HomeMy WebLinkAboutOrdinance No. 2917-2016jSponsored by: Mayor Porter and Council Member Navarre
CITY OF KENAI
ORDINANCE NO. 2917 -2016 (Substitute)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, AMENDING
KENAI MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 3.25.010 - IMPOUNDING PROCEDURE, TO
CLARIFY THAT ALL DOMESTIC ANIMALS INCLUDING CATS AND DOGS MAY BE
IMPOUNDED IF FOUND AT LARGE ON PUBLIC OR PRIVATE PROPERTY.
WHEREAS, the City's Animal Control Office has recently received an increase in the
number of complaints of cats roaming at large, damaging private property and
disturbing the peace and quiet of neighborhoods; and,
WHEREAS, cats roaming at large and complaints of the same impacts the available
resources of the Animal Control Office; and,
WHEREAS, many other Alaskan municipalities prohibit cats and other domestic
animals from roaming at large; and,
WHEREAS, residents of the City should not be unreasonably disturbed by the pets of
others, whether dogs or cats; and,
WHEREAS, cats and other domestic animals roaming at large can spread disease and
impact native wildlife; and,
WHEREAS, while it is recognized that many residents let their cats roam at large, it is
important to clarify for the public and Animal Control Office, that cats and all other
domestic animals roaming at large may be impounded; and,
WHEREAS, this Ordinance does not criminalize or make it a minor offense to allow cats
to roam at large, but does clarify that the Animal Control Office may impound when
necessary to address problems that arise; and,
WHEREAS, the intent of this Ordinance is to protect the public from unwelcome contact
with other people's pets, not to encourage cat owners, or owners of other domestic
animals to inappropriately leash or tether their animals.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI,
ALASKA, as follows:
Section 1. Form: That this is a code ordinance.
Section 2. Amendment of Section 3.25.010 of the Kenai Municipal Code: That Kenai
Municipal Code, Section 3.25.010 - Impounding Procedure, is hereby amended as
follows:
New Text Underlined; [DELETED TEXT BRACKETED]
Ordinance No. 2917 -2016 (Substitute)
Page 2 of 2
3.25.010 Impounding p P rocedure.
(a) The following animals [SHALL] may be subject to impoundment:
(1) An animal found at large including cats and dogs on public property
or the property of another;
(2) A dog not bearing a license tag as required by KMC 3.25.030.
(3) A vicious animal (dog or other).
(b) When an officer finds a[N) [ANIMAL] dog subject to impoundment and the
officer knows the identity of the animal's owner, the officer may cite the owner rather
than impound the animal.
(c) An officer may pursue an animal onto private property in the course of
effecting an impoundment under this section.
(d) Method of impoundment:
(1) An officer of this code may capture an animal by calling the animal
at large to him or her.
(i) A citizen may also capture an animal at large by this method
for removal by the Animal Control Officer.
(2) When deemed necessary, the Chief Animal Control Officer or
designee may capture an animal at large by the use of a baited live
capture cage trap.
(3) When the public safety is in jeopardy, the Chief Animal Control
Officer or designee may capture or destroy an animal by any means.
Section 3. Severabilitv: That if any part or provision of this ordinance or application
thereof to any person or circumstances is adjudged invalid by any court of competent
jurisdiction, such judgment shall be confined in its operation to the part, provision, or
application directly involved in all controversy in which this judgment shall have been
rendered, and shall not affect or impair the validity of the remainder of this title or
application thereof to other persons or circumstances. The City Council hereby declares
that it would have enacted the remainder of this ordinance even without such part,
provision, or application.
Section 4. Effective Date: That pursuant to KMC 1.15.070(1), this ordinance shall
take effect 30 days after adoption.
ENACTED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF I KA s 5th da of October,
2016.
PAT PORTER, MAYOR
ATTES '"
Sandra T"', City erg k
Introduced: September 7, 2016
Postponed: September 21, 2016
Enacted: October 5, 2016
Effective: November 5, 2016
New Text Underlined; [DELETED TEXT BRACKETED[
u
11I/I145e with a Past, C# with a Future"
210 Fidalgo Avenue, Kenai, Alaska 99611 -7794
Telephone: 907 - 283 -7535 / FAX: 907 - 283 -3014
www.kenai.city
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Council Members
THROUGH:
Mayor Porter and Council Member Navarre
FROM:
Scott M. Bloom, City Attorney
DATE:
September 29, 2016
SUBJECT:
Cat Ordinance No. 2917 -2016 (Substitute)
Ordinance 2917 -2016 (Substitute) is recommended to replace the original Ordinance No. 2917-
2016, as a result of further review of the City's existing Code of Ordinances, Animal Control
Office practices and public input. The main difference between the Substitute and original
Ordinance is that the original Ordinance provided for a citation procedure of cat owners, when cats
were found roaming at large, while the Substitute does not allow for a citation, but instead only a
clarification of the City's existing impound procedures. The Substitute Ordinance actually allows
for greater flexibility and less potential impact for cats owners, in dealing with cats at large, than
what currently exists in the City's Code by doing the following: (1) stating that animals at large
"may" be impounded, instead of the existing language of "shall" be impounded; (2) clarifies that
animals (other than vicious animals or animals that pose a threat to public safety) may only be
impounded when found at large on public property or private property of another; and (3) clarifies
that only the owners of dogs may be cited for allowing animals to roam at large, while owners of
other animals impounded, will only have to pay an impound fee to get their animal back (as long
as the animal has a current rabies vaccine, otherwise a vaccination is required prior to release).
While many public comments have characterized this as a leash law, the Ordinance sponsors do
not intend this Ordinance to encourage any cat owner to leash or tether their cats in any
inappropriate way, but instead to clarify for the public and Animal Control Office that cats roaming
at large may be impounded if roaming at large on public or private property. The current practice
of the Animal Control Office of only impounding cats when disturbing others on private or public
property is anticipated to continue, and it is not intended or anticipated that the Animal Control
Office will actively patrol for or impound cats roaming at large, in other than a complaint driven
scenario. A review of other municipalities in Alaska shows that Sitka, Valdez, Seward, Soldotna,
Homer, Anchorage, Wasilla, Palmer, the Matanuska Susitna Borough, Fairbanks North Star
Borough, including the City of Fairbanks, Kotzebue, Nome and Dillingham all specifically or
generally prohibit cats from "roaming at large," while Ketchikan, Juneau, Sitka, Yakutat and
Kodiak do not prohibit the same.
Attached for your review are many public written comments received, Animal Control Office
statistics on cats, and a question and answer sheet provided by the Animal Control Office. Your
consideration is appreciated.
Annual 2014 Report
CATS:
INTAKE
478
DISPOSITION
483
18
Waiver
269
Adopted
245
Stray
202
Euthanized
82
Impound
4
Claimed
8
Protective Custody
2
Other
11
Quarantine
1
Transferred to Rescue
137
Annual 2015 Report
CATS:
INTAKE
436
DISPOSITION
422
18
Waiver
286
Adopted
149
Stray
136
Euthanized
68
Impound
7
Claimed
10
Protective Custody
5
Field Release
0
Quarantine
2
Transferred to Rescue
l 95
January — September 15, 2016 Report
CATS:
INTAKE
262
DISPOSITION
272
18
Waiver
172
Adopted
66
Stray
85
Euthanized
24
Impound
4
Claimed
23
Protective Custody
0
Field Release
0
Quarantine
1
Transferred to Rescue
159
Cat Trap Loans:
Year
Quantity
2015
23
2016
18
Logged phone calls regarding cats:
Year
Quantity
2014
12
2015
8
2016
14
- How many cats can the shelter house? Has the shelter ever reached the limit of cats it can take? If so,
when and how often?
The shelter can reasonably house 16 cats. (Occasionally more when we have cats that have been
surrendered from the same household and like to be housed with the cat they came in with). During my
time as Chief Animal Control officer we have not reached the maximum limit of cats we can take.
- What's a usual length of time for a cat to spend at the shelter? Do they tend to stay longer than dogs?
If so, do you have any idea why?
The usual length of time an animal stays at the shelter is 5 -10 days. When an animal comes in as a stray
we hold it for 3 - 5 days before we are able to adopt it out to allow for an owner to come in and claim it.
However, we do have occasions when animals stay at the shelter for upwards of a month or so before
they are adopted out. Cats and dogs generally stay at the shelter for the same length of time.
- What's the cost of keeping a cat at the shelter? What expenses do cats require?
I need to look through some additional data to give you this information.
- How does the shelter manage an overflow population of cats? In the monthly reports, I see that a lot of
cats get transferred to a rescue center. What center do you send them to? How does the shelter decide
which cats to send to the rescue center?
As I mentioned in the answer to the above question, during my time as Chief Animal Control officer, we
have not reached our maximum capacity for cats at the shelter. The cat rescues we currently work with
are Pet Pride, Cat Tree & Barkery, Clear Creek Cat Rescue and Kool Kats. When we have cats that have
been with us for a while and can't seem to get them adopted out here at the shelter or we have cats
that may thrive in a different environment, we transfer them to a rescue.
- According to the monthly reports, some cats get taken in under a "waiver" category. What does this
mean?
Waivers are animals that are surrendered by the owner to the shelter.
- Scott Bloom's memo to the city council said the shelter loans traps to people having problems with
cats. How many traps does the shelter have and how often are they checked out?
The live traps are loaned to City of Kenai residents for a deposit which is refunded after the trap is
returned. The shelter currently has 6 live traps that residents can come to the shelter to borrow. Traps
are loaned for a period of 14 days. Recently, the traps have been completely checked out and we have
had a waitlist for people to pick them up when they have been returned.
-Judging from the monthly reports, the Shelter has brought its euthanasia numbers down a lot in the
past two years. What are you doing differently?
Factors that have helped to decrease the number of euthanasia's include:
1. The Peninsula Spay /Neuter Fund which has been in existence since 2011. The Peninsula
Spay /Neuter Fund have assisted in getting 1,143 cats and dogs fixed since they started their
program.
In one year, the Cat Tree & Bakery have hosted three low cost cat spay /neuter clinics in which
they have gotten 350 cats fixed.
a. Generally, you see a decrease in overall animal populations within three to five years of
spay /neuter programs coming into existence. With both of these organizations offering
assistance to the community we are noticing a decrease in the number of cats entering
the shelter. Also, during the past two years we have strengthened our relationship with
rescues and have been able to send animals to them.
- How does the shelter decide which cats to euthanize?
The shelter utilizes a species specific behavior analysis to determine if an animal is safe to adopt out. If
an animal does not pass the behavioral analysis we are not able to adopt them out of the shelter. The
other criteria in which we consider is overall health. We take animals not feeling well to the vet and if
the vet determines it is more humane to euthanize we follow that recommendation.
- How many complaints about cats has the shelter received in the past year? Has the number of
complaints been changing over the past several months? Is there a complaint record I could look at to
get this information?
We have noticed an increase in the amount of calls with complaints about cats in the past several
months. Because we do not have a current Kenai Municipality Code regarding cat confinement, we do
not keep detailed records regarding confinement complaints.
- How many cats do you usually bring in through field patrols? Are the strays listed in the monthly
reports all brought in by patrol? How else do cats enter the shelter?
Animal Control brings in a few cats every few months or so through the use of live traps. No, the strays
listed in the monthly reports are not all brought in by patrol. Animals come to the shelter by three main
routes —via animal control as impounds, via citizens bringing them in as strays, or as owner releases
which we call 'Waivers'.
- If a cat isn't collared or microchipped, is there any other way to distinguish an owned cat from a feral
cat?
To best answer that question, we should consider the definition of 'feral' cat. A feral cat is a cat that has
been born to other ferals or from stray cats; these ferals are unaccustomed to human interaction. Feral
cats are usually considered to be distinct from stray cats, which are socialized cats who no longer live in
homes, but could potentially be reintroduced successfully.
Therefore, socialized cats are very easy to distinguish from feral cats based on their temperaments.
Because feral cats are un- socialized, they are fearful and at times very aggressive. Most owned cats
react completely different than a cat that has never had human contact. Even a cat that may have been
away from its owner for a few months or so does not react to humans in the same negative way in
which a feral cat does.
Sandra Modigh
From:
Rick Koch
Sent:
Wednesday, September 28, 2016 10:05 AM
To:
Sandra Modigh; Scott Bloom; Terry Eubank; Christine Cunningham
Cc:
Jamie Heinz
Subject:
FW: Cats in Kenai
Attachments:
How to Live with Cats Humane Deterrents.pdf; TheCaseforTNR.pdf;
TN ROrdinancesAndPolicieslnTheUS. pdf
From: Misty Christo [mailto:mchristo @alleycat.org]
Sent: Wednesday, September 28, 2016 7:00 AM
To: Rick Koch
Subject: Cats in Kenai
Dear Mr. Koch:
I am reaching out in reference to the proposed change to your city's leash law that would require all cats to be
restrained. As former council member Ryan Marquis stated, the cats at issue are likely feral, without owners to
restrain them. Leash laws are especially lethal for feral cats, who do not have traditional "owners" to leash them
and whose natural habitat is outdoors. Leash laws allow animal control to pick them up and bring them to
pounds and shelters where virtually 100% of them will be killed. I urge Kenai City Council to consider the
adoption of Trap - Neuter -Return (TNR) as a means to stabilize and lower the feral cat population instead of a
leash law. TNR is an effective, humane policy with a proven track- record for reducing feral cat populations.
Alley Cat Allies is the only national advocacy organization dedicated to the protection and humane treatment of
cats. We have promoted the spaying, neutering, and vaccinating of cats since our founding in 1990, and we
regularly advise individuals, nonprofit groups, local governments, and state policymakers on humane
approaches to cats.
Community cats, often called feral cats, are the descendants of animals who were either lost or abandoned by
their owners. The best approach for community cats is Trap- Neuter - Return, a management plan where
community cats already living outdoors are vaccinated and sterilized by a veterinarian. Spaying and neutering
eliminates the cycle of reproduction, thus stabilizing the population which declines steadily over time.
Sterilization also eliminates mating behaviors like yowling, fighting, roaming, and spraying, some of the
behaviors most likely to pose a nuisance. Simply put, neutered cats make better neighbors. Furthermore, cat
health improves through vaccination and ongoing management. Trap- Neuter -Return is supported by virtually all
animal protection organizations and the National Animal Care & Control Association.
Trap - Neuter -Return is a mainstream practice, used all over the country. Over 600 localities participate in some
form of TNR, and this number grows every day. In fact, many local governments endorse TNR as the only
effective way to address community cats in their neighborhoods. Communities diverse in population,
geographic region, and tradition are embracing Trap- Neuter - Return.
Alley Cat Allies would be more than happy to work with Kenai and local animal advocates to implement a
successful, robust Trap - Neuter -Return program that would reduce the number of feral cats in the community.
Please see the attached materials that explain the benefits of TNR, discuss some communities that have
embraced TNR, and tips on humane cat deterrents. I am happy to provide any other information that you think
would be helpful, and hope to hear from you soon.
Sincerely,
Misty Christo
Staff Attorney
Alley Cat Allies
7920 Norfolk Ave., Suite 600
Bethesda, MD 20814
240.234.0434
mchristoa,,alleycat.org
�y Alley Cat Allies
25 Vears H Ad,mc ,,y
NATIONAL FERAL CAT DAY OCTOBER
ALL CATS ALL COMMUNITIES 16, 2016
L . 0 NationalFeramatDay.org I= 11WIIIIIIII
Get your copy of Alley Cot Allies' new book celebrating 25 years of saving cats, by President and Founder Becky Robinson
at allevcat.ora /Book.
