Trap–neuter–return

Historically, TNR has been exclusively known and discussed as it related to free-roaming cats. However, in some parts of the world TNR includes free-roaming dogs. The following article focuses on the practice as it applies to cats, but many of the generalities apply to both.

Cat caught in a live-trap for TNR

Trap–neuter–return, commonly known as TNR, is a method for attempting to humanely and effectively manage cat colonies and reduce or eliminate free-roaming populations. The process involves trapping the cats in a colony, having them spayed or neutered (aka: desexed), ear-tipped for identification and, where appropriate, vaccinated, then releasing them back into their territory. If the location is deemed unsafe or otherwise inappropriate, the cats may be relocated to another areas (barn/farmyard homes are often considered ideal) If possible, friendly adults and kittens young enough to be easily socialized are captured, retained, and placed for adoption; whereas feral cats cannot be socialized, shun most human interaction and do not fare well in confinement. Cats suffering from severe medical problems such as terminal, contagious, or untreatable illnesses or injuries, are often euthanized.

TNR is the most widely implemented non-lethal method of managing free-roaming cat populations. The main goal of most TNR programs is the reduction or eventual elimination of these populations by non-lethal means. Other goals may include:

• to provide a better quality of life for community cats
• to improve the communities in which these cats are found
• reducing "kill" rates at shelters that accept captured free-roaming cats, in turn improving public perceptions and possibly reducing costs
• eliminate or reduce nuisance behaviors to decrease public complaints about free-roaming cats

The earliest documented practice of trap–neuter–return was in the 1950s, led by animal activist Ruth Plant in the United Kingdom.

Terminology

TNR usually stands for trap–neuter–return. It is sometimes described as trap–neuter–release. The word "return" emphasizes that most feral cats are returned to their original locations under such a program. Variant acronyms and terms include: TNSR (for trap–neuter/spay–return), TNVR (trap–neuter–vaccinate–return), TNRM (trap–neuter–release–maintain or manage) where "maintain" generally means caregivers feed and monitor the feral cats after they are returned to their territories, and TTVAR (trap–test–vaccinate–alter–release).

TVHR (trap–vasectomize/hysterectomize–release) refers to a different method of cat population management, despite its similar name. TVHR differs in the type of sterilization surgery performed on the cats. Unlike traditional spays (ovariohysterectomy) and neuters (castration) which are done in TNR, the vasectomies and hysterectomies in TVHR result in sterile but sexually active cats.

A Controversial Practice

TNR as a method of managing free-roaming cat populations is a very controversial topic. Global attitudes towards these cats vary from those who see them as pets to those who see them as infestations which need to be eliminated. Many international, national, and regional organizations and association, both professional and advocacy-based, have publicly aligned themselves into 3 basic groups: those that stridently oppose managing, maintaining, or tolerating free-roaming cats and hence TNR; those who conditionally support TNR as a part of a community cat management program (which includes community cat oversight and monitoring); and those that whole unconditionally support and endorse TNR.

Some well-known organization positions that support or conditional support TNR include:

• The American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals: "The ASPCA endorses Trap-Neuter-Return (TNR) as the only proven humane and effective method to manage community cat colonies." It clarifies its position by stating that managing "involves a colony caretaker who provides food and adequate shelter and monitors the cats' health."
• The Humane Society of the United States (HSUS): "we support Trap-Neuter-Return (TNR) and similar sterilization programs, legislation that allows for and supports non-lethal population control, and coalition-based approaches that involve community leaders, citizens, and stakeholders to implement effective community cat management programs." They further clarify this view by stating: "The HSUS believes that the humane reduction and eventual elimination of unowned cat populations should be the end goal for all TNR participants and supporters. TNR should be considered a humane means to an end, not a method of permanently maintaining outdoor cat populations.
• The American Humane Association: "In some situations, safe cat colonies can be maintained by caretakers. American Humane Association supports trap, neuter and release programs for colony cats – especially for feral cats. Whenever possible, homes should be found for colony cats that might be successfully socialized."
• The UK's Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (RSPCA): For feral cats "supports Trap, Neuter and Release (TNR) programmes with veterinary support. Healthy cats should be neutered, ear-tipped and returned or, where appropriate, re-sited."

