Cats' place in society has been a source of controversy for thousands of years.

In ancient Egypt, cats were worshipped and mummified and killing one was a crime punishable by death.

In the fourteenth century, cats were cursed and blamed for spreading the plague. Today, cats have surpassed dogs as our number one pet choice for the home - domestic cats that is. The attraction between the feline and human species often stops, however, at the point when a feline reverts back to its wild nature.

Feral cats are felines which were once domesticated but have either by force or choice reverted back to a wild state. Flourishing in heavily human populated as well as rural areas, feral cats are no strangers to human society. Large facilities such as penal colonies, factories and universities are classic examples of institutions which, historically, have had large numbers of feral cats.

Livestock producers as well have been faced with this problem. Feral cats have been blamed for killing song birds, inflicting bites and wounds, and above all for being vectors of disease, especially those zoonotic which can be transferred to humans or other animals, particularly livestock species.

In the past, the predominant method of managing the problem was to simply eliminate the cats. For those opponents of cats, traditionally livestock and poultry managers which see them as pests, this method is preferred for it offers immediate results with a notable decrease in cat population. When an animal is seen as being obviously wild and dangerous or threatening in some way, by disease or otherwise, it would seem to be a efficient method to end the problem. Opposition to this approach has come from various organizations, particularly urban-based groups such as Alley Cat Allies, C.A.T.S., and the RSPCA. These groups and the Cal Poly Cat Program disagree with these ideas. Their method is in a longer term solution. By establishing feral cat colonies maintained of by means of trap, neuter and release programs, this prevents "vacuums" for new cat colonies to move in to areas where old colonies were eliminated.

Feral cats instinctively form colonies. Because they are wild animals, males will seek and fight over mates and are therefore very territorial. They are also opportunistic feeders, which establish colonies in areas where there is abundant and available food. Rural areas especially with feedlots, barns, and large fields are therefore as likely to support feral cats as an urban school or penitentiary.

Cats are indeed responsible for causing problems especially causing a large number of deaths in bird populations. A recent article published by the British Field Sports Society claimed that in Great Britain, alone, cats were responsible for the death of at least 75 million birds and 135 million mammals annually (Mostyn 1.)

These high numbers, however, are blamed mainly on domestic cats. In fact, Dr. Keith Corbett, rare species officer for the U.K.'s Herpetological Conservation Trust, states that "instead of hunting for food then resting as feral cats do, these healthy cats can spend a proportionately greater time efficiently hunting a given area, almost for fun, and in much greater numbers than they would were they not domestic." Dr. Nick Fox, biologist, farmer and fieldsportsman further adds, "though they take less than 30 seconds to pursue their quarry (after finding it,) they can take up to 30 nauseating minutes toying with their long-suffering prey" (Mostyn 1.)

Feral cats, however, can by no means be free from blame. They do often prey on wild animals but actually prefer wild rabbits and pigeons versus song birds and reptiles. In fact, many farmers and ranchers do take advantage of cats' taste for vermin and find great use for such felines to take care of rodent problems. Where ferals run into opposition with livestock producers, and in urban society as well is with the zoonotic diseases that these animals can carry. Of all such diseases which can be transferred trans-species, which includes various bacterial and fungal diseases and parasites, the one of most concern, perhaps, is rabies. This dreaded disease alone represents a strong argument for exterminating suspect felines on the spot.

The United States is facing a wildlife rabies epidemic and feral cats have been caught in the middle (Rabies 1.) Non-cat opponents, however, argue that cats are not natural vectors of rabies, and that primary carriers include raccoons, foxes, skunks, coyotes and bats. In western Europe, a U.S. developed oral rabies vaccine has proven successful in maintaining an "immune barrier" in over 40 species of animals involved in a research study (Rabies 2.) By using oral V-RG vaccine-laced baits, rabies susceptible species as well as felines can be vaccinated, further reducing risk to livestock and humans.

