Alley Cat Allies is compelled to address the dangerously misinformed portrayal of community cats in the article ’One Of The World’s Most Invasive Species Is Also Your Most Cherished Pet’ published in Forbes. Along with citing debunked and discredited studies, it continues the trend of clickbait headlines meant to encourage online engagement that, at the same time, can inspire cruel and lethal policies against cats.
The contribution written by Mr. Travers is nothing we haven’t seen many times before from opposition to Trap-Neuter-Return (TNR) and community cats. That old chestnut of “cats kill 2.4 billion birds” reared its ugly head yet again, among other flawed conclusions of flawed studies that distort or minimize the facts to place the blame for species loss at cats’ paws. This exaggerated claim has been discredited by experts, as it is based on contorting the findings of old studies (most of which were over 60 years old) and a whole lot of questionable extrapolation.
Mr. Travers also cites a newer article from 2023 that, despite its media portrayal, is not an examination of community cats’ regular diet or what cats regularly consume. The article does not prove that cats are a major threat to wildlife species, including endangered ones. It does not make any meaningful conclusions about the “diet” of domestic cats at all.
And there is, of course, the usual (and almost gleeful) dip into the repertoire of incendiary descriptions of cats. In the article, cats are wrongly painted as “one of the world’s most invasive predators” and “relentless” with a “bottomless appetite,” a “love” for “clipping wings and snapping bird bones.” Cats are even ridiculously characterized as having a “hit list.” This demonizing language is off-putting as always, to put it mildly, and does the article no favors.
Speaking of wrongfully demonizing cats, while making arguments about the risks to species in island habitats specifically, Mr. Travers delegates human-led activities to the role of a mere side villain with a single mention. The truth is that leading biologists, climate scientists, and environmental watchdogs all agree: human impact on the environment is without a doubt the number one cause of species loss.
Here’s the truth: Cats have an important place in ecosystems, and whenever they are removed in large numbers, the consequences are dire—not just for the cats, but for local wildlife. The reality is cats are not a major threat to wildlife species, endangered or otherwise, and much of the “science” that claims such is heavily flawed and funded by fringe interests and biased parties.
Habitat destruction caused by human-led activities (i.e., industrial and residential development, logging, crop farming, livestock grazing, mining, road and dam building, and pesticide use) is what has taken an extreme toll on threatened and endangered wildlife populations, and especially endangered species on islands. With breeding grounds devastated and access to food and other resources diminishing, it’s no wonder why we’ve seen a decline in species diversity.
Sidestepping this issue to focus on cats only diverts attention from the enormous and far more severe impact we, as humans, have on the species we want to protect and the environment they depend on.
And though Mr. Travers’ contribution didn’t involve a suggestion to round up and kill cats, it’s hard not to detect the quiet part…even if it isn’t said aloud. Falsely labeling cats as invasive killers and citing exaggerated “figures” is the habitual starting point of calls (and condemnable government policies) for killing cats, whether that’s through catch and kill in shelters (at taxpayers’ expense) or through ghastly cat hunts and poisonings, which are taking place in Australia and New Zealand.
Killing cats does not work and is morally unacceptable. We have seen time and time again that catch and kill leads to nothing but an endless cycle of expensive and morally bankrupt slaughter that does not benefit cats, the community, or wildlife. When cats are removed from an ecosystem in a catch and kill program, neighboring cats move in to take advantage of the resources that sustained the original population. These new cats reproduce and the population rebounds. This documented phenomenon is called the vacuum effect.
Despite Mr. Travers only briefly—and unenthusiastically—mentioning TNR in his contribution, TNR remains the ONLY evidence-based, humane, and effective approach to cats outdoors. The success of community TNR programs is studied and documented.
Through TNR, community cats are humanely trapped; brought to a veterinary clinic to be spayed or neutered, eartipped (the universal sign that a cat has been spayed or neutered through a TNR program), and vaccinated; and then are returned to their original outdoor homes.
TNR is proven to stabilize community cat populations by stopping the cycle of reproduction; improve the cats’ health and public health through vaccinations; and benefit animal control agencies and shelters by reducing cat intake and calls of concern. Today, communities across the United States and beyond have adopted TNR ordinances or policies and/or are conducting grassroots, volunteer-led programs.
Mr. Travers ends his article with an open question: how do we balance protecting wildlife and maintaining respect and affection for cats?
Thankfully, those goals are not at all mutually exclusive. By advocating for stronger TNR programs backed by local governments AND policies that curb human-led activities that are the true threats to wildlife, we improve the lives of cats, wildlife, and us all. Let’s spend more time and energy advocating for stronger, community-backed TNR programs rather than finding more ways—and words—to demonize cats.