Have you by chance heard of the case of the alleged feral cat shooting in Galveston, Texas? It’s a bit of a scandal since the founder of the Galveston Ornithological Society is the defendant in this high-profile animal cruelty case. His defense? The birds made me do it. Well…sort of.
As reported on the front page of the Wall Street Journal, no less, this mild-mannered, middle-aged and nerdy kind of guy (if my parents’ birding friends are in any way exemplary) hauled out a shotgun after he witnessed a feral cat attacking a pair of endangered piping plovers.
Problem is, there were no plovers around at the time of the shooting, which was witnessed by another mild-mannered kind of guy who took an instant dislike for the gun he was toting. Moreover, the man claimed that this lame, unneutered cat was his very own, since he feeds him every day. Texas ethics be damned, he claims, no person should be shooting at kitty-cats—much less people with deadly aim for their targets.
Bird guy, he swears it was the very same cat he’d been stalking after he spied it preying on the rare birds. Not only had he made sure the cat had no collar, he’d researched the law on the legality of killing feral cats (no protection in the big state—you can kill ‘em humanely ‘till the cows come home). Goes a long way to proving this man’s intent, I’d say.
Problem is, the cat-feeder says he "owns" the cat and the law prohibits killing "owned" pets. Add into the mix that the cat was on the beach when he shot it (an illegal location for cats) and you've got the makings for serious courtroom drama.
You can certainly argue that he was provoked—of that I’m sure. In case you doubt it, birders love their cats—as a group they tend to adore wildlife, indoors and out. They just can’t stand to see cats indiscriminately killing birds, much less those of the endangered variety. And I don’t blame them. Still, it doesn’t take a PhD ornithologist to know that a gunshot, even in Texas, is no way to kill a cat. Period.
Regardless of all benign intentions (as I’m sure the greater good was served with one less feral cat stalking the poor threatened plovers) an example should be made of anyone willing to employ overtly violent means of population control in a vigilante setting.
Yet I’m sure things would’ve been different had the birder killed a raccoon trying to make off with an injured Bald Eagle (shooting is OK by most folks when it comes to noxious, “rabid” wildlife species and protecting symbols of American freedom).
Hence, what I dislike most about this case is the hypocrisy involved in protecting some animals and sacrificing others with nary a thought for the reality of inter-species relations in sensitive ecosystems. We’re species-ist. We’re content to protect a wild animal (a designation for which a feral cat qualifies) that doesn’t belong in an environment, while ignoring the plight of species that may never again be seen as a result of our romantic notions of feral catdom. We treat these animals more as estranged housecats than the true reversion to destructive, introduced wildness they truly are.
Furthermore, I dislike the cat-feeder's claim to ownership. His role is more akin to feeding squirrels in a park than true ownership. After all, he hadn't ever attended to "his" cats' spay, neuter, vaccine or basic health needs.
Yet for me, this case is pretty clear-cut. We don’t shoot animals. It’s inhumane. I’ve seen enough gun damage in animals to feel pretty secure about that statement. But that’s not what this case is really about—let’s be honest, nowhere in the US do we protect our right to shoot anything like we do in Texas. It’s clear this guy’s legal case is more about our culture’s inane vision of feral cats as “kitties”—which as anyone who deals with them on a regular basis, as I do, knows that’s as far from the truth as it gets.
Sure, I’d like to see this guy tried and sentenced. But part of me knows I’d be gunning for the plovers every step of the way. More than that, I’d be gunning for our friend the ornithologist if the murder weapon had been a trap and a vet’s needle instead of a rifle. If we’re going to defy society’s ignorant approach to the disease reservoir and environmental hazard of wild cats in our midst, then we’d better be extra-careful about how we tackle the problem.
Trap, neuter and release has to be our policy. Requirements for licensing and tagging of all cats must be the mainstay of our legislative agenda. Anything less (or more) will only get us into hot water and will always run afoul of our goals in this current cultural climate.
Now that I've incurred your wrath yet again, feel free to [politely] dissent.
Add Comment26 Comments
Actually, Dr. K., I completely agree. I think you are spot on.