This message is intended only for the use of the party to whom it is addressed and may contain information that is
privileged, confidential, or otherwise exempt from disclosure under law. If you are not the intended recipient, you are
hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, copying, or other use of a transmission received in error is
prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please notify us immediately by responding to this email and delete or
destroy it and any copies. Thank you.
v
U
d
E
0
9
d
0
a
E
d
d
F
w
U
i
LL
.W�
Y O O
O` ~ N N O J .I C 3 C 0
E E 0 ~ m N y m Y v °c t
y y C N N N C d N> O> C 2 Y E p C d N
16 U C rCn a N A T 0
R A A d o o 0 0
/ ° I/ /Wu
z
o
rim
o
d
a
4 o
CM IM
L L O fTn p 3 N
N L d
N
m
'9
p o
s° o d o' ,fin
m i
p a0
p y
R
m
0 o
C L E
o
a
A
O
y
d
L
E
C
L a d C rpn N F L
a N N a
CL
p E O j C C
N O a a
c
°o,
°" N °'
A
c
61
m
U
C�
E S y o m ` 2 o
o
N£ C
N
?+
C Y T
N O
O
U O c a 3 N m 13
d c0 E>
N O rn
N C
C !�
N
L a
N
O
f0
d
N
f0
L
_ a C D U V N y 0
U
N N Y cc J
A L o N E
N O Y
cn
N
S
U
w
C
N
Y a E N j N=
J w L U a l0 3 F U
co .L.. > N O
/ ° I/ /Wu
z
o
rim
o
a
4 o
CM IM
m
N �
fn v r O p
I
0
d
N E
0
N
—
3
Y R
.
a C
O
i U
N
w C
Z d d
OE
C
r
E
`d
O a
C
E O
y
L
L
R U B
L
O
O R C
_
3
=�
0
c
d c
O a
d C p
N d T
0
o
O
C
�
p
R t° J
`o
W
° a o d
o
E d d
C
d
R
d R
r
d
O
c m
AO
tL
E
CD=
� � �•
R
in 6 d
U O
$
rn�
H
•�
O
.Ce
O
O R
> d
r
(1.
:..) °
C d
J d _a
«
E>
•`
{Q
r> O
C
C>
T Y E L
r O
>+
N LL {>p
•O
U
p'
a0
C f
O L
N
R N
O
O
L
R d
O
O C
O1 .O
jy 0
0_
LL
75
N
0
N
O
V
i
d d�n
a N •- R
L a`
O A
O
C
C d) l°0 7
d
O
0
3 d°
a
d
>
V O tL
R o o
d
0 J
R d
Y
6 N
O d C C
d
O
N O
N
O
3 X
N
d. R
Y ,..
d O p
W a
a
O
,.. m
N
n .- __
U
N£
L
•- a .. R d
r Y
>
J � y
Y
a
3 d
J
W J
O•
•
W U 3
O
cc
A
a
E L
i
�O
C CL
c E
3 c
O p
L
L Q
R
rtc+
W
U
CD
C R
� a
c O
`J� U
C
C
C J
cm c
N
R
LU
R
N
1
V G
R
c
W
O
d
d
d
d T
E
O
Y R
C p V
(J
a C
O
i U
N
w C
O
O � G
R
O a
C
E O
y
R R
L
R U B
N L L A
T y
O R C
_
3
=�
0
at
N J
A O
d
d C p
N d T
0
o
O
L
R t° J
`o
W
° a o d
o
E d d
O
d
R
d R
d
O
N V a U
6 O
O
E
.�
� � �•
R
in 6 d
U O
$
rn�
H
•�
O
.Ce
O
O R
> d
r
W r
O
T
Ot U
O
V C
_T
g E E
VL d
N ro •3
Y O c
N R Y C
a V J
c 0 a
C w d �
N
U
Y T d d
r y R
d T N
�• 'o a
o c w 3
}
O
C N
`d
o
6 C
r
d d
d E
d C
t• •C1
c w
dO
O
C m
d
a•
d N
IA A
C p
� O
> d
� a
°o
a 3
ar
c c y R
•O R
'yp a N
C
dy
`dn 3 "Q cLi
C
N -ap a W
3
a
O E N
° X
C N N d
c ° °
T C N Y
L R C d
c Y
C Y
ow
N � U d
a oar
c d O O
U r U
N L
a o O°° N a
N N d R
C. 3 V Y I d J« tT
T O R 0 V
m« tLj d v° E
> Y a R
61 61 O O T N L d w m t d U
O H C d U O N O. N d R Q R R
`Jt 1 o`
c o «° Jw E o 'o a d d
m m m L E
d •Y N d w O lU N .N °. O d d C
Tn
O E 2
fA r Y O i. Y c c c w 0 0 N Y T
R : O O v V M d M O N L d C tad
ci O w n> r N o c O N Y R w
W R Q
❑)
d
R
�
L
U 0
U U
.c
d
'v
o C U
y a y
N
w C
Y
L C
U Q J O R
C
J y Q E°
N
w N
E
Y
N L L A
N O d a
O
y
O p C p
E E U d N
°
>d
0 y
at
N J
A O
d
d C p
N d T
0
o
O
O C a u
O
R t° J
`o
W
° a o d
d
a
O
d
R N
.O
J
i
N V a U
6 O
O
a o .
T
Ot U
O
V C
_T
g E E
VL d
N ro •3
Y O c
N R Y C
a V J
c 0 a
C w d �
N
U
Y T d d
r y R
d T N
�• 'o a
o c w 3
}
O
C N
`d
o
6 C
r
d d
d E
d C
t• •C1
c w
dO
O
C m
d
a•
d N
IA A
C p
� O
> d
� a
°o
a 3
ar
c c y R
•O R
'yp a N
C
dy
`dn 3 "Q cLi
C
N -ap a W
3
a
O E N
° X
C N N d
c ° °
T C N Y
L R C d
c Y
C Y
ow
N � U d
a oar
c d O O
U r U
N L
a o O°° N a
N N d R
C. 3 V Y I d J« tT
T O R 0 V
m« tLj d v° E
> Y a R
61 61 O O T N L d w m t d U
O H C d U O N O. N d R Q R R
`Jt 1 o`
c o «° Jw E o 'o a d d
m m m L E
d •Y N d w O lU N .N °. O d d C
Tn
O E 2
fA r Y O i. Y c c c w 0 0 N Y T
R : O O v V M d M O N L d C tad
ci O w n> r N o c O N Y R w
W R Q
❑)
« U d
y p
0
d C C
U 0
U U
N O N
d
'v
o C U
y a y
N
`m
w N
E
Y
N L L A
e
N
A C
V3 3 O
-ELM
C
y�
L
V
W
• U O
N vat R
A E
d U
N
- d
Q V
c to
m 3
v 3
IT N
C
rnv 3
-° E °
L O C
y id d
a � o
3 y m
z a m
c o �
C Y d
a
o m
a
% .> R
d L
d A N
C � L
V R
Od A Tj a
`m
O c T R c0 w
N R > C N
d C 3 R O
C 01 •F c �=
w d a 0 0
N
Y
C
O r O
°
N
`m
E
m N
R
e
V
O
d
R N
C J T« a
J
i
a
d
O
w
rn�
H
y o v
O
.Ce
R,
r
Trap- Neuter - Return Ordinances
and Policies in the United States:
The Future of Animal Control
Elizabeth Holtz, JD
Copyright m 2013 by Alley Cat Allies, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
7920 Norfolk Avenue, Suite 600
Bethesda, MD 20814 -2525
www.alleycat.org
For information on permission to reprint any portion of this work, please contact us at: info @alleycat.org
The correct citation to this document is as follows:
Elizabeth Holtz, JD "Trap- Neuter - Return Ordinances and Policies in the United States: The Future of Animal Control," Law 6-Policy Brief
(Bethesda, MD: Alley Cat Allies, January 2013).
Cover photo: Jason Pursche
Trap- Neuter - Return Ordinances
and Policies in the United States:
The Future of Animal Control
Elizabeth Holtz, JD
A substantial number of cities and counties across the United States
practice or promote Trap - Neuter- Return (TNR) as a method of
animal control for feral cats. Alley Cat Allies' survey of city and county
ordinances and animal control practices revealed that at least 331 local
governments incorporate TNR into their animal control policies and
practices. This number does not include the thousands of feral cat
groups and countless individual caregivers conducting TNR privately.
Many cities, counties, police departments, and animal control agencies
recognize that TNR is the most humane and effective approach for stray
and feral cars. Trap- Neuter - Return is poised to become the predominant
method of feral cat management in the United States.
ABOUT THE RESEARCH
Alley Cat Allies staff attorney Elizabeth Holtz, JD reviewed hundreds of
municipal and county codes and animal control policy statements. This
research was then reviewed by other staff attorneys. A local government
was deemed to participate in TNR if it: (1) has a TNR ordinance; (2)
has an animal control department that supports TNR; or (3) has an
animal control department that condones TNR. Animal control was
considered supportive of TNR if its website or other informational
materials explicitly endorsed it. Animal control was considered to
condone TNR if the municipal website acknowledged TNR as a valid
method of animal control but also offered "catch and kill" services.
Local governments were assessed only on the basis of their ordinances
and animal control websites and materials. This analysis does not
include local governments that support TNR but do not have an
ordinance or materials documenting that fact. This methodology
excludes some jurisdictions we know support TNR. For instance, the
county animal control in Arlington and Albemarle counties in Virginia
have active TNR programs. But because they are not listed on the
county website —as opposed to the shelter website —they, and other
jurisdictions like them, are not included in this analysis.
Trap- Neuter - Return Friendly Ordinances and Policies in the United States'. The Future of Animal Control 3
4 Alley Cat Allies Law & Policy Brief
HISTORY OF TRAP - NEUTER - RETURN
Trap- Neuter- Return is successfully practiced in thousands of communities
and in every landscape and setting. With Trap - Neuter- Return, cats are
humanely trapped and taken to a veterinarian to be neutered, vaccinated,
and eartipped. After recovery, the cats are returned to their home —their
colony _outdoors. Kittens and cats who are friendly and socialized to
people may be adopted into homes.
Trap - Neuter- Return can trace its beginnings to England during the
1950s.' It then migrated to the United States and took hold in the 1990s.
As awareness of feral cats grew, animal protection organizations began
holding workshops and conferences to address the feral cat population's
special needs.
Grounded in science, TNR stops the breeding cycle of feral cats and
therefore improves their lives. Feral cats, just like per cats, are members
of the domestic cat species, but they are not adoptable. The term "feral'
means that the cats are not socialized to people and generally avoid
contact with humans. Feral cats have been living in close proximity to
people for over 10,000 years, and have lived outside in the United States
for centuries .2 Feral cat caregivers care for outdoor cats but are not owners
of these cats. Caregivers neither create nor maintain the stray and feral cat
population. Rather, they are Good Samaritans stepping forward to help
the community.
Historically, the ineffective and costly "catch and kill' approach was
used to control the feral cat population.' But attempts to permanently
clear an area of cats are futile because of the scientifically documented
phenomenon known as the `vacuum effect ": in basic terms, whenever
cats are removed, new cats move in to take advantage of the now - available
resources (like food and shelter), or the surviving cats left behind breed
to capacity. Today, there is robust support for TNR both at the grassroots
level and within traditional political structures.
THERE IS BROAD SUPPORT FOR TNR
At least 240 local governments have enacted ordinances (policies)
supporting TNR Ninety-one cities and counties support or condone
TNR as a valid method of animal control. Out of these, 63 endorse
TNR as the only effective way to address feral cat populations. The three
states with the highest number of TNR ordinances are New Jersey (58),
California (33), and Texas (29). Major municipalities and counties that
support TNR include: San Francisco, the District of Columbia, New
York City, Sacramento County (California), San Jose, Palm Beach County
(Florida), Clark County (Nevada), Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Las Vegas,
Broward County (Florida), Cook County (Illinois), Oklahoma City,
Dallas, Omaha, St. Paul, Milwaukee, Salt lake City, Fairfax County
(Virginia), Maricopa County (Arizona), and Suffolk County (New York).
TRAP- NEUTER - RETURN COMMUNITIES ARE DIVERSE
Trap- Neuter - Return is endorsed by local governments ranging from conservative Colorado
Springs, Colorado to the liberal bastion of Berkeley, California. Because TNR decreases
the size of colonies, decreases animal control calls from citizens, improves public health, and
is humane and economical, it is an appealing method of care for feral cats to many different
interest groups and organizations, not all of them related to animal protection.'Ihis has
resulted in an extraordinary diversity of communities with TNR that vary in population,
region of the country, and political orientation.
For example, Cook County. Illinois--a major metropolitan area that includes the 2.7
million residents of Chicago —has a TNR ordinance. At the other end of the spectrum, Elko
New Market, Minnesota —home to less than 1,500 residents —does, also. Other small, rural
towns like Espanola, New Mexico and Hermann, Missouri employ TNR alongside urban
landscapes like New York City.
Support for TNR runs the gamut from a simple animal control department declaration to
a complex ordinance enacted by a local government. For example, Oakland, California
Animal Services states:
"Oakland Animal Services supports trap, neuter, return as a means of controlling
the feral cat population... Trap -and- Remove doesn't work. `Trap- and - Remove'
is a euphemism for trapping and euthanizing cats. It may seem like a logical
solution, but the fact is that it is not effective... Catch and euthanize is an endless,
costly cycle. "6
The Rancho Cucamonga, California Animal Care & Services echoes this sentiment, stating
on the city's website:
"Sadly, many communities still opt to control populations using outdated methods,
including lethal elimination or relocation. Not only are some of these methods
horribly cruel, they are ineffective."'
The Brunswick, Georgia police department notes in a brochure, °-Ihe best way to handle a
feral cat problem is with a Trap, Spay /Neuter, Release and Manage Program."'
Some animal control departments work closely with local feral cat organizations to provide
TNR services to the community. For example, in Somerville, Massachusetts the animal
control agency urges residents concerned about feral cat colonies in their neighborhoods
to call animal control and either an officer or a volunteer with Charles River AlleyCats will
respond to the call and trap, sterilize, and return the cats.'
Other animal control departments merely opt not to impound cats that are at- large, and
instead refer concerned citizens to private organizations. Carbondale, Colorado uses this
approach. Carbondale does not impound cats, but instead has a feral cat program managed
by a resident.10 The government's website states, "This has been a very successful program.
We have seen a significant drop in feral cats in Carbondale."
Trap- Neuter - Return Friendly Ordinances and Policies in the United States: The Future of Animal Control 5
TRAP - NEUTER - RETURN
ORDINANCES: LESS CAN
SOMETIMES BE MORE
While this paper focuses on broad support for TNR at
the municipal level, this isn't the only —or best —way to
implement aTrap- Neuter - Return program. It is not always
necessary or even advantageous to pursue an ordinance if
the local codes present no obstacle for the neutering and
returning of unowned feral cats.
'Ibis approach may seem counterintuitive because animal
advocates usually regard laws that protect animals as
positive. However, even well - intentioned laws can end up
causing more harm than good if they create regulations and
restrictions —and subsequently, penalties and liabilities —
where there were none. For example, detailed and unnecessary
regulations regarding the care of feral cats could result in
caregivers being fined if they fail to follow them exactly.
Another example: feral cats could be impounded and killed —
even if they already have been neutered and vaccinated —if
they are not part of what could be deemed "sanctioned" or
"registered" colonies.
Often, brief ordinances that simply communicate the
city's support are best. For example, the Washington, D.C.
ordinance underscores the city's commitment to TNR instead
of regulating the practice of TNR It states that the animal
control agency `shall promote: (1) the reduction of euthanasia
of animals for which medical treatment or adoption is
possible; and (2) the utilization of trap, spay or neuter,
and return practices as a means of controlling the feral cat
population. ""
Finally, it is important to note that an ordinance, or the
lack thereof, may not provide a clear picture of actual
TNR practices in a community. A municipality may have
an admirable TNR ordinance, but without education and
support from animal control services and community
members, the cats are unlikely to benefit. Conversely, there
may be a thriving TNR program but no TNR ordinance.
The primary goal is for TNR to be a regular and accepted
practice in communities. An ordinance is one tool among
many to achieve this objective. There are guidelines to follow to
ensure any ordinance passed best protects cats and caregivers.
6 Alley Cat Allies Law & Policy Brief
SAMPLE ORDINANCE PROVISIONS
Ordinances should not be vague or use words inappropriately.
Clarifying the meaning of local ordinances and writing them for
a lay audience ensures there is no room for misinterpretation.
