As this study has shown, a minimum of a third of all known cats in San Diego County are free roaming. Address this problem and the general question of how to reduce the number of animals euthanized in the shelters is greatly answered.
There are several tried approaches to managing roaming cat populations. The most commonly preferred method put forth by animal control organizations for control of cats has traditionally been to capture and euthanize unowned, roaming cats.
Others, who refer to this as the "trap and kill" method, consider it inhumane and objectionable on several fronts. One objection is that it is ineffective.[15] It has been shown as soon as a cat is removed, a new one will move in, assuming a steady food source.[16] Another protest to trap and kill, less objective and more subjective--but still valid, is unless a cat is making a threat to human welfare or is causing unusual harm, it is worthy of life, even though it does not have a human address.
After a six-year
study and daily observation of a feral cat colony, it was documented
that stray female cats start having heat cycles when they are 4-6.9
months old, or as soon as daylight hours are plentiful.[17] January and February are
the start of the breeding season, with the litters born in March and
April. Strays have an average of 2.1 litters per year of 4.25
kittens.[18] By the age
of two months, 42% of the kittens will die of natural causes.[19] Of the kittens who
survive, many go on to perish in the shelters. Those who escape early
death and the shelter go on to be prolific bearers of kittens over
their short life span of approximately three years.[20]
Taking the mortality into account, along with birth and death rates, the average stray female will have 5.25 litters in her lifetime, encompassing 22.3 kittens. At age two months there should be 12.9 survivors, roughly six females and seven males. These six females will go on to have thirteen surviving kittens each. Realistically, over twelve years, one unspayed female, with all her unspayed female offspring can reasonably expected to be responsible for over 3,200 kittens if there is no human intervention.
Cats are territorial. They don't allow other cats into their territory to steal their food. Altered cats will stand their ground and guard their food source, will not have kittens, and will die in a few years. To simply remove the cats from the habitat without changing the habitat will see other, reproducing cats move in.[21]
In 1994 the Humane Society of Santa Clara Valley found 37% of their cats euthanized over an eleven month period were either wild, or the unweaned offspring of feral and stray cats. Once these wild kittens are over six months of age, it is nearly impossible to socialize them to the degree necessary to be placed as house pets. An unsocialized cat is an unadoptable cat. Cities and counties pay for the handling of these stray cats and their offspring. Reducing the number of kittens born to these cats would substantially reduce the number of cat euthanasias, thereby reducing the costs born by the taxpayers.
Unowned cats are routinely euthanized at shelters. Even though the kittens can often be socialized for placement, it takes a minimum of two to three weeks of intensive work. Shelters simply don't have the time, personnel or cage space to socialize kittens. Unweaned kittens are generally euthanized, again due to lack of time, funds and space.
In 1989, Stanford
University officials announced a plan to trap and kill approximately
500 stray cats living on campus. In response to this drastic
announcement, Stanford Cat Network (SCN) was formed. SCN was able to
present an alternative solution to stop the progression of cat
reproduction on the Stanford campus. They proposed a TTVARM program,
(trap, test, vaccinate, alter, release and management), which they
would organize.
Because of SCN's work, Stanford cats now have zero population growth and the population is declining through natural attrition. Over 60 kittens were caught, socialized and adopted out during the first season. By 1994, only four kittens were found on campus. The campus population is now estimated at approximately 300 cats. Stanford's current cat population is healthy and well-cared for, and its maintenance involves students, staff, and faculty.
SCN has accomplished all of this without financial support from the University. SCN's successful five year program with a very large cat population demonstrates that feral cat colonies can be managed and kept under control. Workable, viable alternatives to extermination do exist.
A typical TTVARM program works very simply and methodically. Cats are humanely trapped. The traps are monitored so the cats do not spend a long time in them.
