stray cats

[Guest guest]

A speech I gave to a conference ortanised by the Tasmanian Greens a few years

ago regarding feral cats

 

DESEX AND RETURN TO HOME

 

The most effective way of controlling cats or indeed any other feral animal is

to sterilize them and return them to their territory. Once returned to their

territory they protect their territory from other animals invading it. Each

territory is only capable of holding a certain amount of animals. The sterilised

animals keep others out of the territory. Numbers are reduced and they mainly

live off other introduced animals, thereby keeping other feral populations down.

 

In 1989 I travelled to the Northern Territory with a biologist Prof. Jay

Kirkpatrick who was in Australia to show the government that fertility control

of wild horses was a humane method of control as opposed to aerial shooting.

This method of controlling the fertility of animals has been scientifically

proven as the best way and the most humane way of reducing numbers.

 

Prof. Jay Kirkpatrick has used fertility methods as a way of controlling many

populations of animals in America. Sterilisation is very efficient and humane

and it works.

 

As Prof Jay Kirkpatrick explained during his talks to government departments,

removal of feral animals creates a vacuum, which is filled with other feral

animals who breed up to fill the vacuum.

 

They breed to the numbers that can be supported by the ecosystem around them.

They breed to the numbers that can be supported by the food available. Once the

animals are removed the food is available to others that move in and breed.

 

If the vacuum is occupied by sterilised cats they do not breed up and as they

eat mostly introduced animals they are little risk to the environment.

 

To say that feral cats can be exterminated by controlling domestic cats is over

simplifying the problem. Extermination is not that simple. No method of killing

feral populations is 100% effective. At a meeting held in the Australian Museum

Dr David Butcher of the World Wide Fund for Nature said at the time that you

would need to exterminate 98% of all feral cats in one go just to get control of

them and that is an impossibility. If 98% are not killed in one go the

population left just breed up to the previous numbers and sometimes even higher

numbers.

 

Also eradication of feral cats will also lead to a population growth in rabbits,

rats, mice, pigeons and other feral species on which they prey.

 

Observations of hunting bush-cats suggests that they prefer rabbit or pigeon

and the study conducted by Reark research for Petcare Information and Advisory

Service indicated the cat's preference for hunting introduced species (rabbits,

mice etc).

 

Many scientists that have done studies in this area have proof that cats eat

mainly other feral species and that eradication of cats may not be beneficial to

the environment.

 

No cat has done anywhere near as much damage to the environment as over-clearing

and overstocking of land and 1080 poisoning. Destruction of the native landscape

has caused native wildlife to decline and the cat has moved into the areas

created by man. If cats had done even a ten percent of the damage they have been

blamed for over the last 200 years, there would be no small native animals of

any description left in Australia!

 

Methods used for eliminating strays/ferals around the world have included

trapping, poisoning, shooting and viral agents. These are short-term solutions

only and may be equally dangerous to wildlife.

 

In 1992, at a cattle station in the South Western Australian outback Professor J

Pettigrew (University of Queensland) shot 175 feral cats in a 10 sq km area. The

army shot 400 more in 3 days yet a few weeks later they returned to shoot

another 200. According to Professor Pettigrew cats were pouring into the vacuum

created by the extermination program.

 

Morialta Reserve (Australia) reported that the cat population had actually grown

since culling. The survivors had bred and their offspring were too crafty to be

shot or trapped! Some Councils which have attempted feral extermination have

simply created populations of fitter, craftier ferals. In contrast a C.A.T.S.

(Cats Assistance To Sterilise) study found that the trap-neuter-return of cats

in 84 colonies led to an overall reduction in cat numbers: unneutered cats were

no longer attracted to colonies and no kittens were born to replace cats which

died. The resident populations deterred other cats which would have swarmed into

an area vacated by an extermination method. (1)

 

Viruses mutate and only cause temporary decline in numbers and the vacuum effect

applies again.

 

Various other methods such as traps and poison baits kill the non target species

and once again if numbers do decline more move into the vacuum and breed up to

former numbers yet again.

 

There is a myth that feral cat populations are replenished from the domestic

populations. The feral cat population breeds its own numbers. They are now part

of the ecosystem. The numbers are controlled by the same factors that control

other animals such as availability of food and environmental factors.

 

Domestic cats that leave their homes usually die of starvation or are adopted by

another family or gain food from areas where humans leave food lying around.

Feral colonies do not let them enter. They defend their territory against them.

