Christie Keith: Hi. Good evening everyone.
I�m Christie Keith, a communications consultant
for Maddie�s InstituteSM. Welcome to the
second in our two-part series on radically
rethinking the relationship between cats and
animal shelters. Tonight�s panel discussion
is a Q&A session to address your questions
and concerns about the information presented
in part one of the series.
In that webcast, Dr. Kate Hurley, Director
of the UC Davis Koret Shelter Medicine Program,
presented new solutions to the suffering,
stress, illness and death that are the fate
of so many cats in our nation�s animal shelters,
including an array of positive alternative
approaches, such as shelter-neuter-return
or not taking community cats in at all, if
we can offer a lifesaving outcome.
Tonight, you will be hearing from a panel
of sheltering experts responding to questions
you submitted during the first webcast, via
e-mail and also questions you submit live
this evening. I�ll explain how you can submit
questions in a few minutes. Joining us tonight
is Dr. Kate Hurley, Director of the UC Davis
Koret Shelter Medicine Program, once again;
Dr. Julie Levy, Director of Maddie�s? Shelter
Medicine Program at the University of Florida;
Rich Avanzino, President of Maddie�s Fund?
and former Director of the San Francisco SPCA;
Jon Cicirelli, Deputy Director of San Jose
Animal Care and Services, and Board Member
[G1]of the California Animal Control Director�s
Association; and Holly Sizemore, Director
of Community Programs and Services at Best
Friends Animal Society.
We will be starting in just a few moments,
but before we do, we have some housekeeping
items we need to cover. I will be moderating
the panel, and I will be asking the panelists
to respond to questions that we have already
received from you, as well as those that come
in this evening. On the left hand of your
screen, you will see a Q&A window. That is
where you can submit your questions during
the webcast. It would be helpful to us if
you have a question for someone specific that
you address the question to them. That will
help us process it more easily.
If you need any help with your connection
during the presentation, you can click the
�help� icon at the bottom of your screen
or go to �event.on24.com/view/help.� You
will also see there are some other little
images at the bottom of your screen along
with the help button. These are called widgets.
The green file widget will take you to the
resources our presenters wanted to share with
you tonight, as well as some from us at Maddie�s
Institute. The presenter�s resources can
also be found on our website at www.maddiesinstitute.org.
Please note that while the links in the presentation
slides are not clickable, those same links
are included in the resource documents, and
you will be able to click them there.
If you are Tweeting or Facebooking this webcast,
our hash tag is �#change4cats,� that is
the pound sign, the number 4 and cats. Before
we begin tonight�s Q&A, I want to say a
few words about Maddie�s Fund�, which
is the leading funder of shelter medicine
education in the United States. It is Maddie�s
Fund�s goal to help save the lives of all
our nations healthy and treatable shelter
dogs and cats. We received our inspiration
for that goal from the unconditional love
of a dog named Maddie. Her example led Dave
and Cheryl Duffield to promise her that they
would honor that love by founding Maddie�s
Fund and helping to make this country a safe
and loving place for all her kind. It is our
hope that you, too, will be inspired by Maddie,
and take what you learn here tonight to make
that promise come true.
Members of our panel, thank you for being
here with us this evening. Our first question
is for Jon Cicirelli. �Jon, can you please
explain Shelter-Neuter-Return (SNR); is this
for all cats brought into shelters or just
feral cats? Do all cats get altered and returned
to the community they lived in, and what are
the guidelines for this program?�
Jon Cicirelli: Thank you, Christie. Also,
on behalf of the panel, I want to thank Maddie�s
Fund for [G2]sponsoring this and coordinating
this, and thanks for all the attendees, who
are participating in sending in questions
or may send in questions in a little bit,
for us to have this discussion. We all believe
this is an important discussion to have and
certainly want to be as helpful as we can.
In terms of this question, in San Jose, the
way that we qualify cats for a Shelter-Neuter-Return
Program, or what some of you folks may have
heard called a Feral Freedom Program, is we
are looking for pretty healthy cats ? you
know, no major wounds or illnesses ? that
are at least four months of age. That is primarily
so they can get a rabies shot in California.
The limit is four months of age for dogs,
even though rabies vaccination is not required.
It is also to ensure that they are going to
be okay outside, and cats that aren�t that
friendly behaviorally. They are not soliciting
attention from us. They do not want to climb
in our lap, but, otherwise, they are just
physically healthy. Cats that are in environmentally
sensitive areas do not qualify for the program
? those are the areas that are declared refuges
or anything like that for wildlife ? because
we are trying to relieve those conflicts,
and even several of our parks in San Jose
participate in some level. San Jose does it
a little differently than some of the other
models out there. We are the government agency,
and we partner with a non-profit.
In most forms of these kinds of programs,
the non-profit takes the feral cats from the
shelter at the end of their holding period.
Then the non-profit does its thing ? the neutering
and all the medical services ? and then they
return the cats to where they were found.
In San Jose, we do the medical stuff. We do
all the spaying, the neutering, during the
holding period while the cat in our shelter,
and then we release it a non-profit, who then
takes it back. They manage the educational
materials, the website and the phone line
for questions and concerns. You can see there
on the bottom of this slide, there is a website
for reference. Thank you.
Christie Keith: Okay. Our next question is
for Holly Sizemore. And it�s: �Holly,
the public, including local veterinarians,
often have strong opinions about community
cats; chief of among of them is that �they
are better off dead,� in quotes, �than
suffering outdoors and cared for.� Dr. Hurley
presented data about why that�s not an accurate
way of looking at the issue, but how do you
actually educate those community members and
get them on board?�
Holly Sizemore: Thanks Christie. I also want
to echo that I am really honored to be on
this panel, and want to thank Maddie�s Fund,
fellow panelist, and the participants. First,
I think in terms of the �better-off-dead�
argument, it can really get some animal lovers
a little riled up. I suggest firsthand that
you let the person know that you understand
that viewpoint.
And if it�s true, let them know that you,
too, were skeptical about TNR until you learned
more about it. I know I was. Jon Cicirelli
says that in his presentation. It is a common
theme amongst people I talk to who are now
enthusiastic TNR converts, so to speak. They
all say pretty much the same thing ? that
they were skeptical until they saw firsthand
how well it worked. TNR and SNR can be a counterintuitive
concept for many and acknowledging that right
away can go a long way in having the other
party even be willing to listen to you.
This site talks here a little bit about the
tipping point. For those of you who are not
aware what the tipping point is, it is that
magic moment when an idea, trend, or social
behavior crosses a threshold, tips, and spreads
like wildfire. That is the Malcolm Gladwell
definition. That really has already happened
with TNR, as a whole, just regular Trap-Neuter-Return.
If you look at this graph, you see that we
have already hit that top of the tipping point.
Most communities in the U.S. endorse or practice
TNR. You are really a laggard if you don�t.
However, it is true that the concept of Shelter-Neuter-Return
is still in what I would refer to as the �early
adopter� stage, if you look at this chart.
The innovators, they were out there doing
it: Rick DuCharme, Jon Cicirelli and Best
Friends and many others.
Now we are seeing a lot of early adopters.
Best Friends is partnering with a number of
municipal shelters, who are these early adopters.
These shelter-based community cat programs,
or SNR programs, they are all hugely successful.
Showing others their successes is key in educating
the community.
If you want to forward to the next slide,
Best Friends has a really great action kit,
where you can use � oh, I�m sorry. It
must be in another place. But, we have a really
wonderful action kit that you can use to educate
your community, and the kit gives you � and
it�s in the resources section here. The
link to the action kit is in the resources
section here, and it gives you tips on what
you can do prior to approaching your government
about endorsing TNR. It includes a sample
PowerPoint that you can take to city council.
It has frequently asked questions and couple
of short videos. One [video], �Why TNR is
better than trap and kill?� featuring Jon
Cicirelli and others, and another one about
our hugely successful program in San Antonio.
Really video is a powerful influencer. We
have had great response from these videos,
so check them out.
Christie Keith: That�s great. I just want
to second that, that video is very useful.
I know Maddie�s has shared it, ourselves,
and people respond really well to it. And,
speaking of Jon Cicirelli, our next question
is going to back to him. �Jon, what information
and data is available comparing the cost of
a program like this so-called �catch and
kill� and more conventional TNR?�
Jon Cicirelli: Hi again. Thank you. There
isn�t a ton of data, but I am going to share
with you a couple of things that I do know.
In particular, I want to look at my own organization.
What you can see on this slide is � this
is actually a slide I use to talk about what
it costs to do large-scale lethal control.
The way I talk about that is by breaking down
what it costs us to take care of a cat ? so
that is taking a cat into the shelter, caring
for it for several days and ultimately euthanizing
it. That average cost for us comes out to
about $233.00. You can see it is the second
to last number. The opposing cost for us ? just
the spay/neuter ? is about $65.00 for a cat.
Right there, you can see there is a significant
cost savings.
But, the greatest cost savings you are going
to see, from a program like an SNR or high
levels of TNR that reduce the intake of cats,
is the savings from that. For example, in
San Jose, after three plus years of this program,
we are taking in 3,000 fewer cats than we
did those three years ago when we started.