Many of the numerous international, national, and regional organizations that oppose TNR or free-roaming cat colony management are involved in wildlife care and conservation, birding, ecology conservation, and environment preservation. Some of these, include:

• The International Wildlife Resource Center: "The IWRC supports the humane removal of feral cat and dog populations, including feral cat colonies, through the rehabilitation and adoption of suitable animals into domestic environments and humane euthanasia of animals that cannot be rehabilitated and re-homed." They point out that, as domestic animals "subsidized" by people, they exceed the ability for the environment to support them without resulting in damage to wildlife.
• The Wildlife Society: "TNR undermines the work of wildlife professionals and severely jeopardizes the integrity of native biodiversity."
• The American Bird Conservancy (ABC): "Cats have been introduced into new habitats across the globe with terrible results. Outdoors, cats are a non-native and invasive species that threaten birds and other wildlife, disrupt ecosystems, and spread diseases." They advocate responsible pet ownership and "oppose Trap, Neuter, Release (TNR) for feral cats because of the persistent and severe threats posed by feral cat colonies."

The Debate - the pros and cons of free-roaming cats and TNR

Various studies and arguments have been presented both in support of and in opposition to free-roaming cats and TNR.

Reduced population over time

Some long-term studies have claimed or been cited to show that TNR is effective in stopping reproduction and reducing the population over time, but the methodology, analysis and conclusions of some of these studies have been called into question.

• An eleven-year study of a TNR program at the University of Central Florida achieved a population decrease of 66%, from 68 cats in 1996 (when the census was first completed after some trapping) to 23 cats in 2002. No new kittens were born after 1995, and newly arrived stray or abandoned cats were neutered or adopted to homes. However, as many proponents fail to note,TNR was not the sole reason for success. The population reduction was primarily from adoption (47%) and euthanasia (11%), or due to the cats no longer living on site with their whereabouts unknown (15%).
• A TNR program begun in 1992 by the Merrimack River Feline Rescue Society (MRFRS) on the central waterfront of Newburyport, Massachusetts has been widely cited as an example of TNR success on a community level; however, only superficial reports about what took place have been available and there is very little statistical data to support the claims.

The success of specific focused studies to advocate TNR as a solution for controlling and reducing free-roaming cat populations world-wide is problematic. More broad-based approaches include using matrix population models to estimate the efficacy of euthanasia versus trap-neuter-return for management of free-roaming cats, such as the one researchers established for use in urban environments.

Efforts to assess the effectiveness have been hampered by the lack of sufficient monitoring data. Having some professional assistance, adapting the population monitoring framework developed over decades by wildlife biologists, and systematic monitoring can evolve into a relatively low-cost, high-value adjunct to ongoing management efforts.

The potential problem of TNR advocacy and increased public awareness of non-lethal intervention actually contributing to the increasing numbers of free-roaming pets, by enabling pet owners to make conscious decisions to illegal dump or abandon their animal without having to worry about lethal control measures, has been a contentious point. In a widely cited example of cat control by relocation (cats from Bidwell Park, CA, were trapped and moved to a private sanctuary), the high visibility of the project encouraged more abandonment.

It has become apparent that the while the TNR process can reduce or limit the growth rate of the colony through reproduction, it may not reduce the population numbers if it is the sole method of intervention. Population reduction occurs primarily through adoptions of non-feral cats, natural death or euthanasia of sick animals, and disappearance or emigration of cats. TNR works together with these factors to reduce reproduction and thus to minimize replacement of animals lost from the colony. Other factors such as immigration of cats from surrounding areas can counteract its effect. Thus, the impact of TNR interventions on unowned cat populations can be complex, and ongoing management of colonies becomes an important component in optimizing reductions in the cat population.