The trapped cats are then tested for lethal diseases, most often Feline Leukemia Virus (FeLV) and Feline Immunodeficiency Virus (FIV). Both of these illnesses are common in feral populations, they are contagious to other cats, and are lethal viruses. (They do not pose a threat to humans, as these are species-specific viruses.) Cats which are found to have these diseases are humanely euthanized. Euthanizing FeLV or FIV positive cats is humane to the cat, as these diseases are always lethal and cause pain and suffering to the ill animal. It is also to the benefit of the originating colony, as these are contagious diseases. Removing sick animals increases the health of the colony.
Cats too sick or injured to be treated are also humanely euthanized.
If a cat is found to be negative for FeLV and FIV, it is then vaccinated for common upper respiratory illnesses and rabies. Minor cuts, abscesses, and parasites are also often treated. The cat is surgically altered. The cat's ear is notched for identification and monitoring.
The cat is then released back into its originating environment, providing it is a safe one. The colonies are managed by continued trapping and altering.
There are some variations on the TTVARM programs. Some groups do not test and vaccinate. Some do not mark cats. Management care varies. However, the most successful groups follow the plan as outlined above.
In San Diego County, the non-profit Feral Cat Coalition has handled in excess of 3,100 cats over the past two years in its TTVARM program. In addition to these cats, which were over five months of age at the time of altering, an unknown number of kittens were also trapped, socialized and adopted into new homes.
Prior to this project, San Diego County Animal Management Information System reported an increase of roughly 10% per year in the number of cats handled by San Diego Animal Control shelters from 1988 to 1992. The increase peaked at 13% from Fiscal Year (FY)91 to FY92, with a total of 19,077 cats handled. After just two years, with no other explanation for the drop, only 12,446 cats were handled--a drop of 35%. Instead of another 10% annual increase, euthanasias plunged 40% from 91-92 to 93-94.
Of the 3,153 cats trapped by the Feral Cat Coalition which were altered, 54% were female, 46% were male. Of the 1,639 females spayed, the following characteristics were noted:
453 Normal 28%
691 In heat 42%
218 Pregnant 13%
216 Lactating 13%
61 Post queening 4%
--- ---
1639 100%
Only 3% were found to have been already altered. 17 cats were refused surgery for being under five months of age, or too ill. 18 cats died during surgery. 679 cats (22%) needed additional medical treatment--generally antibiotics and anti-parasitics. Cleaning and suturing of wounds and abscesses was also very common.
Of these stray female cats, 72% were either in heat, pregnant, or had recently had kittens. This is at least a three and a half times higher rate of pregnancy than found among owned cats.
Clearly, the project to trap, alter and release cats in San Diego County has had a dramatic effect on the number of cats handled and euthanized at their shelters, which even historical or nationwide downward trends cannot explain.
Financially, TTVARM programs make sense.
For the FCC program, veterinarians donated their services and supplies were purchased through donations. However, the cost of these services and supplies would average about $52 per cat in a low cost clinic
Looking at the figures from San Diego, for a cost of $163,956 (3,153 cats x $52/cat), the shelter numbers have dropped by at least 6,500 cats. The average three day stay for a cat in a California shelter is estimated at $70 per cat. By reducing the number of cats handled by 6,500, San Diego saved $455,000 over a two year time span. This successful track record shows that in actuality no additional funds need be raised--the program will pay for itself through less shelter costs. Additional funding for altering could be taken from the shelter budget.
Following TTVARM programs, mating behavior and noise associated with breeding are eliminated. The male urine spray smell is eliminated.[22]
Disease transmission from cats to humans is a negligible factor due to the few diseases which are transmitted this way.
The human health
risk of rabies is often touted as a concern in the management of
roaming cats. In California the risk is nonexistent. There has never
been a case of a human acquiring rabies from a cat in the recorded
history of the state. There were only two case of cat rabies found in
1993 in the entire state of California, out of a current population of
some 13 million owned and stray cats. Skunks, bats, and rodents are
more of a real rabies threat.
