Gregory, I am proud to be able to say that I work with you. I pray that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service will be able to see the wisdom in your proposal and avail themselves of our assistance and expertise.

---

Humane traps can be used. Ferals can be relocated, but NOT into existing managed colonies.

For Pete's sake, the problem is just getting moved from one location to the another! The difference? Different wildlife being decimated. Cats hunt and kill. Well-fed or not. Releasing, reabandoning or returning them to the outdoors anywhere can have a significant local impact on native wildlife, public health and the environment.

The cats should be relocated into enclosed, controlled systems, fenced-in and protected.

Why must we wait for a species to be in peril?

Not to mention this is precisely why the number of cats do not reduce in a statistically significant manner in TNR - cats get added by caregivers, neighborhood cats find the food, cats get dumped, and those that are not captured are fed and breed.

http://www.tnrrealitycheck.com/

---

I had to shake my head in pity when I saw the erroneous term "humane eradication" being used by the usfws.

There is nothing "humane" about murdering innocent beings.

If the US fish and wildlife officials were the ones being targeted, they would not consider their proposed "eradication" as anything but murder.

Such speciesist hypocrisy is disturbing.

On the positive side, I would like to thank Mr. Castle and Best Friends for the very well written letter.

It is great to see someone sticking up for feral cats, who, of course, have just as much of a right to live as anyone else on the Island.

The proposal put forth by Mr. Castle was intelligent, and it would be very effective, and most importantly, its the only true humane way of handling this issue.

We HUMANS are to blame for the feral cat overpopulation problem, and we owe it to feral cats to fix the problem that we created, in a way that does not hurt or kill feral cats.

THANK YOU, Mr. Castle and Best Friends!!

I hope that the USFWS does the right thing, and agrees to the humane proposal.

---

Go Best Friends! And everyone trying to help these cats. I am reminded time and again that someone's desired results never justify inhumane means of getting there. Luckily, in the case of feral cats, TNR is both humane and effective.

---

I live very near the Channel Islands, and I was appalled when I read about this proposed slaughter in our local newspaper. I voiced my opinion, and am so glad to see BF taking a stand on this issue. Way to go, Mr. Castle! I fear that my community may not do the right thing in this case, but I appreciate the effort of BF and all the others who have written letters, emailed, etc. in support of the island ferals. All the animals, and the people acting as their advocates, are in my prayers...

---

Since the 60s? Now there is a colony that never died off - the essence of TNR. Absolutely ridiculous that anyone can say in 40 to 50 years none of the birds fell victim to the cats - sheer delusion.

I doubt anyone was watching the cats 24/7.

You may not see the destruction because a cat can kill her prey and take it elsewhere, she may completely consume her prey, or the prey could appear to have escaped from a swat or brief time in the cat's mouth, only to die later from bacterial infection or internal injury.

No birds killed? Hogwash.

Humans are the number one threat - including those who release non-native invasive predators to the wild to wreak further havoc on native wildlife.

For scientific papers/citations see here:

http://www.tnrrealitycheck.com/references.asp

Further, TNR does do harm to these cats. Most get one time vet care and they are subjected to trauma and disease - that is how many die - not of old age.

---

TNRdoesNotWork, your ongoing rhetoric isn't swaying any minds here sorry. You have never managed a single feral colony and you only believe information you read on anti-feral cat websites like Cats Indoors! that promote the killing of ALL outdoor cats. Like you, the Cats Indoors! goons have tried unsucessfully to pull the wool over the eyes of the compassionate public and is never going to get anywhere with their twisted made up "facts" that can be easily proven wrong by any experienced feral cat person. I saw that you are endorsing PETA's kill policies towards feral cats so you have proven your true feelings towards the cats and your previous posts saying you want them to be safely relocated is just more lies and rhetoric. You can still post here but all you will accomplish is showing how little you know about feral cats and that you can't stop contradicting your own statements. I keep wondering also why you are even on a website like Best Friends. Your beliefs about killing one species in favor of another goes against everything Best Friends stands for.

