In a sad, stupid, and short-sighted move, the National Audubon Society has decided to suspend their contract with Ted Williams and remove him from his position of “Editor-at-Large” on the masthead. Ted has contributed articles to Audubon Magazine for over 33 years. The reason for Audubon’s actions? He wrote a column, not for Audubon, but for the Orlando Sentinel, in which he advocated the killing of feral cats instead of the use of trap-neuter-release. The column was originally followed by “Ted Williams is editor-at-large for Audubon magazine” but was subsequently labeled as expressing the views of Ted Williams and not those of the National Audubon Society. (It has also apparently been edited by the newspaper since it was originally published to make it more palatable for the crazy cat people.)
What is perhaps most shameful about the statement Audubon put on their Facebook page is how they tried to distance themselves from Ted Williams:
Ted Williams is a freelance writer who published a personal opinion piece in the Orlando Sentinel. We regret any misimpression that Mr. Williams was speaking for us in any way: He wasn’t. Audubon magazine today suspended its contract with Mr. Williams and will remove him as “Editor at Large” from the masthead pending further review.
Mr. Williams is not an Audubon employee. He is a freelance writer and a conservationist who has written for Audubon for 33 years. He writes for numerous publications.
When one of the leading organizations for bird conservation in the United States caves to the pressure of the crazy cat people that is just disgusting. Feral cats kill birds by the billions in the United States and the only real solution to the problem is removal and euthanasia, along with heavy fines for those caught dumping cats.
Ted Williams is one of the few reasons I read Audubon Magazine. I see very little reason to continue doing so if his writing no longer appears there.
Hat-tip to Rick Wright who pointed me to the Audubon statement.
This post has been edited to clarify Audubon’s actions towards Ted Williams.
That’s a real shame.
wow. what a blown opportunity for audubon. Absolutely disgusted by their behaviour on this point (like corey, I found ted’s articles the main reason to read their magazine).
The comments on the audubon facebook status demonstrate a complete lack of understanding of the issue, my favourite of which seemed to suggest Audubon himself would be a TNR advocate and would never kill an animal.
First of all name calling (cat crazies) is a sign of utter ignorance & low class. Anybody who feels they have to resort to this is obviously not sufficiently intelligent to even bother trying to deal with.
Second, killing any animal with poison or promoting that action in people who are too unintellligent to know better is a sick & disgusting action.
I used to admire & like the Audubon Society thinking they respected & loved nature & the environment. It’s disheartening & sad that such a formerly respected organization did not have the decency to take action on this “article” as soon as it was written, It should have never been published & the “author” should have been reprimanded for his cruelty & ignorance before any so called bird lovers even had the chance to read it.
Lauri, it is because Audubon and others respect and love nature and the environment that they are opposed to outdoor cats. Cats are not nature. Audubon had no control over what Ted published in a publication not controlled by them. What is really disheartening is that people like you have been misled into thinking that outdoor cats are natural and should be supported.
Also, toxoplasmosis, which inflicts many cat owners, literally causes them to behave erratically. So “cat crazies” isn’t so much an insult as it is a statement of fact.
I may not be continuing my support for Audubon after this. ABC or the ABA might be a better outlet for my bird conservation dollar in the future.
Touche Laurie!
I agree with you completely. If you are driven to donate to bird associations, Cornell University’s Ornitholoy program and web cams are a worthy association and need the funding desperately. I am not asosciated with Cornell but have a respect for their work.
Oh, yes, and one other thing……an article by Ted Williams calling for the end of poisoning rodents because it in turn killed birds?
One sided if you ask me. It’s OK to not kill rodents by poisoining because it saves his birds, but it’s really, totally ok to kiil cats by poison because they hurt his birds? If his kids went out and killed birds would he kill his kids?
Terri Gordon, aka “Cat lover,” that is the most twisted logic I have seen yet. Cats are an introduced predator that kill native wildlife. Ted wants to protect native wildlife. His belief is that things that cause harm to native wildlife should be prevented.
What does that have to do with his kids? And what kind of sick person brings up the idea of killing someone else’s kids in a comment thread?
I think the cat people would be better served taking an ecology lesson than anything. Their big argument seems to be “people destroy more habitat than anything–we want the cats!” which just shows how much they really care for the environment…
I wonder if we could start a movement to have cats not be allowed outside from this. Dogs aren’t allowed to be off-leash, why should cats?
You should stop trying, Corey. The cat people can’t be reasoned with. It’s been proven.
Terri Gordon is truly nuts. I’m Ted’s son and have legally killed hundreds of birds in my lifetime: woodcock, partridge, pheasant, wood ducks, Canada geese, mallards, green-winged teal, black ducks, gadwall, blue-winged teal, wild turkey, etc. For that I deserve to die? Because I purchase a state hunting license, state duck stamp, federal HIP permit, and federal duck stamp, most of which is spent on wetlands conservation? Excellent logic. Keep on threatening me with my life because my father is advocating conservation of native birds. See where that gets you.
Totally consistent points of views. In both cases he is for protecting birds. If you leave rodents alone owls and raptors will take care of them.
Corey: please provide statistics from a reputable source to support your claim of widespread toxoplasmosis infection.
Do you agree with using Tylenol to kill feral cats? That was the objection. We all have a right to our opinions, we don’t have a right to outright cruelty and breaking the law using over-the-counter medications.
If you read the remarks by Audubon, you will realize this was the reason. “But backyard poisoning isn’t the answer and we want to make it absolutely clear we don’t support that idea.”
If you agree with poisoning animals of any species with Tylenol, you need to question your ethics.
“Euthanasia” and “poisoning” are two different concepts. The advocating of killing cats (slowly and painfully) by feeding them Tylenol was what got the guy in trouble.
I find it rather ridiculous that people involved in the cat community are “cat crazies” but birders who advocate killing cats (either euthanasia or illegal backyard poisoning) are “nature lovers”….
Cats are part of the natural landscape. They have lived outside for thousands of years and cats today can live healthy lives outside. Feral cats are opportunistic feeders, they scavenge in the trash. If they are hunting to provide for themselves, they specialize in rodents not birds. Mammals appear more than 3 times more often in the diet of a feral cat subsisting completely on what he can catch for himself without having access to scraps or refuse or a well managed feeding station. The birds that cats do catch are usually those birds that would not have survived anyway. Rats prey on birds too, Remove the cats and the rat population will spike. Cats are part of the ecosystem. It is about balance.
Trap-neuter-release programs stabilize the population. Low cost spay-neuter programs and increased education about the importance of spay-neuter will reduce the number of unwanted kittens overall. Feral cats are not a human creation, cats have been part of the landscape for 10000 years, but the current “issue” is a human problem. Humans have changed the landscape, pollution, development, deforestation has killed more birds than cats ever will.
Many cat owners with toxoplasmosis ? Really? Educate yourself on the subject please.
Cat owners have almost exactly the same rate of toxoplasmosis infection as any other group. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toxoplasmosis
The NAS has been shown for what it is. It’s about time.
Every comment in support of Williams makes it clearer and clearer that’s got nothing to do with birds – it’s a club for the weird (and all white) guys who used to try shove firecrackers in stray cats butts.
Birds are an excuse.
And it’s already been stated that there are predators on the cats, as well. Advocating poisoning is sick and malicious. Rodents included. I also find referring to people who advocate trap neuter release as “cat crazies” offensive. I love birds, and I love cats. My cats are indoor.
Corey, you seem to see this issue from only one perspective, and there is never only one side to a story. Would you also advocate poisoning all the invasive birds species that are not native to our country and compete with the native species? Which birds are you in favor of letting live and which ones should die, according to your logic?
Cats are nature. Cats are following their instincts. Do we poison birds because they eat worms or bugs. I’m sure there are people that think worms and bugs are more important than birds, but they aren’t advocating poison. Oh, and what about the hunters, fisherman, and farmers, in some way they are all affecting the native wildlife. Do we poison them too? Oh, I’m assuming you have a car? They affect the environment, which affects the wildlife, just pointing out that you too are affecting the world around you, just as we all do, but we aren’t poisoning each other. Lay off the cats. No one is complaining about dogs that do the same thing. Oh, don’t tell me, they are next on the “let’s go poison the animals” list? Just lay off the cats, birds do figure out a way to avoid them.
Holly you are towing the cat crazy line. The whole point is that cats are not indigenous, they are feral, human domesticated animals returned to a wild state. And the cat crazy logic ensues; because pollution, deforestation, and development have killed lots of birds, it’s okay that feral cats kill 2.4 billion per year. The anthem of the cat crazies, it’s illogical.
Agree with Sue. While cats may pose some threat to birds, it’s humans (the “thinkhing ones” – ha ha ), who brought them to America and elsewhere, so basically IMHO he problem should bacfire on humans, on their pockets, time and energy. Also, in North America, small cats are not native, but there’s plenty of predators who work in similar way; on grounds of this I think birds are as helpless with them as with minks etc. The number is the problem – for cats as well (starving, health issues)…
One thing was completely left out of consideration. Neutered cat still defends its terrritory, even though with less vehemence. How does dead cat defend its territory? And people continue to breed even their indoor cats like crazy. Ane cats are pouring out – not only eating birds, but also sufferingin the most undescribable ways. I’m convinced everyone – even indoor cats owners – should pay through the nose for kinda “cats breeding (not neutering) license”. Of course, this is probavly desperately idealistic, as many people would rather dump their animals than spending some few extra dollar or hour on them. I live in Czech Republic and people here still drown kittens, or throw them still alive into trash bins and leave to die… they have big house withe 2 cars and 2 TVs but would not spend a crown or minute on neutering their animals. Btw, I was going birding in areas just rife with cats and they were rife with birds (including rare species) as well … then I walked along the motorway full of dead birds (and cats) killed by cars… every few meters one…???
I think nature conservation should not be rid of humanity. Look at all mankind, what do we dowith nature including birds.. are we better than cats, whom we kinda dragged into this situaitions? I often call for some Homo “sapiens” neutering program, but no killing ! 😀
And when it comes to toxoplasmosis, if you really want to contract it from a cat, you have to eat its feces sesoned for 2 days (yummy). Poorly washed vegetables or half – done meat are much easier ways, co c’mmon:-) BIrds can give you really nice Chlamydia. And humans … just about everytjing. My friend, who leads a vet laboratory, confirmed.
P.S.: I serve 4 indoor neutered cats, foundlings; trapped and rehomed several more. Love them more than most people.. of course, birds too.