Below are key components that should be included to best
support feral cats in a TNR ordinance. Note that these
components include important protections for impounded feral
cats, such as mandating the return of cats to their colony, as well
as protections for caregivers of the cats.
Definitions:
A. "Eartip" A mark identifying a feral cat as being in a TNR
program, specifically, the removal of approximately Me of an
inch off the tip of the cat's left ear in a straight line, while the
cat is anesthetized.
B. "Feral me 'A cat that is unsocialized to people and typically
avoids contact with humans.
C. "Feral cat caregiver" Any person, who in accordance with a
good faith effort to trap, neuter, vaccinate and return the feral
cat, provides volunteer care to a feral cat.
D. "Feral cat colony" means a group of feral cats that
congregate, more or less, together as a unit and share a
common food source.
E. "Owner" Does not include a person caring for a feral cat as a
feral cat caregiver.
F. "Trap- Neuter - Return /TNR" A nonlethal approach to feral
cat population control where feral cats are humanely trapped,
sterilized and vaccinated, eartipped, and then returned to the
location where they were originally trapped.
Additional Provisions:
1. Trap- Neuter - Return shall be permitted, and feral cat
caregivers, organizations and animal control, are allowed to
carry out TNR.
2. An eartipped feral cat received by animal services or local
shelters will be returned to the location where trapped unless
veterinary care is required. An eartipped cat trapped by
animal services will be released on site unless veterinary care
is required.
3. Feral cat caregivers are empowered to reclaim impounded
feral cats without proof of ownership.
4. A feral cat caregiver who returns a feral cat in conjunction
with TNR is not deemed to have abandoned the feral cat.
REMOVING EXISTING LEGAL BARRIERS
TO TNR
Another powerful way to promote and support TNR in some communities
is to remove the parts of an existing animal control ordinance that interfere
with it or make it unlawful to carry out. For example, if there is an
ordinance banning at -large cats, consider working to strike that provision or
add an exemption for cats who are eartipped.
Additionally, protect feral cat caregivers by exempting caregivers from the
definition of "owner." In some locales, ownership of an animal brings with
it a host of requirements like licensing and registration that are inappropriate
for caregivers of feral cats. Accordingly, the Kem County, California
code defines "owner" as "any person who owns, possesses, controls, keeps,
cares for, harbors, or has custody of the animal for fifteen (15) or more
consecutive days, except feral cat caretakers...""' This exemption for
caretakers in Kern clarifies that caregiving is not the same as owning the cats.
Trap- Neuter - Return is the most effective and humane approach to feral cats
(for a more thorough explanation please refer to "WhyTiap- Neuter - Return
Feral Cats ?: The Case for TNR" available at www.alleycacorg/CaseforTNR)
but there is no one -size- fits -all recommendation for hLgg cities and counties
in the U.S. implement it. Prior to opening a dialogue about a TNR or feral
cat ordinance with your city or county council, Alley Cat Allies strongly
recommends contacting us first at info@alleymt.org.
Trap- Neuter - Return Friendly Ordinances and Policies in the United States: The Future of Animal Control 7
Spotlight on Communities
with Successful TNR
Programs
From local government officials to animal
control officers to your neighbors, TNR
works best when all stakeholders are
educated about feral cats. Successful
implementation of TNR requires
community support. Affordable, accessible
spay /neuter services and community
outreach are also important components of
any feral cat program. Below are highlights
of just a few of the communities with
successful TNR programs.
COMMUNITIES WITH NON -
ORDINANCE TNR PROGRAMS
Fairfax County, Virginia endorsed a TNR program in
the fall of 2008. Four years later, the county shelter had
experienced a 58% drop in the number of feral kittens
in its foster care program. 15 Former Shelter Director Dr.
Karen Diviney, noted, "Trap, neuter, and return works.
It is a humane solution and we are thrilled that in such a
short time the TNR program is showing significant results
in Fairfax County" Similarly, Orange County, Florida
implemented a TNR program in conjunction with the
nonprofit CARE Feline TNR, Inc." After six years, the
county euthanasia rate for cats dropped by 18 %.17
Santa Clara County, California launched a TNR
program in 2011 with the help of county residents.1e
A year into the program, there has been a 65%
reduction in cat euthanasia and a 15% reduction in
cat intake."
8 Alley Cat Allies Law & Policy Brief
COMMUNITIES WITH ORDINANCES
In 2011, Sea Bright, New Jersey passed a pilot TNR ordinance,
and within a year the number of kittens born to feral cats was
reduced to virtually zero.20 The Clark County, Nevada ordinance
has also proved successful. One year after implementing the
ordinance, the local animal shelter impounded 1,600 fewer stray
cats.' The Washington, D.C. ordinance is implemented through
a program called the Cat Neighborhood Partnership Program
("CatNiPP") .12 The CatNiPP program not only assists with the
trapping and sterilizing of feral cats, but also runs community
meetings to educate citizens about feral cats and works with specific
neighborhoods to create a TNR program appropriate for them.
CONCLUDING REMARKS
The research is clear— Trap- Neuter - Return is the future of animal control and sheltering. Trap- Neuter - Return
is embraced by hundreds of local governments in the United States and is becoming the primary method of
feral cat management.
TNR ORDINANCES AND POLICIES ACROSS THE UNITED STATES
TC,
i •
' • - ::• •. � : ��. •� 5. 1,
i C � _j • �
1 • 8
•
I� t_
This municipality has
a TNR ordinance.
The local animal control
department supports TNR.
The local animal control
department condones TNR.
10 Alley Cat Allies Law & Policy Brief
TRAP - NEUTER - RETURN ORDINANCES ACROSS THE UNITED
STATES: 2003 TO 2013
In 2003, 23 municipalities had ordinances supportingTrap- Neuter - Return.* Just ten years later, in 2013, support
has increased ten -fold: 245 communities now have TNR ordinances, and that number increases monthly.
Hundreds of communities support TNR because it works: it's the effective and humane approach for cats.
nnnn
*Note: Some to
date on record
Trap - Neuter - Return ormnance.
n/ A
Trap- Neuter- Return Friendly Ordinances and Policies in the United States The Future of Animal Control 11
.l
- 111101
ENDNOTES
1. Berkeley, Ellen Perry, TNR- pact, preemt, and Future (Washington, DC: Alley Car Allies, 2004), 1.
2. Alley Cat Allies. "The Natural History of the Cat." hap://w ..afeycat.org/page.aspx ?pid =1010 (accessed March 22, 2103)
3. Karyen Chu and Wendy M. Anderson, "U.S. Public Opinion on Humane Treatment of Stray Cars," Law &ALity Brief (Bethesda, MD: Alley Cat Allies, September 2007).
4. Alley Cat Allies. "Feral Cars and the Public -A Healthy Relationship! hap: //w ..aUeycat.org/pagc.aspx ?pid =937 (accessed March 8, 2013).
5. City of Atlantic City. "Business Administrator Ron Cash." hap: //w .. uryofa tlanticciryorg/dimtordetad.mpx ?did =3 (accessed March 8, 2013)
6. Oakland Animal Services, "Feral Cats." http:// oald =danimakervim.org/edumte /feralr u/ (accessed March 7, 2013).
7. City of Rancho Cucamonga California. "TNR Program." Community Programs, http: / /ww ityofrc.w /dtyhall /mimaltare /programs /mr /dcfault.op (accessed March 7, 2013).
8. Brunsvvick Police Department. Animal Control Unit." http:// brunswickpolice .org/AssodatedDocummn /aninul_control_broduar.pcif (accessed March 7, 2013).
9. Somerville, MA "Animal Control- Cats." City of Somerville's Information Center, hap: // fags. somervlllema .intelligowoftware.wm/feral.wpx (accessed March 7, 2013).
10. Town of Carbondale, CO. "Frequently Asked Questions - Police." hap: //w ..rarbondalegovorg/index.wp? Type= 6_ LI ST&SEC= (2AB43FFB- 6EB7- 4CFB -9CF5
9408AA63BO881 (accessed March 7, 2013).
11. "Animal Care and Control Agency." D.C. Official Code, sec. 8 -1802.
12. Kern Counry Code. hup: // library .muniwde.com /index.wpx ?dimtId =16251 (accessed March 8, 2013).
13. Cicirelli, Jon. a -mail message to Elizabeth Holtz, July 5, 2012.
14. Brice, Norman. e-mail message to Elizabeth Holtz, July 9, 2012.
15. Fairfax County, VA. "Trap, Neuter, Return Program Decreases Homeless Feral Car Population" Fairfax County Police Department, January 19, 2012. hap:/ /w .fairfaxwunry.
gov /police/ news - releases /2012 /011912trapneuterremrn.htm (accessed March 7, 2013).
16. Orange County Government, Florida. "Feral Cats: Living with community cars." http: /Iw .. ocfl.net/AnimalsPem/Fera]Cau.zpx (accessed March 7, 2013).
17. Hughes, Kathy L., Margaret R. Slater, and Linda Hallec'Me Effects of Implementing a Feral Cat Spay /Neuter Program in a Florida County Animal Control Service" Journal of
AppGea(Animal Welfare Science 5. no. 4 (2002): 292.
18. County of Santa Clara. "County of Santa Clara Animal Care & Control Places 100% of Healthy Dogs and Can in 2011." January 25, 2012. hap: //w ..sccgovorg/sites /acct
intheuewd Documents /SCC%20Animal- /.2OCare%20PIam %201- 24- 12.pdf (accessed March 7, 2013).
19. Ibid.
20. Ward, John T. "Sea Bright Strays Yield No Kittens." redbankgreen.com, February 3, 2012. http:llw ..mdbmkgmm.wm/ 2012 /02 /sea- bright - strays- yield- no- kittens.himl
(accessed March 7, 2013).
21. Clark County, Nevada. "Trap, Neuter, and Return (TNR) Program for Feral and Free - Roaming Cars Working." District A Newsletters, Apra 2012. http: / /...elarkcountynv.
gov /Depcs/ newsletters /disaicta/ Pages /SisolakApril2012.wpx #TNR9 (accessed March 7, 2013).
22. Washington Humane Society. "CatNiPP" Programs and Services. hap: / /supportw hhumme.org/sitc/PageScr er? pagename= programs_pommuniVmtrmourees_wmipp
(stressed March 7, 2013).
23. Diviney, Karen. e-mail message to Elizabeth Holtz, July 13, 2012.
24. Fairfax County, VA. "Trap, Neuter, Return Program Decreases Homeless Feral Cat Population."
25. Larson, Susan. "Fairfax County Ryjnized for Animal Programs and Rescue." Lorton Patch, April 24, 2010. http:/flormn.pamh.wndutides/fai,f=-munty- recognized -for-
animal- program s - and - rescue (accessed March 8, 2013).
26. Hankins, Michelle. e-mail message to Elizabeth Holtz, July 13, 2012.
27. Diviney, Karen. a -mail message to Elizabeth Holm, July 13, 2012.
12 Alley Cat Allies Law & Policy Brief
�y A11eyCatAllies
The cats' leading advocate
Research
WHY TRAP - NEUTER - RETURN FERAL CATS?
THE CASE FOR TNR
What is Trap- Neuter - Return?
Trap - Neuter- Return is the humane and effective approach for
stray and feral cats. Now in practice for decades in the US after
being proven in Europe, scientific studies show that Trap -
Neuter- Return improves the lives of feral cats, improves their
relationships with the people who live near them, and decreases
the size of colonies over time.
Trap - Neuter- Return is successfully practiced in hundreds of
communities and in every landscape and setting. It is exactly
what it sounds like: Cats are humanely trapped and taken to
a veterinarian to be neutered and vaccinated. After recovery,
the cats are returned to their home —their colony — outdoors.
Kittens and cats who are friendly and socialized to people may
be adopted into homes.
Grounded in science, TNR stops the breeding cycle of
cats and therefore improves their lives while preventing
reproduction. It is a fact that the removal and killing of
outdoor cats that
animal control has been
pursuing for decades is
never ending and futile.
Since feral cats are not
adoptable, they are killed
in pounds and shelters.
With a successful program
like Trap- Neuter - Return
to turn to, it's hard
to believe that animal
control agencies continue
S to kill cats, even though
that approach has shown
zero results.
It is time to put an end to catch and kill. Trap- Neuter - Return
provides a life- saving, effective solution for these beautiful,
independent cats.
There are so many reasons to embrace and promote TNR!
Trap- Neuter - Return:
• Stabilizes feral cat colonies
• Improves cats lives
• Answers the needs of the community
• Protect cats' lives
• Works —other methods just don't
Trap- Neuter - Return Stabilizes Feral
Cat Colonies
Colonies that are involved in TNR diminish in size over time.
• During an 11 -year study of TNR at the University of
Florida, the number of cats on campus declined by 66 %,
with no new kittens being born after the first four years
of operation.'
• A study of the impact of TNR on feral cat colonies in
Rome, Italy, also observed colony size decrease between
16% and 32% over a 10 -year period.
Trap- Neuter - Return quickly stabilizes feral cat populations
by instantly ending reproduction and by removing socialized
cats from the colony.
• A TNR program at the University of Texas A &M neutered
123 cats in its first year, and found no new litters of kittens
the following year.
• Over the course of the same study, 20% of the cats trapped
were found to be socialized stray cats and adopted.'
www.alleyeat.org � 7920 Norfolk Avenue, Suite 600 • Bethesda, MD 20814-2525, 02012
Fact Sheet:
WHY TRAP - NEUTER - RETURN FOR FERAL CATS? THE CASE FOR TNR, page 2 of 5
Trap- Neuter - Return Improves Cats' Lives
Leaders of major humane programs all over America agree that
cats live healthier, more peaceful lives after TNR. "It helps to
stabilize the number of cats in the community," says Bonney
Brown, executive director of the Nevada Humane Society in
Reno, Nevada. "It keeps the cats healthy. They really have
great lives our there doing their feral cat thing."
Trap- Neuter - Return relieves cats of the constant stresses
of mating and pregnancy.
"The obvious benefit of Trap- Neuter - Return to the cars
is that the females dorA go through cycles of producing
more and more kittens. Their health is actually improved,"
says Rich Avanzino, longtime director of the San Francisco
SPCA and current president of Maddies Fund. Spaying
and neutering also virtually eliminates the chance of cats
developing mammary or testicular tumors.
• Mating behaviors cease, like roaming, yowling,
spraying, and fighting.
In a 2002 study conducted by prominent researcher Julie
Levy, DVM, caregivers reported that cats tended to roam
less after neutering, which is beneficial for their safety and
reduces conflict with neighbors.'
With decreased competition for mating, the cats are also
less likely to suffer injuries. A study of a feral cat colony
in London conducted by leading cat biologists and TNR
pioneers Dr. Jenny Remfry and Peter Neville found
that cats were more affectionate towards each other after
neutering, spending more time in groups and fighting less.°
• Cats' physical health improves.
Studies have found that neutering improves feral cats' coat
condition and helps them gain weight .• "...[R]esearch at
the University of Florida shows that they gain weight and
stray less after they've been neutered, so that's a benefit to
their welfare, as well," says Dr. Levy.
• Cats are vaccinated against rabies.
"The process ofTrap- Neuter - Return has an immense
benefit for the cats that are involved in these programs,"
explains Dr. Levy. "They're vaccinated, so they're less
susceptible to infectious diseases." Although feral cats are
healthy, vaccinations given during TNR protect them even
further and help put community members at ease.
• Cats live long, healthy lives.
At the conclusion of the 11 -year study of the impact of
TNR on feral cat colonies at the University of Florida, 83%
of the cats in managed TNR colonies had been residing
in those colonies for more than six years— indicating a
lifespan comparable to the 7.1 -year lifespan of pet cats.6
Learn more about feral cat health at www.alleymt.org/
FeralCatHealth.
Trap- Neuter - Return Answers the Needs of
the Community
"I think there are several amazing benefits for communities that
arise after they embrace Trap - Neuter- Return," says Dr. Levy.
"One of the most substantial ones is a resolution of the conflict
that... [can] surround cats in neighborhoods. Once residents
understand that something is being done to control the cat
population, they usually embrace having a Trap - Neuter - Return
program there."
