Key Lie Kitties

It was easy to miss,* what with all the media attention devoted to the Smithsonian/USFWS’s “killer cat study,” published less than 24 hours later, but on January 28th, the Florida Keys National Wildlife Refuges Complex (managed by USFWS) released the Florida Keys National Wildlife Refuges Complex Integrated Pest Management Plan. Regular readers will recall that the draft version, released two years earlier, proposed the roundup of any free-roaming cats found on Refuge lands, but failed to offer any evidence whatsoever in terms of their estimated numbers, location, or diet.

In other words, evidence that the cats are the threat USFWS claims they are.

Two years later, that hasn’t changed. Indeed, there’s actually more to object to, not less. Read more

The American Bird Conservancy’s Campaign of Killing

“The only sure way to protect wildlife, cats and people is for domestic cats to be permanently removed from the outdoor environment,” argues American Bird Conservancy president George Fenwick in a Baltimore Sun op-ed published earlier this week.

“Trap-neuter-release programs that perpetuate the slaughter of wildlife and encourage the dumping of unwanted cats is [sic] a failed strategy being implemented across the United States without any consideration for environmental, human health, or animal welfare effects. It can no longer be tolerated.”

“Evidence” of the slaughter, Fenwick suggests, can be found “in a long line of scientific studies”—among them the Smithsonian/USFWS “killer cat study,” Rick Gerhold and David Jessup’s “Zoonotic Diseases” paper, Peter Marra’s gray catbird study, and Kerry Anne Loyd’s “KittyCam” research. The trouble, of course, is with the quality of Fenwick’s evidence—or in the case of Loyd’s work, how badly it’s been misrepresented by Fenwick and ABC.

But let’s face it: a witch-hunt is a much easier sell when you can put some “science” behind it. And, although too few Sun readers probably realize it, that’s exactly what Fenwick’s up to: Read more

The Agenda Behind Agenda-driven “Science”

What do you get when public policy is based on agenda-driven junk science? If various TNR opponents have their way, we’ll find out the hard way.

As I pointed out shortly after the Smithsonian/U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s “killer cat study” was published, the paper actually has very little to do with science or conservation. At its core, this was an agenda-driven effort to undermine TNR. (Note, for example, the emphasis on unowned cats—the cause of about 69 percent of mortalities, according to the paper’s authors—and native species—“the majority of the birds preyed upon by cats,” [1] a claim unsupported by the very evidence the authors provide.)

And, as we’ve seen in the past couple weeks, members of the media, wildlife advocacy organizations, and the scientific community are trying to use the Loss et al. paper as a lever to shape policy. There was, of course, witch-hunt pioneer Stan Temple’s op-ed in the Sun-Sentinel, referring to the paper as “a new study… provid[ing] a science-based estimate of the number of birds and mammals killed by cats nationwide.” And the Vermont Department of Fish and Wildlife is sounding the alarm, claiming that “cats may even restrict the statewide recovery of some rare birds.”

Among the other stories I’ve seen (and no doubt there are many I’ve missed): Read more

Stanley Temple Endorses Smithsonian/USFWS Paper

It came as some surprise, a couple weeks ago, to learn that Stanley Temple was a guest on WHYY’s Radio Times, discussing the Smithsonian’s “killer cat study.” (Full disclosure: I’ve yet to listen to the episode.) Temple was, as I’m sure most readers know, the man behind the infamous Wisconsin Study (from which, not surprisingly, Scott Loss, Tom Will, and Peter Marra borrow for their own “estimate”), so his position on the issue is no surprise.

What surprised me (as I’ll explain below) was that he wanted to weigh in publicly.

