Secret Cat vs Other Cat

Since Secret Cat was cool with him, I started giving Other Cat a bit of food. In three weeks he went from a skitty feral, to a chubbabubba who would stay nearby as I filled his bowl… even though he gently hissed at me as I did so! It was sad to see the little guy so fearful.

But you know – just like in the Community Cats campaign – feeding on its own isn’t enough. Fast forward to yesterday when my humane cat trap arrived! Woo!

And as it turns out catching him was easy peasy! I put the trap out early yesterday evening (so he’d have all night to get in there before his appointment first thing today), I walk inside & hear ching! through the open window… success!

One very pissed off cat in a convenient, transportable package…

The vet has been able to confirm that he’s… a he! He’s about three years old and apart from a few fleas is in pretty good health. He’s now had his harblz removed and in a few hours he can come home and go back out into the garden.

Hopefully he’ll forgive me & stick around, but if not that’s fine too. I’m just happy to know he will no longer be the local Lothario.

Long live the Community Cat! <3






*** Update – Saturday ***

Lookit who’s sleeping on my steps – my big tough (ex)tom cat!

“… of a radical or a revolutionary is not the willingness to confront the orthodoxy and arrogance of the rulers but the readiness to contest illusions and falsehoods among close friends and allies.” ~ Christopher Hitchens

In the field of animal protection, with large, national organizations taking in the lion’s share of resources for the stated purpose of helping animals even as they use that money and influence to undermine the No Kill cause – the need for the public and activists to become more savvy – to learn to read between the lines of cleverly worded press releases and fundraising appeals – is, in fact, an urgent need. We need to learn to separate whimsy over substance, to demand results, and to be intolerant of those organizations which never evolve their approach to overcome obstacles to success, that endlessly fundraise on a problem they do not strategically combat, and which sacrifice the best interest of animals to their merciless, greedy fundraising machines.

This is a must read article, showing how the movement will need to be driven here in Australia too, should we ever want to see shelters be a safe place for pets.

Nathan Winograd – Pat the bunny

Photo: BBC News

If the stray cat is not friendly, it may be feral or semi-feral. Feral and semi-feral cats are able to look after themselves and, so long as the feral cat is healthy, leaving it alone may be the best option.

TNR (trap, neuter, release) is well established in Britain, while major investment by welfare groups in programs which offer free cat desexing to free-roaming cats of semi and colony carers, have for several decades supported community efforts in managing cat numbers. In fact the leading cat charity of the UK, Cats Protection helps desex more than 170,000 cats per year.

Along with embracing free-roaming cats, animal welfare groups in the UK encourage ‘barn cat’ adoptions, further cementing the idea that ‘working’ cats are a desirable member of the neighbourhood.

The effectiveness of their programs is evident; the public are encouraged to help keep cats out of shelters, meaning healthy, untame cats aren’t inflating shelter kill rates;

In Australia, the situation is quite different. Our major animal welfare organisations encourage people to feel that cats should be neither seen, nor tolerated. The RSPCA was a driving force behind probably the most well known cat campaign in Australia - the 'Who's for Cats' program. Encouraging anti-cat sentiment in the community, the program asked people to take action against cats, trap or call council and ensure any unowned cats were impounded. The results have been of course new records in the number of cats killed in pounds.

With the blessing of major animal welfare groups, councils enthusiastically mandate all kinds of restrictions surrounding cats in the suburbs, including curfews. One of the first to do so was Bendigo council. In 2004 it introduced a curfew designed to ‘get cats off the streets’ and by gosh, it did! (Read more: Bendigo: a case study in cat management)

Which brings us to today’s climate. Where cat haters rule;

A Strathdale resident claiming to be euthanasing wandering cats has Bendigo’s feline-loving community outraged.

About three weeks ago a notice appeared on a community notice board at Strathdale Shopping Centre warning cat owners that their pets would be trapped and “humanely destroyed” if they came onto that person’s property.

A subsequent notice advised the person had killed three cats, two with collars, and was thinking about “tanning their hides”.

Sure, any psycho could make up a letter like this and post it for attention, but what is really disturbing is the enormous number of comments in support of his actions;

“If your cat was locked away like all dogs this would not be a problem!”

