Trap-Neuter-Return (TNR) Reduces Shelter Intake, Population Size
Approximately 400,000 healthy cats and kittens are euthanized annually at shelters across the country. Of these healthy cats, feral cats often face the bleakest outcome. This is because feral cats are born and raised in the wild and are generally unsocialized towards people. Feral cats are not good candidates for adoption; they often hide in the back of their cages and do not seek affection from people.
Thankfully, trap-neuter-return (TNR) provides an answer to a near certain death for feral cats. TNR involves trapping the cats, providing them with spay/neuter surgery and vaccinations, and returning them where they were found outside. The cats are ear-tipped to identify those who have gone through the TNR process. TNR’d cats will have a group caregiver who will provide them with continued food, water, and veterinary care.
This method humanely handles cat overpopulation, while allowing the cats to live out their lives. TNR acknowledges that feral cats are unsuitable for indoor living and at the same time, helps shelters reduce their intake and euthanasia rates. Furthermore, the number of cats living in outdoor groups will decrease over time because the cats can no longer reproduce.
TNR is not only the most humane option but the most practical as well. Trap-and-kill plans have proven to be ineffective because these plans do not address the root problem of reproduction. A study in Tasmania found that killing feral cats actually led to an increase in population. Researchers stated that this was probably due to new individuals taking over the area after dominant cats were removed[1]. TNR is also much less costly than trap-and-kill plans. One reason TNR is more cost-effective is because it reduces shelter intake and shelter euthanasia, saving local governments’ time and resources. Lastly, TNR also helps curb problem behaviors such as wandering, howling, spraying, and fighting that eradication plans do not address; again, because TNR focuses on reproductive/mating issues.
TNR Reduces Shelter Intake and Euthanasia Rates
TNR Reduces Outdoor Cat Group Size
References
[1] Lazenby, B.T., Mooney, N.J. & Dickman, C.R. (2015). Effects of low-level culling of feral cats in open populations: a case study from the forests of southern Tasmania. Wildlife Research, 41(5), 407-420.
[2] Scott, E. (January 19, 2012). Trap, Neuter, Return Program Decreases Homeless Feral Cat Population. Retrieved https://springfield.wusa9.com/news/news/89821-trap-neuter-return-program-decreases-homeless-feral-cat-population.
[3] Trap-neuter-return. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.faastexas.org/.
[4] Cleveland, C. (March 24, 2017). FOTAS: ‘Rigorous’ community cat diversion program solution to shelter intake issue. Retrieved from https://www.aikenstandard.com/news/fotas-rigorous-community-cat-diversion-program-solution-to-shelter-intake/article_77140b66-0f1a-11e7-a197-af86f1a48d73.html.
[5] Edinboro, C., Watson, H. & Fairbrother, A. (2016). Association between a shelter-neuter-return program and cat health at a large municipal animal shelter. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association, 248(3), 298-308.
[6] Spehar, Daniel D., and Peter J. Wolf. “The Impact of Return-to-Field and Targeted Trap-Neuter-Return on Feline Intake and Euthanasia at a Municipal Animal Shelter in Jefferson County, Kentucky.” Animals, vol. 10, no. 8, Aug. 2020, p. 1395. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani10081395.
[7] Spehar, Daniel D., and Peter J. Wolf. “Integrated Return-To-Field and Targeted Trap-Neuter-Vaccinate-Return Programs Result in Reductions of Feline Intake and Euthanasia at Six Municipal Animal Shelters.” Frontiers in Veterinary Science, vol. 6, Mar. 2019, https://doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2019.00077.
[8] Levy, Julie, et al. “Effect of High-impact Targeted Trap-neuter-return and Adoption of Community Cats on Cat Intake to a Shelter.” The Veterinary Journal, vol. 201, no. 3, Sept. 2014, pp. 269–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tvjl.2014.05.001.
[9] Spehar, Daniel D., and Peter J. Wolf. “Back to School: An Updated Evaluation of the Effectiveness of a Long-Term Trap-Neuter-Return Program on a University’s Free-Roaming Cat Population.” Animals, vol. 9, no. 10, Oct. 2019, p. 768. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani9100768.
[10] Levy, J. K., Gale, D.W., and Gale, L.A. (2003). Evaluation of the effect of a long-term trap-neuter-return and adoption program on a free-roaming cat population. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association 222(1), 42-46.
[11] Hughes, K.L. & Slater, M.R. (2002). Implementation of a feral cat management program on a university campus. Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science, 5(1), 15-28.
[12] Trap-Neuter-Return. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.feralcats.com/tnr/.
[13] Natoli, Eugenia, et. al. (2006). Management of Feral Domestic Cats in the Urban Environment of Rome (Italy). Preventative Veterinary Medicine, 77, 180-185.