And then, a week-and-a-half later, Temple was doing it again, with an opinion piece in Friday’s Orlando Sentinel (where, on that same day, Alley Cat Allies co-founder and president Becky Robinson, called the Smithsonian/USFWS paper “wildly speculative” in an op-ed of her own). Read more

Issues of Consumption, Production, and Surplus

As I continue to drill down into the “The impact of free-ranging domestic cats on wildlife of the United States”—tracking down and reading journal articles, compiling the data therein, etc.—I’m finding (not surprisingly) additional holes in the various claims made by Scott Loss, Tom Will, and Peter Marra. For example:

“Native species make up the majority of the birds preyed upon by cats. On average, only 33 percent of bird prey items identified to species were non-native species in 10 studies with 438 specimens of 58 species.” [1]

That’s quite a statement to make on the basis of just 10 studies (spanning 63 years*) and an average of fewer than eight specimens per species. And actually, one of the studies cited by Loss et al. was no study at all, but rather the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission’s two-page brochure Impacts of Feral and Free-ranging Domestic Cats on Wildlife in Florida (PDF). Not only are there no “bird prey items identified to species,” the document relies heavily on claims made by the American Bird Conservancy (thus raising serious doubts about the agency’s assertion that “scientific data drives management decisions for fish and wildlife populations and their habitats”).

How nobody—neither the three authors nor the multiple reviewers—caught this is a bit of a mystery. Just a glance at the brochure’s title ought to raise eyebrows in light of the way it’s cited by Loss et al. On the other hand, mistakes like this do happen. And in this case, I’m willing to give the authors the benefit of the doubt—largely because there are so many other, far more substantive, problems with their paper. Read more

Animal Wise Radio (February 10)

If you missed this week’s Animal Wise Radio show, when I discussed the Smithsonian’s recently published “killer cat study” with hosts Mike Fry and Beth Nelson, you can check the complete show in podcast format. An MP3 file (10.8 MB) of our conversation (approximately 22 minutes) is available here.

Tune in to Animal Wise Radio Tomorrow!

Tune in tomorrow to Animal Wise Radio, when I’ll be on with hosts Mike Fry and Beth Nelson discussing the Smithsonian’s recently published “killer cat” study.

For schedule, a list of local stations, or to listen online, check out the Animal Wise Radio website.

Vox Felina, Ink?

How many of you are willing to get a tattoo of the Vox Felina logo? Well, two San Francisco SPCA employees are.

Maybe.

As part of SF SPCA’s upcoming Be Mine Adopt-a-thon, Laura Gretch and Daniel Quagliozzi (both of whom I’m proud to call friends) are going head to head in a very unusual fundraising auction, as described on the SF SPCA website:

Two of our resident cat-tat employees, Laura Gretch and Daniel Quagliozzi, will be up for bid on eBay—or rather, their skin will be. The winning bidder for each will get to choose the next tattoo to grace Laura’s and Daniel’s bodies—forever! Bragging rights of who can raise the highest bids are at stake. Don’t miss this head-to-head challenge!

Now, I happen to know that both Laura and Daniel are fans of the VF logo and would wear it proudly. (As for exactly where, that’s another matter altogether—and their decision.) Interested in bidding? Laura’s auction can be found here; Daniel’s is here. (At last check, they’re neck and neck—hers at $162.50; his at $152.50.)

Bidding ends at noon PST Friday. For additional details, check out the SF SPCA website.

The Show Must Go On!

On May 25, 2011, J. Scott Robinson, Director of the Office of Sponsored Projects for the Smithsonian Institute, sent a three-page proposal (PDF) to Randy Dettmers, a biologist in the Division of Migratory Birds for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, outlining the scope and budget for a project called “Effects of subsidized predators on bird populations in an urban matrix.”* The work was to begin in just one week and continue through the end of September, conducted by Smithsonian Conservation Biology Institute researchers Peter Marra and Nico Dauphiné.

“We look forward to working with you on this important project,” Robinson wrote in closing.

The budget request was just $14K, but it’s difficult to imagine any proposal being approved and funded in a week—never mind one with a three-day holiday weekend. For this particular proposal, though, there was more than the usual bureaucracy to contend with.