• The population stabilizes—no new kittens!
Once TNR is in place, the cats will no longer reproduce.
The population will stabilize and eventually decline.
• Cats become better neighbors.
Studies confirm that once TNR stops reproduction, and
therefore mating behaviors, the cats' relationship with
residents improves. Colonies become quieter as behaviors
like yowling or fighting stop, calls to authorities about
the cats decrease significantly, and community morale
improves. 7,8
• Trap - Neuter -Return creates opportunities for outreach,
education, and cooperation.
Trap- Neuter - Return does more than just produce
immediate results and boost the cats' public image. As
Alley Cat Allies has found in its 20 years of experience
through such on- the - ground programs m DC Cat in
www.alleyeat.org E 7920 Norfolk Avenue, Suite 600, Bethesda, MD 20814 -2525 • 02012
Fact Sheet:
WHY TRAP - NEUTER - RETURN FOR FERAL CATS? THE CASE FOR TNR, page 3 of 5
Washington, DC, and the Meadows of Chantilly in
Northern Virginia, this community program presents
a great opportunity for educating and addressing any
concerns neighbors may have. "Having an open dialogue
with neighbors and providing an opportunity to listen to
their concerns can make a huge difference to a successful
TNR program," said Becky Robinson, president of Alley
Cat Allies.
"Usually, neighbors are relieved just to learn that
something is being done to stabilize the cat population.
Caregivers can also take further steps to address concerns,
such as providing deterrents to keep cats out of neighbors'
yards or constructing discreet feeding stations and litter
areas to gradually move cats out of areas they are not
wanted."'
'The cats live in the neighborhood —they will be there
whether they are cared for or not. Trap- Neuter- Return
establishes a point of contact for concerns about the cats
and for resolving any community concerns.
Download the Alley Cat Allies' brochure "How to Live With
Cats In Your Neighborhood" to help respond to concerns about
cats. Visit www.alleycat.org /Deterrents.
Trap- Neuter - Return Protects Cats' Lives
The number one documented cause of death for cats
in America is being killed in shelters. Over 70% of cats
entering shelters are killed —a figure that rises to nearly
100% for feral cats, who cannot be adopted. For decades,
animal control policy has wasted millions of dollars catching
and killing outdoor cats, but populations of cats are still
there, just as they always have been. Clearly, this cruel and
costly system has failed.
• Trap- Neuter -Return is an essential and valuable
component of shelter reform to save cats' lives.
When used as a part of overall shelter reform with policies
including no longer accepting cats at the shelter, across the
board, communities with TNR programs report a decline
in shelter intake. Alongside a decrease in cat - related calls
to animal control, researchers in Orange County, Florida,
also found that the number of cats killed by animal control
decreased in the six years after TNR was initiated. 10
Who does Trap- Neuter - Return?
Trap- Neuter - Return has been practiced abroad for
decades, and spread across the United States with
the help of Alley Cat Allies in the 1990s. Since then,
it has become the accepted approach for feral cats,
supported by:
Major cities including Baltimore, Washington, D.C.,
Austin, Jacksonville, Topeka, San Francisco, Los
Angeles and Cook County, Illinois.
• National organizations like the Humane Society of the
United States, American Society for the Prevention
of Cruelty to Animals (ASPCA), and the American
Animal Hospital Association (AAHA).
• Colleges and Universities including Stanford, Texas
A &M, North Carolina State, and the University of
Florida.
• Thriving destinations and businesses including
Disneyland and Portland's professional soccer
stadium.
• More than 260 registered nonprofit cat organizations
nationwide.
• Millions of Americans, from your friends and
neighbors to some familiar famous faces.
• Trap- Neuter -Return stops wasteful spending of
taxpayer dollars.
Catching and killing cats has been a futile effort used by
animal control and shelters across the country for decades
(see below). Continuing an approach that is clearly not
working is not only a waste of taxpayer dollars, it also
shows blatant disregard for efficiency and value —at a time
when the economy is at the forefront of everybody's mind.
Investing in spay /neuter and TNR is an investment in
cats' lives and cats' health, and it demonstrates a socially -
responsible (and compassionate) and efficient approach to
serving the animals and the public.
www.alleyeat.org < 7920 Norfolk Avenue, Suite 600 - Bethesda, MD 20814 -2525 a 02012
Fact Sheet:
WHY TRAP - NEUTER - RETURN FOR FERAL CATS? THE CASE FOR TNR, page 4 of 5
• Americans want humane solutions —they want TNR.
More than 80% of Americans believe it is more humane
to leave a cat outside than to have her caught and killed,
according to a 2007 study conducted by Harris Interactive
for Alley Cat Allies. Unfortunately, many people don't
realize that this is exactly what happens to feral cats —
they are caught and killed. Trap- Neuter - Return reflects
Americans' humane ethic that cats deserve to live out their
lives in their outdoor homes.
Though Trap- Neuter - Return is practiced all around the
country in hundreds of forward - thinking communities,
catch and kill for feral cats is still the status quo in many
cities. As the paradigm shifts to the lifesaving Trap- Neuter-
Return approach, America's humane ethic is finally being
reflected in animal control policies.
In 1993, San Francisco became one of the first American
cities to embrace TNR. "Money, instead of being spent
on killing, [i]s now being used to protect the animals,
to basically support the colony caregivers and to provide
the surgeries so that we [don't] see the wasted dollars, the
waste of life, and the extra burden put on the cat - colony
caregivers," says Avanzino. "It was a tragedy that needed to
end, and Trap- Neuter - Return stopped it."
Trap- Neuter - Return Works —Other
Methods Just Don't
Attempts to remove cats from an area always fail because
of a natural and scientifically- documented phenomenon
known as the vacuum effect. In basic terms, whenever cats
are removed, new cats move in, or the surviving cats left
behind, breed to capacity. Learn more at www.alleycat.org/
VacuumEffectScience.
As a result of the vacuum effect, other approaches to feral cats are
not only cruel and pointless, they are also completely ineffective
at stabilizing the cat population. These methods include:
Catch and Kill
The traditional and continued approach of animal control,
this futile method has been used for decades to no avail.
As the Humane Society of the Ochocos in Oregon, puts it:
"...Me know now, that more than 30 years of trapping
and killing cats has done nothing to reduce the feral cat
population." " A former president of the National Animal
Control Association echoes this sentiment recognizing
the ineffectiveness of catch and kill and the prevalence of
the vacuum effect: "What we're saying is the old standard
isn't good enough anymore. As we've seen before, there's
no department that I'm aware of that has enough money
in their budget to simply practice the old capture and
euthanize policy; nature just keeps having more kittens.1z
Adoption
Some cats who have lived outside their entire life befriend
their caregivers and make a slow steady transition to living
indoors. This is not representative of the millions of cats
who are not going to make the transition to living with
people in homes. And, it is a time - consuming project
with a very low rate of success. To suggest that all feral
cats can go into homes lacks the big picture of the true
behavior of cats who thrive and live their lives with their
colony members. It also ignores the very real evidence that
spending time doing Trap - Neuter- Return and fostering
truly social cars will help a much greater number of cats.
Learn more at www.alleycat.org/TNRnotTNA.
Relocation
While it sometimes seems like an attractive option,
relocation is also ineffective for the same reasons: it puts
the vacuum effect into motion. And, it endangers cats'
lives and causes them undue stress and suffering. Instead of
trying to uproot cats from their home, the education and
community relations aspect ofTNR addresses concerns
within the community to reach a harmonious solution.
Learn more at www.allcycat.org /Relocation.
www.alleycat.org � 7920 Norfolk Avenue, Suite 600 • Bethesda, MD 20814 -2525 � 02012
Fact Sheet:
WHY TRAP - NEUTER - RETURN FOR FERAL CATS? THE CASE FOR TNR, page 5 of 5
Cat sanctuaries
While cat sanctuaries are usually well - meaning, they do
nothing to stabilize the cat population in the community.
There will simply never be enough sanctuaries to house
every cat. What's more, feral cats who are used to living
outdoors suffer from stress and disease in these facilities.
Trap- Neuter - Return Is the Solution That
Works for Everyone
Cats have lived outdoors for thousands of years —in fact,
keeping indoor -only cats only became possible in the mid -20`h
century. Outdoor cats are pan of our natural landscape.
With Trap- Neuter - Return, you can stabilize the population
humanely, improve the cats' lives, save taxpayer dollars, address
neighbors' concerns, and help the entire community reach a
solution that benefits everyone.
t Levy, Julie K., David W. Gale, and Leslie A. Gale. "Evaluation of the Effect of a Long -Term Trap- Neuter - Return and Adoption
Program on a Free - Roaming Cat Population." journal ofthe American VeeterinaryMedicalAssociation 222, no. 1 (2003): 42 -46.
' Kathy L. Hughes and Margaret R. Slater: Implementation of a Feral Cat Management Program on a University Campus VAAWS
Vol. 5 No. 1, 2002).
s Scott, Karen C., Julie K. Levy, and Shawn P Gorman. "Body Condition of Feral Cats and the Effect of Neutering." Journal of
Applied Animal Welfare Science 5, no. 3 (2002): 203 -213.
a Neville, P.F. and J. Remfry. "Effect of Neutering on Two Groups of Feral Cats." The Veterinary Record 114 (1984): 447 -450.
s Scott, Karen C., Julie K. Levy, and Shawn E Gorman. "Body Condition of Feral Cats and the Effect of Neutering." journal of
Applied Animal Welfare Science 5, no. 3 (2002): 203 -213.
s Levy, Julie K., David W Gale, and Leslie A. Gale. "Evaluation of the Effect of a Long -Term Trap- Neuter - Return and Adoption
Program on a Free - Roaming Cat Population." Journal of theAmerican Veterinary Medical Association 222, no. 1 (2003): 42-46.
' Hughes, Kathy L., Margaret R. Slater, and Linda Haller. "The Effects of Implementing a Feral Cat Spay /Neuter Program in a
Florida County Animal Control Service." Journal ofAppliedAnimal Welfare Science 5 (2002): 285-289.
$ Ibid.
Alley Cat Allies. (2009). Community Relations: Protecting Cats with Outreach, Education, and Negotiation. Washington, DC:
Author.
'a Ibid.
" Humane Society of the Ochocos. Feral Cat Problem. 2011 http:// www. humanesocietyochocos .com /Feral.html (accessed
February 10, 2011).
" "Taking a Broader View of Cats in the Community', Animal Sheltering, September /October 2008, http: / /www.animalsheitering.
org/ resource_ library/magazine_art ides /sep_oct_2008 /broader_view_ofi cats.pdf (accessed February 10, 2011).
www.alleycat.org " 7920 Norfolk Avenue, Suite 600 " Bethesda, MD 20814 -2525 m 02012
Sandra Modiqh
From: Grant Sizemore <GSizemore @abcbirds.org>
Sent: Wednesday, September 28, 2016 7:45 AM
To: Mayor Porter; Bob Molloy; timnavarre @gmail.com; Henry Knackstedt; mboyle @alaskan.com;
Terry Bookey; Brian G. Gabriel, Sr.
Cc: Sandra Modigh; Rick Koch; Christine Cunningham
Subject: Please Support the Proposed Cat Leash Law
Attachments: American Bird Conservancy Support of Cat Leash Law.pdf
Mayor Porter, Vice Mayor Gabriel, and Members of City Council:
Please accept the attached letter on behalf of American Bird Conservancy and its Alaska members expressing our
support for the proposed leash law for cats. We strongly believe that safely containing cats, just like is done with dogs,
will simultaneously benefit cat welfare, wildlife conservation, and public health. We respectfully request that you
support the proposed ordinance.
Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions or comments.
Thank you very much for your consideration.
Grant
Grant Sizemore
Director of Invasive Species Programs
American Bird Conservancy
4301 Connecticut Ave., NW, Suite 451
Washington, D.C. 20008
Phone: 202- 888 -7480
gsize more @a bcbirds.org
www.abcbirds.org/cats
AMERICAN BIRD
..,AMERICAN
September 28, 2016
Kenai City Council
Kenai City Hall
210 Fidalgo Avenue
Kenai, AK 99611
Dear Mayor Porter and Members of the Kenai City Council,
Bringing back the birds
On behalf of American Bird Conservancy (ABC) and our members throughout Alaska, I am writing to
urge your support for the cat leash ordinance introduced by Mayor Porter and Council Member
Navarre. This ordinance would require that domestic cats, just like does, be restrained by a leash, fence,
or building.
ABC strongly supports maintaining cats safely in enclosures or on leashes. Policies that promote these
responsible behaviors result in a much healthier and longer life for cats but also benefit the health and
welfare of people and wildlife by reducing the spread of cat - transmitted diseases and eliminating harmful
cat predation on native species.
Better for Cats
By keeping cats indoors, pet owners help to ensure a long and healthy life for their cats. Cats safely
contained indoors live three to five times longer than outdoor cats, in part because cats kept from roaming
freely avoid hazards like cars, diseases, predation, ingestion of harmful chemicals, and adverse weather
conditions. Once acclimated to an indoor lifestyle, cats frequently show no desire to roam outside. But for
owners who desire outdoor time for their pets, the proposed ordinance allows for the use of leashed
harnesses as well as fully enclosed outdoor spaces, like a screened porch or catio (an enclosed patio for
cats: ham: / /catioshowcase.com/).
Benefit to Public Health
Cats with unrestricted movement facilitate the spread of diseases and increase the risk of infection to
people. One such disease is toxoplasmosis, caused by infection with the parasite Toxoplasma gondii. Cats
are the definitive host for this parasite and spread its infectious eggs into the environment through feces,
contaminating soil and waterways. All warm- blooded species that accidentally ingest or inhale the
parasitic eggs — which persist in the environment for years — may become infected, including humans.
Although once thought only to be an issue for pregnant women and those with compromised immune
systems, research has shown health concerns for healthy members of the population, as well.
Toxoplasmosis has been linked to schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and other neurodegenerative diseases
and may cause miscarriages, fetal abnormalities, memory loss, blindness, or death. ""
Members of the Kenai community, like Sheila Holtzen, have expressed their concerns for public health in
letters written to the City Council. Holtzen worries about the impacts of roaming cats and toxoplasmosis
on her already -ill family members. She also mentions the number of times she has stuck her hand in cat
feces while in her garden. Holtzen is right to be concerned. A study published in 2013 reported that
"Because cats do not defecate randomly but rather select places with loose soil... gardens, children's play
areas with loose soil, and especially sandboxes... are favored sites." The authors went on to say that
"Because cats are now so ubiquitous in the environment, one may become infected by neighboring cats
4301 Connecticut Avenue, Suite 451 • Washington, D.C. 20008
Tel: 202- 234 -7181 • Fax: 202 -888 -7496 • info@abcbirds.org • abcbirds.org
,AMERICAN BIRD
CONSERVANCY
Shaping the future for birds
which defecate in one's garden or play area, or by playing in public areas such as parks or school
grounds. "i
Conservation of Native Species
Cats are a non - native and invasive species in the U.S. that have caused devastation for many of our native
species. "' Worldwide, cats have contributed to the extinction of 33 species, and the US Department of the
Interior's State of the Birds 2014 Report identified cats as the top source of direct, human- caused
mortality for birds." In the U.S., cats kill approximately 2.4 billion birds and 12.3 billion mammals each
year." Even well fed cats will continue to prey on animals, including birds, small mammals, reptiles, and
amphibians. By safely containing cats, this ordinance would help protect our native species.
Support the Cat Leash Ordinance in Kenai
The proposed ordinance would add cats to the list of animals required to be restrained in Kenai and
address growing concerns of its citizens. Supporting the cat leash ordinance is a small but important way
to foster cat welfare, on the same level as dogs. The ordinance will also benefit native wildlife species and
improve overall public health. Based on these considerations, ABC respectfully requests that you
support the cat leash ordinance.
Thank you for your consideration,
k, —
Grant Sizemore
Director of hivasive Species Programs
Torrey E.F. and R.H. Yolken. 2013. Toxoplasma oocysts as a public health problem. Trends in Parasitology 29:
380 -384.