The "kill" or "no-kill" debate

TNR is often presented to public officials and policymakers as a viable alternative to lethal methods with several benefits.

• Reducing euthanasia numbers.
  • It has been claimed that euthanasia in shelters is the leading cause of death of cats. Proponents of TNR use this "kill" statistic to promote "no-kill" tactics. However, in the USA there is no exact numbers of animals being euthanized each year. Only a few states require animal shelters to keep records about animals being euthanized , and there is no agency responsible for collecting or verifying this data. The American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (ASPCA) has noted a marked decrease in euthanasia rates since 2011 and Humane Society of the United States reported that euthanasia of animals in shelters has been declining sharply since 1970. In addition, the reasons for euthanasia vary. Animals may be euthanized because of shelter over-crowding, for medical reasons (illness or injury), for court-mandated reasons, or because of financial/staff limitations.
  • When the number of animals coming into a shelter exceeds its ability to care for, hold, or find foster placements, the facility may end up euthanizing animals. This could include even adoptable kittens or cats simply because they cannot be taken care of. A not atypical outcome for a cat judged to be "feral" after being taken to a traditional shelter not practicing no-kill sheltering is euthanasia (humanely putting the animal to death). "Feral" cats do not tolerate being caged or handled and many shelters are unable to manage them without putting the animal or the staff at risk. TNR could alleviate this.
  • Facilities have reported notable decreases in intakes and euthanasia since implementing TNR programs. It is not clear, however, if these decreases can be directly attributed to TNR, or to concurrent efforts to increase and implement owned pet spay-neuter programs, new initiatives of adoption campaigns where animals at risk of "kill" are transported to areas where animals for adoptions are needed, or public awareness campaigns to enhance adoption rates.
• Cost savings
  • Proponents of TNR claim that while neutering cats may be costly, euthanizing them costs more. However, the cost savings associated with TNR are location-specific and accurate estimates involve taking into account numerous variables. Volunteer support, donations, grants, local spay-neuter agreements for low-cost services must be factored in. Cost savings fluctuate based on the type of TNR program implemented, the extent of animal control involvement, the volunteer base available, and the community’s overall support of TNR. Over time, through attrition and sterilization efforts, if the free-roaming population declines savings may be realized by total decreased expenditures on them.
  • In a 10 year study in Orange County, Florida, after a feral cat sterilization program was instituted in which 7,903 feral cats neutered, the cost was an estimated $442,568, as compared to $1,098,517 if they had been impounded and euthanized.
  • In Port Orange, Florida a TNR program started in 2013 in the city's business areas resulted in fewer stray cats and money saved. In the first year, 214 cats were sterilized for $13,000, which was much less than over $50,000 spent in 2010, when most of the impounded cats were euthanized. A theoretical savings of $123,000 was projected based on not having to impound the offspring that the cats may have produced if not spayed.
• Improved morale and public support
  • A 2011 survey of U.S. pet owners found that 71% agreed that “Animal shelters should only be allowed to euthanize animals when they are too sick to be treated or too aggressive to be adopted,” while only 25% agreed that “Sometimes animal shelters should be allowed to euthanize animals as a necessary way of controlling the population of animals.”

Improving the cats' health and welfare

"Stumpy", renamed "Blue", was trapped and rescued by the Vancouver Orphan Kitten Rescue Association after living outside for over two years with a horribly infected, abscessed tail. He ended up getting adopted after it was determined that he was tame.

It has been claimed that TNR programs improve the welfare of free-roaming cats in many ways:

• By preventing the birth of kittens, who would be at risk of an early death in the wild.
• Adult female cats are no longer burdened with cycles of repeatedly giving birth to and caring for kittens while fending for themselves.
• Medical conditions such as infections, dental issues, and flea treatments may be attended to when the cats are desexed.
• Spaying and neutering may increases their life expectancy.
• Desexed cats are at less risk of certain cancers.
• Fighting may decline, thus reducing injuries.

A study suggests that although TNR "may not meet the gold standard of care desired for pet cats, it appears that sterilized feral cats can enjoy an extended period of good quality of life".