---

TNRDoesNotWork, you have not done your homework because you have NOT managed a single colony or seen the results of managing feral colonies. PETA promotes the killing of feral cats as I stated. Cats Indoors! promotes the killing of any outdoor cat. They just don't come out and say it. They make the same empty suggestions you make such as the millions of ferals can either be placed in sanctuaries, adopted out or given to shelters, which of course means a death sentence. I have never read any BF supporter on their website advocating for the killing of any animal. They may disagree on how to best deal with the situation HUMANELY but I've never read anyone say do what PETA advocates which is round up and kill them. And no, I'm not going to be civil when you are not. When you agree with PETA's kill policies that's where my politeness ends. As far as the birds, it's their loss of habitat and food source that is doing them in, in nearly all the cases. There are some very rare instances like this one where it is a remote island where the cats and other animals are hunting birds. But where is it written birds should come before the cats or any other creature for that matter. What if the birds where eating an endangered insect? Would you then advocate killing the birds to now save that one species of insect? Where does it end? Also using these rare cases as examples and trying to make it look like this is what is going on everywhere else is totally misleading. If people want to try and adopt out feral cats one by one which is painstakenly time consuming and expensive then go ahead. But look at the big picture, we are talking about millions of breeding feral cats that have to be either fixed and put back or killed. The time it took you to rescue, care for and adopt out one cat, you could have TNR'd fifty or more ferals which could have really made a difference in decreasing the numbers of cats out there. People who are TNR'ing the cats are providing a sound, longterm solution to the problem. They are not adding to their numbers because they did not add that cat to the population in the first place, it was already there. They are fixing the cats which will mean fewer cats in the long run. You haven't worked with ferals this is your problem so you are thinking in small terms. So when you can't rely on real facts to support your beliefs then you keep spewing BS hoping someone will buy it.

---

Yes, I have done my homework, five years worth at least by now. I have handled ferals, been to colonies, read and analyzed the studies. I HAVE seen the results of managed colonies and not one was managed well. I do not agree that PETA and ABC promote the killing of feral cats. They are not empty suggestions. You simply ignore the fact that people can and do use sanctuaries, tame ferals, and use cat fencing.

Again, how many BF supporters are there? How many go online? No scientific poll, no go. I know someone who actually volunteers for BF (her involvement is more dog related, but yes, she is totally opposed to TNR). She does not spend time posting.

When was I not civil towards you? I never called you one name. And your politeness never began - you came out calling names!

I honestly just have to laugh when someone says "in nearly all cases" and has probably not read through a single study nor cited one.

The fact that habitat loss is such a problem is PRECISELY why we should not subject wildlife to additional strains. You can clear cut an acre of land or you can stick 50 cats there - either way - loss of habitat. Whatever isolated and fragmented patches are left should belong to wild animals.

You do not seem to understand basic ecology. What you suggest about the insect is not likely to happen. That is what balance is. When man interferes, then things get screwed up. Predators are dependent upon their natural food sources and their numbers fluctuate with the availability of those food sources. Invasives are a big problem, whether it is an asian long-horned beetle or a Brazilian Pepper plant or nutria or domestic cats - the recommendation is removal. The difference? Cats are cute.

I do look at the big picture, but I think you are only looking at the cats. And again, you cannot talk about trying to socialize millions of ferals when we don't TNR millions of ferals! Do the arithmetic. Maybe a few hundred thousand up to maybe 600,000 have gone through TNR since this movement began? That is a drop in the bucket compared to 60 to 100 million that roam the US.

No, TNR will not make a difference. If and when a safe and effective oral sterilization method becomes available that CAN affect millions of cats as opposed to thousands or hundreds of thousands, then we should see a difference.

Colonies can grow in size. Remove the cats and food - done. Maintain a colony - never done. Cats join, pets dumped, caregivers relocate to existing colonies - just as BF suggested - move the problem elsewhere! Instead of musical chairs we have musical cats!

The cat itself may not have been added, but that food source more than likely attracted some, which caregivers may not have kept up the pace and trapped, cats now got pregnant, etc. Or the cats were trap savvy and now FED so better able to breed (and to hunt) and live longer and so on and so on. Yeah, you do add to the population - just not how you think.