Gajewski P.D., M. Falkenstein, J.G. Hengstler, and K. Golka. 2014. Toxoplasma gondii impairs memory in
infected seniors. Brain, Behavior, and Immunity 36: 193 -199.
Lowe S., M. Browne, S. Boudjelas, and M. De Poorter. 2000. 100 of the World's Worst Invasive Alien Species: A
Selection from the Global Invasive Species Database. The Invasive Species Specialist Group, International
Union for the Conservation of Nature.
"North American Bird Conservation Initiative, U.S. Committee. 2014. The State of the Birds 2014 Report. U.S.
Department of Interior, Washington, D.C. 16 pages.
Loss S.R., T. Will, and P.P. Marra. 2013. The impact of free- ranging domestic cats on wildlife of the United States.
Nature Communications 4:1396.
4301 Connecticut Avenue, Suite 451 • Washington, D.C. 20008
Tel: 202 - 234 -7181 • Fax: 202 - 234 -7182 • abcoabcbirds.org • w .abcbirds.org
Sandra Modiah
From:
Scott Bloom
Sent:
Wednesday, September 28, 2016 10:10 AM
To:
Sandra Modigh
Subject:
FW: ?
From: Tim Navarre [mailto:timnavarre @gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, September 28, 2016 8:21 AM
To: Scott Bloom <sbloom @kenai.city>
Subject: Fwd: ?
FYI
---- - - - - -- Forwarded message ---- - - - - --
From: Community Cats United < communitycatsunited @ yahoo.com>
Date: Wed, Sep 28, 2016 at 6:25 AM
Subject: ?
To: "kenaima orlOgmsn.com" <kenaimayorl0(amsn.com >, "ccunnin arnA enai.city"
<ccunninghain@kenai.city >, "bmolloyyy(akenai.city" <bmollo kenai.city >, "timnavarreggmail.com"
<timnavarre(a,gmail.com >, "hknackstedtgkenai.city" <hknackstedtgkenai.city >, "tbookey a kenai.city"
<tbookey@kenai.city >, "bgabriel(4kenai.city" <bgabrieIgkenai.city>
Hi Mayor Porter. City Manager Koch, and Council Members!
I would like to talk with you about your free - roaming cat issue and offer a compassionate, effective
and cost efficient option. But first, please allow me to introduce myself.
I am president of Community Cats United, Inc. (Trap- Neuter - Return Community). We have over
15,000 members and 1,000 groups in 82 countries and all 50 US states, including Alaska, working
together to help community cats.
I know you must be frustrated by and looking for options to address your community cat issue. You
are not alone. Many communities all over the world are facing this issue too. These cats are not
there of their choosing. Humans have let them down, mostly abandoned when they were no longer
convenient.
I would like to introduce you to trap- neuter - vaccinate - return (TNVR). TNVR offers a humane option to
the overpopulation of cats. Cats can reproduce rapidly, as you well know. That is why trap and kill
will NEVER make even a dent in the number of unowned cats. You can NEVER kill all the cats. This
has been proven over the last several decades of use. All that has happened is the number of
community cats has increased, not decreased.
Also, when you remove cats from an area, new ones will take their place. TNVR addresses this
issue. Once cats are spay /neutered, reproduction is ended or greatly reduced. TNVR is also
compassionate and cost - effective. TNVR costs less than housing and killing a cat. When cats are
TNVR'd, they are also vaccinated, providing the public with a healthy option too.
TNVR also saves companion animals (dogs and friendly cats) because it allows more space and
money for them - ferals should never be in a shelter. They should be with caretakers who manage
them in a colony.
I am reaching out to you to offer a helping hand - free of charge. I understand "free" is unheard of
these days but our mission is to help change the climate for these cats
Would you be willing to discuss how TNVR could change the whole animal welfare situation for
you? Save money, save lives - a win -win! We have lawyers that will help with a TNVR ordinance
(also free of charge), experts in trapping, setting up spay /neuter clinics, caretakers and such. We will
help you ever step of the way. We will NOT start and leave.
You have the opportunity to be a compassionate and fiscally responsible model for communities
everywhere. The world will see your success. May we talk TNVR?
Respectfully,
Beth Frank
President/Founder
Community Cats United, Inc.
http://www.communitycatsunited.org
http://www.communitVcatmovement.org /
September 29, 2016
Kenai City Council
210 Fidalgo Avenue
Kenai, AK 99611
Dear Kenai City Council,
On behalf of our supporters in Kenai, For All Animals respectfully requests that you reject the
proposed cat leash law. For All Animals is a national advocacy organization dedicated to the
protection of animals. As part of our work, we consult with municipal governments, state legislators,
and animal control agencies to develop humane laws for cats and dogs.
The best way to permanently reduce the cat population is through Trap- Neuter -Return (TNR). TNR
refers to an animal control management practice where community cats are humanely trapped,
sterilized, vaccinated against rabies, and eartipped (a small portion of the ear is removed during
surgery to indicate the cat has been through the TNR process). Trapping- and - killing, the traditional
approach to community cats, has been used by cities for decades without success. It is abundantly
clear now that lethal control does not work.
Likewise, leash laws, though well - intentioned, are not effective in reducing the cat population. In
fact, leash laws can have the opposite effect. The law jeopardizes every outdoor cat, even community
cats that have been spayed or neutered. Community cats are outdoor, free - roaming cats with minimal
contact with people. If sterilized community cats can be impounded, citizens already practicing TNR
will be discouraged from spending their time and money on neutering community cats.
Removing cats is a stop gap, the population will quickly rebound. Animal control officers
must return to trap and kill the new cats year after year, creating a vicious cycle where cats are killed
at great cost to taxpayers with no decrease in the population. The former president of the National
Animal Control Association, Mark Kumpf explains, "The cost for picking up and simply euthanizing
and disposing of animals is horrendous, in both the philosophical and the economic sense."
The following are key studies demonstrating the efficacy of TNR, its value to local governments,
and the failure of lethal control:
The 2016 study, "Association between a shelter - neuter -return program and cat health at a
large municipal animal shelter" analyzed eight years of data from San Jose Animal Care and
Control in California. It determined that the implementation of a Shelter- Neuter - Return
program reduced both cat intake and cat euthanasia. Furthermore, financial resources
previously spent on cat euthanasia were reallocated to provide medical care to cats with
URLt
I Edinboro. C, Watson, H. Fairbrother, A. (2016) "Association between a shelter - neuter -return program and cat health at a large
municipal animal shelter." Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association 248. no.3:298 -308.
X11
• An eleven year study of community cats at the University of Central Florida campus
determined that the campus cat population decreased by 85% after a TNR program was
instituted.' For years, the campus had unsuccessfully attempted to reduce the population
through lethal control.
• A 2002 study at Texas A &M University found a 36% reduction in the community cat
population coupled with a decrease in nuisance complaints only two years after TNR was
introduced.3
Conversely, attempts at lethal control of community cats can exacerbate the problem. A
2014 study on the effects of trapping and killing on two community cat colonies in Tasmania
found significant increases in the cat population. Researchers found a 75% increase in
population at one site while the second increased by 211 %. Researchers theorized that the
increase in population was due to new cats moving into the areas or an increased survival rate
for the kittens of remaining cats.'
TNR is a win -win for the community because it's effective and reduces animal control costs.
TNR is also accepted and endorsed by animal welfare groups, veterinary associations, animal
control agencies, and over six hundred cities and counties in the United States. Prominent
supporters include the International City /County Management Association, the National Animal
Control Association, and the American Association of Feline Practitioners.
Please join the many cities and institutions in supporting Trap- Neuter -Return and opposing
ineffective leash laws. I'm happy to work with you to tailor a program to fit Kenai's unique needs.
Sincerely,
Elizabeth Holtz
Director of Legislative Affairs
liz(a,forallanimals.org
(301) 332 -8032
' Levy, J.K., Gale, D.W., and Gale, L.A. (2003). Evaluation of the effect of a long -term trap- neuter - return and adoption program
on a free- roaming cat population. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association 222,42-46.
3 Hughes, K.L. and Slater, M.R. (2002). Implementation of a feral cat management program on a university campus. Journal of
Applied Animal Welfare Science, 5,15-28.
4 Lazenby, B.T., Mooney, N.J., and Diclanan, C.R. (2014). Effects of low -level culling of feral cats in open populations: a case
study from the forests of southern Tasmania. Wildlife Research, 41, 401 -420.
Sponsored by: Mayor Porter and Council
1
IIFNAIvIASKA
CITY OF KENAI
ORDINANCE NO. 2917 -2016
AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
KENAI MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 3.10.020 - CONT
ANIMALS, TO REQUIRE CATS IN THE CITY TO BE RES'
WHEREAS, the Kenai Municipal Code does not
large in the City; and,
WHEREAS, the City's Animal Shelter has
complaints of cats roaming at large, damaging
and quiet of neighborhoods; and,
Al, ALASKA, AMENDING
AND CONFINEMENT OF
iED AT ALL TIMES.
prohibit cats from roaming at
. an increase in the number of
property and disturbing the peace
WHEREAS, the number of cats roaming at jArge and complaints of the same has begun
to tax the available resources of the AnimA Shelter; and,
WHEREAS, many other Alaskan mum palities prohibit cats from roaming at large and
also restrict the number of cats allo d to be kept in each household; and,
WHEREAS, residents of Yys ould not be distu rbed by the pets of others, whether
dogs or cats; and,
WHEREAS, it is in the st of the City to require cats be contained on the
owner's property or othe ained from roaming at large.
NOW, THERE/endment IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI,
ALASKA, as fo
Section 1. Fhis is a code ordinance.
Section 2. A of Section 3.10.020 of the Kenai Municipal Code: That Kenai
Municipal Cod , Section 3.10.020 - Control and Confinement of Animals, is hereby
amended as /follows:
3.10.0294Control and [C]Confinement of [A]Animals.
ja) A person who owns a dog or cat shall keep the dog or cat under restraint
at all times.
(b) A person who owns an animal other than a dog or cat that is capable of
annoying or endangering other persons or damaging their property shall keep the
animal under restraint at all times.
New Test Underlined; [DELETED TEXT BRACKETED]
Ordinance No. 2917 -2016
Page 2 of 2
(c) A person who owns a vicious or dangerous animal shall at all times either
confine the animal in a building or a secure enclosure, or otherwise secure the
animal, as with a muzzle, so it cannot injure other persons or their property.
(d) A person who owns a female dog or cat in heat or during ovulation shall
keep the dog or cat under restraint in such a manner that it cannot come into
contact with a male of its species except for planned breeding purposes, provided
that a female sled dog in heat shall be confined unless it is restrained by proper
harnessing in a team in such a manner that it cannot come in contact with a
male dog except for planned breeding purposes.
(e) No person other than an officer performing his duties under this title may
release an animal from restraint without its owner's consent, except to preserve
the animal's life.
Section 3. Severability: That if any part or provision of this ordinance or application
thereof to any person or circumstances is adjudged invalid by any court of competent
jurisdiction, such judgment shall be confined in its operation to the part, provision, or
application directly involved in all controversy in which this judgment shall have been
rendered, and shall not affect or impair the validity of the remainder of this title or
application thereof to other persons or circumstances. The City Council hereby declares
that it would have enacted the remainder of this ordinance even without such part,
provision, or application.
Section 4. Effective Date: That pursuant to KMC 1.15.070(1), this ordinance shall
take effect 30 days after adoption.
ENACTED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENAI, ALASKA, this 21st day of
September, 2016.
ATTEST:
Sandra Modigh, City Clerk
PAT PORTER, MAYOR
Introduced: September 7, 2016
Enacted: September 21, 2016
Effective: October 21, 2016
New Text Underlined; [DELETED TEXT BRACKETED]
u
"Villaye with a Past, C# with a Future"
210 Fidalgo Avenue, Kenai, Alaska 99611 -7794
Telephone: 907 - 283 -7535 / FAX: 907 - 283 -3014
www.kenai.city
MEMORANDUM
TO: Council Members
THROUGH: Mayor Porter and Council Member Navarre
FROM: Scott M. Bloom, City Attorney 53
DATE: August 31, 2016
SUBJECT: Ordinance No. 2917 -2016 KMC 3.10.020
The City of Kenai Municipal Code currently does not prohibit cats from roaming at large,
except when a female cat is ovulating. The Animal Shelter has received an increased
number of complaints regarding cats roaming at large, defecating on private property,
invading plant beds and otherwise disturbing property owners' peaceful enjoyment of their
property. The Animal Shelter has live traps that its staff deploy or rent to others for
capturing cats. If the Animal Shelter captures or otherwise obtains a cat, it is returned to its
owner, without any cost, as long as it is up to date on its rabies vaccine. The Animal Shelter
does not have enough traps to meet demand at times. Many other Alaska Municipalities
prohibit cats from roaming at large and also limit the numbers of cats allowed per
household. While limiting the number of cats per household was considered, the Ordinance
Sponsors hope requiring cats to be restrained at all times will alleviate the need to limit the
number of cats in each household at this time.
The Ordinance amends KMC 3.10.020 — Control and Confinement of Animals, to provide
that cats be kept under restraint and all times. "Restrain" is defined in KMC 3.05.010 —
Definitions, to mean in pertinent part "physical confinement, as by leash, chain, fence, or
building." If this Ordinance is adopted, cats captured by Animal Shelter staff or brought
into the Animal Shelter would be required to have a rabies shot, and could be charged an
impound or boarding fee prior to release. Impound fees begin at $15.30, and boarding fees
are $20.40 per day.
"'Villaye with a Past, C# with a Future"
210 Fidalgo Avenue, Kenai, Alaska 99611 -7794
Telephone: 907 - 283 -7535 / FAX: 907 - 283 -3014 �Illli
1992
MEMO:
TO: Mayor Porter & Kenai City Council
FROM: Rick Koch
DATE: September 14, 2016
SUBJECT: Ordinance No. 2917 -2016, Control and Confinement of Animals, to
Require Cats in the City to be Restrained at all Times
The purpose of this correspondence is to respectfully request a postponement of the above
referenced ordinance.
I would like to research historical information and provide that information to Council so that
you have the best information available on which to base your decision.
Thank you for your attention in this matter. If you have any questions, please contact me at
your convenience.
Sandra Modigh
From:
Ryan Marquis <ryanmarquis @gmail.com>
Sent:
Tuesday, September 13, 2016 9:46 AM
To:
Sandra Modigh
Subject:
ORDINANCE NO. 2917 -2016
Attachments:
CatFood.png; DogFood.jpg
Good morning, Sandra.
Could you please forward this email to City Administration and Council, and include as part of the testimony
for Ordinance 2917 -2016?
Thanks!
Mayor Porter and Council,
I wanted to send a quick email in regards to Ordinance 2917 -2016, requiring cats to be constrained at all times
within the City.
In the third Whereas of the ordinance, it states that Animal Shelter resources are already taxed. I agree with that
statement, based on my own observations.
Please see the attached two images. They show recent posts on social media requesting food donations for the
Kenai Animal Shelter. One of these posts claims that the Animal Shelter was completely out of kitten food; the
other stating that they were almost out of canned dog food. Unfortunately, these posts are not uncommon. They
do support your Whereas statement that Animal Shelter resources are already taxed.
I believe the flaw in this ordinance is that it assumes compliance. It is my opinion that those that start
restraining their cats will be significantly fewer in number than those that ignore the ordinance (whether
unknowingly or not). Also, I believe that a large number of the cats that are likely prompting this ordinance are
feral; they don't have owners that can be responsible for them being unrestrained. If I'm correct, this means that
Animal Shelter resources will be taxed even further.
If the City can't afford to feed the existing animals at the Shelter, how is it wise to exacerbate this problem by
adding hundreds of additional cats that would need to processed and/or housed by Animal Control? Are you
prepared to increase Animal Control's budget to support this new program? And remember, it's not just
additional food that the Shelter would need to acquire, it's the personnel hours involved with chasing after
complaint cats, other expenses associated with housing, time spent dealing with owners, and the additional costs
associated with increased euthanizations and vaccinations. While there are cost recovery measures that the
Shelter can take, I think you'll find that many of the cats that end up at the Shelter will go unclaimed.