In managed programs, cats returned to their original location are fed, monitored and receive ongoing care from caregivers; including being re-trapped (if possible) when medical needs arise.

However, not all free-roaming cats are feral. Nor are all the cats that end up in live traps. Some are owned, but allowed to roam; some have escaped their homes or owners and are strays; some may have been abandoned or "dumped." Clearly, the "return" or "release" component of TNR is not in all of their best interests. The assessment, after trapping, of "social" (friendly & adoptable), "social but timid or scared" (may adjust and be adoptable), "not social" (not feral, prefers to not be handled, hard to adopt out) or "feral" is crucial if TNR is intended to be in the best interest of the animal. When programs provide for feral kittens to be socialized and adopted, and for friendly cats to be adopted, the welfare of those cats is improved.

Fewer complaints

TNR may help reduce public complaints pertaining to free-roaming cats. Female cats will ‘call’ (come into season and be receptive to the male cat) regularly, about every three weeks during sexually active times of the year if they do not get pregnant. Having un-spayed female cats in an area will attract un-neutered males with the attendant problems of spraying, fighting and caterwauling.

• After starting a TNR program in 1995, animal control in Orange County, Florida, received fewer complaints about cats, even after broadening the definition of a nuisance complaint.
• A study of a TNR program at Texas A&M University in 1998-2000 reported that the number of cat complaints received by the university's pest control service decreased from Year 1 to Year 2.

Alternatives claimed to be ineffective and inhumane

Doing nothing may result in the numbers of feral cats increasing. A study of six managed colonies in rural North Carolina showed a 36% decline in population over two years, while three control colonies without TNR increased by 47% on average. Further, animal welfare problems such as high rates of kitten mortality continue to occur. A 2005 paper by the Humane Society Institute for Science and Policy suggested that "While still fairly common, this is not a responsible or constructive choice."

Elimination is an alternative to TNR to control their population. Eradication programs "often require years to accomplish and hundreds of hours of work and are only successful in closed populations where no new cats can arrive". Further, methods used often involve poisoning, shooting, hunting, and other methods considered animal cruelty in many North American jurisdictions. Trapping and removal of cats by euthanasia has been used in many communities, but almost never results in a permanent decrease in the cat population. The 2005 Human Society review stated: "It is extremely difficult to remove every cat in a particular location, and most locations are not sufficiently isolated to prevent migration of new cats into the ecological vacuum created by cat removal. If there is sufficient food and shelter, new cats will move in from nearby areas, and survivors of the removal program will continue to reproduce until the maximum carrying capacity is reached again." Many local and sub-national governments have turned to TNR believing it to be a more effective and humane approach to control feral cat populations.

Feral cats are now thought to be the single largest cause of anthropogenic bird mortality in North America.

Feral cats have been found to harm wildlife on continents. There have been recorded instances of bird extinction from them on islands. It has been argued that fragmented ecosystems near urban areas are similar to islands and thus more susceptible to feral cat damage, and that feral cats in urban areas also pose significant risk to migratory birds. It is argued that feral cats are exotic and do not fill an existing niche and that even well-fed cats can significantly impact wildlife. Longer and more detailed studies are warranted. Feral cats act as vectors for diseases that can impact other cats, wildlife and humans, examples include feline leukemia virus, feline immunodeficiency virus, fleas and ear mites (which are also carried by canines and wildlife), hookworms, roundworms, Bartonella, Rickettsia, Coxiella and Toxoplasma gondii, and that their fecal matter degrades water quality.

In the UK, The Royal Society for the Protection of Birds states that there is no scientific evidence that cat predation "is having any impact on bird populations UK-wide. Research shows that declines are usually caused by habitat change or loss, particularly on farmland."

