Weep Argentina! Local government treatment of strays needs international condemnation

Sorry, "trap-neuter-release" programmes are NOT effective everywhere. They are a failure. Last July, I wrote the following to the head of a Wildlife Rescue Centre, who had expressed frustration at the damage cats--both feral AND domesticated, were doing to wildlife, especially birds: "E", I am quite interested in your remarks about cats. I seem to recall that on your TV interview, you said that cats cause 50% of the injuries to birds and other creatures who are treated at your facility. Could you elaborate on that? I have been made aware that domestic cats in Canada kill some 18 million birds EVERY YEAR. That is over 4 birds on average per year. In my island community, a campaign has been underway for some months to capture and neuter feral cats. But when I have suggested that cats with human custodians kill and maim wildlife, cat owners and advocates either do not acknowledge the problem or will not offer a solution to it. I believe that cats, like dogs, should not be allowed to roam free beyond their owner’s properties unless under control. The idea that only dogs should be subject to this requirement is a double standard of unacceptable hypocrisy, in my opinion. In response, cat lovers say that their animals are natural hunters, and that it is unreasonable, unrealistic and impractical to demand they be confined within their owner’s property. Fine, I reply. Then why not at least give their victims a fighting chance? Why not “bell” your cats. Cat lovers object to that too, and I am not sure why. If it endangers cats, so what? Are cat lovers telling me that cats are an endangered species whose protection and welfare trumps wild creatures? There 400 million cats in the world, for goodness sakes. 4 million in Canada alone. But in BC, on the other hand, there are over 500 endangered wild species. I used to enjoy watching a variety of birds land on my sundeck railing and surrounding trees. Stellars jays, red winged blackbirds, hummingbirds and several eagles as a matter of fact. But two neighbours and their wandering feline pets have put an end to much of that. One of these neighbours has had over a dozen cats and their calling card is a mangled bird here and there. They do most of their hunting at night I think, judging by the yowling I hear. This is an issue that needs publicity. You have made an important step in that direction. She replied, I have always said that as bad as the financial situation is with the Wildlife Hospital I run it will be the cat caught animals that will do me in. This is because it is so disheartening to have almost 80-90 % of the admissions that come in through our doors be the result of cat inflicted injuries. It doesn't end there either because sometimes it is a female that is lactating or a mother bird which means that somewhere out there are babies slowly starving to death. You are right, cat owners do not like to hear the statistics. I run into this all the time. They say it is nature. Nature is when an animal is caught for food but when it is a well fed cat that plays with the animal and then leaves it , it has to be for entertainment. A very one sided source of fun! Often these animals come in covered with maggots after being in the hot sun, It is very sad. Just to make it clear, I am not a cat-hater and have actually rescued many cats in my time. I just wish cats were not allowed to cause so much misery. I am running into a problem similar to yours. We moved to this area (now I have a huge mortgage) so I could do a soft release where the animal can be released on site and come back if they needed security or food. However, I have had to send off some of our releases because there are cats roaming around. Regards, E. At that point, I sent an email to researcher Sherril Guthrie, whom I discovered wrote an article for BC Nature magazine on this very issue. This was her reply. The actual article appears afterward. Please note the link for the video on the failure of TNR: Tim, I thought you'd be interested in this new film by the American Bird Conservancy. It connects with a number of issues related to my research and recent article in BC Nature. (You'll also note that this issue is getting more legitimate attention by reputable journalists and newspapers - a very good thing.) It's going to be VERY important that Conservationists do not fully endorse Trap/Neuter/Release as a stop-gap measure for controlling the feral cat crisis. This approach is one-sided and is not sustainable. It is my firm belief, based on months of researching this topic, that the conservation community in Canada (as it has in the U.S.) must speak up (in a non-activist manner) on this issue and insist on a solution that protects our native species (small mammals and birds). This means changing the 'R' in TNR from release to REMOVE. Could you please ensure that this highly credible film gets the proper attention it deserves? Best regards and many thanks, SG http://weblogs.baltimoresun.com/features/mutts/blog/2009/06/feral_cat_bi... Cat Licensing – A Conservation Strategy that Can Work By Sherril Guthrie In September 2008, Nature Canada's newsroom alerted us that the State of the World's Birds publication was available for review. The report highlights population declines of more than 50% over the past 40 years for 20 of North America's most common bird species. For migratory species including the Chimney Swift, Bobolink, and Canada Warbler, the decline is 57%. The report also identifies the 12 main threats or causes of these troubling declines. Topping the list is habitat destruction and degradation due to agriculture and logging, with invasive species next in line. Surprisingly, the data indicates that invasive species represent a more severe threat to our birds than climate change, pollution, residential and commercial development, or even hunting and trapping. And, yes, Felis catus or