Now this is some seriously good news!
Or, in Ted’s words:
I’ve just been informed by Audubon that I am benched for the next issue but will be permanently back in the game the following issue. I knew I had fans out there, but never imagined there were so many and with such strong feelings. Your support went as viral as the emails from Alley Cat Allies. I was touched and humbled. Thanks so much my friends.
Now if we can just get the National Audubon Society to start putting some money where their mouth is on the feral / outdoor cat issue…
UPDATE – To the cat crazies I have one thing to say.
Corey is a New Yorker who lived most of his life in upstate New York but has lived in Queens since 2008. He's only been birding since 2005 but has garnered a respectable life list by birding whenever he wasn't working as a union representative or spending time with his family. He lives in Forest Hills with Daisy and Desmond Shearwater. His bird photographs have appeared on the Today Show, in Birding, Living Bird Magazine, Bird Watcher's Digest, and many other fine publications. He is also the author of the American Birding Association Field Guide to the Birds of New York.
Do I hear 1000 Yays?
@Mia: Yes, yes you did!
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/27/business/media/ted-williams-audubon-columnist-is-reinstated.html?_r=0
In his statement on Tuesday, Mr. Williams apologized for hurting the reputation of Audubon and emphasized that he worked as a freelancer. He said he regretted committing “bad journalism” but his actions stemmed from an enthusiasm he shared with many Audubon members.
“Like you, I am passionate about protecting birds,” said Mr. Williams. “I let my passion get the best of me, calling into question the scientific credibility of Audubon and squandering some of my own.”
—-
What Mr. Williams acknowledges above is exactly what I have been lamenting. I had this same conversation about Tylenol with Mr. Williams some time ago, but I guess it took someone with the power to fire him to get him to acknowledge that his position wasn’t science-based, but rather passion-based. It doesn’t stop with him, unfortunately. There is far too much ideology seeping into scientific journals on this topic. It seems that no assumption is too absurd if it supports a desired conclusion.
Walter Lamb
From the aforementioned blog, a year and half ago:
Walter: You claim to have
Submitted by Ted Williams on Fri, 09/23/2011 – 09:54.
Walter:
You claim to have vetted my Audubon article, and yet you remain “curious” as to whether the American Bird Conservancy and the Wildlife Society agree with Woodsman and me. Please read again, more carefully, and you will learn that they do. The task of euthanizing feral cats that you claim is so joyless and difficult is neither. There is an extremely effective and selective feral-cat poison–Tylenol. So far the cat mafia has prevented it from being
approved for use; but this will change. Only an ecological illiterate would claim that saving native ecosystems by reducing invasive exotics is “joyless.”
Good to hear he’s back.
@Walter: it’s very simple. The feral cats have to go. This can only be achieved by poisoning. The most effective poison should be used to get the task done quickly and effectively, even if it is not the most humane poison available.
Bringing this comment over from an earlier post, I would also suggest a few yays for National Audubon, and hope that we soon have reason to give them 10,000 yays:
With regard to Audubon’s stance, I hope everyone takes a moment to read this blog entry from NAS CEO David Yarnold. It takes a great deal of intellectual honesty and humility to reflect on your actions with a truly open mind and the willingness to admit that the first decision or reaction might not have been the right call. In fact it is extraordinary. People and organizations do not readily admit to having missed the mark. But NAS has now done just that, and for that, they deserve kudos.
http://magblog.audubon.org/audubon-and-ted-williams
I urge NAS to re-focus their nocs on birds. That will avert this kind of problem in the future. Put birds in the center of everything – climate change, energy policy, ag policy, toxic substances, land management policy. If NAS becomes bird-centric, I’ll be back as a member after a very long absence and encouraging everyone else to re-join, too. The change of course regarding Ted Williams is a very encouraging sign and may be the silver lining of this episode – a huge wake-up call for National Audubon.
Jochen –
All I asked Ted Williams at the time, and what I’ll ask you, is for details on how Tylenol would be administered to address the magnitude of the problem. He had no answer. That is what should have the wildlife advocacy community worried. Unless some organization with the wherewithal to implement a large scale poisoning program develops a comprehensive plan, then poisoning will never be effective at anything than giving certain people a sense of “vigilante justice” against cats. It is not a wildlife conservation effort unless it has the measurable effect of conserving wildlife. The number of individual cats killed, by whatever means, is not in and of itself a conservation metric, any more than the number of individual cats sterilized is.
