HomeHuman to cat relationshipcat welfarePETA versus Nathan Winograd


PETA versus Nathan Winograd — 7 Comments

  1. Let’s see if I can explain this to you in a way where you finally realize that you and even Nathan Winograd are dead wrong. You can’t even use adopting cats to solve this problem. “No-kill” so-called “management programs” are mathematically impossible, not to put too fine a point on it. This applies as much to “adoption” as to any other “no kill” panacea.

    Stray and feral cat populations grow between 23.3% and 33.3% annually per J. K. Levy DVM of “Maddie’s Fund” and P. Nutter DVM (no, that’s really her name). There are, per an average of ASPCA estimates 84.5 million unsterilized stray and feral cats, and 46.4 million un-spayed, un-neutered free-roaming “owned” cats in the US in any given year. Or 130.9 MILLION free-roaming reproductive cats.The US free-roaming cat population increases by an average of 28.3%, or 37 million new cats annually, each of which will live on average 2-3 years in the wild.

    There are 128 million households in the US. Only about one-third, or 42.2 million, own even one cat. Many of those 42.2 million households own more than one cat. Cats aren’t more popular than dogs, more households own dogs than cats, it’s just that most people who have cats already have many more than one. Please believe me the other two-thirds of all US households aren’t “catless” because there’s a shortage. Do the math.

    So, should you by herculean effort manage to find homes for ONE year-class of feral kittens in just ONE kitten season–that’s about 101,370 kittens A DAY for about six months, you’d have 37 million MORE kittens to find homes for the very NEXT kitten season. The ones that have cats are already full-up on cats–or are turning, or have already turned, into cat-hoarding nightmares, you read about it every day now–and the other 2/3rds of all US households don’t have and will never want cats. They don’t want cats anywhere in their lives.

    You’ve over-bred your cats into a logistical and impossible to “fix with no-kill methods” nightmare. You can’t adopt your way out of this mess and you can’t TNR your way out of this mess. Not when less than 0.4% of all stray cats in any community on earth have ever been sterilized for TNR programs. This is YOUR fault, now own up to it and YOU find a way to fix it. Australia came to the very same conclusions that you will eventually have to come to. There’s no other way out of this mess that you made, no matter how much you want to deny it and just type “SMH” every time you read about it.

    Experience the sensational 3-D blockbuster this year! “Reality” … coming soon to a brain near you. (Refreshments available in the lobby.)

    • You sound like Woody in drag to me (notorious troll). Your whole argument is based upon “estimates” which are equally notoriously incorrect. And there is nothing to say why no-kill policies cannot be carried out in parallel with proactive steps which take place at the same time. Nobody said that you can resolve the unwanted cat problem in America solely on a no kill policy. It is one aspect of tackling unwanted cats. And it is a better way of dealing with them because simply killing them encourages more unwanted cats which is the point I made in my article. I’m sorry but you are the one who is brain-dead and I suggest that you see a new high resolution blockbuster in the form of a box set on Amazon which explains everything I’ve said much more clearly because you need it to be said more clearly.

      • The next time you make an educated estimate of how much sugar you are putting into your cup of tea, let us all hope you don’t go into a diabetic seizure–if that’s the way you think that educated estimates work.

        You might want to sign-up for a community night-class high-school course called “Statistical Analysis 101”.

        Or just keep typing “SMH”, just like you did, because you think that that makes you right.

  2. As hard as it may be to accept, re-abandoning cats to the streets or in the woods isn’t kindness at all. Outdoors, cats’ lives are brief and harsh. Many die after weeks of languishing with diseases or infected injuries; after being hit by cars or ingesting poison; at the hands of cruel people who are tired of them using their gardens as litterboxes; and worse. Domesticated cats also take a terrible toll on vulnerable wildlife species.

    As for PETA, they are not a traditional animal shelter. They operate one small shelter—a shelter of last resort for animals who need euthanasia to end their suffering (many of whom have been rejected by other facilities), including dogs who are aggressive and unadoptable because they have been kept chained their entire lives; feral cats dying of contagious diseases; animals who are wracked with cancer; elderly animals who have no quality of life and whose desperate guardians brought them to PETA because they can’t afford to pay a vet to euthanize them; and the list goes on. A painless end is a kindness for these animals, and the services PETA provides are vitally needed in an area where many people can’t afford to take their animals to a veterinarian. This video explains more about PETA’s work: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oItn9Rm9_sE

  3. Horrifying. Euthanising a healthy animal is never the correct answer to the problem. I am totally against kill shelters. Except in the most dire circumstances there is always a better choice, it may just take more time and manpower to find it. Taking the easy way out is a cowardly and less intelligent way to “deal” with the immediate situation.😱😡

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

HTML tags allowed in your comment: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

Note: sources for news articles are carefully selected but the news is often not independently verified.