWCAP Trapping Plan 2017, Barclay and Harrower, 2017) to ensure a structured and best practice approach to camera trapping and live capture. The RZSS SWCAP Trapping Plan was based on previous wildcat camera trapping surveys (Kilshaw et al., 2015), SWA TNR (Trap, Neuter, Release) protocols, SWA Guide to Camera Trapping (SWA, 2019) as well as close consultation with veterinary professionals.

In 2017, as another means of adding new (founder) genetic diversity to the conservation breeding programme, RZSS implemented a trial semen collection project. The objective was to trap living known male (suspected) wildcats in the SWA PAs, conduct full health screening, including for diseases, genetic sampling and pelage scoring, and then collect semen samples that could be used for future artificial insemination with captive females. This work followed the RZSS Conservation Breeding Strategy, which identified the long-term approach for the captive population as a support tool for future reintroduction (Barclay, 2017). Working closely with SWA field teams and following the RZSS SWCAP Trapping Plan (Barclay and Harrower, 2017), camera trapping, live trapping and sampling of individuals was conducted in the winter of 2017 across the SWA Northern Strathspey PA.

Means of verification for successful delivery of this action was measured by acquisition of a Wildcat Animal License, a number of meetings with landowners, development of a wildcat sampling and trapping database, inclusion of genetic scores in the RZSS WildGenes Sample Master Database, independent scoring of pelage, addition of suitable wild-caught wildcats in the conservation breeding programme and the addition of suitable wild-caught animals into the Scottish Wildcat Studbook dataset.

2.3 Update the existing wildcat husbandry manual and disseminate to all holders. Standards will be a condition of participation in the captive breeding programme

Good animal husbandry is a prerequisite for good population management (EAZA, 2019). Therefore, it is vital to have a consistent and best practice approach that promotes optimal conditions for animal husbandry, well-being, enclosure design, veterinary care, breeding and animal welfare that accurately reflects the current requirements for any given species. As with other established breeding programmes in the European and international zoo community, this is achieved through the development of species-specific best practice guidelines (formerly known as husbandry guidelines). To ensure guidance is effective and current, it is best practice to review these documents routinely, for example every five years (EAZA, 2019).

Previous management guidance for Felis silvestris was available (Lyons, 1996), but at the time of the SWCAP launch this document was already 17 years old and unlikely to accurately represent current wildcat management practices or recent developments in animal care. 

From 2015 to 2016 the RZSS Breeding Programme Coordinator undertook a thorough review of current wildcat management practices, following best practice guidance from the EAZA Population Management Manual (EAZA, 2015a), to compile new Scottish Wildcat Captive Husbandry Guidelines (Barclay et al., 2016).

Means of verification for successful delivery of this action was measured by the publication of the Scottish Wildcat Captive Husbandry Guidelines (Barclay et al., 2016) and its dissemination to all captive holders of wildcats in the UK.

2.4 Captive breeding

The management and development of the Scottish Wildcat Conservation Breeding Programme followed best practice guidance set out by EAZA’s Managing Zoo Populations: Compiling and Analysing Studbook Data (Wilcken et al., 2005) and EAZA’s Population Management Manual (EAZA, 2015a). Software used in the management of the studbook included SPARKS and the PMx. This guidance was also complemented by institutional experience from RZSS over ten years of European and international breeding programme management experience from the RZSS breeding programme coordinator, previous population management training and close consultation with European specialists in animal/population management.

For effective breeding programme management there must be access to good quality data. Without it the pairing of new breeding animals, genetic analysis, long-term planning and sustainability are all significantly restricted. When RZSS took over the management of the studbook (2015), the known pedigree of the population was 7%. In other words, the data available would only allow for complete family histories to be traced for 7% of the population. This was a result of historical acquisitions from unknown sources, poor record keeping, unknown breeding pairs and inaccurate assumptions of relatedness between animals. However, molecular genetic data can be used to determine the identities of animals with unknown ancestry and correct errors in the studbook (Witzenberger and Hochkirch, 2011; Fienieg and Galbusera, 2013). In order to rectify this significant gap in data, RZSS implemented a project focused on reconstructing the pedigree by developing a wildcat molecular studbook. As a relatively new technique for captive population management, there is no one-size-fits-all application, although other examples do exist to help inform the most appropriate approach.

In order to reconstruct the studbook, it was necessary to obtain high-resolution genetic data from all living cats in the captive breeding population. To this end “ddRAD” genomic libraries were prepared for all samples of living wildcats from the captive collection and a number of reference samples (N=129). The methodology of library construction and SNP detection is described in Senn et al., 2019.

Dedicated pedigree reconstruction software Sequoia (Huisman, 2017; Huisman, 2019) was then used on multiple independently selected batches of SNPs from a long list of 11,757 SNPs, to test for stability in pedigree reconstruction. An eventual reconstruction was conducted using a list of 2230 SNPs with a MAF (minimum allele frequency) of >0.02 and a low level of missingness in the 129 animals analysed (the SNPs had 0 or 1 missing datapoints across the 129 individuals). This work was carried out with close collaboration between RZSS WildGenes laboratory and the Scottish Wildcat Conservation Breeding Programme.

Whilst work was underway to develop the molecular studbook, additional activities were undertaken to increase the captive population and the number of captive holders. With the breeding programme showing a clear intention to support long-term conservation measures, including planning for reintroduction, it was important to ensure that this message was visible to the wider zoo community both in the UK and Europe. Also, if the captive population was at some point in the future to be used as a source population for wildcat reintroductions, it would need to be robust enough in numbers to allow for the removal of animals whilst still retaining a level of sustainability. As a tool to encourage increased support from zoos and private holders and thus more space for exhibiting and breeding wildcats, several articles were written for publications in 2015, 2016 and 2019.