Ted Williams acknowledged that his comments amounted to “bad journalism” that undermined his “scientific credibility.” Were his comments sincere? Given the bluster with which he defended similar comments in the past, I tend to doubt it. But it seems like a double standard to think that people like me are wrong to be levying the same criticism against him. His comments were bad journalism and they did undermine his scientific credibility.
Now, taking a step back, we need as many folks as possible writing about the environment and clean water and climate change. Many people gravitate toward Mr. Williams style (see Bill Parcells, Chris Chistie). That’s fine. Editors, however, need to keep Mr. Williams on a much shorter leash.
Walter Lamb
Right on Ted. Yeah Audubon’s rep with me went down the tubes after hearing about his problems. Cats are a problem but so are DOG OWNERS (at least the ones who let their dogs run unleashed through nesting areas and such).
Well, it’s been a long week for Audubon and me, but I think we did the right thing. Go to: http://magblog.audubon.org/audubon-and-ted-williams
Ted – I realize that there is a great deal more to environmental conservation than this single topic of feral cats (although looking at recent press releases from ABC, one wouldn’t know that). We need as many people writing about climate change and other issues as possible, so I’m not eager for you to be permanently sidelined.
However, I don’t find your apology or Audubon’s acceptance of it at all credible in the context of our conversation about Tylenol over a year ago. Quite frankly, you acted like a bully in that exchange, ultimately blocking my comments while you continued to welcome and compliment the rants of Woodsman, who I understand is barred from 10000birds. The only change in circumstances between now and then is that you had the power to keep my comments off of your blog, whereas Audubon has the power to keep you off their magazine. That seems to be what drove the apology, not any real change of heart.
Your comments then and now about Tylenol were not just the result of sloppy journalism, but happy ignorance. A 10 second Google search would have educated you about the effects of Tylenol on cats and also other species. You spent more time lamenting laws against Woodsman’s “shoot, shovel and shut up” method than it would have taken to learn about Tylenol well before your Orlando gaffe.
I will be requesting that Audubon take a bit more time, and give you a bit more time, to reflect on how the culture of our bird watching community, which is supposed to value objective science, led you to think even momentarily that your comments could be considered appropriate or helpful to the cause of environmental conservation.
Walter Lamb
@Walter: You grow tiresome. Ted is back at NAS and that’s not changing. Feral cats should be killed. No one cares about your hurt fee-fees.
You claim it as “our bird watching community” but I have never seen your name anywhere in relation to birding or birdwatching except on posts about feral cat issues during which you act as a concern troll.
Stop concern-trolling or be banned.
Wow, I guess I shouldn’t be surprised by this. Please lower your weapon while I very carefully and gently ask that you google “walter lamb birds”.
Yes, many of the feral cat discussions bubble up to the top because, sadly, those get more traffic and hence more weight on Google. Worth noting is that the very first link will be a guest post on Vox Felina in which I challenge Peter Wolf on some common TNR claims.
But the fourth link is related only to bird habitat and the seventh is a surfbirds page mentioning me as the top ABA year lister for 2004 (and my results weren’t great, so no boast here).
Here is the web page I put together at the time:
http://www.lifelist2004.com/
I could send you a thousand more links, but folks have away of compartmentalizing information to fit what they want to believe, so I have no doubt you will consider these to be fabricated.
Now, I had never heard the term concern-troll before, but my understanding is that in order to be a concern troll, I’d have to actually not be concerned about birds. It is odd that you would accuse me of that since I asked you in a private message whether you would consider a post on the folly of building a domestic pet care center in an ecological reserve, which is exactly what is planned for the local reserve where I bird watch frequently.
Your call Corey. You can assume that anyone who disagrees with you on how best to protect birds must not care about birds at all. That would be a real shame in my opinion.
Regarding any kind of apology for the false accusation, no need. I don’t get hurt “fee fees” as you call them. I like science and I like objective analysis. When I see people sloganeering on issues that are important to me, I speak up.
Walter Lamb
@Walter: My bad, you do like birds. I think that the stances you have taken on the recent cat posts easily explain my confusion.
You’re still a concern troll on this issue as you pose as someone who is neutral but is clearly in favor of TNR. All I have to do to confirm your concern troll status is look at the website of Best Friends Animal Society where they use your old concern troll comments to go after Ted.
