what is a good age to neuter a feral cat
How Effective and Humane Is Trap-Neuter-Release (TNR) for Feral Cats?
Introduction
The number of feral, abandoned cats in the United States is estimated to be between 30 and 80 million individuals (Loss et al. 2018; Jessup 2004). As the number of feral cats continues to increase, land managers, public health officials, and individual citizens are voicing concerns nearly how to address the nuisance and public health impacts, too every bit animal welfare concerns, that feral cats create. Feral cat management falls into two main categories of control techniques: lethal and not-lethal. Gaining popularity in the United States, the trap-neuter-release (TNR) strategy for feral true cat management proposes to reduce feral true cat populations without euthanasia. Typically, cats are live-trapped and taken to a nearby veterinarian, where the cats are neutered/spayed, sometimes vaccinated for rabies, and then released back to the area where they were trapped (Figure 1). Because the sterilized cats tin no longer reproduce, the assumption is that over time the numbers of feral cats in a colony will decline, and eventually the colony will stop to exist.
Credit: Steve Johnson, UF/IFAS
In Florida, the TNR strategy is being considered by many canton governments as an option to manage/control feral cat colonies. Brevard, Palm Beach, Volusia, Gilchrist, and Okaloosa counties in Florida accept amended their ordinances to make TNR legal (Hatley 2019). Just is TNR an constructive and humane method to reduce feral cat populations? Below, we discuss the pros and cons of creating TNR true cat colonies. Nosotros investigate peer-reviewed, scientific literature to determine if TNR is an effective way to reduce feral true cat colonies and whether the method is humane.
Does TNR reduce cat populations over time?
Studies That Merits That TNR Does Not Reduce True cat Populations
One of the goals of TNR programs is to reduce feral cat populations in an area. The idea is that neutering/spaying cats and returning them to the environment volition prevent them from reproducing. Over time, the number of feral cats in an area will decrease, and eventually they will disappear. The kickoff report we reviewed was published in the Natural Areas Journal (Castillo and Clarke 2003). Hither, researchers tracked 2 TNR colonies in two public parks in Miami-Dade County, Florida. (The original populations were 25 cats at 1 park and 56 cats at another.) Cats were monitored from 1999 to 2001 using a photographic capture/recapture technique. In both parks, managed true cat populations increased over time due primarily to the introduction of new cats to these colonies, either through illegal dumping or equally the result of stray cats being attracted to the colonies (an increase of 27 cats in 1 park and 61 cats in the other). A second study we reviewed used San Diego County, California, and Alachua County, Florida, TNR data and found that TNR did non reduce the feral cat population growth rate or the proportion of meaning feral cats (Foley et al. 2005). Hither, they practical a population growth model and institute that in lodge for a TNR colony to decline over fourth dimension, 71% to 94% of the cats needed to be neutered. These percentages of neutering were higher than what occurred in the field, and thus the models indicated that populations would increase. Both of these studies used data collection methods for estimating abundance that are scientifically accustomed. Overall, these studies reached the conclusion that TNR did non significantly reduce cat population sizes, but that population sizes increased due to clearing of other cats and the difficulty of trapping all cats and neutering them. Immigration is the motility of cats from the surrounding area into the target population.
Studies That Claim That TNR Does Reduce Cat Populations
We beginning reviewed a study published in the Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association (Centonze and Levy 2002). This study was a survey of caretakers of the TNR cat colonies in north cardinal Florida. The authors asked caretakers to report the initial size of the colony and to estimate the size of the colony after approximately 8 months. This study was conducted across 132 colonies that initially totaled 920 cats. The authors reported that the total number of cats declined from 920 to 678 (a 27% reduction). They reported 151 deaths, 149 disappearances, 238 adoptions, 498 births and 103 immigrants. However, taking into account all of the same parameters, the concluding cat population should be calculated as 983, non 678. The numbers generated in the publication do not add up because, as the authors stated, the estimated cat populations were "...based on the recollections of individual caretakers," and the population fluctuated equally the cats that belonged to the colonies changed. Consequently, the reliability of the estimated cat numbers is questionable (i.due east., human fault in estimating the number of cats); information technology was not based on a scientifically accepted fashion to approximate abundance. In improver, most of the cat colonies included in the study were very small (an average of 7 cats per colony), with the largest colony being 89 cats. The small colony sizes in the study limit how applicable this study is to other larger TNR colonies in the United States. Because of the disparity between the number of cats reported and the population tendency (the number of reported cats was higher at the end of the study, yet observers reported a decrease in the colony size), nosotros do not consider the methods used in this study to be reliable. Furthermore, adoptions accounted for 26% of the original cat population, an outcome that was needed to somewhat offset immigration and births.
