Should City Keep Killing Cats?
They feast on endangered birds, and the city currently kills hundreds. Now, it might neuter them instead.
Cats are evil. At least, that is, according to a story that appeared on Slate.com last week.
Cats are a globally invasive species. They kill millions of birds each year in Wisconsin alone. Cats feast on endangered North American ground-nesting birds such as the California clapper rail, least tern, and piping plover, any one of which is cuter than a laundry basket full of kittens. A study in the D.C. area a few years ago showed that in some neighborhoods (neighborhoods in which a lot of people who really ought to know better let their beasts roam free), outdoor cats eat basically all juvenile birds as soon as they fledge.
To top it off, feral, and they're hard to adopt because they tend to fear and attack humans To deal with the problem, Minneapolis has historically euthanized strays that came its way. According to a city report, Minneapolis Animal Care and Control euthanized over 400 animals of all kinds in 2011, and MPR reports the city destroyed 260 cats in 2012. Many suburban police departments bring their stray animals to shelters like the Animal Humane Society, which euthanizes many of the animals it receives.
But now, a Minneapolis city council member wants the city to spay and neuter all the feral cats it comes across, according to MPR, saying the euthanasia approach hasn't kept pace with the feral cats' birthrate. City animal control officials also took a similar line in a report published in April 2012, saying euthanasia took up resources doing something that damaged the department's public image.
But absent firm details of the city's future spay and neuter plans, it's still possible to ask whether the city—and the Twin Cities' suburbs—ought to plow more money into euthanasia in order to address the environmental damage caused by feral cats. Where would you stand?
Rachel Powell
7:23 am on Tuesday, January 29, 2013
Weird, I voted No but it came up 0 votes.
I love cats. My husband and I had one that was our baby for ages and we adored him. When we moved out here we got two more, giving us three sweet kitties. Unfortunately, when my son was born the cats made his breathing difficult for him. We had to euthanize our poor 17-year-old baby, and we found homes for the other two.
We never allowed our cats outdoors. We fed the birds and we didn't want them being disturbed and/or killed while eating. The cats watched hungrily at the front window.
If packs of wild dogs werre running the streets killing smaller animals I would want them gathered up and euthanized. Same goes with cats. If they cannot be adopted by a loving family because they are feral, they should not be fixed and set loose back into society. If we can't keep up with the feral cats by euthanizing the ones caught, then we are adding to the numbers by re-releasing ferals after they have been fixed. Obviously the euthanized ones are not reproducing. Putting them back into the mix, fixed, doesn't change the fact that there are still wild cats breeding, killing our beloved birds. Plus it takes way more money that could be used for rehab programs for the adoptable cats, or capturing more of the ferals. I am not a cat hater. But we humans set off this dilema by people abandoning cats ages ago. Now we are paying the price, as are our helpless avian friends.
CHDaggett
10:26 am on Tuesday, January 29, 2013
Mostly agree with Rachel. I used to love cats until I became extremely allergic to them, now have next door neighbors who are great, but let their cats roam outside. We have two bird feeders between our house and theirs and there are two many days I feel like I should take them out because they only serve as a cat buffet. Would be interested in seeing some cost comparisons for the two approaches. With the city's budget so tight, I'd be willing to support whichever cost the taxpayers less, but agree that re-releasing 'fixed' cats does nothing to solve the issue of them preying on birds.
welmwood
10:34 am on Tuesday, January 29, 2013
First of all, your question is stated as either/or--kill or spay and cannot be answered
as Yes or No. You may get a better result if it was restated correctly.
Jesse Lykken
3:25 pm on Tuesday, January 29, 2013
True. I voted "No" thinking the vote would count as No Kill, but it could also be counted as Do Not Kill or Fix.
Jesse Lykken
3:23 pm on Tuesday, January 29, 2013
Cats kill and eat birds (and rabbits, chipmunks, and mice if they can get them). It's Nature's way. If we kill cats just because they are doing what they are programmed to do, we are saying that their lives aren't worth the bird lives. I say why is our species judging all of this? Haven't we evolved enough to let the other species work it out themselves? (I realize the answer is "no" but I was still hoping...)
Leah
4:13 pm on Tuesday, January 29, 2013
Wow! Cats eat birds? Sounds like nature doing its job to me!
Mable Peterson
7:50 pm on Wednesday, January 30, 2013
How about the birds that kill and eat other birds??? Let nature do what nature does.