MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2973476369 · doi:10.1080/08927936.2019.1579473

Perceptions of Veterinarians in British Columbia of Cat Management Strategies to Reduce Cat Overpopulation and Impacts on Wildlife Populations

2019· article· en· W2973476369 on OpenAlex
Lauren J. Sherwood, Amy Wilson, Cluny S. South, S.M. Roche, Tanya M. J. Luszcz

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueAnthrozoös · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicHuman-Animal Interaction Studies
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change CanadaUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOverpopulationWildlifeAnimal welfareWildlife managementMedicinePopulationWelfareVeterinary medicineWildlife conservationEnvironmental healthSocioeconomicsEcologyBiologyPolitical scienceSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Free-roaming cats present a multidisciplinary challenge for wildlife conservation and feline welfare. Veterinary professionals are critical stake-holders in the issue of free-roaming cats, making it imperative that their attitudes and perspectives are well understood. In this study, we conducted an electronic survey of veterinarians practicing across British Columbia to evaluate their perceptions of 1) whether cat overpopulation is a concern, 2) the impacts of cats on wildlife, and 3) alternative management strategies for dealing with cat overpopulation. Of the 389 respondents, 56% agreed that cat overpopulation was a local problem, and 91% agreed that veterinarians play a role in reducing cat overpopulation. Veterinarians in rural communities had a greater involvement in cat overpopulation and perceived it as more problematic than their urban colleagues. The majority (70%) of veterinarians reported that they performed early-age sterilization, supported the principle of low-cost spay-neuter services (67%), and 65% of them were involved in these services. Just over half (54%) of respondents reported that they provide permanent identification to cats, typically offering both microchips and tattoos. Veterinarians were less cohesive on their perceptions of the impact of free-roaming cats on wildlife: 53% agreed that after habitat loss cats are one of the most significant, direct causes of bird and wildlife mortality, while 30% were neutral and 17% disagreed. Fifty-six percent of veterinarians felt that keeping cats indoors would be one of the most effective strategies to reduce cat impacts on wildlife, but they also felt that public education programs and low-cost spay-neuter programs would be effective and more popular with cat owners. Most veterinarians (79%) recommended against unsupervised outdoor access, citing safety and disease risks. Rodent control was the most common reason for not recommending an indoor lifestyle. Overall, our survey results suggest that veterinarians are committed participants in the prevention of cat overpopulation. Conservationists need to focus on increased engagement with veterinarians regarding the impact of cats on wildlife.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.712
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.023
GPT teacher head0.361
Teacher spread0.338 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it