I have relied on facts, but you have not read them. Read the paper by Hawkins - then we can talk. Or read the paper by Levy (12/2005). You can call my posts BS - does not make it so.

I am not trying to convince BF or other posters here. But the view is presented for all readers and then they can make up their minds about what they may do.

---

Having seen a handful of unmanaged colonies and reading some literature doesn't amount to doing your homework. I have been doing TNR nearly 13 years and I've seen it all, both sides. Colonies that are properly managed proves the point time and time again that TNR is the most viable option we have right now in decreasing the numbers of feral/stray cats. There are irresponsible people in every instance but since they are not the norm you don't use them as an examply why TNR wouldn't work unless you are already have an anti-feral view. I've been to feral cat seminars, heard and talked to feral cat leaders from all over the country. None of us would be wasting our time and energy on something that doesn't work or do it just because we think the cats are "cute". We've all seen the results of TNR when death rates at shelters drop along with cat populations decreasing on the street. Now with more introduction and use of TNR programs happening in the country, the more progress we are making in ending this problem. PETA's views about killing feral cats is well known and they think killing ferals is the merciful thing to do. PETA also wanted Michael Vick's pit bulls put to death. They are also the same group that took adoptable cats and dogs, euthanized them and threw them in dumpsters. I said "in nearly all cases" when it comes to cat predation because anti-feral cat people continue to cite the same couple papers on the subject. If there were more proof that the outdoor cat population was having a truly negative effect on most bird populations then more studies would have been made public by now. The main problem though citing any paper is it doesn't offer any solution to the problem. That is what is really needed, not more studies or opinion polls. Saying cats are just adding to the strain of wildlife or even the environment is a mute point. Everything has some kind of impact on the environment. There are millions of breeding feral cats in this country and this problem needs an intelligent and longterm solution and that is TNR.

---

Where do you see a handful? I have personally been to more than a dozen and have dozens of friends/colleagues who have been to colonies/send photos, etc. I am still waiting for one that is 'properly managed'.

Reading some literature?

Do you have selective sight? I said 'read and analyzed studies'? Many of them. I have studied this intensely for the past five years. I don't understand your definition of homework. 'Seen it all' does not explain much. Have you seen the results of cat predation in wildlife hospitals? Have you read even a single study?

You have no proof. The norm is that these colonies don't reduce the numbers and are not managed well.

I am not anti-feral. I socialize these cats. I cannot imagine in your 13 years that you have not run into one cat rescue person who is opposed to TNR.

Going to a seminar where the leaders are preaching to the choir does not consitute a thorough and scientific research of the problem from both sides. You are doing what you do because you do not want to see cats possibly get euthanized. I think what you see is what you want to see.

Reduced rates at shelters do NOT mean there are less cats on the streets. I don't know how else to explain that to you. And, if there are actually less cats on the streets, a) where is the proof? and b) you would need to do a study to determine whether there is a cause/effect relationship between the lower number of cats on the streets and TNR (versus some other factor or factors that could be lessening the numbers on the streets).

But, no, of course. You are right - the AVMA is wrong. What was I thinking? :)

BTW, the papers to which you are referring are Churcher/Lawton and Coleman/Temple. I did not even mention those. However, I will say this:

I think there may be some legitimate criticism to the Churcher study in the sense that they only studied one village in all of England. Had they subdivided England and studied a few more, that would have strengthened their results. However, what is interesting is that they got almost every owned cat in the village to participate (I think 70 out of 72). 297 birds were brought back to the owners of 70 cats in one year, which was 35% of all animals brought back. This is just one village and is likely happening in most environments. There is reason to act and not wait for bird and other wildlife populations to become seriously threatened by cats.

But, this is a bit pointless because my guess is that you personally never bothered to look at their work and simply took the word of ACA to be the holy text.

I mentioned Hawkins and there is another by Crooks/Soule and another by Lepczyk for starters.

http://www.tnrrealitycheck.com/references.asp

And Levy's 12/2005 paper that showed no reduction in numbers or population growth.