I understand why we have leash laws for dogs. Dogs have the capacity to be dangerous if uncontrolled (control
meaning either training OR restraint), but uncontrolled cats are significantly less of a threat to human safety
than uncontrolled dogs. They can be a nuisance, sure, but I don't believe they require the same degree of caution
as you might take with a large dog.
I respect the City responding to concerns that some of our residents might have, but I think this ordinance would
ultimately fail to alleviate the problem and only make it more difficult for our Animal Control employees and
volunteers to do the fantastic job they currently do.
I'd encourage you to not support Ordinance Number 2917 -2016.
Thank you for considering my thoughts and for your service to our City.
Ryan Marquis
Kenai
1 1 % L- L-
Kenai, Alaska
We are out of kitten food at the Kenai animal shelter!
Kirkland cat and kitten food from 3 Bears is what we
prefer,or any food without colors. We have plenty of
adult cat food. Can anyone help?
st out of canned dog food at the Kenai shelt(
,icky, anything is great!
Well Done or Frozen
Venison Prevents
Toxoplasmosis Infection
September 29, 2016
In the early 1980s, I was one of three South Carolina wildlife biologists who consumed
freshly killed venison for dinner following a day of processing several deer. The venison
was cooked rare, the way we liked it. Two of us ended up hospitalized for nine days with
fevers peaking at 104 degrees daily. Strangely, there were no other symptoms, making it
impossible for our doctors to reach an accurate diagnosis. Once our fevers subsided,
.y
1
f�
however, we were discharged from the hospital. Months later, a curious physician from
the state health department looked at our blood samples and closed our case with a
diagnosis: toxoplasmosis.
Toxoplasmosis is a parasitic disease caused by a tiny organism called a protozoon. This
parasite, known as Toxoplasma gondii, is one of the world's most common parasites. It
causes a broad scope of symptoms. They range from asymptomatic (no obvious
symptoms), which is probably the most common, to a flu -like condition, and to more
serious complications in pregnant women, infants born to infected mothers, and for
people with weakened immune systems.
The Source: Cats
How does one "catch" this disease? Many wild and domestic animals can harbor this
parasite, but it is the house cat (tame and feral) that is most often associated with human
infections. Direct and indirect contact with cat feces provides the pathway for disease
transmission. Consuming unwashed and /or undercooked vegetables from a garden
frequented by cats is a common indirect method of contracting toxoplasmosis.
Results from a recent Ohio State University study in the metropolitan Cleveland, Ohio
area revealed that 60 percent of more than 400 deer tested were infected with
toxoplasmosis. This was three times higher than rates in suburban deer, likely due to a
higher density of free - ranging or feral house cats in urban areas.
Preventing Infection
The concern with venison consumption from these urban and suburban areas is obvious,
but it should be applied throughout the whitetail's range. For venison lovers, there are
several ways to minimize your chances of contracting this common disease. Once the
meat has been processed, wash cutting boards, dishes, utensils, countertops, and hands
with hot, soapy water. Avoid touching your mouth after handling raw meat.
If you insist on serving your venison with a pink center, make absolutely certain that
the meat has been frozen prior to cooking.
It is a long- standing tradition for hunters at a deer camp to prepare fresh venison,
especially backstraps and tenderloins, as a celebration meal following a successful hunt.
To complicate matters, for many it is sacrilege to grill or pan -fry venison well -done.
Therefore, any Toxoplasma parasites that are present will not be killed.
Here's an important notice to venison lovers. If you insist on serving your venison with a
pink center, make absolutely certain that the meat has been frozen prior to cooking.
Otherwise, cook meat at a temperature of at least 145 degrees and allow a rest time of
three minutes before carving and consuming. During the rest time, the temperature
remains constant or continues to rise briefly, which destroys the toxoplasmosis
pathogens.
Lifelong Complications
As for my two colleagues and me, none of us have had any complications from the
disease since we initially recovered. It is unfortunate, though, that we are not allowed to
give blood nor can we serve as organ donors. Toxoplasma antibodies generally persist for
life and therefore may be present in one's bloodstream as a result of either a current or
previous infection. There are medications that can help reduce the severity of a
toxoplasmosis infection, but the best approach is prevention. Deer hunters are encouraged
to keep their hands clean, to always freeze their venison before it is cooked, or to cook it
thoroughly. From this point on, no worries!
- See more at: https: / /www.gdma.com /well- done - frozen- venison - prevents- toxoplasmosis-
infection / #sthash.OyXkkzMI. dpuf
When will people learn to
treat cats like dogs?
A stray cat crosses a road outside of a vacant apartment ouilding in Venice, Calif. in 2012. (Los Angeles Times)
Peter Marra and Chris Santella
When the first colonists arrived in the New World, cats disembarked with
them. Felines already had followed humans along the Silk Road out of the
Middle East to Asia and Europe. Thanks to us, their two- legged transporters
(and their natural fecundity), outdoor domestic cats are now one of the most
widespread invasive species on the planet.
Which is why it's people's responsibility to minimize cats' impact on the
landscape — by keeping them indoors or on a leash, by putting cats that can't
be adopted in sanctuaries and as a last resort by euthanizing them.
Today Americans own about go million pet cats. Some never leave the safe
confines of their home. But many cat owners hardly think twice about opening
a door to let their cat outside, despite the dangers: cars, coyotes and diseases
carried by some of the 6o million to loo million unowned and unvaccinated
cats.
Cats roaming outside are devastating to wildlife, particularly birds. A study
one of us (Marra) published in 2013 in the journal Nature Communications
reported that cats annually kill a minimum of 1.3 billion birds just in the
United States, with 69% of those by unowned cats. Equally alarming: More
than 6.3 billion mammals, 95 million amphibians and 258 million reptiles are
killed every year by outdoor cats. Worldwide, cats have contributed to 33
extinctions and have caused the decline of 142 other species of reptiles, birds
and mammals.
Through much of the 20th century, people in North
America and Europe routinely let their dogs roam
freely about their neighborhoods and adjoining woods.
This is nothing short of a crisis. What's maddening, however, is that unlike
other environmental threats that seem insurmountable — including climate
change and habitat loss — free - ranging cats are a problem we can reverse.
And there's a precedent for taking action: dogs.
Through much of the 20th century, people in North America and Europe
routinely let their dogs roam freely about their neighborhoods and adjoining
woods. Unowned stray dogs were equally common. But in cities along the
Eastern Seaboard, packs of dogs became a problem. Roaming dogs bit people,
some carried rabies. Dogs themselves were being hit by cars. So lawmakers
began to mandate dog licenses and vaccinations and made it illegal for dogs to
roam free.
More crucially, this led to a change in attitude about how people cared for and
took responsibility for their dogs. Dogs were walked on a leash or kept within
fenced yards. Animal control officers began removing unowned animals from
the streets. Dogs that were unhealthy or that could not be placed in a caring
home were euthanized — an unfortunate outcome but one that many animal
ethicists would insist is more humane than allowing a dog to starve, die of
disease or be hit by a car.
We need to similarly shift our thinking about cats. To fail to do so is unfair to a
species that is dependent on humans, unfair to wildlife and even unfair to
fellow citizens. Cats are the primary carrier of the parasite that
causes toxopiasmosis, which can be transmitted to livestock and humans. Up
to 20% of Americans are believed to be infected.
To begin, we need to end pet abandonment. Taking a cat to an animal shelter
should not carry more shame than leaving it on the streets. It would certainly
help to better fund animal control facilities, which too often are viewed as
grim, unhappy places.
Cat owners should be required to spay /neuter and microchip their pets and
keep them indoors, leashed, or in an enclosure (a so- called "catio. ") Owners
should be fined if their cats are picked up roaming more than once. If
unowned cats are unadoptable, they need to be kept in an enclosed facility.
Euthanasia must also be carefully considered. Removing cats from the
landscape is especially crucial in areas where threatened or endangered
species reside: in Hawaii, coastal areas where migratory birds nest or rest, and
national wildlife refuges and other public lands.
We also need to discontinue the practice of trap, neuter and release for
unowned cats. (Let the Internet comment barrage begin.) Credible scientific
studies demonstrate that it is ineffective at reducing unowned outdoor cat
populations. Further, it's inhumane. When a cat is put back into the wild, it is
abandoned by people once again, vulnerable to the hazards of its environment.
Estimates suggest that 50% to 75% of kittens born outdoors do not survive to
adulthood. Those that do have a significantly shorter life expectancy than
indoor cats.
Removing free - roaming cats from the landscape won't happen overnight —
there are just too many. Where colonies of unowned cats remain, they need to
be managed and monitored to make sure there's no impact on wildlife or
disease spreading and that the colony is indeed shrinking.
People seem to perceive cats as part wild, and thus able to get along on their
own, but cats need human care. At the same time, the native animals they
ineluctably prey upon also need our help. We need to take responsibility for
cats the same way we have dogs.
Peter P. Marra is a conservation scientist and Chris Santella is the author the
"Fifty Places" travel and outdoor series. They are coauthors of "Cat Wars:
The Devastating Consequences of a Cuddly Killer."
zoonoses and Public Health
REVIEW ARTICLE
Zoonotic Diseases Associated with Free - Roaming Cats
R. W. Gerhold' and D. A. Jessup2
' Center for Wildlife Health, Department of Forestry, Wildlife, and Fisheries, The University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN, USA
2 California Department of Fish and Game (retired), Santa Cruz, CA, USA
Impacts
Free - roaming cats are an important source of zoonotic diseases including
rabies, Toxoplasma gondii, cutaneous larval migrans, tularemia and plague..
Free - roaming cats account for the most cases of human rabies exposure
among domestic animals and account for approximately 1/3 of rabies post -
exposure prophylaxis treatments in humans in the United States.
Trap—neuter—release (TNR) programmes may lead to increased n9ve
populations of cats that can serve as a source of zoonotic diseases.
Keywords:
Cutaneous larval migrans; free - roaming cats;
rabies; toxoplasmosis; zoonoses
Correspondence:
R. Gerhold. Center for Wildlife Health,
Department of Forestry, Wildlife, and
Fisheries, The University of Tennessee,
Knoxville, TN 37996 -4563, USA. Tel.: 865
974 0465; Fax: 865- 974 -0465; E -mail:
rgerhold ®utk.edu
Received for publication March 16, 2012
doi: 10 .1111/j.1863- 2378.2012.01522.x
Summary
Free - roaming cat populations have been identified as a significant public health
threat and are a source for several zoonotic diseases including rabies,
toxoplasmosis, cutaneous larval migrans because of various nematode parasites,
plague, tularemia and murine typhus. Several of these diseases are reported to
cause mortality in humans and can cause other important health issues includ-
ing abortion, blindness, pruritic skin rashes and other various symptoms. A
recent case of rabies in a young girl from California that likely was transmitted
by a free- roaming cat underscores that free- roaming cats can be a source of
zoonotic diseases. Increased attention has been placed on trap — neuter — release
(TNR) programmes as a viable tool to manage cat populations. However, some
studies have shown that TNR leads to increased immigration of unneutered
cats into neutered populations as well as increased kitten survival in neutered
groups. These compensatory mechanisms in neutered groups leading to
increased kitten survival and immigration would confound rabies vaccination
campaigns and produce naive populations of cats that can serve as source of
zoonotic disease agents owing to lack of immunity. This manuscript is a review
of the various diseases of free - roaming cats and the public health implications
associated with the cat populations.
Domestic cats are a potential source of numerous infec-
tious disease agents; however, many of these diseases are
controlled in cats belonging to responsible owners
through routine veterinary care, proper vaccination regi-
mens and parasite chemotherapy. Free - roaming cats often
lack the necessary preventative care to control these dis-
eases and consequently pose a potential health threat to
other domestic animals, wildlife and humans. Historically,
animal control programmes have been paramount in
minimizing zoonotic risk in the United States. In the
1950s, a rabies control programme began, which included
0 2012 Blackwell Verlag GmbH • Zoonoses and Public Health
mandatory rabies vaccination in dogs and animal control
programmes aimed at removing free - roaming animals
(Rupprecht et al., 2001). These programmes have signifi-
cantly reduced the incidence of human rabies in the Uni-
ted States. However, in the last decade, there has been a
marked reduction in social support for collection and
euthanasia of free - roaming animals, particularly cats. In
some areas, animal control has been turned over to pri-
vate organizations that follow a `no -kill' philosophy and
routinely release free - roaming animals. Diminished
resources and willingness to collect free- roaming animals
Zoonoses and Free - Roaming Cats
have led to increasing numbers of free - roaming animals;
and rabies exposure in humans remains an important
public health threat.
Rabies
Since 1988, rabies has been detected more frequently in
cats than dogs in the United States (Rupprecht, 2002),
and in 2008 the number of rabies cases in cats (n = 294)
was approximately four times the number of cases in
dogs (Blanton et al., 2009). In 2010, rabies cases declined
in all domestic animals, except for cats, which comprised
62% (n = 303) of all rabies cases in domestic animals
(Blanton et al., 2011). In contrast, dogs accounted for 69
rabies cases, which is a 14% decrease from 2009.
Although rabies is detected most frequently in various
wild animals in the United States and the majority of
human rabies cases in the United States are attributable
to bites of rabid bats, multiple studies have disclosed that
human exposure to rabies is largely associated with free -
roaming cats because of people being more likely to come
in contact with cats, large free - roaming cat populations
and lack of stringent rabies vaccination programmes
(Childs, 1990; Cole and Atkins, 2007; Roseveare et al.,
2009; Eidson and Bigman, 2010). A recent case of rabies
in an 8 -year old girl from California in 2010 disclosed
that the patient had multiple cat bites from free - roaming
cat colonies near her house (Blanton et al., 2011).
Although rabies RNA was unable to be collected for
molecular typing, the epidemiological data highly suggest
that the girl was exposed by a rabid free - roaming cat
(CDC MMWR, 2012).
From 2002 to 2006 in Georgia, 70 cats tested positive
for rabies and the virus was detected more frequently in
cats than in any other domestic animal (Cole and Atkins,
2007). Moreover, 17% of all confirmed human rabies
exposures in Georgia were attributable to cat bites from
2004 to 2006, whereas domestic dogs comprised 5% of all
confirmed human rabies in Georgia during the same time
period. A separate investigation of rabies exposure in
domestic animals in upstate South Carolina disclosed that
free- roaming cats were disproportionately associated with
potential human rabies exposure and were most fre-
quently reported rabid among domestic exposure animals
( Roseveare et al., 2009). Similarly, in New York from
1993 to 2010, cats accounted for the majority of human
rabies exposure incidents (32%) and post- exposure pro-
phylaxis (PEP) treatments (31%) (Eidson and Bigman,
2010). In Pennsylvania, rabid cat cases exceeded all cases
of rabid wild animals, with the exception of raccoons,
and in 2009 and 2010, rabid cat cases (n = 56) were tied
with skunks for the second most frequently diagnosed
animal (Herman, 2010). In contrast to the 56 free -roam-
R. W. Gerhold and D. A. Jessup
ing cat cases in 2010 in Pennsylvania, dogs, cattle and
horses constituted 4, 7 and 5 cases, respectively. In 2011,
numerous press releases from various county health
departments have documented the presence of rabid cats
including a rabid cat in Worchester County, MD: two
human exposure cases in Cecil County, MD, owing to
bites by a rabid cat; four human exposures in Wantage
Township, NJ, owing to two rabid free - roaming cats; and
two cases of human exposure owing to free - roaming cat
bites in Hall County, GA. Similarly in 2012, a rabid free -
roaming cat in Cherokee County, GA, led to rabies PEP
treatment for at least seven people. Unfortunately, report-
ing to county health departments is not performed in
uniform manner; thus, the actual cases of rabies exposure
in humans owing to cats are likely underestimated.
