Feral neuter and release

I don't have an answer to your question, but I have one of my own -- if the
cats weren't predating on these small mammals and birds, wouldn't something
else be doing it? This has always been a question for me when faced with
issues of 'introduced species' (we're all 'introduced species' when you get
right down to it). PLEASE do not hear me saying I approve of feral cat
predation -- I just wonder if the problem is overstated.

Where I live, we have a large colony of monk parrots that resulted from a
release of a pair of pet monk parrots several years ago by a clueless bird
owner. When first discovered, there was much wringing of hands about the
environmental impact of this situation, but over the years it they have
integrated themselves pretty seamlessly into the bird population here.
Undoubtedly, they have probably done so in ways that *humans* don't care
for, but ultimately, it seems to me, natural balance has the last word, and
left to themselves, the cats & their prey will come to some sort of stasis.

Essentially, I wonder if the whole debate about feral cat predation is
simply a form of human preference for one species of animal over another.
Some people prefer birds to cats and curse the cats. Some people prefer
cats to birds and curse the birds. Don't try and tell me that cats are
wiping out entire species of birds and small mammals, because that's simply
not the case. A few nests of dead baby racoons does not equal a massacre.
You have sympathy for those small animals, and that's laudable. But is
killing the babies of another type of animal to preserve *those* babies
logical? I don't think so. Things that appear ugly to *us* are not
necessarily bad or undesirable in the natural world.

I have no conclusion, just thoughts -- L.


"RobZip" wrote in message
...
In the county where I live, we have a county run animal shelter and a few
privately run rescue shelters. The county shelter is in a state of
turmoil,
no full time director(original fired a year ago - interim director quit
after 3 months), a few former employees doing expose type interviews with
the local newspaper etc. They euthanize quite a few animals. Their method
for dealing with ferals is to evaluate for a few days and in most cases
euthanize. I don't really feel this is fair opportunity for proper
evaluation since some ferals could be saved and homed if properly
socialized.

On the other extreme, the privately run rescues trap, neuter and release
ferals back into the same area they were taken from. As a small mammal
rehabber, I frequently see the destruction to native wildlife these ferals
cause. Finding uneaten carcasses of small mammals and all variety of birds
indicates a lot of sport hunting by these animals. The early census this
spring shows more than the usual number of raided rabbit and squirrel
nests.
Coons seem to be holding their own, but I have found a few nests of dead
babies. Hawk and owl nests are being targeted heavily this year too. Feral
cat numbers are up all over the place.

Considering the damage the ferals do, I have really serious misgivings
about
neuter and release. It's too bad the county shelter and the rescues can't
be
brought closer to the same page on this matter and deal with the ferals
without release to the wild. Since both of the rescues have former county
employees on their staffs, the chances of ever getting them together on
any
issue is pretty slim. The wildlife officers who regulate and license my
efforts work through the county shelter. Although that hardly places me in
the same league as the shelter staff, the rescue people here see me as
little more than an extension of the shelter although they certainly more
than anyone else should know better. The county shelter BTW does not deal
with any wildlife whatsoever.

In view of this scenario, how should evaluation of ferals for homing be
done
and what time frame is adequate? Hard to answer for sure but it really is
a
problem in this neck of the woods.

I'm with you, Lotte. Cats are highly overrated as predators of songbirds,
certainly. But try telling that to the Audubon Society.

I figure if ecology-minded Extra-Terrestials visited Earth, ours would be
the first species they would erradicate (or at least TNR).

Sharon Talbert
Friends of Campus (feral) Cats

I'm with you, Lotte. Cats are highly overrated as predators of songbirds,
certainly. But try telling that to the Audubon Society.

I figure if ecology-minded Extra-Terrestials visited Earth, ours would be
the first species they would erradicate (or at least TNR).

Sharon Talbert
Friends of Campus (feral) Cats

Yes, the testing thing is controversial. Campus Cats has always
combo-tested (FIV/FeLV). If an animal appears healthy and is low-risk or
come up with a weak postive in-house, our vet sends out a specimen for a
more accurate test. Generally, we euthanize the carriers. (We work with
ferals, remember, so the indoor life is rarely an option for them.) We
have placed a couple of FIV+ youngsters who were otherwise healthy, in
homes with another FIV cat needing company. Just once we adopted out a
confirmed FeLV+ kitten to one of our vet's staff. Never again.

