| >You are badly misrepresenting the content of your sources. If that's the case, so do you. >[1] do not blame only cats. [1] is a direct attack piece on Google's TNR program. The entire article is centered on that. To say that they "do not blame only cats" is laughable. Who they actually blame is Google's employees who ran the TNR program. >They also do not call for the killing of all cats Ah, but isn't it neat? They don't say it, that's just the impact they want (and got). See, the entire point of gCat feeding stations was attracting un-neutered feral cats, trapping them, and neutering them. That's the T and N of the TNR. R stands for release. Why release? Because not all cats can be domesticated. gCat has adopted dozens of cats from the street, but not all cats were OK with that. The call to "not feed" the cats meant an end to the TNR program, because it could not trap the cats. It also meant that the released cats kept coming back to campus, looking for food. Lacking a TNR program, these cats were captured, then killed (because adoption was not an option for them). >[2] says: Oh, we're quoting [2]? Let's quote [2]. [2] lists the following threats: - Systematic and regular grading on a large scale destroys prime foraging and nesting habitat - Insufficient high-quality foraging habitat - Insufficient mowing during the breeding season to maintain nesting habitat - Disturbance by vehicles going off-road, leading to erosion (of habitat) - Formal and informal trails and unofficial roads in owl habitat Notice anything common with al of the above? And yes, after all of the above, cats may also present a threat. Not the gCat TNR program cats in particular. Cats in general. >One suggested solution is to: "Proactively discourage all feeding of cats in Shoreline" ...not differentiating feeding feral cats, and feeding stations in the TNR program. It's infuriating that you accuse me of misrepresenting truth. >You seem to acknowledge that the large cat population was in fact a threat to owls, but still object to the NYT story. Large, uncontrolled, feral cat population is a problem. Google's volunteer-ran TNR problem was a solution to that. Many cats were adopted (over 50, IIRC, the website has since gone down). The ones that were not adopted were neutered, and their romaing range was made smaller as they (predictably) returned to the feeding stations, instead of roaming freely. The NYT story specifically attacks the TNR program, and misrepresents it as the problem. |
Oops, you forgot one:
- Predation by nonnative and/or nuisance species
>And yes, after all of the above, cats may also present a threat.
You seem to think it's very important this bullet point is last, but there is nothing in the source that suggests items are listed in order of importance. Even if there were the order is not consistent in all parts of the report.
Why are you reading tea leaves when the authors say, explicitly and repeatedly, that cats are a serious threat?