“Simple solution to this people, keep your pets locked up like responsible pet owners should, if you can’t be sure of your cats whereabouts at all times then you should not own one.”

So if a cat is ‘out’, an owner is at fault and anything that happens to it, is really the fault of an ‘irresponsible owner’ – dangerous thinking which drives 1,700 cats into the Bendigo pound annually, most of which are killed there.

Surely, those advocating ‘for’ the cats would be calling for more acceptance? Unfortunately, no;

(Bendigo Animal Welfare and Community Services president Debbie Edwards) said she empathised with people who were plagued by nuisance cats.

“Cats are highly-developed hunters, they do kill things, and they can be noisy. No one wants to wake up to the sound of cats fighting,” she said.

“And if you’re a gardener you don’t want to be digging up cat poo, there’s nothing worse than the smell of cat poo. I fully support people’s right to use cat traps, but we don’t support the destruction of cats, that is against the law.”

By following the major welfare groups lead in supporting the idea that street-cats are beyond compassion, we’ve chosen vilification, abuse and killing for the cats of our community. We now have undeniable evidence that we’ve empowered the wrong people to act. We, as cat lovers, now have an obligation to advocate for the rights of cats to live free of harassment, if we ever want to see a future where our pet cats are safe and shelters stop the wholesale slaughter of unowned cats.

See also: There’s no No Kill without TNR

Is this the ‘animal welfare’ system we’re happy to have?

Image – The Newcastle Herald

The RSPCA Rutherford shelter has for several years managed pound services for the suburbs of Maitland, Lake Macquarie and Newcastle (NSW). The pound had long been criticised by animal advocates for refusing to release animals to community rescue, for working to overturn minimum impound periods making it easier to kill pets and for running overcapacity, especially during the busy holiday periods.

But in 2011, the RSPCA began negotiations with the Cessnock Council (Kurri Kurri Animal Shelter) to take over their pound, and in doing so expand the Rutherford shelter load by an expected 800 dogs and 300 cats per year.

The news was met with howls of protest from animal rescue groups in the area, with groups claiming they had been left out of discussions, that council had awarded the contract without calling for tenders and that more animals would die under the new management;

“Kurri Kurri pound has an extremely low rate of animals being put to sleep,” Hunter Animal Rescue president Jaimie Abbott said.

“This low euthanasia rate is because of the passionate and dedicated rangers and a large [number] of rescue groups releasing from the pound.

“This figure will not be maintained under the proposed new scheme and rescue groups will not be able to help save these animals.”

Despite these objections, council went ahead with the contract. So for the last few months, animals from Kurri Kurri with its “extremely low” kill rate are now being processed by the RSPCA NSW in Rutherford.

Fast forward to today, and how’s it working out for the pets?

Creatures swamp Rutherford RSPCA shelter

The number of animals dumped at the RSPCA’s Rutherford shelter since the start of the summer holiday season has jumped by almost 40% on last year’s figures with almost 1,300 pets passing through the doors over the past five weeks.

There has been a steady procession of animals since the beginning of December and staff are preparing for the numbers to continue to rise with three weeks of school holidays remaining.

Healthy kittens are being euthanised as staff struggle to cope with the unprecedented jump in the number of animals arriving at shelter.
….
(RSPCA spokeswoman Marianne Zander) said the majority of animals handed in at Rutherford had been dogs and kittens, many of the kittens having to be destroyed.
…
She said the shelter had also received many dogs and puppies, 175 of them surrenders.

She said as soon as the animals were behaviour- and health-assessed they stayed at the shelter for as long as it took to find them a new home but if it came to the shelter being too full, animals would be transferred to other shelters.

Now, this is where it gets interesting; the pound claims that should rehomable pets be in danger, they can simply be moved to other RSPCA locations. However those other locations aren’t likely a safe option either. The RSPCA NSW Annual Report 2010/11 contains no breakdown for individual shelters, but provides these overall number, state-wide for the year:

9,606 rehomed
5,509 returned
21,510 Killed (8,209 dogs & 13,301 cats)

Not very reassuring.

The Cessnock Council contract is worth more than $2 million to the RSPCA. Collecting multiple pound tenders, regardless of capacity seems to be a growing trend amongst major animal welfare organisations. And being able to explain away any surge in impounds by blaming ‘irresponsible owners’, ‘global warming‘, or the carbon tax has meant the public has largely remained ignorant the effects of pound management has on kill rates.

