Claims made by trap-neuter-release (TNR) volunteers are not always true but TNR is effective and humane

TNR volunteer. Great people as far as I am concerned. Image in public domain.

There is a study online dated 2009 (Critical Assessment of Claims Regarding Management of Feral Cats by Trap–Neuter–Return) so it's quite old. I can't read the entire study but I can read the summary which states that the claims that TNR volunteers make are all untrue. These are some of them:

• Feral cats only harm wildlife on islands and not on continents
• Feral cats fill a natural niche and don't contribute to the decline of native species
• Feral cats don't spread disease or they don't act as a reservoir for disease
• TNR eventually reduces the number of feral cats to zero
• TNR managed feral cat colonies "resist invasion by other cats".

Harming wildlife

We know that feral cats harm wildlife. It is common sense. They need to eat and in order to eat they need to kill small mammals, marsupials, insects, birds and reptiles. It depends where they live but there is quite a lot of killing. People who dislike feral cats - and there are many scientists who dislike feral cats - exaggerate the amount of killing by this type of cat. 

They take small sample sizes and work out how many animals the cats kill and then they extrapolate that figure and argue that an entire nation of feral cats kill so many billions of animals. This is liable to produce inaccuracies. 

We can't rely on the numbers disseminated by experts as published in studies on websites such as Google Scholar. We certainly can't rely on the numbers stated by Australian conservationists when arguing that they should exterminate all feral cats on that continent.

But feral cats certainly do not only kill small animals on islands. The reference to islands is there because it is known that on several notorious occasions it is argued that feral cats have made extinct certain small species on islands because those animals had nowhere to escape to. The feral cat dominated the island as a top predator and wiped-out small animal species.

Don't contribute to the decline of native species

This is a big argument. I remember, years ago, the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds saying that there was no evidence at that time (about 12 years ago) that feral cats endangered the survival of a species of bird. Yes, feral cats killed birds but not in sufficient numbers to put a particular bird species on the brink of extinction. And I should add that a lot of the birds that feral cats eat are old, dying or dead birds.

It may interest you to think about dead birds. How many dead birds do you see? When you walk in the park or anywhere else, you never see dead birds do you? And yet millions and millions of birds are dying every day. That's because while animals like foxes and feral cats are eating them.

In short, there is no hard evidence as yet that feral cats, preying on birds, jeopardises the survival of a species. And the same applies to any other animal species. Except, as mentioned about island wildlife where there are differences.

I don't want to defend the feral cat unjustifiably. They do kill a lot of animals and this is of great concern to conservationists. But my argument has consistently been that humans kill a lot more animals than feral cats and are doing so as I dictate this because global warming, an indirect consequence of human behaviour, is killing millions of animals every day. 

An example of that would be the massive floods in Australia coupled with the massive wildfires on that continent. It is said that the latter killed over a billion animals often small mammals, marsupials and reptiles, the kind of prey killed by feral cats. That's the point I'm making.

To global warming you can add herbicides and insecticides used by humans in intensive farming which kills many animals. You can add tall buildings and windfarms which kill many birds. All human commercial activity kills animals because it might lead to deforestation for example. There are numerous ways that humans indirectly kill billions of animals. Humankind should stop being hypocritical about wildlife conservation and look to themselves first is the primary destroyer of nature.

Feral cats don't spread disease

Often you hear spokespersons for local authorities saying that feral cats have to be eliminated because they have a negative impact upon the health of residents. There is no hard evidence to prove this. None whatsoever. I've never seen it. If you can refer to an example then please comment. There is exaggeration about feral cats acting as reservoirs of diseases.

It is notable that the Covid-19 pandemic was caused by humans misbehaving in killing wild animals in a wet market in China in an unregulated way. Nothing to do with feral cats. Or the pandemic was caused by the escape of pathogens from a bio lab in Wuhan, China. Once again, a human-created massive problem. Let's look to humans for the cause of the spread of disease first before we criticise the feral cat which is the victim of human carelessness.

TNR reduces a colony of feral cats to zero

If a volunteer says that TNR reduces a feral cat colony to a population of zero, they are wrong. It might happen from time to time but in general TNR doesn't produce a zero population. It stabilises the population and it means that the cats are looked after to a certain extent and therefore it is a humane practice. Sometimes people dump cats and they add to the colony. Numbers are often significantly reduced and the resulting colony size is manageable.

The volunteers are happy in caring for the cats and the residents of the area are usually happy that the feral cats are being managed. Sometimes people argue with volunteers and they hate TNR volunteers and there can be some nasty altercations but by and large the management of feral cat colonies works out well.

Resisting invasion by other cats

I don't think that this is correct. If TNR volunteers are saying that their work helps to resist the invasion of the colony by other cats it is wrong to say that in my opinion. As mentioned above sometimes people see a feral cat colony as an opportunity to get rid of their cat because they know that somebody else will look after him or her. That's immoral and it doesn't help the TNR volunteers.

One last point, if you kill all the feral cats rather than look after them and neuter them, you end up with this well-known condition where you create a vacuum and other feral cats come into that vacuum. Killing feral cats is arguably less effective than gradually reducing their numbers through TNR programs. #

The problem for a lot of authorities is that the processes too gradual. Politicians need to see instant results to satisfy the electorate. That is one reason why the authorities criticise TNR programs sometimes. More enlightened local authorities support TNR programs and praise the work of these wonderful volunteers.

Plattsburgh man commits a crime for looking after feral cats

COMMENT: I think that the Plattsburgh city council have got this entirely wrong. Plattsburgh is in New York state as I recall. They have a local ordinance which states that if you feed cats on your property you are deemed to own those cats. But that seems irrelevant in this instance! That's because the guy was feeding feral cats under a TNR program on, I guess, public property. I'm also told that the city code states that feeding feral cats is a violation level offence whatever that means. Perhaps he was feeding them on his property but we are not told that.

