Trap-Neuter-Return: A Study of the Practice in Switzerland

4.2.1Reaching Farmers

The public perception of feral cats as “pests,”²¹⁷ or not worth caring about, is a common challenge to those carrying out TNR worldwide, and the next section will look at the difficulties posed to Swiss TNR practitioners of these negative attitudes in general. It is worth, however, highlighting the specific challenge of overpopulation among “chats de ferme”, or cats living on or near farms in Switzerland, and the attitudes of farmers themselves. This issue was mentioned by almost all key informants, and it appears in the public materials of NGOs as well.²¹⁸ One issue seems to be the outmoded notions that certain farmers (as well as members of the general population)²¹⁹ retain about cat castration: for example, that neutered animals will become “lazy” or lose their ability to hunt mice; that they will not be “normal” if they do not go through the process of bearing at least one litter; or that nature will “take its course” and keep the feral cat population in check without human intervention – notions that, as both Swiss NGOs and veterinarians have sought to point out, are not confirmed by scientific research.²²⁰ Another challenge is the concern farmers may have about the financial costs of spaying and neutering, and that, as mere “tools” to catch mice, feral cats are not worth spending money on, either for neutering or for medical care if they become sick.

In response to these issues, Swiss groups have made particular efforts to reach farmers and convince them of the benefits of TNR. To combat common misconceptions about neutering cats, as well as to lay out the arguments in favor of TNR, several NGOs that carry out TNR publish and distribute brochures (with titles such as “Cats on the Farm: Together for Healthy Cats”) aimed specifically at convincing farmers to spay and neuter their cats.²²¹ To address financial concerns, some NGOs and PSA sections organizing castration campaigns around Switzerland provide vouchers, defraying the cost of neutering for farmers who agree to castrate their cats.²²² As one PSA section has asserted in relation to the vouchers offered to farmers, “often this financial support is the spark that drives many farmers to sterilize cats in their domain.”²²³

In other cases, an NGO providing TNR might ask farmers to contribute financially to neutering cats trapped on or near their farms, but will cover the cost if the farmer cannot, or will not, do so. One key informant reported that her animal welfare foundation works specifically with local organizations that are already in contact with farmers due to the challenges of engaging them on spaying and neutering farm cats. She emphasized the crucial role of veterinarians in offering castration to farmers (free of charge, with her foundation covering the cost), because, as she put it, “farmers trust vets, but not animal welfare groups!”²²⁴ The PSA points out that veterinarians know the farmers in their region, and when they go to a farm to provide care for livestock, some will also distribute flyers on spaying and neutering cats.²²⁵ Notably, since 2015, two organizations – the PSA and the Union Suisse des Paysannes et des Femmes Rurales (Swiss Union of Female Farmers and Rural Women, hereafter USPF) – have carried out a joint publicity campaign on TNR. The USPF, which has 28 cantonal sections and over 57,000 individual members,²²⁶ distributes an informational leaflet yearly to its membership and posts it on its home page and on Facebook.²²⁷

It is important to nuance the picture around farmers. Several interviewees were clear that, as with any group of people, there is variation among farmers, with some supporting TNR and the groups that conduct it. Anecdotally, it was noted that younger farmers in particular seem to have a positive attitude toward neutering cats. In the canton of Geneva, while feral cats are reportedly under control in the countryside “thanks to the good collaboration of farmers,” it is in the city where problems of overpopulation persist.²²⁸ This is in marked contrast to other cantons, where hot spots are more likely to be around farms.²²⁹ But even in more rural cantons, recent press articles indicate that at least some farmers are moving toward accepting neutering of their cats,²³⁰ and NetAP has been quoted as saying that “there are many exemplary farmers who castrate their cats.”²³¹ In an interesting development, PSA sections together with NetAP have carried out TNR projects with farmers, or their associations, that seem to have led to changed attitudes (toward the positive) among individual farmers as well as, at least anecdotally, a stabilization of the farm cat population in areas where the operations have been carried out.²³²

It is not clear whether these examples are exceptional or if, in a more positive sense, they point to an incipient trend among Swiss farmers. Future research might shed light on this. In the meantime, real challenges remain; as some key informants point out, farmers sometimes still refuse to accept neutering of farm cats even when they are offered the service for free. And cases of brutality, while perhaps not common, do continue in places.²³³ What the foregoing discussion does indicate is that TNR practitioners in Switzerland have formed specific strategies to engage farmers, and in some instances this work seems to be bearing results. Within the ranks of farmers themselves are allies, and TNR groups would do well to continue to find and work with these.

4.2.2Working with Local Authorities

With regard to local authorities, as mentioned earlier, the extent to which cantons or communes carry out or financially support castration campaigns is unknown.²³⁴ As also outlined, groups carrying out TNR — S. 81 —sometimes come up against local authorities who are opposed, or not particularly helpful, to TNR initiatives, or who arbitrarily withhold or grant permission for castration campaigns in a way that makes the work even more difficult than it already is. The research did find two examples in which TNR practitioners have succeeded in creating constructive relationships with local authorities that have allowed, or promise to allow in the future, for the advancement of castration campaigns. These are important instances, because while one could argue that they apply only in one canton or one commune, and that they would not necessarily be achievable in other parts of the country, they could have a demonstration effect for others conducting TNR in Switzerland.