The RSPCA NSW is aware of the lack of capacity and had plans to expand its Tighes Hill vet clinic into an ‘animal care centre’ to cope with the pressure Cessnock city councils’ pound services are placing on the Rutherford shelter.

Unfortunately however, until other solutions are found, the lives of those pets who were once able to be saved by community rescue groups from the Kurri Kurri pound, will remain in the hands of an organisation who seems to be happy to use killing as the main tool to make its overcrowding problems go away.
- – - – - – - – -
If a member of the public was to acquire so many pets that it was ‘forced’ to kill some to make space to continue to acquire more, we would call that ‘irresponsible’. When shelters do it however, they blame the community for the killing…
- – - – - – - – -

Archive of news articles
1. Rescue groups want Rutherford pound animals
2. Lake Macquarie’s new policy on feral animals
3. Cessnock council puts Kurri pound decisions on a lead
4. Abandoned animals on death row
5. RSPCA planning to make room for more homeless
6. Fear for lives of pound animals
7. Animal welfare activists to protest pound closure

Have all these shiny, shiny new laws solved their cat ‘problems’? Of course not. As we’ve seen time and time again, mandates which target owners do little to improve outcomes for cats as overwhelmingly, cats who have owners aren’t the ‘problem’. It’s the large population of unowned cats who need help.

It did have an effect however; by 2009/10 – just one year later – the number of registered cats dropped to 5,920, putting more cats at risk of being killed at the pound by being unregistered.

Unsatisfied, the council in 2010 added a night time curfew to their cat management laws;

Kingston cat owners who let their moggies roam the streets at night will face a $60 fine from next month. The council’s controversial cat curfew comes into effect from Monday, November 1, grounding cats from dusk till dawn.

The curfew supported by the RSPCA and the Cat Protection Society;

Cat Protection Society executive director Dr Carole Webb said a curfew, already adopted by several Melbourne councils, was in the animals’ interests because it cut the risk of injury and spread of diseases such as feline AIDS.

So now they had their curfew, what happened next?

Once the curfew is official… the council will issue warning notices and ads before starting an after-hours’ trapping program.

Council acknowledged that the introduction of the curfew enables Council to more effectively target wild cat colonies and remove them from the community, minimising the chance of trapping owned domestic cats.
Council Annual Report 2009/10

Council was given the blessing of animal welfare groups to trap and kill cats without owners.

And they aren’t only trapping neighbourhood strays, they’re encouraging people to lure cats onto their property with food;

If you have a nuisance cat that you’d like us to remove from your property, your cooperation will be needed to establish a regular feeding time. To ensure the cat can be easily found when officers come to your property, you should feed it during business hours at the same time, and place each day. A feeding pattern should be established over a minimum period of at least 7 DAYS. The cat should NOT to be fed for 24 HOURS before the day the officers are to attend for trapping.

Kingston Council website

Remember, this council is being held up by cat ‘welfare’ as a council doing right by cat welfare;

Cat Protection Society executive director Dr Carole Webb said the (Kingston) curfew benefited the community and protected cats…

“I think all-round night containment is a win-win situation for everyone,” Dr Webb said.

So after all these moves to improve cat ‘welfare’, what’s the situation for cats in Kingston?

Well, the impound rate for cats remained constant;
2008/09 – 266
2009/10 – 295
2010/11 – 254
(Council Annual Reports)

(Whether ‘colony culls’ are included in these figures is unclear – the idea that anything trapped ‘after hours’ can be classified as unowned/feral and able to be killed immediately, certainly leaves this figure open to interpretation.)

And despite assertions that these laws would somehow improve cat health, feline ‘AIDS’ or FIV is still a problem the cat community.

But most worryingly, the community’s feelings around cats have changed. Having set the communities expectation that cats should be confined or removed;

Cruelty against cats in the area seem to be on the increase;

Our pet hate is cruelty in Kingston

Kingston pet owners are under fire after the number of animal cruelty complaints rose by almost 60 per cent during the past financial year…

And all cats are at risk from the newly empowered cat trappers;

Benjamin, 5, from Mordialloc with his severely injured cat Spotty, who was doused with an unknown chemical.