RZSS used SPARKS to manage the studbook dataset and record key events and information, such as births, deaths, transfers, parental sex, individual identifiers etc.  PMx was used, following the import of SPARKS datasets, to allow population analysis, monitoring of population development and the development of annual breeding and transfer recommendations. Annual reports, detailing the developments in the programme, were also prepared to ensure captive holders were kept informed on all aspects of population management and conservation efforts. Annual meetings were organised to ensure there was the opportunity for face-to-face contact with the coordinator and holders, as well as more detailed presentations on the development of the programme. The breeding programme coordinator also engaged with the wider European zoo community through EAZA, as well as annual attendance and engagement with the EAZA Felid TAG.

Successful delivery of this action was measured by the development and implementation of the molecular studbook, increase in the captive population recorded in SPARKS, increasing the number of captive holders, dissemination of annual breeding and transfer recommendations, publication of wildcat breeding programme articles and improved data quality recorded in the PMx analysis programme.

3. Results

3.1 Assess the genetic status of the captive population

RZSS took over the management of the Scottish Wildcat Studbook (and now conservation breeding programme) in 2015 when the dataset was transferred from the Aspinall Foundation to RZSS Highland Wildlife Park. This event was approved by the EAZA Felid TAG, with RZSS being recorded as the holders on the Felid TAG Member and Advisor Database.

Between 2015 and 2017 genetic samples were collected from all fertile wildcats in the UK captive breeding population and genetically tested using the scoring matrix (Table 3) as detailed in the Wildcat Hybrid Scoring Protocol (Senn and Ogden, 2015). All genetic scores are recorded in the RZSS WildGenes Master Sample Database and in the Scottish Wildcat Studbook (Barclay, 2019). Of the 72 captive cats sampled, two were removed from breeding via sterilisation (for failing the genetic/pelage matrix), six were recorded as monitor breed (for possessing a borderline genetic score and in absence of pelage score) and 64 passed for continued breeding. In addition to genetic assessment, pelage images were also collected and scored independently to RZSS by Dr Andrew Kitchener of National Museums Scotland and recorded in the studbook. 

Table 3. Results from genetic hybrid screening of captive breeding population.

Matrix outcome	%
Pass	89
Monitor breed	8
Fail	3

 

Genetic work conducted at RZSS shows that wild-living cats in Scotland show a hybrid swarm structure, but the historical wildcat population and cats in captivity are at the “wildcat end” of the continuum (Figure 2, Senn and Ogden, 2015, Senn et al., 2019). All cats in captivity have also been analysed via higher resolution genomic “ddRAD” methods, which show highly concordant results with the 35 SNP methodology (Senn et al., 2019). Results from this work have informed the annual breeding recommendations for 2017, 2018 and 2019.

 

3.2 Acquire more wildcats of known genetic status to increase the diversity of the captive population

RZSS received the first wildcat trapping licence in March 2015, which gave the necessary legal provisions for wildcat capture, sampling, possession and, where necessary, inclusion in the breeding programme. To date RZSS has held 22 individual meetings with landowners, land managers or gamekeepers out-with Priority Areas to discuss site assessments for potential wildcat presence and live capture.

RZSS developed a guidance document for site surveys and, where necessary, live capture. This document was finalised as the SWCAP Trapping Plan (Barclay and Harrower, 2017). An RZSS Wildcat Sampling and Trapping Database was also developed to store all critical information, e.g. capture location, sex, pelage score, genetic score, health, measurements, age, etc., on animals that were either acquired by RZSS through accidental trapping or for animals that were specifically trapped by project staff. In 2016 RZSS completed the construction of two large off-show, natural conservation breeding enclosures at RZSS Highland Wildlife Park (Figure 3), as well as three individual wildcat quarantine facilities for temporary holding during screening.

These enclosures were designed to ensure minimal disturbance, retention of key natural behaviours, and future holding and breeding of wild-caught individuals. To date and following 22 meetings with landowners, 13 potential wildcats (i.e. prominent wildcat features at time of identification) have been genetically screened (including genetic sampling and pelage scoring) by RZSS as part of this action. All animals that have been genetically screened as a result of this action are shown in Table 4.

Table 4. Details of all 13 wild caught cats genetically sampled by RZSS. Under the column ‘Method obtained’, OP = opportunistic and, TG = Targeted.

