Urgent Alert!

Urgent Alert!

The city of Waukegan, Illinois has begun legally obstructing feral cat
caregivers. On Monday, June 7, 2004 the City Council passed an
ordinance that requires caregivers to buy a $100 annual license and keep the
feral cats they trap and spay/neuter in an enclosure. Caregivers are
considered owners and may also have to apply to the zoning board for a
kennel license.

This ordinance went into effect immediately after it was voted on and
will result in the killing of more cats while doing nothing to reduce
the cat overpopulation problem. Feral cat caregivers are not the problem,
they are a major part of the solution! The time and personal resources
caregivers spend in humanely and effectively reducing feral cat
populations through spay/neuter and adoption of kittens should be supported,
not condemned.

Please CALL and WRITE Waukeganâ€[emoji]8482[/emoji]s city aldermen and mayor. Ask them to
rescind this ill-conceived ordinance. Go here
http://feralpower.c.topica.com/maacmdtaa7G9Ha832Qwb/ for their contact
information.

For more information on how to get involved locally contact:

Rebecca Adler
Spay and Stay
[email protected]
www.spayandstay.org

Is there any information about what spurred this town to create this legislation? I would think that Feral Cat Communities would more or less fly under the radars of most towns as being a non-issue. What would motivate the town council to even have this on the table for discussion?
-

Monica...I would contact spay and stay to see what they say...there is no further information from Alley Cat Allies.

Katie

Spay and Stay's website actually explains what the situation was that spurred the town to pass the legislation. It also indirectly explains why the new rules about Kennell Fees, Licensing, etc., by mentioning that they are not a shelter. Clearly this legislation was created to stop this group from doing what they are doing.

Ughhhh this is a terrible piece of legislation.

I am a feral caretaker and rescuer, so I was upset when I received this from alleycats.org. I hope that your members will react to this posting and will call, email and/or write these very ignorant and mislead people.

We are not asking for money--just a little of your time!

Urgent Alert!

The city of Waukegan, Illinois has begun legally obstructing feral cat caregivers. On Monday, June 7, 2004 the City Council passed an ordinance that requires caregivers to buy a $100 annual license and keep the feral cats they trap and spay/neuter in an enclosure. Caregivers are considered owners and may also have to apply to the zoning board for a kennel license.

This ordinance went into effect immediately after it was voted on and will result in the killing of more cats while doing nothing to reduce the cat overpopulation problem. Feral cat caregivers are not the problem, they are a major part of the solution! The time and personal resources caregivers spend in humanely and effectively reducing feral cat populations through spay/neuter and adoption of kittens should be supported, not condemned.

Please CALL and WRITE Waukegan's city aldermen and mayor. Ask them to rescind this ill-conceived ordinance. Go here http://feralpower.c.topica.com/maacmdtaa7G9Ha7X5zUb/ for their contact information.

For more information on how to get involved locally contact:

Rebecca Adler
Spay and Stay
[email protected]
www.spayandstay.org

Thanks for that update. I believe there is another thread on this topic in the Caring for Strays & Ferals Forum, so I will merge it there.

It is times like this that I feel so helpless being all the way over in UK. But good vibes being sent over and I do hope the help that you need comes to you.

Cila, even though you are in the UK, you can email these people--maybe you can make some suggestions to them (other than getting a new brain lol). Anyway, at the posted website is their email addresses.

Originally Posted by gaia33

Cila, even though you are in the UK, you can email these people--maybe you can make some suggestions to them (other than getting a new brain lol). Anyway, at the posted website is their email addresses.

Click to expand...

That is brilliant, I thought I would be excluded. OK I will definitely do that, I will plan it all out first and go straight ahead. Thanks for that.

is there an article posted somewhere? I would like to send an email, but just want to make sure I say the right thing!

thanks!
shannon

This information in the original post ultimately came right from the spay and stay website that TNR links to in her post.

I thought about writing one of the selectmen too until I went to he spay and stay website. It seems like this is an isolated incident, that the legislation was created to address the specific needs and concerns of a neighborhood in their district. And I don't live in that neighborhood and I'm not going to go to that neighborhood to help them deal with their cat issue, so it's not my place to write and complain. Ultimately the neighborhood wanted the cats gone, not a managed feral community. I honestly can't say as I blame them. I wouldn't want a feral cat community in my back yard, nor would I create one and impose that burden on my neighbors. And I'm a cat lover! I don't think extermination is the right solution either... but continued feeding of cats in a neighborhood that doesn't want the cats there is what lead to this legislation. And it raises a question about the placement of feral cat communities and is there a way to re-locate the cats and not stimulate further cat reproduction in the place of origin (ie a Vaccume Effect)... which is a question I'm dying to hear some opinions on as I'm faced with an issue similar to this neighborhoods it seems.
-

This is a news article posted on Feral Cats in the News ~ the Feral Cat Blog! on June 10.