In a review report by Crawford, Calver, and Fleming (2019), authors noted that in that location were very few studies that tracked a TNR cat colony from initial population size to final population size. They only found 11 studies that did this and found that, typically, cat colonies were tracked for less than 3 years. Ten of these studies were in urban areas and one in a rural setting. From these studies, the number of cats that were adopted was reported in 7 colonies. Of these, five colonies decreased (ranging from a i% to a 72% reduction), and 2 colonies increased (ranging from a 25% to a 175% increase). For the 5 colonies that decreased, adoption rates ranged from xviii%–80%. Adoption rates were calculated past dividing the number of reported adopted cats by the number of cats in the initial colony added to the number of new cats that joined the colony. They noted that in each study, new cats joined the colonies, indicating that TNR colonies are not closed colonies and have immigration occurring due to abandoned cats or cats attracted to the colonies. Most studies concluded that TNR cat colonies were prone to attracting abandoned and devious cats (Longcore et al. 2009).
Some other study had volunteers monitor TNR true cat colonies at the University of Central Florida (Levy et al. 2003). Here, 68 cats from eleven colonies in 1996 were reduced to 23 cats in 2002. These colonies attracted additional cats, merely overall numbers decreased due to deaths, euthanasia (of sick cats) and a high rate of adoption (47%). This adoption charge per unit was like to the removal charge per unit (50%) calculated from a population model of TNR colonies (Andersen et al. 2004), which is necessary to reduce feral cat populations. For the TNR colonies at the Academy of Central Florida, the high adoption rate was the primary reason for the reduction in TNR cat populations.
Other example studies that establish a reduction in cat colonies through TNR as well had high adoption/removal rates: 39% adopted, euthanized, or relocated in Chicago (Spehar and Wolf 2018); 43% estimated adopted or euthanized in Newburyport, MA (Spehar and Wolf 2017); and 32% adopted or euthanized in Sydney, Australia (Swarbrick and Rand 2018). Each of these studies found a reduction in cat colonies, largely owing to adoption and removal. There is less show that the reduction in cat colonies was attributable solely to spaying/neutering of cats, and a concerted effort was needed to remove cats to assistance decrease populations over time.
Many of the above studies (due east.g., Centonze and Levy 2002; Levy et al. 2003) were conducted with volunteers and used surveys of caretakers or veterinary clinic records to estimate abundance. These studies did not use standardized field observations; thus, results are likely not accurate. To highlight the discrepancy in data drove, we present data from a study where simply one caretaker surveyed cats at various feeding stations in Central Largo from 1999 to 2013 (Kreisler, Cornell, and Levy 2019). This flagman did not report how ofttimes each feeding station was sampled. The number of feeders changed from year to year, and many of the feeding stations were located near each other, and then that cats very likely ate from multiple stations, yet the flagman provided no rationale for how double counting was avoided. Furthermore, the written report did not state what happened to the cats in each of the colonies: were they adopted, killed, or euthanized? The written report did not provide this information.
In a large report of 72,970 TNR cats beyond vi cities (Spehar and Wolf 2019), researchers measured feline intake to municipal shelters over a three-year period. They found a median reduction of 32% in feline intake and a median decline of 83% in shelter euthanasia. Although fewer cats were taken to shelters, information technology is not articulate that cat colonies decreased in size. The authors attempted to compare the number of DOA (dead on arrival) cats before and after implementing the TNR program, only inconsistencies in the information meant that the authors could not demonstrate a consequent turn down in true cat colonies. Other studies take reported similar results where TNR along with targeted adoption reduced the number of cats taken into shelters, but overall reductions of cat populations across the cities examined in these studies were non measured (Levy, Isaza, and Scott 2019).
Another field study in Rome, Italy, establish that TNR programs did reduce population size (xvi% to 32%) (Natoli et al. 2006). Researchers surveyed 103 cat colonies from 1991 to 2000 and found that some of the colonies increased and others decreased. The authors found that cat immigration from nearby neighborhoods was effectually 21 percent, and that the immigration was due to abandoned cats from nearby neighborhoods. They concluded that TNR programs alone may not subtract cat populations unless nearby residents are educated to neuter their own cats and not to abandon cats.