P.P.S.: I consider everyone who calls for poisoning of any living being – be it in its proper place in ecosystem or not – a potential monster. Howgh.
excuse tha typos, i’ m half blind, for human Chlamydia (pneumoniae)
“Cats are part of the natural landscape”
Nonsense. Domestic cats? The ones bred to be house pets? I suppose there are arguments (however terrible) that TNR is a legitimate means of dealing with feral cats, but this natural landscape argument is not one of them. Give it up.
oh, it’s here again… 😀 sorry for the spawning!
There is nothing in that link about the rate of toxoplasmosis in cat people. I think the craziness speaks for itself. Clearly feral cat advocates are not rational people.
As I’ve said before on another comment thread:
If you support T-N-R you are supporting the deaths of wild, native species. I would much rather see the introduced, domesticated, unnatural predator removed. If the cat crazies don’t want them killed then they can take them all home and live in cat filth. If not enough cat crazies exist to take all the cats in then they should be trapped and euthanized. If the resources to trap and euthanize feral cats aren’t there then other control measures, like poisons, should be used.
I am beyond appalled and Corey – there are just no words here – calling cat lovers “cat crazies” and teling them to go home and live in “cat filth”. What? Your own defensive replies and writing indicate how uninformed you are – this is just beyond sad. Please don’t call yourself an animal advocate – you are nothing of the sort.
@Sharon Albright: About what, exactly, am I uninformed?
I am a cat lover. I have two cats that are not allowed out of the house. I know that outdoor cats live short, brutal lives and I would not want to condemn any domesticated animal to such a life. It is crazy to support such a thing which is why I refer to folks who advocate for T-N-R as “cat crazies.” If you support T-N-R you are supporting the death of native wildlife and a miserable life for the animals you claim to love.
the answer is …everything. just that. best of luck to you.
I love how hunters with big guns love to throw around the word “conservation”. It’s laughable. So, Ted’s son – you’ve killed hundreds and hundreds of birds all bv yourself – well congratulations. I bet you have them all stuffed and mounted on your wall too – or maybe some big glossy 8 x 10’s? ego, pure and simple.
As a cat, horse, dog, bird and so on person and an individual who teaches logic, I take exception at being called irrational. Whose concept of rationality are you utilizing?? Kant whose logic Aristotlean? Either way if you read his article it is loaded with infomal fallacies and the science he refers to is merely speculative and based on statistical models. However the models employed do not meet the standard of being representative of the cat/bird population. We need some actual hard scientific research. Once that is done any solution to the problem (if one exists) must also be ethical. Arbitary killing is never an ethical solution. If cats killed 4.7 billion birds per year the planet would be void of all birds. FInally, it is arbitrayr and capricious to draw discriminatory lines in terms of life chickens, ducks and geese who are also avian. What is the moral distinction between the bird species that allows humans to kill one species and promote the killing of cats to keep another species of bird from being killed?? The issue requires real science and critical thought not name calling. The so called study that portrays cats as killing billions of birds is contrary to the observation of many individuals whose farms are home to both cats and songbirds and anyone who spends any time at a farm knows that cats fear dive bombing barn swallows and fall prey to hawks and other predatory birds.
With due rsepect, Corey, honsetly, I think tgings coul be said with some decency. Also, I have four cats and don’t live in filth! And I didn’t live in filth when I had birds at home! (Ok, once I had a young rook, fallen out of the nest, and there were droppings everywhere:-) .then it moved to wild animals asylum). Have you ever seen what mess can normal human toddler make? Cats can’t compare to them! Or take a look at the streets covered in spit and worse things.
Ok, cats are introduced species in your place. But people, in fact, too. And moch more dangerous. How many species have people wiped out in America? IS that cats who erased e.g. Passenger pigeon? So go out and kill people on that logic. I see all of this quarrel is somehow rooted in anthropocentrism and washing hands. Also in human need to to go for a little fish instead of the big one – it’s safer, but keeps resemblance with action, huh?
I don’t claim there should be all the trapped cats released. They should be mostly just rehomed. Or kept in some closed areas on people’s expenses (not bird’s). People already spend money on more redundant things. (Still I speak about places where cats are not indigenous… here, where they’ve lived for millions years, situation would be a littke bit less complicated – if not for the threat that people and their devices and infections and “”manmade” domestication triggered cat’s tendency to overbreeding pose for outdoor cats).
As a child i was spending my holidays in 2 villages. In one, there were the huntsmen who killed cats even in people’s backyards. In the other, there were no such things happening, it was more more of a middle of nowhere. Still the cats’ populatoin density was about the same. As I said, dead cat won’t chase the living newcomer out.
Of course, domestic cat belongs strictly to sofa, not to foreign country woods. But when happens otherwise and there is a problem, people are responsible. It’s them who should pay for that, whatever it takes; not cats, who do just what the instinct tells them and don’t have their say in the case. Nor the birds should.
When I have more space, I’ll take more cats inside and keep them inside. And you bet they won’t make the place more dirty than one smoker’s visit (or one baby rook on the sofa – God, that little piggy was cuute! :D)
All of this just saddens me. I usually go here to heal myself from the wolrld…
Ted Williams is one of the few reasons I read Audubon Magazine. I see very little reason to continue doing so if his writing no longer appears there.
You just gave me good reason to stop reading this pathetic blog. Admit it, all you care about is the funds generated by the ads in the sidebar. Cowardly punk.
You are right on. National Audubon has been compromised for many years, and this is the latest example of a bad move on their part. People who care about conserving birds and bird habitat need to support American Bird Conservancy and Cornell Lab of Ornithology. While there are some good chapters out there, National Audubon is nothing more than a big business.
What Ted Williams did was no worse than this cat advocate site has been doing for years, listing various control methods (they also mention asprin, antifreeze, etc) in this large but oppositely positioned article:
http://www.messybeast.com/auspredicament.htm#tradcontrol
“In order to selectively poison cats and exclude birds from the poison bait, the bush-worker developed a specialised baiting device. Built of fibreglass, it relied on the cat to paw out a poisoned bait. This was developed in near secrecy because of the cat lobby which he regarded as misguided but vocal and whom he claimed had to be re-educated. Boiled and smoked liver baits and smoked oily fish set with gelatine were found to be effective. Rather gruesomely, he tested baits on a subject cat kept at home. This was often starved so that it could be tested with different baits.
Live-trapping is only effective in urban areas where the cats are attracted to rubbish dumps etc. Live-trapping requires considerable time and effort and non-target animals should be released. Outside of urban areas, traps are often not checked regularly resulting in the deaths of trapped animals including native animals. Trapped feral cats are difficult to handle and usually while still in the trap. There has been research into improving baits and traps to control feral cats, including visual lures (e.g. feathers) and scented attractants (e.g. tuna oil). A program by the NSW. National Parks and Wildlife service is set to take off to trap feral cats with a sonic trap which gives out cat calls and is scented with cat faeces and urine to further lure and trap the cat. The sonic trap has apparently been 100% successful in elimination of feral cats on an island off the Western Australian coast, however no data was provided on the relative success rates of sonic and non-sonic traps.
Shooting is an opportunistic method, but is ineffective for population reduction in rural situations since cats from neighbouring areas quickly recolonize. Night shooting using a spot light and a high powered rifle (shotgun at short range) can be effective in localized areas. The army have been used to clear areas of feral cats by shooting, but the areas were quickly recolonized from neighbouring areas. Surviving cats were reported to be even more elusive.
…
On the borders of national parks close to suburbia, cat eradication involves poisoning feral and pet domestic cats with aspirin or paracetemol in a bowl of milk. The dead cats are usually found close to the bowl. Antifreeze in milk is also used.
Um, what? You do realize that the person who wrote this blog post (me) supports Ted and is opposed to how NAS handled this, right?
@Antonia: The cat people responsible for getting Ted fired support T-N-R which means more cats out in the wild killing native wildlife. I love cats and wish this problem did not exist but it does. And native wildlife should not have to pay because people feel guilty about the problems we have caused. There are not enough people willing to take feral cats in and most aren’t suitable for adoption anyway. That leaves as the only solution the killing of cats. It’s not the cats’ fault at all but they need to go.
Always a most controversial issue, this topic’s comments never ceases to amaze me! There are some good ones – for both sides, but in the end isn’t it always man who’s responsible for ANY non-native changes to the landscape? Be it wild pigs, giant snakes in Florida gone awry… it doesn’t matter. Man has created the problem every time and is inept at creating an acceptable solution.
A recent blog post titled “I died today” was enough to bring a tear. A woman tried saving an owl who’d eaten a poisoned rat. Not so much that individual owl, it just reflected the big picture of man’s absurdity and overall damage to the planet. There is nothing humane in the word human 🙁
COrey: Die I write anywhere that wildlife should pay for our mistakes? Did you really read what I wrote (I know, that keyboard diarrhoea requires some stronger digestion :D)?
I just point out that whether even when you “clear” the area of cats, and whatever you do with them, new cats will come, sooner or later, because of people still breed them excessively. So basically, tehe should be restriction on breeding – with no exclusion of in/home cats. That’s the root of the problem. MAybe it could also even the cats supply and cats demand. But of course, it would take some sweat and trillions that people rahter spill over some super-expensive, self-celebrating rituals. If there was some peomile of money wasted on rubbish, maybe there would be more money and energy for solution humane both for cats and birds.
No, I don’t think killing cats is more effective than not breeding them. IAnd is it more humane? And poisoning them, or advocating doing so even in the slightest allusion… just inexcusable.
Beth Wheeler… you’re so absolutely right.
Beth – I’m sorry, I choose not to be so cynical. I see a problem in feral cats and I see a solution, and I’d like to work towards that solution for the betterment of wild birds.
With all due respect, I don’t see throwing up your hands and giving up because humans-are-bad-so-nothing-can-be-done as a reasonable way forward for anything. I plan on having several more decades on this earth and I’d like there to be wild birds there too.
I don’t see what the problem is. To make people take responsibility for their pets you just need to treat cats just like dogs. You make people register cats and keep them on leashes outside. Cats found not collared and registered are taken in by animal control. Their owners can pay a hefty fine to get them out. If they are not claimed they are euthanized,
Then you eliminate feral cat colonies either by trap and euthanize or shooting. People who dump cats are fined heavily.
Problem solved. But for some reason we can’t do this because cats are “different”. Nonsense.
Hi Nate, for years I thought I was part of the solution by participating in TNR. Managing a feral colony or two, I can absolutely say the process DOES KEEP the cats from breeding! But if/when the cats are removed, it simply creates a vacuum, where more cats show up. Many of these HAVE BEEN domesticated too, meaning they’ve been dumped by their humans for one reason or another. So once again, the finger points to man’s irresponsibility.
Nothing would be better than an ethical solution for both sides.
