Post by: Elkaholic daWg on August 28, 2010, 07:45:34 AM
Kind of like football subsidizing all other sports at the college level.
Do you suppose the "bird conservancy" is pro hunting??
I think I see some FAT to be trimmed in the state budget!
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE
600 Capitol Way North, Olympia, WA 98501-1091
http://wdfw.wa.gov (http://wdfw.wa.gov)
CROSSING PATHS NEWS NOTES
Don't help cats hurt wildlife
Wild birds and free-ranging cats are not a good mix.
As a backyard wildlife enthusiast, you control your own cat and talk to cat-owning neighbors about doing the same.
But feral cats - those untamed strays that now total up to an estimated 10 million throughout the United States - can, and have, seriously damaged wild bird and other wildlife populations.
While domestic cats are solitary animals, colonies of feral cats often form around food sources like bird feeding stations, garbage dumps, or places where people deliberately leave food for them. In fact, many colonies of feral cats are supported by well-meaning but misinformed advocates of what's become known as "TNR" management: Trap, Neuter, Release.
The theory behind TNR programs is eventual reduction of feral cat colonies. But sadly, such claims are not substantiated and research shows continuing negative impacts to wildlife (as most recently documented by Darcee Guttilla and Paul Statt from California State University in the Journal of Mammalogy http://www.bioone.org/doi/abs/10.1644/09-MAMM-A-111.1 (http://www.bioone.org/doi/abs/10.1644/09-MAMM-A-111.1) .)
Cat colonies often serve as dumping grounds for other unwanted cats. The food provided usually attracts more cats. Contrary to TNR proponent beliefs, colony cats do not keep other cats from joining the colony. As time goes on, some colony cats become too wary to be caught, so rarely are all spayed or neutered. With females capable of producing up to three litters of four to six kittens each every year, it doesn't take long to grow a feral cat colony.
Well-fed cats, either feral or domestic, become "super-predators" of birds and other wildlife. The need to eat and the instinct to hunt can and do function separately. Any cat owner can attest to this fact with stories of "gift birds" laid at their feet by feline companions.
Almost one-fifth of all injured wildlife brought to Washington's wildlife rehabilitators across the state was harmed by cats.
In addition to their threats to wildlife, feral cat colonies pose human health risks. Even TNR-managed colonies can spread disease such as ringworm, toxoplasmosis, cat scratch fever, and rabies, since every cat is not captured regularly for health care.
Free-roaming cats usually have short, miserable lives, due to collisions with motor vehicles, attacks by other domestic and wild animals, accidental poisoning or trapping, and parasites and diseases. The Humane Society of the United States reports that the expected life span of an indoor cat is at least triple that of cats that spend their lives outdoors.
TNR management of feral cats is clearly not in the best interests of anyone, and it often overwhelms the ability of well-meaning people who genuinely want to help animals. It also undermines efforts of responsible pet owners who keep their cats indoors.
For more information, see the American Bird Conservancy's "Cats Indoors!" campaign at http://www.abcbirds.org/abcprograms/policy/cats/index.html (http://www.abcbirds.org/abcprograms/policy/cats/index.html) .
Post by: Axle on August 28, 2010, 07:51:35 AM
Man was that fun shooting for a while! Must have gotten about 30 of them.
About 20 to 25 years ago, Australia declared war on the cats. The cats were eating a lot of wild birds and the Aussies went to town on the cats. I remember reading the article. I think it was similar to the recent outlash on the stingrays after one of them killed one of their celebrities a couple years ago.
Post by: Kain on August 31, 2010, 01:43:43 PM
This is a very interesting quote and should be remembered when debating about wolves.
Quote
The need to eat and the instinct to hunt can and do function separately.
Post by: Atroxus on August 31, 2010, 02:06:48 PM
Post by: Lowedog on August 31, 2010, 02:14:33 PM
Sure is good to see what all that money I spent on this years hunting scrolls gets spent so wisely on game species! WTF do birdwatchers or bunnyhuggers contribute to WDFW?
Kind of like football subsidizing all other sports at the college level.
Do you suppose the "bird conservancy" is pro hunting??
I think I see some FAT to be trimmed in the state budget!
I see this type of statement often on here.
This is from the WDFW FAQ...
Quote
How much does the Department collect annually from sales of permits, licenses, etc.?
$31,302,327 was collected by the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife from the sale of permits, licenses, and fees July 1, 2001 through June 30, 2002 (fiscal year).
Where do license fees go? What percentage goes into the State General Fund or other funds NOT for use by WDFW?
79% goes to the State Wildlife Account 13% of that money goes to Other WDFW controlled accounts 5% goes to the General Fund
Out of the money that goes to the General Fund, how much is appropriated back to the Department?
As an example: In fiscal year 2002, the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife deposited $47,099,799 as revenues into the General Fund and spent $90,389,524 as expenditures from the General Fund.
How does the Department fund services and programs?
Licenses, Permits, and Fees 33% Federal Grants-In-Aid 46% State Charges & Miscellaneous Revenue 1% Private/Local Charges & Misc Revenue 19% Other Miscellaneous Revenues 1%.
↑ Back to top
This is another reason they are called Fish and Wildlife and not Hunting and Fishing. All tax payers contribute to WDFW.
Post by: Kain on August 31, 2010, 02:37:28 PM
Post by: Elkaholic daWg on August 31, 2010, 08:27:41 PM
I think the point is that hunters and fishers still pay more than anyone else because we pay taxes like everyone else AND still have to pay for license and tags and tax on ammo. Thanks for posting the number though, they are good to know. Just wish it would go back to Fish and Game sometimes.
I miss the Washington department of fish and game also, they did do a better job
Post by: wolfbait on August 31, 2010, 09:24:01 PM
I think the point is that hunters and fishers still pay more than anyone else because we pay taxes like everyone else AND still have to pay for license and tags and tax on ammo. Thanks for posting the number though, they are good to know. Just wish it would go back to Fish and Game sometimes.
I miss the Washington department of fish and game also, they did do a better job
We all miss those days, but there is a new agenda on the horizon and it does not include hunting.
Post by: bearpaw on August 31, 2010, 09:36:00 PM
Roughly 25% comes from license sales to hunters and fishers, 25% from Bonds, etc,and 50% form Pittman/Robertson and Johnson/Dingle which are federal funds derived from sales of sporting goods. So in a round about way, hunters and fishers are still the primary fund source.
Post by: Axle on September 01, 2010, 10:27:38 AM
Quote
We all miss those days, but there is a new agenda on the horizon and it does not include hunting.
It includes anti hunting, anti gun ownership, etc. etc.
It includes so few ungulates that most hunters will simply give up. Is this what we want? I say no!
Post by: WAcoyotehunter on September 01, 2010, 10:32:40 AM
If the feral cats are damaging wildlife whether that be game or non-game animals I would think that is exactly what WDFW is supposed to help address. Otherwise it should be called Washington Department of Hunting and Fishing.Agree. The department works on lots of wildlife/fish issues that are not related to harvest. It's their job to protect and maintain species diversity, not just to make sure we have lots to kill.
Post by: wolfbait on September 01, 2010, 03:54:28 PM
Not to worry, WDFW's wolves will take care of the cat problems sooner or later. ;)