Finally, a written report that modeled various cat-direction practices reported that the best practice for control was TNR (Boone et al. 2019). This report modeled population fluctuation using estimated population parameters with different hypothetical management strategies, such every bit TNR at low and loftier removal intensities. At the end of x years using these models, outputs measured were population size and preventable deaths. Preventable deaths were defined as the number of cats that would not die as the upshot of a item direction strategy. The study reported that loftier-intensity TNR (50% of cats sterilized every vi months) was the best solution for minimizing preventable deaths. However, results indicated that the best strategy to reduce cat populations was l% removal of cats, either through euthanasia or adoption. One shortcoming of the modeling attempt was the use of an immigration charge per unit of ii%. Other studies written report a substantially higher rate of immigration (eastward.g., Crawford, Calver, and Fleming 2019). Using values greater than 2% would accept greatly increased the population size over time. The authors state this was an capricious number. Thus, they should have tried the scenarios at unlike immigration rates. Some other shortcoming of the model was the assumption that a given environment'due south carrying capacity for a true cat colony is equal to the established cat colony's population size. An environment's carrying capacity for a given species of brute is the maximum number of animals that tin can subsist on the resources in the environment (nutrient, shelter, etc.). Considering TNR programs typically feed cats, the carrying chapters would likely increment with the establishment of a TNR plan, because the extra nutrient would hateful that the surroundings could support boosted cats. Reliable nutrient sources can cause cats to become more than social and less territorial (Levy and Crawford 2004), resulting in more than cats in a given area (Schmidt et al. 2007).
Overall, it appears that TNR cat colonies were reduced just if there were high rates of adoption/removal of cats (effectually l% or more), if in that location were loftier rates of neutered cats, and if there were low rates of immigration past cats. Without these, the colonies would not pass up in size over time.
How humane are TNR programs for the cats?
Regardless of whether TNR programs are effective in reducing feral true cat populations, it is of import to assess whether these programs are humane. Although some people feel that TNR programs are the nearly humane method of managing feral cat populations (e.chiliad., https://world wide web.neighborhoodcats.org/how-to-tnr/getting-started/what-is-tnr), creature rights organizations do not necessarily hold. PETA (People for the Ethical Handling of Animals) states, "Having witnessed the painful deaths of countless feral cats, we cannot in good conscience advocate trapping, altering, and releasing (e.1000., TNR) as a humane way to deal with overpopulation and homelessness" (https://www.peta.org/nearly-peta/why-peta/feral-cats/; accessed ane/7/20). Outdoor cats, whether they are on their own, in unmanaged colonies, or in TNR colonies, are subject to a variety of injuries, trauma, poisoning, and death. They scavenge dead animals, eat refuse out of garbage cans, and potable dirty water from parking lots (Crawford et al. 2019). Many complimentary-ranging cats are brought into veterinary clinics because they have ingested toxic compounds (Crawford et al. 2019). Trauma, peculiarly from beingness hit by cars or injured/killed by dogs or coyotes, is a serious risk for outdoor cats. In 1 study, 18% of 164 cats in TNR colonies were killed by vehicles (Nutter 2006). Even human cruelty is a gene when people shoot cats or purposely injure them by other means (eastward.one thousand., Vnuk et al. 2016).
In a TNR study in Key Largo, Florida, of captured cats brought into a vet clinic (total = two,530), 441 (17%) were euthanized for being unhealthy or retrovirus-positive, and 209 (eight%) were expressionless on arrival through high trauma (due east.g., hit past cars) or other unknown reasons (Kreisler, Cornell, and Levy 2019). Although one,111 cats were returned to the colonies afterward veterinarian treatment, Kreisler, Cornell, and Levy (2019) stated that "return [of cats to TNR colonies] rather than routine euthanasia of trapped cats [may] increment animal suffering due to non-retroviral disease or trauma (in other words, that free-roaming cats would be better off dead)." The average historic period of cats in this report was 82.1 months when they were euthanized and the boilerplate age of DOA/MIA cats was 58.7 months, indicating that many of these outdoor cats concluded upwards being very sick and/or killed by the time they were 7 years sometime. In i study in Raleigh, North Carolina, 127 of 169 (75%) kittens died or disappeared in free-roaming managed colonies (Nutter et al. 2004). One study estimated that complimentary-ranging domestic cats on farmsteads survived on average 3–5 years, and less than ane% survived 7 years or more (Warner 1985). Although few concrete studies have been published, diverse humane societies and veterinary organizations estimate that indoor cats live longer on average than outdoor cats (e.g., American Veterinarian Medicine Association, https://world wide web.avma.org/policies/free-roaming-owned-cats).