Ana September 5th, 2007 08:49:00 AM
Could you possibly do a post (or maybe you have) about catch, neuter and release? I have never really understood this policy. If you've caught the feral cat, why isn't it being put down instead of being released again? I'm certain there is a good reason for this re: population control but it doesn't quite make sense to me.
Love the blog!
Anna September 5th, 2007 09:46:00 AM
I agree with you on this one. I love cats, and have five. I also built a wildlife pond in my backyard - and the feral cats make sure that there are no frogs in it, and the pile of dead birds who came in for a quick drink is just horrible. Feral cats are a huge problem where I live, and are a main cause of the decline in the songbird population.
I'm not a fan of shooting cats, but if the "owner" wants to claim that his pet cat was shot, then perhaps the judge ought to levy fines against him for allowing his cat to harm endangered wildlife - not to mention endangering the public by allowing an unvaccinated cat to hang out where people do.
Cindy September 5th, 2007 09:53:00 AM
Why does trap, neuter, and release have to be our policy? It's an expensive, inefficient policy driven by sentiment. It's like saying you should harvest, render un-seeded, and repot kudzu. You can't go all Richard Dawkins and say all that matters is reproduction when you're talking about an introduced predator.
On the birding theme... it's interesting that people are unsentimental about clearing Canada geese. Maybe turning out some border collies in feral cat areas would be more socially acceptable than shooting cats on the beach? Who knows, it might even turn into a popular televised dog sport.
Thing One September 5th, 2007 09:54:00 AM
Thing One: If it were up to me and everyone thought the way we did, the ferals among the species would be eradicated. It could be done (though not easily) with TNR if culling for sick ones was part of the policy (that's more than 50% of them). Add to that the restriction of outdoor cats in a strict tagging and licensing environment (hate to do it but it's the only way) and the whole mess would at least be more ruralized. After ruralization, culling of colonies becomes easier because there's no one around to cry foul and the cats are harder to defend as "housecats" when they're feeding exclusively off of wildlife.
The animal rights movement has played into the ferals as kitties thing and without TNR I don't believe the rational-minded animal welfare minority among us will ever get to our goals. We'd have to battle the huge political outcry against our "cruel tactics."
Dr. Patty Khuly September 5th, 2007 10:02:00 AM
I think your definition of humane differs from mine. A well placed bullet isn't going to cause much suffering. It might not look pretty, but it's over quick. It's much less stressful for the animal than say, trapping it, carting it to a vet's office, and sticking it repeatedly with a needle. The claim by the TNR advocates that feral cats have a negligible impact on populations of native birds and small mammals is laughable, and just blatantly false. Obviously, this is a problem created by humans. I don't hate the feral cat, it's just trying to survive. However, that doesn't change the fact that we must take a pragmatic approach to dealing with the problem, and TNR ain't it. I'm fully in support of the idea that all cats must be tagged and registered just like dogs. But as far as dealing with feral cats, I'm on board with the backyard ornithologist. This goes for all noxious exotic wildlife, not just cats (of which there's not shortage of in this state).
http://www.law.ufl.edu/conservation/pdf/feralcat.p...
Chip September 5th, 2007 10:12:00 AM
Dr K and group, you have forgotten a couple of very important things about feral cats. They keep the vermin population in check. Remember the black plague during medieval times in Europe? The superstitious hunted down "witches". They felt that cats were their familiars. Most of the feral cat population was destroyed. Vermin brought the black plague; which if I remember right killed something like 1/3?, 2/3 ? of the people.
In the springtime, I read about a poor Los Angeles neighborhood that their outside cats (feed by people but not kept as indoor pets) "disappeared". I am guessing a round up by animal control. That neighborhood was now overrun by rats, these folks were really upset. I would be too, I hate rats and I hate mice.
I live on three acres in CA. We have outdoor cats to help control rats, mice and gophers. The first cat was feral and had a litter of kittens on our property. We took the kittens away and found homes for them. The cat stayed, became semi tame and did a great job killing vermin. Now we have two kittens that were born feral, have become tame and we are hoping will be great killers of vermin as well. All three were spayed/neutered. None have been vaccinated but I do think they should be vaxed for rabies.
