Study
“Impact of a Local Government Funded Free Cat Sterilization Program for Owned and Semi-Owned Cats,” published in the journal Animals, 2024. Complete article available (open access) online here.
Overview
Researchers documented the results of a cat management program in Banyule, a suburb of Melbourne (Australia), over eight years [1]. The program, funded by the local government, included sterilization, microchipping, and licensing, and was free to residents in three target areas (i.e., “low-socioeconomic suburbs with the highest cat-related complaints and microtargeted at ‘hot-spots’”).
Unlike most trap-neuter-return (TNR) programs in the U.S., an important aspect of Banyule’s program was the requirement of semi-owners (i.e., residents feeding community cats) to become owners, as doing so allows them to continue caring for the cats legally (TNR being illegal in Australia).
Key Points
The impetus for Banyule’s program was in large part the result of its animal management officers’ frustration with “the standard trapping practice resulting in the euthanasia of kittens under eight weeks of age, or cats which appeared unsocial at the time of impound, and cats that were not reclaimed or rehomed but were healthy.” As the authors note, “this method of cat management was clearly not working; many relinquished or stray cats and kittens continued to be collected from the same properties each year, and numerous nuisance cat complaints within the municipality also continued” [1]. Frustrations peaked when two officers “were forced to deliver a stray socialized kitten to the contracted animal management facility only to have the kitten euthanized upon admission because it was under eight weeks of age” [1].
Over the course of eight years, Banyule’s animal shelter reported a 66% decrease in cats impounded by animal management officers (from 396 to 134); impounded kittens under 12 weeks of age decreased by 75% (from 85 to 21) over the same period. Meanwhile, the rate of cats returned to their owners increased from 6% of feline admissions to 16% (likely because of microchipping). During the final four years of the program (the only period for which such data is available), the number of cats and kittens relinquished by owners decreased by 50% (from 204 to 102). In addition, the number of cats who were impounded and subsequently euthanized decreased by 82% over eight years (from 138 to 25).
Over the course of the program, cat-related calls to elected officials decreased by 51% in the three target areas and 36% city-wide. The program cost the municipality roughly US$58,000 (for 831 surgeries) but provided as estimated savings of nearly US$330,000 (due to reduced impoundments and “staff time associated with responding to cat-related calls to council” [1]).
It is recommended that urban cat management policies and programs are revised and, instead of being focused on a traditional compliance-based approach, are focused on being assistive, helping owners and semi-owners have their cats sterilized and identified with a microchip."
The intensity of sterilization efforts varied over the course of the program (depending on resource allocation) and across the city (as different areas were targeted). An average of 4.1 cats/1,000 residents were sterilized in three target areas over eight years, while the city-wide average was 0.8 cats/1,000 residents. In the program’s final year, the target areas saw 33 cats/1,000 residents sterilized, with 6.5 cats/1,000 residents sterilized across the city. Although these intensity levels are considerably lower than those reported from a high-intensity TNR program in Alachua County, Florida (i.e., 60 cats/1,000 residents over two years) [2], Banyule’s shelter saw a comparable reduction in feline intake. This is likely explained by the program’s “microtargeting” and longer duration.
Based on their results, the authors conclude that “the traditional methods of trapping wandering and nuisance cats have not resulted in long-term reductions in cat-related calls to councils. However, following the implementation of a microtargeted free sterilization program for owned and semi-owned cats, marked reductions in cat-related calls, impoundments, euthanasia, and costs were realized, similar to that reported in U.S. programs. It is recommended that urban cat management policies and programs are revised and, instead of being focused on a traditional compliance-based approach, are focused on being assistive, helping owners and semi-owners have their cats sterilized and identified with a microchip. Legislative changes need to be implemented to facilitate this approach to assist people caring for multiple stray cats, instead of the current approach to trap and euthanize most of these cats which are poorly socialized, which is documented to damage the mental health of shelter and pound staff and cat caregivers” [1].
See related Issue Briefs:
References
Cotterell, J.; Rand, J.; Barnes, T.; Scotney, R. Impacts of a Local Government Funded Free Cat Sterilization Program for Owned and Semi-Owned Cats. Animals 2024, 1615.
Levy, J.K.; Isaza, N.M.; Scott, K.C. Effect of high-impact targeted trap-neuter-return and adoption of community cats on cat intake to a shelter. The Veterinary Journal 2014, 201, 269–274.
Comments