An Open Letter to Dr. Mark Stetter, Dean of UC Davis School of Veterinary Medicine Regarding the Million Cat Challenge and Community Cat Programs
By Ed Boks / Jan 27, 2025
Dear Dr. Stetter,
Since its launch in 2014, the Million Cat Challenge—spearheaded by the UC Davis Koret Shelter Medicine Program (KSMP) and the University of Florida Maddie’s Shelter Medicine Program—has sought to revolutionize shelter practices across North America. With its ambitious goal of saving one million cats through strategies like Community Cat and Return-To-Field (RTF) programs, the Challenge has been celebrated for achieving significant milestones.
However, a recent legal ruling in San Diego found aspects of these programs in violation of California’s animal protection laws, raising serious questions about their implementation and impact on animal welfare. Ironically, while the Challenge was designed to empower local shelters with flexible strategies tailored to their communities, it has evolved into a centralized model where national practices are dictated by a few influential institutions.
In fact, in a recent email* you stated that community cat programs are “supported by virtually all major animal welfare organizations.” However, many of these organizations take their lead from KSMP, making their endorsements reflective of your institution’s recommendations rather than independent evaluations. Without rigorous, peer-reviewed research to substantiate these claims, this feedback loop undermines accountability and transparency—both essential for maintaining credibility and public trust.
The Legal and Ethical Implications
In the aforementioned email*, you stated that sterilization and return of healthy adult cats to their original locations benefits shelters by allowing resources to focus on kittens or injured animals. While this may be true in theory, the reality is far more complex. Many cats released under these programs are not feral but lost or abandoned pets—domesticated animals that could have been reunited with their families or adopted into loving homes.
San Diego provides as a pertinent case study in understanding the risks of return-to-field (RTF) programs, not only because of its large-scale implementation but also due to UC Davis’ direct involvement in defending these practices. Dr. Kate Hurley, Director of the KSMP and co-founder of the Million Cat Challenge, testified as an expert witness in defense of the San Diego Humane Society’s Community Cat Program during this landmark case.
Despite Dr. Hurley’s testimony, Judge Katherine Bacal ruled that releasing cats without caretakers violates California animal protection laws, including Hayden’s Law. The court emphasized how these practices expose cats to severe risks—traffic accidents, predation by wildlife, starvation, disease, and human cruelty—raising serious ethical concerns about abandoning animals under such circumstances.
As a leader in shaping national shelter practices, UC Davis must ensure its strategies are supported by independent evidence rather than relying on endorsements from organizations influenced by its recommendations. While reducing euthanasia is a noble goal, it cannot come at the expense of abandoning animals to lives of suffering or violating established legal protections.
Misrepresentation of Outcomes
Your email* also claimed that “community cat programs benefit all cats by giving shelters greater capacity to admit and find homes for cats that are in the greatest need and at the highest risk.” However, there is no reliable data to substantiate this claim. Instead, anecdotal accounts frequently describe injured or deceased cats found on roadsides or preyed upon by wildlife—far from the thriving picture presented. This disconnect between optimistic claims and observable realities undermines public trust and raises serious questions about the program’s accountability.
To ensure these strategies truly benefit community cats, rigorous monitoring systems must be implemented to track their outcomes and evaluate their long-term welfare. Evidence-based practices are essential for determining whether these programs fulfill their intended purpose or simply shift the burden from shelters to communities ill-equipped to manage it.
Financial Accountability
You emphasized in your email* that UC Davis has taken its stewardship of state funds with “the utmost seriousness” and that public and government oversight of these funds has been constant. However, a significant concern remains regarding the use of public funds for these initiatives. The $50 million state grant awarded to KSMP was intended to improve shelter outcomes, not to finance programs that effectively abandon animals to uncertain fates.
Given KSMP’s leadership role in shaping national shelter practices, transparency in how these funds are allocated and utilized is essential. For example, while millions have been allocated for grants and outreach through programs like “California for All Animals,” there is little publicly available data demonstrating measurable improvements in shelter outcomes. Without clear evidence that these programs are achieving their stated goals, public confidence in their administration is undermined.
Calls for an independent audit should be embraced as an opportunity to demonstrate ethical stewardship and rebuild trust. Transparent financial management is not only a procedural necessity but also a moral obligation to taxpayers and donors who expect their contributions to support humane and effective solutions.
A call for reflection: UC Davis must find the balance between Return-to-Field programs and the humane, legal treatment of lost and stray pet cats.
A Humane Path Forward
While the Million Cat Challenge was launched with good intentions, it is clear that adjustments are needed to align its practices with legal, ethical, and humane standards. To address these issues constructively, I propose the following steps:
- Reassess Program Strategies: Convene a panel of experts—veterinarians, legal advisors, community stakeholders, and animal welfare advocates—to review the alignment of Community Cat Programs with California laws and ethical principles.