Rabies virus is transmitted via saliva from one host to
another primarily via a bite from a rabid animal. Follow-
ing a bite of a rabid animal and virus inoculation, the
virus replicates in neurons and disseminates via the ner-
vous system. Later in the infection, the virus can be
found in highly innervated organs including cornea, skin
and salivary glands (Iwasaki, 1991). Rabies leads to vari-
ous neurological impairment symptoms, and the disease
is invariably fatal. Individuals exposed to potentially rabid
animals are administered PEP, and cat exposures account
for approximately 1/3 of all PEP recipients. Post - exposure
prophylaxis regimen generally costs $5000 -8000 for each
individual, which is mostly bome by public health agen-
cies (Recuanco et al. 2007). Although rabies vaccination
may be provided to free - roaming cats by some trap —neu-
ter— release (TNR) programmes, it does not decrease the
need for PEP because (i) cats can shed virus for a few
days prior to clinical onset, (ii) the uncertainty about
free- roaming cat vaccination status, (iii) the inability to
determine time and route of virus exposure in the cats,
and (iv) the inability to confine free - roaming cats for
observation similar to dogs (Jessup and Stone, 2010;
Brown et al., 2011). Additionally, Murray et al. (2009)
reported rabies cases in 22 (2%) of vaccinated cats,
including two cats classified as currently vaccinated, indi-
cating that vaccine failures can occur. Moreover, TNR
advocates are unlikely to administer rabies immunization
of all free - roaming cats. This is significant because one
rabid cat in an aggressive (i.e. furious rabies) condition
can lead to multiple exposure events because furious
rabid animals often seek potential hosts to bite. Rabid
cats were found to exhibit aggressive behaviour (55% of
cases) more frequently than dumb behaviour, which is in
contrast to rabid dogs which only displayed aggressive
behaviour in 33% of cases (Eng and Fishbein, 1990).
Moreover, rabid cats were significantly more likely than
rabid dogs to bite a person (62% vs. 36 %) (Eng and
Fishbein, 1990).
2 ® 2012 Blackwell Verlaq GmbH • Zoonoses and Public Health
R. W. Gerhold and D. A. Jessup
In vaccination studies, it was demonstrated that feline
leukaemia virus (FeLV) - infected cats may not be able to
mount adequate immune response to some rabies vaccines
(Franchini, 1990). The author indicated that FeLV- infected
cats should be confined strictly indoors to prevent spread
of FeLV to other cats in the neighbourhood and if left out-
side in areas at risk of rabies, FeLV - positive cats should
receive more frequent rabies vaccination (every 6 months).
In a prospective study of FeLV and feline immunodefi-
ciency virus (FIV) in Canada, the authors noted that 6%
(n = 14) of free - roaming cats were FeLV seropositive,
whereas only 2% (n = 4) of owned cats were FeLV sero-
positive (Little, 2011). The risk of being seropositive for
either virus was most frequently associated with being free -
roaming, followed by having access to outdoors. Owing to
the threat of rabies exposure as documented above, the
2011 Compendium of Animal Rabies Prevention and Con-
trol states that stray animals including cats should be
removed from the community through local health depart-
ments and animal control officials (Brown et al., 2011).
Free- roaming cat behaviour
An investigation of the demographic differences of urban
groups of neutered and sexually intact free - roaming cats
following a TNR procedure disclosed that the neutered
groups increased significantly compared to intact groups
because of higher immigration and lower emigration
(Gunther et al., 2011). Additionally, the authors noted
that sexually intact adult cats immigrated into the neu-
tered groups at a significantly higher rate than the sexu-
ally intact groups. These immigrating cats were not
tame and succeeded to integrate into the group, which
highly suggests that these were free - roaming cats and not
abandoned house cats. In addition, kitten survival in the
neutered groups was significantly higher than in the
unneutered groups. The authors suggested that immigrat-
ing sexually intact females had increased fertility along
with increased survivorship of kittens as a population
compensation response to neutered individuals. These
data suggest that neutered cat groups act as attractant of
sexually intact free - roaming cats, thus negating the belief
that TNR programme leads to decrease in free - roaming
cat populations. In a separate study, free - roaming cats
changed movement patterns and habitat on a seasonal
basis compared to owned cats (Horn et al., 2011). Inter-
estingly, the free - roaming cats used more grasslands and
urban areas than predicted because of available habitat.
Although the owned cats were neutered, it was not con-
sidered a reason for the movement pattern differences
because in a separate investigation, Guttilla and Stapp
(2010) did not find a significant difference between the
movement of neutered cats and intact cats. These data
Zoonoses and Free - Roaming Cats
suggest that immigrating and habitat switching of unvac-
cinated cats may severely limit the protection offered by
vaccination of TNR processed cats and would not abate
the zoonotic threat of rabies in these groups.
Secondary mesocarnivore impacts
Free - roaming cat colony feeding stations attract wild
mesocarnivores (Gehrt, 2003), potentially exacerbating
human rabies exposure incidents. Raccoons, bats, skunks
and various fox species are the wildlife species most fre-
quently infected with rabies, depending on the region of
the United States. By attracting mesocarnivores, feeding
stations likely increase the potential interaction between
humans and mesocarnivores, leading to a greater public
health risk of exposure to rabies. Furthermore, raccoons
harbour an intestinal nematode parasite, Baylisascaris
proryonis (i.e. raccoon roundworm), that has caused mor-
bidity and mortality in humans, especially children (Kaza-
cos, 2001). Infections occur after accidental ingestion of
the microscopic B. proryonis eggs containing embryonated
larvae followed by larvae migration (i.e. larval migrans)
through visceral organs, eyes and brain. The geographical
distribution of B. proryonis is expanding from its historical
range from Midwestern, Western and Northeastern United
States (Kazacos, 2001). Baylisascaris- positive raccoons have
been found in multiple states in the Southeastern United
States, Canada, Europe and Japan (Kazacos, 2001; Souza et
al., 2009; Blizzard et al., 2010; Yabsley et al., 2010). The
finding of B. proryonis in raccoons only near urban areas
in Georgia (Blizzard et al., 2010) is of particular interest
given that managed free - roaming cat colonies are likely to
be found in urban and suburban settings.
Domestic cats can be a source of infection for native wild-
life. Contact or consuming domestic cats can be a threat to
native predators. Consumption of free - roaming cats by cou-
gar or panther (Felix concolor) poses a risk of FeLV transmis-
sion, and suspected cases of domestic cat - transmitted FeLV
in wild felids have been reported in California and Florida
(Jessup et al., 1993; Cunningham et al., 2008). Genetic anal-
ysis of the FeLV virus associated with mortality in 5 Florida
panthers indicated that the virus envelope sequence was
nearly identical indicating the source or the infection was
likely from a single domestic cat (Brown et al., 2008).
Endoparasities
Domestic and wild felids are the definitive host for several
zoonotic parasites, including the protozoan Toxoplasma
gondii and the ascarid Toxocara cati. Similar to B. procyo-
nis of raccoons, the host defecated eggs (Toxocara) or
oocysts (Toxoplasma) of these parasites are extremely
environmentally resistant (Long, 1990; Kazacos, 2001),
0 2012 Blackwell Verlag GmbH • Zoonoses and Public Health 3
Zoonoses and Free - Roaming Cats
and human infections can occur months or possibly even
years after the cat has excreted the parasite egg. For this
reason, cat faeces - contaminated playgrounds, garden soil,
sandboxes and other outdoor recreational areas may serve
as a source of infection for humans (Holland and Smith,
2006; Lee et al., 2010). The prevalence of T. cati was
higher in urban areas than rural areas, and soil samples
from urban parks contained a higher proportion of
T. cati compared to the canine Toxocara, Toxocara canis.
These data suggest that the higher levels of T. cati are
associated with free - roaming cats in urban areas. Toxocara
cati infections have been associated with visceral and ocu-
lar larval migrans and can result in permanent ocular
damage in infected humans (Lee et al., 2010).
In toxoplasmosis, humans are infected primarily by
ingestion of sporulated oocyst in cat faeces- contaminated
soil or water or tissue cysts in undercooked or raw meat
(Elmore et al., 2010). Nutter et al. (2004) reported a
higher seroprevalence of T. gondii in free - roaming cats
than pet cats, with the lowest prevalence in cats kept
indoors. Similar results were found among free - roaming
cats in Sri Lanka and Seoul, Korea (Kulasena et al., 2011;
Lee et al., 2011). Contact with infective T. gondii oorysts
in cat faeces has been shown to be a primary risk factor
for human toxoplasmosis (Elmore et al., 2010).
For many years, the risk of infection from oorysts has
been dismissed as considerably less common than infec-
tion from ingestion of undercooked or raw meat.
Recently, a T. gondii embryogenesis- related protein anti-
body (TgERP), which is sporozoite specific, has been
developed, which allows for serological distinction
between oocyst and tissue cyst infection given that spor-
ozoites are only present in oorysts (Hill et al., 2011). The
TgERP can be detected within 6 -8 months post- infection
allowing for detection of oocyst infection in acute
stage infections. Of 163 individuals in acute stage infec-
tion, 103 (63%) were positive for TgERP indicating that
the majority of human infection was attributable to
oocyst infection (Hill et al., 2011). Toxoplasma infections
can manifest as ocular diseases, neurological impairment
and lead to blindness, abortions and birth defects, partic-
ularly hydrocephalus, in humans ( Dubey and Odening,
2001). Toxoplasmosis is also a significant risk for individ-
uals receiving immuosuppressive therapy, transplant
recipients and is a major cause of systemic infection and
death for immunosuppressed (e.g. HIV /AIDS) patients
(Elmore et al., 2010). An increased risk of schizophrenia,
autism, Alzheimer's and other neuro - inflammatory dis-
eases has been proposed with T. gondii infection (Fekadu
et al., 2010; Prandota, 2010), but further research is
needed to fully understand the neurological effects of
T. gondii. Toxoplasmosis is also a major disease issue for
wildlife and has been documented in multiple wild avian
R. W. Gerhold and D. A. Jessup
and mammalian species, especially marine mammals and
Australian marsupials ( Dubey and Odening, 2001; Dubey,
2002; De Thoisy et al., 2003; Lindsay and Dubey, 2007).
In addition, toxoplasmosis is an important cause of
abortion in domestic animals including sheep and goats.
In addition to the above parasite species, human infec-
tions with domestic cat hookworms, including Uncinaria
stenocephala, Ancyclostoma tubaeforme, A. brazilense and
A. ceylanicum, have been reported (Bowman et al., 2010).
After defecation, hookworm eggs hatch and the infectious
filariform larvae can penetrate the skin of animals or
human hosts. Infective larvae can cause skin lesions known
as cutaneous larva migrans (CLM) and less frequently
pneumonitis, muscle infection and ocular manifestations.
Occasionally, A. ceylanicum can develop into an adult
hookworm in humans and cause abdominal discomfort
(Prociv, 1998). Several reports of human infections of feline
hookworm infections have been reported from soil under
houses or on beaches that cats defecate upon. Approxi-
mately 75% of free - roaming cats in Florida were positive
for A. tubaeforme, and 33% were positive for A. braziliense
(Anderson et al., 2003). In 2006, 22 people were diagnosed
with CLM at a Miami -Dade County children's camp.
Although free - roaming cats were found in the vicinity of
the camp, the source of the infection was not determined
(CDC MMWR, 2007). In 2010, contaminated cat faeces
was responsible for at least seven confirmed and eight
unconfirmed human hookworm infections in Miami -Dade
County from contaminated beaches (Personal communica-
tion Miami Dade health Department). In both of these
incidents, the County public health department bore the
expense and responsibility of trapping the free - roaming
cats and removing faeces from the contaminated areas to
minimize further human infections.
Ectoparasites and vector -borne diseases
Ectoparasites of domestic cats, especially the cat flea (Cte-
nocephalides felis), are important in transmission of zoo -
notic diseases. Three major flea - associated diseases of cats
in the United States include cat- scratch disease (CSD),
flea -borne typhus and plague (McElroy et al., 2010). Cat -
scratch disease or bartonellosis is caused by the gram -neg-
ative bacterium Bartonella henselae. Cats are the primary
source of the bacteria; however, they are inapparent carri-
ers and thus appear healthy. Animal to animal and ani-
mal to human infection occurs by exposure of an open
wound, from a scratch or bite, or B. henselae-contami-
nated flea faeces. Fleas acquire B. henselae from a previ-
ous bloodmeal from an infected cat. Symptoms in human
with CSD include fever, headaches and regional lymph
node enlargement, and the disease is one of the most fre-
quent diagnoses of benign lymphadenopathy in children
4 0 2012 Blackwell Verlag GmbH • Zoonoses and Public Health
R. W. Gerhold and 0. A. Jessup
and young adults (McElroy et al, 2010). Atypical compli-
cations including encephalitis, retinitis and endocarditis
occur in 5 -15% of CSD- infected humans (Chomel et al,
2004), and recently Bartonella spp. infection has been
associated with chronic rheumatic symptoms, clinically
similar to chronic Lyme disease, in humans (Maggi et al.,
2012). Seroprevalence of B. henselae in cats ranges from
14 to 93% (Nutter et al, 2004; Case et al., 2006; Lappin
et al., 2006), and free- roaming cats had a significantly
higher Seroprevalence than pet cats (Nutter et al., 2004).
In addition to CSD, cat fleas are potentially able to
vector rickettsial diseases including murine typhus (Ric -
kettesia typhi) and a closely related zoonotic disease agent,
Rickettesia fells which are potential human health threats
wherever cat, rat or flea populations are dense (Case
et al., 2006). Similar to CSD, cats are inapparent carriers
of R. typhi, and outbreaks have been associated with
free - roaming cat colonies in Hawaii (Jessup, 2004). Other
reported cases of routine typhus in the United States are
focused in central and south - central Texas and Los Ange-
les area (Adams et al., 1970; Sorvillo et al., 1993). In the
Los Angeles R. typhi focus, 90% (n = 9) of collected cats
were seropositive for R. typhi antibodies, whereas no sero-
positive cats (n = 21) were found in the control areas
where no human infections were reported ( Sorvillo et al,
1993). Flea suppression is the first public health action
often initiated; however, failure to control free- roaming
cat populations can lead to future disease outbreaks.
Additionally, human bacterial diseases including tulare-
mia, caused by Francisella tularensis, and plague, caused
by Yersinia pestis, have been associated with direct contact
with cats or cat fleas (Liles and Burger, 1993; Gage et al.,
2000; McElroy et al., 2010). Approximately, 8% of plague
cases in the United States are associated with transmission
from cats, and cases of cat exposure associated plague are
reported year round where flea - associated cases are gener-
ally restricted to warmer months (Gage et al., 2000). Cats
frequently develop the pneumonic form of plague, which
is considerably more infectious to humans in close con-
tact, and results in rapidly progressive and frequently fatal
disease. Both tularemia and plague can cause various
symptoms and potentially lead to fatal respiratory disease
or multiorgan failure in both humans and other animals
(Spagnoli et al, 2011). It is suggested that in addition to
harbouring infected fleas, cats preying on infected rodents
can contain the bacterial agents of tularemia and plague
in their mouths and potentially transmit the bacteria to
humans via bites or scratches.
Viruses
Cats have been implicated as potential vectors of other
diseases not historically associated with felines, including
Zoonoses and Free - Roaming Cats
SARS and H1N1 and H5N1 avian influenza as evidenced
by natural and experimental infection of domestic cats
(Kuiken et al., 2004; Songserm et al, 2006; Thiry et al,
2007; Anonymous, 2011). In the experimentally infected
cats, excreted virus was transmitted to sentinel cats dem-
onstrating horizontal transmission and suggesting cats
can be involved in epidemiology and transmission of the
virus (Kuiken et al., 2004). Cats have been infected with
H5N1 through ingestion or dose contact of infected birds
as well as intratracheal and intra -oral infection of a
human isolated virus strain ( Thiry et al, 2007). Addition-
ally, cats have been found to be subdinically infected with
H5N1 (Leschnik et al., 2007), and more research is
needed to determine the role cats may play in the epide-
miology and spread of avian influenza.
