WISCONSIN: TRUTH & CONSEQUENCES

By now, most cat advocates are familiar with the controversial proposal which would allow Wisconsin hunters to shoot free-roaming felines. There are two key issues that should be examined before the hearing on April 11:

If this proposal passes, who stands to gain?

-Certainly, the hunters will be elated. Now they will have the government’s approval to sharpen their skills shooting little cats. They will also have the gratitude of misguided bird enthusiasts for “protecting”their avian friends. Hunters could also make tidy profits by selling the carcasses to lab supply houses, pet food manufacturers and fur traders.

-Stanley Temple and John Coleman will be pleased. After years of ridicule and scorn resulting from their often cited, but universally debunked “study”, they will have been vindicated. Their extrapolated, exaggerated “statistics”will finally be accepted by the public as “fact”.

-The Wisconsin DNR, who published the “study”back in 1996, will have scored a real coup. By encouraging hunters to take the lead in this indiscriminate extermination of outdoor cats, they will have shielded themselves from criticism and the inevitable public backlash. By allowing hunters to shoot the cats, DNR has one less job to do.

-The biggest winner of all? The American Bird Conservancy, a special interest group which has funded a national campaign against outdoor cats. Why? Because their case is based in large part on the “study”by Temple and Coleman who just happen to be members of the American Bird Conservancy’s Cats Indoors Technical Advisory Committee.

In addition to the felines, who stands to lose if this proposal is passed?

-The birds, ironically. With a multitude of cats out of the picture, the rat population will increase. Rats devour bird eggs at an alarming rate and have decimated songbird populations in preserves where feral cats have been removed.

-Civic leaders and politicians who will feel the wrath of cat lovers when they are up for re-election. They may have to explain to their constituents why tourism and convention business is down.

-The citizens of Wisconsin who will be vulnerable to humiliation. In addition to the coverage by mainstream print and electronic press, there is the likelihood of ridicule from social satirists like Jon Stewart and Bill Maher.

Find out how you can help the cats of Wisconsin:www.dontshootthecat.com

Prepared by The Feline Resistance volunteers 03/10/05

HEARTLESS IN OHIO

In 2002 the Akron, Ohio City Council passed a law allowing Animal Control to trap and incarcerate all free-roaming cats including pets. Adding to the injustice, up to 82% of cats and kittens were destroyed the first day of impoundment, despite a law requiring the city to hold them for three days.

In 2003, the Animal Legal Defense Fund (ALDF) joined forces with Akron's Citizens for Humane Animal Practices (CHAP) to legally challenge the ordinance.

On February 24, 2005, the Akron Beacon Journal reported:

Akron's law allowing free-roaming felines to be trapped has come out on top in its most recent catfight.

The 9th District Court of Appeals on Wednesday rejected an appeal by a group of cat lovers who contend the law is unconstitutional.

The appellate court found the law -- which allows for a trap to be set or a warden to pick up a cat after a complaint is made -- is not “unduly oppressive.”

To comply with the law, a cat owner “need only prevent his animal from trespassing upon another's property,”appellate Judge Lynn Slaby wrote.

Citizens for Humane Animal Practices, the group that formed to fight the law, had wanted the appeals court to overturn a May 2004 decision by Summit County Common Pleas Judge Brenda Burnham Unruh.

Jeffrey Holland, the group's attorney, said another appeal is being considered.

*Additional information about the cruelty to felines in Akron can be found in the Overview, Battlegrounds and For the Record sections of this Web site.