Cats, wildlife & people II
Published: Thursday, Feb. 14, 2013, 8:55 p.m.
I don't agree with the statement in the USA Today news story “Cats kill more than believed in past” about feral cats that a Trap-Neuter-Return (T-N-R) program is harmful to wildlife.
This “puts down” the very groups that are working hard to help cats as well as wildlife. A T-N-R program works to humanely get stray cats neutered, thus reducing the number of new cat predators that otherwise would be produced by the unspayed females. How could this not be beneficial to wildlife?
These T-N-R groups are struggling daily — with all volunteers and no federal funding — to neuter and get rabies shots for hundreds of stray cats! An Internet source says a single female cat, living for 12 years, could have as many as 3,500 descendants. So, an effective T-N-R program eventually scales down these feral cat colonies, therefore lessening the threat to wildlife.
T-N-R groups work for the future — hopefully, one in which cats are lovingly cared for by their owners, who responsibly get them neutered, don't let them run wild and don't randomly toss them into the woods to take care of themselves!
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- Hero at rest
- Prevailing wage downsides II
- Prevailing wage downsides I
- Obits interesting
- Lies and disrespect I taught …
- New sewer fee not unreasonable
- Leave economy alone
- Prevailing wage misunderstood
- Forcing their beliefs
- Valid comparison?
- Death for dealers