 Plattsburgh man commits a crime for looking after feral cats. Pic in public domain. Sorry for the poor image quality.

The upshot is that this guy, Mike Clowney, has been told to appear before the local court because he's been feeding feral cats as part of a TNR program. He's been doing it for more than a decade. He attends the cats twice a day every day. He is a dedicated volunteer providing a good service to the community I would argue.

He said that they would have to put him in prison if they want to stop him helping the feral cats within his community.

As reported on Yahoo News the picture is highly unclear. The reporting is bad in my opinion because I just don't know what law is applicable in this instance. Under what law is this man being charged with a crime? I would doubt that there is any law applicable in Plattsburgh which gives the city the authority to punish this man for helping out in a TNR program. I would expect the case to be dropped for that reason. This appears to be a mistake by the authorities.

He wasn't arrested but has been asked to attend court as mentioned. Apparently, his violation of the local ordinance comes under the Pigeons and Other Wild Animals section of the City Code. Other volunteers engaged in TNR programs are worried that the language of the ordinance is going to affect them. They think that it may deem them to be owners of the feral cats that they look after.

The law was not intended to impinge upon the activities of TNR programs. It's a ridiculous mistake and I'm sure adjustments will be made. Mike Clowney said that TNR programs really work and that this local law might slow TNR work. He said that it will discourage people from helping. He is not discouraged however. But other people will be. He spent years finding new homes for feral kittens. He's doing council work! He's contributing to the amenity of the community in which he lives. To punish him for that is mindless.

Do mother cats need more food?

Yes, lactating mother cats do need more food because their energy requirements increase by about 50% during pregnancy. Their energy requirements soar during lactation. Cat's milk contains about 40% more energy than cow's or goat's milk. 

Mother nurses her kittens two of which are black. Photo: Wikipedia Commons. Caption: A one year old pure white cat nursing four kittens in a cardboard box behind a warm TV. Expectant mother cats usually seek a warm, dark place for giving birth to their kittens. Picture taken in Beaumont, Alberta, Canada in 1986. Name of Mother: Sugar (March 8, 1985 - August 26, 2004) Names of Kittens: Channel 3, Channel 5, Cable 8, Circuit Overload (May 4, 1986 - )

In order to produce milk which is so energy-dense, the cat has to ingest that energy i.e. they have to increase their energy consumption considerably. And even after her kittens have reduced their milk consumption, a cat's energy demands remain 50% above her usual needs until she replaces the bodyweight that she has lost on behalf of her kittens.

The energy requirements during lactation are up to 4 times greater than those of an inactive cat. During this time, the kilocalories energy level of your cat's food should be increased to minimise weight loss.

Purina, says that a pregnant cat will eat about 50% more than her normal level and it can be as high as twice her regular amount. They recommend that you feed your pregnant cat kitten formula from the 4th week of her pregnancy as the food is designed for kittens who need extra nutrition during the early development. 

They also recommend that you mix dry and wet cat food, as if she prefers wet food, it has a lower calorie content to dry food. By adding the dry you add to the calorie content. The diet should be introduced slowly. Spend 7-10 days gradually adding the new formula to her standard food, they say.

As a guideline, an adult cat weighing 4 kg who has an inactive life burns 200-280 kcal per day. A pregnant cat requires 400-560 kcal. For a 6 kg cat the figures should be 300-420 and 600-840 respectively.

Here is a table (a rather poorly formatted one) showing calories needed for a lactating female and her weight.

ADULT WEIGHT	2 kg	4 kg	6 kg	8 kg
Lactation weeks 1-2	220 kilocalories per day	440	660	880
Lactation weeks 3-4	300	600	900	1,200
Lactation weeks 5-6	420	840	1,260	1,680

Source: Dr. Bruce Fogle: Natural Cat Care

Man confesses to feeding human flesh to stray cats outside his window

NEWS AND COMMENT: A man living in Kazakhstan (first name: Arman, 33) has admitted to police when in custody to feeding the flesh of his neighbour, Daniyar, 37, to stray cats outside his window. The good point is that he likes cats! Sorry that's too flippant.

The bad point is that he decided with his neighbour to have a drinking session at his apartment. They bought several litre bottles of vodka and began to drain them of their contents. Unsurprisingly it started off as a nice pleasant drinking session albeit heavy but deteriorated into an argument which further deteriorated into violence and to the point where Arman stabbed Daniyar to death with a kitchen knife.

 Man confesses to feeding human flesh to stray cats outside his window. Blood on
window frame. Pic: Astana TV.

Not satisfied with that act and being concerned about the stray cats outside his apartment window he cut off bits of flesh from Daniyar and fed the stray cats by throwing the flesh through the window to the cats outside.

The reason why he fed the cats with bits of Daniyar is because he wanted to get rid of the evidence. It would have been a very slow, tortuously slow process and impractical to put it mildly. I can't help being slightly amused by this although that is a horrible thing to do because I'm genuinely sympathetic towards Daniyar's family who must be terribly distraught.

 Man confesses to feeding human flesh to stray cats outside his window. The apartment block.
Image: Astana TV.

But the behaviour of these two men and the general picture that the story draws in my mind reminds me of a B-movie horror flick. Maybe they'll make one and start it off by saying that it is based upon a true story. Arman lived in Karaganda apparently.

I wondered whether the cats would accept raw human flesh as a meal. I expect that they did because it looks bloody cold at this time of year in Kazakhstan and I also expect that they were starving. As domestic and stray cats are obligate carnivores it would have been a reasonable diet!