If you just do simple math and say each cat
only cost you $100.00 to care for, that would
be a savings of $300,000.00 for cats that
we don�t have to care for anymore. That
is the kind of money that can really make
a difference, and that is the kind of argument
you can use ? a solid dollars argument with
a government officials or other agencies that
you are trying to convince to do this. Because
the purpose, remember, here with these kinds
of programs, is to reduce the number of cats
going into the system.
Christie Keith: Great. Thanks. Our next question
is for Dr. Julie Levy. �Dr. Levy, when TNR
or Shelter-Neuter-Return becomes the way to
manage cats in a community, does that send
a wrong message to citizens? Could they think
in the end the best thing to do for the cats
is to just leave them outside and not worry
about them at all?�
Dr. Julie Levy: We hope that this is not the
message that people take home for our kitties.
We certainly would love to get most of the
cats that are adoptable into homes. That is
always the best outcome for cats that are
socialized. We know that there are a large
number of cats that either do not want to
live in homes because they are unsocialized,
or there may currently just not be enough
homes for all of those cats. So, when we see
these cats that are happily enjoying each
other outside and are clearly fat and fluffy
and thriving, we would not want to have an
instinct that the best thing we could do is
remove them and euthanize them at the local
animal shelter. It is really much more respectful
for them to help them continue to enjoy this
happy lifestyle that they have.
If you look at the next slide, you can see
statistics that are very typical for southern
shelters that are high-intake shelters. This
is a Florida county shelter that has been
taking in 16,000 cats a year or so and euthanizing
eight of ten cats that come into the shelter.
There are some people that feel like the life
on the street is too fraught with risk to
make it worth living. But, if the alternative
is taking a cat into a shelter like this,
which currently has very little chance for
live release, I think it is teaching people
to have less respect for the lives of cats
than more.
If you look at the next slide, this is a picture
that was sent to me by one of our colony caregivers
in Gainesville. I think it shows how happily
cats can live in TNR programs in their communities.
These cats, even though they cannot be touched,
have loving caregivers that are very concerned
about them, have named them, even though they
can't tell the black cats apart. They are
passionately protective and affectionate towards
these cats. This really is the greatest sign
of respect for these animals, helping them
find the best way to live safely in their
community.
Christie Keith: Thank you. Our next question
is for Rich Avanzino. �Rich, if shelters
do not intake cats, do you think that people
will take it into their own hands to reduce
the population themselves in a non-humane
manner or by hiring exterminators to deal
with the cats?�
Rich Avanzino: Well, it is a great question.
I would like to put that in context. Unfortunately,
with open-admission shelters and with a lot
of effort to make it easy for people to bring
in cats, we still have animal abusers in almost
every community of the United States, even
when it is easy for cats to be surrendered
to shelters. There are some bad people, fortunately,
a very few number. But, there are some bad
people that do terrible things. When we start
new programs, it is not unusual for people
to talk about, �Oh my gosh, if we don�t
do what we have always been doing, then there
will be some more suffering.�
For instance, in San Francisco, when I used
to be involved with the San Francisco SPCA,
and we were supporting feral cat colonies,
people worried that people who were animal
abusers would go out to the feral cat colonies
with baseball bats, and other bad things,
and do terrible things to these animals. While
that fear existed, and while that concern
was real, the reality never came close to
any indication that the feral cat colonies
were in greater danger by bad people. The
same thing as when we implemented owner surrender
fees. People said that people would abandon
the animals and that the animals would be
on the streets and they would suffer from
illness and injury, and hit by � incidents.
Those fears never materialized.
Additionally, in California, where it is illegal
to trap and bring raccoons to shelters, at
least that is my understanding, people do
not go out and torture the raccoons or the
opossums or the skunks. The vast majority
of citizens of our communities respect the
fact that these animals are precious, that
they deserve our protection. That while they
might be a nuance now and then, there is something
that is special about sharing our environment,
even with these animals that are in urban
and suburban environments that get into garbage
cans, make some noise and sometimes cause
disturbance. The vast majority of people respect
the fact that that is part of what life in
our country should be all about ? that we
are stewards, and we are not here to manipulate
and deprive life just because occasionally
we have an annoyance. So, yes, there are animal
abusers out there, but I think all of the
evidence points that when you have these kinds
of programs in effect, there is no increased
incidence of the animals being harmed.
The alternative is to bring them into shelters,
like Julie was saying, and see them die by
the millions because we do not have a better
alternative. That kind of reality has got
to be changed. I think everybody recognizes
that killing healthy and treatable dogs and
cats in American shelters is a tragedy that
deserves to be ended real soon.
Christie Keith: Thank you so much, Rich. Thank
you. The next question is for Dr. Julie Levy,
who has definitely had some experience at
this in her community. And, it�s a little
bit of a long question that we definitely
shortened there on the slide, but I am going
to read the entire question as it came in
so that people can understand the context.
�Dr. Levy, how can we organize to change
the minds of local governments that have laws
or regulations they say, �don�t allow
programs like this�? Examples are laws against
TNR, bans on the feeding of outdoor cats,
requirements in animal control contracts that
cats not be returned to their habitat, ordinances
that permit or require animal control to pick
up so-called nuance and stray cats, not just
dogs, or even laws that require cat owners
to keep their cats indoors or on their property.�
Dr. Julie Levy: Well, this certainly is a
common situation that is faced in many communities.
I think the first thing to do, though, is
to actually pull a copy of the law and make
sure that is what it really says. Because,
we have repeatedly found that law enforcement
agencies and animal control agencies are working
a lot of times off of tradition or off internal
policy that is not actually legislated in
local laws.
Very often when you go and look for the letter
of the law, you have much more flexibility
than we thought we had. However, some of the
laws are draconian, and they do have these
kinds of obstacles in them, in which case
it is up to us to have some lobbying effectiveness
of our own. In those cases, it is important
to get together a small group of respected
community leaders, and to address policymakers,
as a group, with data, showing why these things
need to change.
We recently had a little experience in our
community government where we wanted to change
some adoption policies in our shelter. We
took one of the largest philanthropists and
our grant organizer, and we went one-by-one
into county offices meeting with our commissioners
and our county managers. They were very relieved
to see that we were not asking for money,
because everybody normally asks for money.
We just wanted the flexibility to help the
shelter do a better job.
It was amazingly successful. Almost overnight,
policies changed and the shelter director
was then liberated to be more creative and
flexible in their job.
Then, if it does come time to revise the code,
I would recommend thinking long and hard before
doing that. Because, we have seen disasters,
such as Tallahassee, Florida, where a fairly
innocent attempt was made to change a code,
and then Trap-Neuter-Return opponents got
wind of it, and they ended up with a code
that very literally prohibited TNR. So, that
backfired. If the code could be better but
nobody is enforcing it, or it is not getting
in the way, I would probably leave it alone.
However, I would like to share some examples
of the Jacksonville Municipal Code, which
is my favorite code for community cats. It
starts with some description of why the code
is written this way. It says that the city
�recognizes the need for innovation in addressing
the issues presented by feral free roaming
and other community cats. To that end, it
recognizes that there are community caregivers,
and acknowledges that properly managed community
cats may be part of the solution to the continuing
euthanasia of cats...� And, I have personally
never seen a municipal code before that is
so poetic in its explanations of why it looks
the way it does.
If we can look at the next slide, it defines
community cats as: �Any free-roaming cat
that may be cared for by one or more residents
of the immediate area, who are or are not
known, and a community cat may or may not
be feral.� This is amazingly flexible. It
acknowledges that there might be someone caring
for the cat, but we do not know who they are,
and that community cats include friendly cats,
as well as feral cats, and that �community
cats shall be distinguished from other cats
by being sterilized and ear-tipped. Qualified
community cats are exempt from licensing,
stray and at large provisions of this ordinance,
and may be exempt from other provisions directed
towards owned cats.� Again, very friendly
supportive language that is there to encourage
TNR, but not to penalize our friendly free-roaming
cats.
On the next slide, they get into more detail
about community cat management, and require
that cats be sterilized and vaccinated against
rabies and ear-tipped. What I love is that
it says, �If a person is providing care,
the cats must be fed daily and cats must not
be allowed to suffer.� But, it actually
does not require that there be a known caregiver.
There is a caregiver certification program
that may be implemented by the city. This
is important because sometimes we have caregivers
who are a nuisance. In that case, the city
can step in, try to educate that caregiver
and certify them. It does not require a caregiver
registration or education program. So, again,
[it is] extremely flexible, and the code only
addresses people when there is a problem.
Then, just a couple of other sort of unrelated
code changes that I would encourage other
people to look at, if they are updating their
code. We are always trying to shorten the
length of stay of pets and shelters and get
them out sooner. They have defined [that]
litters of puppies and kittens less than six
months old, without a nursing mother, have
no required hold stay. The reason for this
is we do not ever want puppies and kittens
to be forced to stay in the shelter, especially
if it is a shelter that has the risk of disease.
It is much better for them to go straight
into foster [care] or to get adopted right
away. The reason to have a hold period for
stray animals is so that the owner can find
them if they are lost. But, we know that litters
of puppies and kittens do not run away in
mass. There probably is not an owner out there
looking for them. It is far better not to
require hold period for juveniles, and that
is what this code says.
