Lord, L. K. (2008). Attitudes toward and perceptions of free-roaming cats among individuals living in Ohio. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association, 232(8), 1159-1167.
Objective—To characterize attitudes toward and perceptions of free-roaming cats among individuals living in Ohio.
Design—Cross-sectional study.
Sample Population—Households in Ohio.
Procedures—A random-digit–dial telephone survey was performed, and 1,250 households were contacted.
Results—703 of the 1,250 (56.2%) households completed interviews. Five hundred fifty-three (78.7%) participants reported seeing free-roaming cats at least occasionally, and 184 (26.2%) reported having fed free-roaming cats during the previous year. However, only 42 (22.8%) participants who fed free-roaming cats had ever taken one to a veterinarian, and 43 (23.4%) participants who fed free-roaming cats reported that at least one of the free-roaming cats had produced a litter in the preceding year. Differences existed between cat owners and other participants and among urban, suburban, and rural residents in regard to their attitudes toward free-roaming cats and the need for government regulations.
Conclusions and Clinical Relevance—Results suggested that free-roaming cats were common in Ohio, but that attitudes toward and perceptions of free-roaming cats differed between cat owners and other participants and among participants grouped on the basis of residential area. Thus, developing statewide approaches for regulating free-roaming cats may be challenging or unrealistic.
Objective—To characterize attitudes toward and perceptions of free-roaming cats among individuals living in Ohio.
Design—Cross-sectional study.
Sample Population—Households in Ohio.
Procedures—A random-digit–dial telephone survey was performed, and 1,250 households were contacted.
Results—703 of the 1,250 (56.2%) households completed interviews. Five hundred fifty-three (78.7%) participants reported seeing free-roaming cats at least occasionally, and 184 (26.2%) reported having fed free-roaming cats during the previous year. However, only 42 (22.8%) participants who fed free-roaming cats had ever taken one to a veterinarian, and 43 (23.4%) participants who fed free-roaming cats reported that at least one of the free-roaming cats had produced a litter in the preceding year. Differences existed between cat owners and other participants and among urban, suburban, and rural residents in regard to their attitudes toward free-roaming cats and the need for government regulations.
Conclusions and Clinical Relevance—Results suggested that free-roaming cats were common in Ohio, but that attitudes toward and perceptions of free-roaming cats differed between cat owners and other participants and among participants grouped on the basis of residential area. Thus, developing statewide approaches for regulating free-roaming cats may be challenging or unrealistic.
No comments:
Post a Comment