People against TNR?

[wea]

cats are domesticated animals yes, but their domestication is not yet completed. They can go feral again en take very good care of themselves. Unlike other domesticated animals, cast were kept often to hunt on mouse and other rodents. So, even though domesticated, they still had to find thier own food. Besides that, cats interbreeded with the wild cat species in EU. So, with feral cats, they are a mix of domesticated and wild cats. Also, next to socialization, there is an influence of genes as well on how friendly cats are. The process to have only the friendly gene selected in the whole cat population is far from complete. So some cats are just more feral than others and prefer a feral life above a life with creatures that they fear.

concerning FIV en FeLV, if the population is neutered, the spread is halted. If the population is neutered, it aslo seems that the survival of infected cats is pretty long. And in one study median survival of infected cats was 12.5 years, while for uninfected it was 8.6 years. That such diseases are just for cats, mixomatose is a deadly disease for rabbits and I do not see people catching all rabbits.

Yes cats catch birds, but they cats far more rodents than birds. Birds are not very easy prey for cats. Their attempts to catch birds fail quite often. The decline of birds is also very often due to habitat loss. we do not like birds nesting in our houses, so we make sure that does not happen. Only making our houses more birdproof resulted in a steep decline in a bird species in europe. But then pointing to cats as the quilty party... cats have always lived here, there was an equilibrium between cats and birds. But that this equilibrium failed is not just because of the cat, but also for habitat loss, insecticides, ... For that reason I do not think that advocating against TNR will suddenly help the birds

what is the alternative? trapping and killing, it took up to 10 years to make some uninhabited middle sized ilands cat-free with intensive hunting, trapping,... How will one tackle complete continents that have people and owned cats?

But I also think that some claims of TNR are not that black/white. That TNR will result in reducing and eventually slow extinction of cats, I do not think that this is realistic.TNR is a method that will require constant maintenance as well. Altough I do think that a TNR method will be cheaper than trapping+killing as numbers in trapping+killing will not go down.

[Korat]

Originally Posted by Whaler

no, other wild animals do not suffer from the same diseases, hence the F in fiv and felv.


do you know for a fact that that specific cat was been fed by a caretaker? a study of a feral cat colony in brooklyn found that the cats depended more on local garbage for food than on either prey or feeding by caregivers, and that the neighborhood produced enough garbage to feed three times more cats than actually lived in that area (Calhoon, Robert E. and Carol Haspel. Urban cat populations compared by season, subhabitat and supplemental feeding. Journal of Animal Ecology 58 (1989): 321-328.)


well, then i guess you have a very limited knowledge of animals. tree squirrels; rabies, squirrel fibroma, metabolic bone disease, rodent plague, fox; toxocariasis, weil's disease, sarcoptic mange, rabies


"Cancer is one of the leading health concerns for humans, but we now understand that cancer can kill wild animals at similar rates." Dr. Denise McAloose, a pathologist for the Wildlife Conservation Society.


"the shorter lifespan of birds and small mammals means fewer tumors than in people." Carol Meteyer, wildlife pathologist with the National Wildlife Health Center


studies show that the animals caught by predators are generally weaker and more diseased than those killed by manmade sources (Møller, Anders P., Johannes Erritzøe and Jan T. Nielsen. Frequency of fault bars in feathers of birds and susceptibility to predation. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 97 (2009): 334-345) (Leyhausen, Paul. Cat Behavior: The Predatory and Social Behavior of Domestic and Wild Cats, (New York: Garland STPM Press, 1979), 78.)


one study found that “birds killed by cats had significantly lower mass, fat scores, and pectoral muscle mass scores” than birds of the same species killed by cars or windows (Baker, Philip J., et. al. Cats about town: is predation by free-ranging pet cats Felis catus likely to affect urban bird populations?. Ibis 150 (Suppl. 1) (2000) 86-99)


studies indicate that cats are catching what some biologists refer to as the “doomed surplus”—animals who would not have lived, and so whose death does not affect overall population levels. (Lilith, Maggie. Do pet cats (Felis catus) have an impact on species richness and abundance of native mammals in low-density Western Australian Suburbia? Ph.D. thesis for Murdoch University, Western Australia. 2007)




you're not serious are you? so, if we had killed Lance Armstrong back in 1996 there would be no more cancer?