British biologist Roger Tabor states that "studies from all around the world have found that cats catch relatively few birds compared to small mammals". Moreover, city cats have smaller ranges; in his research, Tabor found "the average annual catch of the average London cat to be two items instead of the fourteen of a village cat". Tabor comments about some of the challenges of stalking birds for cats: "From the cat's point of view not only do birds not play fair by flying and having eyes that can see beyond the back of their heads, but they can positively cheat by using loud alarm calls and throw the cat's chances of catching any others." This study has limited applicability to North American birds and wildlife, however. Cats are a domesticated species that did not exist in North and South America prior to European contact.

TNR advocates claim that cat predation is inflated. They have argued that removing feral cats en masse can harm the environment and even endangered species. For example, Alley Cat Allies' "Why Removing Cats is Worse for Everyone" (2016) suggests that cats primarily prey on weak animals that would have died of disease or hunger anyway, that modern human-geographical environments include cats as part of their ecosystems and are not comparable to wilderness, and that a mass-killing of cats would create a vacuum rapidly filled by cats from other areas and the offspring of local survivors – essentially the same criticism that is leveled against TNR's own effectiveness. Similarly, a 2013 Sydney Morning Herald article reported on research published in the journal Global Ecology and Biogeoraph, showing that some endangered insular species of mammals in Australia were more at risk from human-introduced rats than from introduced cats, foxes, or dingoes, who keep the rat population down if these predators are not eradicated. These special-case arguments do not address the broader statistics of cat predation on wildlife; in the United States alone, cats are believed to kill billions of birds and small mammals annually, though estimates vary widely, from 7.6 to 26.3 billion total.

TNR advocates have, in turn, criticized "anti-cat" studies as arriving at dubious predation figures based on methodological flaws. In the United Kingdom, the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds stated that there is no evidence that cat predation "is having any impact on bird populations UK-wide"., in sharp contrast to American Bird Conservancy's position on the question in the US. However, the 2013 systematic review by Loss, et al., strongly supports the idea that cats have a major negative impact on small wildlife populations overall.

Methodology

Feral kitten, approximately nine months old, with the tip of his left ear removed to indicate he has been trapped and neutered.

The triggers for a trap–neuter–return program include: a perception of free-roaming cats or kittens in need, a steadily increasing number due to open breeding, an unmanageable burden on community resources while trying to manage or eliminate the cats, and when the cats become a notable nuisance or concern.

A TNR program may approach the situation using some, or all, the following steps:

Preparation

1. Assessment of the cats and their environment, including whether they appear to be free-roaming pets or feral animals; whether there are kittens and/or nursing mothers, and any ill or injured cats. This helps to plan ahead for the care to be provided after trapping.
2. Communication with neighbors and any caretakers, and building of good community relations, working to address the concerns of others.
3. Appointing a colony manager and establishing a regular feeding schedule. This may involve providing feeding stations and winter shelters.
4. Securing a holding/recovery area where the cats can wait for surgery (if not immediate) and recover after surgery.
5. Finding and coordinating with a veterinarian or clinic to perform the surgery and provide other medical treatment.
6. Assembling trapping supplies, including humane traps, newspapers and other useful materials.
7. Withholding food (but not water) for about 24 hours before trapping, with the cooperation of caregivers and neighbors.

Trapping

1. Baiting and setting the traps in a safe location, using as many traps as there are cats in the colony needing trapping.
2. Waiting nearby but out of sight for cats to enter the traps and the traps to close.
3. Quickly covering each occupied trap with a cover or sheet, which helps to calm the cat within.
4. Checking whether each trapped cat is already owned or neutered (e.g., via ear-tip marking, identification tattoo or microchip, and lost-pet databases and ads; attempting to contact owners in the case of stray pets.
5. Carefully releasing any accidentally trapped wildlife.
6. Safely transporting the cats in their traps to the clinic or holding area.
7. Trying alternative traps and methods in the case of unusually wary cats.

