Culling Invasive Species (including cats) in New Zealand

Kaiyo Funaki
TCD
Thu, July 25, 2024 at 9:15 PM EDT·3 min read

A divisive event in New Zealand has sparked a debate over the ethics of killing invasive species after including an animal most cultures typically view as a companion instead of a threat.

The Guardian reported that over 1,500 people — including 440 children under 14 — participated in the annual North Canterbury Hunting Competition to target deer, pigs, ducks, possums, rabbits, and, most controversially, feral cats.

Event organizer Matt Bailey told the Guardian feral cats threaten the country's biodiversity and native wildlife, as the prodigious predators hunt endangered birds, lizards, bats, and insects. They also carry diseases that jeopardize the health of livestock.

The feline category was introduced last year and awards 500 New Zealand dollars ($296) for the most killed and NZ$1,000 ($593) for the largest one killed. Contestants caught a record 371 cats in this year's edition, the Guardian said.

Hunting problematic species for cash prizes is a common tactic to control populations and restore wildlife balance. Organizations across the U.S. have incentivized removing invasive and pest animals like northern pikeminnows in the Pacific Northwest, silver carp in Tennessee, and Burmese pythons in Florida.

Cats are first trapped to ensure they are feral, and all traps must be set at least 10 kilometers (6.2 miles) from any residential area to protect domesticated pets.

"When [ferals] are caged, it's pretty obvious," Bailey said to the Guardian. "They are like the devil on methamphetamine; they will try to attack you."

Furthermore, only adults can partake in the cat culling, and they must use a minimum of a .22 caliber rifle to ensure a humane killing.

The event — which reportedly raised around NZ$60,000 ($35,652) for a nearby school and a community pool and donated harvested venison to local food banks — received intense backlash from animal rights activists who found these protective measures unsatisfactory.

They also contended that it enables violence and animal cruelty under the guise of conservation while endangering domestic cats. The issue is of particular concern to New Zealand — data from Companion Animals New Zealand in 2020 showed that 41% of households own a cat.

Members of the Animal Save Movement who protested at the competition told the Guardian that they were harassed by hunters. "There is nothing conservative about encouraging children to kill animals and people attempting to throw dead possums at us," Sarah Jackson, one of the protesters, said.

Bailey dismissed the complaints and stated that hunting is part of rural life for children in the area.

However, hunters and activists alike agreed that improved accountability was needed to limit ballooning feral feline numbers.

"They are an apex predator — the time's come that if we want to be predator-free, we need to stem the flow of people breeding [cats] and dumping in the countryside," Bailey said, adding that domesticated cats needed to be sterilized and microchipped.

"If we genuinely care about bird conservation and wildlife protection, we need individuals to take responsibility for their cats by neutering to prevent unplanned breeding and the subsequent dumping of unwanted litters," the Animal Justice Party said.

"after including an animal most cultures typically view as a companion instead of a threat." Though if it is cruel to hunt a cat, it is cruel to hunt an animal that is a threat. The concern in these cases seems to be less about the animals and more about the feelings of the humans (which are of course relevant, but we should be clear about what the real issue is).

It is also less cruel to humanely dispatch a caged animal than to shoot a free roaming one (which has a fairly high likelihood of simply being wounded and suffering before dying). Anyway, it isn't considered cruel to trap a cat in an box trap, as when capturing to take to a rescue (keep in mind that feral cats do not get rehomed) or when trapping for TNR programs (which is another can of worms).

Well said.
Feral cats have been proven to be a problem in America as well in some parts, to the native bird population. The problem starts with humans who move and decide to leave the family pets behind.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mistergreen

Well said.
Feral cats have been proven to be a problem in America as well in some parts, to the native bird population. The problem starts with humans who move and decide to leave the family pets behind.

---

It's also allowing domestic pets to be un-neutered/un-spayed, and allowing them to roam loose outside at all. It's NOT only ferals that are killing birds, reptiles & small mammals...it's all those "adorable house cats" that run loose. They've put tiny cameras on some of them & shocked their owners at just how many creatures their pets killed when loose outside...:( Domestic cats don't belong outside- no other pets are allowed to roam...why cats? They spread diseases & parasites, in addition to maiming & decimating wildlife. I take my hat off to New Zealand for doing something about it, as Australia has in the past. :colbert2: Personally, I've had it "up to here" with "TNR" (trap neuter & release) advocates, that are perfectly happy if all wildlife disappears & their yards are filled with nothing but roaming cats.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bogertophis

Personally, I've had it "up to here" with "TNR" (trap neuter & release) advocates, that are perfectly happy if all wildlife disappears & their yards are filled with nothing but roaming cats.

---

I'm skeptical (to put it a bit euphemistically) about TNR too. There is, though, evidence that at least on some time scales it is the least ineffective eradication method. Cats are territorial, and so if there's a cat in an area that prevents others from being in that area (and so prevents those others from having hunting grounds, and thus reduces their breeding potential). If a feral cat is simply removed from an area, those in other areas will be able to expand their hunting range and so have more offspring. Having a bunch of neutered feral cats around helps keep the non-neutered ones from reproducing.