Conclusion
The information in this review highlights the serious pub-
lic health diseases associated with free - roaming cats and
underscores the need for increased public health attention
directed towards free - roaming cats. Diseases including
rabies, toxoplasmosis, cutaneous larval migrates and vari-
ous vector -bonne diseases have been shown to be associ-
ated with free - roaming cats. Rabies exposure in human is
disproportionally associated with free - roaming cats com-
pared to other domestic animals. This fact should be of
paramount concern to public health officials because of
the high mortality rate of clinical rabies and the signifi-
cant cost of PEP in exposed people. Furthermore, TNR
programmes can increase immigration and kitten recruit-
ment, which would lead to naive populations of cats that
would be a source for zoonotic diseases including
rabies and toxoplasmosis. While citizens who are con-
cerned about the perceived improved welfare of cats in
TNR programmes may be very vocal in their support of
free - roaming cat populations, local, county and state
legislative and medical officials need to understand the
economic and public health threats associated with
various policies and laws associated with free - roaming cat
populations. Further resources are needed to educate the
public, the medical community and public health officials
about the zoonotic disease potential associated with free -
roaming cats.
References
Adams, W., R. Emerson, and J. Brooks, 1970: The changing
ecology of murine (endemic) typhus in Southern California.
Am. J. Trap. Med. Hyg. 19, 311 -318.
Anderson, T. C., G. W. Foster, and D. J. Forrester, 2003:
Hookworms of feral cats in Florida. Vet Pamsitol. 115,
19 -24.
0 2012 Blackwell Verlag GmbH • Zoonoses and Public Health 5
Zoonoses and Free - Roaming Cats
Anonymous, 2011: H1N1 influenza turns up again in cats.
J. Am. Vet. Med. Assoc. 238, 964.
Blanton, J. D., K. Robertson, D. Palmer, and C. Rupprecht,
2009: Rabies surveillance in the United States during 2008.
J. Am. Vet. Med. Assoc. 235, 676 -689.
Blanton, J., D. Palmer, J. Dyer, and C. Rupprecht, 2011: Rabies
surveillance in the United States during 2010. J. Am. Vet.
Med. Assoc. 239, 773 -783.
Blizzard, E., C. Davis, S. Henke, D. Long, C. Hall, and M.
Yabsley, 2010: Distribution, prevalence, and genetic charac-
terization of Baylisascaris procyonis in selected areas of
Georgia. J Parasitol. 96, 1128 -1133.
Bowman, D. D., S. P. Montgomery, A. M. Zajac, M. L.
Eberhard, and K. R. Kazacos, 2010: Hookworms of dogs
and cats as agents of cutaneous larva migrans. Trends
Parasitol. 26, 162 -167.
Brown, M., M. Cunningham, A. Roca, J. Troyer, W. Johnson,
and S. O'Brien, 2008: Genetic characterization of Feline
Leukemia virus from Florida Panthers. Emerg. Infect. Dis.
14, 252 -259.
Brown, C., L. Conti, P. Ettestad, M. Leslie, F. Sorhage, and B.
Sun, 2011: Compendium of animal rabies and control, 2011.
J. Am. Vet. Med. Assoc. 239, 609-617.
Case, J. B., B. Chomel, W. Nicholson, and J. E. Foley, 2006:
Serological survey of vector -borne zoonotic pathogens in
pet cats and cats from animal shelters and feral colonies.
J Feline Med. Surg. 8, 111 -117.
CDC Morbidity, Mortality Weekly Report, 2007: Outbreak of
cutaneous larva migrans at a children's camp - Miami,
Florida, 2006. 54, 1285 -1287.
CDC Morbidity, Mortality Weekly Report, 2012: Recovery of
a patient from clinical rabies- California, 2011. 61, 61 -65.
Childs, J. E., 1990: Urban cats: their demography, population -
density, and owner characteristics in Baltimore, Maryland.
Anthrozoos 3, 234 -244.
Chomel, B., H. J. Boulouis, and E. B. Breitschwerdt, 2004: Cat
scratch disease and other zoonotic Bartonella infections.
J. Am. Vet. Med. Assoc. 224, 1270 -1279.
Cole, D., and L. Atkins, 2007: Rabies: the epidemic continues
in Georgia. Ga. Epidemiol. Rep. 232 1-4.
Cunningham, M., M. Brown, D. Shindle, S. Terrell, K. Hayes,
B. Ferree, R. T. McBride, E. Blankenship, D. Jansen, S.
Citino, M. Roelke, R. Kiltie, J. Troyer, and S. O'Brien, 2008:
Epizootiology and management of feline leukemia virus in
the Florida puma. J. Wildl. Dis. 3, 537 -552.
De Thoisy, B., M. Derl C. Aznar, and B. Carme, 2003:
Ecologic correlates of Toxoplasma gondii exposure in
free - ranging neotropical mammals. J Wildl. Du. 39, 456-
459.
Dubey, J. P., 2002: A review of toxoplasmosis in wild birds.
Vet. Parasitol. 106, 121 -153.
Dubey, J. P., and K. Odening, 2001. Toxoplasmosis and related
infections. In: Samuels, W. M., M. J. Pybus, and A. A.
Kocan (eds), Parasitic Diseases of Wild Mammals, pp.
478 -519. Iowa State University Press, Ames, Iowa.
R. W. Gerhold and D. A. Jessup
Eidson, M., and A. Bigman, 2010: Terrestrial rabies and
human postexposure prophylaxis, New York, USA. Emerg.
Infect. Dis. 16, 527 -529.
Elmore, S. A., J. L. Jones, P. A. Conrad, S. Patton, D. S.
Lindsay, and J. P. Dubey, 2010: Toxoplasma gondii: epidemi-
ology, feline clinical aspects, and prevention. Trends Parasi-
tol. 26, 190 -196.
Eng, T. R., and D. B. Fishbein, 1990: Epidemiologic factors,
clinical findings, and vaccination status of rabies in cats and
dogs in the United States in 1988. J. Am. Vet. Med. Assoc.
197,201-209.
Fekadu, A., T. Shibre, and A. J. Cleare, 2010: Toxoplasmosis as
a cause for behavior disorders- overview of evidence and
mechanisms. Folia Pamsitol. 57, 105 -113.
Franchini, M. 1990. Die Tollwmimpfung von mit felinem
Leukamivirus infizierten Katzen. Veterinary Dissertation.
Zurich University.
Gage, K. L., D. T. Dennis, K. A. Orloski, P. Ettestad, T. L.
Brown, P. J. Reynolds, W. J. Pape, C. L. Fritz, and L. G.
Carter, 2000: Cases of cat - associated plague in the Western
US, 1977 -1998. Clin. Infect. Du. 30, 893 -900.
Gehrt, S. D. 2003. Raccoon (Procyon lotor) and allies. In:
Feldhamer, G. A., B. C. Thompson, and J. A. Chapman (eds),
Wild Mammals of North America, 2nd edn, pp. 611 -634.
Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Gunther, L, H. Finkler, and J. Terkel, 2011: Demographic
differences between urban feeding groups of neutered and
sexually intact free - roaming casts following a trap- neuter-
return procedures. J. Am. Vet. Med. Assoc. 238, 1134 -1140.
Guttilla, D., and P. Stapp, 2010: Effects of sterilization on
movements of feral cats at a wildland -urban interface.
J. Mammal 91, 482 -489.
Herman, K. 2010. An Update on the Incidence of Rabies in
Pennsylvania in 2010. Pennsylvania Department of
Agriculture, Pennsylvania Veterinary Laboratory,
Pennsylvania Bureau of Animal Health & Diagnostic
Services, Pennsylvania, app.
Hill, D., C. Coss, J. P. Dubey, K. Wroblewski, M. Sautter, T.
Hosten, C. Munoz - Zanzi, E. Mui, S. Withers, K. Boyer, G. .
Hermes, J. Coyne, F. Jagdis, A. Burnett, P. McLeod, and H.
Morton, 2011: Identification of a sporozoite- specific antigen
from Toxoplasma gondii. J. Parasitol. 97, 328 -337.
Holland, C. V., and Smith H. V., eds (2006) Toxocara: The
Enigmatic Parasite, pp. 301. CABI Publishing, Cambridge,
MA.
Horn, J., N. Mateus - Pinella, R. Warner, and E. Heske, 2011:
Home range, habitat use and activity patterns of free -roam-
ing domestic cats. J. Wildl. Manage. 75, 1177 -1185.
Iwasaki, Y, 1991: Spread of rabies virus within the central ner-
vous system. In: Baer, G. M. (ed.), The natural history of
rabies, 2nd edn, pp. 122 -132. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL.
Jessup, D. E., 2004: The welfare of feral cats and wildlife.
J. Am. Vet. Med. Assoc. 225, 1377 -1383.
Jessup, D., and E. Stone, 2010: More on feral cats. J Am. Vet.
Med. Assoc. 235, 7.
0 2012 Blackwell Verlag GmbH . Zoonoses and Public Health
R. W. Gerhold and D. A. Jessup
Jessup, D., K. Pettan, and L. Lowenstine, 1993: Feline leukemia
virus infection and secondary spirochetemia in a free -rang-
ing cougar (Felis Concolor). J. Am. Vet. Med. Assoc. 214,
73 -79.
Kazacos, K. R. 2001. Baylisascaris procyonis and related species.
In: Samuel, W. M., M. J. Pybus, and A. A. Kocan (eds),
Parasitic Diseases of Wild Mammals, 2nd edn, pp. 301 -341.
Iowa State University Press, Ames, IA.
Kuiken, T., G. Rimmelzwaan, D. V. Riel, G. V. Amerongen,
M. Baars, R. Fouchier, and A. Osterhaus, 2004: Avian HSNI
in cats. Science 306, 241.
Kulasena, V. A., R. Rajapakse, J. P. Dubey, P. N. Dayawansa,
and S. Premawansa, 2011: Seroprevalence of Toxoplasma
gondii from cats in Colombo Sri Lanka. J. Parasitol. 97, 152.
Lappin, M. R., B. Griffin, J. Brunt, A. Riley, D. Burney, J.
Hawley, M. Brewer, and W. Jensen, 2006: Prevalence of
Barumella species, haemoplasms species, Ehrlichia species,
Anaplasma phagocytophilum, and Nwrickettsia risticii DNA
in the blood of cats and their fleas in the United States.
J. Feline Med. Surg. 8, 85 -90.
Lee, A., P. M. Schantz, K. R. Kazacos, S. P. Montgomery, and D.
D. Bowman, 2010: Epidemiologic and zoonotic aspects of asca-
rid infections in dogs and cats. Trends Parasitol. 26, 155 -161.
Lee, S. E., N. H. Kim, H. S. Chae, S. H. Cho, H. W. Nam, W.
J. Lee, S. H. Kim, and J. H. Lee, 2011: Prevalence of Toxo-
plasma gondii from feral cats in Seoul, Korea. J. Parasitol.
97, 153 -155.
Leschnik, M., J. Weikel, K. Most], S. Revilla- Fernandez, E.
Wodak, Z. Bago, E. Vanek, V. Beneetka, M. Hess, and J.
Thalhammer, 2007: Subclinical infection with avian influ-
enza A (H5N1) virus in cats. Emerg. Infect. Dis. 13, 243 -247,
Liles, W. C., and R. J. Burger, 1993: Tularemia from domestic
cats. West. J. Med. 158, 619 -622.
Lindsay, D. S., and J. P. Dubey, 2007. Toxoplasmosis in wild
and domestic animals. In: Weiss, L. M., and K. Kim (eds),
Toxoplasma Gondii the Model Apicomplexan: Perspectives
and Methods, pp. 133 -152. Elsevier, London.
Little, S., 2011: A review of feline leukemia virus and feline
immunodeficiency virus seroprevalence in cats in Canada.
Vet. Immunol. Immunopathol. 143, 243 -245.
Long, P. L. 1990. Coccidiosis of Man and Domestic Animals.
CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, 356 pp.
Maggi, R. G., B. R. Mozayeni, E. L. Pultmak, B. C. Hegarty, J.
M. Bradley, M. Correa, and E. B. Brietscherdt, 2012: Barto-
nella spp. bacteremia and rheumatic symptoms in patients
from Lyme disease - endemic region. Emerg. Infect. Dis. 18,
783 -791.
McElroy, K. M., B. L. Blagburn, E. B. Breitschwerdt, P. S.
Mead, and J. H. McQuiston, 2010: Flea- associated zoonotic
diseases of cats in the USA: bartonellosis, flea -borne rickett-
sioses, and plague. Trends Parasitol. 26, 197 -204.
Murray, K. O., K. C. Holmes, and C. A. Hanlon, 2009: Rabies
in unvaccinated dogs and cats in the United States, 1997-
2001. J Am. Vet. Med. Assoc. 235, 691 -695.
0 2012 Blackwell Verlag GmbH . Zoonoses and Public Health
Zoonoses and Free - Roaming fats
Nutter, F. B., J. P. Dubey, J. F. Levine, E. B. Breitschwerdt, R.
B. Ford, and M. K. Stoskopf, 2004: Seroprevalences of
antibodies against Bartonella henselae and Toxoplasma gondii
and fecal shedding of Cryptosporidium spp, Giardia spp, and
Toxocara catiin feral and pet domestic cats. J. Am. Vet. Med.
Assoc. 225, 1394 -1398.
Prandota, J., 2010: Autism spectrum disorders may be due to
cerebral toxoplasmosis associated with chronic neuro-
inflammation causing persistent hypercytokinemia that
resulted in an increased lipid peroxidation, oxidative stress,
and depressed metabolism of endogenous and exogenous
substances. Res. Autism Spear. disord. 4, 119 -155.
Prociv, P. 1998. Zoonotic hookworm infections (Ancylostomo-
sis). In: Palmer, S. R., E. J. L. Soulsby, and D. I. H. Smipson
(eds), Zoonoses, Ist edn, pp. 803 -822. Oxford Medical
Publications.
Recuenco, S., B. Cherry, and M. Eidson, 2007: Potential cost
savings with terrestrial rabies control. BMC Public Health 7,
47.
Roseveare, C. W., W. D. Goolsby, and I. M. Foppa, 2009:
Potential and actual terrestrial rabies exposure in people and
domestic animals, Upstate South Carolina, 1994 -2004:
a surveillance study. BMC Public Health 9, 65 -70.
Rupprecht, C. E., 2002: Rabies: reemergence of the disease.
Compend. Contin. Educ. Vet. 24, 57-60.
Rupprecht, C., K. Stohr, and C. Meredith, 2001. Rabies. In:
Williams, E. S., and I. K. Barker, (ed.), Infectious Diseases
of Wild Mammals, 2nd edn, pp. 3 -36. Iowa State University
Press, Ames, IA.
Songserm, T., A. Amonsin, R. Jam -on, N. Sae -Heng, N.
Meemak, N. Pariyothorn, S. Payungporn, A. Theamboon-
lers, and Y. Poovorawan, 2006: Avian influenza H5N1 in
naturally infected domestic cat. Emerg. Infect. Du. 12,
681 -683.
Scrvillo, F., B. Gondo, R. Emmons, P. Ryan, S. Waterman,
and A. Tilzer, 1993: A suburban focus of endemic typhus in
Los Angeles County: association with seropositive domestic
cats and oppossums. Am. J. Trop. Med. Hyg. 48, 269 -273.
Souza, M., E. Ramsey, S. Patton, and J. New, 2009: Baylisasc-
aris procyonis in raccoons from Eastern Tennessee. J Wildl.
Dis. 45, 1231 -1234.
Spagnoli, S., K. Kuroki, S. Schommer, T. Reilly, and W. Falls,
2011: Pathology in practice. J Am. Vet. Med. Assoc. 238,
1271 -1273.
Thiry, E., A. Zicola, D. Addie, H. Egberink, K. Hartmann,
H. Lutz, H. Poulet, and M. C. Horzinek, 2007: Highly
pathogenic avian influenza H5N1 virus in cats and other
carnivores. Vet. Microbiol. 122, 25-31.
Yabsley, M, E. Blizzard, M. Beck, and S. Harsch, 2010:
Geographical expansion of Baylisascaris procyonis round-
worms, Florida, USA. Emerg. Infect. Dis. 16, 1803 -1804.