The Road to TNR: Examining Trap-Neuter-Return Through the Lens of Our Evolving Ethics

Wolf, Peter J.; Schaffner, Joan E.

doi:10.3389/fvets.2018.00341

Cited by 23 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Not only is such a discussion conspicuously absent, the article reveals no interest in exploring the considerable body of literature on the topic. While it is true that the potential “welfare challenges” identified in the article can be useful prompts for a vigorous debate about the ethics of TNR, they are no substitute for the debate itself [56,57]. Simply declaring TNR to be unethical does not make it so.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reply to Crawford et al.: Why Trap-Neuter-Return (TNR) Is an Ethical Solution for Stray Cat Management

Wolf

Rand

Swarbrick

et al. 2019

Animals

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Simple SummaryMuch controversy surrounds the management of Australia’s unowned urban cat population. The longstanding practice of trapping and killing urban stray cats and kittens that are not reclaimed or adopted has proven ineffective at reducing their numbers. In addition, it has been shown that shelter staff tasked with the repeated killing of healthy animals often face severe mental health consequences. A growing body of scientific evidence from Australia and elsewhere indicates that a non-lethal alternative, trap-neuter-return (TNR), can be effective at reducing urban stray cat numbers. TNR has also been associated with declines in feline intake and euthanasia at animal shelters. A large-scale trial of TNR in Australia is warranted and needed urgently. An extensive yet fundamentally flawed argument against such a trial is presented in a recently published article, “A Case of Letting the Cat out of the Bag—Why Trap-Neuter-Return Is Not an Ethical Solution for Stray Cat (Felis catus) Management,” by Crawford et al. In the text that follows, we provided a rebuttal to the Crawford et al. paper and argued that TNR is an ethical, scientifically sound solution for the management of Australia’s urban stray cats.AbstractThe recently published article, ‘A Case of Letting the Cat out of the Bag—Why Trap-Neuter-Return Is Not an Ethical Solution for Stray Cat (Felis catus) Management,’ by Crawford et al. warrants rebuttal. The case presented in the paper, opposing the initiation of TNR trials in Australia, ignores peer-reviewed evidence which substantiates the effectiveness of TNR at reducing unowned urban cat numbers. In addition, the paper’s authors offer a number of unrealistic recommendations, which are little more than a rebranding of the failed status quo. Urban stray cats have long been considered a problem across Australia. Current practice calls for the trapping and killing of thousands of healthy urban stray cats and kittens each year with no apparent effect on the total population. In contrast, the literature offers numerous examples, including two recent studies in Australia, of reductions in urban stray cat numbers where TNR has been implemented. TNR has also been associated with reduced feline intake and euthanasia at shelters, which improves both animal welfare and the well-being of shelter staff. A large-scale trial of TNR in an urban Australian context is scientifically justified and long overdue.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reply to Crawford et al.: Why Trap-Neuter-Return (TNR) Is an Ethical Solution for Stray Cat Management

Wolf

Rand

Swarbrick

et al. 2019

Animals

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…How household cat owners take responsibility for their animals and municipalities for stray cats is progressively being legislated in different countries and is no longer purely a case of individual decisions (Finkler and Terkel, 2012;Høgåsen et al, 2013;International Cat Care, 2018;Natoli et al, 2006Natoli et al, , 2019 The European Parliament's Intergroup on the Welfare and Conservation of Animals, 2016). There is a need for governments to implement policies to control the stray cat population, but the question is how to do this (Calver et al, 2020;Crawford and Fleming, 2019;Peterson et al, 2012;Wolf and Schaffner, 2019).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As citizens may protest against stray cat policy decisions it is important for policy makers to understand public opinion on possible stray cat population management scenarios within the existing legal options and which factors influence these opinions (Deak et al, 2019;Lohr and Lepczyk, 2014). Acceptance of cat management scenarios by the public will differ between stray cat management scenarios and according to personal preference of inhabitants, and may also evolve over time (Rand et al, 2019a;Wolf and Schaffner, 2019). Knowing opinions of different citizens to guide decision making, within the options available according to Animal Protection Laws, is key to developing and finding common ground for a supported policy (Loyd and Hernandez, 2012;McLeod et al, 2019;Van Patter et al, 2019a;Wald et al, 2013).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Public opinions on seven different stray cat population management scenarios in Flanders, Belgium