Two weeks earlier, on May 11, Dauphiné had been arrested, charged with attempted animal cruelty for trying to poison neighborhood cats outside her Park Square apartment building. Read more

Garbage In, Garbage Out

By now—just about 72 hours after the story broke—it’s probably more difficult to find people who haven’t heard about the Smithsonian study claiming “that free-ranging domestic cats kill 1.4–3.7 billion birds and 6.9–20.7 billion mammals annually” [1] than it is to find people who’ve heard the news somewhere—the New York Times, the BBC, NPR’s All Things Considered, or any number of other media outlets.

Very few scientific papers receive the kind of press coverage that’s been given “The impact of free-ranging domestic cats on wildlife of the United States,” published in the online journal Nature Communications. Then again, very few studies make the kinds of claims made by the paper’s authors—claims the media has accepted without the slightest bit of scrutiny. Which is, unfortunately, to be expected.

And, I suspect, exactly what these researchers intended. Though they describe their work as a “data-driven systematic review,” [1] it’s difficult not to see it as part of a concerted effort to undermine TNR. Read more

A Ban on Cats in New Zealand?

I swear, I really didn’t want to put any energy in to the Gareth Morgan story—didn’t want to give the thing any more oxygen. As a former co-worker used to say, “Never wrestle with a pig. You both get dirty, and the pig likes it.”

But, as if often the case with such PR stunts, the media is having a field day with Morgan’s just-launched campaign to rid New Zealand of cats. All of them. “The fact is,” he explains on his Cats to Go website, “that cats have to go if we really care about our environment.” For Morgan, “a New Zealand businessman, economist, investment manager, motor cycle adventurer, public commentator and philanthropist,” according to Wikipedia, “that little ball of fluff you own is a natural born killer.”

Which, I suppose, would have been easy enough to ignore. Not so easily ignored, however, if the way Morgan and others have co-opted various scientific studies in an effort to justify his proposal. Read more

Feline Shelter Intake Reduction Program FAQs

The timing was perfect—almost.

Not 10 minutes after I published yesterday’s post, I noticed a link posted by my friends at Stray Cat Alliance on the organization’s Facebook page. Beside the link was this not-so-subtle endorsement:

“THIS IS A MUST READ!!!!!”

As I say, not so subtle. On the other hand, I couldn’t agree more. Read more

Monmouth County, NJ

It’s taken a very long time, but there is now an unmistakable momentum. At long last, shelters across the country are beginning to reconsider their long-standing policies about stray, abandoned, and feral cats.

Among the pioneers were, of course, Jacksonville, FL, and San Jose, CA, with their “Feral Freedom” programs. Late last year, Sutter County, CA, decided to, as The Sacramento Bee put it, “no longer accept healthy wild cats at its animal shelter.” [1]

And last week, the community of Chico, about 50 miles north of Sutter County, announced a similar move. According to the Chico News & Review, the city’s shelter “is instituting a new policy to not accept healthy stray, feral and surrendered cats” beginning the first of next month. [2]

“We’re starting to rethink and re-examine how to do animal care,” explained Tracy Mohr, a 35-year veteran of the animal-welfare business, and animal-services manager at the Chico Animal Shelter. Referring to feral cats in particular, Mohr told the paper: “They’re scared, stressed; they don’t want to be handled by people… Basically it’s a one-way trip for those cats.” [2]

Of course, that’s still the case in far too many shelters across the country. Witness last week’s story coming out of Monmouth County, NJ, for example. Read more

Follow-up: Indian Harbour Beach Ordinance

Last Wednesday, I reported that the Indian Harbour Beach (FL) City Council had voted in favor of ordinance revisions that would effectively ban the feeding and care of feral cats. At the time, I hadn’t seen the final wording of the ordinance, however. Nor did I have any details of the lively discussion that preceded the council’s decision.

According to Florida Today reporter Rick Neale, the council “softened the proposed terms of a citywide cat-colony crackdown.”