Cats in TNR colonies may have loftier parasite loads, carry diseases that spread to other cats, compromise the wellness and welfare of wild and domestic animals, and threaten human safety (Wilson et al. 1994; Crawford et al. 2019). In New South Wales, Australia, 79% of feral cats had feline immunodeficiency virus (FIV), 64% had gingivitis, 54% had throat weather, and 23% had cat influenza (Wilson et al. 1994). Feral cats accept fleas, ticks, and lice and are susceptible to the diseases that these ectoparasites carry (Mohd et al. 2013; Lefkaditis et al. 2015). Gastrointestinal parasites, including roundworms and tapeworms (Waap et al. 2014), are also fairly common in feral and outdoor domestic cats (Chalkowski et al. 2019).
Treatment for the higher up diseases and parasites tin can be costly, and in many situations the cats in TNR colonies need to be recaptured for follow-up treatment. Recapturing feral cats tin can be very difficult because the cats become trap shy. In Commonwealth of australia, just treating annually for ectoparasites and worms in devious cats would cost about AU$157 (approximately Us$108) per cat and would require monthly captures (Crawford et al. 2019). Because of the difficulty of catching cats more than once, most studies use visual assessments of TNR cats to determine the health of the cats. Some studies gauge that 21% of cats in a colony are bullheaded or have scars or pare problems (Castro-Prieto and Andrade-Nunez 2018). Others have estimated that a large bulk of the cats appear healthy (80% of cats in Auckland, New Zealand; Zito et al. 2019). However, visual assessments are likely to be inaccurate. Cats may appear to be healthy but have underlying conditions such every bit parasites and mastitis.
Finally, a typical treatment of a spayed or neutered cat is for a vet to recommend an e-collar to be placed on the true cat to prevent them from opening/licking their incisions (Christy Layton, DVM, personal communication). At that place are no studies of the wellness outcomes of cats spayed or neutered after existence released dorsum exterior without an e-collar.
Practise TNR programs increase the adventure of transmitting diseases to humans or wild animals?
Cats are host to a range of zoonotic diseases, such equally rabies, toxoplasmosis, hookworms, and roundworms. The almost mutual road of disease exposure to humans from feral cats is directly from bites and scratches. In Florida, cats are the virtually mutual domestic animal to expose humans to rabies, and on boilerplate ten Floridians are exposed to rabies from feral cats each year (Florida Morbidity and Mortality Report 2017). In 2010, 303 rabid cats were reported through a national surveillance program in the USA (Blanton et al. 2011). Rabies is a lethal illness to humans, and exposure from feral cats requires ambitious and expensive postal service-exposure handling of the person exposed. In improver to rabies, feral cats may also exist a reservoir for the flu virus. Laboratory studies have shown that cats can contract avian influenza (H5N1) and could possibly transmit this virus to humans (Rimmelzwaan et al. 2006).
Cats besides harbor ectoparasites, including fleas, ticks, and mites. True cat fleas acquit numerous diseases that can bear upon people, including cat scratch fever (acquired by the bacteria, Bartonella henselae), flea-borne typhus (acquired by several species of the leaner, Rickettsia spp), and plague (caused past the leaner, Yersinia pestis; Gerhod and Jessop 2013). Cat scratch fever is a frequently diagnosed affliction in children and immature adults that have had contact with cats (McElroy et al. 2010).
Because feral cats deposit a large amount of urine and carrion into the environs, contaminated soil effectually feral cat colonies is as well a source of disease. Roundworm eggs and hookworm larvae reside in the soil and are transmitted to humans through skin contact with contaminated soil. For example, in Prague, in urban areas with feral cats, 45% of soil samples contained roundworm eggs. In California, information technology is estimated that 2,309 free-roaming cats contributed almost 108 tons of feces into the landscape (Dabritz 2006). These contaminants tin touch nearby waterbodies, such every bit wetlands, streams, and lakes. When information technology rains, feces and urine can be carried to nearby waters and pollute these areas. In Monterey Bay, California, the prevalence of Toxoplasma gondii infections in bounding main otters (Toxoplasma gondii is the causative agent of toxoplasmosis) has been attributed to coastal runoff of infected cat feces and urine into the ocean (Miller et al. 2002). In another case, feline leukemia virus (FeLV), which historically has non infected wild populations of panthers, caused the deaths of at least 5 endangered Florida panthers (Puma concolor coryi) between 2002 and 2004, and infections have been diagnosed in half-dozen boosted panthers since 2010. These infections are believed to have been transferred to the panthers from domestic cats (https://myfwc.com/wildlifehabitats/wildlife/panther/health/; accessed 1/vii/20).