The two-year-old cat was taken to the pound on December 16 with pus seeping from her nose and face after a White St resident alerted Kingston Council to Spotty’s capture.

‘‘We let her out in the morning (December 15) and she didn’t come home, which was a bit strange.’’
….
The RSPCA warned against residents taking matters into their own hands regarding animal cruelty. “If people are concerned they should contact their local authorities to ensure the most effective and humane method of control is used,” senior inspector Simon Primrose said.

Seems cats have two choices; death in the hands of council, or torture at the hands of cat haters – things go from bad to worse for the cats of Kingston.

The Lost Dogs Home is circling the wagons to defend themselves from the public questioning of their high kill rates and multi-million dollar budget as presented in their annual report, deleting posts from Facebook and locking down their fan page. However I did receive the following response when I asked some questions:

“Hi Michelle, as a long term critic of mainstream animal welfare organisations you know as well as anyone know that we are always working on ways to improve animal welfare in Australia. You are also more than aware of the many proactive services the Home offers to increase the number of pets identified and our initiatives to adopt more unwanted pets into homes.”

I’d like to think rather than being a long term critic of ‘mainstream organisations’, I’m actually a long term critic of the unnecessary killing of pets. I’d also like to think I’ve been an avid supporter of rescue as a whole, but when an organisation simply refuses to reflect the community’s belief that shelters should offer ’shelter’ to homeless animals, ignores the experience of more progressive organisations which have eliminated shelter killing, and squanders millions of dollars killing, rather than saving pets… then I feel being ‘critical’ is the only appropriate response.

Question to the LDH number 1.

Cat impounds at the Lost Dogs Home have increased only slightly in a decade (from 8,213 in 1999, to 10,995 in 2011); however your cat adoptions dropped this year to less than 1,000. Given intakes seem to be remaining steady, and with the enormous discrepancy between adoptions and intakes, can you please tell us what programs you have planned in the future to reduce the number of cats entering your organisation?

Answer from the LDH:

“We will have to agree to disagree on the solution to the cat overpopulation crisis. That being said we are dedicated to raising awareness for what it means to be a responsible owner and to reducing the number of unwanted, undesexed and feral cats. You can find lots of information about our new cat facility, satellite kitten adoption programs and how well it’s working on our website.”

I think it is fantastic that the Lost Dogs Home is promoting “responsible pet ownership” – I really do. But when did this become an acceptable substitute for saving the lives of those pets who are already born, in their care and who are needing protection?

This organisation killed nearly 9,000 of the 11,000 cats they impounded for the year. Just think for one moment, how many cats that is. Look at the cat at the start of this article and then try and imagine thousands more like him. Killed by an organisation who claims to be a champion for cat welfare.

“Raising awareness” didn’t help these cats. Sure, maybe one day in the future “raising awareness” will lead to less cats somehow… whatever. But how does running an awareness campaign which might work tomorrow, make it OK for an animal welfare organisation, to seek out and kill today the very same animals it claims to be protecting? To each year accept several million dollars worth of donations from pet lovers to save the lives of cats… while simultaneously accepting several million dollars worth of local council contracts to trap and kill them?

We absolutely do have to “agree to disagree” on the solution to cat overpopulation in shelters – namely that I do not believe in shelters artificially inflating numbers by running cat trapping & killing programs on behalf of local councils is a solution. I do not believe killing cats en-mass is a solution. I do not believe that continuing to ignore the experience of shelters who have reduced and even eliminated cats being killed offering their communities bulk, targeting, free and discount desexing is a solution. I do not believe using the donations of pet lovers to kill cats is a solution. I do not believe an ‘awareness campaign’, rather than active and proven programs to reduce cat impounds is a solution.

And the truth is, neither do the Lost Dogs Home. They have no five year plan to eliminate the killing of cats in their shelter. They have no ten year plan to eliminate the killing of cats in their shelter. They plan to kill cats every year for the forseeable future. Because their leadership believes there is no other way. How’s that plan working out as a ’solution to cat overpopulation’ so far?

Question to the LDH number 2.

This year you adopted 2,168 dogs, but killed 2,879. Is it your belief that more than half of unclaimed dogs are truly unsavable?

