» Articles » PMID: 23009077

Costs and Benefits of Trap-neuter-release and Euthanasia for Removal of Urban Cats in Oahu, Hawaii

Overview
Journal Conserv Biol
Date 2012 Sep 27
PMID 23009077
Citations 13
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Our goal was to determine whether it is more cost-effective to control feral cat abundance with trap-neuter-release programs or trap and euthanize programs. Using STELLA 7, systems modeling software, we modeled changes over 30 years in abundance of cats in a feral colony in response to each management method and the costs and benefits associated with each method . We included costs associated with providing food, veterinary care, and microchips to the colony cats and the cost of euthanasia, wages, and trapping equipment in the model. Due to a lack of data on predation rates and disease transmission by feral cats the only benefits incorporated into the analyses were reduced predation on Wedge-tailed Shearwaters (Puffinus pacificus). When no additional domestic cats were abandoned by owners and the trap and euthanize program removed 30,000 cats in the first year, the colony was extirpated in at least 75% of model simulations within the second year. It took 30 years for trap-neuter-release to extirpate the colony. When the cat population was supplemented with 10% of the initial population size per year, the colony returned to carrying capacity within 6 years and the trap and euthanize program had to be repeated, whereas trap-neuter-release never reduced the number of cats to near zero within the 30-year time frame of the model. The abandonment of domestic cats reduced the cost effectiveness of both trap-neuter-release and trap and euthanize. Trap-neuter-release was approximately twice as expensive to implement as a trap and euthanize program. Results of sensitivity analyses suggested trap-neuter-release programs that employ volunteers are still less cost-effective than trap and euthanize programs that employ paid professionals and that trap-neuter-release was only effective when the total number of colony cats in an area was below 1000. Reducing the rate of abandonment of domestic cats appears to be a more effective solution for reducing the abundance of feral cats.

Citing Articles

Using applied social science disciplines to implement creative outdoor cat management solutions and avoid the trap of one-size-fits-all policies.

Leong K, Gramza A, Duberstein J, Bryson C, Amlin A Conserv Biol. 2024; 39(1):e14321.

PMID: 38973598 PMC: 11780197. DOI: 10.1111/cobi.14321.


Community Engagement and the Effectiveness of Free-Roaming Cat Control Techniques: A Systematic Review.

Ramirez Riveros D, Gonzalez-Lagos C Animals (Basel). 2024; 14(3).

PMID: 38338135 PMC: 10854515. DOI: 10.3390/ani14030492.


High prevalence and diversity of Toxoplasma gondii DNA in feral cat feces from coastal California.

Zhu S, Camp L, Patel A, VanWormer E, Shapiro K PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2023; 17(12):e0011829.

PMID: 38100522 PMC: 10756541. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0011829.


Intensive Adoption as a Management Strategy for Unowned, Urban Cats: A Case Study of 25 Years of Trap-Assess-Resolve (TAR) in Auckland, New Zealand.

Calver M, Crawford H, Scarff F, Bradley J, Dormon P, Boston S Animals (Basel). 2022; 12(17).

PMID: 36078020 PMC: 9454951. DOI: 10.3390/ani12172301.


Two Methods of Monitoring Cats at a Landscape-Scale.

Lohr C, Nilsson K, Johnson A, Hamilton N, Onus M, Algar D Animals (Basel). 2021; 11(12).

PMID: 34944337 PMC: 8698172. DOI: 10.3390/ani11123562.