By the way… where’s Woodsman on the issue? I’m sure he’d raise a few emotions on here 🙂
In theory Nate’s idea would make sense, but not because “cats are different”. Having the solution fall on any animal control facilities would be impossible due to sheer lack of funding and other very limited resources. You NEVER find the “dumpers” to fine them either.
In the south, many counties can’t even budget for an animal control facility within their own jurisdiction. Unfortunately it’s just not a priority and hardly ever within budget of the more rural areas 🙁
He’s here using aliases. He’s toning down the language and name- calling to pretend to be someone else at the moment. The alter identity will emerge soon. This is common in people with his disorder.
Woodsman was banned from this blog quite some time ago and the URL he commented from is blocked.
With all due respect, feral cat colonies persist because they are fed. Stop providing food and cats will die off on their own. Of course, at that point public health becomes a problem.
So you have these artificially high concentrations of cats that only exist people well-intentioned people continue to provide them with food. It’s truly more humane to kill them off and work to prevent re-establishment.
I’m hugely disappointed in NAS, but sadly not surprised. Controversy like this doesn’t fit their business model and hurts their bottom line.
I applaud Ted Williams for his courage in writing something that he knew would go over like a lead balloon. Maybe he spent 30-some years writing for Audubon for just this moment; he has such influence and maybe he saw this as a good way to get a conversation started and get something done about the problem. I’m sad that NAS has backed away from the table with its tail between its legs. Mr. Williams deserves better and the birds that NAS is charged with protecting deserve better.
Cat owners get an undeserved pass in my opinion… and should at least be held accountable to the same level of responsibility as dog owners.
I appreciate your clear-headedness, Beth. It makes me feel like there’s a way forward here beyond the organizations that look to this issue as an opportunity to fundraise.
Refreshing to read some commentary by ecological literates. Keep it up guys and gals. Science and rational thought processes will prevail in the long run.
As with any highly polarized issue, people have knee jerk reactions when they feel that “other side” has gained some advantage. Corey, forget the impact on cats, why do you think that Ted Williams tylenol comments would have any positive impact on our native wildlife? Any notion that “a cat killed is several birds saved” completely ignores important population dynamics. How would you envision a Tylenol based control program being administered?
Ted’s comments weren’t intended to benefit native wildlife. They were meant to appeal to the raw emotion of people frustrated by the problem of feral cats. Audubon was right, and severally years late, in cutting ties with Mr. Williams.
People who are driven by a sincere love of birds will rightly seek policies that reduce the many threats they face, feral cats included. However, as a community of citizen scientists, we have a higher standard to meet. We should not e driven by blind ideology. Before we propose a solution, we ought to have thought it through. Mr. Williams obviously put no though into his suggestion that tylenol should be part of the feral cat management equation.
Walter Lamb
Corey and Nate vs. the Cat People — Fight the good fight, boys.
Its also important to point out that the feline vet association agrees with many of the positions of Ted Williams, they also have credibility unlike naive cat owners and irresponsible TNR projects
http://www.catvets.com/uploads/PDF/Free%20Roaming%202012.pdf
American Association of Feline Practitioners
http://www.catvets.com
Position Statement
Free-Roaming, Abandoned, and Feral Cats
Overview of the Problem
The AAFP supports the welfare of all cats, and strongly supports public education and efforts to
promote responsible care of unowned, abandoned, and feral cats. The numbers of free-roaming,
abandoned and feral cats in the United States are estimated to range from 70 to100 million.1,2
Ignoring this population has implications for the welfare of the cats themselves, public health,
wildlife and ecosystems.
-Welfare Considerations
Compared to owned cats, the welfare of these cats is significantly diminished. The mortality
rate of kittens born in an outdoor environment can approach 75% by 6 months of age.3
Their life expectancy is often less than 5 years,3
during which time they may have a poor
quality of life. Death from trauma, disease, starvation, and climatic challenges is common.3
-Public Health
Unowned free-roaming cats pose important threats to human health. Zoonotic concerns
include the rabies virus, Toxoplasma gondii, Bartonella spp., Toxocara cati, Microsporum
canis, Cryptosporidium spp., Campylobacter spp., Yersinia pestis, Cheyletiella spp., and
Francisella tularensis.1,2,4,5,6 A comprehensive review can be found in the American
Association of Feline Practitioners 2003 Report on Feline Zoonosis. Human injury can
result in serious trauma and infection.2,4,5 While not eliminated, the risks that unowned
free-roaming cats pose to the public can be reduced with veterinary intervention such as
vaccination programs.
-Wildlife Ecology and Ecosystem Disruption
Free-roaming cats are responsible for considerable wildlife destruction and ecosystem
disruption.1,4,5,6,7,8,9 Free-roaming cats are efficient predators, resulting in significant
mortality of small mammals, reptiles and birds in a wide variety of ecosystems.9
Thus it is clear that all of the above populations (i.e. the public, wildlife, and feline) stand
to benefit from the reduction in population of free-roaming, feral, and abandoned cats.
Patrick – I’m always curious when people opt for this overly simplistic approach to such a complex issue. The labels don’t even make sense. Corey clearly states “I love cats.” So he is, by definition, a “cat lover.” So obviously that isn’t your litmus test for who is on the right “side” and who is on the “wrong” side. Is it whether someone supports or opposes TNR? If so, Audubon didn’t suspend Ted Williams for opposing TNR. They suspended him for clearly suggesting that poisoning feral cats was a good strategy for managing their populations? Do you actually agree with him on that? If someone opposes TNR but also opposes poisoning as a control method, does that make them a cat person and not a bird person? What about someone like me, who has done a big year, does bird surveys and other volunteer work, and simply thinks that the decision of lethal or non-lethal control should be made based on the specific variables of a particular setting rather than a universal ideology? Does that make me a crazy cat person?
This “fight the good fight” mentality really gets us nowhere. It is mindless chest beating. Let’s focus on the end goal of reducing the number of cats in the environment and let’s push for more accountability of all population control strategies. If a TNR program isn’t effective, let’s identify that and make adjustments. If a trap and remove program isn’t effective, let’s do the same thing. Otherwise, we aren’t helping native wildlife, we are just allowing ourselves to indulge in useless self-righteousness.
Walter Lamb
By the way, this is all a little tough for me to swallow because while we’re debating whether we should be poisoning feral cats with Tylenol (a really dumb question that Audubon correctly but belatedly answered), a local ecological reserve I have volunteered for for over a decade is under threat of having a companion animal center built on it.
http://www.ballona.org/annenberg
Any chance that some of the bird watchers here could divert some energy toward this inexcusable attempt to encroach on public open space? And, frankly, cat advocates may want to speak up as well since this $50 million luxury center won’t make a dent in the plight of homeless cats and the money could be spent much more wisely.
Just a thought.
Walter Lamb
I wonder what we should do about all the humans (invasive species) than have destroyed native animal populations by eliminating habitat with our farms, cattle, houses, cities?
Feral cat colonies ( AKA community cats) come form unfixed domestic cats that started as pets. People abandon these cats and they are left to fend for themselves. If you want to make a difference, you need to target irresponsible owners and get those pet cats spayed and neutered, because this problems won’t go away. Another issue is killing pets that happen to get lost. Some of those cats are missing pets, that somebody is looking for! I’m involved in TNR and it really works at controlling cat numbers.
well,
thanks for syad’s link… and what do you think about hist? a pile of lies?
http://www.messybeast.com/eradicat.htm
i must confirm that while i didn’t make any scienticif survey, i visited a few localities with just one or several cats neutered and the number of cats stayed +/- the same, except for one place, where people let their ovn unneutered cats run around (but even there, some 2 cats moved in; one had 2 kittens, of which one was killed by magpies, the other turned into indoor cat. birds everywhere.) in my place, 1 big, alpha neutered male chased all the other cats out quite efficiently. (eventually, he was trapped because of bladder trouble and now lives a life of couch potato. another one moved in. only one. and you bet birds come to cat’s feeders to glutton!)
mabye the efficiency of both methods depends on many factors. but i state once more, we could as well kill people on this environmental basis.
Come on, stop with the slippery slope fallacy. We’re talking about cats. CATS.
Really. Are you people capable of making an argument that isn’t a slippery slope? Because that’s the first thing you guys reach for.
Address the cat issue. Not people. You are just running from the subject.
In another article Ted responds: ““The feral cat community seized upon a reference I’d made to Tylenol, a cat poison unregistered for feral cat control. The sentences, quickly struck by the Orlando Sentinel on the online version (there was no print version) because of comments from feral cat support groups, read as follows: ‘There are two effective, humane alternatives to the cat hell of TNR. One is Tylenol (the human pain medication) – a completely selective feral-cat poison. But the TNR lobby has blocked its registration for this use.’”
Ted is a writer, he chooses words carefully. Where in the above line is he actually advocating illegal acts or poisoning?
Sounds like a good solution and one that I would love to see implemented. To get there, strangely enough, we may have to convince millions of people that cats are not actually babies that should be allowed to go outside and kill native wildlife because “that is just what they naturally do”, but are animals whose only natural landscape is the arid African environments where the domestic cat evolved.
On another note, I find it interesting that some of the cat loving crowd seem to bring up this notion that humans, not cats are the problem (which, in putting the blame on people but taking any blame off of cats seems to support the idea that they actually view cats as surrogate babies). Well, if we were really talking about the effects of humans on the environment, that would be a valid part of the conversation. However, since the subject in this case concerns the effects of feral cats on native wildlife, the only human part of the equation here is the extent to which we allow cats to do this and the solutions we can come up with.
Nate!! Corey!!
For this comments thread alone you deserve to be invited by some birds & birding company to a big, fat, kick-ass birding trip to Costa Rica, or Panama!
Keep it up, boys!
Oh, of course Corey deserves to be invited next year, after our year list competition is over and I won. 😉
Ha!
Wow Corey, way to sound like a Nazi there.
Yes! Godwin’s Law proven once again!
Agree with Kelly Lynn. And I don’t feel like wildlife hater for that.
Nate, but you can’t leave out the human factor out of this. Abandoned/feral cats are problem of human origin. Denying this is burying heads in the sand. You will never get rid of all the feral cats. By either way. We can only diminish the problem – maybe by better anti – abandonment laws – and , in my opinion, indroducing some “anti – breeding ones”. By then TNR can get much more effective than killing, because the remaining (neutered/spayed) cats would take some care of population dispersion.
