An open letter to Canterbury City Council

by Marie Pepper

COLONY CATS: Stray Protection Plan, from article in Cooks River Valley dated 13 October 2005

Shame on you! Mr. Wills (Fairford Rd Vets) and Mr. Montague (Canterbury Council), 327 cats trapped and only 10 survived. I would hardly call that a proactive stance on feral cats. Both Mr. Wills and Canterbury Council admit that council actively gives out traps. This is both dangerous and I think {an} illegal exercise.

Some of the cats trapped at the hands of callous individuals could be tortured or just left to die from dehydration. What about warring neighbours? Many cats go missing. What would stop a neighbour from taking another’s cat for a drive and releasing it somewhere else? Some of the cats that are trapped would have been feeding kittens which would have starved to death or been eaten by insects.

Mr Wills says these cats will tear you to threads. If you know anything about psychology you would know about fear and flight or defend. If one were trapped in a small wire cage then one would have no option but to defend oneself. I have seen domestic cats behave no differently to these colony cats when trapped. If you were to trap the human species, you would find that they would react in much the same way. It is an instinct we all have and that is to survive.

Have some compassion. These poor and homeless creatures have probably suffered human cruelty all their lives.

Unlike Mr. Wills and Mr. Montague, I can speak from experience about the nature of these poor homeless creatures. I have tamed and rehoused about 60 kittens and young cats and have four of my own who all live inside. I have also desexed and returned a number of others. It is important to remember that there must be a food source or these cats would not be there. E.g., What you would all consider vermin i.e., rats.

Mr. Montague, some time ago I had the privilege of speaking with Councils Environmental manager on this very issue. I mentioned a colony of homeless cats (obviously he thought I had a complaint) as he declared unashamedly that a bullet would fix them. I had been asking for help for a woman that I knew was feeding a colony at a park that fell within the Canterbury Municipality. He then proceeded to tell me that he had no money to subsidize desexing programs as he had already gone over budget with euthanasia. Euthanasia should only be reserved for those dying of a terminal illness or those so badly damaged that it is kinder to turn off life support.

What is the cost of boarding and finally euthanasia? I have heard that some councils are paying $20.00 a day board and finally the cost of euthanasia. It is both cheaper and more ethical to desex and return a cat. What is the cost on the human psyche of those who have become so desensitized that money seems to come before what is morally right?

The council has somewhat of a responsibility to these cats as it is highly unlikely that ratepayers or their tenants dump them.

In the newspaper article Council mentions free microchipping. Where was this advertised? Microchipping is fine for reuniting companion animal guardians with their lost animals. This is only a recent requirement and not all companion animals are registered nor do they fall under the new legislation that requires them to be registered. Microchipping does not stop those cute little kittens growing up and breeding generations of unwanted cats. Why not subsidize desexing programs and how about abit of education as well?

For your interest, the following is an example of savings made by Tomkins County in New York. This community was probably the first to have a no-kill policy for feral cats. In June 2001, a Trap Neuter program was commenced offering free desexing of feral cats. This country went from killing 100% of its feral cats and a budget deficit of $150,000.00 to a humane program and a surplus of $23,000.00.

CATS (South Australia) is currently the only organisation in Australia to have conducted long term studies of desex and return as a method of controlling feral cat populations. These began in 1988 and 84 colonies were involved. The study found that un-neutered cats were not attracted to these colonies and no kittens were born to replace those that died. The resident cats deterred new cats coming into the area, which would have happened if the original colony had been exterminated.

Extermination of feral or free-living cats to preserve our wildlife is appealing to those who dislike cats and see them as the number one reason for species extinction. When infact the number one factor is habitat destruction, caused by humans. In clearing the land humans have unraveled the complex ecosystem that once held predators and prey in equilibrium.

As a final note, it is a common misconception that cats were introduced with the colonies. However, there is at least one tribe of aborigines that through stories passed down through the generations remember when the camel and horse came to this country but not the cat. They remember cats always being here. It is believed that cats came here some 500-600 years ago when the aborigines traded with the Asia’s or off Dutch shipwrecks.

Why doesn’t Canterbury Council set procedure and operation in a similar program to the DVD produced by Alley Cat Allies that contains information about a very successful program in America? I urge you to watch this and would like your feedback.

Space not taken up in a pound by a feral cat could be extra time given for a dog to find a new home.

Sincerely,

Marie Pepper
Cc: Valley Times.