Hypothetical colony care
I want to know people's opinions on this matter.
I realize that most TNR advocates discourage any euthanizing of cats, unless the cat were terminal anyway or in great pain with little chance of full recovery.
In a situation where a person could care for a colony, but with a few conditions/restrictions:
- income/resources are limited, so could properly care for only a few cats (say about 6 to 8 max)
- landlord barely tolerates the colony's presence (while not evicting resident, is not too pleased about all the cats around either)
The sickest, weakest, and generally in poor shape would be trapped and Animal Control come take them for euthenization/disposal.
This allows the few remaining healthier cats to THRIVE with proper amounts of food and enough shelter for everybody - rather than have a larger colony of everybody scrabbling for resources (food & shelter), and the weaker ones barely surviving harsh weather elements because of limited food/shelter.
So, basically... even though some cats will be euthanized, others get a better chance at life than they would have otherwise.
Is this acceptable? In terms of being all "good morals and ethics" kind of way? Or do you totally disagree, and think that EVERY cat should have a chance, even though it would be lower quality if life for each one?
(and yes, the remaining cats would all be fixed, so there doesn't end up being MORE cats needing taking care of)
The only other option for the "rejected" cats, would be relocation. However, it would have to be FAR away (so they couldn't try to come back), AND would have to be funded/done by whoever is taking the cats, rather than giving the cats...and that seems like quite a difficult undertaking.
Last edited by Vivid Dawn; 01-04-2011 at 12:46 PM.
Reason: added info for relocating