hyperbole? i really don't see any specific points in this statement.






exactly how often have you seen that occur?


the last one that i did a tnr with was brought to my local vet as opposed to the low cost clinic since it was a holiday weekend and i did not want to put him through the stress of waiting three days in a trap. i paid $360 for his care and i did not even think of asking for a discount.


that same vet does all of the work for two different towns animal control and does not give any discounts to them, even though it is for the municipality whether it be dog, cat, rabbit.




what an incredibly vague and inaccurate statement that is


yet another inaccurate statement and shows your lack of understanding of the disease itself. one of the cats in the colony i care for is fiv+ and guess what? out of the high point of 13 cats not one other than her is fiv+.




again, just plain wrong. see;


Natoli, Eugenia, et. al. “Management of Feral Domestic Cats in the Urban Environment of Rome (Italy).” Preventative Veterinary Medicine 77 (2006)


Hughes, Kathy L. and Margaret R. Slater. “Implementation of a Feral Cat Management Program on a University Campus.” Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science 5, no. 1 (2002)


Neville, P.F. and J. Remfry. “Effect of Neutering on Two Groups of Feral Cats.” The Veterinary Record 114 (1984)


Levy, Julie K., David W. Gale, and Leslie A. Gale. “Evaluation of the Effect of a Long-Term Trap-Neuter-Return and Adoption Program on a Free- Roaming Cat Population.” Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association 222, no. 1 (2003)


Hughes, Kathy L., Margaret R. Slater, and Linda Haller. “The Effects of Implementing a Feral Cat Spay/Neuter Program in a Florida County Animal Control Service.” Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science 5 (2002)




Scott, Karen C., Julie K. Levy, and Shawn P. Gorman. “Body Condition of Feral Cats and the Effect of Neutering.” Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science 5, no. 3 (2002)

Yes I know for a fact that the cat was being fed by a specific caretaker, it mostly stayed in her large garden, she wouldn't bring it in inside and have it come into contact with 'her own' indoor cats.
It was signed over to welfare to be treated, this much took a day for the caretaker to decide, as welfare stipulated she would never again have access to the cat, or be eligible to 'rehome' it after it was treated.

Such is the case with many, I see these cases every week. Mostly ferals that can't be handled and were difficult for the caretakers to catch or monitor. Every week we have ferals handed over. Kittens and adults alike.

Our welfare system is such that, unless it is injured, it can't be taken in by welfare, and if it is taken in by welfare, it won't be released. Hence the massive numbers of people bringing in cats to private clinics, looking for discounted treatment... they want to 'keep' or 'return' the cats ... or sometimes, aren't even aware the cat required treatment, they just wanted a flea treatment as 'its scratching'.

I saw one incidence where a caretaker called looking for a flea treatment, was refused unless the cat was brought in, when the cat was brought in (having lent her a trap and carrier) it was icteric and on the point of liver failure!

As it happens, very rarely are these cats euthanised, they are signed over to welfare, and or treated or rehomed. Never released (irrespective of their health)

FIV/FeLV are euthanised.

We don't have rabies in this country, and a large percentage of the fox population are trapped and tested to keep to toxo and lepto within reasonable levels. The more they find, the more they catch and cull ... yes, cull, no more then should be done for ferals IMO.

And this is only my opinion, from what I have experienced, relative to my locality, not read in a study carried out in a different country.

Sarcoptic mange is prolific among foxes, a lesser of evils - if that was the worst the ferals were suffering then it might be a different story.

Yes it is a problem created by people, hold all the ideals you want, the majority of people are not changing. What is needed are solutions.