Trap-Neuter-Release cat colonies tin be reservoirs for human diseases for several reasons. First, TNR colonies take loftier rates of clearing because they attract other cats into the colonies (Gunther et al. 2011). Often these newcomers are animals that do not have vaccinations and are susceptible to affliction. As the number of susceptible animals increases, so does the risk of disease transmission (Gerhold and Jessup 2013). In addition, when people leave nutrient for feral cat colonies, the nutrient attracts local wildlife similar raccoons, rodents, and opossums (Hernandez 2018) that tin can also transmit diseases to cats in the colonies, which increases the routes and frequency of disease transmission (Gerhold and Jessup 2013). Although some animals that have been spayed or neutered may also have been vaccinated against rabies, they are unlikely to take been vaccinated for other zoonotic diseases or treated for ectoparasites like fleas and ticks. Further, with rabies vaccinations, National Association of Country Public Health Veterinarians have guidelines that state an beast needs an initial shot, a booster afterwards 1 year, and then boosters every 1–3 years, depending on vaccine manufacturer recommendations (National Association of State Public Health Veterinarians, 2016). While feral cats that are returned to TNR colonies have been vaccinated for rabies, they are unlikely (if trap shy) to go the necessary booster shots, which ways that these cats do non have life-long immunity to rabies.
Feral true cat colonies have been reported to control rats in urban areas (Glass et al. 2009), merely this statement is questionable. In i study, cats in an alley with rats did reduce the population of rats by more than than 50% in one year, but the following year, the number of rats increased by more than 100%, despite the number of cats staying abiding in the expanse (Glass et al. 2009). Further, cats may prey on rats, merely that does not mean they end preying on other animals in the area (Bradshaw 2006). Switching prey occurs depending on the abundance of certain prey species; so when rat populations go down, feral cats in the area volition target other animal species, such as birds, frogs, etc.
Finally, feral cats are typically non socialized and can be a danger to people and pets nearby. Many feral cats tin be aggressive and volition seize with teeth and scratch people, and some become a public nuisance. For example, in State of israel, three,354 complaints were registered across five city councils about aggressive cats (Gunther et al. 2015). In 2018, more than than 2000 cats were tested for rabies because of possible human exposure due to bites and scratches (Zito et al. 2019). In addition, devious cats enter yards and defecate and urinate in these yards, increasing the possibility of illness manual to residents (Crawford et al. 2018). Thus, TNR colonies could accept high rates of disease prevalence with an increased potential for man exposure.
Summary
The above review of the TNR studies indicates that population outcomes cannot be predicted only by the application of TNR: sometimes populations refuse, and sometimes they do non. The lack of scientifically applied monitoring in studies makes reliable estimates of population sizes and TNR outcomes unreliable. What seems clear is that TNR colonies take high immigration rates via human-assisted or natural immigration, which keeps colony sizes from decreasing. In order to observe a decrease in population size in TNR colonies, high adoption/removal rates are needed to remove cats from the colony.
In theory, sterilizing enough cats then that the birth charge per unit is less than the decease rate would reduce the true cat population in a given area. Nonetheless, this assumes a airtight population, a phenomenon that has not been observed in any of the studies. Instead, the studies observed cats immigrating into colonies, dispersing from other areas or beingness released into colonies by people. Even in a airtight population, a big proportion of the colony must exist sterilized (71% to 94 %) earlier the population volition reject over time (Andersen et al. 2004), which requires a significant input of resources. Another concern is whether TNR is humane and truly beneficial for the welfare of cats. As cited above, cats ordinarily feel a painful decease and suffer from diverse diseases and injuries during their lifetimes. Additionally, feral cat colonies are a source of public and wild fauna health take chances.
Commentary by Authors
Based on the science that we reviewed above, we offering commentary about the strategy of TNR to decrease feral cat populations, and we provide future directions to address the problem of homeless cats. Overall, we feel that TNR does not appear to decrease population size unless significant resources and efforts are made to remove animals via adoption. The animals that remain announced to live shorter lives and are bailiwick to disease and injury. In our opinion, it is much more humane to capture a healthy cat, and, if cannot be adopted, have it euthanized instead of returning information technology to the outdoors, where information technology will endure during its life.