Answer from the LDH:

“The Lost Dogs’ Home operates on a totally open-door policy. We do not turn any pets away and accept everything. We have a committed team who do everything we can to reunite lost pets with their owners and rehouse as many abandoned dogs and cats as possible.”

So there you have it folks – the reason the Home kills more than half of unclaimed dogs is because the organisation takes them in. If the dogs weren’t taken in, the Home wouldn’t kill them – simple! Meanwhile, there is no hope of less killing whatsoever, as they are doing “everything” they can.

The killing certainly has nothing to do with the fact scared and lost pets aren’t having their pictures posted online to make it easier for owners to find them. It certainly isn’t that the Home refuses to allow anymore than <1% of dogs to be released to rescue groups. It certainly isn't that the Home's "temperament testers" fail more than 50% of the unclaimed dogs and they wind up at the kill room. And it certainly isn't that the Home holds more than 20 council contracts, growing every year, ensuring that their facilities are often at capacity, and overcapacity during holidays and new years.

The idea that more than half of all unclaimed dogs processed by this organisation - be they stray or surrender - have a poor prognosis for rehoming or rehabilitation is inconceivable. The fact the Home defend this level of killing in 2011, with what we know about shelter dynamics and while other much less fortunate pounds and shelters save nearly every pet is revolting and unjustifiable.

Shelters across the country are saving lives by working with the community. Shelters across the world have eliminated shelter killing in its entirety. Continuing to peddle the notion of ‘doing the public’s dirty work’ while squandering the community’s resources should no longer be accepted.

Question to the LDH number 3.

Do you believe the Home slogan; “100% Commitment to Re-Homing Savable Pets” is accurate and not misleading to the public, given that your organisation killed 11,872 pets in a single year?

Answer from the LDH:

Yes, we are most definitely 100% commitment to rehoming saveable pets.

Well I’m totes reassured; how about you?

Image: The Lost Dogs Home – The Herald Sun

How many pets would you expect to see saved in a year with a budget of over $12 million dollars?

$12 million dollars is a veritable fortune in animal welfare circles. From the tiniest rescue group working on a shoestring, through to the grandest private shelter; $12 million dollars should be able to save the lives of tens of thousands of pets, with some left over to put towards impoundment prevention and relationship building with the community. So news that the The Lost Dogs Home have released their annual report, showing that they this year, like previous years, recorded “revenue from continuing operations” of $12,375,271, should be a cause for celebration from pet lovers and homeless animals.

But unfortunately despite its enormous resources, the Lost Dogs Home continues to be a disaster for pets.

This week the Home is imploring the community to keep their ‘best friend safe’ over the holiday period, listing five things pet owners can do to ensure their pets aren’t spooked and lost during new years eve celebrations, and that…

… the best hope for lost, frightened animals is to be picked up by The Lost Dogs’ Home’s after-hours ambulances or a local council’s animal control officer… Sadly there is no guarantee that every pet can be reached in time, before the worst happens.

The ‘worst’ is obviously the pet being injured or killed on the street. But what are the ‘best’ outcomes for pets once they enter the Lost Dogs Home’s ‘care’?

The report shows over the 2010/11 year the outcomes for pets were as follows;

3,525 – adopted
7,407 – returned to owner
11,872 – killed (2,879 dogs, 8,993 cats)

This means for every single one of the pets the organisation processes, they make a whopping $536, regardless of the outcome for the pet. By these calculations, they make a staggering $6.3 million dollars for pets who are simply killed and their bodies incinerated.

But how can this be happening?

Local councils pay this organisation for pets collected during holiday celebrations. ‘Pet ambulances’ aren’t an altruistic effort to protect pets, but a money generating investment. Rather than pets being returned to owners as a public service, these ‘ambulances’ are simply glorified ranger vans impounding on behalf of councils, taking pets to the North Melbourne pound. It’s also worth noting they aren’t paid to per-pet returned to owner, but can hold and kill the pet and still be paid for their services.