Just another viewpoint......
Setter Lover September 5th, 2007 10:58:00 AM
Some of the "feral" cats may not in fact be feral, but dropped off by owners no longer wanting to care for them. Some, as the last commenter pointed out, may only be semi-feral, and with some socialization, could be placed in homes. Shooting or otherwise removing all the cats doesn't seem to be the across-the-board answer to this problem, which is perhaps why the TNR program is the best we've got going for now. I'm wondering how many volunteers rescued cats out of these situations and placed them with homes?
My former neighbor has 3 cats, all of whom are let outdoors on a very busy street. They often hang out between the yards, underneath a tree, and have killed more birds than I care to think about. The birds are not endangered, but my husband had to take at least two of them to the wildlife vet when we found them mostly alive on the back lawn. If only the neighbor would have put a collar with a bell on each of them, how many lives might have been saved!
I am owned by two cats that I love dearly, but they and the birds are much happier that the cats live indoors only. If people still do let their cats outside, I hope they will consider putting a bell on their breakaway collars so the birds have a fighting chance.
Debby September 5th, 2007 11:20:00 AM
I have to agree with you on this subject. Feral cats are a real threat to wildlife and especially birds. I have never agreed with this catch, neuter and relase programs. Cats are not a native species and were brought in with settlers. I have no problem with house cats that are kept inside, but have no tolerance for ones that are allowed to roam loose outside. Although I couldn't shoot one myself, I have trapped them on my property and taken them to shelters to be euthanized.
Linda Fleming September 5th, 2007 11:22:00 AM
Unfortunately, I think I'm coming down on the side of the crazy-plover man. Despite the fact that I think he's probably a grouchy, self-important goon to have chosen that method without looking into more alternatives. If it's legal to kill them, it should be legal to kill them. No dice to the neighbor who says he owned it, it takes more than throwing food out on the step to own something.
As to the shooting making a difference - if you don't have to trap, transport, and humanely euthanize a deer (or whatever else people hunt - shows how much I know), why should you have to do it for a cat? It seems to me that assuming you're a decent shot, it could easily be more humane.
ellipsisknits September 5th, 2007 12:08:00 PM
I agree that shooting can be more humane than trapping and clinically euthanizing (all that stress!)--if it's done right. It's just that the ones I get to see are the ones who weren't so lucky.
Dr. Patty Khuly September 5th, 2007 12:12:00 PM
In response to Debbie, I have a friend to whom aniaml control brings "found", turned in baby kittens. These babies are anywhere from a day old to 6 weeks. She bottle feeds and raises these babies, an adoption group picks them up and they go to PetSmart on adoption days. If animal control took them to their facility, they would be put to sleep ASAP.
I have been over to her house with as many as 20 baby kittens running and scampering around! I will say it is a stitch! They learn to be housebroken, socialized to dogs, adult cats, people and some manners. So there are volunteers that help. During kitten season, she brings a box of tinies with her everywhere she goes so that she can feed them as needed.
Setter Lover September 5th, 2007 12:16:00 PM
From what I understand, the main rationale for TNR (Trap, Neuter, Release) vs. killing the feral cats is that since cats are so territorial, if you return the neutered cats to their area they will keep new cats from coming in. The population will be stable and will age. I guess the the assumption is that the older cats will do less hunting - or at least will be less efficient at it. But if you just remove the cats, new ones will keep coming into the area.
Interestingly enough, the main animal rights groups are AGAINST TNR. They support trapping & euthanasia since the feral cats are not native wildlife. http://www.peta.org/mc/factsheet_display.asp?ID=12...