Btw, sometimes I wonder how emotional can even demand for leaving any emotional factor out get…;-)
I’ve done some research on this topic. First we must remember that TNR is accompanied by feeding 365 days per year and that the feeding is for all comers (regardless of whether they were neutered). That is the reality of TNR. I know the ideal is that every cat in the colony is neutered and new cats are neutered immediately as they are discovered. I’m sure this happens in some locations but it is expensive and rare to be this diligent. So, providing food does two things. It increases the resources a cat needs to survive and as such, it reduces their territory size. Where in the past they may have had to travel a mile or two to find enough food, now they can simply hang out behind a motel and wait for dinner. So the territory it has vacated now becomes open and can provide resources to an additional cat. Where you had one, now you have two. If you neuter that one in the colony, you have not changed anything overall. If however, you stop feeding and remove food sources like unsecured dumpsters you reduce resources and subsequently reduce populations over time. So, if we really wanted effective population reduction we would do TNR (without feeding) AND we would stop feeding outside of the colonies and secure our garbage.
Thanks for cutting through the crap, Bjorn!
Exactly what I have been thinking in the uproar after Ted Williams published his masterpiece: this level of rage and hate against cats has little to do with any rational arguments. So I won’t even bother to waste my time arguing.
I think I’ll do a fun little documentary piece exploring the underlying psychological motives and projections of “extreme cat haters”. I have a few theories as to the patterns that will emerge. Should be interesting.
The guy wants to kill people’s pets horribly with tylenol. It causes the liver to fail over a period of several days.
Eye for an eye, you say?
Well, Corey, when you start making up myths about people being crazy because of toxoplasmosis and say that people can “live in filth” you sound like a fascist freak, weak attempt at dismissal or not.
“To me the problem is simple.”
That’s the problem. To biased, ideologues it’s always simple — just kill something and keep killing. And anyone not mired in this monochrome mentality is to be called “crazy.” Sadly, this behavior is not limited to some bird oriented types such as your self. There’s a killer for every element of nature in the biosphere. Wolf haters sound a lot like you. Seal and dolphin haters sound a lot like you. Some remember the ecosystem and care about all lives in it. Some remember that one is called to greatest good with LEAST HARM. Williams at the least forgot that and so have you…
No one is objecting to a feral cat being euthinized humanly.
The objection is that Tylenol is a slow and painful death for a cat.
No human would want that for themselves.
Your father was obviously angry at cats for killing birds.
If he apologizes and admits to over reacting people just
might be forgiving of this.
Lots of issues with the story on how to poison cats with Tylenol. Yes, bird lovers are upset with what happened. But lets look at this the other way. What if a person who is tired of cleaning up bird poop from their clean car, house, property, advocated putting out poisoned food to eliminate the problem. Wow, bird lovers are upset. Failing to realize what goes around comes around. I have cats and I like birds. I just stopped work on my outside patio when a sparrow nest was built. I’ll restart work when the family has moved on. Just saying both sides need to chill, do what they they can to reduce the problem. And to never, ever, advocate the killing of any innocent animal. Realizing they did nothing wrong, just doing what they do, have done for longer than we have been around. Can’t we all get along?
I agree that better cat abandonment laws are essential.
But TNR does not remove cats from the ecosystem, and neutered cats kill just as many birds over the course of their lives as non-fixed cats.
Trap and euthanize is the only humane option, for birds and for free-roaming cats.
No, he doesn’t.
We’re talking about feral cats, not pet cats. And Williams only states that Tylenol is an effective cat poison.. He DOES NOT tell people to go use it.
Cats and wolves and seals and dolphins.
I feel like I should play ‘One of these things is not like the others”
See if you can guess which one.
And here I was losing steam. Thanks, Jochen.
Bring it on, feral lovers!!!!11!1
Did you read the editorial? You may be surprised that it’s not about how to poison cats with Tylenol.
There is a difference between wild, native birds and feral cats. Leaving feral cats outdoors means the deaths of native wildlife. So leaving cats in the outdoors means that a decision has been made to value the life of a non-native, introduced, domestic animal over the lives of numerous native, wild, animals. The cats need to go.
Are you kidding me? Yes, I am objecting to a single healthy feral cat being killed. Stop misusing the word “euthanize”. Go check your dictionary.
As much as you would like it, repeating silly labels such as “cat crazy” makes them not one bit more true. Yes, you can make yourself feel better in your small group of radical cat haters, but that is about it. You are the one presenting yourself as irrational – loud and clear, for everyone (but your hate mates) to see.
From a psychological perspective, it is truly a feast to observe Corey and his brothers in arms spewing words of hate, while having not the faintest the idea how off the charts pathological they sound.
One more voice in support of removing a destructive invasive species. Is the life of a non-native cat worth hundreds of native birds (some of whom may have declining populations)? Of course not. There are programs like this to get rid of Nutria, where was the outcry when that happened? People’s emotional attachment to cats is preventing them from making rational choices about managing our natural resources, and unfortunately we are at a point where we have no choice but to engage in such management, and that involves making some tough decisions.
Additionally, this post would be more effective if it included links where readers could voice their support of Mr. Williams and this idea in general, like a contact page for the Audubon Society and/or petition.
It’s not really true that TNR always and in alle places requires feeding. I’ll ask a friend if mine, who executes this method on some tens of cats a year for numbers.
Anyway, in alle localities that I I mentioned, cats were fed (only in one case, I was the villain:-) – the cat was one and stayed one; birds didn’t move out – of course, it was no isolated island without predator history) . The number didn’t rise – except for one little park, where the number rose insignificantly. It was probably more about traffic, how much the area was built-up and if people were letting their pets run around and get lost.
Yes, it’s a bit expensive. But so much money is spent on real trifles, that somehow I don’t care.
Cat hunting birds has been so since the beginning of both species. To unintelligently and cruely attempt to murder cats with poisen is unacceptable even to our lower class human race. I am shocked that a wildlife organization would irresponsibly publish such a psychotic rant. Cats are killing birds which are leser in their species and need to be killed off. It is natural and noraml flow of the eco system and always will be. Cats are not the villan here. People that chose to murder animals such as this author and “bird” types that believe this behavior is not natural. People need to educate themeselves on the subject before making statements that one species must due a horribly painful slow death to justify the beliefs of a few extreme people in the bird society. Its a sad state of our society that people even exist that choose murder and do not understand the eco system and the survival of species. If your going to be involved in a wildlife organization you should educate yourself on survival of the species and the natural order of life. I fully endorse the firing of Ted Williams, he is a danger to society and is deranged individual.
Where to begin? Eh, this comment is so poorly written and riddled with errors, misconceptions, and outright lies that it isn’t even worth responding to.
Alexis, please refrain from commenting here until you have at least a slight idea what you are talking about. Thanks!
There’s no need. Just look at the insanity the cat crazies constantly spout. That’s all the evidence I need.
And here we are, 90 comments and still counting, discussing cats when the real issue is how National Audubon treated Ted Williams.
Nate, apparently you failed to read the original article in the Orlando Sentinel. Here is the quote from the original article: “There are two effective, humane alternatives to the cat hell of TNR,” argued Williams.
“One is Tylenol (the human pain medication) — a completely selective feral-cat poison. But the TNR lobby has blocked its registration for this use. The other is trap and euthanize. TE is practiced by state and federal wildlife managers; but municipal TE needs to happen if the annihilation of native wildlife is to be significantly slowed.”
The paper published Williams’ byline as “editor-at-large for Audubon magazine.” Both the Tylenol reference and the byline were changed after the original publication of the article and after the controversy began to explode. I am surprised that you didn’t take the time to examine the story and its history.
@Ted Eubanks: I don’t see him advocating for the use of Tylenol in that quote. I see him pointing out that it would be an option if TNR advocates weren’t preventing its use that way. And if that quote and the of the Audubon editor-at-large byline were the issue then why is Ted Williams still suspended considering that both the quote and the byline have been removed?
All of this “bring it on” stuff is rather infantile and out of place for a community of citizen scientists. We should be striving for results measured by a reduction in the number of outdoor cats preying on birds, not rejoicing in the exchange of inflammatory rhetoric as though this were a Yankees – Red Sox game.
I’m glad that Steve Holtzman at least added a degree of substantive dialogue here by pointing out that feeding, especially in sensitive wildlife areas, is the main ecologically objectionable component of managed and unmanaged cat colonies. That is an issue that we can intelligently discuss.
All of this other name calling and cheering on is utterly useless in solving the problem.
Walter Lamb
@Ted Eubanks – I read the article, pre and post edit. Even if he flat-out stated that that private citizens should use Tylenol to poison cats, which he clearly didn’t, the article is still not about how to poison cats with Tylenol, it’s about the the impact of feral cats on wild birds, and the difficulty of getting anything done in the face of the TNR lobby.
Last post (maybe except fot promised/soight after statistics) under this article and than let me die peacefully and feed me to vultures 🙂
Well, now one person is upset about not talking cats. The other one is upset about discussing cats and not Ted Williams. But the root of both is probably being upset about the outcry against implicite proposing killing feral cats with Tylenol.
Did anyone think about how many of the cats are at the moment sougt after? That they may have kittens? Why is American cat issue compared to cat issue in some isolated places, where there were no similar predators? Corey, did you ever think about the possibility of your cats geting lost? Wil you turn against them at the moment?
I don’t agree feral cat are natural part of ecosystem. But the question is, what is a natural part of ecosystem in 21. century and whether the cats are the only factor. There’s never such discussion against the others. Also, this differs from country to country and depends of history of small predatos there etc.
Probably most of cats feeding occur in towns and cities, not reservations or any kind of protected natural areas. Feeding them where any engangered species – not only birds, but anything that fits into their mouhs – should’n occur in any case. But then again, rare species, intact ecosystems and resrvations are not usually specialties of towns and cities. These localities are not a real native wildlife anyway, there’s much more introduced species than just cats. Then again, we cannot let any abandoned animal starve to death. And abandoned cats usually keep close to human dwellings, at least those who aren’t pushed by hormones. In such cases, I have absolutely nothing against feeding them. Of course, kinda licensed, surveyed, joint with obligatory castration of anything possible and impossible, and, as far as possible, basic vaccination. Of course that feral cats with FeLV, FIV and suchlike, if they’re not adaptable and adoptable by people who’d keep them properly, is better to put to sleep painlessly. As a cripple with Cpn and Lyme, I sometimes envy animals this act of grace 🙁
Yes, expensive. I remember this every time when I see enormous fireworks (killing birds) and trillions of coloured lights in public areas in my city during every holiday or feast.
And of course, the vacuum effect will always be swept off the table.
SO much hysteria … on BOTH sides.