The danger we see in TNR programs is that TNR may exist seen as a viable solution to reducing feral true cat populations, and that therefore less money and effort will get towards prevention of gratuitous-ranging cats. The practice of TNR and the establishment of TNR colonies is neither humane nor proven to be effective at reducing feral true cat populations. Our review concurs with another published review that found that TNR colonies exercise not decrease without high adoption/removal rates, and that these colonies are both a danger to the cats themselves and to nearby humans and wild animals (Longcore et al. 2009). We empathise at that place is no easy solution to the feral cat population problem, simply we (the authors) promise more funding is directed towards prevention. Keeping cats indoors and sterilizing them is not cruel and will help to keep these cats prophylactic from disease or injury, allowing them to alive longer (run across American Bird Conservancy Cats Indoors Entrada). People should not feed outdoor cats merely should rather help them to be adopted. People who care about the welfare of cats tin support funding for local animal shelters and can increase public pedagogy for the adoption of cats. Euthanizing sick, injured, or unadoptable cats may exist the just solution in cases where adoption rates are low. We maintain, based on the best available science, that TNR is not a feasible solution in most situations. Overall, nosotros view TNR strategies as inhumane to the cats themselves and potentially unsafe to humans, pets, and wildlife.
Literature Cited
Andersen, M. C., B. J. Martin, and Thousand. Due west. Roemer. 2004. "Use of Matrix Population Models to Estimate the Efficacy of Euthanasia Versus Trap-Neuter-Return for Direction of Free-Roaming Cats." Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association, 225: 1871–1876.
Blanton, J. D., D. Palmer, J. Dyer, and C. Eastward. Rupprecht. 2011. "Rabies Surveillance in the United States during 2010." J. Am. Vet. Med. Assoc. 239: 773–783.
Boone, J. D., P. South. Miller, J. R. Briggs, Five. A. Benka, D. F. Lawler, M. Slater, J. K. Levy, and South. Zawistowski. 2019. "A Long-Term Lens: Cumulative Impacts of Free-Roaming True cat Management Strategy and Intensity on Preventable Cat Mortalities." Front. Vet. Sci.| https://doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2019.00238
Bradshaw, J. W. South. 2006. "The Evolutionary Footing for the Feeding Behavior of Domestic Dogs (Dog) and Cats (Felis catus)." J. Nutr. 136: 1927S–1931S.
Castro-Prieto, J., and M. J. Andrade-Nunez. 2018. "Health and Ecological Aspects of Stray Cats in Old San Juan, Puerto Rico: Baseline Information to Develop an Effective Control Programme." P. R. Health Sci. J.37: 110–114.
Castillo, D., and A. 50. Clarke. 2003. "Trap/Neuter/Release Methods Ineffective in Controlling Domestic Cat 'Colonies' on Public Lands." Natural Areas Periodical 23(3): 247–253.
Centonze, L. A., and J. G. Levy. 2002. "Characteristics of Free-Roaming Cats and their Caretakers." J. Am. Vet. Med. Assoc. 220: 1627–1633.
Chalkowski, K., A. E. Wilson, C. A. Lepczyk, and S. Zohdy. 2019. "Who Let the Cats Out? A Global Meta-Analysis on Risk of Parasitic Infection in Indoor Versus Outdoor Domestic Cats (Felis catus)." Biol Lett. 15(4): 20180840.
Crawford, H. G., M. C. Calver, and P. A. Fleming. 2019. "A Case of Letting the Cat Out of The Bag—Why Trap-Neuter-Return Is Not an Ethical Solution for Devious Cat (Felis catus) Management." Animals ix(4): Article 171.
Crawford, H. M., J. B. Fontaine, M. C. Calver. 2018. "Ultrasonic Deterrents Reduce Nuisance True cat (Felis catus) Activity on Suburban Properties." Glob. Ecol. Conserv. 15: e00444, doi:10.1016/j.gecco.2018.e00444.
Dabritz, H. A., R. Atwill, I. A. Gardner, M. A. Miller, and P. A. Conrad. 2006. "Outdoor Fecal Deposition by Complimentary-Roaming Cats and Attitudes of True cat Owners and Nonowners toward Devious Pets, Wildlife, and Water Pollution." J. Am. Vet. Med. Assoc. 229: 74–81 doi:10.2460/javma.229.ane.74.
Foley, P., J. E. Foley, J. K. Levy, and T. Paik. 2005. "Assay of the Touch of Trap-Neuter-Return Programs on Populations of Feral Cats." JAVMA Vol 227 No. 11: 1775–1781.