“Initially, City Council considered a blanket-style ordinance that would prohibit registered cat colonies across the community. After debate, council members unanimously adopted a version that prohibits future colonies on public property… [but] allows future colonies on private properties, so long as landowners secure City Council approval.” [1]

As for exactly how one might go about securing such approval, I’ve seen nothing spelled out in either the paper or in the ordinance itself. Given what I have read, though, this looks to be a concession only in theory. Read more

Giving Shelter 2013 a Great Success

Unlike the Florida communities of Indian Harbour Beach and Pompano Beach, New York City allows—even encourages via the Mayor’s Alliance for NYC’s Animals—the ongoing care of stray, abandoned, and feral cats. And, thanks to Architects for Animals, some of these cats are going to be living in style.

Although, as New York Times Home & Garden writer Joyce Wadler observed, “not a single client was present” at Giving Shelter 2013, it was clear that participants in the competition “had taken pains to address the needs of the users.” Read more

Pompano Beach Cracks Down on Feeding Homeless Cats

The same day the Indian Harbour Beach (FL) City Council voted to ban the feeding of, and caring for, feral cats, the issue was making headline 150 miles to the south, in Pompano Beach.

According to Tuesday’s Sun Sentinel, “Gretchen Sheehan’s labor of love”—feeding homeless cats—”netted her a $50 fine,” thus creating a bit of an uproar in the community. Sheehan, it turns out, “had no clue she was breaking the law.” [1]

And a second offense could cost her $100, a third $250, and any subsequent violations $500 apiece. Read more

Indian Harbour Beach Bans Feeding and Care of Feral Cats

Late Tuesday I received word that Indian Harbour Beach, Florida, went through with its proposed ordinance, thereby making it illegal: “for any person to possess, harbor, feed, breed, maintain or keep any feral animals on any public or private property located within the corporate boundaries of the City of Indian Harbour Beach.”

The approved ordinance* reads, in part: Read more

Indian Harbour Beach, FL, Votes on TNR Ban Tonight

Regular readers will recall that last summer, officials in Brevard County, FL, threatened to impose restrictions on TNR by way of changes to their ordinance governing free-roaming cats. This came after a moratorium on new colonies in residential areas was declared by the Brevard County Commission during its May board meeting.

According to a Florida Today article posted yesterday, it looks as if the community of Indian Harbour Beach is taking the lead. Tonight its city council “will conduct a public hearing and cast final votes on an ordinance that would make it illegal to ‘possess, harbor, feed, breed, maintain or keep’ feral cats within city limits.” Read more

Giving Shelter 2013

As I often to say: It’s hip to be tipped. And, thanks to Architects for Animals and the Mayor’s Alliance for NYC’s Animals, some of New York City’s hipster street cats will soon have accommodations to match their image. Thursday evening is the third annual “Giving Shelter” fundraiser, a friendly competition for which area architects design innovative outdoor cat shelters (which are later donated to caregivers).

This year’s event will feature entries from Callison Barteluce Architects, Francis Cauffman Architects, a team of students from City CollegeH3 Hardy Collaboration Architecture, M Moser, Pilot Projects, Stonehill Taylor, Zimmerman Workshop, and last year’s winner, designer Kathryn Walton—who also happens to be the founder, president, and treasurer of The American Street Cat, Inc. (“just blue collar folks working for blue collar cats,” as the organization’s website puts it).

If the photos from previous years are any indication, there’s bound to be some spectacular designs!

All proceeds go to the NYC Feral Cat Initiative, a program of the Mayor’s Alliance for NYC’s Animals. For tickets, reservations, or to make a donation, click here.

Where: Steelcase Showroom (4 Columbus Circle, New York, NY 10019)
When:
Thursday, January 10, 6:00–8:00 pm

Animal Wise Radio: 2012 Trap Liner Awards

Did you catch this week’s Animal Wise Radio show? Hosts Mike Fry and Beth Nelson had me on to discuss the 2012 Trap Liner Awards and my November 16 Q&A with Walter Lamb.

If you missed it, you can check the complete show in podcast format. An MP3 file (12 MB) of our conversation (approximately 25 minutes) is available here.