By removing roaming cats, vector problems should increase until such time as other rodent predators take the place of the missing cats. Other predators are less desirable, as most of us would probably prefer to have a small, healthy feral cat population, rather than a larger Norway rat and seagull population.[23]
In addition to TTVARM programs, the issuance of vouchers for residents to take their stray and "loosely owned" neighborhood cats in for free altering is another method which is proving to work.
The city of San Jose has enacted a spay/neuter program beginning in October 1994. The program has so far been well-received, and while it is still early, the Humane Society is reporting an unusually "light" kitten season, with no other explanation other than the voucher program. HSSCV also reported they had an 11% decrease in the number of stray cats for the two month period of March-April 1995 compared to March and April 1994. At the same time, stray cat intakes for three surrounding cities to San Jose has increased 4% at the same shelter. A similar program for dogs was begun in San Jose on May 1, 1995.
San Jose's program is simple and has a "no strings attached" approach. Even though the vouchers are issued by the licensing department, buying a license is not a requirement. The only requirement is participants must be residents of the City of San Jose. People request vouchers, either in person or by mail, and they take these to one of the 15 participating veterinarians. There is no limit to the number of vouchers a resident can obtain. The cat is "fixed" for free. The city reimburses the veterinarians at a set fee of $25 per female and $15 per male. If the female is pregnant the veterinarian reimbursement adjusts upwards to a maximum of $50 for a full-term pregnancy. For males with anatomical abnormalities, the fee can be increased up to $150 depending on the degree of surgery necessary to completely neuter the male. For the first six months of the program, the costs for all altering have averaged $21.07 per cat.
The veterinarians have control over whether or not they will alter the animal. If an animal is too sick, or has other problems, the veterinarian can decline to do the surgery. Attached to the voucher is a short, anonymous questionnaire for the owner to fill out at the veterinarian's. This form asks ownership questions useful to monitoring the program's success and to determine who is using the program. The questionnaires are sent back to the department handling the program.
So far, the reports from San Jose have been all positive. The veterinarians have had no problems, the people redeeming the vouchers like the program, and the city department handling the program have reported that all is working smoothly.
For the first six months of the program, approximately 2,500 vouchers were issued. 2,000 have already been redeemed. As of May, 1995 the city is redeeming 150 per week.
San Francisco SPCA also has an active, successful, free altering program. Any feral cat brought to the shelter is altered free of charge year round. Owned cats are altered for free during May, June and July each year. The rest of the year owned cats are altered at a low cost. Starting in 1995, SF SPCA also started paying a $5 "bounty" for every owned cat brought in for altering.
King County,
Washington has recently passed some of the most stringent, punitive
animal related laws in the country. This includes differential
licensing for dogs and cats, where owners of unaltered pets pay a
substantially higher license fee. They also have a voucher
program. Instead of being an open program, as in San Jose and San
Francisco, vouchers are sent to those people who have purchased
unaltered animal licenses.
In 1993, 4,931 vouchers (worth $25) were mailed to people who had purchased unaltered animal licenses--212 vouchers (4.3%) were redeemed. In 1994, there were 5,654 vouchers mailed and 633 (11%) were redeemed.[29]
King County's approach of sending out unsolicited vouchers to only those who purchase unaltered animal licenses is not a big success. Obviously those people who have purchased the more expensive, unaltered animal licenses are the very group of people who have chosen to keep their animals intact. Linking the licensing program to the voucher program also tends to make people wary of "the catch" in dealing with a government program, even if there is no catch.
As has been cited several times above, while most owned cats are altered in SDC, 19% of pet cats had litters prior to being altered. Are these owned cats causing an overpopulation crisis?