Cat ID	Genetic ID	Trap / acquisition date	Method obtained	Trap No.	Behaviour	Age class	Sex	Genetic score Q + 90% confidence interval	Pelage score (out of 21)	Wildcat or hybrid
Cat (1)	WCQ0901	24/03/2015	OP-mink trap	n/a	calm	18-24 months	female	44.8 (33.6 - 56.1)	12	hybrid
Cat (2)	WCQ902	27/07/2015	OP	n/a	calm	~ 6 weeks	female	23.9 (13.1 - 35.6)	Too young for markings to be scored	hybrid
Cat (3)	WCQ903	10/09/2015	OP (welfare organisation)	n/a	calm	1-2 yrs	female	62.6 (50.1 - 74.5)	13 (2 markings not scored)	hybrid
Cat (4)	WCQ904	15/09/2015	OP	n/a	aggressive when trapped	1-2 yrs	female	33.2 (21.9 - 45.1)	13	hybrid
Cat (5)	WCQ905	16/11/2015	OP	n/a	Calm	~ 5 months	female	29.6 (18.5 - 41.5)	13	hybrid
Cat (6)	WCQ906	09/11/2015	OP	n/a	Calm	~ 5 months	female	38.3 (26.7 - 50.2)	n/a - never photographed at vets	hybrid
Cat (7)	WCQ907	23/11/2015	OP	n/a	n/a	2-3 months	n/a	20.6 (10.8-31.5)	n/a - never photographed at vets	hybrid
Cat (8)	WCQ908	12/01/2016	OP	n/a	calm	3-4 months	female	62.6 (50.5 - 74)	16-18 (young cat so pelage un-reliable)	hybrid
Cat (9)	WCQ909	05/09/2016	OP	n/a	calm	3-4 months	female	65.1 (53.5 - 76.1)	14-15	hybrid
Cat (10)	WCQ913	13/11/2017	TG	1	calm	6-9 months	female	12.1 (3.1 – 22.5)	11	hybrid
Cat (11)	WCQ0915	20/01/2018	OP	n/a	calm	1-2 years	female	79.9 (69.6 - 88.9)	17-20	wildcat
Cat (12)	WCQ1185	16/01/2019	OP	n/a	slightly aggressive	~ 8 months	male	24.5 (14.3-35.5)	10.5	hybrid
Cat (13)	WCQ1227	11/03/2019	OP	n/a	calm	~ 4-6yr	male	70.1 (59.3-80.1)	18	wildcat

 

Two of these animals, reported by SWA project officers, were genetically screened by RZSS, but not held on site. Of the remaining 11 potential wildcats, acquired via accidental trapping on estates, opportunistic capture or targeted capture, all were screened, including disease screening, pelage scoring and genetic testing. Of these 11 individuals, only two passed the necessary pelage and genetic criteria (Cat 11 and Cat 13) and have been included in the conservation breeding programme. Both individuals (one male and one female) are currently held by RZSS. The female, trapped in 2018, has successfully bred twice in the RZSS conservation breeding enclosures, with one of her daughters also reproducing and one of her sons siring another litter. Both animals, and their genetic and pelage data, are included in the current Scottish Wildcat Studbook (Barclay, 2019) and are included in current breeding and transfer recommendations for 2019/2020. Furthermore, all genetic scores from these (13) individuals are recorded in the RZSS WildGenes Sample Master Database. In addition to the screening of cats acquired through accidental trapping, opportunistic capture or targeted capture, eight camera-trapping exercises were conducted, yielding five additional images of potential wildcats at five separate locations. This resulted in one live capture, two unsuccessful live captures and two cats for which live capture was deemed unnecessary. Equipment support was also given to three individual estates to support their own wildcat camera-trapping surveys, although this yielded no high pelage-scoring individuals worthy of screening. Four additional public sightings were reviewed for live capture potential; two were of cats inside a PA boundary and two others were not pursued due to low pelage scores.

In 2017, using the SWCAP Trapping Plan (Barclay and Harrower, 2017) and support from SWA field teams, two high-scoring wildcats were identified in the Northern Strathspey PA for a trial semen collection project. Following a two-week camera-trapping and live-capture exercise, both individuals were trapped alive and sampled for disease screening, genetic screening, pelage scoring and semen collection. Both target cats failed the genetic/pelage matrix and as a result semen samples were not stored. A third (non-target) female cat was also trapped during this exercise. Following pelage assessment of the non-target female (17+/21) she was released. Disease screening of one (high-scoring pelage) male trapped for semen collection did, unfortunately, show a positive result for feline immunodeficiency virus (FIV) and was later re-trapped and euthanised. The genetic, pelage and disease results of these cats are shown in Table 5.

Table 5. Details of all cats trapped during trial semen collection project

Cat ID	Genetic ID	Sex	Pelage score from project officer (based on camera trap image)	Pelage score during field trial (as per protocol)	Genetic score (Q)	Positive disease tests
Cat 1	WCQ0910	male	17/21	19-20/21	0.620	FIV
Cat 2	WCQ0911	male	18/21	12-16/21	0.322	none
No ID	WCQ0912	female	n/a	17+/21 (when in trap)	0.236	none

3.3 Update the existing wildcat husbandry manual and disseminate to all holders

New Scottish Wildcat Husbandry Guidelines (Barclay, 2016) were completed and disseminated to all current captive Scottish wildcat holders in November 2016. These guidelines set out recommended standards for enclosure design, husbandry and management and veterinary management for wildcats held in the breeding programme. Captive holder meetings also took place in September 2016, October 2018 and December 2019, allowing further discussion, review and guidance with regards to captive husbandry. These guidelines are distributed to all new or potential collectors wishing to add wildcats to their collection. The guidelines are also available to the wider EAZA community via the EAZA Felid TAG webpage, which is accessible to all EAZA members across Europe. The guidelines have also been shared with several European wildcat holders in the absence of (mainland) European wildcat captive husbandry guidance documents.

3.4 Captive breeding

In 2018 the first wildcat molecular studbook was completed by RZSS, leading to a reconstructed pedigree, based on molecular data and historical studbook data, and giving an increase in known pedigree for the breeding population from 7% to 100%. The molecular studbook estimated there are 26 wildcat founders represented in the breeding programme (Table 6) of which 14 were inferred from historical studbook data, 8 were known founders and 4 were confirmed from molecular data. This data has proved vital in allowing more effective management of the breeding programme and more accurate breeding recommendations. Based on the updated studbook data (including molecular data) and population analysis, annual breeding recommendations were developed and disseminated to all captive holders in 2016, 2017, 2018 and 2019, detailing the annual transfers of wildcats between holders, as well as new breeding pairs and those animals that should not be bred from in a particular year. In 2018 and 2019 the recommendations were significantly enhanced using the molecular studbook dataset.

