A Person Caring A Feral Colony Has The Right To Decide What Is The Right Thing To Do With Them?

[solomonar]

Six months ago I spotted a feral colony. It was heavy winter. Following a kind effort of a forum mate here, I contacted an organisation that can neuter them for free and also help with capturing in this purpose.

Now, when the spring arrived, I had the chance to talk to the person who cares the colony and turns to be an wonderful and loving cat-lover, and a nature lover as well. I had wonderful time talking about cats.

But for an unknown reason, the person was somehow reticent o let me neuter the cats. It is true that they were already a couple of kitties around and of cours it was not the right time to proceed with neutering. But I feel I would not be welcomed to neuter the cats.

I am very much in favor of personal responsibility and individual freedom, thus I just cant get over the opinion of the person loving the cats so much to care the colony despite some harsh circumstances (not the place to detail here).

I kept thinking during past few months about this moral dilemma.

What do you think? Thanks!

 

[msaimee]

How many cats currently are part of the colony? I think that you should be able to reason with the caregiver using mathematics alone. If there are currently a dozen cats and half of them are female, and each of these female cats give birth to even two kittens over there next several months, and then these kittens reach puberty in about 5 months and have more kittens, you are going to end up with a very large amount of cats. Does the caregiver have the resources to care for a colony of cats that continue to multiply exponentially? Even if there is enough food, some of these cats are going to chase the others out of the territory at a certain point, and they will be in a bad situation. Try very hard to reason with this caregiver about the logistics alone of allowing a colony to continue to multiply. Because at a certain point, it is going to get out of control, and Animal Control will come and trap and euthanize many of them. Have you spoken with the organization who was willing to neuter them to seek their advice and input on how to handle this situation? Now regarding the laws of ownership, that depends on the city and county. In many areas, such as mine, if a person has veterinary records for an outdoor cat, they are considered owner. In other areas, if someone is feeding the cats, they are considered owner. If the current caregiver has no veterinary records for these cats, who is to say that there aren't several people feeding them who could also claim part ownership? My personal opinion is that if the organization you contacted is still willing to come and TNR these cats, to move forward with it, with or without the caregivers permission because this is what is in the best interest of the cats.

 

[solomonar]

Thank you msaimee for the reply!

The number of cat is perhaps 10-15, difficult to count because of the shape of the terrain and multiple obstacles (buildings, lakes) - it is unbelievably complexity for a very small plot (maybe 2 km x 2 km).

The argument of exponential multiplication is somehow counter-weight by the records of that colony. As far as I remember, the colony grew over the past years but nor so much. I suspect traffic accidents and health problems, as well as natural long-range roaming of male-cats limited the growth.

 

[msaimee]

So it is okay for feral cats to multiply, some of whom will be killed by the difficult terrain and traffic accidents, and some who will roam and lead difficult lives elsewhere? If we're putting the needs of these cats first, they should be TNR'.

 

[orange&white]

I would ask the organization which is willing to trap and spay/neuter if they have any brochures or other written literature which you could give to the colony manager.

Is the colony on privately-owned land, and owned by the colony manager? That could make a big difference in whether or not you want to push the issue.

 

[solomonar]

Public land (city ownership).

I would avoid pushing. That may cause a lot of harm. The person who care the colony is of an wonderful character.

 

[msaimee]

I thought you were having a moral dilemma over this issue, but it sounds like you are at peace with it. I still think it would be good to provide the caregiver with more information about all of the benefits of spay and neuter. Aside from the issue of overpopulation, life is much easier for the female cats if they are not going into heat every few months, and neutering reduces the risk of certain diseases for the male cats. Perhaps if you provided some written material containing this information the caregiver might change his mind. You say he is friendly in caring, so I don't see what harm it could do.

 

[solomonar]

It is a moral dilemma. Shall for her to do something that is against her moral referential?

 

[msaimee]

Has she explained why she feels it would be morally wrong to spay and neuter the cats? If you understand her reasons, you could help educate her so she is at least making an informed decision. It's hard for me to understand how anyone could think a female repeatedly going into heat mating, and having kittens could be a good life for a feral cat. Also, tomcats fight over mates, sometimes to the death, and the bitung that occurs during fighting is exactly what spreads feline AIDS, which leads to a lot of suffering and a horrible death. Sorry, I know I'm preaching to the choir! Your neighbor's mindset is just troubling to me because it leads to so much suffering.

 

[orange&white]

When I wrote "push the issue", I meant "keep trying to influence" the colony manager...in a respectful and helpful way. My poor choice of the phrase I used could be interpreted as "pushy" in an aggressive or even hostile manner. That was not my intended meaning.

For years, there has been a feral colony in my neighborhood. I've seen 3 to 4 dozen kittens born each year. Those are only the ones I've observed occasionally coming to my property from the apartment complex where people were feeding them but not doing TNR.

I'm fairly certain that more kittens than the close to 50 are born, and I'm not seeing all of them. After winter, by the next "kitten season" in the spring, only 4-6 cats have survived to breed that year's "crop" of dozens of homeless kittens. The rest were killed due to lack of survival skills or were not genetically healthy enough to survive.

Out of all the ferals, one decided she liked my backyard, so I had her spayed and am caring for her.

This year there have been no kittens that I have seen personally. The 4-6 survivors from last year's "crop" all have tipped ears. Someone in the neighborhood has been trapping and spaying/neutering so they have broken the cycle. No more rapid "birth and death" cycle of dozens of kittens annually. It is a good thing.

I do hope you will "keep trying" without "being pushy". I do thank you for caring!

 

[solomonar]

Some people think and behave in line with the natural order. A sort of "non-intervention" principle as stated in the Star-Treck :-).