Neutering, medical care and socialization

1. Providing extra care for cats not yet ready for surgery. Cats in poor condition may receive additional medical attention, and be well-fed to gain weight and strength before surgery. Young kittens may be socialized in foster care, which prevents their becoming feral. Nursing mother cats may be kept with their kittens (and even other orphaned kittens) until the kittens are weaned.
2. When ready, a veterinarian performs spay or neuter surgery and provides other medical attention as needed. Multiple surgeries may be done in high volume clinics.
3. During the surgery of feral cats, ear-tipping (removing 3/8 inch or 1 cm from the tip of the left ear; proportionally smaller in a kitten) identifies that the cat has been neutered and treated, when later seen from a distance.
4. Vaccinations are provided as arranged in advance. Common vaccines include rabies,, FVRCP, panleukopenia ("distemper"), and respiratory-virus vaccines,, though this will vary by program.
5. Cats found suffering with terminal or untreatable illnesses or injuries are humanely euthanized.
6. When the vet deems that the cats are ready to leave the clinic, they are taken to the recovery area, and monitored for at least 24 hours.
7. If needed, the cats may receive additional care (e.g., medications, or more recovery time from complex surgery such as amputation).

Returning the cats

1. If the original colony location is safe, the treated cats are transported there and safely released from their traps or carriers.
2. If the location is not safe for feral cats, other arrangements are made, e.g. for farmyard homes.
3. Tame cats and (especially) kittens are placed in foster care until they are adopted. If there are insufficient resources to foster or shelter, the cats may be returned to outdoor colony locations in the same manner as feral cats.
4. Detailed records are kept of the cats assisted, and the traps and other materials used are regularly cleaned.
5. Caregivers monitor the outdoor colony locations, providing food, shelter, and medical care, and watch for any new abandoned cats requiring trapping. Some communities with "feral freedom" programs return cats without ongoing monitoring by caregivers.

Early in TNR work, some groups did routine testing for the feline leukemia virus (FeLV) and the feline immunodeficiency virus (FIV) prior to the neutering surgery. This practice is no longer recommended, due to problems such as unreliable results, the high cost of testing, and the low incidences of the viruses.

Social perceptions and the legality of TNR

The legal status of free-roaming and community cats varies from location to location, as do the histories of TNR programs in different places. Cultural, religious, social and economic values, perceptions and realities play critical roles in this. The following highlights some of the TNR issues around the world:

Australia

In a Feb 17, 2017 news release in the Sydney Morning Herald, Threatened Species Commissioner Gregory Andrews reportedly summarized the reason for the federal government's intention to wipe out 2 million feral cats – about a third of the population – by saying that they are "the single biggest threat to our native animals, and have already directly driven into extinction 20 out of 30 mammals lost." This cull is planned to go until 2020.

Canada

In Canada, it is an offence under the Criminal Code to intentionally cause unnecessary pain, suffering or injury to an animal. Poisoning animals is specifically prohibited. It is also an offence to threaten to harm an animal belonging to someone else. Most provinces and territories also have their own animal protection legislation.

In January 2012, a bylaw officer in Merritt, British Columbia, removed cat food and asked the Royal Canadian Mounted Police to consider criminal charges against those feeding the community cats. No charges were laid, but the rescue group's business license was revoked and it was forced to move from its storefront location.

The City of Toronto, Ontario, has included TNR in its animal services for some years, and enacted a bylaw specifically addressing TNR in 2013. Toronto Animal Services offers spay and neuter clinics for feral cats, and is a member of the Toronto Feral Cat Coalition. Other governments within Canada with laws or policies supporting TNR are described in the list of governments supporting trap–neuter–return.

Denmark

TNR was practiced in Denmark in the mid-1970s, as reported at the 1980 Universities Federation for Animal Welfare (UFAW) symposium in London. Denmark's Society for the Protection of Cats practiced both tattooing and tipping the ear of the neutered cats to identify them.

France

In 1978, the city of Paris issued a Declaration of Rights of the Free-living Cat. In that year, Cambazard founded École du Chat and TNR'd its first cat, continuing to help thousands of cats in the following years.