Table 6. Population analysis following completion of molecular studbook (Barclay, 2019). Numbers in parentheses under population are the sex ratio (male.female).

Activity	October 2019
Population	107 (47.60)
Known pedigree	100% (reconstructed)
Gene diversity	89.3%
Founders	26

 

In 2015, 2016 and 2019 wildcat breeding programme articles were submitted and published in EAZA’s Zooquaria publication (EAZA, 2015b), the Association of British and Irish Wild Animal Keepers (ABWAK) journal Ratel (ABWAK, 2016) and the British and Irish Association of Zoos and Aquariums publication BIAZA NEWS (BIAZA, 2019). These articles have played an important role in increasing the awareness of wildcat conservation efforts in Scotland, as well as acting as a call for support from potential new wildcat holders across the UK.   

RZSS has hosted annual wildcat holders’ meetings in 2016, 2018 and 2019 and presented on current conservation efforts, field research and breeding programme developments. The breeding programme coordinator has also presented wildcat conservation and breeding programme updates to the EAZA Felid TAG in 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018 and 2019 and a wildcat captive breeding for reintroduction presentation to the EAZA Conservation Translocation Working Group (CTWG) in 2015. In 2017 the breeding programme coordinator presented at the first International Small Cat Summit and in 2019 at the ABWAK Small Cat Workshop. In 2016 RZSS also gave a presentation on current wildcat conservation efforts and the role of wildcat conservation breeding for reintroduction to Iberian lynx project staff at breeding centres in Doñana, Spain, and in Silves, Portugal.

Aside from ex-situ-based meetings and conferences, RZSS has presented at several SWA meetings, workshops and forums, ensuring that all wildcat stakeholders in Scotland are well-informed and updated on developments within the breeding programme.

As a result of the communications outlined above and in line with breeding programme best practice guidance (Wilcken et al, 2005) and EAZA’s Population Management Manual (EAZA, 2015), RZSS has been able to significantly develop the captive wildcat population in the UK. This has been evidenced by the updated studbook dataset (Barclay, 2019), using SPARKS, and by data available from PMx (Barclay, 2019). From August 2015 to October 2019 the captive wildcat breeding population in the UK has grown by 67.2%, from 64 (24.40, male.female) to 107 (47.60) individuals (data as of Oct. 2019, Figures 4-5, Table 7), all of which are suitable for further breeding following genetic and pelage assessments (Barclay, 2019).

The number of wildcat holders (with breeding animals) has grown by 26% from 20 to 27, with 18 having signed management agreements with the programme. Annual average offspring survival between 2015 and 2019 was recorded at 85% and, when comparing the breeding success from year 2015 directly to 2019, there was an increase in birth numbers of 200% (Barclay, 2019).

Table 7. Key breeding programme population developments between 2015 and 2019. Numbers in parentheses under population and births are the sex ratio (male.female).

Activity	August 2015	October 2019
Population	64 (24.40)	107 (47.60)
Holders (with breeding animals)	20	27
Known pedigree	7%	100% (reconstructed)
Births	8 (4.4)	24 (9.15)
Management agreements	0	18
Additional founders	0	2

Since taking over the studbook in 2015, RZSS has put in place the necessary framework for it to function as a well-managed conservation breeding programme that can support conservation projects like that of SWA. Working closely with captive holders across the UK, conservation stakeholders and population management specialists across Europe, RZSS has implemented a range of population management techniques to ensure it has the capability to act as a valuable tool for future wildcat reinforcement. 

4. Discussion

Following the implementation of the project actions 3.1.1, 3.1.2, 3.1.3 and 3.1.4, RZSS has been able to successfully deliver a range of outputs that have significantly improved the quality, knowledge, awareness, support and long-term sustainability of the Wildcat Conservation Breeding Programme. Progress of all individual actions should be considered complete and as 100% successful (Table 8). The work, led by RZSS, emphasises the importance of a collaborative approach between all ex-situ stakeholders and the success that can be achieved when delivered effectively. 

Table 8. Progress of ex-situ measured actions under project 3.1

Action no.	Action name	Completion rate (%)	Priority
3.1.1	Assess the genetic status of the current captive population	100	High
3.1.2	Acquire more wildcats of known genetic status to increase the diversity of the captive population.	100	High
3.1.3	Update the existing wildcat husbandry manual	100	Medium
3.1.4	Captive breeding	100	High

Key elements that played a significant role in the delivery of the above actions can be identified as development and implementation of new genetic techniques, population development via best practice management, increasing gene diversity via acquisition and breeding of founders, and the development of new best practice management guidance. The work highlights the importance of combining shared learning from previous models and the exploration/development of new techniques to enhance conservation breeding programme management.

As a point of reference for the wildcat conservation breeding programme, it is possible to look to other successful models of cat conservation breeding programmes, and when needed, to successful reintroduction projects. To date the Iberian lynx (Lynx pardinus) recovery project in Spain and Portugal is arguably one of the most successful felid conservation projects. Fortunately, there have been several similarities (as evidenced by action outputs in this report) in the approach taken for both Iberian lynxes and wildcats. Molecular work, effective population management, breeding of wild-caught animals, engagement with the wider European zoo community, close collaboration with field and research teams, integrated approaches between ex-situ and in-situ stakeholders, and publication of best practice guidance to ensure long-term replicability, have all been core elements in both projects. It goes without saying that wildcat conservation breeding for reintroduction efforts are far behind those for the Iberian lynx, following years of successful reintroductions, but with an effective framework in place, wildcat recovery across Scotland has the potential to mirror some of the successes already seen with the Iberian lynx.

