From yesterdays post – TNR in WA


Engaging vets is vital to any TNR program; not only to allow you to secure their support, but also to reduce resistance to the program.


Understanding that vets are businesses helps us empathise with their situation and work to engage them in a positive way. While vets are doing us a favour if they help, it can have great benefits for them also.


Some common concerns vets will have about TNR programs include;

Are the cats being cared for appropriately?

Many vets don’t really understand the advantages of TNR and since it’s a given that it’s not ideal to send cats back out into the street, they may have apprehensions about the fate of the animals once released.


The short estimated lifespan of feral cats (3-4 yrs) compared to their domestic counterparts (10-15yrs) leads them to feel the cats may not receive appropriate care if they become injured or sick.


Take the time to explain your capabilities for caring for the cats once in the colony and your proposed procedures for health care. Assure them that this is based on a considered community movement, not the whims of ‘cat nuts’.


Vets may also have concerns about the quality of care you are providing during desexing surgeries in high volume, low cost clinics. Take the time to allay these fears and assure them you’re not ‘cutting corners’.

What about the sick cats?

Vets who work with you from their surgeries will have concerns about infections from stray cats such as flu or ringworm. They have a duty to protect the pets of their paying clients from disease.


Work with them to address issues of quarantine and how you can best manage any potential risks.

Is it legal?

There is much confusion about the legalities of releasing cats. TNR programs need to work within DEC regulations, address environmental concerns and ensure that the large roaming range of the cats don’t put them into protected or environmentally sensitive land.

But desexings are a bit dull!

Vets will also be concerned about becoming a ‘one trick pony’. They spend 5-6 years training to become a vet and don’t want to compromise their professional reputation by being seen as ‘only’ doing desexings.


The Cat Haven has veterinary students visit as part of their training to do desexing and cat killing (30 or 40 kittens a day) in an effort to convert them to the importance of early age desexing and helping cat programs. Four and five month old cats having kittens also helps dispels the myth that cats shouldn’t be desexed until six months old.

Are you stealing my clients?

Vets can very much fear competition from low cost clinics. Having fixed overheads (staff, premises, supplies) they don’t want to lose business to cheaper alternatives. Assure your vet that you will be doing desexings only and will refer any ill or adopted pets to them.


It’s strongly shown that the vets that people deal with after their adoption are the ones they later return to – being seen to work with rescue is an incredibly proactive way for vets to meet new, long term clients.

What about the babies?

Explain that all existing and future kittens will be removed and rehomed.

The benefits to vets

One of the biggest benefits to vets is that there will be less kittens. Given they are animal lovers with the animals’ welfare at heart, yet are the ones doing the killing, they will likely be very interested in being involved in programs that can reduce cat euthanasia.

Don’t expect them to see the big picture immediately

The symposium spokesperson from the AVA, Gary Edgar…

TNR seems like a sensible approach, it’s a nice approach because cats aren’t being put to sleep, but it does have welfare issues. One of the biggest problems with it, is that once a cat has been returned to a cat feeder they’re wholly reliant on that feeder. If something was to happen to that feeder, then you’ll have issues. The main issue is that having been trapped once, these cats are trap-shy so they’re very difficult to retrap should they become ill or they become injured. Or worse, if the cat feeder were to die or have to go into a nursing home, then these cats are just a nightmare to try and retrap.

Without a full understanding of the issue, it’s easy to generalise that the ‘crazy cat feeder’ is the same as a managed colony. It becomes our responsibility to persistently explain in a positive and professional manner that everything that has been tried to date hasn’t worked and that it’s time to try something that has had good results overseas.


It’s recognised that TNR by itself is not a whole solution to overpopulation. Preventing cats becoming abandoned in the first place, education on the importance of desexing, microchipping and continuing rehoming efforts also playing an important part. However, we need to implement a holistic cat welfare initiative which includes TNR to start making genuine reductions in the huge number of cats killed every year.

Continued from yesterday’s post: What cat problem?


The most limiting factor on a stray populations is resources – mainly food – but it’s nearly impossible to eliminate sources like garbage tips and rubbish bins. With a reliable food supply cats are able to breed efficiently and the population grows. Program have shown that a typical stray cat lives 3- 4 years and will produce 6 litters in her lifetime (with 4 kittens in each litter). A semi-owned cat will be healthier due to a good diet so will be even more able to breed.