Barb September 5th, 2007 06:54:00 PM
At least one reason that TNR is used instead of just euthanizing is that the neutered males will still mate, and females stop looking for a mate once they've mated. So, TNR uses those two things to lower the population more effectively than just killing the male. If you just kill the male, you have one less cat, but the females will all (more or less) still get pregnant (unless you can capture and euthanize every male). If you TNR, that male will still mate with as many females as possible, and each female will be sated, and stop mating for the season, so over a few seasons, you end up with far fewer kittens. Lots of places are doing the same thing with squirrels that are horribly overpopulated. With cats, as they are non-native, you would still want to irradicate all the ferals. But the TNR would help get them down to a reasonable population size to deal with.
Amanda September 5th, 2007 08:59:00 PM
If the Texas cat shooter had the presence of mind to stalk the cat for weeks or however long it took him to determine that the cat was unowned and that it was legal to kill the cat, why didn't he have the presence of mind to call in Animal Control and the EPA to take care of the cat in the protection of the plovers?
zandperl September 5th, 2007 10:09:00 PM
Amanda, you seem to be assuming that the N, neuter, in TNR applies just to males. While the point you make about sterile males preventing females from mating with intact males may be valid, the 'neuter' in TNR applies to both males and females. And for every female that is altered you can be positive you are preventing unwanted litters from being born.
Feral cats present a dilemma in which no answer is completely satisfactory, at least partially because we are unable to decide whether to treat them like wil animals or pets. TNR seems to be the best solution, but it must be done properly, which takes a lot of educated effort. Persoanlly, while I support TNR, I'm not sure I think feral colonies should be fed by people. If they are wild animals, they should find their own food. It may seem like cats who are required to hunt will kill more wildlife, but even well-fed cats hunt, and colonies receiving supplemental feeding may support larger numbers of cats, who will kill more birds.
The articles listed at the attached Alley Cat Allies website gives a comprehensive explanation of TNR, how it works, research supporting it, etc. Highly recommended. BTW, I am a dog person, not a cat person, but I think it is important to understand the issues surrounding both. Though they are usually lumped together in legislation, and various attempts to solve pet population issues, they are actually significantly different in their reproductive biology and their relationships with humans. The issues are different; the causes are different; and the solutions need to be different.
I also strongly recommend reading the new book Redemption: The Myth of Pet Overpopulation and the No Kill Revolution in America by Nathan Winograd. Anyone who cares about the problems of shelter populations and euthanasias MUST read this book. Go to http://www.nathanwinograd.com/ for more information.
BTW - all things considered, I have to come down on the side of the crazy bird guy.
Linda H September 6th, 2007 12:00:00 AM
Amanda: I don't know of too many neutered cats that could convince intact females that they've been bred. Cats are induced ovulators--they require successful penetration during their heat cycles to cut them short and move on to the next round. Neutered males don't have enough testosterone to accomplish this feat. Sorry so graphic but it's an interesting point you make. Unfortunately, it's one that has no physiological rationale.
and, btw, Mini-storage: you suck.
Dr. Patty Khuly September 6th, 2007 08:36:00 AM
Thank you for the trap and release info - it sounds like managing the population down for a while and THEN switching to trap and euthanize does make sense - but what a lot of concentrated effort! It makes me think that a lot of programs might ultimately fail if a lack of funding occurs late in the game, for example.
Anna September 7th, 2007 09:40:00 AM
For Debbie: You wondered how many rescuers have taken and found homes for cats from these type of colonies. Well, I can tell you that MANY have and do. When I started feeding some stray cats I saw under a house, I knew nothing of TNR. What I DID know was that these animal were hungry, sick, and had kittens. I caught and socialized the kittens and found homes for them. Meanwhile, one cat got pregnant again! While out feeding, I met a lady who told me about TNR and how it helped control the cat population. I bought a trap and trapped the momma cat and aborted the babies. This was not an easy decision, but I knew there were enough unwanted kittens in the world without bringing more into it! I then trapped the other cats and had them sterilized and vaccinated as well. Any sick cats that had a communicable disease were humanely euthanized. Since that first experience with TNR, I have trapped, socialized, and found homes for over 200 cats and kittens. I now more than one "managed" colony and am a strong supporter of TNR, because I have seen it work! I have trapped and sterilized hundreds of adult feral cats, and friendlier adults have been placed in homes. Of the original "colony" I found and cared for, only one cat remains and no kittens have been born in the colony for over five years! So TNR works, but maybe just not fast enough for the birders..
