Posted on 04/12/2005 11:34:55 PM PDT by flashbunny
Wisconsinites have spoken - at least those who showed up at Conservation Congress meetings - and it's bad news for feral cats.
|
|
 Cat Hunting |
| What's Next |
 The Conservation Congress will vote next month on whether to recommend the proposal to the Natural Resources Board.
|
| Related Coverage |
 Video: TMJ4 Coverage
|
| Recent Coverage |
 3/11/05: Both sides bare claws in debate over shooting feral cats 3/10/05: Cat-hunt plan has promoter in cross hairs |
Vote results released Tuesday show the idea of allowing anyone to kill cats that are not under the control of an owner or who aren't wearing collars passed 6,830 to 5,201 at Conservation Congress meetings held Monday in every Wisconsin county.
Though residents voted in favor of listing feral felines as an unprotected species, cats won't find themselves in cross hairs anytime soon.
Now it's up to the Conservation Congress, a five-person advisory group to the Department of Natural Resources, to vote and possibly pass along to the DNR its recommendation on what to do with feral cats.
Any changes in animal-cruelty laws, however, would require action by the Legislature. That means it won't be open season on kitties, at least not yet.
"OK, we're not talking about shooting cats," said Steve Oestreicher, Wisconsin Conservation Congress chairman. "We're talking about whether they should be classified as an unprotected species."
The Conservation Congress will meet next month to discuss whether it will support the statewide vote. That's likely, Oestreicher said, since the question passed in 51 of 72 counties. It would then be taken up by the Natural Resources Board in May.
Pro-cat groups were disappointed.
"It's appalling news," said Jessica Frohman, of Alley Cat Allies, a Bethesda, Md., clearinghouse for information on feral and stray cats.
"It shows there's a clear need for education in Wisconsin and beyond about what feral cats are and how they behave and how the (cat) population needs to be controlled in humane ways. In one sense, it's a very large vote on ignorance. But in another sense, there was a large margin of people who voted to protect the cats," Frohman said.
Ted O'Donnell, who started dontshootthecat.com in response to the cat-hunting proposal, said he wished the idea had been voted down, but he was heartened by the turnout. He attended the meeting in Dane County where about 1,200 people showed up, including cat people clutching stuffed animals, wearing cat ears and whiskers and holding pictures of felines.
O'Donnell noted the vote margin was much closer for cats than mourning doves. In 1999, tens of thousands of residents voted overwhelmingly in favor of a mourning dove hunt.
"We perceived this as a back-door attack on our animal-cruelty laws. My lack of surprise comes from my understanding of the body," said O'Donnell, who owns Mad Cat Pet Supplies in Madison. "The history is whenever the Conservation Congress wants to shoot something they get it - and this is no exception."
The idea was proposed by Mark Smith, a La Crosse firefighter who wants the state to reclassify stray and feral cats as an unprotected species, arguing that they're no different from invasive species. After news of the proposal hit local and national media, Smith was the target of death threats.
Smith, whose answering machine message said he would not talk about the feral cat proposal, did not return a phone message Tuesday night.
In support of his proposal, Smith cited research by a University of Wisconsin-Madison professor that showed feral cats kill millions of songbirds as well as native species such as pheasants and grouse every year in the state.
Despite the yes vote, the Legislature would have the ultimate authority to change animal-cruelty laws.
"If it ever got that far (lawmakers) would have to declare the animal a nuisance. That will probably not happen," said Oestreicher.
"The thing here is, hopefully we've gotten the attention of the irresponsible pet owners, not just here in Wisconsin but other states, that once you tire of that animal, just don't take it out to the woods and drop it off."
Attendance at the Conservation Congress hearings was 13,281, more than twice the number that showed up last year. The meetings are always held on the second Monday in April. The 20-year average is about 7,000, though more than 30,000 attended in 1999, the year of the mourning dove hunt vote.
You don't know what the heck you are talking about. Please reinsert your brain before posting again.
Like I said...we need to work at a permanent solution from the beginning...not this dangerous easy selfish back door temporary solution....many cats are just going to be maimed and die a slow death....
Not always.
Once your cat is out of your yard it's fair game bub.
No, it's not that way here.
The last guy who tried to ignore The Rules (in a non-cat related incident) has seen his professional career and marriage suffer as a result, and we hear that his church publicly announced that he's started drinking again. His life is going down the toilet. That is the fate of those who disobey The Rules.
If you don't like The Rules, don't come to this neighborhood.
I grew up in the country in Texas, and I now live in the country in California, so I think I am fairly well acquained with rural habits and attitudes. I didn't say that this measure did give anyone the right to shoot cats on their home territory. But unrestrained cats do roam, often widely, and when Mr. A's Tigger sets foot on Mr. B's property, Mr. B would be within his "rights" to shoot Tigger. Mr. B may then "shovel and shut up," but people are notoriously bad at keeping secrets, and when Mr. A finds out just what happened to Tigger, he may then find it within his "rights" to shoot Mr. B's hound dog the next time he gets out of the fence again and comes trotting down the road. This is where the Hatfield/McCoy aspect comes in. People get very, very testy about other people shooting their animals, even when they should have controlled them themselves in the first place. If you don't believe that this measure ups the potential for human-on-human violence, just look at some of the veiled threats on this thread.
As for other methods for controlling cats, there are plenty. For true ferals that can't be rehabilitated, you trap them and euthanize them. They end up just as dead, yes, but at least you can weed out the ones that are totally uncontrollable or too sick to get well from those who can be placed somewhere. And lots of places are now supporting feral "colonies," where volunteers trap, neuter, and release the animals, then feed them until they die of old age. This is work, yes, and I agree that it should not be done on the taxpayer's dime -- but there are plenty of people who are nutsy enough about animals to do this sort of thing, if they are simply allowed to do so.
"Anyway, you're missing my point. I don't think idea of shooting feral cats is that bad, but I think a lot of house cats could be mistaken as feral cats and shot. That's my problem."
Shooting feral cats is legal in many states.
How come we don't here of stories where people start shooting housecats because of the law, due to mistaken identity or on purpose?
That's because there are none. In fact, this issue parallels the concealed carry movement in many ways. Those against it argue based on emotion without any facts. And they claim that the passage of concealed carry laws would lead to wild west shootouts or incidents of road rage where concealed carry holders go nuts. They haven't been able to come up with any examples though.
Come on, since it's already legal in many other states you should be able to find plenty of examples where 'evil bloodthirsty cat haters' went around and shot somone's pet and later claimed they thought it was feral.
Go ahead. I'll wait. But if you can't find a bunch of stories that by your line of thought should exist, will you admit your concern is unfounded???
Really? The Rule on my property is once it's on my property, I do what I want with it. My dog loves cat's. She finds them quite tasty.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.