Rethinking the Animal Shelter's Role in Free-Roaming Cat Management

Abstract

Substantial societal investment is made in the management of free-roaming cats by various methods, with goals of such programs commonly including wildlife conservation, public health protection, nuisance abatement, and/or promotion of cat health and welfare. While there has been a degree of controversy over some of the tactics employed, there is widespread agreement that any method must be scientifically based and sufficiently focused, intensive and sustained in order to succeed. The vast majority of free-roaming cat management in communities takes place through local animal shelters. Throughout the 20th century and into the 21st, this consisted primarily of ad hoc admission of cats captured by members of the public, with euthanasia being the most common outcome. In North America alone, hundreds of millions of cats have been impounded and euthanized and billions of dollars invested in such programs. Given the reliance on this model to achieve important societal goals, it is surprising that there has been an almost complete lack of published research evaluating its success. Wildlife conservation and public health protection will be better served when debate about the merits and pitfalls of methods such as Trap-Neuter-Return is grounded in the context of realistically achievable alternatives. Where no perfect answer exists, an understanding of the potential strengths and shortcomings of each available strategy will support the greatest possible mitigation of harm—the best, if still imperfect, solution. Animal shelter function will also benefit by discontinuing investment in methods that are ineffective as well as potentially ethically problematic. This will allow the redirection of resources to more promising strategies for management of cats as well as investment in other important animal shelter functions. To this end, this article reviews evidence regarding the potential effectiveness of the three possible shelter-based strategies for free-roaming cat management: the traditional approach of ad hoc removal by admission to the shelter; admission to the shelter followed by sterilization and return to the location found; and leaving cats in place with or without referral to mitigation strategies or services provided by other agencies.

Coexistence between Humans and ‘Misunderstood’ Domestic Cats in the Anthropocene: Exploring Behavioural Plasticity as a Gatekeeper of Evolution

“…Domestic cats are the most abundant carnivores with ~600 million world-wide [85,86]. The presence of free-ranging domestic cats is increasing in all urban and rural environments (e.g., 30-80 million unowned domestic cats in the United States alone [87]), as well as in wild environments on islands (e.g., ~10,000 feral cats on the main island of Kerguelen archipelago [88]). They played an essential role in pest control in past societies and continue to serve this purpose in present rural communities [89].…”

Characteristics of cat semi-owners

“…Semi-owners know where to find unowned free-roaming cats and, if positively engaged in the programme, can often catch them or assist with trapping programmes and can gradually socialise the cats over weeks and months, making them easier to trap and neuter or rehome. 23 Semi-owners can also be invaluable for ongoing surveillance for new-arrival unowned cats and for monitoring the health, welfare and size of the population. Hence, it is often in the interests of local government and animal welfare organisations to work collaboratively with semi-owners on the management of unowned free-roaming cats.…”

“… 2 , 7 , 9 This semi-owned population are generally sexually intact with a high reproductive rate owing to supplementary feeding and hence their offspring contribute to animal shelter intakes and swell the feral and owned pet cat populations ( Figure 1 ). Semi-owned cats may or may not be socialised with people; 9 lack of socialisation to people makes many semi-owned cats unsuitable to be rehomed 23 and may be a barrier to semi-owners assuming full ownership. 6 Nonetheless, cat semi-owners can have high levels of attachment to the cats they care for, 24 , 25 and care provided to semi-owned cats, while variable, can be indistinguishable from care provided to owned cats.…”

Increasing Engagement in Kitten Fostering Programs: Lessons Learned From High Kitten Intake Zip Codes in Los Angeles County

“…Jenkins and Rudd ( 21 ) argue that disparate representation of minoritized population groups in animal welfare efforts is a barrier to the development of services, and approaches that center marginalized individuals and communities are needed to promote comprehensive strategies and drive culturally relevant approaches. Therefore, in addition to focusing on the development and dissemination of Spanish-language promotional materials, ensuring that the diversity of animal welfare workers mirrors that of the local community will likely be a critical component of increasing public engagement in cat management and fostering community-informed programs, particularly in the context of high-intake communities ( 22 ).…”