|
In response to: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/cats-kill-a-staggering-number-of-species-across-the-world/
Dear Mr. Tamisiea and Editors: Alley Cat Rescue (ACR) is an international nonprofit focused on compassionate treatment of all cats. We are concerned that your December 12th article, “Cats Kill a Staggering Number of Species across the World,” is contributing to the demonization and scapegoating of cats that is pervasive in conservationist dialogue. Such theorizing is dangerous because it obfuscates far more significant threats to biodiversity, such as fragmentation of habitats by human development, and certainly puts a target on the backs of cats. Christopher Lepczyk is quoted as saying that the problem with cat predation can be solved by keeping pet cats indoors. ACR agrees that this should be the standard as a safety measure for both the cats and the wildlife they might hunt. However, feral cats are a different matter. As it is not possible to keep them indoors, claiming that cats are a grave threat to biodiversity turns public opinion against them and threatens their lives. (We feel compelled to add that this is a highly debated and debatable claim. Even the implications of the study examined by this article are questionable since, as you admit in the article, cats scavenge in addition to hunt. Therefore, isn’t it important to factor into any analysis of their prey the numbers of each species of animal, not just the number of species, cats killed themselves versus scavenged?) For now, the major point we would like to make is that, 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. Driven by this belief, we at ACR have been working for nearly three decades to reduce and manage feral cat populations through the only humane method, trap-neuter-return (TNR). Aggressively practiced TNR 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.* 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. By using buzz terms like “terrorized” to describe cats’ interaction with native species and calling cats “biological invaders” and , this article is promoting anti-cat attitudes amongst the large audience of Scientific American. The fallout of this is persecution - killing - of feral cats. We hope that you will explore opposing information about cat predation from other scientists, as well as the well-studied efficacy of TNR programs, and spread that information. If you would like to be pointed to sources, please Email [email protected]. Sincerely, Louise Holton President / Founder of Alley Cat Rescue, Inc. *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.
0 Comments
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. In response to: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/dec/12/cats-diet-2000-species-conservation-study-aoe
Dear Ms. Weston and Editors: Alley Cat Rescue (ACR) is an international nonprofit focused on compassionate treatment of all cats. We are concerned that your December 12th article, “Killer kitties: cats are eating 2,000 species, including hundreds that are at risk,” is contributing to the demonization and scapegoating of cats that is pervasive in conservationist dialogue. Such theorizing is dangerous because it obfuscates far more significant threats to biodiversity, such as fragmentation of habitats by human development, and certainly puts a target on the backs of cats. As the article says, one remedy for cat predation would be to keep pet cats indoors. ACR agrees that this should be the standard as a safety measure for both the cats and the wildlife they might hunt. However, feral cats are a different matter. As it is not possible to keep them indoors, claiming that cats are a grave threat to biodiversity turns public opinion against them and threatens their lives. We feel compelled to add that this a highly debated and debatable claim, despite the study examined by this article. If you would like to explore this point further, we would be eager to follow up with more information at your request. For now, the major point we would like to make is that, 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. Driven by this belief, we at ACR have been working for nearly three decades to reduce and manage feral cat populations through the only humane method, trap-neuter-return (TNR). Aggressively practiced TNR 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.* One might expect that the vacuum effect could at least be overcome on an island by eradicating every cat on it quickly. The reality, though, is that it is close to impossible to determine if all targeted subjects have been killed, let alone identified, and when they are not, the breeding cycle will repopulate the area. A mistaken assumption that eradication is complete when it really isn’t can have disastrous consequences. Cats are especially prolific breeders and can reproduce at as young as four months of age, so a handful of undetected, unsterilized cats can multiply more quickly than many other species. Subsequent eradication campaigns will be necessary, increasing the cost of ridding an area of cats. 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. By echoing the interpretations of the featured study’s authors, and without offering counter arguments nor solutions that would protect feral cats from culling, this article is predisposing the large audience of the Guardian to persecution of feral cats. We hope that you will explore opposing information about cat predation from other scientists, as well as the well-studied efficacy of TNR programs, and spread that information. If you would like to be pointed to sources, please Email [email protected]. Sincerely, Louise Holton President / Founder of Alley Cat Rescue, Inc. *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. |
AuthorAlley Cat Rescue is leading in the way in promoting humane and compassionate care for ALL cats. Archives
March 2025
Categories
All
|
RSS Feed