Undesexed stray and feral cats fighting for resources cause many of the behaviours that annoy the community; spraying, fighting and litters and litters of kittens. Shelters and rescue groups struggle to find enough homes for cats. For every cat rehomed there are ten more waiting and a dozen more ‘free to good home’ in the newspaper. Getting these unowned cats under control is the key to reducing the ‘cat problem’.


Growing scientific evidence shows that TNR is more effective than culling. Removing adult cats from an area allows whole litters of kittens (of which around 70% would not normally survive) to grow to adulthood. A ‘vacuum’ effect is also created allowing other cats to simply ‘move in’. Populations quickly recover – sometimes in as little as 6mths.

I think of desexed ferals a wall, keeping back the reproducing cats.
Dr Gwenda Williams (Rainbow Group)

TNR also improves the welfare of the cats in colonies as the most debilitating cat diseases (like feline leukaemia and feline AIDS) are transmitted by blood or fluid and desexing reducing mating and fighting.


By providing low cost and early age desexing and TNR we can engage the community and encourage them to take ownership in a postitive manner – rather than us just being seen as ‘the organisations that kill cats’.

Setting up a TNR clinic

Eric Yeoh of Cat Alliance Australia spoke on his experiences working for Noah’s Ark in Singapore and Malaysia; the 2 major costs of a TNR clinic are labour and supplies.

Labour

There is a lot of potential to funnel fresh veterinary graduates through a high volume desexing clinic. Private practices will likely support this kind of program because it’s better to ‘practice’ on strays.


Finding the right volunteers is crucial and this is where engaging the community becomes vital.

Supplies

Sourcing donated materials saves large amounts of money. Vets and human doctors can be good friends who pass on suture materials and other medical suppliers which is near expiry.

The steps of setting up a clinic

• engaging the community




• planning and fundraising




• setting up the facilities




• getting the people/volunteers

Ear tipped cat

Tipping of the ear

Ear-tipping TNR cats is a novel concept in Australia, but has had great success overseas. The advantages of ear-tipping include;

• It discourages people from dropping their own pets off to be desexed through the clinic




• It allays the concerns of vets that you will be taking business from them (the pets we’re treating are street cats)




• It helps identify cats, especially where they might be culled. Ear-tipping is very obvious (better than tattoos that can sometimes fade), the cats don’t need to be caught to identify them and there is less chance that the cat will be desexed twice!




• It raises public awareness; a campaign can be built around the ear tipped cats as it is a mark of difference

As ear-tipping is done while the cat is under a general anesthetic it is not traumatic to the cat.


Tomorrow: TNR – a veterinary perspective

On Saturday morning last week I had the pleasure of joining the WA Cat Welfare and Management Symposium at Murdoch University. Coordinated by the Cat Alliance of Australia some of the states most dedicated cat rescuers gathered to discuss issues surrounding cat management and work on some solutions.

There seems to be agreement amongst these rescuers that cat overpopulation issues are caused mainly by abandoned pets, or cats that are semi-owned. Most owned cats (85-90%) are desexed, but it’s the unowned cats; causing a nuisance, spraying and fighting with owned cats and breeding unchecked, that has generated a strong anti-cat sentiment in the community.


The situation of the semi-owned cat is especially problematic, as although someone has taken on feeding her, they don’t really consider her ‘theirs’ so don’t have her desexed. The resulting oversupply of ‘free’ kittens means groups like SAFE find it hard to adopt cats and kittens and recoup the cost of any vet work.





Problems with desexing non-compliance are largely in low social economic areas, which see disadvantaged people unable to afford to sterilise their cats or without the transport needed to get their cat to the vet.


Cherry Leonard of the Cat Sterilisation Society commented on why support, not stronger pet ownership legislation is the way forward.

The people (who aren’t desexing) cannot pay their electricity bill. Their standard of living is unbelievably squalid. While a third of the cases we see are pensioners who could scrape together the money if they tried, two thirds of them are dysfunctional owners. Many people with mental illness have cats. They aren’t able to raise the money or get the cat to the vet. They are not connected enough to society to realise they’re part of the problem.

