Reply to Crawford et al.: Why Trap-Neuter-Return (TNR) Is an Ethical Solution for Stray Cat Management

Abstract

Simple SummaryMuch controversy surrounds the management of Australia’s unowned urban cat population. The longstanding practice of trapping and killing urban stray cats and kittens that are not reclaimed or adopted has proven ineffective at reducing their numbers. In addition, it has been shown that shelter staff tasked with the repeated killing of healthy animals often face severe mental health consequences. A growing body of scientific evidence from Australia and elsewhere indicates that a non-lethal alternative, trap-neuter-return (TNR), can be effective at reducing urban stray cat numbers. TNR has also been associated with declines in feline intake and euthanasia at animal shelters. A large-scale trial of TNR in Australia is warranted and needed urgently. An extensive yet fundamentally flawed argument against such a trial is presented in a recently published article, “A Case of Letting the Cat out of the Bag—Why Trap-Neuter-Return Is Not an Ethical Solution for Stray Cat (Felis catus) Management,” by Crawford et al. In the text that follows, we provided a rebuttal to the Crawford et al. paper and argued that TNR is an ethical, scientifically sound solution for the management of Australia’s urban stray cats.AbstractThe recently published article, ‘A Case of Letting the Cat out of the Bag—Why Trap-Neuter-Return Is Not an Ethical Solution for Stray Cat (Felis catus) Management,’ by Crawford et al. warrants rebuttal. The case presented in the paper, opposing the initiation of TNR trials in Australia, ignores peer-reviewed evidence which substantiates the effectiveness of TNR at reducing unowned urban cat numbers. In addition, the paper’s authors offer a number of unrealistic recommendations, which are little more than a rebranding of the failed status quo. Urban stray cats have long been considered a problem across Australia. Current practice calls for the trapping and killing of thousands of healthy urban stray cats and kittens each year with no apparent effect on the total population. In contrast, the literature offers numerous examples, including two recent studies in Australia, of reductions in urban stray cat numbers where TNR has been implemented. TNR has also been associated with reduced feline intake and euthanasia at shelters, which improves both animal welfare and the well-being of shelter staff. A large-scale trial of TNR in an urban Australian context is scientifically justified and long overdue.

Response to Wolf et al.: Furthering Debate over the Suitability of Trap-Neuter-Return for Stray Cat Management

“…Legge et al [18] estimate 700,000 unowned cats (considering cats living in highly modified environments including urban areas but also rubbish dumps and piggeries) and 1.0 million to 11 million feral cats (including 95% confidence limits on the estimates). We agree with Wolf et al [2] that the plight of stray cats cannot be ignored and that the problems they cause should be mitigated. Concern for the welfare of strays features in local news bulletins (e.g., [23]), raising substantial community concern.…”

“…We also agree that neutering is important in population regulation. We believe that we have common ground with Wolf et al [2] in acknowledging that stray cats also hunt wildlife, cause nuisance, may be a public health concern, suffer ill health themselves, and may transmit disease to wildlife or to pet cats; thus inaction is not an option. We may, however, differ in our assessments of the significance of these risks.…”

“…As noted in the glossary in Crawford et al [1], the text in Wolf et al [2], and other discussions on cat management (e.g., [5][6][7]), many different terms are used to describe cats close to, and remote from, human habitation. Pet cats, housebound cats, domestic cats, stray cats, colony cats, feral cats, semi-feral cats, community cats, unowned cats and semi-owned cats are common examples (but ironically not clowder).…”

“…Those following the exchange of views between Crawford et al [1] and Wolf et al [2] regarding the suitability of Trap-Neuter-Return (TNR) for managing stray cats in an Australian context will realise that debate is sharply polarised. Further statements of disagreement will do little to improve understanding of the issues unless alternative views are considered constructively to refine positions, exchange information, or agree on research programs to resolve outstanding matters with empirical data.…”

Global Strategies for Population Management of Domestic Cats (Felis catus): A Systematic Review to Inform Best Practice Management for Remote Indigenous Communities in Australia

“…In Australia, the TNR method is currently being debated [10,[41][42][43] as to whether it should be permitted. TNR is currently used unofficially in Australia, mainly by individuals that take semi-owned stray cats (that they feed) to be neutered but not taking full ownership of the cats that are still left to their own devices, and to roam [10].…”