the domestic cat, ranks high on the list—second only to rats. The Problem BirdLife International, the official IUCN Red List Authority for birds, has identified cats as the second most invasive predator currently threatening our bird populations. Sadly, cats have also made The World Conservation Union's list of 100 of the World's Worst Invasive Alien Species. Analysis of data held in BirdLife's World Bird Database(2008) demonstrates that cat predation has negatively affected over 170 of our globally threatened bird species, and the situation is getting worse. According to Environment Canada, in a statement on their website: "The impact of invasive alien species on native ecosystems, habitats and species is severe and often irreversible, and can cost billions of dollars each year." Cat Predation Studies According to the American Bird Conservancy, extensive studies of the predation habits of free-roaming domestic cats have been conducted over the last 55 years in Europe, North America, Australia, Africa and on many islands. From this data we know that roughly 60-70% of the wildlife cats kill are small mammals, 20-30% are birds, and the remainder are amphibians, reptiles and insects. Some free-roaming domestic cats kill more than 100 prey each year; rural and feral cats take more prey than urban cats; and birds that nest or feed on the ground are most susceptible, as are nestlings and fledglings of many other bird species. In their report, Domestic Cat Predation on Birds and Other Wildlife, the American Bird Conservancy states, "Scientists estimate that nationwide, cats kill hundreds of millions of birds, and more than a billion small mammals, each year." Thanks to studies such as The Mammal Society's, Look what the cat's brought in!(1998) study in England, we also have a realistic snapshot of the devastation caused by free-roaming cats. In five months, 964 cats killed more than 14,000 animals, with birds representing 24% of their prey. This study also confirmed that the mean kill rates for belled cats was higher than for cats without bells. Scope of the Problem The American Bird Conservancy estimates that there are over 77 million pet cats in the United States and based on results from a 1997 nationwide poll, only 35% are kept exclusively indoors. In Canada, estimates from a 2007 nationwide survey conducted by Ipsos-Reid and Members of the Canadian Animal Health Institute found there are approximately 7.9 million cats and 5.9 million dogs in Canada. According to experience-based estimates provided by Humane Society administrators and staff, less than 30% of cats are kept exclusively indoors. Conservatively, this means that Canada's birds are currently being threatened by over 5.5 million free-roaming cats that are killing over 165 million birds each year. This calculation does not take into account the impact of our growing feral cat population, where the kill rates are higher. To Make Matters Worse The feral cat population in Canada is a growing concern. From the Comox/Courtney Valley and Creston, BC to Lake Erie, Ontario and many points in-between, the feral cat population is a troubling example of an invasive species wreaking havoc on our natural environment. Feral cat colonies always start with a small number of unspayed and unneutered strays, then quickly grow. According to similar data from the Cat Advocacy Society in Comox and the Port Colborne Feral Cat Initiative in Ontario, each mature female cat can produce 2-3 litters per year, with 4.5 kittens per litter. Within 8 months, the first litter of kittens will have their first litters. In real terms, as one funding proposal for 2006 stated, "Spaying 215 mature cats (at a cost of $12,000) will prevent the births of 3900 to 4900 kittens within one year." Well-meaning cat advocacy groups are trying to get approval for funds to support this approach, referred to as a trap/neuter/release or TNR program. Given all that we know about the environmental impact of free-roaming cats on birds and small mammals, however, this is clearly a one-sided approach that is simply not sustainable. Desperately needed is a more reasoned approach that balances the needs of our birds and wildlife, with the human pleasures of owning a cat. In Calgary they have a name for this approach. It's Responsible Pet Ownership and, thankfully, the program is working. The Solution: Responsible Pet Ownership Bill Bruce, the City of Calgary's Director of Animal and Bylaw Services, is the visionary behind Calgary's Responsible Pet Ownership Bylaw—a rare and logical program that benefits just about everyone and nature itself. Calgary's animal services program, in partnership with the Calgary Humane Society has successfully introduced cat licensing and other cities and municipalities have worn a path to their door. Why? Because the cat overpopulation problem is widespread, growing at an alarming rate, and far too many cats are being abandoned and abused . . . all due to irresponsible cat ownership. How successful is Calgary's program? To appreciate Calgary's success, it's worth noting that for decades cat licensing has been a contentious issue that many cities and individuals, especially politicians, have avoided like the plague. Fearful of entering an emotional debate and losing support, far too many stakeholders have set aside credible data from respected sources that told them, repeatedly, we have a growing array of problems due to the overpopulation of domestic and feral cats. Bill Bruce knew this in 1997 when he first attempted cat licensing. At the time, the issue had its critics and demonstrators, and support was hard to find. Fast forward to 2009 and much has changed. Calgary's Responsible Pet Ownership Bylaw came in to effect on March 20, 2006 and cat licensing became mandatory on January 1, 2007. Since then 50% of the city's domestic cats, conservatively estimated at 108,000, and over 90% of its dogs, estimated at 110,000, have been licensed. Of the 