Often people living in these conditions have the best intentions; they adopt the strays even though they don’t have sufficient resources to care for them. With ‘hoarders’ being portrayed as evil in the media (and often by rescue groups themselves) people who are struggling feel they can’t ask for help and are afraid animal control will seize and kill their cats. Helping these people needs to be an exercise in sensitivity, not stigma.


So if the only people not desexing are genuinely needy and most other owned cats are desexed, what can we do to stem this tide of kittens?


Tomorrow: TNR in WA

In the wake of the UK documentary Pedigree Dogs Exposed is certain to be a whole bunch of people looking to get a dog with absolutely no idea what to believe. They thought the right choice was a purebred – now, maybe it isn’t.


You can bet the designer dog breeders will have a clear message for them. Will you be there with your message? Do you even know what your message is?

“The problem with designer dogs is people might think they’re trendy — and that’s not a good reason to buy a dog” – rescuer


Did you know the original ‘designer dog’ was a marketing initiative to help find a guide dog association puppy raisers?

Although Royal Guide Dogs always had a waiting list of families wanting to puppy walk the Guide Dog puppies, no one from those waiting, wanted to open their home to a ‘cross breed’. Wally knew the importance of the puppies being properly socialized in family homes but it wasn’t looking hopeful.

He contacted television station Channel 9 in Melbourne, with a story about a ‘new breed of Guide Dog’ called the ‘Labradoodle’.  After the show went to air, the phone lines were jammed with people offering to walk this ‘new breed of Guide Dog’! ref

So successful was this ploy that it completely flipped on its head the concept of ‘purebred snobbery’ and instead turned the ‘mongrel’ or ‘cross breed’ into a highly sought after pet.

There is often the feeling amongst rescue that anyone who fails to do their homework and falls prey to designer dog promises, deserves what they get. But dog owners throughout history have gotten giddy for new breeds and canine breeders have always bred the dogs that people wanted to own.

While it is easy to mock the faddishness of designer dogs, it bears remembering that many of our haughtiest purebred lines are themselves recent human inventions, willed into being amid a surge of similar excitement. The purebred pug itself may have been the first, real American canine craze. Though its origins are older, the pug toddled its way to distinction in the 1870s, appearing on calendars, trading cars and as stubby-faced ceramic tchotchkes. Its celebrity owners included the queen of England. ref

Rescuers have silently protested against puppy farming by stubbornly distancing ourselves from designer dogs; refusing to call a poodle lab cross a labradoodle. These policies were brought in to help us feel that we weren’t perpetuating the myth that these dogs are any kind of ‘breed’.


Unfortunately it’s had the opposite effect two-fold. By referring to LWF’ies as maltese X’s instead of ‘maltliers’, breeders and sellers of these animals are able to deny there is an abandonment problem;“the pounds aren’t overflowing with oodles” (no they’re not, they’re full of poodle x’s).


Secondly, potential adopters who are ignorant of the issues surrounding DD’s who have their hearts set on one of these ‘breeds’ don’t think for one moment to ‘visit a shelter instead’. And the breeds stay fashionably rare.

Rescue killed the designer dog myth

The most common sources of designer dogs are pet shops and BYB; the two places least likely to screen new owners for suitability or help guide them through normal behavioural issues. Sure, designer dogs are fashionable, but that doesn’t necessarily mean all the people who want them are automatically bad owners. However, when set up to fail it’s often a very quick decline; unknowledgeable owner + no support network = relinquished pet.


As rescue keep pets from becoming impulse items and ensure pets go to a compatible home we’re the best source of designer dogs. In fact that’s exactly what most of our dogs are; completely unique combinations of breeds. Rescue groups, now overflowing with designer dog cast offs, should embrace this new change in consumer behaviour by providing a designer dog name to their adoptees; essentially we should give potential adopters what they want.


Bring out your Jack-A-Bee (Beagle x Jack Russell), Poogle (Beagle x Poodle ) or Corkie (Cocker Spaniel x Yorkie). List your Malt-A-Poo (Maltese x Poodle) proudly alongside a Labmaraner (Labrador Retriever-Weimaraner) or make up your own name and laugh with new owners about this silly craze.


