Many cat lovers promote TNR (trap, neuter, return) as a solution to the feral cat problem. As far as I know cats are the only species for which this option is promoted. It does not help the environment, is not affordable and is not promoted out of concern for animal welfare. It is promoited purely out of concern for the cats and the total ignorance of the interests of other animals and the environment.

For some reason I keep having the same discussion with TNR proponents. I do not know where they get this propaganda from, but they seem remarkably consistent. Here is a sample:

http://www.care2.com/c2c/groups/disc.html?gpp=68&pst=345801

ok FD, lets say you go out and shoot a bunch of feral cats- to protect biodiversity.  You are not going to get all of them.  Those cats will have no competition for rescources, will breed and the population will be right back to where it was within a couple of years.  TNR on the other hand will keep a colony the same size, so the competition will keep new cats from coming in, and the cats in the area are sterilized so the population steadily goes down in the entire area.

Additionally, things such as pesticides, deforestation and human development are playing a much larger role in loss of biodiversity than feral cats ever will.  Prey evolves (that's right, evolves) to survive it's predators.  Some natural resource biologists refer to this as "the arms race."  Song birds are evolving to survive feral cats the same way they evolved to survived other predators- the future generations of birds (and other animals) can't, however, evolve if they don't have a place to breed.

Response:

Those cats will have no competition for rescources, will breed and the population will be right back to where it was within a couple of years.

True, but in those intermediate few years there are less feral cats. Fewer native species will go extinct. For many native species, this may be just enough time to adapt to the new predator. Feral cats were introduced very quickly into Australia - far faster than they could have spread by their own means.

TNR on the other hand will keep a colony the same size

So you get no reduction in the population size

and the cats in the area are sterilized so the population steadily goes down in the entire area

No. As above, you will not get them all. In fact you will catch far fewer of them. As the population goes down the ones you didn't get will breed. In fact, if they die out slow enough there may not be any population drop at all as the cats you didn't get will be able to breed fast enough to keep the population at carrying capacity. In fact the population may well go up because you are supporting a number of extra cats by feeding them. The cats you feed will still hunt and kill out of instinct. They may even kill more than wild unfed cats.

Additionally, things such as pesticides, deforestation and human development are playing a much larger role in loss of biodiversity than feral cats ever will.

Not according to the UN. In many parts of the world feral pests are just as significant as loss of habitat. That is a huge problem. Furthermore the presence of multiple problems should never be used as an excuse for not dealing with an individual problem. That just leads to circular finger pointing and nothing ever gets done. I see the same thing from industry and fishing interests on a regular basis.

Prey evolves (that's right, evolves) to survive it's predators.

Or, as is so often the case these days, it just goes extinct. Adapts is probably a better term.

 [ send green star]

Well, since I just referenced TN if not the R in support of this group, I better continue.

TNR can work very well depending on the situation.  Dealing with small colonies and open habitats one can employ it with confidence of processing the entire colony.  Dealing with larger colonies and denser habitats it will become progressively difficult.

The other thing is that even when you miss a few cats, it's easy to catch the kittens.  Those can be domesticated instead of released.  So in that way colony populatiosn can be depleted.

Of course this option is heavily dependent on volunteer resources and local prey animal population situations.  In dire circumstances one must regrettably shoot first.  It's hardly the only sad truth of the world.

 [ send green star]  [ accepted]

Another 'trick' used by TNR proponents (apart from chanting 'TNR works') is to pretend that all three components must be looked at together, not separately. This 'allows' them to release feral animals by linking it with trapping and neutering. Lets consider them in isolation.

Trapping: an effective way of capturing feral cats and removing them from the wild.

Neutering: prevents cats from breeding. However, euthanasia also prevents them from breeding for a much lower cost. Neutering does not solve the problem of having to either kill animals to support the cats (thus still contributing to environmental damage) or letting them do it themselves. Thus, unless the cats is replacing a 'farmed pet' and going to a good home, neutering is an inferior option and also more expensive.

Release: This makes no sense at all. You have the feral animal removed from the wild - why put it back? This is likely to undo most of the benefit of trapping and neutering, especially if you don't neuter every single cat (almost always the case). Releasing feral animals harms biodiversity and cannot be justified.

 [ send green star]

This proves that you're a liar, freedrinker. Anyone who knows ANYTHING about cats knows that if they don't really want to be caught, outside, it ISN'T going to happen.

(Michelle, i love your answers at this group.)

 [ send green star]

 [ accepted]

It probably just depends on what you are willing to do to catch them.

 [ send green star]

I've even seen 'stocky' old aboriginal women running down full grown cats on TV. Not that I'd expect you to be able to catch one Warren. You might break a fingernail or something.

 [ send green star]

I posted this on another thread but it is also most appropriate here.

I think it's wonderful if these [trapped and neurtered] cats can be re-tamed IF the people adopting them keep them INDOORS.  Domestic cats should NEVER be allowed outdoors off a leash unless they have an absolutely cat-proof fence that will keep them in the yard.  Free-running cats and dogs are a nuisance and indicative of selfish, inconsiderate, ignorant owners.

And while I'm at it, free-running cats--pet or feral--kill other cats.  I had a cat once that we let out on a short leash to enjoy the sunshine.  Another cat visited just long enough to give our cat anemia which killed our cat.  I'll say it again:  NO DOMESTIC OR FERAL CAT HAS THE RIGHT TO RUN FREE ANYWHERE!

And Warren, I think your posts would have a lot more positive impact if you'd stick to the facts or relevant beliefs rather than spend most of your time calling people liars and other names.  Feral kittens can be caught until they learn to fear man if you approach them in the right way.  They aren't born with this fear.

 [ send green star]

 [ accepted]

In other words... "Man is the real enemy of Native Habitats and the creatures, therein, since wilderness animals don't know that they SHOULD fear Men?" Interesting idea.