In the first example, two NGOs practicing TNR in the canton of Geneva have formed an agreement with state authorities that allows them to conduct feral cat castration campaigns in the canton. The arrangement began in 2010, when SOS Chats, a section of the PSA, and the Société Genevoise pour la Protection des Animaux (hereafter, SGPA, which is not a section of the PSA), decided to work together in this area (SOS Chats had already been conducting TNR on its own for many years; SGPA had also conducted a sterilization program before 2010 but the two had not previously collaborated in this work). The NGOs eventually created a formal, written accord with the cantonal veterinary office of Geneva (Service de la Consommation et des Affaires Vétérinaires, hereafter SCAV) and the Société des Vétérinaires Genevois to carry out TNR throughout the canton and to treat sick or injured cats to the extent possible. The NGOs split the labor of TNR, trapping cats themselves as well as lending traps to individuals or groups of residents. They have negotiated financial discounts for the surgery with three private veterinary clinics, and residents monitor released cats on an ongoing basis.²³⁵

SOS Chats and SGPA cover the cost of the neutering, with SOS Chats receiving some money for this annually from the PSA. Unusually, the initiative includes microchipping the cats that have been through TNR; SCAV pays for part of the cost of vaccination and of the microchip, as well as taking care of the administrative work of registering the microchipped cats with ANIS, the centralized companion animal database. The chip indicates the cat’s age, date of vaccination, the postal code of the location where the cat was captured, and the fact that the animal is registered to the canton.²³⁶

The program is innovative on several levels, and appears to be unique in Switzerland. First, it is truly multi-stakeholder, involving NGOs, private veterinarians, residents and governmental authorities. The government’s level of participation – not simply allowing the operations but being an involved party that collaborates willingly – is noteworthy. Second, it is highly unusual that the government has a formal agreement to pay for part of the program – specifically, contributing towards microchipping and vaccination

–and to register the microchipped feral cats in the ANIS database. Third, the microchipping element itself is unusual for TNR programs in Switzerland, and possibly for other countries, as well. In her study of the legal status of street cats in Spain, France and the UK, Dufau concluded that it is quite uncommon to find laws referring to the identification of “street cats” (“gatos callejeros”) as an aspect of managing these populations.²³⁷ The Geneva TNR program is not a law, but even as a formal program, it stands out.

The president of SOS Chats, Valérie Derivaz, notes that the program is marked by a good working relationship among the different players, with the governmental authorities agreeing with the NGOs that community cats are not to be poisoned or killed, thus presenting a coherent and strong message to the public. The authorities also direct residents’ complaints about these cats to the two NGOs, which work to find solutions that will not harm the cats. Derivaz cites healthier cats, a more stable population in the canton, a good level of surveillance of the cats, and a heightened public awareness about their presence, as signs that the TNR program is working.²³⁸

On a smaller scale, and only recently formed, is a written accord between the SPA Valais and Commune X,²³⁹ in the canton of Valais, to allow castration campaigns. Manuela Roux, the official volunteer of SPA Valais (see above), has formed many informal partnerships with communes in the canton to allow for TNR take place. These have been “relations of trust” (“relations de confiance”), not committed to writing; — S. 82 —with these partnerships, once she has obtained the initial informal permission of a commune to conduct castration campaigns, she can continue working with local residents on an ongoing basis to manage local cat colonies (as noted earlier, this is not necessarily the experience of other TNR practitioners, who, depending on the commune or canton, must sometimes repeatedly ask permission from the police or local authorities to enter an area to trap cats for neutering.)²⁴⁰

In the case of Commune X, the written accord came out of a difficult experience. Roux had responded to residents’ requests for help with an overpopulation of feral cats in the commune. Her efforts to discuss the requests with the police and the communal authorities went unanswered, and villagers were willing to pay for one-third of the cost of the castration campaign (with the rest covered by the SPA Valais and veterinarians), so the operation went forward. The authorities were angered, though they had not responded when originally approached for permission, and they summoned Roux and the SPA Valais to a meeting.²⁴¹

After months of negotiation, the parties eventually signed an accord that authorizes Roux, as the official volunteer of the SPA Valais, to conduct spay and neuter campaigns on their communal territory. It also acknowledges that the cats will be released on their territory, and specifies that the commune will not trap community cats except in case of emergency for seriously wounded cats and that the commune will inform Roux if necessary.²⁴² The accord is beneficial to the police, as they will not have to trap community cats; it benefits the SPA Valais because it provides clear permission for TNR in that commune; and in principle it should benefit the cats because it brings the TNR into the open and normalizes it.

Besides these examples, the research did not turn up similar instances of formal accords with communes to carry out TNR, though it is entirely possible that others exist elsewhere in the country. The two initiatives discussed above owe their existence to careful groundwork laid by the TNR practitioners to establish relationships of trust with local authorities. In fact, both Derivaz and Roux emphasized that constant dialogue and one-on-one communication are an essential part of their work, which includes convincing people of the importance of TNR and pushing back against hostile attitudes toward community cats.²⁴³ Derivaz acknowledges that Geneva is unusual in comparison to other cantons, as it is “evolved” (“évolué”) in relation to animal welfare.²⁴⁴ But perhaps aspects of these examples could provide inspiration to others carrying out TNR in Switzerland. Even if these arrangements are not replicable in their entirety, certain aspects could be drawn on to facilitate TNR in other communes or cantons.