Gerhold, R. Due west., and D. A. Jessup. 2013. "Zoonotic Diseases Associated with Free-Roaming Cats." Zoonoses and Public Health 60(3): 189–195.
Glass, G. East., Fifty. C. Gardner-Santana, R. D. Holt, J. Chen, T. M. Shields, M. Roy, S. Schachterle, and Due south. Fifty. Klein. 2009. "Trophic Garnishes: Cat-Rat Interactions in an Urban Surroundings." PLoS One iv: e5794. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0005794.
Gunther, I., T. Raz, O. Berke, and Due east. Klement. 2015. "Nuisances and Welfare of Free-Roaming Cats in Urban Settings and Their Clan with Cat Reproduction." Prev. Vet. Med. 119: 203–210. doi:10.1016/j.prevetmed.2015.02.012.
Gunther, I., H. Finkler, and J. Terkel. 2011. "Demographic Differences between Urban Feeding Groups of Neutered and Sexually Intact Free-Roaming Casts Following a Trap-Neuter-Return Procedure." J. Am. Vet. Med. Assoc. 238: 1134–1140.
Hatley, P. J. 2003. "Feral Cat Colonies in Florida: The Fur and Feathers Are Flying." Periodical of Country Use eighteen: 441–465.
Hernandez, Due south. M., Chiliad. A. T. Loyd, A. N. Newton, G. Gallagher, B. L. Carswell, and K. J. Abernathy. 2018. "Action Patterns and Interspecific Interactions of Free-Roaming, Domestic Cats in Managed Trap-Neuter-Return Colonies." Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 202: 63–68.
Ireland, T., and R. M. Neilan. 2016. "A Spatial Agent-Based Model of Feral Cats and Analysis of Population and Nuisance Controls." Ecological Modelling 337: 123–136.
Jessup, D. 2004. "The Welfare of Feral Cats and Wildlife." Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association 225(9):1377–83
Kreisler, R. Due east., H. N. Cornell, and J. Chiliad. Levy. 2019. "Subtract in Population and Increase in Welfare of Customs Cats in a Twenty-Three Yr Trap-Neuter-Return Program in Key Largo, FL: The ORCAT Program." Front. Vet. Sci. 6: 7.
Lefkaditis, Thou. A., A. 5. Sossidou, A. H. Panorias, Due south. E. Koukeri, A. I. Pastiu, and L. V. Athanasiou. 2015. "Urban Devious Cats Infested by Ectoparasites with Zoonotic Potential in Hellenic republic." Parasitol. Res. 114: 3931–3934. doi:10.1007/s00436-015-4688-4.
Levy, J. M., and P. C. Crawford. 2004. "Humane Strategies for Controlling Feral Cat Populations." J. Am. Vet. Med. Assoc. nine: 1354–1360.
Levy, J. K., D. W. Gale, L. A. Gale. 2003. "Evaluation of the Outcome of a Long-Term Trap-Neuter-Return and Adoption Program on a Gratis-Roaming Cat Population." J. Am. Vet. Med. Assoc. 222: 42–46.
Levy, J. K., N. Grand. Isaza, and K. C. Scott. 2014. "E?ect of High-Impact Targeted Trap-Neuter-Render and Adoption of Customs Cats on True cat Intake to a Shelter." Vet J. 201:269–74. doi: 10.1016/j.tvjl.2014.05.001
Longcore, T., C. Rich, and L. 1000. Sullivan. 2009. "Critical Cess of Claims Regarding Management of Feral Cats past Trap-Neuter-Return." Conservation Biological science 23(4): 887–894.
Loss, South. R., T. Will, T. Longcore, and P. P. Marra. 2018. "Responding to Misinformation and Criticisms Regarding U.s.a. Cat Predation Estimates." Biological Invasions 20: 3385–3396.
Ma, X., B. P. Monroe, J. Thousand. Cleaton, L. A. Orciari, C. M. Gigante, J. D. Kirby, R. B. Chipman, C. Fehlner-Gardier, V. Gutierrez Cedillo, B. Due west. Petersen, V. Olson, and R. Thou. Wallace. 2020. "Rabies Surveillance in the United States during 2018." Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association. 256: 195–208.
McElroy, K. M., B. L. Blagburn, East. B. Breitschwerdt, P. Due south.Mead, and J. H. McQuiston. 2010. "Flea-Associated Zoonotic Diseases of Cats in the Usa: Bartonellosis, Flea-Borne Rickettsioses, and Plague." Trends Parasitol. 26: 197–204.
