I think this paragraph might be the key to most of the problem:
"Up on the bridge, a tollbooth attendant named John Newland heard the
shot. Newland, a quiet man in his 60s, often fed the cats under the
bridge. He called them his babies. Newland bolted out of his tollbooth
and saw Stevenson's van. "I got you!" Newland screamed. "You quit
shooting my cats!""
It appears the Stevenson wanted to reduce the number of cats in the
area. I wonder just how many were being atttracted/fed by the tollbooth
attendant alone, and what effect it would have had if he'd managed to
stop him feeding them.
I can understand people wanting cats, and people taking in strays, but
the practise of feeding strays while allowing them to remain strays has
always annoyed me. But I'd feel very uncomfortable about them being
shot near a built up area (where I might be wandering), especially
unofficial shooting.
Peter Shute
wrote on Wednesday, 5 December 2007
7:06 PM:
> http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/02/magazine/02cats-v--birds-t.html
>
> Kill the Cat That Kills the Bird?
> By BRUCE BARCOTT
> Published: December 2, 2007
>
> < a lengthy but interesting item on the fight over feral cats in the
> USA >
==============================www.birding-aus.org
birding-aus.blogspot.com
To unsubscribe from this mailing list,
send the message:
unsubscribe
(in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
to:
=============================
|
