- Joined
- Sep 14, 2003
- Messages
- 460
- Purraise
- 4
Again, it continues to amaze me how these guys can't even come close to getting it right.
Of course, the greatest irony is this story about non-native predators (domestic cats) is written by a white male hunter...in a magazine for white male hunters...which are certainly non-native predators!
(The day a guy dressed in bright orange camo, holding a shotgun, constitutes a native, natural part of the environment, I'll eat my shoe)
http://www.fieldandstream.com/fields...191854,00.html
When it comes to abandoning animals...which is worse? Someone that abandons a cat in a colony, where it will be spayed or neutered, or someone that abandons it in a remote area, where it will simply generate an entirely new population?
We would have to assume that if an owner is compassionate or irresponsible enough to abandon a pet, rather than have it euthanized or take responsibility for it....that aspect of the owner's personality didn't change simply because TNR is going on elsewhere.
Second, if we look at PETA's own feral cat page, a few things emerge. First, that one reason they cite for "trapping" ferals is the cruelty of humans. I don't know when human crimes of torturing animals became a good reason to kill them, but it strikes me that something is wrong with the logic there.
This is the PETA page quote, which is used as partial justification for why it is sometimes acceptable to euthanize animals:
Second, they also cite information from the ABC, so we all know how much credibility that has.
Third, the mention diseases such as rabies, and TNR expressely vaccinates for rabies. They mention FIV and FELV, though some TNR programs test for those diseases. No TNR program that I know of would release a sick cat, and I expect most euthanize when the animals are unrecoverable.
Third, PETA amazingly recommends releasing some ferals into a home after they've had a week to adjust. ???????? That seems to betray the true circumstance of most ferals, which is that they are not going to socialize in a week's time unless they are the youngest of kittens.
From PETA's page:
--------------------------
As for HSUS, they host various pro-TNR stories on their website...what's their stance?
Of course, the greatest irony is this story about non-native predators (domestic cats) is written by a white male hunter...in a magazine for white male hunters...which are certainly non-native predators!
(The day a guy dressed in bright orange camo, holding a shotgun, constitutes a native, natural part of the environment, I'll eat my shoe)
http://www.fieldandstream.com/fields...191854,00.html
Proposed "control" programs (which are actually "kill" programs) elicit protest because they are often ineffective, costly, randomly implemented, and exist as "maintenance" programs in which cats are only killed once there are complaints. By then, the population is probably already outside of a "kill" program's control.Wildlife experts agree that some free-roaming cat populations, especially in rural areas, need to be controlled. However, because cats are domestic animals, they fall under a hodgepodge of jurisdictions. And proposed control programs elicit caterwauls of protest from animal lovers.
This is an obvious misuse of the term. The "vacuum effect" refers to trap-and-kill programs that lead to repopulation of an area, not the effects of feeding.Feeding programs also create a "vacuum effect" that attracts more feral cats-as well as people looking for a place to abandon unwanted cats.
When it comes to abandoning animals...which is worse? Someone that abandons a cat in a colony, where it will be spayed or neutered, or someone that abandons it in a remote area, where it will simply generate an entirely new population?
We would have to assume that if an owner is compassionate or irresponsible enough to abandon a pet, rather than have it euthanized or take responsibility for it....that aspect of the owner's personality didn't change simply because TNR is going on elsewhere.
A complete lie and misrepresentation. No one says the animals are turned into "benign" felines. It's not genius to realize that a fed cat has less reason to hunt than a cat that survives by hunting...even when they hunt for practice and instinct (ironically, in a story written by a hunter). The underlying motive of TNR is to reduce the cat population in a humane, effective manner...not simply protect cats from harrassment.Cat welfare organizations such as Forgotten Felines and Alley Cat Allies are adamant that these "homeless" cats have the right to live out their lives unmolested by humans. They advocate programs in which feral cats are trapped, vaccinated, neutered, and released back to their colonies, where, proponents say, feeding programs turn them into benign felines.
First, the animals are not abandoned. They are monitored under the watch of caretakers and volunteers .Ironically, animal rights groups such as the Humane Society of the United States and People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals also disparage "neuter-and-abandon" programs, but for a different reason.
Second, if we look at PETA's own feral cat page, a few things emerge. First, that one reason they cite for "trapping" ferals is the cruelty of humans. I don't know when human crimes of torturing animals became a good reason to kill them, but it strikes me that something is wrong with the logic there.
This is the PETA page quote, which is used as partial justification for why it is sometimes acceptable to euthanize animals:
How many of us believe that 16 feral cats -- afraid of humans -- were attacking his children? Yeah, right. Why these absolutely ludicrous claims are given any credibility is beyond me.In one feral cat colony, half of the 32 cats were shot by a man who claimed that they were “attacking†his children.(2) Cats in another colony were shot with darts.(3) A loose dog killed several cats in another colony.(4)
Second, they also cite information from the ABC, so we all know how much credibility that has.
Third, the mention diseases such as rabies, and TNR expressely vaccinates for rabies. They mention FIV and FELV, though some TNR programs test for those diseases. No TNR program that I know of would release a sick cat, and I expect most euthanize when the animals are unrecoverable.
Third, PETA amazingly recommends releasing some ferals into a home after they've had a week to adjust. ???????? That seems to betray the true circumstance of most ferals, which is that they are not going to socialize in a week's time unless they are the youngest of kittens.
From PETA's page:
....which obviously isn't the case in TNR.Please do not allow the prospect of euthanasia to deter you from trapping cats. If you leave them where they are, they will almost certainly die a painful death.
--------------------------
As for HSUS, they host various pro-TNR stories on their website...what's their stance?
Actually, neither group espouses killing unwanted animals. PETA suggests that euthanization might be an acceptable alternative to having a free-roaming cat tortured by cruel humans or suffering from incurable or painful sickness. That's not exactly a controversial stance.And when animal rights groups espouse killing unwanted animals, it is a sure sign that the problem is already out of control.