They also specifically exclude feral animals
from a hold period. This is very important
because effective and efficient Shelter-Neuter-Return
programs need to get those cats out immediately.
In Jacksonville, the cats are transferred
immediately to the spay/neuter program on
the day they come into the shelter. They are
booked in on paper, but they stay in their
traps and are picked up twice a day. There
is no reason in the world we would ever want
to force a shelter to hold feral cats. It
is cruel to the cats and it consumes resources.
Then they describe an interesting intervention,
which is to allow spay and neuter to happen
during the required stray hold period, which
is an ungodly six-day period in Jacksonville.
They say that due to the low reclaim rate
and high euthanasia rate for cats, all cats
that do not have a positive traceable identification
may be sterilized immediately upon intake
and placed in adoption as soon as two days
after impound. So, they still have to hold
them six days, but they can start moving the
cats through the system earlier. Great code.
We can make [it] available in the resources,
the entire code, if people are interested.
Christie Keith: That�s fantastic, Dr. Levy.
Thank you. That is going to be enormously
useful to the people who are inquiring about
this. I believe you also wrote an article
about this that is on the Maddie�s Fund
website, so there is additional information
about that available to people there.
Our next question is going back to Jon Cicirelli:
�Jon, is there any evidence to what happens
to cat intake levels at other shelters in
the area when one shelter implements the admission/release
procedures that you were suggesting? For example,
when San Jose Animal Shelter changed its practices,
were there any recorded impacts upon other
shelters or the community in general?�
Jon Cicirelli: Thanks. Yeah, when we started
our program � in San Jose, we are actually
part of a Maddie�s Fund-inspired coalition.
We have five brick and mortar shelters in
our county, San Jose being one of them and
four others. One of the other shelters is
actually a partner of ours in the SNR program.
But, the other three, actually, kind of looked
at us crazily when we started the program.
They were sort of wondering, and they kind
of stepped back and were like, �Okay. Let�s
see what happens,� you know. Interestingly,
as soon as we started reporting results of
them and telling them what was going on with
the program, they all started adopting the
same program.
So the slide I have presented here is our
county of which, again, we are one of five
shelters in our county. You can see overall
intake for all of us is going down. Nobody
had reported increases in cat intake. Partly,
of course, that is due to the fact that they
also started doing the program. But, also,
there is not this movement of cats from community-to-community,
at least not that we are able to measure.
I do not have good data on every community
where programs like this are enacted, what
happens to the nearby shelters. In fact, there
are enough of these programs now that it is
actually getting hard to keep track of everybody
who is starting or trying one.
I can tell you though, last month, I was also
contacted by � actually Dr. Hurley was contacted
through her website, but she shared with me
? a small organization in Central Pennsylvania
who started a similar program in 2010 for
community cats with one of their cities. They
quickly ran out of cats to take care of, or
have in the program, because it was reducing
the intake of cats. They were taking care
of all the feral cats. They had expanded to
four total cities, same problem; they ran
out of cats. Now, their plan for this year
is to expand to the rest of the county. In
fact, now, even though they are sort of founded
and based on this community cat kind of programming,
they are planning to stretch out and reach
out to start helping dogs in their community
too, because they are finding they have the
bandwidth. Those are two examples where intakes
did not go up in other places; they just kept
going down.
Christie Keith: Great. Thank you. The next
question is somewhat related, and this one
is for Dr. Kate Hurley. �Dr. Hurley, does
any community that you know of keep statistics
on the number of complaints coming in after
the shelter stops accepting cats, or complaints
that went above the shelter level to the local
government, such as a board of supervisors?
And, how many other communities are not taking
in community cats that you know of? Is there
a lot of support in the animal sheltering
world for this kind of change?� That�s
a very big, long question, but I know that
you have been very active in these issues
in California in the last year or so. I�m
hoping that you have some answers for our
questioners.
Dr. Kate Hurley: Yeah. So far, we have been
talking more about Shelter-Neuter-Return,
but just to remind you on the next slide is
another option that I mentioned in the previous
webinar ? especially for those shelters that
don�t have a big grant, and maybe for some
shelters it costs less than $65.00, so less
than the cost of a spay to intake and euthanize
a cat, or for whatever reason.
Today, Shelter-Neuter-Return is not an option.
Today, if a cat is admitted, it is going to
mean euthanasia for that cat, or euthanasia
of another cat, whether intentionally or due
to overcrowding of the shelter. So, in terms
of the answer to the question of how many
shelters have adopted that program, I want
to remind the audience that it does not have
to be a wholesale adopt or not adopt. For
some shelters, it is just giving themselves
the freedom to say, �You know what? It�s
the middle of August and we are chalked full.
And, if this cat comes in today, it is going
to cause a problem. So, we are going to ask
one cat to wait, or we are going to ask people
to wait for a week.�
I am going to present a few studies though,
from shelters that have gone more whole hog
in deciding that they did not have the resources
to manage intake of feral cats, or in one
case, healthy stray cats in general, and how
that has gone.
On the next slide, this is an article that
I read about Pasco County, Florida saying
no to feral cats in that community on some
of the rationale that some shelters are going
through. They were charged with a goal of
saving 90 percent of their animals, and they
were not able to make that a reality as long
as they were admitting feral cats for whom
they did not have a live release option.
Some shelters are able to solve that by implementing
an internal Shelter-Neuter-Return program,
but sometimes that does not make sense and
it is not necessary. Sometimes, there is already
a program in the community. That is highlighted
later in the article in the next slide, where
there is already a group that is doing TNR.
Moving the cat through the shelter just adds
unnecessary expense and risk. The shelter
can just redirect citizens to say, �Hey,
if you have a problem with a feral cat, then
here�s the number to call.� So, sort of
changing the map, as I discussed in the last
webinar, where people are remarkably pliable
in, for the most part, doing what we direct
them to do.
Sometimes it is just reminding ourselves that
we have the freedom to ask them to do something
different from what we have already asked
them to do. That has been a consistent theme
in the feedback I have gotten ? that people
just are more willing and less �complainy�
than anybody expected them to be. I think
that I have heard Jon Cicirelli say that about
the Shelter-Neuter-Return program, as well.
On the next slide, this was a shelter that
went even further and just said, �You know,
there is a good adoption organization in this
community already. There is TNR going on in
this community already. We�re a small shelter
with not a lot of resources. We�re going
to focus on taking in and caring for sick/injured
orphaned kittens that really need our care,
and we�re not going to take in healthy stray
cats. We�re going to redirect our efforts
instead to work with citizens to find other
alternatives or work with organizations in
our community that are already offering those
services.�
I think one of the interesting things is to
look at how these different programs have
been presented. I was shocked by that. I was
like, �Really? Wow. Not taking in healthy
strays at all?� The feedback that, you know,
again, was received is � except for a few
people that I have been unable to have a reasonable
conversation with, which there is always some
of those. Once we explain to people why we
have changed our policies, they usually understand.
Word is out. We had a gentleman come in and
say he knows we do not except feral cats,
but where can he get traps to do a TNR? In
the past, maybe that gentleman would have
just brought the cats into the shelter not
really thinking about what the consequences
would be. When we create a slight barrier
and give citizens pause in that whole process,
often times they are very amenable to going
a different path.
The next slide. Research has found that often
times behavior that we think is very difficult
to change, really just requires a little bit
of guidance to help people make the choices
that we would like them to make. We are really
the ones who know what�s at stake and what�s
best for both the animals 
and the community. Go on.
One of the great things in the communities
where the shelter has said, �Hey, we�re
not going to continue taking in cats if that
is going to mean euthanasia of that cat,�
the community, themselves, has stepped up
to fill a void that was never really recognized
before. In that community ? and that is Chico
City ? several groups are involved, including
a new group that was formed to specifically
do TNR.
The great thing there is that all the groups
are basically sharing the same message. I
think that speaks to the question that Jon
addressed, too. As long as all the groups
are onboard with this program, all the groups
can share information with community members
about alternative strategies to manage cats,
and intake does not need to be redirected
to another shelter or another organization.
We all need to help solve the problem in another
way other than euthanasia.
Next slide. I think that is a really important
part. This also speaks to the concern of,
�Are people just going to do nothing?�
There are a lot of things that are �not
admitting a cat to a shelter for euthanasia�,
and are not �nothing.� This was a roadmap
for staff that the Director of the Chico City
Shelter prepared to interview citizens, who
are calling about a cat that they previously
would have brought into the shelter ? to find
out what was going on, what were the risks
for the cat, what was the problem for the
people, and come up with an answer that was
another solution, whether that was referral
to another group or solving the problem in
another way. Go on. They have had very dramatic
results, a 75% decrease in intake from implementing
the program. For most cats, other solutions
can be found. For the 25% that are sick or
injured, or orphaned, or part of a cruelty
case or part of a special nuisance situation,
they have so much more ability to really provide
good care. And, also time to think about what
they are going to say to the people who call.
They have time to spend time on the phone.
Next slide. Her report was that it was actually
getting easier over time. Citizens are coming
to expect it and her staff is reporting that
they are getting a lot better at having these
conversations with people.