Miller, G. A., I. A. Gardner, C. Kreuder, D. M. Paradies, G. R. Worcester, D. A. Jessup, E. Dodd, Chiliad. Harris, J. A. Ames, A. East. Packham, and P. A. Conrad. 2002. "Littoral Freshwater Runoff Is a Chance Gene for Toxoplasma gondii Infection of Southern Ocean Otters (Enhydra lutris nereis)." International journal for parasitology. 32(8): 997–1006.
Mohd Zain, S. N., North. Sahimin, P. Pal, and J. Due west. Lewis. 2013. "Macroparasite Communities in Stray True cat Populations from Urban Cities in Peninsular Malaysia." Vet. Parasitol. 196: 469–477. doi:10.1016/j.vetpar.2013.03.030.
National Association of State Public Health Veterinarians. 2016. "Compendium of Creature Rabies Prevention and Control." JAVMA 248(five): 505–517.
Natoli, E., Fifty. Maragliano, Chiliad. Cariola, A. Faini, R. Bonanni, South. Cafazzo, and C. Fantini. 2006. "Management of Feral Domestic Cats in the Urban Environment of Rome (Italy)." Prev Vet Med. 77(3–four):180–five.
Nutter, F. B., J. F. Levine, and M. K. Stoskopf. 2004. "Reproductive Capacity of Free-Roaming Domestic Cats and Kitten Survival Rate." J. Am. Vet. Med. Assoc. 225(nine): 1399–1402.
Nutter, F. B. 2006. Evaluation of a Trap-Neuter-Render Direction Program for Feral Cat Colonies: Population Dynamics, Habitation Ranges, and Potentially Zoonotic Diseases. Due north Carolina State University, Ann Arbor, MI, U.s.a.
Rimmelzwaan, Chiliad. F., D. van Riel, M. Baars, T. Grand. Bestebroer, G. van Amerongen, R. A. Fouchier, A. D. Osterhaus, and T. Kuiken. 2006. "Flu A Virus (H5N1) Infection in Cats Causes Systemic Disease with Potential Novel Routes of Virus Spread within and between Hosts." Am. J. Pathol. 168: 176–183. doi:10.2353/ajpath.2006.050466.
Schmidt, P. M., R. R. Lopez, and B. A. Collier. 2007. "Survival, Fecundity, and Movements of Costless-Roaming Cats." J. of Wild animals Direction 71 :915–919.
Spehar, D. D., and P. J. Wolf. 2017. "An Examination of an Iconic Trap-Neuter-Return Programme: The Newburyport, Massachusetts Case Study." Animals 7(eleven): 81.
Spehar, D. D., and P. J. Wolf. 2018. "A Case Report in Denizen Scientific discipline: The Effectiveness of a Trap-Neuter-Return Program in a Chicago Neighborhood." Animals 8(1): 14.
Swarbrick, H., and J. Rand. 2018. "Application of a Protocol Based on Trap-Neuter-Render (TNR) to Manage Unowned Urban Cats on an Australian University Campus." Animals 8(five): 77.
Vnuk, D., H. Capak, V. Gusak, D. Maticic, Chiliad. Popovic, and North. B. Bottegaro. 2016. "Metal Projectile Injuries in Cats: Review of 65 Cases (2012–2014)." J. Feline Med. Surg. 18: 626–631. doi:10.1177/1098612X15590869.
Waap, H., J. Gomes, and T. Nunes. 2014. "Parasite Communities in Stray Cat Populations from Lisbon, Portugal." J. Helminthol. 88: 389–395. doi:10.1017/S0022149X1300031X.
Warner, R. 1985. "Demography and Movements of Free-Ranging Domestic Cats in Rural Illinois." J Wildlife Management. 49: 340–346.
Wilson, P. Yard., C. R. Tidemann, and H. R. C. Meischke. 1994. "Are Cats on Rubbish Dumps a Problem?" In: Proceedings of the Urban Animate being Management, Sydney, Australia. 163–174.
Zito, South., J. M. Walker, C. Gates, and D. Arnja. 2019. "A Preliminary Description of Companion Cat, Managed Stray Cat, and Unmanaged Stray True cat Welfare in Auckland, New Zealand Using a 5-Component Assessment Calibration." Forepart. Vet. Sci. 21. https://doi.org/ten.3389/fvets.2019.00040
Source: https://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/publication/UW468
0 Response to "what is a good age to neuter a feral cat"
Enviar um comentário