9000 stray or abandoned cats taken in by Calgary's Humane Society in 2005, only 17% had identification and could be returned to their owner. Compare this to an 88% return rate for dogs in the same year because of established licensing practices, and you see one of the key benefits of licensing cats. Like dogs, cats in Calgary must now be confined to their owner's property—a change made in response to the many citizens concerned about cats prowling, yowling, killing birds and wildlife, scattering garbage, digging, defecating and spraying on their private property. As Bill asked me, "What do you suppose would happen if dog owners let their dog out every night before they went to bed?" I conjured an image of the chaos, and we agreed it wouldn't wash. As a result, Animal Service's public education program strongly recommends that cats be kept indoors, not simply to prevent them from nuisance behaviours, but to ensure their own safety and health. The result: fewer complaints and disagreements among neighbours, and fewer cats killed by cars, coyotes, poisoning or random abuse, and fewer unwanted kittens. As cat licensing matures and compliance rates continue to rise due to incentives, education and bylaw enforcement, it can also be predicted that the feral cat population will decline. In April 2009, Animal Services, with funds directly from the cat licensing program, opened it's first low-cost spay and neuter facility. According to Bruce, without funds from cat licensing, this service couldn't be offered. Combine all this, and Calgary not only has a successful animal services program, but a grassroots conservation strategy that, over time, can work. Fewer free-roaming cats means fewer small mammals and birds will die. Fewer feral cats and colonies means less impact on wildlife and the environment. It's about simple mathematics that can add up to big savings for wildlife, the environment and for cats. It's also about seeking balance, fairness, and demonstrating concern for more than one species. It's not at all about activism or winning and losing. That's dated and passé. It's about everyone parking their anger and egos at the door and entering a new collaborative phase that works for nature. Our combined energies and creativity can accomplish some wondrous things, and the Calgary program is proof of that. Why the Program Works 1) The right approach – To build support for a cat licensing program, Bill and his team connected with all stakeholders, including local rescue groups. Their goal was to identify all the issues and find common ground. Everyone agreed that cats were not the problem, rather the unwilling victims. No one wanted more homeless cats or strays and no one wanted so many cats hurt, sick or euthanized because of irresponsible owners. 2) The right focus – Calgary built its entire program on a foundation of Responsible Pet Ownership that treats cat and dog owners equitably. As Bill said, "Virtually every animal that winds up in a shelter is the result of a failed human relationship." By focusing on pet owners, the program is able to access the root cause of stray and unwanted pets. A license means, "This is your pet and you're responsible." The four principles of responsible pet ownership: license and provide permanent identification, spay/neuter, provide training, care and proper medical attention, and don't allow your pet to become a nuisance or threat. Every aspect of Calgary's program is geared to instilling these behaviours. 3) Communicate the benefits – The program stresses the benefits of Responsible Pet Ownership. In addition, cat licensing in Calgary has produced an all-important revenue stream for the safe return of cats to owners, as well as low-cost spaying and neutering, in particular for low income families. All of the funds taken in from cat licensing are used to provide these and other services for cats. 4) Make it easy to comply – Cat owners were given six months to get their first license and easy options for doing so were made very clear. Change takes time and a transition phase was anticipated. Once the first cat license is purchased, a renewal notice is automatically sent out, as it is for dogs. As well, further incentives were created to target cat owners who are slow or reluctant to comply, as it is with dog owners slow to comply. Calgary's goal is to have cat licensing on par with dog licensing within 2-3 years, and they seem to be on track. And with Calgary's success, the landscape for issues such as cat licensing has changed forever. As of January 2009, Edmonton, Saskatoon, Regina, and Mississauga, to name only a few, all have cat licensing programs in various stages of development. The city of Toronto is also developing a strategy to confront its overpopulation of cats, including ferals. As Eletta Purdy, manager of Toronto Animal Services said at the Toronto Feral Cat Conference in North York, Nov. 2008, "Once Toronto had a problem with too many dogs. Now shelters are almost looking for dogs for adoption. That's where we want to get with cats." The cities with cat licensing on the books that have not enjoyed the same level of success as Calgary, appear to be those cities who have not taken the four pillars approach. In other words, cat licensing programs without public education, easy access and bylaw enforcement, typically only achieve limited results. To protect and restore our bird and small mammal populations, as well as return cats to their rightful place as valued pet and companion, let's do it and let's do it right. We need to listen to each other and find that common ground where we can all stand together. There is a solution, a way. They've proven that in Calgary. So isn't it time we got started in BC? To weigh in on this issue, email [email protected] and offer your view: Would you support cat licensing in your city or municipality? Would you like to be a part of the collaboration process to develop a program that works in BC?