Next slide. In terms of who else is catching
on, this is an article from last week: �Don�t
freak out over new feral cat policy.� This
is the current county shelter in California
that is quite a high volume shelter. Again,
it does not have all the details worked out
but it does not have the resources to implement
full scale SNR. At the same time they are
dealing with this constant influx of feral
cats. As a first step, they are asking community
members to handle it in a different way, to
work with other TNR groups in the community
while they look at what they can offer themselves.
I think that is a really important thing for
us to communicate � both for us presenters
to communicate to you in the audience and
for us in sheltering to communicate to our
community members ? is that saying no to intake
when it is going to mean euthanasia does not
mean just saying, �No, I�m not going to
help you.�
[There are] lots of resources we can give
people who have found a cat, to help find
the owner, to help rehome the cat, to help
them keep the cat and take good care of it,
if they decide to go that route, or resources
to coexist with the cat. If it is a cat that
is appropriate for adoption but there is just
not room right now, using managed intake and
saying not �no� forever, but just �no
today and bring it in later. We�ll call
you when we have room.�
Christie Keith: Great. Thank you Dr. Hurley.
The next question is somewhat related to the
last two in theme. This is another one that
we were asked in many different ways by many
different people, and it is directed to Holly
Sizemore of Best Friends. �Holly, in areas
where this program has been implemented, is
there a problem of people trapping cats and
dumping them in the middle of nowhere when
they know they can't take them to a shelter?
Or a problem that the cats will be brought
back if they do take them back to the area,
where they are perhaps perceiving them as
a nuance or at risk, if they do take them
to the shelter?�
Holly Sizemore: Well, obviously, someone who
is going to engage in abandonment is probably
not going to talk much about it. To my knowledge,
this is never happened, where someone has
been caught abandoning a cat, and they said,
�It was because I went to the shelter and
they wouldn�t accept this cat,� or, �TNR
was the only option.� I have never known
that to happen. Again, that may happen occasionally,
but referring back to what Rich was saying
earlier. There may be a few bad seeds, but
most people know abandonment is illegal. The
benefits of such a program far outweigh those
few isolated incidents where that may occur.
I want to talk a little bit about the Best
Friends Community Cat Programs. We do programs
in a number of different cities across the
U.S., and they differ slightly, but this is
the gist of our SNR program. [At] the cat
center of the shelter, the eligibility of
the cats for TNR is determined, and that can
differ from community to community. A lot
of our programs do release tame cats. I will
let the group know that, and that can be a
little bit different from some other programs.
The eligible cats, if they are fat, healthy,
and they are at risk of dying because of space
or anything, and they have been known to be
living outdoors, that is usually the eligibility.
They are then returned to their impound locale.
All the cats in the return area, we attempt
to TNR everybody else, and then we attempt
to mitigate nuisance issue. Really, I think
our programs, like Kate was saying, we work
to help people solve the problem. Our motto
is: �Whether you love or loathe cats, we�re
going to help you.�
If you go to the next slide, we have a great
video on our website, too, about humane cat
deterrents. A lot of people � some complainants
do not want to watch the video. I will give
them that. Sometimes it does take a one-on-one
conversation. I think this is a really great
tool for people to learn about what options
are available, because there are legitimate
nuisances that are sometimes created. A lot
of complainants do not want to pay for deterrents,
but I have known a number of shelters who
have successfully gotten grants to buy cat
deterrents, because it is a pretty easy pitch.
Going on to the next slide, I also want to
talk about our programs in terms of what we
do. We do our work in plain sight. This is
our van for our San Antonio, our Albuquerque
program actually. We definitely are not hiding
and releasing the cats out at midnight; however,
we also do not make it, what I would call
�a battle� between the impounder and our
program. Upon intake, we do attempt to determine
the nature of the relationship between the
cat and the trapper or impounder.
When I began this work, one of my biggest
surprises was how many people were both the
cat caregiver and the cat trapper. Many of
them, they loved the cats, but they simply
became overwhelmed by the numbers and did
not know of any alternatives. Of course, those
folks are really easy to deal with. We can
give them the right resources and send them
on their way. But, if someone brings in a
cat and says, �This cat has been hanging
around my house yowling and bothering us,�
we don�t say, �Well, tough luck, it�s
coming back.� We may give them information
on cat deterrents; we impound the cat, and
then we TNR it, which obviously will probably
take care of the yowling. Then we return it
in our well-marked van that you see here,
and we leave door hanger information educating
the community about TNR.
It is possible that type of trapper might
learn that cat has come back, but by in large,
most trappers do not complain that they see
the cats again. A very tiny minority do. That
is why you need to be sure if you are going
to do such a program, gather testimonials
from all the multitudes of people who are
going to love the program, and then that will
help offset the few who really do get riled
up about it.
Christie Keith: Great. Thank you. The next
question is one that was asked by several
people, and it is also one that most of the
members of the panel tonight had things to
say about. I�m going to direct it first
to Dr. Hurley, and then we will see who else
on the panel would also like to respond.
Before I ask the question, though, I just
want to remind the panel that we are about
halfway through our time, and we are not halfway
through our questions. If we could start trying
to keep the answers a little bit shorter that
would probably make sure that we are able
to get some of the questions in that are coming
in live while you are speaking tonight.
Dr. Hurley, we are going to start this out
with you, and then you can pass it along to
the other panelists when you are done. �In
all this discussion, there has been no mention
of the role of� ? although that�s actually
not true now, but I think they are referring
to the first webcast ? �there has been no
mention of role of feral colony caretakers.
We could never recruit enough volunteers to
manage the number of cats you�re talking
about. What is the role, if any, of managed
colonies in this new paradigm?�
Dr. Kate Hurley: I am going to go back to
a slide that I presented in the last webinar,
just reminding us of the general health of
community cats that I present to TNR clinics
and they present to shelters. Remember, when
we talk about these programs, we are only
talking about targeting cats that present
healthy and in good body condition. If they
are emaciated, if they are injured, then we
are going to admit them to the shelter and
find another solution. I think the question
is: �Do cats need to be part of managed
colonies to survive?� I think we actually
already know the answer.
Next slide. If you think about, �How are
most community cats cared for? Where do most
community cats live?� Do they live in a
big old colony with 20 or 30 cats and a formal
caregiver, or are they living in one�s and
two�s in backyards and alleys, by dumpsters
and on people�s back porches? The answer
from multiple research studies is that, for
the most part, un-owned cats live singly or
in small groups. The average number of cats
is between about 2.6 and 4, with an overall
average of just around 3 cats being fed. The
vast majority of cats are not part of managed
colonies.
Here is the good news in that. In these same
studies, we found that up to one in four households
feed cats that they do not own. So next slide.
That is an awful lot of involuntary volunteers.
There are a lot of people already out there
taking care of cats. I was so enthusiastic;
I said that Self-Neuter-Return helps these
volunteers do a good job and the right thing.
It all blended together on that cartoon.
When we decriminalize feeding cats and bring
it out from the underground, we can actually
contact more people who are doing this activity
and help make sure that they are doing it
right ? that they are doing it responsibly,
that they are managing the impact on neighbors
and other animals, and getting the cats spayed/neutered
and vaccinated.
Christie Keith: Before we go on, do any of
the other panelists want to respond to that
question, or do you all feel comfortable with
Dr. Hurley�s answers?
Holly Sizemore: Yeah, this is Holly. I love
Dr. Hurley�s answer. I would say our definition
of a managed colony, here at Best Friends,
is that even if there are one or two cats,
if there is someone who is caring for it,
we consider it a colony and managed. We look
at it a little bit differently but agree wholeheartedly
with the concept. Many of these animals are
coming in healthy and happy, and we can assume
that they are being cared for.
Christie Keith: Anybody else? Okay. I�m
going to go ahead and move onto the next question,
which is for Rich. �Rich, this is a big
picture question: The concept of the open-door
or open admission shelter has been an important
one in sheltering for a long time. Does this
paradigm change for community cats mean retiring
that term in practice, and if so, doesn�t
that seem like a change people will have a
hard time accepting?�
Rich Avanzino: Well, Christie, I am an old
dog, and in the 35 years that I have been
involved in this work, like it or not, we
are experiencing a phenomenal amount of change.
Change is hard. When I think back to when
I started my career in animal welfare, we
did not have cell phones. We did not have
personal computers. We did not have social
media. In the animal world, we were euthanizing
at the very beginning, with something called
a high-altitude chamber, to put an end to
an animal�s life. There was no such thing
as spay and neuter before release. People
had not even thought of the idea of vaccinating
on entry. Feral cat colonies were taboo, and
TNR was hardly a fledgling idea.
All of those things demonstrated to me that
while it is in fact difficult to find a new
path, our industry, and society in general,
has to embrace change. There is no alternative
if we stagnate and stay back in the past,
if we don�t look to the future and figure
out what our real role is. I mean it is our
role to end the euthanasia of healthy and
treatable animals.
I don�t think there is anybody in our work
that does not honesty believe that. Even though
it is going to be uncomfortable sometimes
to embrace new ideas, to try new approaches
and to radically rethink what we have done
in the past and what we have to do to be a
better steward in the future, we are going
to do it even if we do not want to. Because,
that is what is going to be demanded by society,
by funders, by municipalities and by the people
of this country who love their animals. When
we ask people who have pets, �What do you
think of your relationship?� They say they
are family members, and we are not treating
family members right when they go to shelters,
if we are killing them by the millions.