Australia is one country, along with Antarctica and islands such as Britain and Hawaii that does not have such a problem with rabies. Quarantine measures are so strictly enforced in these areas of the world that the disease threat is now of little concern. Other diseases do however, pose great and realistic threats. In New South Wales, a documented case exists of pregnant ewes consequently aborting from the transfer of toxoplasmosis from feral cat feces (Feral 1.). Aside from the ability for the disease also to be transferred to wildlife, the implications, economically, are obvious. Bovine Tb and Lyme disease, spread by the deer tick, are two other threats which many livestock producers are increasingly worried about. Both these disease are capable of being carried and spread by feral cats.

Livestock are not the only species that producers should be worried about. Humans as well can contract dangerous diseases such as Rabies and Lyme disease from cats. Congenital toxoplasmosis can also be transmitted to pregnant women with exposure to contaminated cat feces, for example. Additionally, Cat-scratch fever, Chlamydiosis, Campylobacter, Salmonella and Ringworm are all realistic threats. In some areas of Australia, the feral cat problem along with that of wild ferrets has become so great that the City Council in Devonport, Tasmania had offered free disposal of "unwanted cats," encouraging people: "UNWANTED AND STRAY CATS MAY BE LEFT HERE BETWEEN THE HOURS OF 8 A.M. AND 2 P.M. WEEKDAYS. PLEASE USE HESSIAN BAGS PROVIDED." These bags, with cats inside, are then placed inside a "small metal box at the council depot" until they are all collected and destroyed at the end of the day (Hartwell 2.)

Are such drastic measures necessary to reduce the number of feral cats and the problems they bring with them? Organizations such as the Cal Poly Cat Program say no. In fact, numerous studies have shown that exterminating cats and therefore eliminating cat colonies actually leads to an increase in the future population. In the 1950's, health officials depended on such methods as gassing, poisoning, trapping and shooting many free ranging animals, including feral cats, in efforts to reduce the frequency in rabies in various species. These methods were applied with an intent to exterminate those individuals infected with the virus so that the few creatures that were left were healthy and relatively unaffected by the very few infected creatures still remaining. In order for a method such as this to prove successful, the overall population must be reduced by 60 to 70 percent. With respect to rabies levels, of all the species targeted, only a few were somewhat successfully controlled (Winkler 86.)

Cal Poly State University San Luis Obispo had similar results. Being a large, agricultural university established in 1901, Cal Poly had had a huge problem with the number of feral cats. Up through the eighties, the university followed similar methods of extermination and to no avail. In 1992, it was estimated that 400 feral cats roamed the inner campus and various livestock units alone (Quindimil 1992.) Through new methods to "trap, test, vaccinate, medicate, alter and release," proven successful by groups such as Alley Cat Allies, Stanford Cat Network, Australia's C.A.T.S. and others, Cal Poly has successfully reduced the numbers to approximately 50, the majority of which have gone through the program and having been vaccinated, altered, and rereleased. In addition, over 200 cats and domesticated kittens have found homes through the program, many going to ranches as mousers.

Realizing that it is nearly impossible to eliminate a population of wild animals without creating a vacuum for a new population and its problems to move in, one would think the TTVMAR method to be the only way to go. However, looking at the average rancher, it seems improbable, if not impossible for some, to have the adequate resources to undertake such a program. The Cal Poly Cat Program, established in 1992, is a non-profit organization that is run solely off fundraising, monetary donations and volunteer people power.

Established within a university with a strong animal science and pre-veterinary program, the organization has had an incredible amount of support in order to keep it going. For a shepherdess who has established her flock fifty miles from civilization, how much more practical it would seem to be to just shoot any pesky cats that look threatening. This is a hard case to ignore. Current California law allows a shepherdess to shoot such a cat that could harm her flock on her property. But, for a case of suspected rabies, tuberculosis, or Tb, this is a situation that is ideally best prevented rather than treated. Oral vaccines such as V-RG have proven successful in countries of Europe such as Switzerland so that it is nearly rabies free. Within a few years, because of the application of such a successful program, all of Europe is expected to see an end to fox rabies, alone (Winkler 92.)