Despite the successes of the project, there were some challenges. It is widely recognised that the wild-living cat population has, regardless of conservation efforts, continued to decline during the past five years. This, combined with extensive levels of hybridisation, meant that the identification and sourcing of valuable wildcats (genetically and phenotypically) for inclusion in the conservation breeding programme was incredibly difficult. In addition to this, many cats that were monitored during the project and subsequently sampled (albeit latterly) were identified as having high (17+) phenotypic characteristics, but low genetic scores (LBQ<75%). This highlights the need for quicker assessments (genetic and pelage) in the future to ensure that resources are not wasted with non-target animals. This should also be considered for future conservation and or recovery efforts, especially in relation to release site assessments. Areas assessed for future release should have low levels of hybrid cats and a source (i.e. local domestic cats and feral cats) that with suitable resources can be controlled, thus clearing the way for reinforcement or reintroductions.    

Obtaining genetic samples from entire captive populations is a rare event in the zoo community. This is often due to restrictions or challenges relating to institutional protocols, CITES (Convention on International Trade on Endangered Species) permits, sample transport, institutional support and/or individual veterinary restrictions. Although RZSS achieved this, albeit with just a UK population, it still took around two years to acquire all the samples. Using this project as a model for other small cat or small carnivore programmes, a recommendation would be to collect genetic samples (blood and hair) from all individuals at any opportunity, be it routine health screenings, restraints, transfers, veterinary treatments etc. This recommendation complements the EAZA Biobank Strategy, which aims to preserve captive samples as a primary resource for genetically supporting population management and conservation research, as well as to connect researchers to available samples. RZSS currently recommends that, as a minimum, all captive wildcat holders collect hair samples from all animals that are available for long-term genetic monitoring.   

The current status of the captive wildcat population has improved significantly by the actions detailed in this report. Continuation of these results should be a priority for future wildcat conservation efforts and additional resources and investment should be allocated to develop them further.

5. Conclusion

Wildcats have been held in UK captive collections for at least 45 years. However, it is highly unlikely that in the early 1970s researchers were exhibiting the species with the intention that they could be a potential resource for future recovery. Despite the reasons behind the historical management of captive wildcats, the work delivered by RZSS reiterates that, with effective population management practices, conservation breeding programmes are a valuable resource that can actively support current conservation efforts. Further support for using conservation breeding programmes to support wildcat recovery was documented in the 2019 status review conducted by the IUCN SSC Cat Specialist Group chairs (Breitenmoser et al., 2019). The Scottish Wildcat Conservation Breeding Programme continues as a well-managed programme that supports an integrated approach to wildcat conservation. With the continued decline of wild-living wildcats in Scotland over the last five years, there is the possibility that long-term conservation actions will be significantly influenced, if not reliant, on the availability of captive stock for reinforcement or reintroductions.

The evidence available to date, regarding the wild-living wildcat population, indicates that the wildcat in Scotland is on the verge of extinction and can no longer  be considered  viable (Breitenmoser et al., 2019). Breitenmoser et al. (2019) emphasise the need for a step change in conservation planning, stating;

“The recovery will only be possible with the support of reintroduction/reinforcement projects”

To address these recommendations and as a means of continuing and bolstering the conservation breeding programme actions from SWA, RZSS (in collaboration with NatureScot, Forestry and Land Scotland, Cairngorms National Park Authority, Nordens Ark [Sweden] and the coordinating partner of the Iberian lynx recovery project Junta De Andalucía [Spain]) have launched a second-phase project focused on wildcat population reinforcement. Benefiting from the significant SWA legacy, the project will put a robust platform in place for the long-term recovery of this iconic threatened species.

6. References

ABWAK. 2016. Ratel: Journal of the Association of British and Irish Wild Animal Keepers. Vol. 4. No. 2. June 2016.

Anonymous, 1987. IUCN Policy Statement on Captive Breeding. SSC Captive Breeding Specialist Group.

Barclay, D. Williams, R. Girling, S. Richardson, D. Neff, A. 2016. Scottish Wildcat Captive Husbandry Guidelines. RZSS

Barclay, D. 2015a. RZSS Genetic Sampling Protocol. Unpublished, RZSS.

Barclay, D. 2015b. RZSS Protocol for Wildcat Pelage Scoring. Unpublished, RZSS.

Barclay, D. 2019. Scottish Wildcat Studbook, SPARKS v1.6.

Barclay, D. Harrower, B. 2017. RZSS SWCAP Trapping Plan. Unpublished, RZSS.  

BIAZA. 2019. BIAZA NEWS. The Magazine for Britain and Ireland’s best zoos and aquariums. Issue 23. Summer 2019.

Bourgeois, S., Senn, H., Kaden, J., Taggart, J. B., Ogden, R., Jeffery, K. J., McEwing, R. 2018. Single‐nucleotide polymorphism discovery and panel characterisation in the African forest elephant. Ecology and Evolution, 8(4), 2207–2217. https://doi.org/10.1002/ece3.3854

Breitenmoser, U. Breitenmoser-Wursten, Ch. Carbyn, L.N and Funk, S.M. 2001. Assessment of carnivore reintroduction. In: J.L. Gittleman, S.M Funk, D. Macdonald and R.K. Wayne. Carnivore Conservation – Conservation Biology 5, Cambridge Press, Cambridge. Pages 241-281

Breitenmoser, U. Breitenmoser-Wursten, Ch. Lanz, T. 2019. Conservation of the wildcat (Felis silvestris) in Scotland: Review of the conservation status and assessment of conservation activities.