People will always want a pet that suits who they think they are. You’ll never convince a staffy fanatic that they should have a chi – you wouldn’t even try. So why are we all trying to convince the public that they should stop wanting cavoodles and pugliers? Especially when we have exactly the same animals, but much, much better programs for keeping them in their new homes. It’s never been our role to push the barrow for purebred breeders – by giving our pets ‘designer names’ we’re confirming DD’s are in fact common, normal mutts that can be found in a shelter.

Our motto should be

“mutts and mongrels – the most fashionable fido can be found at the pound!”

And check out PetFinders Adoptable Mutt Maker or the Mutt-i-grees Club for inspiration!

Animal management in Queensland is the talk of the town today - but is it good news about effective and compassionate animal welfare initiatives?

Hardly. Instead try pounds that kill pets, support for new laws that bully owners and the demonisation of dogs – and you have a recipe that puts animal welfare completely at odds with a pet loving public. Go figure.

Kill! Kill! Kill!

First is the news that the Logan City Council pound is going to continue sending it’s death row pets to the University of Queensland for their students to practice ‘terminal surgery’ on (read: kill).

Of the 3,500 pets impounded with them every year, 800 will continue to end up in the program with the justification “they’re going to die anyway”. But according to the Australian Association for Human Research, the RSPCA QLD’s Mark Townend says he is happy to rehome as many dogs as the councils can supply and the RSPCA has called for the practice to be stopped.

The ol’ bait and switch

With all this bad press about QLD’s pound dogs winding up as landfill, a new $380,000 initiative has been launched by the Queensland government

Queensland Premier Anna Bligh said yesterday that two-year trials in the Moreton Bay, Gold Coast, Logan and Townsville council areas could look at mandatory de-sexing by-laws.

She also plans to introduce compulsory registration and microchipping state-wide by the end of the year.

These new laws aimed at irresponsible owners will help reduce the pound population by impounding the animals of those people who don’t microchip or desex… hangon a minute. Can I have that again?

Moreton Bay Deputy Mayor Greg Chippendale said 3000 dogs and cats were dumped at its pounds each year, which was why he backed mandatory de-sexing, except for animals owned by breeders.

So people breeding their animals (breeders) won’t be made to desex, but everyone else who isn’t breeding their animals (not breeders) will be made desex their pets. And this will stop breeding. And those who can’t or won’t desex will have their animals impounded. Reducing the pound population.

Sorry, no I’m confused.

“It’s not just unwanted adult cats and dogs that are being put to death, it’s kittens and puppies as well,” Local Government Minister Warren Pitt said.

So forget fully functioning adoption programs that include offsite adoptions. Forget banning pounds from killing healthy pets when other options are available. Forget using the funds generated from dog licencing to offer desexing for low income earners and the semi-owned and feral cats. Forget reducing the $130 release fee (+ $25 per day) to get pets back into their homes.

No – much better to send animal control out into the community and start heavying the public into compliance with a new law. Rather than inspire the public and develop the relationship between pet owners and rescue – we’ll bully them into supporting us. That should work.

Anti-dog initiatives

The state government today released a report showing the rapidly developing region’s koala population could be gone within 20 years.

A task force will now look at drastic measures including banning dogs in new residential areas, phasing out dog ownership in existing residential areas, and mandating koala-friendly fences for homes.

All while completely overlooking the fact these housing estates are being built on top of the forests where koalas used to hang… like, who needs habitat man?

Boo.

When we’re been swindled in the past, we can become desperate to protect ourselves in the future. The loss of control that comes from being unable to trust our instincts leaves us scrambling and unsure and we come up with solutions based on quietening these out of control feelings, rather than sensible policies.


Think, someone who’s been mugged becoming housebound. Or a shop keeper so concerned with shop lifters that they start treated genuine customers like criminals.


As usual, Seth Godin puts it eloquently

The best way to keep your bank from getting robbed is to not open a bank.

Sometimes, in our zeal to avoid loss at all costs, we focus too hard on the false positives (that guy might be a robber) and not enough on the false negatives (we just turned away a good prospect).