[14] Boeck, Claire. “Student Organization Spotlights Local Felines.” Daily Sundial, sundial.csun.edu/176683/featured/student-organization-spotlights-local-felines.
[15] Spehar, Daniel D., and Peter J. Wolf. “The Impact of Targeted Trap–Neuter–Return Efforts in the San Francisco Bay Area.” Animals, vol. 10, no. 11, Nov. 2020, p. 2089. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani10112089.
[16] Spehar, Daniel D., and Peter J. Wolf. “A Case Study in Citizen Science: The Effectiveness of a Trap-Neuter-Return Program in a Chicago Neighborhood.” Animals, vol. 8, no. 1, Jan. 2018, p. 14. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani8010014.
[17] Kreisler, Rachael, et al. “Decrease in Population and Increase in Welfare of Community Cats in a Twenty-Three Year Trap-Neuter-Return Program in Key Largo, FL: The ORCAT Program.” Frontiers in Veterinary Science, vol. 6, Feb. 2019, https://doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2019.00007.
[18] Stoskopf, M.K.; Nutter, F.B. Analyzing Approaches to Feral Cat Management—One Size Does Not Fit All. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association 2004, 225, 1361–1364.
[19] Nutter, F.B. Evaluation of a Trap-Neuter-Return Management Program for Feral Cat Colonies: Population Dynamics, Home Ranges, and Potentially Zoonotic Diseases, North Carolina State University: Raleigh, NC, 2005.
[20] Spehar, Daniel D., and Peter J. Wolf. “An Examination of an Iconic Trap-Neuter-Return Program: The Newburyport, Massachusetts Case Study.” Animals, vol. 7, no. 12, Oct. 2017, p. 81. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani7110081.
[21] Swarbrick, Helen, and Jacquie Rand. “Application of a Protocol Based on Trap-Neuter-Return (TNR) to Manage Unowned Urban Cats on an Australian University Campus.” Animals, vol. 8, no. 5, MDPI AG, May 2018, p. 77. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani8050077.
[22] Tennent, Jaclyn, and Colleen T. Downs. “Abundance and Home Ranges of Feral Cats in an Urban Conservancy Where There Is Supplemental Feeding: A Case Study From South Africa.” African Zoology, vol. 43, no. 2, Oct. 2008, pp. 218–29. https://doi.org/10.3377/1562-7020-43.2.218.
[23] Jones, Amanda, and Colleen T. Downs. “Managing Feral Cats on a University’s Campuses: How Many Are There and Is Sterilization Having an Effect?” Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science, vol. 14, no. 4, Oct. 2011, pp. 304–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/10888705.2011.600186.
Thankfully, trap-neuter-return (TNR) provides an answer to a near certain death for feral cats. TNR involves trapping the cats, providing them with spay/neuter surgery and vaccinations, and returning them where they were found outside. The cats are ear-tipped to identify those who have gone through the TNR process. TNR’d cats will have a group caregiver who will provide them with continued food, water, and veterinary care.
This method humanely handles cat overpopulation, while allowing the cats to live out their lives. TNR acknowledges that feral cats are unsuitable for indoor living and at the same time, helps shelters reduce their intake and euthanasia rates. Furthermore, the number of cats living in outdoor groups will decrease over time because the cats can no longer reproduce.
TNR is not only the most humane option but the most practical as well. Trap-and-kill plans have proven to be ineffective because these plans do not address the root problem of reproduction. A study in Tasmania found that killing feral cats actually led to an increase in population. Researchers stated that this was probably due to new individuals taking over the area after dominant cats were removed[1]. TNR is also much less costly than trap-and-kill plans. One reason TNR is more cost-effective is because it reduces shelter intake and shelter euthanasia, saving local governments’ time and resources. Lastly, TNR also helps curb problem behaviors such as wandering, howling, spraying, and fighting that eradication plans do not address; again, because TNR focuses on reproductive/mating issues.
TNR Reduces Shelter Intake and Euthanasia Rates
- After implementing TNR at The Fairfax County Animal Shelter in Virginia, the shelter noted a significant decrease in the number of feline offspring entering the shelter’s foster care program. The shelter saw a 58% decrease in the number of feral offspring in the shelter’s foster care program in 2011 versus in 2010. In addition, foster data from 2008 through 2011 showed a 41% decrease in the number of bottle-fed kittens entering the shelter and a 9% decrease in the total number of kittens needing foster care when comparing 2010 to 2011 [2].
- Arlington, Texas had a 48% decrease in cat intake at the Arlington Animal Shelter after implementing a TNR program [3].
- A TNR and spay/neuter voucher program resulted in a 50% increase in animals saved and a 50% decline in animals euthanized in Aiken County, South Carolina [4].
- In an 8 year period of implementing TNR, San Jose county shelter reduced its cat euthanasia rate from 66.6% down to 34.9% [5].