Christie Keith: Thank you, Rich. Our next
question is for Dr. Levy again. �Dr. Levy,
how should the issues of feline leukemia and
FIV in feral cats and kittens be addressed
by TNR or Shelter-Neuter-Return programs such
as the ones you�re advocating?� And, then
a number of other questions that are similar:
�Do you test; if so, and if they are positive,
should they be returned to the community?
What about mildly sick cats that are not positive
for feline leukemia or FIV with eye discharge
and/or some degree of upper respiratory infection?�
I realize that question could be answered
with a textbook, but I just want to remind
you that we are needing to move it along.
Dr. Julie Levy: This is one of the most controversial
topics among veterinarians and medical directors
of these types of programs, and it is one
that we have studied extensively in our program.
If you go to the next slide, you will see
a study that we reported in the Journal of
the American Veterinary Medical Association.
We had test results from over 18,000 pets
and feral cats nationwide. We divided the
data into cats that were healthy at the time
of testing and cats that were sick. We also
looked at if cats were indoor pet cats, outdoor
pet cats or feral cats.
If we just start with the graph on the left,
you see that, naturally, indoor cats have
the lowest infectious disease rate, but interestingly;
outdoor cats and feral cats have had exactly
the same rates of infection, if they were
healthy. That is not surprising, because they
have the same risk. They are out roaming outside
and encountering other cats.
Now, if we move over to the right side where
we look at sick cats, things change a little
bit. Again, our indoor cats are healthier,
are less likely to be infected than our outdoor
cats, and this is where we see the sick feral
cats start to come up as a higher rate of
infection for both FELV and FIV.
There are several reasons why this might be.
One is that in programs that do not normally
test cats in TNR programs, they might just
test the sick ones in order to make some decisions
about those. There might be some preferential
testing of feral cats if they are sick, or
they might just truly be more likely to be
infected.
Our take-home message for this is that if
the cats look healthy, they are no more likely
to be infected than a pet cat is. We should
not have different standards for them, and
no one is forcing pet owners to test their
cats. No one is forcing pet owners to kill
their cats if they are positive. So, in our
program, we have made the strategic decision
to put all of our resources into neutering
more cats, and we no longer test. We will
say that we have tests on hand, in case we
want to use the test as a tiebreaker in a
cat that we are on the fence about.
Of course, cats going to pet adoption homes
and foster programs, they are all tested.
That is how we have chosen to utilize our
resources for the greatest good. The good
news is that both FELV and FIV are largely
controlled by neutering. FELV is primarily
spread from infected mothers to their newborn
kittens. Of course, there are not any newborn
kittens after cats are spayed. FIV is spread
primarily among tomcats that fight, and that
fighting behavior is almost eliminated by
castration. We actually believe we can reduce
these infections faster simply by using our
resources to neuter more cats.
Christie Keith: Dr. Levy, the next question
is also for you. It is a little different.
�Dr. Levy, Dr. Hurley described the hell
and stress a feral cat endures when confined
in the first webcast. What can be done with
community cats brought in to be neutered and
released when they have conditions that need
treatment for several days, such as a broken
leg or URI (upper respiratory infection)?�
Dr. Julie Levy: Sure. This is a common problem
that we encounter. The first step is that
we always handle these cats covered. Whether
they are coming in traps that are covered
with a sheet, or whether they are being carried
in a carrier around the clinic, if we keep
them covered, that will help them feel safe.
I also really love double compartment housing
for feral cats that need to be housed in the
clinic. This allows you to move the cat to
one side for cleaning, and it also allows
you to cover the front of the cage so that
the cat can hide while you work in the other
compartment.
I have shown here a picture of really nice
housing for feral cats. We would of course,
just hang a towel or a cage cover over the
front, but that allows us to very safely handle
the cat. Then, finally, here is a picture
of these feral cat dens, and these must be
in every single cage. They are perfect for
managing feral cats. The cats will naturally
run in and hide. You can close that little
porthole and then handle the cat. Some other
things that are important ? now we have an
antibiotic called Convenia, which will last
a week or more with a single injection. That
is perfect for eliminating some of the handing
for daily care for feral cats that have wounds
or infections that need to be treated.
Christie Keith: Great. Thank you. The next
question is for Holly. �Holly, if you do
TNR a cat at a shelter, is it inhumane to
release them to an unfamiliar neighborhood,
or is it prudent that we release them close
to where the cat was trapped?�
Holly Sizemore: They need to be released close
to the location where they trapped. All of
the Best Friends Community Cat Programs instill
upon the field officers and impound staff
that very clear and correct impound location
information is essential. It is important
to us to release very close to the impound
site. Now, in the rare cases where you may
need to relocate, we will be talking about
that in a bit.
Christie Keith: Okay. Great. Thank you. Dr.
Levy, we�re coming back to you again. �If
deciding to release kittens through TNR, whether
feral or stray kittens, and fostering or socializing
adoption are not options, what is the minimum
recommended age and weight to release back
to the community? And since the feral kitten
survival rate is so low, what would you suggest
doing with feral kittens who are over two
or three months, who are harder to socialize
than very young kittens?�
Dr. Julie Levy: For cats that are heading
to adoption programs, we will do neutering
very young, if the kittens are fat and healthy
? so a pound and a half, six weeks or older,
for fat kittens, of course, always looking
at the condition of the cat. There are some
cats that are four pounds, but too scrawny,
and we would not do them. Our TNR programs
present some other challenges, because we
are going to release these kittens back to
the field. We do know that they have a relatively
low survival rate, just like all other free-roaming
animals, such as rabbits and raccoons. Life
in nature is hard, and it is nature�s strategy
in litter bearing species to have a low survival
rate.
Our program, because we are in a rabies endemic
state, will only admit cats for TNR that are
12 weeks of age or older, so that they can
have a valid rabies vaccine. That means that
a tipped ear means they have had at least
one valid rabies vaccine. That is what we
do routinely. Occasionally, we will neuter
cats younger if they have a caregiver that
is going to be looking out after them, and
we think it is the only time that we are going
to get our hands on the cat. But, generally,
we pick somewhat arbitrarily, 12 weeks, which
is about three pounds for our TNR program.
Christie Keith: Okay. Our next question is
for Dr. Hurley, and this is a big one. So,
I�ll remind you again about the time. �Dr.
Hurley, how can we balance the lives of free-living
cats and those of the wildlife they prey on?
This is compounded by, �What if there are
endangered or threatened species in the area?�
We also had a couple of questions from people
who lived in island environments, such as
Hawaii, asking about any special considerations
about their communities.
Dr. Kate Hurley: I am going to fly through
these slides because there are a few of them,
partly because this seems to be one of the
biggest stumbling blocks. If you could go
to the next slide, really the question is,
as this magazine article put it so plainly
about a month ago: �Must cats die so birds
can live?� Because, we are not talking about
discontinuing any of the other things that
we have been doing to promote responsible
cat ownership, and spay/neuter, and coexisting
with wild animals and with domestic pets in
a responsible way. We are talking about discontinuing
euthanasia of our cats and either replacing
it with Shelter-Neuter-Return or other strategies
to coexist with these animals.
This is really a two-part question. Part one
is: �Is eradication of cats necessary for
the protection of wildlife on lizards or in
general, and, if so, is shelter euthanasia
an effective way to accomplish this?� An
answer to part one: Really, it varies. We
know that cats prey, there is no secret about
that. They prey on about six times as many
mammals, so rodents and rabbits, as they do
birds. The impact of predation is not even.
Like other predators, predation tends to be
targeted at weak, sick, injured animals that
may be less fit for survival in general.
There are many conservationists who believe
that predation does not actually cause mortality;
it replaces mortality from another cause.
The animals that are preyed upon likely would
succumb to another cause of mortality. That
is on a sort of a macro population level.
On a microenvironment, like an island, like
a sort of urban island that is defined by
specific parameters, in fact, the impact of
predation is unpredictable. In some cases,
it actually can help some species, and harm
others. Removal of the predator, likewise,
has unpredictable effects.
This is an article that just came out in Conservation
Biology looking at the effect of wildlife
services and control of predators on a large
scale in the United States. Looking at a meta-analysis
of predator removal in 113 systems found that
prey populations actually declined in 54.
In almost half of the cases, removal of the
predator actually reduced the abundance of
the prey species it was designed to protect.
Often times, that is because the predator
was also controlling other species that might
have competed for food, for nesting sites
or might also have preyed on the species of
interest.
On the next slide, I show an example where
that actually happened with cats. There are
multiple examples of this as well, where cats
were removed, and, lo and behold, rabbits
proliferated out of control with even more
devastating effect on the animals that were
trying to be protected.
The answer to question one is: �Do cats
need to be eradicated in order to protect
wildlife?� Well, not all the time. In some
microenvironments, predation by cats is actually
beneficial to some native species. It is particularly
likely be beneficial to birds in some cases
because they prey preferentially on rodents
that might otherwise eat a bird�s eggs or
compete for resources. In some microenvironments,
small islands, it has been demonstrated to
be helpful to remove cats. Most probably,
in most of the United States and in most urban
areas even in Hawaii or a larger island, where
the habitat is already very disrupted by humans
and many other species, probably the effect
of predation is neutral.
