08-18-2013, 04:21 AM
Perhaps you're right; maybe TNR proponets actually see themselves as creating "terminator" cats programmed to defend the colony.
But that doesn't change my point; if there is enough food to feed 1000 cats, there will be 1000 cats. If you remove half of them, 500 more cats will appear; either through breeding or through incursions from cats outside the original colony. You would see an immediate reduction in the cat population, but it would eventually increase to the sustainable amount. Also, every sterilized cat will eventually die and be replaced by some other cat.
Sterilzation would only work if 100% of the cats are neutered/spayed, including "owned" cats so you don't get animals wandering off or being dumped. I don't think that is possible, and if you did that, cats would go extinct. I like cats, and would prefer to keep them around.
The dump attracts cats because of all the food thrown away there. I've heard people also feed cats there. Increasing the food supply just means more cats. Reducing the food supply would mean fewer cats. Weaker cats would starve; I understand that pregnant females actually absorb the fetuses back into their bodies when there isn't enough food, so they wouldn't necessarily die.
Intellectually, I think feeding is a bad idea. Emotionally, I think "Oh, those poor kitties are starving!" I see both viewpoints, and I don't want to take a side.
Like I said, I like cats. I have two (both neutered, and I will not get two males again, they fight like brothers). I would love to come up with a solution where every cat has a loving home, but I don't know what that is.
Anybody is welcome to disagree with my statements and opinions.
><(((*> ~~~~ ><(("> ~~~~ ><'> ~~~~ >(>
But that doesn't change my point; if there is enough food to feed 1000 cats, there will be 1000 cats. If you remove half of them, 500 more cats will appear; either through breeding or through incursions from cats outside the original colony. You would see an immediate reduction in the cat population, but it would eventually increase to the sustainable amount. Also, every sterilized cat will eventually die and be replaced by some other cat.
Sterilzation would only work if 100% of the cats are neutered/spayed, including "owned" cats so you don't get animals wandering off or being dumped. I don't think that is possible, and if you did that, cats would go extinct. I like cats, and would prefer to keep them around.
The dump attracts cats because of all the food thrown away there. I've heard people also feed cats there. Increasing the food supply just means more cats. Reducing the food supply would mean fewer cats. Weaker cats would starve; I understand that pregnant females actually absorb the fetuses back into their bodies when there isn't enough food, so they wouldn't necessarily die.
Intellectually, I think feeding is a bad idea. Emotionally, I think "Oh, those poor kitties are starving!" I see both viewpoints, and I don't want to take a side.
Like I said, I like cats. I have two (both neutered, and I will not get two males again, they fight like brothers). I would love to come up with a solution where every cat has a loving home, but I don't know what that is.
Anybody is welcome to disagree with my statements and opinions.
quote:
Originally posted by MarkP
Why don't you think the idea is that the TNR-ed animals will fight off the strays from outside?
{snip}
You have essentially argued for not feeding. I am certain that TNR proponents would disagree.
><(((*> ~~~~ ><(("> ~~~~ ><'> ~~~~ >(>