CSIRO Publishing Home Books & CDs Journals About Us Shopping Cart
Wildlife Research
  50 years of publishing quality research
You are here: Journals > Wildlife Research   
Search
 
 
  Advanced Search
   
Journal Home
General Information
Scope
Editorial Board
Editorial Contacts
Print Publication Dates
Online Content
For Authors
For Referees
How to Order

 Most Read
Visit our Most Read page regularly to keep up-to-date with the most downloaded papers in this journal.

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

 

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 and 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


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.

Wildlife Research 36(2) 117–125    doi:10.1071/WR08018
Submitted: 3 February 2008    Accepted: 28 November 2008    Published: 20 February 2009





   
Subscriber Login
Username:
Password:  

 View
Issue Contents
Full Text
PDF (357 KB)
Export Citation
 Tools
Print
Email this page
    


 
Top  Email this page
 


Legal & Privacy | Sitemap | Contact Us | Help

CSIRO

© CSIRO 1996-2010