Conde DA, Colchero F, Gusset M, Pearce-Kelly P, Byers O, Flesness N, et al. 2013. Zoos through the lens of the IUCN Red List: A Global Metapopulation Approach to Support Conservation Breeding Programs. PLoS ONE 8(12): e80311. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0080311

EAZA. 2015a. EAZA Population Management Manual. EAZA. 

EAZA. 2015b. Zooquaria. Quarterly publication of the European Association of Zoos and Aquaria. Issue 91. EAZA.  

EAZA. 2019. EAZA Population Management Manual: Standards, procedures and guidelines for population management within EAZA. EAZA.

Fienieg, E. Galbusera, P. 2013. The Use and Integration of Molecular DNA Information in Conservation Breeding Programmes: A Review. Journal of Zoo and Aquarium Research. 1(2). 2013.

Fischer, J., and D. B. Lindenmayer. 2000. An assessment of the published results of 22 animal relocations. Biological Conservation 96:1–11.

Frankham, R. 2008. Genetic adaptation to captivity. Molecular Ecology 17:325–333.

Griffith, B., J. M. Scott, J. W. Carpenter, and C. Reed. 1989. Translocations as a species conservation tool: status and strategy. Science 245:477–480.

Huisman, J. 2017. Pedigree reconstruction from SNP data: parentage assignment, sibship clustering and beyond. Molecular Ecology Resources. 17, 1009-1024.

Huisman, J. 2019. Sequoia: Reconstruction of multi-generational pedigrees from SNP data.  

Jone, K. 2015. RZSS Animal License. Species Licensing, Scottish Natural Heritage. Unpublished.

Kilshaw K., Johnson P. J., Kitchener A. C. and MacDonald D. W. 2015. Detecting the elusive Scottish wildcat Felis silvestris silvestris using camera trapping. Oryx 49(2), 207–215.

Kitchener A. C., Yamaguchi N., Ward J. M. and MacDonald D. W. 2005. A diagnosis for the Scottish wildcat (Felis silvestris): a tool for conservation action for a critically endangered felid. Animal Conservation 8, 223–237.

Kitchener A. C., Breitenmoser-Würsten Ch., Eizirik E., Gentry A., Werdelin L., Wilting A., Yamaguchi N., Abramov A. V., Christiansen P., Driscoll C., Duckworth J. W., Johnson W., Luo S.-J., Meijaard E., O’Donoghue P., Sanderson J., Seymour K., Bruford M., Groves C., Hoffmann M., Nowell K., Timmons Z. and Tobe S. 2017. A revised taxonomy of the Felidae. The final report of the Cat Classification Task Force of the IUCN/SSC Cat Specialist Group. Cat News Special Issue 11, 80 pp.

Leus, K. 2011. Captive breeding and conservation, Zoology in the Middle East, 54:sup3, 151-158, DOI: 10.1080/09397140.2011.10648906

Lyons, J. 1996. Management Guidelines for The Welfare of Zoo Animals. Wildcat (Felis silvestris). Edinburgh Zoo. The Federation of Zoological Gardens of Greta Britain and Ireland. 1^st Edition. ISSN: 0963-1712.  

Simón Mata M.A., 2018. CENSO DE LAS POBLACIONES DE LINCE IBÉRICO AÑO 2018. Life+IBERLINCE, Recuperación de la distribución histórica del Lince ibérico (Lynx pardinus) en España y Portugal. (LIFE10NAT/ES/570)

Macdonald D. W., Daniels M. J., Driscoll C., Kitchener A. and Yamaguchi N. 2004. The Scottish wildcat: analyses for conservation and an action plan. Executive summary. 1–6 pp.

Peterson, B. K., Weber, J.N., Kay, E.H., Fisher, H.S., and Hoekstra, H.E. 2012. Double digest RADseq: An inexpensive method for denovo SNP discovery and genotyping in model and non‐model species. PloS One, 7(5),     e37135.

Putman, a. Ivy, J. 2013. Kinship-Based Management Strategies for Captive Breeding Programs When Pedigrees Are Unknown or Uncertain. Journal of Heredity. 2014:105(3):303-311

SWA. 2019. Guide to Camera Trapping: Scottish Wildcats.

Senn H. V. and Ogden R. 2015. Wildcat hybrid scoring for conservation breeding under the Scottish Wildcat Conservation Action Plan 2015. Royal Zoological Society of Scotland,

Senn, H. Ghazali, M. Kade, J. Barclay, D. Harrower, B. Campbell, R. Macdonald, D.W. Kitchener, A. 2018. Distinguishing the victim from the threat: SNP-based methods reveal the extent of introgressive hybridisation between wildcats and domestic cats in Scotland and inform future in-situ and ex-situ management options for species restoration. Evolutionary Applications. 2018; 1-16.

SNH (Scottish Natural Heritage) 2013. Scottish Wildcat Conservation Action Plan. 12 pp.

7. Annexes

7.1  Appendix 1: Scottish wildcat genetic sampling protocol

Please follow the guidance below for blood sampling of wildcats which will be used to identify genetic status of individual cats and to inform captive breeding recommendations.

