Search

Urban free-roaming cats create concern about their impacts on wildlife and human health, leading to the use of trap–adopt–kill methods to manage these populations. This method is ineffective at decreasing the free-roaming cat population and has a negative impact on cat caregivers’ well-being. Using semi-structured interviews, this study explored the relationship that semi-owners (people who feed cats but do not perceive ownership) and owners of multiple cats have with the cats they care for, and the social and psychological impacts of an alternative assistive-centered approach to urban cat management. This approach to semi-owned and owned cats provided free sterilization and preventative healthcare. Our findings demonstrate that the caregivers had a strong emotional bond with the cats they cared for. The caregivers also experienced a positive impact on their quality of life, and indicated an improvement in the cats’ welfare after having the cats sterilized through this program. Additionally, the cat caregivers indicated that they had a negative view of agencies, such as the municipal council. It is recommended that an assistive-centered approach to urban cat management be prioritized by local councils and welfare agencies to improve caregivers’ quality of life and psychological well-being, whilst also improving cat welfare. The implementation of this assistive-centered management approach could improve the relationship between communities and the agencies involved, leading to the continuous reporting of free-roaming cats for sterilization. This assistive-centered approach has the potential to reduce the free-roaming cat population, their effects on wildlife, nuisance complaints, and council impoundments, and is aligned with the One Welfare philosophy.

In urban and peri-urban areas of the world, free-roaming cats often pose management challenges for authorities. Most are wandering owned or semi-owned cats (fed by people who do not perceive ownership). Some are lost or abandoned, or unowned cats who obtain food from humans unintentionally. Unidentified cats are classified as “stray” in shelter data, and by government agencies as “stray” or “feral” based on their behaviour. However, legally feral cats are usually considered to live and reproduce in the wild with no support from humans. Cats classified as feral in Australia can be managed using lethal methods, including shooting, poisoning, trapping, and blunt trauma. The impact of killing animals on shelter staff is well documented. However, no previous research has investigated psychological impacts of lethal cat management on citizens who care for free-roaming cats. Using semi-structured interviews, this study explored the lived experience of six cat caregivers affected by lethal management of cats by shooting, instigated by the Port of Newcastle in 2020. Results demonstrated strong relationships between the caregivers and cats, and negative impacts on caregiver psychological health and quality of life associated with lethal management. It is recommended that a care-centred approach to cat management be prioritized in future, whereby authorities aid neutering and, if possible, adoption, to improve cat welfare, minimize cat nuisance complaints, and reduce psychological hazards to caregivers. Further, a revision of relevant legislation used to distinguish between domestic and feral cats in Australia should be actioned to prevent unnecessary killing of domestic cats.

The development of a therapeutic alliance represents one of the most important processes that occurs in psychological therapy and is one of the strongest predictors of treatment outcome. To ensure the effective delivery of psychological interventions, it is important to explore factors which may improve the therapeutic alliance. There are well-documented effects of human–animal interactions in social settings, and researchers have also considered the effect of dog presence on the therapeutic alliance. A systematic review was conducted in accordance with the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) checklist. Database searches included CINAHL, Cochrane, Embase, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and Scopus. The inclusion criteria were studies that assessed the effect of dog presence on the therapeutic alliance and provided a quantitative outcome measure. Six studies met the inclusion criteria and were included in the systematic review. Three of the included studies observed no significant effect of dog presence on the therapeutic alliance; three studies did observe a positive effect, with effect sizes ranging from d = 0.10 to d = 0.58. All six studies took place in either research or clinical settings. Studies differed in terms of help-seeking versus non-help-seeking populations, where help-seeking populations were genuinely pursuing a psychological intervention. Heterogeneity was observed regarding study procedure and outcome measures used. Current data is limited, and initial evidence suggests that the effect of dog presence on the therapeutic alliance remains unclear, illustrated by inconsistent outcomes across the included studies. Further research is warranted before introducing dogs into therapeutic settings for this purpose.