- A Return-to-Field was added to an ongoing TNR program at Louisville Metro Animals Services animal shelter in Kentucky. After eight years, feline euthanasia at the shelter declined by 94.2% and feline intake dropped by 42.8% [6].
- A study that covered six large scale return-to-filed/TNR programs at shelters in diverse communities over three years resulted in a median reduction of 32% in feline intake and a median decilne of 83% in feline euthanasia across the shelters [7].
- A two-year program was implemented to capture and neuter at least 50% of the estimated community cats in a single 11.9 km(2) zip code area of Alucha County, Florida, followed by return to the neighborhood or adoption. Approximately 54% of the projected community cat population in the targeted area were captured for the TNR program over the 2-year study period (2006-2007). At the end of the study period, data showed shelter cat impoundment from the target area decreased by 66% during the 2-year study period, compared to a decrease of 12% in the non-target area [8].
TNR Reduces Outdoor Cat Group Size
- During an 11-year study at the University of Central Florida, the number of cats on campus declined by 66% after implementing TNR with no kittens being born after the first four years [9]. A follow up study done 12 years later found only 5% of the original number of cats remained on the campus and that 11 of the 16 orignally existing colonies had been eliminated. The follow up study explains, "These results occurred despite significant growth in enrollment at UCF over the same time frame, which suggests that with sufficient ongoing management of colony sites, declines in community cat populations associated with TNR are sustainable over long periods and under varying conditions" [10].
- The University of Texas at A&M began a TNR program and saw no kittens in the subsequent years and saw a decrease in cat-related complaints [11].
- The Stanford University Cat Network reduced its feral population from 1500 cats down to 300 over a ten-year period by implementing a campus TNR program [12].
- A city-wide TNR program decreased cat group sizes in Rome, Italy by 22%, despite a 21% rate of cat immigration (abandonment and spontaneous arrival). Although some groups experienced initial increases, the numbers began to decrease significantly after three years of TNR. “Colonies neutered three, four, five or six years before the survey showed progressive decreases of 16, 29, 28 and 32%, respectively" [13].
- Students at CSUN in Southern California began TNR for the campus' 75 cats in 2001. By 2023, there were only 7 cats still living on the campus [14].
- Forest City, CA study: A population of 175 cats living on a two-mile section of the San Francisco Bay Trail decilned by 99.4% at the end of a 16-year TNR program (2004-2020) [15].
- A citizen scientist in Chicago, Illinois, recorded significant reductions in a free-roaming cat population as the result of a neighborhood TNR program. Colony populations, when grouped by the number of years enrolled in the program, declined by a mean of 54% from entry and 82% from peak levels [16].
- After a 14-year (1999-2013) TNR program at the Ocean Reef Community in Key Largo, Florida, a population of 455 commuity cats was reduced by 55% to 206 cats [17].
- A study carried out in Randolph County, North Carolina sterilized cats in six colonies and compared their populations with cats in three unsterilized control colonies over time. After two years, populations in the sterilized colonies had decreased by an average of 36% while populations in the control colonies had increased by an average of 47% [18]. A follow-up census four years later found that one sterilized colony had no cats left and several others had fewer than five cats left [19].
- Seventeen years after the implementation of targeted TNR of a colony of about 300 community cats Newburyport, Massachusetts, none remained. Up to one-third of the cats trapped were sociable and adopted into homes; the remainder were sterilized and vaccinated before being returned to the waterfront, where they declined in number over time due to attrition [20].
- Over the course of nine years, and supplemented by the rehoming of socializable cats and kittens, TNR reduced the free-roaming cat population from 69 to 15 cats on the campus of the University of New South Wales (Syndey, Australia). Subsequent institutional support for the program was strong because of a reduction in complaints from campus staff and students, the minimal institutional costs, and the improved health status of the remaining cats [21].
- A TNR program on the campus of the University of KwaZulu-Natal’s Howard College, which is recognized as an “urban conservancy … interspersed with conservation-sensitive natural bush habitat and a nature reserve on the northern border," [22] led to a 38% reduction in the number of cats on campus (from 55 to 34) after four years [22, 23].
References
[1] Lazenby, B.T., Mooney, N.J. & Dickman, C.R. (2015). Effects of low-level culling of feral cats in open populations: a case study from the forests of southern Tasmania. Wildlife Research, 41(5), 407-420.
[2] Scott, E. (January 19, 2012). Trap, Neuter, Return Program Decreases Homeless Feral Cat Population. Retrieved https://springfield.wusa9.com/news/news/89821-trap-neuter-return-program-decreases-homeless-feral-cat-population.
[3] Trap-neuter-return. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.faastexas.org/.
[4] Cleveland, C. (March 24, 2017). FOTAS: ‘Rigorous’ community cat diversion program solution to shelter intake issue. Retrieved from https://www.aikenstandard.com/news/fotas-rigorous-community-cat-diversion-program-solution-to-shelter-intake/article_77140b66-0f1a-11e7-a197-af86f1a48d73.html.