Look, in this issue there are pretty clear sides. If someone is genuinely in the middle, great! But you are not and when you spend your time going after a great voice for conservation you go beyond even concern-trolling to general trolling. Just stop and realize that you have aligned yourself with Alley Cat Allies and Best Friends Animal Society on this issue. Which side do you think cares more about birds and does more about bird conservation – Ted Williams or ACA and BFAS? And if you are on the wrong side of this fight what does that say about you?
Corey –
This is a great site about wild birds (and I’m not just saying that because you have a ban phaser pointed at me). I have stumbled across it’s excellent photos often when researching a particular bird.
However, when it comes to editorial content like this, I firmly believe that your style, and that of Ted Williams, is entirely counter-productive to the goal of reducing the impact of cats on our native wildlife. It is that simple. I don’t care about fitting in or being one of the gang. I am striving for more accountability across the board when it comes to reducing the number of outdoor cats.
You continue to create a fictional version of me that conforms to your view of the world. To say that I have aligned myself with Alley Cat Allies means that you have ignored all of my writing on this topic. Ditto when you say that my goal is to promote TNR over other methods of control. I simply don’t make that argument.
My argument is very simple. We need to focus on conservation-based metrics, such as the total number of feral cats in the environment, rather than on demagoguery and ideological-based metrics like how many supportive headlines are printed or how many communities ban TNR.
There will be times when cat advocates conducting sterilize and return efforts will not be able to compete with professional trappers conducting permanent removal and vice versa. Universally vilifying people who successfully deploy sterilize and return will most likely just convince more people to sit on the sidelines and do nothing. Likewise, vilifying people who have the thankless task of lethal control is unfair and unhelpful.
Your statement that “Feral cats should be killed” is normative and passive. It describes a wish, not a strategy. What I have said to Los Angeles Audubon, ABC, TWS and Ted Williams i(and what I will say to you) is that if you believe permanent removal is the way to go, then you need to promote and participate in it with as much vigor as the cat advocacy groups promote and participate in sterilize and return.
This isn’t the first time that my character has been called into question for speaking my mind. People suggested that I was un-American for opposing, purely on national interest grounds, our invasion of Iraq. When I mentioned that I had graduated from a military academy and served in the Army, that just caused the same people to say that I should have to repay the government for my education. When I saw people screaming “no war for oil” at the top of their lungs, I felt that they were doing more to rally support for the war than opposition to it. All of their sloganeering was drowning out the few retired generals with the courage to explain why this particular war wasn’t in our national interest.
Regarding Ted Williams, I am not trying to take him down. It is clear that his job is safe and I’ve been very clear about acknowledging his skill in getting people to appreciate nature who might not be otherwise inclined to do so. Sometimes, however, an individual star player does something that hurts the cause. If Audubon never asked Ted whether he had made comments about Tylenol before, then they were disingenuous with their remarks. If they asked, and Ted wasn’t forthright in his answer, then that is also a problem. Ted has already posted several times here, so he couldn’t certainly address this head on. For you to call my past comments concern-trolling just doesn’t seem logical given that my criticisms of Ted at the time were for the same things he has now apologized for. I wonder how people would have reacted had I accused Ted of bad journalism and undermining his scientific credibility before he used those same terms in his own apology. I expect I would have been roundly blasted.
Again, this is your site and I’m a guest. If I’m not welcome I will leave (or perhaps limit my comments to other posts), but that would reduce these posts to fan posts, not open discussions. Is that what you want?
Walter Lamb
Education is so very essential. Now that I’ve learned that serious conservationist debate involves i. e. links at a cartoon laughing and ban threats to a person with different views, no matter how politely expressed, I’d like to know one more thing – what is the exact definition of “cat crazy”. Is it anyone who’s not in favour of “saturation bombing” at any cat out of house, no matter, if it is owned by your neighbour, accidentally lost, etc.? And even one more, what is the exact definition of reasonable middle?
Btw, side effects on Tylenol on cats:
“The most common abnormalities observed upon physical examination of cats are: increased respiratory rate, pale-muddy mucous membranes, hypothermia, and tachycardia. Other signs are CNS depression, anorexia, vomiting, swollen face and paws, salivation, diarrhea, coma and death.”
(Quote from here https://www.addl.purdue.edu/newsletters/1998/spring/acet.shtml)
“Symptoms begin within hours of ingestion. They include lack of appetite, drooling, vomiting, depression, blood in the urine, brown or blue mucous membranes without difficulty breathing, dark chocolate-colored blood and urine, edema of face and paws, and death in 18-36 hours.”