Well, (some part of) bird people, if you keep playing that hardball in your discussions, you’ll lose many sympathies. The same goes probably for some par tthe other side, too . Instead of changing and mutual tuning of knowledge that could possibly lead to some solution – not ideal, cause nothing is ideal, but closer to ideal for all sides.
blah blah blah … i’m dead. vultures come. 🙂
Cat “advocates” say its inhumane to kill cats and yet millions of animals are killed in industrial farms to feed cats which are obligate carnivores – animals must always suffer for cats as the can only eat meat.
TNR cat colonies not only will kill native wildlife for decades to come but they will also sentence millions of animals to a cruel life and death so feral cats can live out a cruel life outdoors and spreading disease and wildlife death for years to come. Addtionally your irresponsible TNR programs have direct responsibility for the environmental destruction caused by factory farming. You have no moral ground to stand on:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eIY6zm_DVWU
Antonia,
Unfortunately, managed feral cat colonies are not just found in cities and town. They are indeed found in nature preserves and in our state parks. In some cases, the colonies are on state park land near the nesting areas of endangered birds. This is what frustrates me the most.
syad, are you a vegan? how many of you are?
I recently read an interesting paper about the psychological issues dominating this conflict. The authors concluded that “because western society’s orientations toward wildlife is becoming more moralistic and less utilitarian, conservation biologists must develop innovative and collaborative ways to address the threats posed by feral cats rather than assuming wholesale removal of feral cats through euthanasia is a universally viable solution. Here is the link to the paper. ://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0044616
Innovative and collaborative are not words that I would use to describe this discussion. Nate and Corey’s predisposition to ad hominum attacks is neither innovative nor collaborative. All that is left are two extremes: the cat crazies, and the cat killers. Surely there is a middle ground.
The reason why that middle ground needs to be found is simple. There are around 50 million feral cats in the United States. TNR addresses a minute fraction of this population. Wholesale euthanasia is socially and politically untenable. Therefore any meaningful solution will require the identification of areas where both sides can work together.
Nate and Corey have done Ted Williams a disservice. Of all of the writers that have written on this topic, at least Ted had the balls to say precisely what he would recommend to control feral cats. Is what he recommends illegal? In most places, yes. Did his opinion piece place one of his clients (the National Audubon Society) at risk? Yes. The mere mention of Tylenol as a cat killer no doubt attracted the attention of Johnson and Johnson. How would you like for your medicine to be associated with euthanasia?
This only strengthens my respect for Williams and for Audubon. Williams engaged in civil disobedience, purposefully or not. He had the cajones to write precisely what he felt, placing himself at risk of losing his position with Audubon.
Audubon did what it had to do. I have noticed all of the comments about Audubon and money. Take a look at Audubon’s check book, and that of Johnson and Johnson. Easy call.
What I would like to hear from Corey and Nate is specifically what they would recommend. Let’s see if either is as gutsy as Williams. Corey, are you willing to have 10000 Birds advocate for private citizens breaking the law? Nate, are you willing to break those laws yourself? Are you both willing to march on Washington and demand a change in the laws? Nate, is ABA going to march beside you?
Alley Cat Allies have mojo. They have political juice. Birders have virtually none. Alley Cat Allies can win this cat fight with ease. Unless you can locate the birder mojo that I have been searching for for decades, Alley Cat Allies and their friends will always win the day.
After all of this name calling and gnashing of teeth, there will still be 50 million feral cats on the loose. My recommendation is simple. Work with the Alley Cat Allies and other humane organizations to determine what scale is needed for TNR or related programs (one that we, perhaps, have yet to think of) to actually work. What level of euthanasia is socially acceptable and politically viable (such as diseased cats)? How can we work with the land resource agencies (BLM, COE, USFWS, USFS, NPS, etc) to have public lands cat free?
I completely agree with working at the local level to develop ordinances that require cats to stay indoors or be outdoors only when in the control of their owner. I do not want loose cats in my neighborhood, just as I do not want dogs crapping in my park. If you own a pet, control it.
Finally, stop the name calling and ridicule. All this accomplishes is a further polarization of an already emotional debate.
One last aside. During the BP fiasco in the Gulf Ted Williams and I engaged in a rather contentious debate. Ted had downplayed the spill, and had criticized Drew Wheelan (working for ABA at the time) in his efforts to publicize the extent of the damage. I had defended Drew, and criticized Ted.
Time has shown, I believe, that Drew had it right all along. In this case, Ted blew it. Every journalist blows it, eventually. My clash with Williams has not reduced my respect for him at all. In fact, I admire anyone who feels so strongly about an issue that they are willing to risk their personal well-being to speak to that issue.
I see little evidence that anyone here has such a level of commitment. Birders bark, rather than bite.
@Ted Eubanks: If you think there is middle ground to be found with Alley Cat Allies you have clearly not been paying attention.
“Wholesale euthanasia” is necessary. That is it not easy to do does not make it any less necessary.
Ted WIlliams did not call for using Tylenol to poison cats. He pointed out that it is one possible solution that is currently blocked by TNR advocates. The fact that you think his pointing out that Tylenol could be used to kill cats could lead to Johnson & Johnson doing, well, you didn’t say what you thought they would do but you seemed to imply legal action. Nothing Ted said could possibly be the basis of a successful lawsuit, much less one against Audubon. Also, Johnson & Johnson is surely savvy enough to realize that suing the National Audubon Society would just draw more attention to the fact that Tylenol could be used to poison cats.
Williams did not engage in civil disobedience. He wrote a column that pointed out that poisoning cats is something for which Tylenol is not registered.
If you can’t figure out what my position is in this from my numerous comments across many media let me spell it out for you clearly so you can understand: I think feral cats should be trapped and euthanized. If that is unaffordable or untenable I think they should be poisoned or shot. Local governments should require cat registration and ban cats from being outdoors and fine heavily those who break those rules (using dog laws as a basis).
Birders would have “mojo” if the biggest national organization, the National Audubon Society, stopped being timid and weak and actually tackled these issues. Sadly, getting dollars from Toyota seems more important to the National Audubon Society than tackling this difficult issue.
And, Ted, I can call anyone any name I want. You don’t get to tell me not to, you sanctimonious, pompous, blowhard.
Finally, Ted, if you knew anything about my background you wouldn’t be questioning what I am willing to do for my beliefs. This birder bites.
I’m sorry Ted, but I find this argument fairly weak. Not that I blame you for not wanting to wade into the muck, but I’ve laid out my recommendations *several times* in the comments above. Trap and euthanize starting with those colonies most destructive to local bird populations. Significant fines for cat dumpers. Registration of cats and leash laws exactly like those of dogs. Education and outreach.
I made no ad hominins, thought I admit I laid the sarcasm on thick at time. Most of my comments were in response to incorrect information and attempting to correct the intentional misinformation pserpetrated by the Alley Cat Allies members with whom you want birders to work. They are, in fact, a group that has managed to cow the very same land management groups you cite into abandoning lethal means of feral management. There are no doubt groups with whom common ground can be found, but ACA is absolutely not one of them.
“Birder mojo” or political juice or whatever buzzwords you want is not something you can just will into being. If it exists at all, it is created in the grass roots by passionate individuals. And Alley Cat Allies does not win the day by virtue of their political juice, they win it because they’re *not afraid to engage*. I happen to find their tactics unnecessarily provocative and bullying. But you don’t beat the bullies by talking sweet to them. You show them that you’re not willing to be rolled.
Finally, I find it a bit of a cop-out to call for a national movement on what you even admit is effectively a series of local issues. Nor do I find it particularly helpful to be lectured to on what I *should be* doing when you have absolutely no idea what I have and haven’t done.
If you want to help, then do what Ted Williams did and speak out on it. Turning on those who should ostensibly be your allies on this issue over what is essentially a disagreement over *civility* is not a solution.
Nate, disingenuous as usual. Must be an ABA thing. The issue is simple. Do you have the balls to do anything about this? Alley Cat Aliies seems to have the mojo. What are you bringing to the table?
As usual? Did I offend you personally or something?
I don’t know what you’re asking me to do, but I’m not willing to engage with someone who seems interested in settling a score that I’m not aware of.
Here is a suggestion, Nate. If you feel this strongly, write an article for the ABA blog that recommends a “trap and euthanize” approach. Tell us who should be doing the trapping and killing. Tell us how you personally plan to see this program move forward. Tell us exactly how you propose to euthanize the cats, and what your personal role will be in the killing. And, please, tell me how you plan to make this politically palatable.
Thanks, Corey. No balls. Tell me exactly what you plan to do about this issue. Are you willing to post on this blog an article about the need to kill cats and how to accomplish this? Are you personally willing to go out and begin to poison your neighbors cats with Tylenol? You bite? Show us.;
Nate, answer the question. Do you personally have the cajones to do something about this?
By the way, Corey. Thanks for proving my point about ad hominum attacks. They are always a sign of weakness.
Corey, you say that “Wholesale euthanasia” is necessary. That is it not easy to do does not make it any less necessary.” Is this an effort that you are willing to lead? Are you willing to be jailed for your beliefs?
Ted, neither Nate nor I answer to you.
Your obsession with our balls is kind of weird too – did Alley Cat Allies neuter you or something?
And, yes, you’re right, I’m going to go outside right now and track down some feral cats and strangle them with my bare hands and drink their blood. That’ll solve everything.
What you remind me of right now is an aggressive drunk calling everyone else a wuss right before he passes out. So, please, put down the bottle, back away from the keyboard, and stop trolling.
Class act, Corey.
Lecturing others for being “emotional” and “polarizing,” Ted? Irony is running high tonight.
The last feral cat I saw was carrying a rodent on a World Birding Center parking lot in your neck of the woods, just a few weeks ago. What have you done about that? Or do you lack the balls, the cajones, to do something about it even on your own turf? I worked tirelessly and ultimately effectively by joining forces with my county health department and local veterinarians to get Duluth’s cat leash law enacted against all those moxie-imbued cat advocates. Have you done that in your neck of the woods, Ted? Have you modeled the actions, based on your own balls and cajones, that you feel other birders should be doing?
I’m lacking all evidence of balls or cajones, for which my husband is thoroughly grateful. It doesn’t take balls or cajones to tackle these issues at a local level. But it does take action, not sitting at a computer whining about how others lack the balls and cajones to act and further polarizing the birding community.
Our community is made up of a wide variety of people with a wide variety of interests, skills, and areas of expertise, making us more like a track team than a football team. Tackling the many issues confronting bird populations today, we need to capitalize on everyone’s strengths rather than body-slamming our own team members. And it’s maybe time you stopped obsessing about other people’s private parts, quit resting on your laurels, and actually did something good. I’d love to read what actions you have taken and are taking to solve even one of the problems birds are facing today.