The fact is that there wouldn't be any feral cats if people would just be responsible pet owners and spay or neuter and vaccinate their cats. A cat cannot "self impregnate", so if people TNR and owners keep their cats indoors and sterilize them, then eventually nature will take it's course and the population of feral cats will die down - I have seen this happen. As for feral cats "spreading disease" to house cats, this would not be possible if people kept their cats indoors, now would it? And frankly, I am more worried about the "owned" house cats spreading disease to the ferals! As a feral cat rescuer, I vaccinate and sterilize ALL my cats, but many "owners" of cats don't provide that level of care for their "beloved" pets!
Be a responsible pet owner - spay and neuter your pets!
Adopt a humane solution to the feral cat problem - TNR!
Tara September 15th, 2007 10:06:00 PM
As a longtime feral cat caretaker, I've followed the cats vs. birds argument for years (Wisconsin, anyone?).
Yes, cats are predators by nature, sometimes even hunting birds! But I don't think there's any cat in the world who could tell an endangered piping plover from the unendangered version any more than I could.
And as anyone with half a brain knows, cats are not the worst enemies of the bird population. We are. Remember passenger pigeons? Didn't think so.
Stalking and shooting a (lame, no less) feral cat with a shotgun for ANY reason ANYWHERE is just plain wrong.
Saying you're the owner of a feral cat that you haven't neutered (yet, hopefully) is valid. I do feel an affinity even for the ferals I haven't been able to trap yet. Some of them are amazing savvy for being so young.
Love the blog, gonna subscribe.
P.S. Maybe they should put up signs: No cats allowed on beach. That might help.
Nikki November 5th, 2007 04:42:00 PM
After reading questions by people who don't understand the importance of TNR, it includes follow-up maintenance of feral cat colonies by dedicated caretakers who feed and water the cats on a daily basis. This negates the need for survival predation, which means the cats don't kill the indigenous wildlife population, but is still sufficient to keep vermin levels down. Any bird that can't fly to escape a cat's predation probably doesn't have much chance of survival in a natural environment anyway.
Here is an excellent interview with Nathan Winograd answering the question "Why trap-neuter-exterminate doesn't work.'
Nikki November 5th, 2007 05:11:00 PM
Oops, need more coffee. Interview with Nathan Winograd:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X1r9GJ_N7WU
Nikki November 5th, 2007 05:12:00 PM
While shooting feral cats may not be the most humane way to minimize the ever growing population of feral cats in Texas, those of us who live in areas where there are increasing populations can not be expected to cover the costs of what is considered a humane course of action.
My first reaction to my wild neigbhors was to live and let live. I am not a cat owner, nor ever likely to be one, but if its not bothering me, leave it alone.
I do feed birds and enjoy watching the native wildlife where I live. It wasn't long when I notice bird feathers under my feeders, cat hair on my patio furniture, and an ever decreasing pupulation of the creatures roadrunners like to eat.
By the time I started to get challenged to entry to my own patio by the feral cats, I decided it was time to thin the population down a bit. Getting charged by animal control shelters for leaving off live trapped animals soon seemed not to be an option.
If you are willing to come and get em, let me know.
Mark Gibson November 16th, 2007 08:46:00 AM
I completely agree.
Human being is driving away the existence of other species in the world.
We have to protect them.
Thanks
Tony
http://www.self-storage-hk.com
Tony February 9th, 2008 01:50:00 AM
http://www.whoms.net/
http://property.hk.msn.com/
http://www.js-property.hk/
http://www.yickshun.hk/
Home property ?? August 14th, 2008 04:36:00 AM
<a href="http://www.anyhosting.net">hong kong web hosting</a>
<a href="http://www.sy-host.com">hong kong servers hosting</a>
<a href="http://www.karrierenomics.com">hong kong web design</a>
<a href="http://www.swissbusinessbank.com">hong kong dedicated servers</a>
hong kong web hosting November 2nd, 2009 12:47:19 AM
Add Commment