Animal agriculturists face a legitimate threat from wild animals of which feral cats are no exception. Feral cat concerns of urban dwellers seem almost mild compared to those of the livestock producer. The majority of these complaints include: "They howl and fight at night; they spray on such things as car tires, patio furniture and flower boxes; they dig in gardens and flower beds and use them as litterboxes; they attack pet cats; they leave paw prints on cars; they get sick or injured and people then hate to see them suffer" (Feral 379.) Feral cat populations are a legitimate problem in the cities, however. One needs only to look at the current numbers held by already crowded animal shelters across the country. It takes but one neglectful cat owner who fails to vaccinate and alter their cat to produce such a tragedy. In just one generation, their wandering, fertile queen can produce as many as fifteen unhealthy feral kittens a year to join the wild animal world.

What kind of legislation can be implemented to keep the feral cat population from getting out of control? One needs only to look at the outcome of California's Proposition 197 regarding mountain lion maintenance to see how the majority of society feels about controlling wild cat populations. Who is to say that feral cats present less of a problem? Australia's feral cat problem has gotten so great that, although there is no threat of rabies, many measures have been proposed for legislation. In Victoria, where there are large numbers of feral cats, bills have been proposed to include: "banning cats from premises and areas of municipalities; impounding, desexing or killing cats found in cat-free zones; mandatory cat registration by owners; mandatory breeder registration; visual identification markers on all cats." Gold Coast City Council similarly is considering passing: "fines of up to $5,000 for owners of 'recalcitrant' cats; curfew from 8 p.m. to 6 p.m.; cats to be kept on a leash when outdoors and not allowed to enter another property of foul a public place; owners must not allow cats to 'attack, kill, worry or torment, pursue, endanger, injure or destroy poultry, birds or other animals.'" (Hartwell 3.) California's Central Coast legislature has proposed similar laws on registering cats and has ran into some resistance.

Ultimately, society should see more and more trap, neuter and release programs being implemented. For urban areas, especially, there seems to be no excuse for shooting feral cats on the spot. In rural areas, it does not seem probable to keep a rancher from shooting. But, keeping their own pets vaccinated and neutered and encouraging their neighbors to do so could greatly decrease the number of feral cats in the area. With the future use of oral vaccines for rabies and other diseases, the country is bound to see such success as has been seen in Europe. Perhaps what it will take is for more ranchers to voice the importance of such vaccines and how they could be applied towards feral cats. However, with 98% of today's society coming from urban backgrounds and 72% of California's voters from either the North Bay Area of Los Angeles area, this may sound like a difficult task (Pitts 1997.) For him, he might not feel there to be much support today for a livestock producer having "a few wild cats" on his property. However, with such successful methods as those presented, one would hope that the future for livestock producers would include a working relationship with society on animal control and long term prevention rather than needing to treat the problem individually with a quick fix shot.

For information on the Cal Poly cat situation: Cat Stats

Feral Cat (Felis catus). Alley Cat Allies Publication. 25 April 1997.

Feral Cats: Moving from Pest Control to Birth Control.

Alley Cat Allies Publication. 1991.

Hartwell, Sarah. The Great Australian Cat Dilemma.

Feral Cat Coalition Publication. 1997.

Mostyn, Rupert. "Cat Among Pigeons Lends Fresh Perspective."

British Field Sports Society. 1995.

Pitts, Lee. "The Chicken Model - and Other Short Stories." Issues in Animal Agriculture. Cal Poly State University, S.L.O. 6 May 1997.

Quindimil, Garrett. Feral Cat Management Program.

Cal Poly State University S.L.O. 1993.

Rabies and Feral Cats: Facts and Control. Alley Cat Allies Publication.

25 April 1997.

Winkler, William and Konrad Bögel. "Control of Rabies in Wildlife."

Scientific American. June 1992.

return to homepage