Hi Sheila, First let me thank you for your article in the online newspaper. Let's hope it starts moving things down here. All these politicians are hard bones but I think we will be able to defeat them. This is very hard and difficult to us down here because we are practically under attack all over the country by municipalities and the veterinarian corporation. Both animals' public enemies. Iris Gallegos from Bright Eyes Society has been to Argentina and knows how we love our strays and the way animal advocates work all over the country and she has depicted us very well. You can read something here but this is not the article I am talking about http://www.ethicalsolutions.eu/index.php?lang=es Yes, we are a 'no-kill city; and there are more and more and this has been possible thanks to citizens' pressure. In many cities in Argentina gas chambers were dismantled a long time ago but there are some still working but we think this will change in a short time. There are two kinds of shelters in Argentina, the ones run by animal advocates and the ones run by municipalities. All the despicable pictures you saw belong to municipal shelters and they are all run by municipal veterinarians and as you can see their minds are so twisted that after having studied many years to be able to save precious lives they end up being sadistic individuals perfect Hitler's followers. The shelters run by municipalities (vets) have one thing in mind, clear the streets - so animals are trapped and piled up in those places and since they cannot be killed because of our legislation. Out of revenge they starve them to death or if the poor animals are trapped sick they are left unattended, with no medical treatment until they die. This is not our imagination. We have gone with court orders and taken dogs out of our municipal shelter here and exposed them. Because of this some of them have lost their jobs and that's why we are hated among local authorities and vets as well. The thing is that not many groups or animal advocates are strong enough to face the pressure and the threats. They remain silent and under a lot of stress because all the suffering they have to carry in their hearts. That's why many years ago the Argentine Network of No-Kill Associations was created. We are fighters. For example we flood politicians, majors or whoever email boxes not with nice and polite letters, we call them murderers, corrupt and sick. We circulate pictures depicting them for the monsters they are. This is the only way they can be stopped. Newspapers then use these pictures to expose them and the pressure is so big that they are shamed into behaving. For example some years ago, another mayor signed a decree in which euthanasia was reinstated here in my city. We raised such hell that he was not able to leave the town hall facility. He had started receiving phone calls telling him that the minute he stepped out of the building he would be gassed. He called a press conference and said that everything had been a misunderstanding. Two years ago a council woman tried to pass an ordinance in which strays were going to be captured and if they couldn't get homes for them they would be handed over to labs for experimentation. God, when he heard about her macabre plan it was like a declaration of war. We raised such a hell that next day we were on the front page of the main newspaper. We had said we would offer her for experimentation. She had to leave the city overnight and we got our bill passed. Now it is different because this mayor seems to have a severe drinking problem and his wife, who happens to be the secretary of the cabinet, strikes us as heartless and she has been dishonest in her dealings with us. Above all she seems to hate us. In our city you cannot kill animals anymore and it's been this way since 1993. The idea was that animals could not be killed, but massive and free of charge spay/neuter programs had to be carried out instead. Unfortunately, the veterinarian corporation said that if the spay /neuter procedures were free of charge they would lose money. How would strays pay for themselves to be neutered or the owners of pets from low income families? Ridiculous! So the vets have been lobbying against this policy being carried out. They have boycotted these programs all over the country. Since the municipal shelters all over the country are run by vets with mean attitudes, we have this terrible overpopulation of strays. And if we come across any vet who choose to help animals or doesn't charge people for their services, their licence is taken away. We know cases where this has happened to some of these good hearted and excellent vets. What's more, when we got our bill passed two years ago, there was an attempt to put a veto on it. Fortunately our pressure was stronger and the councilmen had to pass it. They never thought that we would find out about their new secret and macabre plan in time to raise an outcry. Because we have they are very upset. When the media tried to help us, the town hall threatened to suspend their advertising accounts with newspapers that gave us coverage. So the sympathetic media withdrew. Worse, other media outlets have accused us of making our complaints up. Today, however, one important political magazine which is absolutely opposed to the town hall, met with us. We have given them all the information and evidence, and they have said they will publish everything this Thursday. In the meantime, we are doing something that the people who mean harm to animals cannot prevent us from doing. We are making people aware of the atrocity-in-the-making and we have turned on the fan so the shit is flying everywhere. Today we were also contacted by a group of people who are trying to bring the town hall to justice because of a number of horrible things they are doing in this city. We have been invited us to be a part of this movement. It will be a sort of collective action against the town hall. Well, I do hope this is more or less clear enough, if you have any kind of doubts please do not hesitate and contact me right away. Best wishes, Coqui Canadian Voice for Animals - Argentina www.canadianvoiceforanimals.org/argentinabranch_index.html Sitio Matriz en Canadá: www.cvfaf.org