The reality is, and this is difficult, but
specific research is necessary in each microenvironment
where we might consider attempting to eradicate
cats as a predator in order to serve a prey
species. We need to follow up in those environments
to make sure that eradication of cats did
not trigger an unintended cascade of negative
consequences.
Then, what about part two? In those instances
where we say eradication of cats would be
a good idea, or maybe we just want to do it
just in case that might help the species of
wildlife that are at risk, is shelter euthanasia
a good tool for this? And this is the part
of the question that gets a lot less discussion,
but it is really a lot more important. No
matter what you might think about how good
of an idea it is to eradicate cats, if shelter
euthanasia is not a good tool to do that,
then we are not good partners in that process
and we might as well stop our part.
Here is the reality. I talked about this last
time. At least 50% removal is required for
eradication. There is an estimated 30-80 million
un-owned cats in the United States. Nobody
believes that we are euthanizing more than
about 2 million in our nation�s shelters.
Rich Avanzino just gave an estimate even a
little bit lower than that. Nobody is trying
to increase that number, and yet if you just
do the math on that, we would have to up our
euthanasia between 8 and 20 times as much
in order to hit that 50% goal.
Every study is consistent in reporting that
removal, short of eradication, is not useful.
It simply leaves a niche open that is filled
by other animals. It leaves more resources
available; other animals reproduce to fill
that spot. Next slide. This study is a good
reality check on what it really takes to eradicate
cats, and how shelter euthanasia potentially
fits in. This is a review of feral cat eradication
on islands, and these were all smaller islands,
quite a bit smaller than, say, Hawaii. On
average, in successful campaigns, three different
eradication methods were used. The top three
were leghold traps, hunting and poisoning.
On small islands where eradication was achieved,
it was using methods that we cannot imagine
would be acceptable on any kind of scale in
the U.S.
The real question we should be asking, presented
on the next slide, is not �Must cats die
so birds can live,� but �Can cats die
so birds can live?� And the real answer
to that, on the next slide, is no. We cannot
euthanize enough cats through shelters to
eradicate them even on a fairly small scale,
such as on a mid-sized island, and the methods
that would be successful in eradicating cats
simply would not be tolerated. If we discontinue
that activity as an apparent solution to the
problem, where we think we are helping birds
by euthanizing some of the cats, and we are
really not, we can focus on our attention
on better solutions. I just want to skip past
the next couple of slides, which are an example
from another species. You can certainly look
at those on your own.
What are all the ways that we can support
the lives of free-living cats and the lives
of the wildlife they prey on? Well, there
are lots of things that we can do. This is
taken from the Portland Audubon website, which
really has nothing to do with cats but [has]
profoundly effective methods to help wild
animals, acknowledging that euthanizing a
few of the cats is not one of those things
that we even can do, even if we would.
Here is the great news about Shelter-Neuter-Return,
if you think just in case maybe it�s a good
idea to have fewer cats out and about in communities;
well, the evidence is strong and building
that Shelter-Neuter-Return accomplishes that
as well as making lives better for the cats
that are targeted. San Jose, as Jon mentioned,
has seen a 25% decrease in intake and also
almost a 20% decrease in the number of DOA
(dead on arrival) cats that are picked up.
[That is] evidence that there are fewer cats
out and about causing risks for wildlife.
And, that is my answer.
Christie Keith: Thank you.
Dr. Kate Hurley: I just wanted to mention
really quickly that in Jon�s program, as
in other programs, it is important to find
solutions other than return for those cats
in really sensitive microenvironments. When
we are not filling our shelters will all the
cats, we can really do that in those microenvironments
where it is needed.
Christie Keith: That is great. Our next question
is actually about relocation, and it is for
Holly Sizemore. �Holly, what happens to
established, managed colonies if they experience
a change in care, such as cessation of feeding
or nearby development, or as Dr. Hurley mentioned,
other reasons that the community may have
for wanting to move them? Do they relocate
themselves, or do we need to relocate them?
And, if relocation has to be done, what makes
it successful?�
Holly Sizemore: Well, what we [do] in our
programs is when we release the shelter cat,
we go out and try to identify his buddies.
That way we can get entire colonies fixed.
We are out in the field a lot talking to neighbors.
What we have found in our experience is that
often times cats do have multiple caregivers.
A lot of times these caregivers do not even
know about each other, so we help network
those caregivers amongst one another. If people
do call us that don�t � have not had interaction
with us or our program, we encourage caregivers,
who may no longer be able to care for their
colonies, to talk to their neighbors and find
out if someone else is feeding them. They
are often times a lot of people feeding the
same cats. Then, make arrangements for someone
else to take over, and slowly move the food
source towards the other caregiver property
to ensure all cats know where to go. Where
there are no other alternatives, because relocation
is time intensive and marginally successful
in some cases, you have to do it right and
it takes a lot of resources.
We advise people on when you need to relocate.
You really need to do good research about
how to do it appropriately, and we even loan
out relocation equipment since it is so important
to securely confine the cats in an enclosed
area for two to four weeks. You need to be
able to do it in a really secure manner.
This slide here is about two of our newest
programs in Albuquerque and San Antonio. It
shows the successes with significant decreases
in euthanasia as a percentage of all the outcomes
and significant increase in live release rates.
It is that we focus most of our effort, 90-95%
of our labor efforts, on the actual Trap-Neuter-Return,
and the other 5-10% on working to adopt out
young kittens, helping with the occasional
relocation, when there are no other alternatives,
and helping complainants mitigating cat nuisances.
We really have not found a need to put too
much more energy into some of these alternatives,
except in rare situations.
Christie Keith: Thank you. Dr. Levy, just
a quick word: �What�s your opinion on
how successful barn cat programs are? Is this
an option for community cats who need to be
relocated?�
Dr. Julie Levy: I think Holly summarized nicely
with the issues of relocating cats. Barn cat
programs are just an effort to identify places
that might be suitable for cats. Barns usually
want to have a few cats around. My experience
is that most barns have cats if they have
resources that attract cats. So, it can be
hard to find them. There are some cats, sometimes,
that just might be relocated, as Kate said,
from those environmentally sensitive areas
or very dangerous areas. I think The Neighborhood
Cats TNR Handbook has an excellent section
on how to relocate cats, and it does involve
confinement. I think relocating whole family
units together is more likely to be successful
and to fight that cat�s natural homing instinct.
We agree, and we really try to minimize relocation.
But, there are times when it must be done
and it can be done.
Christie Keith: Great. Thank you. Rich, we
have some questions about the economy, of
course. �In these hard times when budgets
are being slashed, many animal control agencies
see this paradigm change as a threat to their
job. They feel that if they stop taking in
cats, their budgets will be cut even more,
and staff will be laid off because of fewer
animals to care for. How can the management
at animal control agencies be convinced that
this negative outcome won't happen?�
Rich Avanzino: Well, history is pretty clear
on this. We have reduced populations. If you
look at what is happening in the next slide
with the number of animals that came into
shelters in the seventies, and you look at
how many we had just a few years ago and what
we are expecting to happen in 2015, we have
had death and populations going into shelters
plummet in the last forty years. Budgets for
animal control have not gone down proportionally.
As a matter of fact, I would say that costs
for animal control have skyrocketed relative
to the number of animals that have been taken
in.
The history of our movement is that � and
this is probably true of any cause ? when
you reduce the numbers and you effectively
use your dollars to do the right thing, as
opposed to continuing practices of the past
that actually were contradictory and adversely
impacting what your purpose was, that things
change.
Also, if you think about the theory that if
we reduce animal populations, that that�s
going to threaten jobs ? that would basically
say that spay/neuter before release, or spay/neuter
programs, are going to be threatening to the
employee status of people involved at animal
control. I do not think any animal control
program speaks negatively about spay/neuter,
and, yet, the purpose of spay/neuter is to
reduce the number of animals coming in, so
the deaths actually go down.
I think we have all embraced the idea that
animal population in shelters have to decrease,
making a more effective use of the dollars.
Also, in these times, we have not seen animal
control � while they have been slashed ? we
see no indication that there is a desire to
take them down even further because we are
coming out of the recession. If we can build
back the animal control programs, as I believe
they should be done, that the dollars should
be spent on what our mission and our purpose
is, which is to save animal lives, to rehome
these animals and to see that our function
as an animal welfare community is successful.
To basically say we do not want to stop the
killing because it will reduce the number
of people employed, or it will result in a
budget decrease, I think is such a ridiculous
argument. I think anybody that would put that
out there would be embarrassed to suggest
that, because it obviously is totally contrary
to why all of us ? animal control agencies,
humane organizations and animal welfare groups
? exist. We are all there to save animal lives.
Some of us do it more effectively and less
effectively than others, but we are all there
for the single purpose of saying that more
animals go home and fewer animals get carried
out in barrels. To say anything contrary to
that, I think is almost heresy in our movement.
I do not think the American public could ever
accept the idea that we do not want to see
fewer animals coming in and less number of
animals killed because it would hurt the job
market for people doing animal welfare work.