Hong Kong

See History of TNR in Hong Kong

Italy

Since 1988, killing feral cats has been illegal in the Latium Region, which includes Rome. Since August 1991, feral cats have been protected throughout Italy when a no-kill policy was introduced for both cats and dogs. Feral cats have the right to live free and cannot be permanently removed from their colony; cat caretakers can be formally registered; and TNR methods are outlined in the national law on the management of pets.

Korea

Korea has an ongoing government run Trap-Neuter-Return (TNR) program to reduce the number of feral and abandoned cats in major cities.

New Zealand

The Department of Conservation (DOC) is legislatively mandated to control feral cats on public conservation land. It has eradicated feral cats from several offshore islands. Control techniques include poisoning, trapping and shooting. Lethally controls follow efficient and humane best-practice techniques and adheres to the Animal Welfare Act 1999.

Turkey

Turkey has a huge problem with free-roaming dogs and cats and the country is struggling with ways to manage the problem. Turks are very much against euthanasia for “population control;” recent efforts to curb an ever-increasing population include TNR for roaming cats and dogs.

United Kingdom

The earliest documented practice of trap–neuter–return was in the 1950s, led by animal activist Ruth Plant in the UK. In the mid-1960s, former model Celia Hammond gained publicity for her TNR work "at a time when euthanasia of feral cats was considered the only option". Hammond "fought many battles with local authorities, hospitals, environmental health departments" but stated that she succeeded over the years in showing that control "could be achieved by neutering and not killing".

The first scientific conference on “the ecology and control of feral cats” was held in London in 1980 and its proceedings published by the Universities Federation for Animal Welfare (UFAW). Subsequent UFAW publications in 1982, 1990, and 1995 were the primary scientific references for feral-cat control for many years.

In 2008, the Scottish Wildcat Association began utilizing TNR of feral cats to protect the regionally endangered Scottish wildcat Their goals include:

• Saving the genetically pure Scottish wildcat
• Removing all feral cats from the region
• Using humane, neutering-based feral cat controls
• Establishing buffer zones to prevent feral cats returning to the area

United States

For an excellent overview of the background and changing perspectives refer to: COMMUNITY CATS: CHANGING THE LEGAL PARADIGM FOR THE MANAGEMENT OF SO-CALLED “PESTS”

Currently, there is no applicable federal law that controls the feral cat issue. A few states have recently recognized the need to establish programs to control feral cat populations since their effects on wildlife have now been more widely studied and the efficacy of euthanasia for population management has been criticized. These laws vary in their approaches. The Endangered Species Act and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, have played a role in setting forth policy on feral cats. The federal case, American Bird Conservancy v. Harvey, puts the challenge of bird advocates under these federal laws in response to cat programs front and center. The merits of this case have not been decided but have the potential to impact both sides of the issue.

In a January 2013 legal brief, Alley Cat Allies provided evidence that at least 240 municipal or county governments in the United States had enacted ordinances supporting TNR; a ten-fold increase from 2003. New Jersey, California and Texas had the highest number of local ordinances. New York City-based organization Neighborhood Cats has cataloged local ordinances in 24 US states. Model ordinances are available from Neighborhood Cats, Alley Cat Allies, and the No Kill Advocacy Center.

In 2001, under the leadership of Nathan Winograd, Tompkins County, New York, became the first no-kill community in the US, "saving 100 percent of healthy and treatable animals, and 100 percent of feral cats". In the No Kill Equation, a "roadmap to no kill" developed by Winograd, TNR is one of the essential elements. Many communities followed this strategy in subsequent years.

In 2008, a grant from Best Friends Animal Society supported a feral freedom program in Jacksonville, Florida, that saw the end of killing stray and feral cats in that city. The program, conceived by Rick Ducharme of First Coast No More Homeless Pets, "has feral cats trapped by Jacksonville Animal Control bypass the shelter entirely in favor of being spayed or neutered and returned to the location where they were trapped." Similar programs were later implemented in Albuquerque, New Mexico, DeKalb County, Georgia, San Antonio, Texas, Baltimore, Maryland, Salt Lake City, Utah, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania and many other communities.