Assuming an average litter of 4.25 kittens per litter,[24]nd assuming an average life span of seven years,[25] it turns out there are not enough owned cats reproducing to sustain a zero population growth among the owned cat population in SDC. See Chart Six.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ASSUME 1000 OWNED CATS | ASSUME 1000 ROAMING CATS
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
7 year life span | 3 year life span [26]
|
143 will die annually. To sustain | 333 will die annually
zero population growth in the |
owned population, 143 cats will |
need to be replaced by new births. |
|
500 will be female | 350 will be female [27]
|
500 x 16% will have a litter | 97% of mature (approx. 6 mos or older)
prior to being spayed | females are capable of reproduction.
| Some will be altered through trap/
| alter/release programs. A few will be
| stray, previously owned cats.
|
= 80 litters over 7 years time | 350x97% = 340 litters born two times/yr
= 11 litters per years |
|
11 litters x 4.25 kittens | 340 litters x 1.4 kittens
| alive at 1 yr[28]
=47 kittens per year/per 1000 | =476 kittens
owned cats |
| 476 kittens x 2 cycles per year
| =952 kittens per year/per 1000
143 for zero population - 47 born | non-owned cats
=94 kittens less than the level |
needed to maintain the owned cat | 94 of these kittens are assumed to be
population | adopted or obtained as strays to
| sustain the owned cat population
Owned cats produce 33% of the owned|
kittens necessary to maintain the |
owned cat zero population level | 952 born - 94 adopted = 858 surplus/
| unwanted feral and stray kittens per
(A small percentage may have a | year, per 1000 stray/feral catsa
second litter prior to altering) |
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Owned cats produce only 40.6% of the kittens necessary to sustain zero population growth of owned pets. (While a few may have a second litter, these are negligible.) Without the adoption of kittens from the roaming population into the ranks of owned cats, the owned pet cat population would decrease at a rate of 8.5% per year.
In a similar situation, the stray dogs have unplanned pregnancies at a substantially lower rate than unowned cats. This requires some dogs, some where, to reproduce in order to sustain the species. If every dog were altered, within ten years there would be few dogs left. The average dog lives 9.57 years,[30] and with no replacement puppies, approximately 10% of the dog population would die out every year.
So, while the owned cat population is not vastly contributing to the euthanasias at the shelters, these numbers can be reduced. Unless animals are part of a planned, wanted breeding program, they should not be bred.
Most of the litters born to owned cats were from accidental breedings. People were simply not aware that cats can become sexually mature quite young. An education program targeted at this problem is in order. Education has already been shown to be effective in other areas of pet ownership. There is no legislation which is going to prevent well-meaning, but uninformed, pet owners from having these types of accidental litters.
Many studies[31] have shown early surgical altering of pets is safe. Again, educating the public is the way to get this message across. The safety of early surgical altering and its procedures may not be well known to all area veterinarians. This group should also be targeted for education, and then be involved in educating their clients.
All dogs or cats should be altered before leaving the shelters. In SDC, 14% of the cats having litters prior to spay were obtained from shelters! Policies should immediately be enacted to bring this number to zero. In effect, the shelters are now providing some of the litters with which they must ultimately contend. This is unacceptable.
The spaying and neutering of dogs can be increased. Some may be reluctant to alter their pet dogs because of the close psychological extension some owners have toward their dogs. Some reasons for owners balking at "fixing" their dogs--especially male dogs--are historical and some arecultural. Most of these issues can be directly approached through education, sometimes targeting specific groups.
As shown, few people own or breed purebred cats. There is no animal control problem with this population of owned cats. In fact, purebred cats are less of a problem, as they tend to be indoor-only cats. If these cats are bred, they are planned, wanted litters. Even though the number of purebred dogs is substantial, there is no indication there is any animal control problem with this population either. No special action is needed regarding purebred animals, their breeders or owners.
A renter-landlord adoption incentive program, such as the San Francisco SPCA has instituted, is recommended. This program provides landlords with bonds against pet damages caused by cats and dogs acquired from the SF SPCA. There are many potential pet homes in the rental community. Providing an open-door policy will result in more animals being adopted from the shelters, lowering the euthanasia rate of healthy, adoptable animals.