 

And even if the feral cats were eradicated the resulting imbalance would be

disastrous.

 

Registration and legislation.

The Greens need to learn from the NSW and the Victorian experiences. I live in

an area where " free cats " are offered. They are not micro chipped or registered.

This is even though the council has put leaflets in with rates notices and has

been active in promoting desexing and registration.

 

Registration and micro chipping does nothing to control domestic or feral cat

colonies but just creates work for governments and causes neighbour hood feuds

and the council is often blames for these feuds.

 

Force never obtains good results and people just go underground.

No amount of registration or legislation will create responsible owners but

education programs will.

 

Many people will just hide their cats. The compliance rate for registration is

extremely low in New South Wales and Victoria, where legislation there has been

a dismal failure.

 

I can give an example of one incidence I know about. A person who tried to do

the right thing, had her cat desexed and micro chipped. Even though it was not

much extra to register the animal she could not afford it immediately after the

costs of micro chipping and desexing. She planned to register it with council in

the following weeks. The council in the meantime received their copy of the

micro chipping document and contacted her because she still had not registered

the cat. The letter was forceful and unwarranted. She explained to me no further

animals she acquires will be micro chipped.

 

The Cat Control Bill put forward by the Greens does not address the successful

management of cats. It will cost the Government and therefore the rate-payers

millions of dollars without achieving the desired result. If Government wishes

to reduce cat numbers and cat related problems then by all means encourage and

assist with desexing. To do this it clearly does not need a Cat Control Bill,

especially one that is full of stand over tactics as the greens bill.

 

Often owned cats, that have lost their collars or where owners cannot afford

microchips are destroyed by mistake, stray cats which have several homes can be

picked up and killed and the practice of trapping non-friendly colony cats is

considered despicable by many ratepayers.

 

However, cats - factory, farm feral and friendly, which rely either directly or

indirectly on a food source via humans, can be desexed and returned to home to

hold their territory against intruder cats. As has been stated, this method

dramatically decreases cat numbers and cat related problems to a minimum.

 

There needs to be affordable desexing which result in a downturn in the numbers

of cats. This however needs to be affordable and registration and micro chipping

are not needed for desexing. Micro chipping and registration are time wasting

exercises and the cost to local government will never be recovered from the

costs of registration. Cat legislation is a nightmare to administer and

impossible to police and achieves nothing constructive.

 

 

But, most importantly, desexing needs to be done through cooperation, education

and assistance, not force and legislation. Without the support of the people

who control the cats, success will not be achieved.

 

In South Australia and Tasmania, C.A.T.S. Incorporated has organised the low

priced desexing of eighty thousand cats through the goodwill it has built up

with nearly sixty Veterinary Surgeons. C.A.T.S. cooperating vets provide the

same excellent service and care for our referred cats as for those where the

full price is paid. Our vets donate their valuable time. Although most of our

vets are in South Australia, there is no reason to prevent more Tasmanian vets

from joining the C.A.T.S. Scheme.

 

The more desexed cats, the fewer undesexed cats can move in. Whether the cats

are owned or unowned, identified or unidentified, registered or unregistered,

feral or tame, on owners' property or patrolling their territory, it is of no

real consequence. Provided the cats are desexed and fed, numbers and problems

will reduce to a minimum while the balance between introduced species and native

animals will be maintained.

 

To conclude, letters from two South Australian councils confirm that desex and

return is a highly successful method in controlling cat numbers. The City of

Unley council says -

 

" ..the city of Unley has worked with Cats Assistance To Sterilise for nearly

fifteen years to reduce the number of undesexed cats within the city. This

Council has long held the view that controls on cats have to be sensitive to the

community's needs and I believe this has been met by its involvement with

C.A.T.S. Incorporated. The number of calls we receive each year about community

cat problems has significantly reduced since we began the program in 1990 (in

2002/03 there was just one call).

 

In the last fifteen years there has not been one occasion where the Council has

had to step in to destroy or impound healthy cats as a cat reduction measure. "

 

This is supported by a letter from Norwood Payneham and St Peters Council who

write -

 

" C.A.T.S. Incorporated has been significant in reducing cat numbers and cat

related problems in an efficient and humane way by coordinating existing

services and getting as many cats desexed and returned to the home territory as

possible. The more desexed resident cats, the fewer undesexed cats can move in

and by adopting this approach, there has been a major success in the reduction

of the number of cats within our Council area. "

 

 

(1) MESSYBEAST.COM CAT RESOURCE ARCHIVE