Stray cats banned by city
Waukegan ordinance: Targets caretakers of feral colonies
http://www.suburbanchicagonews.com/n...09waukegan.htm

In the end, 6th Ward Ald. Larry TenPas made a point of noting that the new ordinance does not declare open season on strays.

"We're not killing cats," TenPas said.

Click to expand...

I'll write a formal letter on why their though-process is bunk, but the above statement pretty much sums it up.

So they're making TNR impossible, but they're not killing strays or ferals?

So what's the result?

No TNR group working and no effective municipal control.

Therefore, more cats.

What a bunch of idiots.

Monica....cats will go where there is a food source....so even if you remove/relocate all the ferals in a neighborhood..if there is a food source of any kind..new cats will move in and the problem starts all over again.

Susan Greene has an excellent website that discusses the issues about feral cats/TNR and relocation.

http://www.americancat.net/

Katie

In short, why they're plan won't work:

• TNR groups generally cannot create large sanctuaries for cats.
• Homeowners are generally friendly to animals and will not report strays to "kill" control.
• There are all these claims of "attacks," yet ferals are terrified of humans. The idea that a feral went out of its way to attack a human is almost absurd. (Note that the news story mentions it was the warden that was scratched -- not surprising that an animal would try to fight another animal that's trying to kill it)
  
  

  But Waukegan Animal Warden Tina Fragassi lobbied the council Monday against releasing feral cats, displaying injuries she's received in the past corraling strays.

  Click to expand...

  Surprise!
  
  
  
  When did she get hurt? Did she get hurt releasing them or did she get hurt trapping them? Duh!
• That group has sterlized or rescued over 700 cats. What has animal control accomplished, and at what cost to the taxpayers?
• If they're not going to "kill cats," then what are they going to do? Just let them breed? Or are they trying to pressure animal lovers into creating sanctuaries and solving a communtiy problem at their own [great]expense???

...to get it started...

Originally Posted by Scott77777

What a bunch of idiots.

Click to expand...

I read the second article and had that same thought... but for a different reason... I loved the fact that the Animal Control person complained that she lost part of her finger to a feral cat she was trying to trap!

Did you notice how they left out the details of how the non-animal control person got scratched/bitten? I found that a bit curious seeing how afraid of people ferals are, they normally don't come up close to people.

I love this quote...

"I think we have an ordinance (stating) that a four-legged animal has to be on a leash. What are they doing wandering around?" said 2nd Ward Ald. John Balen. "They need to be picked up and taken care of ... Rabies is a hell of a deal."

Does that include skunks, squirrels, raccoons, and the rest of the 4 legged animals? Also, there was no mention in this article of even one case of Rabies caught from the cats.

It's interesting that squirrels can be wild, but cats cannot. We have wild horses in this country but cats have to be domesticated or killed. Seems a little inconsistent.
-

Yes, rabies is awful...

Of course, TNR proponents are vaccinating the cats for rabies (which is more than can be said for other animals, despite the general lack of booster shots)...

The thing that really bothers me is comments such as that portray TNR'd ferals as rabies-ridden attack cats, when they are just the opposite.

Thumbs down.

Originally Posted by TNR1

Susan Greene has an excellent website that discusses the issues about feral cats/TNR and relocation.

http://www.americancat.net/

Click to expand...

Interesting articles on this site. They don't really sell the idea of not removing the cats though. It suggests though that the only effective removal program is one where everyone works together, and is dilligent about it. The same is true with TNR.

I think this quote could easily be used with neighborhoods as well as Wildlife Parks (which is the context of the quote)

On the other hand, cat advocates must accept that the land they are is dedicated to a mission other than cat rescue. "Nonlethal cat control" may be appropriate-but a program that is 100% cat rescue is not. While sterilized cats might be tolerated for a short time, the aim should be zero cats, or a very low number of cats, as quickly as possible. This may require more aggressive placement of cats to alternative locations, in return for the cooperation of park staff. Compromise is a two-way street once such controversies arise.