At a first sight it looks like for the sake of the cats, humans are entitled to act following what humans believe it is a moral principle - naming saving life.

My personal view is different: we are not entitled to act in virtue of the moral principle, for the Nature has no moral. However, it is equally true that humans shall keep natural balance because humans modified the Nature for their own benefit and so preventing nature to harmonize life.

Of course, I cant accept to passively look to kitties who freeze to death, just because the Nature shall keep balance using natural order principles which are above moral.

If I attempt to persuade the caregiver to accept to TNR the cats, this shall be done based on some rationale which is not moral-based, but responsibility based - in my perspective. Or moral-based, in her perspective. But in both cases, her stance for letting Nature to keep constant the cat population cant be beat by neither moral arguments ("many cats will die if not TNR") nor by responsibility arguments ("you should do what is in your responsibility to do (TNR)").

The arguments that may arise are the following
- "It is not for us to judge whether the TNR is morally more acceptable than letting the Nature to kill the surplus" (moral-based stance)
- "Responsibility means to keep them alive, not to kill future generations" (responsibility-based stance).

If I would be the caregiver, then the perspective of intervention would not make any difference, since the final result would be the same.

The caregiver worked a lot to catify the area and is very committed, in good mental health. Thus no reason to overcome her decision. In a sens, we talk about her cats, not about a feral colony. Therefore, it is also a matter of individual freedom.

It is far more complicated than it looks at a first sight. :-((((.

At a first step I will try to talk more to her, to maybe find a compromise - like TNR the old females first (in this case is a medical reason for intervention anyway).

 

[orange&white]

There are no clear-cut answers. In my neighborhood, the feral kittens which didn't die of disease were killed by domestic animals, namely dogs and humans, not by natural predators like coyotes or raccoons.

Personally, if I feed a cat then I take on responsibility for that cat's all-around health. That includes having them vaccinated against disease and getting medical treatment if they become sick or injured.

Keeping intact feral cats healthy helps them thrive and breed. Even without medical care, giving the cats food and water instead of having them hunt prey, you could say is interfering with nature. In other words, for the colony manager to provide food and shelter, she is giving them an unnatural advantage over the wild animals which survive without intervention. To make a "natural" argument, it seems the cats would only be observed from a distance and not helped in any way.

I suppose it is logical for the colony manager to believe there is no harm to the clowder as long as it is staying around 20 cats, justifying any die-off as "natural". I've just never seen a healthy group of ferals which didn't mushroom into dozens or hundreds of cats in a very short time.

Well, thank you again for your concern for the cats and for the feelings of the colony manager. Taking any older females (and males) for spay/neuter would be a positive step. And yes, that is a human judgment based on subjective thinking.

 

[sweetblackpaws]

I don't understand this thread....why is TNR a "moral" issue for the colony keeper?

 

[msaimee]

Since the land is public land, not private, and owned by the city, not getting these cats spayed and neutered is going to lead to eventual human intervention in the form of animal control trapping and euthanizing the cats, or certain people taking matters into their own hands and shooting or poisoning the cats. I have one such cat in my home who has had a bullet lodged in her hip since I rescued her 5 years ago, perhaps because she got into someone's trash or made too much noise one night. So I kid you not that this happens. Maybe it hasn't happened yet in your community,, but sooner or later there are going to be some neighbors who complain about the cats. They will complain about the woman who keeps feeding them, and how the cats keep breeding, how they kill birds, make noise at night with their fighting, how they spray stinky urine on people's property, etc. Some of the cats may become diseased or even rabid. All it takes is one single person to start complaining to the township about their irresponsible neighbor and the cat problem. Now if the caregiver acts responsibly and gets the cats neutered/spayed and vaccinated against rabies, then she has a valid case to present to her neighbor and local authorities. She is doing a public service, and she can claim that because she has veterinary records, they are legally their cats and cannot be trapped and destroyed. There may not be a problem today or next month, but eventually these problems and conflicts are going to arise, and no philosophical or moral high ground is going to prevent the eventual suffering of these cats. I honestly don't even understand how this subject could be up for debate among those of us who have been involved in caring for Strays and ferals and advocating for them within our communities. Smh.

 

[orange&white]

I honestly don't even understand how this subject could be up for debate among those of us who have been involved in caring for Strays and ferals and advocating for them within our communities. Smh.

Romanian culture and attitudes toward things like spay/neuter vs nature are likely to be much different from the US and Western Europe. In the US, we may be at the end of the discussion, whereas in Romania, they may be just starting the discussion.

 

[msaimee]

I didn't realize the OP was from Romania, and I didn't intend cultural insensitivity. It seems, however, that Romanian society is more advanced than ours in the USA with regard to the care of feral cats because they have organizations willing to spay and neuter these cats for free. Most of us have to pay for this service ourselves, which can be a hardship for some, even at low cost clinics. The caregiver in this situation has a wonderful opportunity to really help these cats and I hope she takes advantage of it at some point. I guess there isn't much else to say other than God bless, and positive thoughts sent to the kitties.

 

[Willowy]

At a first step I will try to talk more to her, to maybe find a compromise - like TNR the old females first (in this case is a medical reason for intervention anyway)

Yes, I was going to suggest this. First ask if you may have any older females spayed, on the grounds that they're old and tired of having babies, and it's healthier for them. Perhaps the older toms, too, who are too old to fight for the females and are being beaten up by the younger toms. Then maybe she'll see the benefits and agree to do the rest. Or not. But either way it will help some of the cats.

But, yes, to be technical, feeding the cats would violate the Prime Directive too. Feeding them makes them have more babies, and makes them survive longer. So it really throws the balance of nature off. Once you've messed with nature in that way, it's only fair to help with birth control .