LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.5

Help for VTBIRD Archives


VTBIRD Archives

VTBIRD Archives


VTBIRD@LIST.UVM.EDU


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

VTBIRD Home

VTBIRD Home

VTBIRD  January 2013

VTBIRD January 2013

Subject:

Re: bbc article on cats/birds-wildlife - (long)

From:

Richard Enser <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Vermont Birds <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Wed, 30 Jan 2013 08:02:51 -0800

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (67 lines)

Thank you Noel for providing the link.  Clearly, whtever one may think about the BBC article being a "scare story" or their method of "burying the lead", or not being "honest", they were simply reporting on an important study, peer-reviewed, authored by scientists from the American Bird Conservancy and the Smithsonian Conservation Biology Institute, and based on a review of 90 previous studies.  Now we have clarification of a problem that conservationists have long known to be an issue.  I suggest that if you want to quibble about the issue of cats being a detriment to wildlife populations you take your argument to the authors of the study and not the BBC who are merely just the messengers.
 
Jane, I'm not going to bore the list serve readers by addressing all of your points.  I might suggest you read a little more about forest fragmentation before characterizing the problem as merely devastation of habitat.  Direct habitat loss is certainly an issue that causes fragmentation, but the real problems for biodiversity are the incidious impacts that take place in the remnant forest tracts that are left behind.  Developers are always proud to point out the amount of land they "save" in their subdivisions as "open space", with of course little understanding of how the remnants they save are merely refuges for the opportunists  (the raccoons, skunks, etc. of which you speak).  But the impacts are not just from coyotes and raccoons, but from the higher incidence of invasive plants, increased air and water pollution, greater fluctuation in temperature, greater wind damage, and yes, dogs and cats reducing populations of shrews, voles, snakes,
 amphibians, pretty much anything that moves.  And forest fragmentation does not just impact birds.  There are a growing number of studies reporting on the detrimental impacts to plants, herptiles, and many insect groups, all of this resulting in the homogenization of forest communities - basically the local extirpation of native species and replacement with alien species, many of them invasive.
 
Yes, cats are not the only isssue, but with this most recent study we get a clearer understanding of the depth of the problem and recognition that it is one that needs to be addressed.
 
 
 

________________________________
 From: Noel Dodge <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask] 
Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2013 9:00 AM
Subject: Re: [VTBIRD] bbc article on cats/birds-wildlife - (long)
  
Forget the BBC article; here is the American Bird Conservancy, with a link to the actual paper. 

http://www.abcbirds.org/newsandreports/releases/130129.html

You cannot compare natural predator impacts to anthropogenic sources of mortality to justify those anthropogenic sources. Any domestic cat mortality is an additional impact that would not otherwise occur.

-Noel


-----Original Message-----
From: Vermont Birds [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Jane Stein
Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2013 1:19 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [VTBIRD] bbc article on cats/birds-wildlife - (long)

Richard, please don't make up your own stories about what I think or do. 
  Thanks.

Here's what I know that makes me skeptical of this and other similar articles.  First, any naturalist will tell you there's far, far more damage done to ground-nesting birds in both woods and fields by coyotes, foxes, racoons and other small to medium-sized predators and omnivores whose population is way too high because of the absence of top predators, like wolves, to keep their numbers down.

It isn't primarily nest-sitting birds that are killed, it's eggs, and when nests are destroyed, birds often don't come back to try again. 
These wild critters love eggs and seek them out.  They destroy far more ground nests than any cat, which unlike them, typically have no idea what to do with an egg.  I used to know and work with several refuge managers for small suburban refuges, and none of them ever mentioned their not uncommon cat visitors as a problem, but became apoplectic on the subject of dogs, which trample nests out of curiosity more than actually eat eggs, and egg-eating raccoons, etc.

I intensely dislike killing things, even spiders in my kitchen and wasps nesting over my door.  But there comes a point when it's them or me, and I'm afraid I choose me.  (I have it on fairly good third-hand authority, btw, that even the Dalai Lama's household is unkind to mice.  I asked because I remain troubled about the issue.)  Yes, mice are pests when they chew their way into your house and cupboards and leave their feces all over your kitchen and pantry or chew holes in your potato crop before it's even harvested.

Urban sprawl and forest fragmentation, I whole-heartedly agree, is the major problem here.  But it's not because of housecats, it's primarily from the devastation of the habitat itself, secondly the presence of coyotes and raccoons attracted to human garbage.

We can argue all day about cats, but articles like this BBC one are just not honest in their attempt to portray housecats as having a devastating effect on "wildlife," which conjures up horrible images, but then not telling you until the very end that they're talking about mice and other creatures so abundant and with such a reproduction rate that it would take 100 times as many cats as there are now roaming around to make a dent in them, and then that it's feral cats that do the most damage anyway.  That's called "burying the lead" in journalism, and it's not being straight with readers.

What this kind of thing does, IMO, is let us in our too easy anger at very visible cats forget about the things that are doing the real
damage-- as you say, human development and forest fragmentation, which would be just as devastating even if there were no cats at all.  Far more damage is done to bird populations by cowbirds allowed in by forest fragmentation, not to mention the rapidly shrinking winter habitat and staging areas along the way for migratory birds.

As for prey for hawks and owls, it's coyotes and foxes that do the most damage there, though still not enough to make very much of a dent. You might find it interesting to look up what's happened at Yellowstone since they introduced wolves and the populations of both those smaller predators dropped way down.  Among other things, yes, the hawks came back, and also the nesting habitat for birds that had been destroyed by deer browsing.

They've seen the same thing at Plum Island in Mass., where for a while wintering Rough-Legged hawk numbers dropped dramatically when both coyotes and foxes, I think, moved in and the refuge staff held off on killing them because of public distaste for the idea.  There were no cats in either place.

Also, the primary mouse and vole-eating raptors in this country have stable or increasing populations, with only two exceptions that I know of, one being the Ferruginous Hawk out west, the one that came back to Yellowstone, and the Kestrel.  Neither one is in trouble because of food insufficiency.

I've also seen very vividly here that when the local hunters go on one of their periodic coyote slaughtering parties, the population of both rabbits and voles absolutely explodes for a year or so until the coyotes build their numbers up again.

Against all this, cat predation is insignificant, if we're talking about actual effects on populations.

By all means, do what you can to get neighbors to keep their cats in where you're having a problem, or even work for a city ordinance.  I'd help you.  I wouldn't have a cat that needs to be outdoors in the city or even most suburbs.  But it really does seem to me the issue is someone's desire to have unmolested feeder birds to watch versus the neighbor's desire to let his cat spend time outdoors.  That's a volatile issue, but it isn't a conservation issue.

I looked up, by the way, endangered species of rabbits and other rodents in North America, and couldn't find one where cat predation was cited as even worth mentioning.  If there are places where it is, I'd favor some kind of vigorous local, state or even federal action to restrict, trap and remove, or even ultimately kill cats.

All I'm arguing for here is that we look maybe more calmly at the facts. 
  Those are the relevant facts that I know of.  Given all those things, I'm more than a little bit skeptical of the scare stories that pop up periodically, especially because they tend to be published, as this one was, as scare stories and not reasoned ecological discussions and the role cats may or may not play in them.

Jane

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

August 2021
July 2021
June 2021
May 2021
April 2021
March 2021
February 2021
January 2021
December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003
December 2002
November 2002
October 2002
September 2002
August 2002
July 2002
June 2002
May 2002
April 2002
March 2002
February 2002

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LIST.UVM.EDU

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager