Large populations of free-roaming cats (FRCs) generate ongoing concerns for welfare of both individual animals and populations, for human public health, for viability of native wildlife populations, and for local ecological damage. Managing FRC populations is a complex task, without universal agreement on best practices. Previous analyses that use simulation modeling tools to evaluate alternative management methods have focused on relative efficacy of removal (or trap-return, TR), typically involving euthanasia, and sterilization (or trap-neuter-return, TNR) in demographically isolated populations. We used a stochastic demographic simulation approach to evaluate removal, permanent sterilization, and two postulated methods of temporary contraception for FRC population management. Our models include demographic connectivity to neighboring untreated cat populations through natural dispersal in a metapopulation context across urban and rural landscapes, and also feature abandonment of owned animals. Within population type, a given implementation rate of the TR strategy results in the most rapid rate of population decline and (when populations are isolated) the highest probability of population elimination, followed in order of decreasing efficacy by equivalent rates of implementation of TNR and temporary contraception. Even low levels of demographic connectivity significantly reduce the effectiveness of any management intervention, and continued abandonment is similarly problematic. This is the first demographic simulation analysis to consider the use of temporary contraception and account for the realities of FRC dispersal and owned cat abandonment.
This study used a previously developed stochastic simulation model ( 1 ) to estimate the impact of different management actions on free-roaming kitten and cat mortality over a 10-year period. These longer-term cumulative impacts have not been systematically examined to date. We examined seven management scenarios, including: (1) taking no action, (2) low-intensity removal, (3) high-intensity removal, (4) low-intensity episodic culling, (5) high-intensity episodic culling, (6) low-intensity trap-neuter-return (TNR), and (7) high-intensity TNR. For each scenario we tracked within the model the number of kittens born, the number of kittens surviving to adulthood, and the number of adults removed using lethal control over the entire 10-year simulation. We further defined all kitten deaths and lethal removal of adults as “preventable” deaths because they could potentially be reduced by certain management actions. Our simulation results suggested that the cumulative number of preventable deaths over 10 years for an initial population of 50 cats is highest for a “no-action” scenario, estimated at 1,000 deaths. It is lowest for a high-intensity TNR scenario, estimated at 32 deaths, a 31-fold difference. For all management scenarios tested, including removal and culling, the model predicted fewer preventable deaths than for a no-action scenario. For all management scenarios, the model predicted that the higher-intensity option (defined in terms of the proportion of animals sterilized or removed within a given time period) would result in fewer preventable deaths over time than the lower-intensity option. Based on these findings, we conclude that management intensity is important not only to reduce populations more quickly, but also to minimize the number of preventable deaths that occur over time. Accordingly, the lessons for the animal welfare community are both encouraging and cautionary. With sufficient intensity, management by TNR offers significant advantages in terms of combined lifesaving and population size reduction. At lower intensity levels, these advantages are greatly reduced or eliminated. We recommend that those who seek to minimize suffering and maximize lifesaving for free-roaming cats attempt to balance prospective goals (i.e., saving lives tomorrow) with proximate goals (i.e., saving lives today), and recognize that thoughtful choice of management strategies can ensure that both of these complementary goals are achieved.
Objectives Non-surgical contraceptive management of free-roaming cat populations is a global goal for public health and humane reasons. The objectives of this study were to measure the duration of contraception following a single intramuscular injection of a gonadotropin-releasing hormone-based vaccine (GonaCon) and to confirm its safe use in female cats living in colony conditions. Methods GonaCon (0.5 ml/cat) was administered intramuscularly to 20 intact female cats (queens), and saline was administered to 10 queens serving as sham-treated controls. Beginning in late February, 4 months after injection, all cats were housed with fertile male cats in a simulated colony environment. Time to pregnancy, fetal counts and vaccine-elicited injection-site reactions were evaluated. Results All control cats (n = 10/10) and 60% (n = 12/20) of vaccinated cats became pregnant within 4 months of the introduction of males. Two additional vaccinates became pregnant (70%; n = 14/20) within 1 year of treatment. Average fetal counts were significantly lower in vaccinated cats than in control cats. Vaccinates had a significantly longer ( P = 0.0120) median time to conception (212 days) compared with controls (127.5 days). Injection-site reactions ranging from swelling to transient granulomatous masses were observed in 45% (n = 9/20) of vaccinated cats. Conclusions and relevance A single dose of GonaCon provided contraception lasting for a minimum of 1 year in 30% (n = 6/20) of treated cats. The level of contraception induced by this GonaCon dose and vaccine lot was not sufficiently effective to be recommended for use in free-roaming cats.
Objectives This study used computer simulation modeling to estimate and compare costs of different free-roaming cat (FRC) management options (lethal and non-lethal removal, trap–neuter–return, combinations of these options and no action) and their ability to reduce FRC population abundance in open demographic settings. The findings provide a resource for selecting management approaches that are well matched for specific communities, goals and timelines, and they represent use of best available science to address FRC issues. Methods Multiple FRC management approaches were simulated at varying intensities using a stochastic individual-based model in the software package Vortex. Itemized costs were obtained from published literature and expert feedback. Metrics generated to evaluate and compare management scenarios included final population size, total cost and a cost efficiency index, which was the ratio between total cost and population size reduction. Results Simulations suggested that cost-effective reduction of FRC numbers required sufficient management intensity, regardless of management approach, and greatly improved when cat abandonment was minimized. Removal yielded the fastest initial reduction in cat abundance, but trap–neuter–return was a viable and potentially more cost-effective approach if performed at higher intensities over a sufficient duration. Of five management scenarios that reduced the final population size by approximately 45%, the three scenarios that relied exclusively on removal were considerably more expensive than the two scenarios that relied exclusively or primarily on sterilization. Conclusions and relevance FRCs present a challenge in many municipalities, and stakeholders representing different perspectives may promote varying and sometimes incompatible population management policies and strategies. Although scientific research is often used to identify FRC impacts, its use to identify viable, cost-effective management solutions has been inadequate. The data provided by simulating different interventions, combined with community-specific goals, priorities and ethics, provide a framework for better-informed FRC policy and management outcomes.
At present, only surgical sterilization is available for veterinarians and pet owners seeking suppression of fertility in male dogs, in most countries. An alternative contraceptive alternative approach is GnRH releasing implants that desensitize the pituitary to the stimulatory effects of GnRH and thereby block testicular function (testosterone and sperm production). Two GnRH agonists (deslorelin and azagly-nafarelin) have been researched in controlled release formulations for this purpose. A deslorelin-releasing biodegradable implant, marketed under the name Suprelorin ® , has been available in Australia and New Zealand since 2007, the European Union (EU) since 2008, and received regulatory approval in China and Mexico in late 2019. Two versions of the implant are available, one labeled for a minimum of 6 months of fertility suppression in male dogs, and the other for a minimum of 12 months in male dogs. Another GnRH agonist (azagly-nafarelin) was also included in a solid implant (Gonazon ®). Research results showed it delivered 6-months to 1 year of suppressed fertility; however, it is not commercialized. This review paper summarizes research on the mechanism of action for these technologies and compiles and interprets the research on efficacy and safety. New findings on usage of the deslorelin releasing implant in countries where veterinarians and pet owners have this option is shared. Research on off-label use of the product in male dogs is also reviewed. This review aims to aid in the evaluation of the deslorelin releasing implant as an adjunct or alternative for surgical sterilization of male dogs.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.