CSIRO Publishing Books Journals About Us Shopping Cart You are here: Journals > Wildlife Research   
Wildlife Research
  Ecology, Management and Conservation in Natural and Modified Habitats
 
Search
 
 
  Advanced Search
   

Journal Home
About the Journal
Editorial Board
Contacts
Content
Online Early
Current Issue
Just Accepted
All Issues
Special Issues
Sample Issue
For Authors
General Information
Notice to Authors
Submit Article
Open Access
For Referees
General Information
Review Article
Annual Referee Index
For Subscribers
Subscription Prices
Customer Service
Print Publication Dates

 Early Alert
Subscribe to our email Early Alert or RSS feeds for the latest journal papers.

 Connect with us
facebook   youtube

 CSIRO Wildlife Research
All volumes of CSIRO Wildlife Research are online and available to subscribers of Wildlife Research.

 

Article << Previous     |     Next >>   Contents Vol 36(2)

Evaluation of euthanasia and trap–neuter–return (TNR) programs in managing free-roaming cat populations

Paige M. Schmidt A D, Todd M. Swannack A, Roel R. Lopez A, Margaret R. Slater B C

A Department of Wildlife and Fisheries Sciences, Texas A&M University, 2258 TAMU, College Station, TX 77843-2258, USA.
B College of Veterinary Medicine, Texas A&M University, 4458 TAMU, College Station, TX 77843-4458, USA.
C Present address: Animal Services Program Office, The American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, 1717 South Philo Ave, Suite 36, Urbana, IL 61802, USA.
D Corresponding author. Email: pmhill@tamu.edu
 
PDF (357 KB) $25
 Export Citation
 Print
  


Abstract

Global estimates of the number of domestic cats (Felis catus) are >400 million. Issues associated with free-roaming cats are of global importance because of animal-welfare and public-health concerns and impacts on native wildlife through predation, competition and disease transmission. In the United States, proposed control solutions for managing urban free-roaming cat populations include euthanasia and trap–neuter–return (TNR) programs. We evaluated control methods using a demographic population model for a 25-year period, with parameters estimated from an unmanaged, free-roaming cat population in Texas. We modelled euthanasia and TNR at 25%, 50% and 75% implementation rates and a 50 : 50 combination of euthanasia and TNR at 25%, 50%, 75% and 100% implementation rates for 0%, 25% and 50% maximum immigration rates. We compared final population size, total number of cats treated and treatment effort relative to population reduction. Population decreases were comparable among euthanasia, TNR and a 50 : 50 combination for all treatment rates when the immigration rate was 0%; however, they were higher for euthanasia at 25% and 50% maximum immigration rates. Euthanasia required higher treatment effort than TNR. Our results indicate that immigration must be prevented and high (>50%) treatment rates implemented to reduce free-roaming cat populations.

   
Subscriber Login
Username:
Password:  

    


 
Top  Email this page
 
Legal & Privacy | Contact Us | Help

CSIRO

© CSIRO 1996-2012