Working in rescue and dealing with both good and bad people daily, we can find ourselves paralyzed by this lack of control; suddenly instead of embracing our community we’re mistrustful. We fear our public.


Many bad decisions have been made while in the throws of fear of the public. Arbitrary rules in adoptions, restrictions on volunteer contributions and now, a brand new bad idea – making our foster carers pay a pet deposit.


Like the bank who stays closed rather than risk being held up, asking foster carers to pay treats good people like criminals and puts an impediment between you and the public trying to invest in you.

Fighting the fear

The easiest way to take the emotion out of policy making is to do a risk assessment. This requires an honest appraisal of the existing risk and then an equally honest look at the cost of implementing the new policy. Often when both sides are given an appropriate value, the picture becomes much clearer.


Foster carers should be screened individuals suitable for pet ownership. If you wouldn’t adopt to them, it’s natural that you wouldn’t foster to them and vice versa. So foster carers are suitable owners.


So far the risk = very small


If your foster carer has given you all their details and you’ve seen their drivers licence, checked reference etc, then you have a pretty good idea of who they are. At the very least you will know where to send the police should the situation turn out badly.


The risk = still very small


You’ve invested in your pet, done all their vet work and put together some food and accessories. Lets say all these things added together equal $500. Some pets more, some less.


Risk = $500


So in total the risk to the welfare of the pet is minimal and the financial risk to the group is around $500.


Now lets look at the risk of bringing in the policy of a $100 deposit for all future foster carers.


Risk = + $100


The risk of offending people by treating them as dishonest
= less goodwill


The risk that anyone without a spare $100 will be put off fostering
= less foster carers


The risk of the loss of potential Fan Club members
= less donations, volunteer support and investment


The risk of negative discussion about you
= less positive transfer of your message


So in total the risk to the pet is still minimal and the financial risk is around $400. But now you have a whole other section of risk which is risk to the relationship between you and your community.


This new deposit is done out of fear. Not good risk management.


Even if people have stolen from you in the past, you must recognise that fear of the public is driving policies like this and will cost you much, much more in the long run. There is no such thing as ‘risk free’ – some risk is part of the deal of any interaction with the public, but the payoff in doing so is huge.


Punishing someone that you’ve only just met, for the misdeeds of someone you’ve dealt with in the past is quick way to have them turn against you. Don’t let fear drive your policies.

Here’s the thing – most people are busy. They want to help pets, but they don’t want to have to dig through horror stories, wait on the phone for you or visit your shelter and help.  They’re the interested outsiders looking in; they do want to help, they just feel like they haven’t got the time.


So make it easy for them to get what they want (warm, fuzzy feelings) for a minimum output (money).


This isn’t you begging them or them doing your a favour. This is them becoming part of your organisation – and in return they get to feel the same sense of acomplishment that personally adopting out a dog would bring… but from their desk at work. Or home. Or whereever they are – via the interweb.


So how? How do you make your members feel like they’re part of your group?

Step 1. Make it easy for people to give online

Don’t put any obstacles in the way of me donating to you – definitely don’t make me call you or write a cheque. This means getting your online donation system in tip top shape.


Most people are happy to use their credit card via a paypal account, so it’s highly recommend you start an account with them. They also offer a repeat donation option for people who want to give ongoing support.


(Tip: Always acknowledge these donations with an email or letter of thanks)

Step 2. Make your donors part of your team

Putting a face to your group is one of the easiest ways to help your Fan Club feel like they know you. You’re not just a faceless organisation with cute pets asking for money - you’re family. And who wouldn’t want to be involved with a family of nice animal people?


Check out the volunteers page of the Animal Protection Society website. How does it make you feel to see these people? It’s infinitely more personal than pages and pages of pet photos and costs you nothing to add to your website.


I would go one step further. I would make the first person on that list titled in big letters ”YOU!”. Then I’d say…


“Our valued supporter. By sponsoring or donating to us you enable us to do the work we do. Without you support we would cease to exist. Thankyou very much.”

See also; Ten tips for success from a group kicking butt, How to start a Fan Club

A program in the US helps young people take pride in having well behaved dogs instead of fighting dogs. Watch this video – you’ll be glad you did.