Protocols for such samples include the collection of 1-2ml of whole blood into EDTA tubes (purple) by a qualified veterinary surgeon. It is requested that sample tubes are inverted ~ x15 to prevent clotting (as clotted blood yields poor DNA). Each tube should be labelled with

• House name
• Local ID number (where appropriate)
• EAZA studbook number (where appropriate)
• Sex
• Institution
• Date of sampling

Such samples should be posted first class, with each tube double bagged in individual zip lock bags (this ensures that blood can still be recovered if the tubes are damaged), and all tubes placed within one larger bag. PAD WELL. Send email to [email protected] and [email protected] to say that you are posting samples. Post 1^st class to:

Wildgenes,
RZSS,
134 Corstorphine Road,
Edinburgh
EH12 6TS

Please remember to include contact details with the parcel so we know who it came from.

7.2 Annex 2 - RZSS Protocol for wildcat pelage scoring

To ensure accurate and consistent assessment of wildcat, or suspected wildcat, pelage (coat markings) a reliable photographic record must be collected.

Below is a guide to the key images that should be taken at as high a resolution as possible, e.g. at least 2-3Mb file images.

Top tips:

- if possible photograph the cat against a white or pale standard background - if the fur is wet or ruffled, try to dry it using paper towels and smooth the fur flat - include the label on as many of the record photos as possible - if a dead cat is collected for later examination, put label in a small plastic bag inside the bag with the cat.

Essential images:

ID Label:

(Location and/or grid reference, date, collector name, studbook details (where relevant) and contact details (obscured below):

 

 

 

 

 

Please send your images to both:

Dr Andrew Kitchener, Principal Curator of Vertebrates, National Museums Scotland
[email protected] 

David Barclay, Cat Conservation Project Officer, RZSS
[email protected] 

7.3 Annex 3 - SWCAP Trapping Plan 2017 

SWCAP Scottish wildcat (Felis silvestris) camera and live trapping plan

Background

Working as part of the Scottish Wildcat Action plan, RZSS staff will conduct monitoring surveys to assess key sites across Scotland for the presence of wildcats. This work aims to highlight key locations where wildcat presence has been identified and where targeted live trapping can take place, with a view of acquiring wild caught individuals for the RZSS conservation breeding programme. Under the RZSS Animal license (93984) issued by SNH, valid to 31^st Dec 2020 RZSS are permitted to undertake live capture and sampling of wild living wildcats as well as the captive breeding of any wildcats that pass a genetic and pelage scoring assessment.

 Using Geographical information system (GIS) and the 10km x 10km tile system (Figure 1), survey sites will be labelled following this reference system. For example, “Survey 1 – Name of estate NH80 or Survey 1 – Name of estate NH80/NH81”.

After survey sites have been identified (Figure 2) using the 10km x 10km identification reference a more detailed 1km x 1km tile system will be applied to the survey site using GIS, shown on the right, to pin point preferred survey location, camera location and preferred habitats.

This 1km² x 1km² grid system will be used in conjunction with “suitable” & “unsuitable” habitat where tiles containing unsuitable habitat, Kilshaw et al (2015), will be eliminated from camera locations. 

• Suitable habitat – woodland (coniferous, broadleaved / mix woodland), scrub and pasture/grassland
• Unsuitable habitat – arable, urban/suburban, heather moorland, bog and montane. (Kilshaw, et al., 2015)

Only numbered tiles (containing suitable habitat), as shown on the left, will be used as camera locations with exact locations of the cameras flexible to within 100 – 200m of the tile center, taking into account preferable wildcat habitat features, shown below.

• Wildcat habitat features – small animal trails, cat faeces, potential den sites, cat paw prints, holes in animal fencing, natural funnels (walls, fence lines) 

Despite previous surveys often using two cameras per camera location, the structured survey methodology will only use one per location in order to maximize coverage and available resources. Given the need for quick data collection and to enable live trapping should wildcats be found, a survey duration of 30 days will be used. Taking into account the camera trapping survey in 2012 (Hetherington & Campbell) where 50% of cat images were captured within the first 21 days of a longer 60-day survey (using two cameras per location) this survey aims to capture a minimum of 50% of cats in any given area. All cameras used will be baited using rabbit, pheasant or quail to maximize capture probability.  All cameras will be set to image mode.

Targeted survey methodology

The targeted methodology will be used when reliable and new information is provided on wildcat sightings providing RZSS can operate within that area and an agreement with the landowner is in place. After acquiring the exact location of the sighting, image or evidence of wildcat presence, cameras will be set up around wildcat habitat features at a density of five cameras per 1.75km² with the exact location as the central point (where possible) as shown below, based on the minimum home range of female Scottish wildcats (Corbett, 1979; Daniels et al., 2001). In instances where the sighting is on the edge of suitable habitat, the box may be adjusted to encompass the most suitable nearby habitat whilst retaining the sighting location with the 1.75km². In particular situations where an area cannot be covered by a square the ebullient size of a minimum territory may be represented in other shapes. 

Cameras used during targeted surveys, at the five cameras per 1.75km² density, will be baited using rabbit, pheasant or quail, and checked / re-baited once per week until footage is collected confirming wildcat presence. For targeted surveys all cameras will be set to video mode (15 second clips) for greater accuracy in cat identification. Once wildcat presence is confirmed live capture can commence.  

Live trapping methodology

Following the confirmation of wildcat presence and agreement by all involved, cage traps will be set to conduct live capture. Live cage traps will only be set and monitored by RZSS wildcat agents signed on to the current RZSS/SNH Animal license and in full accordance with accompanying health and safety guidelines/risk assessments. 

Prior to activation cage traps may be setup, baited and securely tied open to help habituate target cats to them prior to trap activation. Cage traps will be active for one week periods at any one time with further activation being reviewed following the first week. Traps will be baited with rabbit, pheasant, quail or chicken meat and re-baited weekly should efforts continue for more than a week. 