I've seen as many neutered FIV+ as not, with cat bite abcesses being probably the most common of cat-related-illness/injury - in general, it seems unless you keep your cat inside, it will be bitten at some point.

You seem to have taken some of my points out of context also, in relation the birds and survival of the fitness, I say 'may not', I was referring to a point made earlier. The interesting study you posted seems to prove that it doesn't. As as you have pointed out, the end result is that only the birds that wouldn't have survived anyway are killed.
Personally, I would agree with this, I don't see cats having an impact, no more then the weather. No amount of cats could be as damaging as severe winter we got last year.

The same for the disease stopping when an animal dies, I said for the most part - referring to diseases that spread by transmission only. But you knew that, right?

Some interesting case studies, didn't need the attitude though!

A large cull is being carried out in my local area at present (by local authority on request of residents)

They do it with dogs, thousands humanely euthanised every year, you don't see the same incidence of disease, and no, the numbers never decrease as people still throw them away and allow them to breed indiscriminately. And yes its desperately desperately sad. I find it even more so, consdiering that the majority are dogs that were once pets, have no behavioral issues, unlike ferals who have never been touched by human hand and are essentially 'wild'.
When you look at that, how can TNR alone lessen or control the numbers? Especially when you consider that cats can breed more, and more frequently.

[The Divine Miss M]

"Culling" is just a nice way of saying extermination, and it doesn't work.

Why Feral Eradication Won't Work

Get informed - The Vacuum Effect - Alley Cat Allies

VACUUM EFFECT

When you go around killing healthy cats, those healthy cats are no longer there to defend that territory. You then end up with new breeding cats. TNR avoids this by leaving the cats to ward off new cats but without the ability to breed and create more cats. Will it end in complete eradication? No. You would need 100% of colonies to be 100% TNRed, but the numbers will significantly reduce over time. This isn't about idealism. This is about the fact that we created this mess and now it's our responsibility to clean it up and that clean up should not be at the expense of the cats who are the innocent party in this debacle.

Another thing to consider is that if we all say to ourselves people will never change and use that as a justifications to ourselves not do the right thing, THEN things will truley never change.

[Korat]

Originally Posted by The Divine Miss M

"Culling" is just a nice way of saying extermination, and it doesn't work.

Why Feral Eradication Won't Work

Get informed - The Vacuum Effect - Alley Cat Allies

VACUUM EFFECT

When you go around killing healthy cats, those healthy cats are no longer there to defend that territory. You then end up with new breeding cats. TNR avoids this by leaving the cats to ward off new cats but without the ability to breed and create more cats. Will it end in complete eradication? No. You would need 100% of colonies to be 100% TNRed, but the numbers will significantly reduce over time. This isn't about idealism. This is about the fact that we created this mess and now it's our responsibility to clean it up and that clean up should not be at the expense of the cats who are the innocent party in this debacle.

Another thing to consider is that if we all say to ourselves people will never change and use that as a justifications to ourselves not do the right thing, THEN things will truley never change.

Who is using that excuse as justification?

The vaccum effect article says that trap and remove is an unending budget expense. I would argue, that were the number of TNR'd cats to have the medical care they need to avoid suffering, then it becomes an unending budget expense. So which is more important? The amount of cats you can maintain, or their welfare?

That was what my first topic on this thread was about, I've yet to see any opinions directed at that. Only aggressive defensiveness of an operation that is already in place, with no response to the issues I raised.

This was intended to be a discussion on TNR no? Discussion, as in, many views and opinions are expressed.

[Dave_ph]

The last time people tried to elimate free roaming cats it resulted in The Black Plague.

[Korat]

Originally Posted by Dave_ph

The last time people tried to elimate free roaming cats it resulted in The Black Plague.

Despite the fact that cats can carry plague the same as rats?
A myth.

In any case it was the fleas, and not the rats - you could argue that more cats = more vectors.

Plague in Cats | petMD

[marie73]

I think this thread has run its course.



P.S. People who don't speak fluent sarcasm should get an interpreter for Dave's posts.