Ruyver

Abatih

Villa³

et al. 2021

Research in Veterinary Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Stray cat population management is an important worldwide issue. Understanding citizen attitudes towards stray cat control options is vital to the success of controlling stray cat numbers, as public perception affects the acceptance of, support for and collaboration in stray cat management policies. Audience segmentation, as to enable each group to be engaged in the stray cat management policy, is important for the success of the interventions. Therefore a web-based survey was conducted among Flemish citizens in order to examine differences in acceptance towards seven management scenarios: household cat neutering with financial support for the owner, household cat neutering without financial support for the owner, encouraging responsible household cat ownership, trapping stray cats and taking them to a shelter, trapping and neutering stray cats for release into a managed "cat colony" (composed by so called "community cats"), trapping and killing of stray cats, and undertaking no action. A total of 4059 valid responses were collected and the proportions of agreement were compared across the different management scenarios using the two-sample z-test. Interactions among factors that influenced each management scenario were investigated using the CHAID (Chi-squared Automatic Interaction Detection) analysis and visualized on a tree.Our results showed that fostering responsible household cat ownership (89.9%) and conversion of stray cats to "community cats" (76.3%) were most supported by respondents in our sample (which consisted mainly of females, cat-lovers, and families without children). Least supported were the killing of stray cats (7.7%) and undertaking no action (3.3%). The demographic analyses revealed that for the acceptance of management scenarios there were three important factors (attitude towards cats, area of residence, and gender), two weaker factors (education and having children) and two which had almost no impact (age and cat ownership). We propose that future studies should focus on the effect of 'area of residence', 'having children' and 'education'.In conclusion, our research confirms that management of and communication on stray cat strategies should not be developed with a one-size-fits-all approach. Efforts should be tailored to each audience segment, thus adapted to the area of residence and human characteristics.

show abstract

“…For decades much controversy has surrounded the management of stray and feral cats (henceforth referred to as community cats). Among the key factors prompting policy makers to take action are concerns over wildlife and public health impacts [1,2,3], nuisance complaints [4,5], and animal welfare concerns [6,7,8]. Since the early 1990s, the use of trap-neuter-return (TNR) as a humane alternative to the lethal management of community cats has proliferated in the United States.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Back to School: An Updated Evaluation of the Effectiveness of a Long-Term Trap-Neuter-Return Program on a University’s Free-Roaming Cat Population

Spehar¹,

Wolf

2019

Animals

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Simple SummarySince the early 1990s, the use of trap-neuter-return (TNR) as a humane alternative to the lethal management of stray and feral cats (also known as community cats) has expanded in the United States. Over this time, numerous studies have pointed to the effectiveness of TNR at reducing community cat numbers, although many of these investigations have covered relatively short time periods (3 years or less). A seminal paper by Levy et al. in 2003, documented a significant decline in community cat numbers on the campus of the University of Central Florida (UCF) over a 11-year period. Since 2017, a series of peer-reviewed articles have described other examples of long-term reductions in community cat numbers associated with TNR. The present study adds to this growing body of evidence by revealing the extent to which the results first reported by Levy et al. have been sustained over a subsequent 17-year period. After a total of 28 years, 10 (5%) of 204 total cats enrolled in the UCF TNR program, remain on campus and the campus community cat population has declined by 85% from the completion of an initial census in 1996 to 2019.AbstractA growing body of evidence indicates that trap-neuter-return (TNR) is not only effective at reducing community cat numbers, but that such reductions are sustainable over extended periods. Recently, a series of peer-reviewed articles documenting long-term declines in community cat populations associated with TNR have been published. The present study adds to this pool of evidence by updating and reexamining results reported from the campus of the University of Central Florida (UCF) in 2003 by Levy et al. From 1991 to 2019, a total of 204 cats were enrolled in a volunteer-run TNR program on the university grounds; 10 cats (5%) remained on site at the conclusion of the present study. The campus community cat population declined by 85% between 1996, the year an initial census (indicating the presence of 68 cats) was completed, and 2019. In addition, 11 of 16 total colonies were eliminated over a 28-year period. These results occurred despite significant growth in enrollment at UCF over the same time frame, which suggests that with sufficient ongoing management of colony sites, declines in community cat populations associated with TNR are sustainable over long periods and under varying conditions.

show abstract

The Road to TNR: Examining Trap-Neuter-Return Through the Lens of Our Evolving Ethics

Cited by 23 publications

References 22 publications

Reply to Crawford et al.: Why Trap-Neuter-Return (TNR) Is an Ethical Solution for Stray Cat Management

Reply to Crawford et al.: Why Trap-Neuter-Return (TNR) Is an Ethical Solution for Stray Cat Management

Public opinions on seven different stray cat population management scenarios in Flanders, Belgium

Back to School: An Updated Evaluation of the Effectiveness of a Long-Term Trap-Neuter-Return Program on a University’s Free-Roaming Cat Population

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About