I would be more supportive of TNR if it were one temporary tool in an overall program to get the number of feral cats down to zero. As a long time cat keeper (who recently captured two kittens in his woodshed*), I'd support some pretty serious regulation -- chipping and neutering of every captive cat, and criminal penalties for violations (in line with criminal penalties for other relevant wildlife violations such as killing migratory birds intentionally, which is currently a misdemeanor up to $15k fine and up to six months prison). Legit breeders could get licensed and have different regulations. Also, no cats outside off a leash or otherwise confined (as with a sturdy kennel or catio). Everyone who wants a cat should be allowed to keep one or more, and everyone who keeps one should be expected to keep it responsibly.

*We kept one, which is doing well though I've never had an eight week old kitten before and she's a fun little terror. The other was seriously injured -- two broken legs and a big wound, looks like a coyote might have gotten a hold of her -- but a tech at our vet agreed to take her in and nurse her back, and I have been told she's doing well.

Even if they're neutered/spayed, loose cats are killing native wildlife (& interfering w/ neighbors, spreading diseases some of which impact humans, & spreading parasites) so TNR makes no sense to me. A feral cat that's captured should be euthanized, not set free again to continue to raise havoc. You'll notice they're not "trapping, neutering & releasing" pythons & boas in Florida...:rolleyes:

Even with TNR or family owned cats killing the animals in the area...
The cats are also spreading diseases amongst themselves and other animals in the area as well. So by reducing the number of feral cats you also reduce the spread of feline HIV, FIP, panleukopenia, micoplasm, feline herpes and feline Chlamydia. And then there's cat scratch fever, toxoplasmosis and ringworm that tend to plague cats as well.

It sucks, but overall the general population of felines will be better off as well as the environment. There's a cat colony I know of and can't help anymore because it's too out of hand and none of the rescues or animal control want to work on it. They're so sad and mangy looking now... I own a cat from that colony when I rescued some abandoned kittens from them.
He was diagnosed with herpes, mycoplasma, Chlamydia and may have some sort of liver condition. Thankfully not hiv/leuk/fip but still quite a bit for a cat that we took in at 3 weeks old. @_@

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mistergreen

Well said.
The problem starts with humans who move and decide to leave the family pets behind.

---

Or with humans who dump them in rural or semi-rural areas thinking that someone needs another barn cat. We found one dumped recently that was pregnant, go figure. :rolleyes:

Our county shelter is so full of both cats and dogs there's a wait list for admittance. They have cats and small dogs in carriers stacked up in offices.

Same with my local shelter. They're always full of dogs & cats, with a wait list to get in, & they work at it regularly to promote adoptions, like taking some to Petco & other locations. (It's a no-kill shelter.) The problem is that there aren't enough good homes to go around, & when some people are told the shelter cannot accept the animal they want to turn in right away, they just dump it somewhere.

It's not fair to the animals (domestic pets do not live "happily ever after" in the wild- they face hunger, disease, temperature extremes, predators, etc.) nor to sympathetic but overwhelmed pet lovers, or people who are tired of cat-fights keeping them awake at nights, & cats roaming in their yard, etc.

Honestly.... Working as a former vet tech. It's not just people moving and leaving them. People are just to lazy to research on what kind of care these animals need to keep from going stir crazy or were just taught by their family that 'cats don't like to stay inside' or some other strange belief that the cat has to see outside.
I spoke to someone with a purebred ragdoll that just left it outside and never vaccinated it. I was horrified. When explaining the dangers he was like, 'well they still live a long time. They seem healthy. My last cat was 7 years old.'

Besides ignorance, there's a lot of "lazy" involved too- cleaning a cat box every day versus the cat doing its stinky business outside somewhere else...

Quote:

---

they must use a minimum of a .22 caliber rifle to ensure a humane killing.

---

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for hunting cats. Would this minimum caliber requirement really do anything though? Sounds kind of like useless information included to make the hunt sound better... there's not much smaller than .22.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gobuchul

Sounds kind of like useless information included to make the hunt sound better... there's not much smaller than .22.

---

I counted out 37 BB pellets in a cat's x-ray once. It's not pretty. A handful were still embedded around the face. We were really hoping they were just weird allergies or an infection of some sort and not random cruelty on a cat that had been rescued.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gobuchul

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for hunting cats. Would this minimum caliber requirement really do anything though? Sounds kind of like useless information included to make the hunt sound better... there's not much smaller than .22.

---

Some people might use a .17HMR since feral cats can be hard to get close to and so a caliber with a longer reach might seem warranted. There's probably plenty of people who think a regular .177 air rifle is a good idea, especially in urban areas where that's the only option.

A .22 certainly doesn't "ensure a humane killing" though.