Australia’s war on feral cats
theconversation.com
Australia’s war on feral cats
1–10 of 45 posts
Re: Australia’s war on feral cats
#2What a silly set of arguments:
1) "We have ethical responsibilities to cats as well as to biodiversity"
2) "[Compared to humans] are we really to believe that it is cats who are the enemy of biodiversity?"
3) "Out of respect for cats and the people who care for them, we should give preference to nonlethal alternatives in management first and foremost."
To which I say:
1) There will always be more cats. We're nearly out of some of their prey, such as brush-tailed bettongs and mountain pygmy possums.
2) Your argument is humans are worse, therefore we shouldn't do anything about cats? Really?
3) This is a reasonable point, insofar as you can figure out an ethical way to deal with an undomesticated cat once you've caught it.
Re: Australia’s war on feral cats
#3An interesting perspective and it seems like more science needs to be done to sort out the true scale of the problem. However I still don't take issue with using lethal means to control the problem, and I don't doubt in some areas it is a problem.
Looking at the issue pragmatically we're not going to see the political will to paying for a bait, neuter and release program. Meanwhile we're losing native prey species who cannot wait for the "ethical" solution to work its way through our parliament.
Re: Australia’s war on feral cats
#4Weird article. The article finishes up complaining that humans are the prime agents of reducing biodiversity and are hence morally obligated to fix it... but apparently not by animal management. Somehow we are morally obligated to fix the damage we have done, but not by reducing the numbers of cats (or foxes, toads, pigs, rabbits, camels...). The proposed alternatives are merely links to sites that don't give clear paths of action - the first is a link to a book talking about ways to live near wild animals (ie: not wide-ranging maintenance of biodiversity) and the second is a puff site.
> Out of respect for cats and the people who care for them, we should give preference to nonlethal alternatives in management first and foremost.
Ah, the "this animal is pretty" problem. What a bizarre argument that the article makes; that humans are the actual scumbags that are the real cause of the problem... but at the same time, we shouldn't engage in a cull because it will upset some humans.
In any case, it's something a self-correcting problem - if there really aren't 20M fetal cats in Australia, then the proposed cull won't get 2M of them.
Re: Australia’s war on feral cats
#5Weird article. The article finishes up complaining that humans are the prime agents of reducing biodiversity and are hence morally obligated to fix it... but apparently not by animal management. Somehow we are morally obligated to fix the damage we have done, but not by reducing the numbers of cats (or foxes, toads, pigs, rabbits, camels...). The proposed alternatives are merely links to sites that don't give clear p…
20 million is probably a low estimate. I have previously worked with a farm owner to cull wild dogs (not dingos, mainly large dog breeds that went rogue). They attacked livestock so the owners had an economic need for getting rid of them. In a fairly small area of 500 acres (2km^2) there were around 30 dogs. Australia is a massive country.
I am a cat person but I can't see how allowing feral cats to drive even more species to extinction is a good thing. The moral argument falls unstuck when you think that cats lives, which are common, geographically safe and domesticated, are more important than hundreds of species which will be extinct if steps are not taken to correct the balance. Some small mammals are primary pollinators in Australia too so you are then also looking at plant species becoming extinct too.
Re: Australia’s war on feral cats
#6It strikes me that there's a reasonably simple metric that can be applied, if you presume biodiversity to be good, and human induced extinction to be bad.
If you do, then the value of a feral's cat life is far lower than the value of a threatened native Australian mammal's life.
As for the non-lethal vs. lethal, it's all well and good to propose it, but I'd take such proposals a lot more seriously if you had a way of funding it. Conservation is always underfunded by government, so if you want to change how it's done, Morrisey, put some money on the table.
The same holds true for the usage of 1080 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sodium_fluoroacetate) vs. using more humane lethal methods - trapping and shooting are far more expensive to administer per square hectare.
Re: Australia’s war on feral cats
#7Cats are totally out of control here and there needs to be more action both on fully feral animals and those left to roam freely by their "owners".
I can't move around my yard at any time of day or night without disturbing a cat. They aren't chipped or tagged and there are no registration fees unlike dog ownership. There is no equivalent of a dog catcher or fines for people who let them wander.
I got a hefty fine for a chihuahua cross that bolted out the door a child left open and got a couple of blocks away before we noticed. A huge threat to humans and livestock that was.
My neighbours cats set up near permanent residence in our yard shitting Toxoplasmosis into my kids sandpit and killing native wildlife that would cost thousands of dollars in fines and/or a jail sentence if their owners did it and there is no recourse. I am surprised illegal baiting of them isn't more common.
Re: Australia’s war on feral cats
#8What a silly set of arguments: 1) "We have ethical responsibilities to cats as well as to biodiversity" 2) "[Compared to humans] are we really to believe that it is cats who are the enemy of biodiversity?" 3) "Out of respect for cats and the people who care for them, we should give preference to nonlethal alternatives in management first and foremost." To which I say: 1) There will always be more cats. We're nearly o…
I've hunted and killed feral cats on properties before, good luck doing any kind of rehoming with a feral cat. They are a lost cause.
Re: Australia’s war on feral cats
#9Who here remembers John Wamsley? Is he still on a crusade to reduce the feral cat population in Australia? I remember this guy from way back, he made a lot of people mad.
http://aso.gov.au/titles/documentaries/wamsleys-war/clip1/?n...
Also, this article reads hilariously close to an essay from a climate change "skeptic".
Re: Australia’s war on feral cats
#10Cats are totally out of control here and there needs to be more action both on fully feral animals and those left to roam freely by their "owners". I can't move around my yard at any time of day or night without disturbing a cat. They aren't chipped or tagged and there are no registration fees unlike dog ownership. There is no equivalent of a dog catcher or fines for people who let them wander. I got a hefty fine for…
>>> They aren't chipped or tagged and there are no registration fees unlike dog ownership. There is no equivalent of a dog catcher or fines for people who let them wander.
In Western Australia it's now illegal to let your cat out the house unless it's chipped, tagged, tattooed and de-sexed. Other states will probably follow soon.