Christie Keith: Great. Thank you, Rich. Because
we want to make sure that we can get to the
live questions that were submitted, and we
still have several questions that were given
during the last webcast or during the weeks
between, I�m going to really just go through
these last few questions very quickly. Please
make your answers extremely short.
Jon, this question is for you. It�s the
question that�s been raised before. �There
is this 50-75% idea that 75% of cats in an
area need to be sterilized to reduce population,
but only half would have to be killed or removed.
How do we successfully advocate for neuter/release
programs because this sometimes gets used
against us to support catch and kill?�
Jon Cicirelli: The 75% spay/neuter rate, or
the 50% death rate, for existing cats are,
sort of, hypocrisies from other areas of science
that have been speculated about in this area.
But, in fact, I am not aware, really, of any
area where they got 75% of the cat population
and spayed or neutered it. With the exception
of perhaps some of those small items that
Dr. Hurley was talking about, there is probably
rarely a place that has ever euthanized or
trapped and killed 50% of the existing cat
population. Nor, are any of us advocating
that, nor is there money for that ? which
is something that I talked about in one of
the early slides. The kind of money you would
have to have to be able to accomplish that
is substantial. In fact, in San Jose, if I
went about trying to trap and kill 50% of
cats, I would be run out of town. I would
not have a job. The public would not accept
that kind of program.
How do you advocate then for TNR over catch
and kill? First of all, you use the evidence
in the data that is available, and that is
what this slide is about. It is some evidence.
There are many different shelters or communities
that are having a similar experience. Use
what others have done to demonstrate that
this can work.
You also should talk about the money. When
you take in fewer cats, you are having fewer
expenditures. Your goal is to reduce the number
of cats, which reduces the number of nuisances.
Targeting through programs, like an SNR program,
seems to have a great deal of effect. This
program only spays and neuters about 2,500
more cats a year; yet, we have an estimated
cat population of 400,000. So, we get nowhere
near that 75% neuter mark yet. This is the
only program we have changed, and you can
see some dramatic results. Quick in a nutshell;
we can move onto the next one.
Christie Keith: Okay. Thank you. Dr. Hurley,
this is your question next, and it is a two-part
question. First: �What are the real public
health concerns about free-living cats, rabies,
parasites, etcetera, and what practical considerations
are there in managing and mitigating them?
Second, assuming these risks can be managed
or not as significant as many believe, how
do we educate the public?�
Dr. Kate Hurley: I think this goes back to
the same point I was making about wildlife.
There are some risks associated with free-living
cats. In some cases, those are overstated.
Regardless, by euthanizing a small fraction
of those cats through shelters, we have not
been mitigating those risks, and discontinuing
that euthanasia will not increase those risks.
What is really important to recognize is that
those risks do not come only from cats and
cannot be addressed through control of cat
populations. We need to educate the public
about methods they can take to reduce the
risk of roundworm, rabies and toxoplasmosis.
The powerful things they can do are things
like washing their hands, wearing gloves when
they are gardening and covering sandboxes
that kids play in. Sorry, I am skipping some
of my slides that you all can look at later.
I think, really importantly, Shelter-Neuter-Return,
again, has a profound effect on reducing public
health risk. Rabies vaccination is a part
of Shelter-Neuter-Return programs, and by
definition, it is targeting the cats that
are closely interfacing with people, because
those are the ones that get caught and brought
into shelters. Then it fills up those niches
where somebody was feeding with a vaccinated
neutered cat. Toxoplasmosis, roundworm, some
of the other things that we are concerned
about tend to be diseases of kittens and young
cats. So, again, by stabilizing cat populations
we are protecting public health; we are protecting
cats; we are protecting wildlife; and, we
are making our own jobs easier and better.
Christie Keith: Great. Holly, this question
is for you. �The idea of leaving cats to
live outdoors seems designed for temperate
climate areas. In areas with very cold winters,
it is not uncommon to see cats come in to
the shelter with frostbite. How can this paradigm
shift work in areas with harsh weather conditions?�
Holly Sizemore: Well, first I would like to
make it clear that many cities with TNR programs
experience winter lows below freezing routinely
for months on end. There are already a lot
of communities successfully doing TNR in some
pretty cold climates.
If you were to adopt with us, in our program,
you may need to decide if all or certain cases
of frostbite would make the cat eligible for
the program. It is pretty simple. If the person
bringing the cat in was someone who actually
cares for the cat, you could say, �Oh, well,
do you want a free easy, cheap, winter cat
shelter?� There are plenty of resources
online about how you can build cheap winter
cat shelters. TNR can be done in these climates.
It can be done in every climate. You just
need to take certain precautions when you
are doing it in very cold or very wet weather,
and there are lots of resources online to
find out how to do that.
Christie Keith: Great. Thank you.
Holly Sizemore: So this last slide here, I
just want to remind anyone who may be interested
in learning more, we are hopeful that we can
expand our community cat public/private partnerships
next year with one or more new shelters. If
anyone is interested, I would love to hear
from anyone who would be interested in looking
at that opportunity.
Christie Keith: Great. Jon, this question
is for you, a very timely one. �How can
we talk to the media, government, and the
public about community cats and wildlife when
there is so much anti-cat PR (public relations)
making headlines lately?�
Jon Cicirelli: So, you know, I think the way
to start to answer this question is to ask
why there might be anti-cat PR. Primarily
lately it is due to wildlife conflicts or
perceived wildlife conflicts. Locally, it
tends to be nuisance cats or over population
of cats. There are too many around, and also
locally, the euthanasia of a large percentage
of cats is a flashpoint, really, about what�s
going on in your local shelter. Communities
are generally not happy to see 70, 80, or
90% euthanasia rates in a local shelter.
Those tend to be sort of the anti-cat stuff
going around or the controversy surrounding
it. The way that you get people to buy on,
or you convince people that these kinds of
programs work, is to stay firm and clear about
what the goals are. All of those things that
I have talked about that might create anti-cat
PR, are all mitigated by successful TNR and
SNR type programs, because you are reducing
the number of cats in the community. That
is exactly that the public wants, whether
the methodology might be in question. If that
is your goal ? fewer cats and doing it in
a non-lethal way ? then you would choose all
the things to find solutions or you help reduce
the problems that every one might complain
about, or anyone might complain about, that
cats create. That is how you really have to
form your argument.
Christie Keith: Okay. Great. Thank you. Was
that it? I saw you had one more slide.
Jon Cicirelli: Yeah, I was trying to move
along.
Christie Keith: Thank you. Rich, this question
is for you, and you already actually kind
of touched on this in an earlier question,
but I�ll just see if you have anything more
to add, which is: �How do we deal with the
resistance we see in so many organizations
to making modifications to benefit animals,
which also in the long run benefit the shelter,
itself. Intuitional change is hard. What works
when it comes to getting those agencies and
groups onboard?�
Rich Avanzino: Well, I think it really works
with programs like we�ve heard about over
the last hour and a half. I think we provided
some excellent information, which can be used
to target the various constituencies of the
target groups. For instance, when we are talking
to government, it is all about reducing costs.
If we are talking to the public, it is the
fact that what we have done in the past just
does not work. If we are talking to animal
lovers, it is about the importance of saving
lives and how this relatively easy policy
modification can make a sea-change difference
in helping our best friends on four legs have
happy and wonderful lives. Then if we are
talking to shelters and the people working
there, this goes to reducing their overcrowding
problems, their sickness problems and the
tremendous number of animals that are dying.
People working in shelters do not want to
continue on the way we have done it in the
past. Nobody likes to see an animal die. Nobody
likes to take a life of an animal that should
be able to exist in our environment. If we
focus our message to the constituencies and
the stakeholders, who are instrumental in
bringing about the sea-change difference,
then we can be successful. I think what all
of our panelists have done, over the last
hour and a half, is bring out some excellent,
statistical, scientific, fact-based information
that could all be utilized in achieving that
goal.
Christie Keith: Fantastic. This is a question
from somebody who is in the audience tonight.
�The new paradigm depends on more spay/neuter,
more low-cost, accessible or free spay/neuter.
But, most rescue groups are already stretched
financially. How do you reconcile that?�
And if anyone really wants this question � I
was thinking Dr. Hurley might want to weigh
in, but is there anyone who would like to
take it?
Dr. Julie Levy: I would like throw in, if
that is okay, and then Dr. Hurley can add.
I would like to mention that our community
cat programs, many of them are thanks to the
generous funding of PetSmart Charities. They
are a very large funder of spay/neuter programs,
and I would encourage anyone interested in
growing their spay/neuter programs to check
out those opportunities with PetSmart Charities.
Christie Keith: Great. Anybody else want to
weigh in, or I�ll go to the next question?
Jon Cicirelli: This is Jon. I just want to
add when you look at some of the examples
that I have been giving, and doing things
like Dr. Hurley suggests, which is to step
back and take a breath, and maybe limit some
admissions, you begin to free up some resources
to try to do these other programs. Even from
existing resources, if you change how you
are approaching cat issues in your community,
and reduce how much time and effort you have
to spend on sheltering and euthanizing them,
then you free up capacity to start investing
in a more progressive program.