[5] Edinboro, C., Watson, H. & Fairbrother, A. (2016). Association between a shelter-neuter-return program and cat health at a large municipal animal shelter. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association, 248(3), 298-308.
[6] Spehar, Daniel D., and Peter J. Wolf. “The Impact of Return-to-Field and Targeted Trap-Neuter-Return on Feline Intake and Euthanasia at a Municipal Animal Shelter in Jefferson County, Kentucky.” Animals, vol. 10, no. 8, Aug. 2020, p. 1395. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani10081395.
[7] Spehar, Daniel D., and Peter J. Wolf. “Integrated Return-To-Field and Targeted Trap-Neuter-Vaccinate-Return Programs Result in Reductions of Feline Intake and Euthanasia at Six Municipal Animal Shelters.” Frontiers in Veterinary Science, vol. 6, Mar. 2019, https://doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2019.00077.
[8] Levy, Julie, et al. “Effect of High-impact Targeted Trap-neuter-return and Adoption of Community Cats on Cat Intake to a Shelter.” The Veterinary Journal, vol. 201, no. 3, Sept. 2014, pp. 269–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tvjl.2014.05.001.
[9] Spehar, Daniel D., and Peter J. Wolf. “Back to School: An Updated Evaluation of the Effectiveness of a Long-Term Trap-Neuter-Return Program on a University’s Free-Roaming Cat Population.” Animals, vol. 9, no. 10, Oct. 2019, p. 768. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani9100768.
[10] Levy, J. K., Gale, D.W., and Gale, L.A. (2003). Evaluation of the effect of a long-term trap-neuter-return and adoption program on a free-roaming cat population. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association 222(1), 42-46.
[11] Hughes, K.L. & Slater, M.R. (2002). Implementation of a feral cat management program on a university campus. Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science, 5(1), 15-28.
[12] Trap-Neuter-Return. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.feralcats.com/tnr/.
[13] Natoli, Eugenia, et. al. (2006). Management of Feral Domestic Cats in the Urban Environment of Rome (Italy). Preventative Veterinary Medicine, 77, 180-185.
[14] Boeck, Claire. “Student Organization Spotlights Local Felines.” Daily Sundial, sundial.csun.edu/176683/featured/student-organization-spotlights-local-felines.
[15] Spehar, Daniel D., and Peter J. Wolf. “The Impact of Targeted Trap–Neuter–Return Efforts in the San Francisco Bay Area.” Animals, vol. 10, no. 11, Nov. 2020, p. 2089. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani10112089.
[16] Spehar, Daniel D., and Peter J. Wolf. “A Case Study in Citizen Science: The Effectiveness of a Trap-Neuter-Return Program in a Chicago Neighborhood.” Animals, vol. 8, no. 1, Jan. 2018, p. 14. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani8010014.
[17] Kreisler, Rachael, et al. “Decrease in Population and Increase in Welfare of Community Cats in a Twenty-Three Year Trap-Neuter-Return Program in Key Largo, FL: The ORCAT Program.” Frontiers in Veterinary Science, vol. 6, Feb. 2019, https://doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2019.00007.
[18] Stoskopf, M.K.; Nutter, F.B. Analyzing Approaches to Feral Cat Management—One Size Does Not Fit All. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association 2004, 225, 1361–1364.
[19] Nutter, F.B. Evaluation of a Trap-Neuter-Return Management Program for Feral Cat Colonies: Population Dynamics, Home Ranges, and Potentially Zoonotic Diseases, North Carolina State University: Raleigh, NC, 2005.
[20] Spehar, Daniel D., and Peter J. Wolf. “An Examination of an Iconic Trap-Neuter-Return Program: The Newburyport, Massachusetts Case Study.” Animals, vol. 7, no. 12, Oct. 2017, p. 81. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani7110081.
[21] Swarbrick, Helen, and Jacquie Rand. “Application of a Protocol Based on Trap-Neuter-Return (TNR) to Manage Unowned Urban Cats on an Australian University Campus.” Animals, vol. 8, no. 5, MDPI AG, May 2018, p. 77. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani8050077.
[22] Tennent, Jaclyn, and Colleen T. Downs. “Abundance and Home Ranges of Feral Cats in an Urban Conservancy Where There Is Supplemental Feeding: A Case Study From South Africa.” African Zoology, vol. 43, no. 2, Oct. 2008, pp. 218–29. https://doi.org/10.3377/1562-7020-43.2.218.
[23] Jones, Amanda, and Colleen T. Downs. “Managing Feral Cats on a University’s Campuses: How Many Are There and Is Sterilization Having an Effect?” Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science, vol. 14, no. 4, Oct. 2011, pp. 304–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/10888705.2011.600186.