Traps will be covered using either waterproof sheeting or wooden boards and disguised using nearby vegetation to ensure any animal captured is sheltered from the elements. Cage traps when active will be paired with a GPRS camera (allowing remote email access to images) and a standard camera trap (to monitor nearby activity). The GPRS cameras will be set to automatically send images via email every four hours (six times per day) that will provide evidence of the trap being triggered or not. This method will reduce the amount of staff time needed to physically visually check cage traps whilst reducing human scent and disturbance around trapping locations. In the event where no images are received within a 12hr period of the trap being active RZSS staff / wildcat agents will go and check the trap visually.  A timetable will be used to ensure that there is at least one member of the RZSS Wildcat agent team providing cover whilst the traps are set. If there is any doubt over availability i.e., during a weekend, then the traps will be de-activated. 

Following the same methodology as the targeted survey additional non-GPRS cameras will still be used during live trapping efforts to continue to gather information of cat presence should the trapping not yield any cats (shown above in figure 4). As with the targeted methodology all non GPRS cameras will be set to video mode (15 second clips) for greater accuracy in cat identification. If wildcat presence is confirmed and trapping efforts have been unsuccessful the trap may be moved to the camera location that identified wildcat presence.      

Annual fieldwork plan

Out with the trapping season (September-March) surveys will take place to identify key locations and wildcats in preparation for the trapping season. At any given time, there may be two active surveys following the above methodology utilising 10-15 trail cameras per study site. In addition to this any cameras not in use will be held for targeted surveys. Following successful wildcat identification live trapping will commence using the traps and GPRS cameras. If time or resources are limited, then live trapping of positively identified wildcats will always take priority.

Additional RZSS staff and volunteers should be contacted if further support is required.  If funding allows and the need arises contractors may be engaged with any new individuals undertaking live capture on behalf of RZSS doing so only when covered as a named agent under the SNH Animal license and working under this RZSS SWCAP Trapping plan.  When possible fieldwork will be conducted by two members of staff/volunteers but could frequently be undertaken by individuals who will follow lone working protocols. 

Health and Safety

See documents:

          •    RZSS Wildcat Handling, Trapping and Transport Risk Assessment

The Society’s lone working procedure will be used. Anyone lone working whilst conducting the wildcat trapping work will have a ‘fail to safe’ system in place. Equipment relevant to the trapping plan include:

PPE/Field equipment

Equipment	No.	Comments
Vehicle	1	Hyundai i20 (can borrow 4 x 4 if required)
GPRS Camera	6	GPRS enabled specific for live trapping
Trail Camera	30	Basic camera for presence/absence survey + live trapping monitoring
Cage trap	8	For all live capture of wildcats

 

Fieldworkers need to ensure they carry a safety bag with them at all times. Items within the safety bag should include: first aid kit, survival kit, torch, hand warmers, whistle, compass, foil blanket, snack. All field workers should also wear appropriate clothing for the weather conditions. 

Review

Once the license from SNH expires, this plan will be reviewed and amended if necessary. If the plan has been successful and there is a need to continue trapping to aid the captive breeding population then the methodologies will remain the same. 

References

Ancrenaz, M., Hearn, A., Ross, J., Sollmann, R., Wilting, A., (2012). Handbook for wildlife monitoring using camera‐traps. BBEC II Secretariat. 

Corbett, L.K., (1979). Feeding ecology and social organization of wildcats (Felis silvestris) and domestic cats (Felis catus) in Scotland. University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK.

Daniels, M.J., Beaumont, M.A., Johnson, P.J., Balharry, D., Macdonald, D.W. & Barratt, E. (2001). Ecology and genetics of wild-living cats in the north-east of Scotland and the implications for the conservation of the wildcat. Journal of Applied Ecology, 38, pp 146–161.

Hetherington, D. & Campbell, R., (2012) The Cairngorms Wildcat Project Final Report. Report to

Cairngorms National Park Authority, Scottish Natural Heritage, Royal Zoological Society of Scotland, Scottish Gamekeepers Association and Forestry Commission Scotland

Kilshaw, K., Johnson, P., Kitchener, A., Macdonald, DW., (2015). Detecting the elusive Scottish wildcat Felis silvestris silvestris using camera trapping. Cambridge University Press, Oryx, Vol 49, Issue 2, pp 207 – 215

Kilshaw, K. & Macdonald, D.W., (2011) The use of camera trapping as a method to survey for the Scottish wildcat. Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 479.

For further information on this report please contact:
David Barclay
Royal Zoological Society of Scotland (RZSS),
Highland Wildlife Park, Kingussie,
PH21 1NL
Telephone: 01540 651 985
Email: [email protected]

ISBN: 978-1-78391-982-6

This publication is part of a series of specialist reports on the work of the Scottish Wildcat Action project that ran from 2015-2020. The work was led and steered by a partnership of organisations: Cairngorms National Park Authority, Forestry and Land Scotland, National Museums Scotland, Scottish Land & Estates, NatureScot, Scottish Wildlife Trust, The National Trust for Scotland, The Royal (Dick) School of Veterinary Studies, The Royal Zoological Society of Scotland, The Scottish Gamekeepers Association, The Scottish Government, Wildlife Conservation Research Unit (WildCRU).

The many other partners and funders are listed in the SWA Summary report.

For more information, including access to the other reports, contact Martin Gaywood at NatureScot. 

This report, or any part of it, should not be reproduced without the permission of NatureScot or the relevant authors. This permission will not be withheld unreasonably. The views expressed by the author(s) of this report should not be taken as the views and policies of NatureScot. ©NatureScot 2023.