Click to expand...

Replace the words "park staff" with "neighborhood residents" and it seems that with the same dilligence and persistence it would take to TNR a population of cats, you could TNR and relocate the cats somewhere else... But requiring that the neighborhood make a significant donation for truly humanely removing the cats should be required.

There are many good and bad points in these articles... For example, I found it ridiculous to imply that the Audubon Society doesn't understand the costs involved with maintaining a santuary and offers no real guidance on how to finance such a project.

In one of the articles the author discusses the notion of ALL cats being indoors and how unrealistic a goal that is and how it's a more realistic goal to start by managing small communities on a regular basis. I agree with that.

But the author brings up the wierd dynamic with feral cats... Conflicts between whether to consider them wildlife or pets. How to deal with populations that live on private property? How does the treatment of such populations relate to Animal Cruelty legislation? And I have to think that without some kind of relocation program, many people will be put in the position I am in, where I am conflicted as to what I should do about the one stray boy cat who keeps showing up in my back yard. Not having a place to take the cat leads to people not doing anything until there is a massive population issue.

One more quick quote...

They say only "call your local shelter" when many areas have no local shelter, or the local shelter may in fact offer only TNR. They say "feral cats should be humanely removed" but don't mention this likely means euthanasia. When a citizen follows their advice and calls a shelter, they learn they have buy a trap, trap the cat, bring it to the shelter, and sign away its life. They are surprised ("Is that what 'humane removal' is?") and say "I'll think about it." It is likely they never call again.

Click to expand...

This was exactly the experience I had with my local "humane" society... The author is exactly right... I'll never call them again! Thankfully there are other groups around me, I'm going up to talk to them tommorrow. I'm hoping they'll help out in exchange for some volunteer time.

Originally Posted by Scott77777

The thing that really bothers me is comments such as that portray TNR'd ferals as rabies-ridden attack cats, when they are just the opposite.

Click to expand...

I would have to imagine with consistent feeding that these feral cats become less feral over time... They may never be fully handleable, but I would imagine they become less fearful of people. Though I bet they hate being trapped repeatedly to get their shots! But who's cat likes going to the vet to get shots?
-

where I am conflicted as to what I should do about the one stray boy cat who keeps showing up in my back yard. Not having a place to take the cat leads to people not doing anything until there is a massive population issue.

Click to expand...

I agree with the last half of this statement (hence, one reason why "kill" programs don't work - many property owners don't want to actively go out and have animals killed). But why are you conflicted in having him neutered?

There are many good and bad points in these articles... For example, I found it ridiculous to imply that the Audubon Society doesn't understand the costs involved with maintaining a santuary and offers no real guidance on how to finance such a project.

Click to expand...

Actually, I agree with much of what she says on that site, and that's confirmed by the fact that I've often come to the same independent conclusions.

She makes excellent points about ABC and I wholeheartedly agree with her. They talk about cats "killing" birds, but they never talk about humans "killing" cats. They talk about removal and sanctuaries, but they don't provide a roadmap on how that is actually going to be accomplished. If they're so humane, they should run the sanctuaries themselves. I posted a news article from DVM magazine (Veterinarian news) that suggested that ABC works towards making cats "adoptable."

He calls on veterinarians to support programs like "Cats Indoors," which help make feral cats adoptable;

Click to expand...

Really? Linda Winter is spending her day socializing feral kittens for adoption? All of these ABC-supporting Audubon Societies are doing the same?

As far as I can tell, that's their PR -- not their program.

I think you are right that there are similarities in any non-profit operation (such as a sanctuary), but it's realistic to think that most Audubon societies lining up behind "Cats Indoors" have no idea of the costs involved in maintaining a long-term sanctuary for 50-100 cats -- which is probably just a "starter population" for areas with "nuisance ferals." Those cats may need specific medical care, and we all know that one animal can generate thousands of dollars in medical bills. And with cats potentially living 10-20 years, that's a serious long-term investment. I'll make the guess that most Audubon societies deal with wildlife rehabilitators and not long-term, indoor "sanctuaries" for hundreds of potential animals.

Birds of Prey are probably the exception, but I've never heard of Sparrow Rescue. Of course, Birds of Prey programs also do heavy fund-raising with school, fair, and mall shows. I am wondering if there should be the same thing with feral cats. See Simba bite an Animal Control officer as the AC officer puts her hand in the trap!