Christie Keith: Excellent. Here is another
question from one of the audience members
tonight. �How do we overcome the attitudes
of animal control agencies who place priority
on people in the community who complain of
nuisance behaviors and support killing as
the solution?� And who would like to take
this question? Dr. Hurley, I know you actually
spoke a little bit about this, and I think
Jon, you have too. Would either one of you
like to take it?
Dr. Kate Hurley: I think I�ll encourage
Jon to take it as animal control.
Christie Keith: Jon?
Jon Cicirelli: So, you know, I think this
is a question that does come up, and I have
talked about it in other presentations. One
of the things I think that tends to � where
you have situations like this ? suggest that
the relationships typically between the shelter
and the community are not as good, probably,
as they can be. Trying to enhance that relationship
through local non-profits and organizations,
through other means, first can sometimes open
the doors to these kinds of ideas. So, doing
a fundraiser for the local shelter, volunteering
or helping them with an event, or down at
the shelter, or with some other program other
than something like at TNR or an SNR program,
and building that trust helps.
Also, of course, exposing them to this information,
you know, this whole idea about how angry
the community is going to be, I can tell you
is a myth. We have talked about it in some
of these slides tonight. We talk about it
constantly in our presentations about [how]
there are a variety of myths about what might
happen. So, helping them to understand or
see the data, the surveys and the experiences
of agencies that have gone through this and
did not have those problems, that helps them
to start to see the light. I can tell you,
I have these very same conversations with
my own colleagues, who I believe respect me
and I certainly respect them. Some of them
just have an honest disagreement with me that
they are still committed to this other path.
The only thing that I would suggest is that
over time, I think as Holly showed in her
graph early on, we are still in that early
adoption phase. But there was a time, like
Rich mentioned long ago, where nobody in an
animal shelter ever spayed or neutered a single
animal. There was a time when nobody ever
did pediatric spay and neuter. Everybody had
all their reasons and myths for believing
why they should not do that. Yet, today, it
is a very common practice. I think the same
thing is going to come with community cats.
Every week, I think, I am seeing a new community
come online and try this.
That just means there is going to be a greater
and greater and body of evidence to help convince
people that the sky is not going to fall when
you do this. In fact, it is going to open
up your ability to do better programming,
more proactive programming, and provide a
higher degree of animal welfare to your community.
Christie Keith: Great. Thank you. This is
a question that I�m going to direct to Dr.
Julie Levy. �What do you do in a raccoon
rabies endemic area with regard to annual
vaccination for rabies? We have already had
several cases of rabies in areas where there
are cat colonies where most have been neutered
and vaccinated once.�
Dr. Julie Levy: This is a common question
we get in the rabies endemic areas like Florida,
and it certainly is ideal to give cats their
recommended boosters, but [it is] not very
practical. In our program, we actually do
offer free boosters, so if the caregivers
can bring their cats in traps, we just vaccinate
them right through the trap. We always use
a product that is licensed for three years,
and we know that that will last for three
years even though it is labeled for only one
year the first time. But the way these vaccines
are tested, cats are vaccinated and they are
held for three years before challenged. We
know that they actually have very good efficacy.
I would say if there is a report of rabid
raccoons around a colony, I certainly would
make an effort to revaccinate those cats,
but it is not practical to do it for all of
the cats in the community. However, I am also
still waiting to hear the first report of
a cat with a tipped ear being diagnosed with
rabies ? so if anybody hears about it, I�d
like to know. Even that one vaccine is really
potent in protecting cats and developing some
herd immunity. Internationally, that is the
approach that is taken with controlling dog
rabies.
Christie Keith: Great. Thank you very much
Dr. Levy. This next question is � actually
I think Dr. Hurley has already had to leave
us because we�re running a few minutes over.
I am thinking, Dr. Levy, this is one that
you might want to take, but if anyone else
would prefer it, just let me know. This question
is: �Is it possible that some of the cats
are fearful, less than social, indoor-only,
lost cats, but in returning them to the found
location, is it possible that owners may have
a greater chance of finding their cats given
most shelters only hold for three days?�
Dr. Julie Levy: I certainly agree with this.
Dr. Hurley has presented very nice data to
show that cats are � lost cats are much
more likely to return home on their own then
to be found in an animal shelter and returned
via a shelter. So even a lost cat has a better
chance of getting back home if we leave it
where it is. If it comes home neutered, all
the better.
Christie Keith: I am just checking to see
if we want to continue with more of the questions.
We have run over a little bit on time. But,
I�m going to send a few more to the room
so that you can all decide. This is a question
for someone from Northern Maine, who is new
there and is startled by the number of cats
living in colonies and old unused barns. I�m
really sorry, but the question has just disappeared
for me. I am guessing you can probably see
it there.
Dr. Julie Levy: I can see it. Would you like
me to read it?
Christie Keith: No, I got it back now. It
just blanked out and came back. �What you
think, how you would suggest approaching what
seems to be an overabundance of un-owned cats
in rural poor areas without the potential
for community of humane advocates sufficient
to care for them?�
So in other words, I think we are kind of
going back here to the issue of caregivers,
caretakers, as opposed to just cats who seem
to be living on their own. What are the best
ways to approach getting those cats neutered
and vaccinated in rural poor areas?
Holly Sizemore: I will take a stab at this
one. This is Holly. Best Friends is headquartered
in a fairly rural area, and we are lucky enough
to have good resources that we really we are
able to work long and hard � I mean people
here care about the cats, too. I would not
say that people do not care in rural areas
� many, many times they do. Sometimes, in
my experience, you just see larger numbers
of cats because there have been fewer programs.
It really is about taking it maybe one colony,
one area at a time. You do need to be thinking
in terms of, well, if a lot of these people
do care about them and they want to do right
by them ? it is about educating people who
may have not known how to care of these cats
appropriately.
I would say you go and help them get all the
cats fixed, and slowly, if not immediately,
if you are doing it colony-by-colony, you
will see the health of those cats improve.
I have seen that in rural communities where
we start with one farm, and then move to the
next, the next, and the next. It does take
time, but, overall, you see the health improve.
Lynne Fridley: �Do you ear tip Spay-Neuter-Return
cats that are already fixed, especially when
you have a strong suspicion that they are
owned? Our staff is worried that we will ear
tip one of the owned cats that 40 percent
of Americans let outside.�
Christie Keith: Thanks for jumping in on that
one, Lynne.
Jon Cicirelli: This is Jon. I�ll answer.
You know, if you are in a situation where
you suspect you have an owned cat, it is a
little general to say that. Typically the
suspicion that you have an owned cat is often
that it is friendly, in which case, in a lot
of programs it would just go through the adoption
program. It might not necessarily qualify
for an SNR program. That is certainly the
case in our shelter.
If it was not that friendly, but you still
suspected, �Well, somebody must own this
cat because it got fixed somewhere along the
way,� we would ear tip it, and assuming
that it did not have any microchips or anything
like that, we would put microchips in it.
If that cat were not friendly, then its probability
of living through the shelter experience is
very low in most of our shelters. Even though
an owner might get a little upset that you
ear tipped their cat, it is certainly better
than the alternative you would have previously
offered if you were not doing that kind of
program ? which is that the cat would likely
have been euthanized.
I think you have to balance that. There was
a question earlier about you might accidentally
spay and neuter somebody�s cat, or returning
a semi-friendly cat, is it more likely to
get back home, and of course the answer to
those questions seem to be yes. Again, the
flipside of that is what would have been the
alternative? If the cat was not friendly and
could not qualify for an adoption program,
the alternative in the past would have been
euthanasia. Now at least the cat has come
home, even thought it might be minus a couple
of parts, it is still going to get back to
its owner.
Dr. Julie Levy: If I could just jump in � this
is Julie ? and comment on our program. We
actually do TNR to all community cats, whether
they are friendly or not. We do not deny cats
access to spay and neuter just because they
purr. We do ear tip all cats, even if they
are already spayed. We have done over 38,000
TNR cases since 1998, and I would say we had
less than a dozen complaints about ear-tipped
cats. Our code does require that cats wear
a license, and nobody puts a license on their
cat. Basically any cat that comes into our
program and brought by a member of the community
is already violating the law. But, it really
is not an issue at all for us.
Christie Keith: Thank you everyone. That is
all we have time for tonight. We, at Maddie�s
Institute, want to thank Dr. Hurley, Dr. Levy,
Jon Cicirelli, Holly Sizemore and Rich Avanzino,
as well as all of you who came, for your time
tonight. Before you go, please click on the
link to take the survey. It might have been
blocked by your popup blocker or be on a different
screen. If it is, we will be emailing you
the link, and we would appreciate it a lot
if you could take a few minutes to respond
to it. We hope that you have checked out the
resources in the widgets at the bottom of
your screen. If not, we will be emailing the
links to those to you, as well as sharing
a link to the archive version of tonight�s
webcast when it is ready. We have already
published the archive version of the first
webcast in this series, which is available
on our website at maddiesinstitute.org Then
just click on �webcast.� Thank you once
again to everyone for being here this evening,
and keep working for change for cats. Good
night.
[End of audio]
[G1]Capitalized?
[G2]Can you check this?