Testing is expensive (it adds $15 per animal to our costs) but we feel
strongly that it is the right thing to do. Just as we feel that
vaccinating for rabies as well as for distemper is the right thing to do.
Releasing infectious animals back into a population that has contact with
roving pets does not sit well with us, especially when we know that a
carrier will eventually die a lingering death. They haven't the luxury of
the indoor-only and carefully tended live of a FIV+ pet.

That FIV is not prevalent among the feral population is something I
question, given what I have observed first-hand here at the University of
Washington and in at least one other of our neighborhood colonies. I have
seen whole colonies die out from FIV. One colony even had two females
with FIV, one reaching a ripe old age and the other dying young. Another
may have had a kitten with FIV; we'll never for sure because our vet
didn't test the kitten and we thought she had (the owner called us a few
months later with the news of FIV).

This message is long but not meant as a rant. It's just something that
Campus Cats thought through and wrote into our mission at the start.

Just my $2 worth (the cost is up from 2 cents, all considered).

Sharon Talbert
Friends of Campus Cats

Yes, the testing thing is controversial. Campus Cats has always
combo-tested (FIV/FeLV). If an animal appears healthy and is low-risk or
come up with a weak postive in-house, our vet sends out a specimen for a
more accurate test. Generally, we euthanize the carriers. (We work with
ferals, remember, so the indoor life is rarely an option for them.) We
have placed a couple of FIV+ youngsters who were otherwise healthy, in
homes with another FIV cat needing company. Just once we adopted out a
confirmed FeLV+ kitten to one of our vet's staff. Never again.

Testing is expensive (it adds $15 per animal to our costs) but we feel
strongly that it is the right thing to do. Just as we feel that
vaccinating for rabies as well as for distemper is the right thing to do.
Releasing infectious animals back into a population that has contact with
roving pets does not sit well with us, especially when we know that a
carrier will eventually die a lingering death. They haven't the luxury of
the indoor-only and carefully tended live of a FIV+ pet.

That FIV is not prevalent among the feral population is something I
question, given what I have observed first-hand here at the University of
Washington and in at least one other of our neighborhood colonies. I have
seen whole colonies die out from FIV. One colony even had two females
with FIV, one reaching a ripe old age and the other dying young. Another
may have had a kitten with FIV; we'll never for sure because our vet
didn't test the kitten and we thought she had (the owner called us a few
months later with the news of FIV).

This message is long but not meant as a rant. It's just something that
Campus Cats thought through and wrote into our mission at the start.

Just my $2 worth (the cost is up from 2 cents, all considered).

Sharon Talbert
Friends of Campus Cats

In ington.edu, Sharon
Talbert wrote:

| Testing is expensive (it adds $15 per animal to our costs) but we feel
| strongly that it is the right thing to do.

It's more than that for us. The Humane Society charges $32, and it's no
less than $50 elsewhere. For a mass trapping - we need 20+ cats to get
the services of the ASPCA mobile van, for instance - the expense would
be out of sight.

| Just as we feel that vaccinating for rabies as well as for distemper
| is the right thing to do.

The distemper part is interesting. The HS won't do it unless you ask
them (they'll do the rabies for free, though) - they say that the FVRCP
shot isn't worth it without the followup shot several weeks later. So,
this is an optional part of our programs.

| Releasing infectious animals back into a population that has contact
| with roving pets does not sit well with us, especially when we know
| that a carrier will eventually die a lingering death.

The risk to roving pets we don't care about. We've caught enough of
them while trying for ferals to consider them a nuisance.

The lingering death part is hypothetical - death due to misadventure is
the typical lot of a feral cat.

| That FIV is not prevalent among the feral population is something I
| question, given what I have observed first-hand here at the University
| of Washington and in at least one other of our neighborhood colonies.
| I have seen whole colonies die out from FIV.

Then they already had it from pre-TNR times. FIV is transmitted by bite
wounds: I find it unlikely that a stabilized colony would have as much
fighting as would be needed to infect everyone.

| This message is long but not meant as a rant. It's just something that
| Campus Cats thought through and wrote into our mission at the start.

Here's a "rant" propounding the other view :-)

http://www.neighborhoodcats.org/info/releasing.htm

In ington.edu, Sharon
Talbert wrote:

| Testing is expensive (it adds $15 per animal to our costs) but we feel
| strongly that it is the right thing to do.