You’re being an idiot, Eubanks. Go to jail? Is there a law for killing feral cats? Did you get that from the ACA website or do you actually have a .gov reference? Because ACA fails to make any links to any proof. I’d be happy to see an actual reference.
I hope you’re not one of those people who believe everything you see on the internet. I know a great website where people are convinced that reptilian humanoids actually secretly control the government from the shadows. Except they’re capable of having decent conversations about their subject of interest, instead of hypocritical trolling of “you’re weak because people who insult others are weak” circular logic.
ACA’s grabs desperately to ONE case to prove the whole swath of feral cats as illegal to kill. Just ONE. And that case was regarded as the cat in the trial being a “pet.” I can guarantee you that there are many more cats out there that aren’t “pets” and ACA seems not to care about the damage they do, despite demanding that they are the authority for such animals. Instead of taking responsibility for the destructive nature of the invasive species that they are trying so hard to turn into saints, they lie instead, claiming it’s someone else’s fault. In order to raze protest they use outdated and fallacious logic to enrage people in order to accomplish their goals, which apparently is to ruin the lives of people who speak their minds, for the sake of wild animals who are damaging ecosystems across the world. That’s ACA. I thought PETA was bad, but I now think they have some sense of reality compared to the bile ACA paints on their website.
Your initial post, utilizing phrases such as “apparently you failed” and “I am surprised that you didn’t take the time” reek of superiority complex. How high is that pedestal you’re standing on? I’m surprised you even get signal up there, or can see the screen looking down your nose as you type. You did not enter this conversation on friendly terms, so I hope you’re not surprised with the reaction. And if it wasn’t your intent to appear in such a manner, well, welcome to the internet and text based communication.
Can I hope for a middleground between the extremist groups like ACA (which is not an environmental conservation group) and groups like the non-profits such as Audubon or the government agencies? You betcha. But the only thing you’ve done here is sour the concept of ACA more. If there was a middle ground, ACA stomped ALL over it with their actions, something you have neglected to mention (perhaps you failed to think of it- Look! I can do it too!). They never sought a middle ground with their raging and illogical bandwagon hordes, they went right for the throat, and you’re defending their such childish behavior. Now that they’ve tasted blood, I bet they have no intention of apologizing for screwing over someone who was speaking his mind.
Maybe I should go over the ABA blog website and tell them how I’m incredibly insulted about how one of their bloggers is advocating for a destructive invasive species that kill billions of birds needlessly a year, something that, unlike humans, is incapable of learning any better and needs to be regulated like all other invasive species (such as feral hogs, but gosh, those poor little kitties are certainly different than feral hogs, right?). Maybe that would put it in perspective for you what ACA did to Ted Williams, by starting this mess. ACA doesn’t understand the concept of middle ground, they don’t even understand what a feral cat is.
well said!
Audubon kills wildlife- plain and simple
Audubon, Defenders of Wildlife (what a joke in light of this white paper), and the Southern Environmental Law Council-
Sue the National Park Service and thousands of mammals are murdered.
http://www.preservebeachaccess.org/newsreleases/special_predator_removal.pdf
Audubon doesn’t kill anything. They support the National Park Service’s efforts to manage Cape Hatteras National Seashore by whatever accepted means are required.
Nate you sound like the insanity that was behind Abi Grave-
You support “any means necessary” equals murder of another species.
Can you possibly hear how arrogant and insane your position sounds.
So it’s ok to kill mothers and thus their babies in the den- who will starve to death – killing of wildlife is wrong – you were not made God and to assert you have His authority does not bode well for you or your kind.
I find it incredibly ironic that the same people that support unregulated ORV access to CHNS beaches, which destroys the nests of beach-nesting birds and turtles, get so choked up about the management of predators on NPS land. Predators for which there are exceptionally few, and in some cases *zero*, records until the Bonner Bridge was completed in 1963.
Management of ecosystems is messy, and the priority should always be the native wildlife over non-native. Grow up and accept it.
Well fine, Walter. But I find the high-minded hand-wringing about civility to be unhelpful too.
If you think intelligent discussion is possible with people coming to a blog to scream about Audubon poisoning pet cats wholesale, then you’re welcome to try. These are not individuals looking to solve the problem. These are individuals looking to overwhelm the discussion and prevent anything productive from happening.
First you clean out the riff-raff, then you can talk substance.
Let’s focus on the end goal of reducing the number of cats in the environment and let’s push for more accountability of all population control strategies
Walter, I absolutely agree, but I think you underestimate our opponents here. ACA works round the clock to prevent this very thing from happening. They bully opponents. They cow federal agencies. Until they are marginalized from the discussion there is no way forward.
Nate, As usual your kind of extremist uses faulty logic and spews them out as fact to support your “team” with no regard to others. You are the epitome of an eugenists.
Now how does not wanting to kill other species equate to being for ORVs except in a twisted mind that will lie cheat and kill to serve their purpose.
BC, you are clearly not here to discuss the topic but instead to spout grammatically incorrect venom at Nate. Please stop inflicting your poor grammar and nonsensical opinions on us.
Thank you.
I’m sorry Corey,I was told to grow up and accusd of being for ORVs.
I couldn’t let that stand. As far as my grammar is concerne, please tell me what is the acceptable level allowed. Does a Princeton Phd qualify?
BC, though I may be generous, I find it hard to believe that you are so unintelligent that you linked to a study put out by the ORV folks without having any idea that they were behind it. If you actually are that stupid then I apologize for assuming nefarious intent.
Either way, you are a boring troll. Go crawl back under your bridge, with or without a degree from Princeton.
If you’re not advocating for increased ORV access to Cape Hatteras National Seashore that I wonder why you’re promoting the propaganda of those who do.
The link you cite is a favorite ploy of those liars, who use it to make the argument that those who support restricted access for beach-nesting birds are somehow hypocritical for supporting the management (i.e. killing) of nest predators whose numbers are sustained by beach drivers and the messes they make.
But I suppose it’s like catnip for someone looking for evidence that Audubon members are animal murders or some such nonsense.
I would have thought a “Princeton PhD” would be better than ridiculous references to “Abi Grave” and “eugenists”, but I guess an Ivy League education isn’t worth what it used to be.
As a birder and a 37-year director of a dog/cat rescue, I have a foot in both camps here.
First, let me state that our rescue only adopts cats to indoor homes. Period. No exceptions. We take that position for the health and safety of the cat AND for the sake of wildlife.
The majority of the problem lies, however, not with feral cats. Rather, the problem lies with owned cats whose owner/companions let them out in the morning and bring them in at night. While the statistics on feral cats are iffy at best, the statistics on owned cats aren’t. There are almost double the number of owned cats (even assuming the 50 million feral figure is correct). And a clear majority of owners let their cats outside.
So, what do we do?
It is my opinion that to go after the ferals is to shy away from dealing with the real problem; outdoor owned cats. It is far easier to blame the ferals than to go after cat owners and, imho, a far more gutless move.
Until and unless we implement, at the local level, laws requiring cats be indoors, there is little if any hope in controlling the cat/wildlife conflict.
As to Mr. Williams: Had I advocated a criminal act in a large newspaper (online or not), likely it would not have been printed. And it shouldn’t be. Where do we draw the line? Do we advocate harming those people we don’t agree with?
Cats are private property just like your car in many states. What Mr. Williams did is advocate for the destruction of this private property, no different than advocating damage to someone’s vehicle because you don’t like their gas mileage. It’s advocating a crime and it shouldn’t be tolerated. By anyone.
I’m glad Audubon distanced themselves from Williams. It was that or I and others would distance ourselves from Audubon. I was VERY angry when I read William’s piece.
So, if you WANT to do something to help solve the problem, work at the local level to require two things:
1. Requirements that cats be indoor only
2. Mandatory microchipping so more lost cats actually get home.
Those two things will take some time, but they WILL eventually stem the tide.
And obviously, be sure all the cats/dogs in your own household are spayed and neutered.
But advocating/taking any kind of action to harm an innocent animal is patently unacceptable.
@Sherry: Please show where Ted advocated for anyone breaking the law. Because that didn’t happen. And you saying he did is just repeating the lies of the feral cat advocates.
And there is a problem with feral cats and their “allies” both because of the damage that feral cats do and because they advocate for the end of trap-euthanize and for keeping cats outdoors.
Yes, outdoor cats are a problem but there seems to be almost universal acceptance by organizations that pet cats should be kept indoors. It is only the folks who also advocate for feral cats who seem to think that cats outdoors are alright. Have you looked at what they say about outdoor cats at Alley Cat Allies?
Exactly my point Sherry- hope you have better luck trying to reason with them.
http://ipr.interlochen.org/ipr-news-features/episode/plover-versus-merlin-national-lakeshore/2012-06-28
Hey BC. What is the point of your link? It’s completely irrelevant to any discussion taking place here.
To back to my original post Nate- the point is that you choose to kill other species to protect a bird which is the original topic of this blog. The killing of other species asp tottered by Ted Williams.
Just love the bullying and superiority technics you guys always use to shout down anything that goes against your mantra. Right or wrong.
Um, what?
Yeah. I do and will continue to support the killing of an invasive or non-native species to protect a population of protected or threatened species.
So what?
Nate- you are a non native species to N.America.
Oh and unless you are at least 1/8 Native American Indian you are an invasive species.
BC – I think you mean race, not species.
I help TNR. It actually works to shrink cat colonies. These cats did not occur by spontaneous generation. If we killed every stray cat in North America today, the colonies would be there again in less than a year. People who let unfixed cats roam, or dump them off like yesterdays trash, are the ones that build cat colonies. I’m not guessing, I’ve seen it. I’ve been behind the neutering of a number of cats (male and female) that have owners, but make babies in the bushes. These humans are also responsible for spreading cat diseases like feline leukemia. Cat people WANT cat numbers lower too. Some of these same people ALSO help wildlife organizations. They aren’t crazies, they have big hearts.
At least the rat fans love me:
http://www.facebook.com/AlleyRatAllies
BC,
It’s clear you’re not interested in relying on facts when developing counter arguments. Native Americans aren’t even truly native, as all scientific knowledge that we have at the moment indicates that they are in fact originally descendents of Asia. I have much respect for them, and have no issue with them being the first people of the America’s, but at one point in time, humans were an invasive species, and easily yes, we still are. In fact NASA is very worried about how even their rovers might effect Mars, especially if bacteria and other organisms hitch hike across space.
However, there’s a reality that most crazies don’t understand, that they are quick to use as their basis for most arguments when they rabble over and over about how the eradication of an invasive species is a bad thing by trying to compare it to being the same as killing humans. It’s similar to the foundation of your argument.