In Palm Beach County, Florida, a project called Project CatSnip: Countdown to Zero (C2Z, for short) was organized in 2015 as a collaboration between government agencies, businesses, volunteers from a local animal rescue group, and residents working together to end euthanasia of feral cats in the community through TNR, toward a goal of zero cats euthanized in the county by 2024.

On January 29, 2019, the Hawaii Invasive Species Council adopted a resolution supporting the keeping of pet cats indoors and the use of peer-reviewed science in pursuing humane mitigation of the impacts of feral cats on wildlife and people.

TNR of cats is illegal in Alaska.

TNR efforts in the US have encountered opposition. The majority of traditional shelters continue to euthanize feral cats. Some wildlife groups blame cats for much of the reduction in US bird populations. The American Bird Conservancy, began its "Cats Indoors" campaign in 1997.

Governments have been sued to try to block their TNR efforts. In December, 2010, an injunction was granted to prevent a planned TNR program of the City of Los Angeles until an environmental review was completed under the California Environmental Quality Act. The judge did not rule on any environmental issues, or prohibit other organizations from doing TNR in the city.

Some caretakers have been prosecuted for taking care of feral cats. The perplexing issues of where a "feral" cat fits in local ordinance depends on the consideration as to whether they are pets or wildlife. Many ordinances restrict feeding of wildlife (excluding birds). Then there are ordinances that restrict how many pets a person may own, and those that disallow free-roaming pets. In 2011, charges against Danni Joshua of Vandercook Lake, Michigan for "allowing animals to run loose" were dismissed when she agreed to have her colony of 15-20 cats relocated. In 2012, 78-year-old Dawn Summers was sentenced to community service for hoarding, as she was feeding up to 27 community cats within a managed colony in a city-sanctioned program in Biloxi, Mississippi. Alley Cat Allies criticized the decision, stating that the community cats should not have been considered owned by the caregiver. The Virginia Supreme Court found a zoning ordinance too broad in 2013, when Henrico County charged Susan Mills for caring for feral cats, which the county said was not a permitted activity under the zoning. A circuit court judge had ordered her to stop feeding the cats, but that part of the decision was not enforceable.

Opponents of feral cats have also been prosecuted violating animal-protection laws by trying to harm or kill the animals. In 2007, Jim Stevenson stood trial for shooting a cat from a colony in Galveston County, Texas, which he reportedly did after observing the colony cats hunting endangered piping plovers in the area. The trial resulted in a hung jury because of a gap in the law stating that ownership of the animal had to be proven, an issue which has since been resolved. In December 2011, wildlife biologist Nico Dauphiné received a suspended sentence for attempting to kill feral cats with rat poison in Washington, DC,

See also

• List of governments supporting trap–neuter–return
• Overpopulation in domestic animals
• Spaying and neutering

Further reading

• Berkeley, Ellen Perry (2004). TNR: Past, Present and Future: A History of the Trap–Neuter–Return Movement. Alley Cat Allies. ISBN 978-0-9705194-2-9.
• Marra, Peter P.; Santella, Chris (2016). Cat Wars: The Devastating Consequences of a Cuddly Killer. Princeton University Press. ISBN 978-0691167411.
• An Examination of an Iconic Trap-Neuter-Return Program: The Newburyport, Massachusetts Case Study
• The Cat Conundrum. Tens of millions of free-roaming felines take a huge toll on wildlife; what to do about them has spawned battles from coast to coast

• ICAM - Humane Cat Population Management Guidelines International Companion Animal Management Coalition.Includes a wide range of solutions, including TNR, to surgical and non-surgical sterilization, and lethal methods; outlines a five-stage program.
• Guide to Trap-Neuter-Return (TNR) and Colony Care from Alley Cat Allies, the ASPCA and the Mayor’s Alliance for NYC’s Animals
• "Information on Managed Cat Colonies and TNR". ABCBirds.org. American Bird Conservancy. Retrieved July 23, 2018. Criticism of TNR, and advocacy of "a movement to overcome local and national challenges caused by free-roaming cats".