(Taken from here http://www.peteducation.com/article.cfm?c=1+1411&aid=2226)
“Signs: Clinical signs of aspirin toxicoses in cats are dose-dependant and may include CNS depression, anorexia, vomiting, gastric hemorrhage, toxic hepatitis, anemia, bone marrow hypoplasia, hyerpnea and hyperpyrexia, hyperthermia, hyperglycemia, and glycosuria. Early in the syndrome, respiratory alkalosis may develop secondarily to the salicylate-induced metabolic acidosis. This would cause hyperventilation, which inturn, stimulates renal secretion of bicarbonate. Thrombocytopenia, anemia, and Heinz bodies are evident in cats with chronic exposure. Elevated sodium and reduced potassium concentrations are characteristic but not diagnostic of aspirin toxicosis. Inco-ordination, loss of balance and falling, hypersensitivity and loss of appetite are also some clinical signs. Vomiting occurs, sometimes it may be bloodstained.”
(From http://www.ansci.cornell.edu/plants/toxcat/toxcat.html)
Doesn’t look like just losing conscience ane passing away calmly and rapidly.
I was an avid, though silent, reader here, but as I read these lines, which seem to be sillently approved or at least tolerated by this website owners – …”@Walter: it’s very simple. The feral cats have to go. This can only be achieved by poisoning. The most effective poison should be used to get the task done quickly and effectively, even if it is not the most humane poison available.”… I start to doubt its seriousness. Sorry. And I certainly don’t promote cats running free in herds in HAwaii, New Zealand, protected areas and (for thier own benefit) generally anywhere!
Hope those extreme stances won’t have any negative impact on birds protection and conservation.. sounds contradictory, but… yes.
Walter, if you need any help with spreading links and other kinds of information, on fcb Antonia Vetesh. Maybe the last chance I’ve got to offer you this:-)
Beautiful day to all of you, and birds aplenty.
VEry tired, I gave the oncorrect link. But here it is.
http://www.naturechest.com/toptendaforb.htm
For birds, just one tablet can be the end.
Actually you can selectively poison feral cats, even a biased cat advocacy site itself acknowledges this:
“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.”
And they posted far more detailed information about poisoning and control methods than Ted Williams…
If you mis-apply any pesticide, herbicide, poison, drug, etc obviously there will be problems…
Mr Williams is clearly an ignorant black hearted man. Anyone who sees nothing wrong with poisoning a cat is clearly warped and disturbed. It is illegal to poison cats, and this extreme nut job is clearly disregarding the law, compassion and common sense. He makes up statistics in his head. I think that one of the 60 diseases that birds bring to your backyard has seriously infected this mans brain. He is a danger to society.
Oh but it has…..cat lovers now see birds as enemies.
lol
” I think that one of the 60 diseases that birds bring to your backyard”
Such as?
I agree. Warped perspective is common among environmental extremists. He is waaaay “out there” on many topics he writes on though, so this comes as no surprise. He hates deer even more than cats. lmao. Guys a clown.
Sams:
You appear to be intellectually disadvantaged. Has it occurred to you that someone can love deer and hate the way they are overpopulated to the point that they wipe out wildlife habitat including their own? Audubon asked me to write about the need for deer control; and they came up with the title: “Wanted More Deer Hunters.” At 12 deer per square mile you start losing ground and mid-level nesters. My son is a deer biologist in CT, and on his research station there are 100 deer per square mile. Habitat is nuked. No birds left. And the deer are malnourished. Get a life Sams. Before you spew this stuff learn about native ecosystems.
Sams: I advised against ‘lyao’. Seeing as to how you’re ALL ‘a’, you might disappear.
And yeah, I know this is two years too late, but your post is just as imbecilic now as it was when you wrote it in 2013. But don’t be sad–you have equally misguided company in Walter and Dawn.
Speaking of the latter, I would ask does she consider it ‘black-hearted’ to destroy rats? The Popof Tribal Council does this to protect ground-nesting seabird rookeries on their island. Hawaii should take a lesson from them–cats from ‘managed’ feral colonies have reduced the world population of Hawaiian Petrals from 50 down to 48 at last count, and this doesn’t count the nestlings they’ve recently destroyed.
Hawaii has been a giant litter-box since Mark Twain visited there over a century ago–he noted it in his journals. Was gonna ask why Hawaiians haven’t wised up about this by now, but Walter’s, Dawn’s and Sams’ warped ‘thought’ processes (using the term in its broadest possible sense) provides all the answer I need.
MaSalaam…
Sp: “petrels”, not ‘petrals’