The fact that, while all humans are animals, not all animals are humans. Humans are unique (in many ways, some I certainly hope you recognize) because we have the power of choice, of planning ahead, and of capability a hundredfold compared to other species. That’s obvious because of our use of language, tools, cities, etc.
Cats, and many other animals, don’t have that choice. You drop them somewhere, and they do what they do. It’s the reason why rats are so destructive. Left where they were, with their natural predators, they’d be fine. But drop them onto an island with ground nesting birds and lizards and suddenly the rats have an overabundance of food and they eat everything and multiply without any consideration for other species or without ever realizing that they can take it slow and pace themselves.
Humans, on the other hand, are capable of profound consideration and planning. Sure, we haven’t always used our abilities right, whether it was knowingly or unknowingly. Releasing cats, rats, feral hogs, marine toads, all those other species are an example of this. Those animals are here now because of us, it was the mistake of our ancestors, and now the ecosystems are being effected dramatically by those past mistakes.
I was once a representative for the US Forest Service. In the area I worked at the USFS was engaged in fuel reduction procedures, which means thinning large sections of forest. Historically, the USFS with Smoky the Bear sought to put out every forest fire, even the ones naturally caused by lightning. Jump fifty years to the present, and we finally learn that the no fire policy was a mistake, because forests that use to rely on fires as a balancing point are growing in very dense (which if set on fire would cause a fire so hot it would burn inches down into the soil, sterilizing the land, among other issues), and in some cases even the species of trees were changing dramatically. So the USFS decided to counter the initial mistake by fuel reduction (I suppose it’s ironic to a degree because numerous Native American tribes actually understood the use of fire in an environment).
Now, I once had a visitor who was mad at the government because of the fuel reduction, and since I was in uniform, naturally I was the one to speak to (I was in environmental education, not law enforcement or fuel reduction, I had no hand or decision in the matter). He was angry because the Forest Service was “clear cutting” the forests. Very obviously to me, I could see that it wasn’t clear cutting, because there was still half of the trees left, and the forest actually looked more like it use to in the old black and white photographs than it did a year ago. A clear cut would just be a field of stumps. I tried to explain the difference, and how the fuel reduction not only made things safer for us but better for the environment in the long run, but he was so emotional at the site of stumps and wood chips he instead decided to write a letter to my agency and I was sat down in a nice little office and talked to for a long while about a whole bunch of wonderful things, when all I did was explain the reason, the tactic, and defend the USFS in a very nice and pleasant manner.
My point is, we make mistakes. We need to fix them. Feral cats are a mistake. We need to “fix” them, either by literally fixing them, or removing them utterly. We are capable of changing and reducing our impact on the environment, cats and other animals are not. Cats are not going to stop themselves, it’s up to us as much as it is up to us to control our own selves. Therefore to compare the eradication to cats to killing humans is idiotic and childish. ACA is just like that one angry moron yelling at me in the forest, overcome with emotions, not thinking ahead, and not giving a gosh darn about anything but their own need. They fix nothing by making ruinous emotional attacks at people who actually have conservation in mind.
Humans were and in many cases still are, highly destructive. But, we’re understanding how we change things, and we’re understanding how to fix things. We can be better, and we’re learning to be better. Other animals don’t, they will eat themselves to starvation, they will leap off a deadly cliff to escape a predator, and they will devour their young if they don’t think they will survive. So tell me, how many human babies have you eaten?
I wish people who dump cats, dogs, iguanas, snakes, whatever, in the wild (especially breeders) would be fixed and/or locked up. They’re the reason for many issues nowadays with our environment. Another particularly bad one is the lion fish on the east coast (the population was traced back to only a handful of released pet fish, and not only are lion fish venomous they also eat everything, having no natural predator in the area to keep them in check).
And I will agree that not all “crazy” cat people are crazy, but look at the reaction to Ted Williams and to Audubon! Those people, who consisted of all cat folk (but they did not represent the entire cat folk community) threw out insults such as “nazi” and other hateful things. They sent out mass emails with incorrect information and mislead followers into vengeful, harsh action.
Instead they could have tried to deal with it professionally, but they didn’t.
So if you want to be upset for the current status of “crazy” being attributed to cat people being lauded by myself and others, you need to look at those people with big hearts, at least at the ones who spouted venom and pushed lies and hate. They helped no one, not themselves, not the environmental groups, and certainly not cats.
Dream on about Johnson and Johnson. I’ve contacted them and pointed them to all the pertinent information (that would be the unedited Orlando Sentinel article, the posts on the Audubon Society’s Facebook page where people were openly plotting to use Tylenol to poison cats and the email sent to a journalist by a disturbed person claiming to be using Tylenol to poison cats as a direct result of what Williams said) and they didn’t sound happy to me at all. They may not make it public, but I just bet that they have a LOT more money and a bigger, better legal department than Audubon and there is a lot going on behind the scenes that we don’t know about. And the “Cat Crazies” are going to keep this in the public eye until anti-cat fanatics accept the laws of this country and join us in the 21st century.
Now let’s see if my post gets published. I saved it, just in case it disappears.
Let’s see – “there is a lot going on behind the scenes that we don’t know about.” And “let’s see if my post gets published.”
A paranoid and a conspiracy theorist. Yup, definitely a cat crazy.
Maybe someday the cat crazies will learn that supporting a non-native species in the outdoors is a bad idea. Probably not until someone starts a feral rat colony in their neighborhood though.
Corey,
I live in a rural area. There are different species of rats about naturally. Also, you revealed yourself to be a troll with your reverse-psychology gambit and “cat crazies” comments. Thanks for playing, though. Anti-cat people are so predictable.
Oh, Alley Cat Allies is aware of the Alley Rat Allies BS. From a legal background, that’s skating on thin ice. Trademark infringement…well. Again, I’m betting on the organization with more money, house lawyers, and a registered trademark. Have fun with your armchair naturist fantasies! And remember this…every anti-cat “writer,” post or site brings more members to my site. Please, please keep making hostile comments. It only makes the anti-cat mindset more distasteful and increases Trap-Neuter-Return donations. Why pay for advertising when you do it for me?
Yes, Julia, I am trolling my own blog post.
And if you think that you can scare me by telling me my legally protected speech is “skating on thin ice” from a “legal background” then you are even less bright than I thought. Not only would there be no case for Alley Cat Allies to bring but it would be an incredibly stupid move on their part to bring more attention to the site that is mocking them.
Finally, I find it hilarious that you come to 10,000 Birds to comment but claim that this post is driving people to your site, which you aren’t even bright enough to include the URL for in your name. Yes, I’m sure tons of people are going straight to your site which they don’t even know exists after reading this post on 10,000 Birds.
I hate to see such hostiliteis between bird lovers but, I have dealt with the ferrul cat issue for over 50 years. I know what happens everytime.
All I can say is that cat lovers are not, necessarily wild animal lovers at all.
Arguing with them is like trying to tell a heroin addict that heroin is bad.
We just need to go around them and do what needs to be done. Nate knowqs me, I don’t hold back and I’m not scared of facing cat people one bit.
Let’s just not argue amongst ourselves. It might divide and conquer us.
There is no justification for the continue horrible bird death toll from cats.
99.9% of birders sit idly while the cats kill billions of birds per year. There is no way that there will be a reduction in cat numbers At All (caps for emphasis) unless you kill them. A bounty would add incentive. If you have another solution that is likely to be financed and staffed with enough people to actually reduce feral cat numbers I’d love to hear about it. Make sure to consider how likely it is to happen.
Wait, so you’re saying that Native Americans are a different species than Americans of European descent?
And *I’m* the one who is crazy here?
I for one think that cats should be licensed just like dogs. Maybe $35.00/year. Maybe wave this fee if the cat is neutered or spayed. We have fewer feral cats now that we have a number of coyotes in our area. Also I have seen cats on leases, most not very seuccessfully but they should be outside like dogs, on a leash or supervised at least.
This could help reduce the situation if a cat gets out and escapes. It could then not add to the increase in feral cats and probably reduce their numbers over time. This might be able to fund at least some local control of stray cats as well. They could be treated as dogs that are on the loose are. Picked up and attempt at adoption or the same cosequences that the dogs meet eventually.
Rather sadly, here I see two sides spouting insults at each other
There are, however, some points that both sides say that are true
– Birds, mammals, reptiles, etc. are getting killed by feral, as well as outdoor cats. That much is true, and has been established.
– House cats should be kept in the house- outside, they have a chance of injuring themselves, brining in parasites or diseases, and killing smaller animals.
– Some people are saying “cats are part of the natural landscape”. Yes, cats used to be found in NA. Used to. Saying that is a bit like saying that your actions of releasing a pet jaguar into the countryside was justified as Saber-toothed Tigers used to be present in the area, and are “part of the natural landscape”. Wild cats have been extinct for many years in NA. Their niche has been replaced by small predators like Weasel, Mink, Fox, etc. These predators are natural here and have their own predators or specialized diseases to keep them in check. Yes, animals die. People die too. It’s a fact of life. The deaths of ten animals are worth the stability of an ecosystem. The fall of an ecosystem is worth far more in lives, lives that the failed ecosystem cannot support.
– Humans are the ones who chucked the cats out of doors. They have also done the same thing with, to list a few: Dogs (which are larger, bolder, and potentially more dangerous than cats), Nutira/Coypu, Cane Toads, Foxes, Rats, and the Mongoose. Also, unintentionally, Brown Tree Snakes, which have devastated Guam.
– All those introduced species, the toads, the cats, the rats, the mongoose, the tree snake, they are all doing what nature has made them to do. To survive. I have seen some disgusting comments here- birds are an inferior species, and cats are superior to them. And why? Because cats are more familiar and adored by people? I love cats too. I often go out into the compound and play with them, take pictures of them, but I never feed them. There are too many people to do that already. Cats are lovable creatures, I won’t deny anyone that. As for the cat-lovers and cat-supporters (people who love cats aren’t actually crazy. neither are people who love dogs, mice, birds, fish. etc.), I say this. Cats are great animals. They are. They kill wild animals, yes, but that is what they would do back when they were wild. Cats are smaller versions of leopards, tigers, puma, and they are no less proficient predators. But they are also not completely adapted to spending life outdoors, and many take in diseases and pass away. Personally, I don’t think euthanasia is “humane” in a sort of way. It is bringing about the death of an animal, just because it doesn’t belong. Birds have been killed like this too, remember, Common Mynahs and introduced birds that are harming local species. So please don’t call the birders and bird-lovers here “bird loving extremists” or something. They know the environment very well, and know what’s better for it. Feral cats are not a part of the environment. And very likely they never will be. Why chuck your cat out of doors, instead of keeping them with you in your house, where they can live nice, peaceful lives as your companions and friends? Why can’t they enjoy that? “Releasing” pets are basically chucking them into a hostile, unknown environment, and they have to race to survive. Many do not, e.g. Moose in New Zealand, Asian Pheasants in Europe, European Finches in America, and so on. Humans should quit tampering with environments- they’ve done enough already. If you don’t have the time or money to keep a pet, just either give it back, to a friend who might want it, or simply, don’t get it in the first place. You are saving many people (and animals) a lot of trouble.
