Letter to the Editor: NY Times

In response to: https://www.nytimes.com/2023/12/12/climate/cats-nature-biodiversity.html

Alley Cat Rescue (ACR) is an international nonprofit focused on compassionate treatment of all cats. We advocate for keeping pet cats indoors, and entertaining them properly with exercise and “catios.” This is safest for the cats and it does of course prevent them from hunting wildlife.

However, feral cats are a different matter. Though some people may not appreciate them or even think much about them as they do pet cats, feral cats are equally sentient and deserving of life. If their presence is destructive or unwanted, they cannot simply be kept indoors.

This is why ACR has been working for nearly three decades to reduce feral cat populations through the only practical and humane method of trap-neuter-return (TNR). The article touches on TNR only to discount its efficacy, saying “research has shown that those efforts tend to have limited or no success in reducing populations unless they are performed at continuously high intensities.” Our immediate response to this is - where is the problem? TNR should be done consistently and aggressively, especially considering the enormous number of feral cats in the country in general. 

When TNR is done correctly, it is not only effective but the MOST effective means of population control while catching and removing (often by killing the cats) is actually more expensive and only a temporary solution. When cats are trapped and removed from an area, new cats quickly move in to fill the vacated territory and take advantage of the resources that had been sustaining the cats there before them and start the breeding process all over again. This phenomenon is referred to as the "vacuum effect." 

One example of the vacuum effect is a 2015 study conducted in the forests of Tasmania, Australia. Over 13 months, researchers trapped and killed cats and by the end of the period, they found that the number of feral cats at the two target sites had actually increased by 75% and 211%. When the cat culling stopped, the researchers saw the cat population return to the same level as before the experiment had begun.*

The reason for the decrease in population after the study is because, when a colony of cats is neutered and returned to an area, the presence of the original cats will continue to keep other new (not-neutered) cats out.

Whatever one’s concerns about outdoor cats’ effect on the environment, one cannot deny that 1) feral cats exist and 2) they have nowhere else to live. Even people who do not value the lives of feral cats must understand from research that trying to get rid of them would backfire. Widespread, focused TNR is the only real solution from a rational as much as moral standpoint.



*Reference: Lazenby, Billie T., et al. “Effects of Low-Level Culling of Feral Cats in Open Populations: A Case Study from the Forests of Southern Tasmania.” Wildlife Research, vol. 41, no.5 2014, pp. 407-20.