Cats fare even worse than dogs in this purely profit-driven arrangement. Each year, local councils pay the Lost Dogs Home to actively trap unowned cats and bring them to the Home. Despite being perpetually at capacity with lost pet cats and friendly rehomable strays, the organisation chooses to take on the extra role of ‘cat slaughterhouse’, offering untame cats no option other than death. Untame cats, or those acting feral cat be killed immediately. Each cat-trapping council tender earns the organisation a yearly salary and keeps their intake numbers high, but the organisation does little to actually combat cat-overpopulation, offering just 100 discount desexing surgeries per year under the ‘Who’s for Cats’ program – while they kill close to 10,000 cats annually.

Along with council income, they also receive around $6 million dollars in bequests and donations annually, ($7.5m in donations and legacies this year). Pet lovers hoping their contributions will see pets saved, ironically supporting one of the largest killer of companion animals in the country.

With all this money being generated from lost and homeless pets, what incentive does the Lost Dogs Home have to reduce intakes and killing? None. Even as the solutions to shelter killing have been available to the animal sheltering community since the 80’s and in the popular media since 2009 they still continue to choose to squander the enormous fortune given to them by the pet loving community every year… and kill rather than save the lives of pets.
………………………….

What can I do?

This section has been added to address the large public outcry & requests for people asking “what can I do?”

To lend the words of Lisa, an awesome animal advocate:
The rewards for killing are obscene. That this is accepted without screaming from the rooftops is also distressing, however most in the public domain have no idea. Yes people can stop making financial contributions to LDH but this will have minimal impact. In addition to the bequests, the bulk of their revenue comes from the very lucrative pound contracts. Losing these is what will hurt. Being front page news for their kill rates will hurt. Being held to account by those who support them will hurt. Complaining on facebook may relieve people’s frustration but it makes no difference to the animals. Invest your time wisely and write to all the councils who provide “kill” work to LDH and demand they get with the times and the No Kill movement. Contact the media and demand LDH becomes front page news. If you really want change, you need to work for it and demand change.

If you are in one of the following municipalities, then it is up to you as a ratepayer to demand change. If you are an animal lover it is up to you to let the media know this is important.

The Lost Dogs Home provide pound services for 10 councils (Melbourne, Moreland, Moonee Valley, Brimbank, Maribyrnong, Wyndham, Hobson’s Bay, Darebin, Hume and Port Phillip).

They provide animal management services for the City of Greater Bendigo. The Home owns a property at Cranbourne west to service the Cities of Bayside, Casey, Cardinia, Frankston, Greater Dandenong and Kingston.

They are a leading organisation in providing animal management and pound services for councils. The Home hold more than 20 council contracts. (ref)

This morning, across the nation, council pounds are killing the dogs and cats in their care.

Not because they’re sick.

Not because they have behavioural problems.

Not because the community doesn’t want to adopt them.

But because it’s Christmas.

Pounds who close from Sunday 25th December through to Tuesday 3rd January do not want to have to pay holiday rates for staff to manage the pound. So they empty their establishments. They kill the healthy, the adoptable, the young and the old. At a time when literally thousands of people are opening their hearts and homes to a new pet, they close their doors to adopters.

These are pounds who throughout the year, make little to no effort to rehome pets. These are pounds who keep pets in run down, noisy, unhealthy kennels which scare off potential families.These are pounds who refuse to allow access by volunteers to help care for the animals. These are pounds who fail to promote lost or available pets online. These are pounds who burn out overworked rescuers by threatening to kill pets unless they’re collected under impossible deadlines. These are pounds who shoot the pets in their ‘care’ with a shotgun.

One by one. People’s lost companion animals, held the required 72hr hours, are disposed of like garbage. Their furry bodies dumped in pits in landfill.

These pounds are using the community’s tax dollars to run pet slaughterhouses.

Is this your local council pound?

Animal lovers must demand to know; what is your pound doing this Christmas?

.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*

‘Pet City’ is open every day 7-days-a-week except for xmas day (9am – 5pm), and on the public holidays through the xmas/new year season (10am – 4pm) to allow people looking to get a pet to visit while they’re home off work and spending time with their families.

With that in mind, why aren’t more shelters running high-excitement-pound-emptying-promotions in the lead up to this weekend? If the Sydney fish market can promote its 24hr-fish-buying-marathon on major media, why don’t we see pounds and shelters throwing open their doors, extending their trading hours and BEGGING people to offer homes for the holidays, to the pets they would otherwise kill?