Finally, a solution. You may call me weak for this, or “no good at all”. Go ahead, you may. I’m just putting this out there. Euthanizing is killing. A “humane” way of killing, maybe, but killing all the same. Certainly not kill cats with Tylenol. Also, the two sides (wildlife advocates and cat advocates) both have people who have common ground- wildlife-lovers who have indoor cats. The answer is simple,
-Don’t let your cats out unless under your supervision or just plain don’t let them out at all. My friend’s cat is terrified of the grass and insects outdoors and stays in at all times. He seems perfectly happy.
-Like many have said, pass laws on releasing cats, or frankly any animal that will potentially harm the local environment.
-Bring the feral cats back into the homes, and keep them there. Or in a shelter-type area if they are too timid for direct human interaction. Both let the cats rightfully keep their lives, keep them fed, and away from natural wildlife
-Please, both sides stop insulting each other and calling each other “cat crazies” or “birding extremists”, and other, more generic names, like saying “oh, you love birds, you must have no balls”, or “feral cats should definitely be euthanized, and the term cat crazy is certainly applicable if you are not”. They help attribute to nothing except build up more and more dislike on either side, until many people are just hurling insults like bombs over a wall of ignorance.
Please, just stop fighting with each other and find some common ground. Break down the wall, and I’m sure you’ll find some.
Laurence… thank you a million for this. That’s extactly what i was trying to say…. Good luck.
Fyi. I was googling about my swimming pool when i randomly clicked a hawk article which led me to some other website that led me here. I scrolled around the other site which mentioned cats and birds so i began reading. Which led me to post this comment. Yes i will check her website. So there. I love cats and birds and all animals , people included. People should not meddle with nature. That includes cats and birds . Dont poison either. Thats my opinion. Carry on. Dont bother with me cuz I dont follow this site. Just saying the lady is right and you are wrong.lol
I wonder if the feral cat advocates feel the same towards the invasive python population in Florida? Or does the no-kill policy only stand for cute and furry?
Hmmmmm?
I live in a small community along a riparian corridor and our property attracts many different kinds of birds, especially during migrations. We are swamped with feral/stray cats and the problem is way out of control. I love cats, birds and animals in general, so can’t be called a hater. (I have five indoor cats, all resues.) Cats do not belong in our ecosystem and are negatively impacting all kinds of native species. We are not talking sweet “Fluffy” here, as the majority of these cats were either born in the wild or have gone feral, as such they are NOT domesticated! I’ve contacted government officials and the local humane society but no one is doing anything about the issue. I’ve found homes for kittens and have trained my dog to chase cats off our property, that’s about all I can do, legally, but I may have to take matters into my own hands to protect MY birds, as enough is enough. I actually feel sorry for these felines, but I also feel sorry for the House Sparrows that I routinely destroy. It’s not their fault, it’s our fault, and we need to remedy the situation by the most humane means possible. End of comment.
Cats in England are considered outdoor pets. Have they lost all their birds???? It’s the humans who get a pet don’t take care of it and let it out alone in the wild who should go to prison. cruel——–
I think this would be a good place to start.
I don’t know that they should go to prison, but they sure as hell should be paying a significant fine.
In reply to Maegaret Maes, cats aren’t considered ‘outdoor’ pets per se, just pets. Sadly we have had massive declines in many bird populations, some as much as 80% in the last two decades. The main causes are habitat degradation and decline and increased predation by cats and dogs (the latter tending to destroy ground nests more than anything).
To comment more generally, the declines of course cannot be due to one cause alone for all species. They vary. For example, Song Thrush decline in urban gardens is mainly due to cat predation at the nest or of fledged young. The decline in Corn Buntings, a ‘grassland’ species is due to over-intensification of agriculture and subsequent crash of invertebrate populations.
If we go back to feral cats, other than bird predation we do have a problem with interbreeding with the Scottish Wild Cat which is leading to the extinction of the species. One route is to eradicate feral cat populations. However, this is not easy due to the secretive nature of the animals so shooting is not particularly successful. Poisoning is too random, indeed it is illegal in the UK for obvious reasons. The only real way to deal with the problem as with other similar species is by trapping. In most non-native species they are euthanised humanely. It has been voiced that there may be merit in castrating males and releasing them back into the wild allowing them to hold territory and keeping other males (that are fertile) out of the area. However, there are problems with this, not least the effect of castration on the ability (or wont) of the male cat to hold a territory. It also does not stop male Wildcats mating with female feral cats. Spaying a female is more complicated than castrating a male and the cost and effort is a hindrance.
The saying ‘Live and let live’ is a good one but in the cold light of reality, this can only apply to balanced ecosystems. When Man unnaturally introduces a ‘species’ such as feral cats he must have the responsibility to control and ensure the balance of that system. If it means eradication, so be it. However, he also has the responsibility to do so effectively and humanely.
I would suggest concerted live trapping with humane euthanasia as the best way to combat feral cat predation of wildlife. Prior to this, mandatory chipping for all owned/pets cats must be introduced. The latter will then prevent pet cats from being euthanised, the live cat being identified and returned back to its owner. All this should be backed up with a full-on education programme, explaining the damage cats do to bird and small mammal populations, the mechanics of eco-systems and the effects of non-native species have and why. Cat owners should be encouraged to take responsibility for their pet and its actions. Indeed, there may be some areas where cats have access to protected areas which contain protected species. I’m not sure what the US law is but in the UK, if a predatory feral animal is perceived to be a direct threat to livestock or wildlife, permission is given for dispatch of that animal. Prosecution of the owner (if traced) may follow.
By the way, I’m a cat person – I will always like them, but I’m also pragmatic. I have a responsibility to and consideration for the native species that call the outdoors their home. Tibbles needs to run around a bit but he also gets fed regularly so he doesn’t need to feast on the local wildlife. Cat owners need to be reminded of that.
Sorry, that was a bit long-winded.
To the polite English gentleman, I couldn’t agree with you more, thank you.
@BC You are incorrect. All humans are an invasive species to North America by the definition expressed here, including the so called “Native” Americans. All immigrated at some point. In addition, if you go back far enough, our native North America flora and fauna are immigrants as well. The question is when they arrived, not who spontaneously sprang from the earth on the continent. It appears that species have been coming to this continent for a very long time and displacing the last wave before them. Kind of Darwinian, don’t you think? Just look at the fossil record. I love birds. I love cats. I have advocated for the spaying and neutering of pets since before most of you were born – before Bob Barker’s personal endorsements, before PETA, way before ACA. I have always advocated for and owned strictly indoor cats. That said, it appears that the problem is feral cat over population, and this will take a concerted effort on everyone’s part using various means to solve. Outdoor cats do more than hunt birds. They also hunt and control rodent populations which spread terrible deadly diseases. Google “rodent epidemic” and see. It seems to me that the goal is balance. We NEED some outdoor cats. They do an immeasurable service for us in the absence of other larger predators. But we need to be able to keep them at a manageable level where bird populations are not detrimentally impacted. I am against poisoning anything. It’s just not controllable. Anything can eat the bait or the sick animals who ate the bait. There are better ways to euthanize an animal. As painful as it is to say, the answer lies somewhere in the middle. More trapping in problem areas, neutering of most, rehoming those that can live indoors (not all cats can) and then euthanizing enough to bring down the truly wild population where necessary. Can anyone suggest the optimum season to do this? We manage other animal populations. We should be able to control feral cats as well.
By outdoor cats, I mean any cats out and about hunting whether owned or feral.
@a polite Englishman…
Thank you for your thoughtful response. I would like to add though that feral cats are probably all that’s standing between us (U.S. and Great Britain) and the next sweep of the Black Death and other plagues. They’ve already found it in the U.S. Concerning your suggestion for mandatory I.D. chipping, I don’t think this will do anything but enable bureaucrats greater ease levying fines. The problem lies in the fact that if someone acquires a cat that “doesn’t work out” for some reason and they didn’t update the chip before dumping it, guess who gets the fine? That’s right…the good Samaritan who rescued the little fur-ball and found it a home. Also, cats occasionally go AWAL (away without leave). Should these owners be fined as well? I think we need to concentrate on real solutions that don’t involve more useless laws. Cheers!
When will gringos ever learn to spell the word “cojones” properly? It is NOT cAjones.
Cojones, not cajones! Spelling matters…
Oh geez… At least I can admit that I’m uncomfortable about cat killing due to emotional reasons (protectiveness of creatures that remind me of animal family members, possible maternal instinct?) and that it doesn’t actually mesh with the rest of my moral system in a logical way. I also have mixed feelings about it that may be partially location-based. What on earth are my fellow cat people talking about…? I’d feel less embarrassed if people were quoting studies, but nope…
On a side note, I completely support the idea of education and cat leash and indoor-only laws, though since many cats refuse to wear a collar (and can remove one) the latter seems difficult to enforce (putting my own thoughts on the matter aside, just risking killing house cats would get way too sticky and probably never get off the ground as an idea anyway). Can we at least all agree that letting cats outside unsupervised is dangerous for them as well as wildlife in most areas?
I would like to say I love all animals. I watch the birds and have bird feeders out. I love to take pictures. I live in Louisiana.and we have wood pecked and other type birds that come to my feeders. They are so beautiful. The birds and squirrels eat at the same feeders. When I was little I would listen to the Bob whites and the whippoorwills. I am older and now they have gone
I’m not sure why. I miss the sounds they were a special part of my childhood.
Now about the problem of the feral cats. When have so many in the area we live in. They are every where. I love cats! I have had cats all my life. I have Neighbors that try to get as many as they can fixed. I use to be able to do that but now I’m older and on a fixed income. On tv they always so get your cats fixed. Do you know how much the charge to do that. Males 150 or more and female 200+. This is a big problem. I have to deside wither to eat or get my medicine
It is ridiculous and people dump cats off all the time.
Ok I’m through but need people to know . We need help if we are going to solve this problem.
Every Cat owner should keep their cats inside, safe for birds and safe for the cats themselves.
Thanks for sharing Corey!
Cheers,
Yvonne