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.
Kewl.
I have an indoor/outdoor cat.
Anyone who messes with my cat will regret it. The retribution will not be violent, but it will be a living hell for the culprit.
If you keep your cat in on your property, then you will not have a problem.
If you are irresponsible and it escapes and is out in the wild without a collar, it is YOUR fault that it is treated as a feral animal.
*My* cats would certainly not be affected, since I am in another state and I also have the good sense to keep all of them indoors.
However, it seems to me that the people who have crafted this and wish to see indiscriminate shooting of "roaming" cats are really closet troublemakers who want to see neighbor pitted against neighbor. Numerous Hatfield/McCoy feuds will spring up, with the genesis being one neighbor who "accidentally" shoots the other neighbor's cat. I hope the cops are ready to respond to lots of domestic disturbance calls.
Pet ownership comes with responsibility. I'm against shooting cats so long as their owners accept financial responsibility for cleaning sh-t out of my yard, repairing scratched cars from where they like to nap on them, and child (kitten) support for other cats their's knocks up. I also want compensation for lost productivity at work due to being awakened at night by fornicating kitties. And don't even get me started on aluminum wheels damaged by spraying tomcats. lol
"However, it seems to me that the people who have crafted this and wish to see indiscriminate shooting of "roaming" cats are really closet troublemakers who want to see neighbor pitted against neighbor."
Sorry but this is the same gibberish that is posted on the other threads. This doesn't give you the ability to shoot cats on other people's property or to discharge a firearm within city limits or other places it is prohibited. It is targeted to where the problem lies- rural areas where cats don't belong in the wild and need to be controlled like any other nuisance animal.
But I expect that part to be ignored and the same lame claims to be made that 'a bunch of rednecks just want to shoot cats' - just like it always is.
I guess logic isn't required when talking about cats.
Reowwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwr ***SCRATCH****!!!
Well trap them then. You've heard of farm cats surely.
Charming. What penalties are there for the sickos who bred these animals irresponsibly and then abandoned them?
So why punish the poor cats for having bad owners?
Nobody wants any problems. But if anyone messes with my cat, there are going to be unpleasant consequences. It's one of The Rules.
If you go and shoot the wrong person's cat, don't come crying to us.
If my cat got out, and someone killed it for the heck of it?
They're on limited time.
"Charming. What penalties are there for the sickos who bred these animals irresponsibly and then abandoned them? "
Not sure. I guess they're not the problem. Just the people who want to be responsible and preserve the ecosystem must be criticized.
" Well trap them then. You've heard of farm cats surely."
Yes, My grandparents had one to control the rat population.
However your comment isn't a solution. You have to trap them. Then you have to feed them. And provide medical care. All this costs money. I sure as hell don't want my tax dollars paying for it.
Plus, many of these cats are so far removed from domestic situations that they are not suitable for adoption.
Posts like this remind me of the ninnies who are opposed to deer hunts and instead wish to provide birth control for deer. Guess what, that doesn't work, either.
Thanks for illustrating EXACTLY what I was talking about.
You guess they're not the problem? You seem to have difficulty with cause and effect.
They aren't being punished, they are being eliminated in the most economical means available. Last time I checked, cats do not respond well to prison reform programs. lol Animals are an owners responsibility. I've never shot a cat, and likely never will, but they need to be controlled if their owner won't accept responsibility for them.
" Nobody wants any problems. But if anyone messes with my cat, there are going to be unpleasant consequences. It's one of The Rules.
If you go and shoot the wrong person's cat, don't come crying to us."
Again, another illustration of exactly what I was talking about.
Talk about a person's responsibility to keep control of the cat and get some oblique warning from the 'humane' cat lovers of bodily harm.
Super. Just super. Do you know how irrational you all are making yourselves look?
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.