No matter what, Freedrinker IS a liar!! He would NEVER be able to catch anything but a small kitten, in his life. He claimed that he could catch cats, and, that they weren't kittens. THINK!

 [ send green star]

 [ accepted]

Here's an example:

http://www.care2.com/c2c/groups/disc.html?gpp=4244&pst=400479&archival=

I don't agree that cats are having the effect on biodiversity that you think

Here's a statement on the impact of ferals from the Global Biodiversity Assessment - a peer reviewed scientific publication. It puts the impact of ferals as equal to habitat loss in many places. Haven't we been through this many times already?

http://www.care2.com/c2c/groups/disc.html?gpp=4244&pst=126778&archival=

 [ send green star]

I'd like some of the TNR proponents to guess what would happen if the 6 to 8 million euthanised dogs and cats (every year in the US alone) were released into the wild.

Note that these are only estimates as euthanasia usually goes unreported.

http://www.sniksnak.com/overpopulation.html

Over $2 billion is spent annually by local governments to shelter and ultimately destroy 8-10 million adoptable dogs and cats due of shortage of homes. <i>Source: Business Wire Features

The main reason for cat overpopulation is feral, free-roaming, unowned cats Source: Save Our Strays

An estimated 6 to 8 million dogs and cats are euthanized in shelters each year. Millions more are abandoned, only to suffer from illness or injury before dying. Source: Doris Day Animal League

Seven dogs and cats are born every day for each person born in the US. Of those, only 1 in 5 puppies and kittens stay in their original home for his/her natural lifetime. The remaining 4 are abandoned to the streets or end up at a shelter. Source: The Humane Society of the United States

 [ send green star]

In places where ferals have been "eradicated," there has not been a sudden increase in biodiversity at all. 

Biodiversity cannot increase suddenly. It can only increase very slowly (millions of years). It can decrease very suddenly. While we cannot regain extinct species, nor can we reasonably expect to put a complete halt to the mass extinction we are currently causing, we can reduce the rate of extinction.

http://www.care2.com/c2c/groups/disc.html?gpp=4244&pst=126778

A recent study in California showed that parks that excluded cats had twice as many ground nesting birds and far fewer exotic pest species of mice than parks that had cats.

 [ send green star]

From the feral cat group which has the promotion of TNR as it's policy (and usually bans anyone who disagrees).

Is this mainland US?

http://www.newsday.com/news/columnists/ny-hen0329,0,3050247.column?coll=ny-news-columnists

http://www.care2.com/c2c/groups/disc.html?gpp=4076&pst=395752

And there is a truly ironic twist in this claws-and-feathers drama: The bird carnage at the beach is being enabled -- even promoted -- by self-professed animal-rights activists.

Apparently, their zeal for protecting vicious cats goes utterly unbalanced by any comparable concern for helpless and endangered birds.

Among the helpless targets of these feral cats: The shoreline's endangered plovers, which, unlike the cats, are actually native to these shores.

The New York State Department of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation has a reasonable and necessary plan. Clear the beaches of the vicious cats before all the plovers are annihilated. Deliver the cats to local animal shelters, where they can be put up for adoption by dedicated cat lovers who step forward to take them.

But let's be realistic and frank. There's not a huge public demand for feral animals. How many families really want to adopt a wild and vicious cat?

Sadly, some of these animals may meet the unfortunate fate that too many unwanted animals do already in this era of pet overpopulation and irresponsible ownership. Some may ultimately be euthanized.

This is awful. Undeniably so. But it's a direct consequence of what their heartless owners did to them. And anyone who cares to adopt such an animal should, please, step forward now.

What exactly is the alternative? The feral-cat defenders, who are already feeding these wild animals and thereby helping them to thrive and multiply, say they have a fine one.

They want to capture the feral cats, have them spayed or neutered, and then returned promptly to the public beaches to live out their untamed lives. The birds, apparently, can just fend for themselves.

But that's no solution -- not for the people, not for the cats, certainly not for the birds.

Summer is coming. Sorry, but beaches are no place for wild cats.

And compared to the packs of untamed animals now roaming the Long Island shore, Sylvester is suddenly looking like a "puddy tat."

Say a prayer for today's endangered Tweety Bird.

 [ send green star]

Neutered cats continue to eat native animals. TNR colonies often become a dumping ground for pet cats because people prefer to release their pet into a known colony than take them to a pound where they will be put down. Thus they usually increase the ecological havoc. The whole point of TNR is to save the native animals, not to help the cats in any way, but the result usually defeats this purpose, which is why all experienced animal welfare groups (eg PETA) oppose TNR.

 [ send green star]

Of course, dogs should be neutered as well. My family has all their dogs neutered.

This article has a lot of care2's catlovers upset. And since when are feral cats cuddly? I'd like to see someone cuddle one. Anyone know what the hot tub comment is about?

http://www.beloblog.com/KHOU_Animal_Attraction/archives/2006/05/iowa_city_fines.html

CLERMONT, Iowa (AP) -- The city isn't going to pussyfoot around when it comes to stray cats. The City Council has decided that anyone who feeds the cuddly creatures are aiding a nuisance.

Police Chief Arthur Sullivan said people don't understand the problem.

"People find those cats sweet, cuddly and lovable," he said. "It's one of those situations that you're not going to win no matter what you do."

"We have people who feed the wild cats and the cats leave something behind," he said. "One guy won't be able to use his hot tub."

 [ send green star]

TNR of rabbits?

http://www.care2.com/c2c/groups/disc.html?gpp=50&pst=359284

 [ send green star]

some well researched data --

http://library.thinkquest.org/03oct/00128/en/cats/effect_light.htm

 [ send green star]

 [ accepted]