- Implement Monitoring Protocols: Establish stricter oversight for all cats released under RTF initiatives. This should include microchipping, tracking outcomes, and ensuring released cats have a caretaker to provide food, water, and safe shelter.
- Increase Shelter Transparency: Encourage shelters to reopen adoption centers, enabling families to reclaim lost pets or adopt new ones, rather than relying solely on RTF strategies.
- Conduct a Financial Audit: Perform an independent audit of all funds associated with the Million Cat Challenge and Community Cat Programs and publicly share the findings to demonstrate ethical stewardship of public resources.
- Engage with Communities: Organize public forums where concerned citizens can voice their perspectives and contribute ideas for improving outcomes for community cats while addressing broader shelter challenges.
The Role of Leadership
The Million Cat Challenge and its subsequent Community Cat Programs have reshaped shelter practices across North America, introducing innovative strategies aimed at reducing euthanasia and improving live outcomes for cats. However, their long-term effectiveness remains uncertain due to a lack of rigorous, peer-reviewed data demonstrating measurable success. Addressing these gaps is critical for ensuring these programs achieve their intended goals without unintended harm.
By embracing the recommendations outlined above—such as reassessing program strategies, implementing rigorous monitoring protocols, and ensuring financial transparency—UC Davis has an opportunity to lead by example and set a gold standard for humane animal welfare practices. Through evidence-based evaluation and transparent stewardship, the Million Cat Challenge can evolve into a model that prioritizes both accountability and the well-being of all cats.
Sincerely, Ed Boks
Ed Boks is a former Executive Director of the New York City, Los Angeles, and Maricopa County Animal Care & Control Departments, and a former Board Director of the National Animal Control Association. His work has been published in the LA Times, New York Times, Newsweek, Real Clear Policy, Sentient Media, and now on Animal Politics with Ed Boks.
Thank you ED for such a clear and accurate description of the situation.
I am the concerned citizen, animal advocate and California taxpayer who originally contacted Dean Mark Stetter at UC Davis Vet School about his cruel and illegal kitten and cat dumping scheme. His vet school has sanctioned and promoted this scheme all across the country, advocating the dumping of MILLIONS of tame, friendly, lost cats and kittens to their deaths on our streets. San Diego is but one of his pet shelters following their advice.
Recently, the “community cat” scheme was ruled illegal after a long court battle here in San Diego: Pet Assistance Foundation vs San Diego Humane Society. I watched many days as San Diego Humane Society called witness after witness to say what a wonderful idea this cat abandonment scheme was. One of the defendants star witnesses, spent nearly 3 days on the stand, she was Kate Hurley from UC Davis Vet School who claimed that cats and kittens are actually “Thriving in the new outdoor homes”. After unceremoniously being dumped. Yet, in the next breath she had to admit cats not a single cat was microchipped or followed up in ANY way whatsoever.
How could Kate Hurley, a licensed veterinarian, who is clearly violating her Veterinary Oath lie and claim to know what was happening to the cats? Our San Diego community knows… a quick visit to the app “Next Door” has hundreds of horror stories from all across the county, about those dumped cats, they are hit by cars, half eaten by coyotes, chased by dogs, starving, eating rats that were poisoned being poisoned secondarily, owls are carrying them away….. people who hate cats are taking matters into their own hands.
In my naivety, I thought perhaps Dean Stetter wasn’t aware of the ruling, or that he might have had a “come to jeezus moment” about the obvious cruelty and inhumanity of such a scheme. NOPE. Says he isn’t going to stop even as it has been ruled illegal. His “animal welfare experts” and research know better. Apparently, they are all ABOVE THE LAW.
Follow the money.
Maybe this is going to have to be a case that is won in the court of public opinion. Donors and taxpayers are going to need speak up and stop funding these organizations who engage in legalized animal cruelty while collecting hundreds of millions. Stop funding these organizations who openly violate animal protection laws.
For reference, Dr. Stetter’s actual email is included below to provide context for the open letter.
From: Mark D Stetter
Date: January 24, 2025 at 10:47:49?AM PST
Subject: Re: Million Cat Challenge
Dear Ms. Haslet,
Thank you for your concern for the cats in San Diego. Sterilization and return of healthy adult cats to the location where they were found, as part of a comprehensive community cat program, is supported by virtually all major animal welfare organizations in the United States. Community cat programs benefit all cats by giving shelters greater capacity to admit and find homes for cats that are in the greatest need and at the highest risk, such as young kittens and cats that are sick or injured.
UC Davis’ Koret Shelter Medicine Program has taken the stewardship of the allocated state funds with the utmost seriousness, and in direct accord with the legislature’s mandate. Public and government oversight of the funds has been a constant since the funds were made available.
I hope this provides helpful context.
Mark Stetter, DVM, Dipl. ACZM Dean and Professor UC Davis School of Veterinary Medicine