So, you can ignore this/turn a blind eye - OR, actually look into this. Either way, science often takes a back seat to politics/money/emotional outcries/cute cats.

There are solutions that don't involve TNR, but when the focus is 'save every cat' - we won't get far at all.

And yes, lots of things have impact on wildlife/environment, but those are regulated, scientifically analyzed - you cannot just build a mall or put up a windfarm anywhere. There are not environmental impact studies done before a colony is maintained. There are no zoning laws involved. Caretakers are not considered the legal owners in most cases. There are questions of liability. And, all those other secondary causes ARE being addressed by many conservation orgs. Try to address the cats - that is a whole different story.

http://www.nat

---

This was a wonderful letter to read. Very respectful, to-the-point, and of course, BF standing right up there being willing to head the whole thing up. Awesome!

To "TNRdoesnotwork"--
I would be very interested to see any data you have on your assertions. There are many animal welfare organizations, especially Alley Cat Allies, which have in-depth, well-documented studies relating to feral cat colonies and their response to TNR efforts. And as for feral cat enclosed sanctuaries, please see this .pdf report/case study:

http://www.alleycat.org/pdf/fca_winter08.pdf

Again, please message me with any facts you may have regarding your claims, and I suggest doing research into some actual factual data, rather than anecdotal evidence (as much as I love Spax's mom's story!).

---

Unless you took a scientific poll, I'll have to disagree with you about swaying minds. Not all Best Friends supporters are pro-TNR, not all cat rescuers are for TNR. In fact, even how TNR is done is a subject of debate among TNR people - there is dissension among TNR people. So surely there are many views out there.

You are right - I have never managed a single colony and never will because I would never release a cat knowing the risks to cats and to wildlife.

I remove cats. I work with them and find them homes - the very few I have had euthanized were due to positives on FIV/FeLV and severe injury. So you can continue to paint me as anti-cat all you like - that is simply an attempt to sidestep the issue.

This is not about 'belief' from anti-TNR websites. I have done my homework. I know the facts.

Twisted made up fact that can easily be proven wrong? Like what?

Neither I, nor ABC, nor PETA promotes the the killing of ALL outdoor cats. You know that - just take a look at the position statements/fact sheets/advice etc.

I have tried to post exactly what my true feelings are and I believe I have been quite clear, but this is not what some people want to hear and that is fine. But, this is my point of view. There are enough TNR groups posting their point of view - people can see both sides and decide for themselves.

And, have I called you a goon? Namecalling does not help your cause. We can disagree, but try a little civility.

Funny you should mention beliefs about killing one species over another. I'll say this again:

Each and every time you release a feral, you have made a choice. Your actions result in the deaths of native wildlife. Depending on the life span of the cat you release she may kill hundreds if not thousands of animals. You are involved in killing many species over that of ONE cat. In my case, at least I try to rehome the other species.

---

I have removed the comments from the last two days because they had degenerated into finger pointing and name calling.

The comment feature for the news stories is provided by us so that you can comment on the news stories. I would think that everyone has had the chance to post their opinion on a story that is nearly two months old.

Unless someone has something new to say about the above story, please refrain from making us read more of the same so that we can get back to the business of saving feral cats and other homeless animals.

If anyone has any complaints, they may send them to me directly at joy@bestfriends.org.

Joy Moffat
Network Member Services Manager

---

Job well done, great comment! I also read the report and sent a comment by fax. Let's hope they will listen.
I'm not even going into the 'TNR does not work' stuff posted down there. All I can say is, my mother takes care of a feral cat colony since the 60s, and with the help of TNR and a local group reduced an out-of-control stray cat situation in a rural area to a handful of cats. Next to the feral cats is her garden with birdfeeders. None of the birds fell victim to the cats, they are not interested. She would tell you in no uncertain terms that it works. And you know mothers are always right!
By the way, the number one threat to the seabirds is still DDT, and efforts to bring back the birds to former numbers are hampered by eggshell thinning due to the poison still in the environment. Look in the mirror and you see the number one threat to wildlife is human not feline.

---