It's more than that for us. The Humane Society charges $32, and it's no
less than $50 elsewhere. For a mass trapping - we need 20+ cats to get
the services of the ASPCA mobile van, for instance - the expense would
be out of sight.

| Just as we feel that vaccinating for rabies as well as for distemper
| is the right thing to do.

The distemper part is interesting. The HS won't do it unless you ask
them (they'll do the rabies for free, though) - they say that the FVRCP
shot isn't worth it without the followup shot several weeks later. So,
this is an optional part of our programs.

| Releasing infectious animals back into a population that has contact
| with roving pets does not sit well with us, especially when we know
| that a carrier will eventually die a lingering death.

The risk to roving pets we don't care about. We've caught enough of
them while trying for ferals to consider them a nuisance.

The lingering death part is hypothetical - death due to misadventure is
the typical lot of a feral cat.

| That FIV is not prevalent among the feral population is something I
| question, given what I have observed first-hand here at the University
| of Washington and in at least one other of our neighborhood colonies.
| I have seen whole colonies die out from FIV.

Then they already had it from pre-TNR times. FIV is transmitted by bite
wounds: I find it unlikely that a stabilized colony would have as much
fighting as would be needed to infect everyone.

| This message is long but not meant as a rant. It's just something that
| Campus Cats thought through and wrote into our mission at the start.

Here's a "rant" propounding the other view :-)

http://www.neighborhoodcats.org/info/releasing.htm

Arjun Ray wrote in message . ..
In ington.edu, Sharon
Talbert wrote:

| Testing is expensive (it adds $15 per animal to our costs) but we feel
| strongly that it is the right thing to do.

It's more than that for us. The Humane Society charges $32, and it's no
less than $50 elsewhere. For a mass trapping - we need 20+ cats to get
the services of the ASPCA mobile van, for instance - the expense would
be out of sight.

| Just as we feel that vaccinating for rabies as well as for distemper
| is the right thing to do.

The distemper part is interesting. The HS won't do it unless you ask
them (they'll do the rabies for free, though) - they say that the FVRCP
shot isn't worth it without the followup shot several weeks later. So,
this is an optional part of our programs.

| Releasing infectious animals back into a population that has contact
| with roving pets does not sit well with us, especially when we know
| that a carrier will eventually die a lingering death.

The risk to roving pets we don't care about. We've caught enough of
them while trying for ferals to consider them a nuisance.

The lingering death part is hypothetical - death due to misadventure is
the typical lot of a feral cat.

| That FIV is not prevalent among the feral population is something I
| question, given what I have observed first-hand here at the University
| of Washington and in at least one other of our neighborhood colonies.
| I have seen whole colonies die out from FIV.

Then they already had it from pre-TNR times. FIV is transmitted by bite
wounds: I find it unlikely that a stabilized colony would have as much
fighting as would be needed to infect everyone.

Correct but what they do is transmit it to rogue house cats that enter
their territory.

-L.

Arjun Ray wrote in message . ..
In ington.edu, Sharon
Talbert wrote:

| Testing is expensive (it adds $15 per animal to our costs) but we feel
| strongly that it is the right thing to do.

It's more than that for us. The Humane Society charges $32, and it's no
less than $50 elsewhere. For a mass trapping - we need 20+ cats to get
the services of the ASPCA mobile van, for instance - the expense would
be out of sight.

| Just as we feel that vaccinating for rabies as well as for distemper
| is the right thing to do.

The distemper part is interesting. The HS won't do it unless you ask
them (they'll do the rabies for free, though) - they say that the FVRCP
shot isn't worth it without the followup shot several weeks later. So,
this is an optional part of our programs.

| Releasing infectious animals back into a population that has contact
| with roving pets does not sit well with us, especially when we know
| that a carrier will eventually die a lingering death.

The risk to roving pets we don't care about. We've caught enough of
them while trying for ferals to consider them a nuisance.

The lingering death part is hypothetical - death due to misadventure is
the typical lot of a feral cat.

| That FIV is not prevalent among the feral population is something I
| question, given what I have observed first-hand here at the University
| of Washington and in at least one other of our neighborhood colonies.
| I have seen whole colonies die out from FIV.

Then they already had it from pre-TNR times. FIV is transmitted by bite
wounds: I find it unlikely that a stabilized colony would have as much
fighting as would be needed to infect everyone.

Correct but what they do is transmit it to rogue house cats that enter
their territory.

-L.