DrRalph
01-06-2009, 12:54 PM
The threads about feral cats on Guana Cay and manatees prompted me to consider a few observations and commentary.
Last week an article appeared in our local paper about a “raid” on a house that contained almost 100 cats. The house was inhabited by an elderly woman and her daughter, and was located in a lower section of town. The involved law enforcement and animal control people described the house as “fetid, foul, and unlivable.” Many of the animals were malnourished, feces and rotten food were littered about, and the stench was described as “overpowering.” The two women identified themselves as merely “cat lovers,” and seemed otherwise appropriate. The animals were confiscated and transported to the Humane Society, the women were charged with negligence and cruelty to animals. What is striking is that this seems to occur in our community of maybe 300,000 two or three times each month.
My wife has three clients who, along with their spouses, “volunteer” to feed colonies of feral cats. The first couple spends about $400/month on cat food; not the cheap stuff from Wal-Mart, but hi-dollar “gourmet” cat food, because, well, they deserve it. They own a small business in an industrial area, the cats live behind it. They have spent "several hundred dollars" to spay/neuter a number of them. A second couple is more casual: they drive by an established colony twice each day and load food into bowls that stay in the area.
The third and most passionate couple belong to a group of volunteers who for years have “maintained” a large colony, 400-500 animals, that live in a park run by a city north of us. These people are so dedicated that they do not take vacations, and only one of them will leave the area at a time, and then for only the most dire emergency. It turns out that the park is part of a federally mandated flyway and bird sanctuary. As the colony grew and development encroached on the park, neighbors began to complain about the smell, animal carcasses, and then attacks on nesting birds. When local government became involved, the Feds learned about it, as did some people from Audubon and other bird groups, and they demanded that the cat colony be “eliminated.” As you might guess, the Feds won, and after some public howling, some time in court, a little vandalism and some threats, a solution was reached whereby someone in the western section of the county donated some acreage, and the cats are being trapped and relocated. There is some effort to spay and neuter the animals, but it’s expensive, and the cat volunteers have not been as cooperative as they could be in terms of trapping and bringing the cats in for surgery.
There is obviously a small but intensely passionate segment of the population that is obsessed (is that too strong?) by cats. I don’t understand it, and I’m wondering whether there will be this kind of passion if and when the folks on Guana start trapping feral cats.
* * * * *
Almost 40 years ago a survey of the manatee population here in Florida revealed that their numbers had dropped to about 600. Over the ensuing years the issue generated wide public interest, and ultimately wound up before the State Legislature. After much time and debate, laws were enacted that required counties with significant manatee populations to develop management plans, which would then be submitted to the state for approval, and finally enacted and enforced. Part of the law required that commercial interests in each county be consulted during the planning process, such as to minimize the impact of the new regs on people whose economic well-being might be adversely affected. What was missing from the law was any mention of an effort to attempt to determine, in a geographic sense, those areas which should be protected.
For those of us on the Florida East Coast, this principally impacted two waterways: the Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway (ICW), and the St. John’s River. The ICW is the I-95 of boating: it essentially runs from New England to Mexico, and it can be very busy, carrying many thousands of recreational and commercial vessels on a daily basis. The St. John’s is a regional waterway, but is no less busy. Without question both waterways host a significant manatee population. In the interest of full disclosure, at this time I should point out that we run a 33-foot powerboat on the ICW and nearby Atlantic Ocean. I should also note for those of you who are not boaters that there have always been speed-restricted areas on the waterways, usually near marinas, anchorages, crowded areas, launch ramps, narrow bridges, etc. These are typically referred to as “idle speed” or “no wake” zones, and the boater is required to slow to about 5-6 mph, such that his vessel produces no wake (wave).
So the planning phase began, which was covered intensely by a number of periodicals, including Florida Sportsman Magazine, to which I subscribed at the time. The first fly-speck in the ointment was a list of the commercial enterprises which were being consulted in Brevard and Volusia counties. There was Ron-Jon’s, a surf shop on the beach, several restaurants, a number of other businesses not related to boating or the waterways in question. What seemed to be missing were guides, marinas, boat-building companies, construction companies, those that would be directly affected by the new regs. After a period of consideration, each county submitted plans, which basically involved designating areas on the ICW, the St. John’s, and its tributaries, as “slow speed manatee zones,” slow speed being defined by statute as “5-7 mph.”
The Save the Manatee Club, which had evolved over the previous two decades, was elated, and the boating community howled. The Club was and still is extremely effective at drumming up public support all over the US for their cause. They provide awareness, raise money, and lobby the legislature. For many boaters, they are “The Enemy,” for basically two reasons: the slow speed zones make it difficult for people such as fishing guides to reach several areas during a day’s outing, and commercial traffic is slowed with attendant delays and expenses. Second, many county plans included severe restrictions and even moratoriums on building docks and dredging channels. Again, this was done without an effort to actually study and locate areas of dense manatee populations.
My friends and I laughed when we saw the plan for our local area. I’ve been boating in the Daytona area since 1962, I can tell you where manatees are most likely to hang out, and the planners missed. It was as if someone set up a dartboard, kind of like the weather guys have, and said, here, throw some darts at a map, and when we get enough mileage to satisfy the plan, we’ll submit it. Fast forward to 2009, and what do we have? There is no question that boats are responsible for the greatest fraction of manatee deaths, and there is no question that it’s rare to see a manatee without prop scars on its back. The current manatee population is now up over 3000 from its low of 600, and each annual count seems to increase. The manatee people say this is simply better counting technique. However, last year the state began to consider removing manatees from the “endangered” status, but the resultant howl brought that to a halt, at least for now. There have been some relaxations in the dredging and dock-building regs, which seemed ill-conceived at the time. Even the most ardent manatee protectionist will not attempt to portray the population as declining; they do contest the numbers that show growth.
* * * * *
Last night our local TV station did a piece on the Florida Cougar (also known as Florida panther). They were celebrating the fact that the latest estimate of the statewide population of this critter could be as high as 100, up from “possibly extinct” a decade ago. Cougars live in the deep woods, they do not like to be anywhere near people, they don’t really interfere with us. They are apex predators, an essential part of the natural ecology, the food chain. Their principle cause of death are automobiles, they are struck by people who drive through remote areas, such as the Ocala National Forest or the Big Cypress area. There has never been a “Save the Cougar” club, even though this critter teeters far closer to elimination than the manatee ever did. No one has ever proposed slow speed zones on I-75 or SR 40, kids up north don’t see pictures of endangered cougars on milk cartons. There are several species of coastal and pelagic sharks whose populations have been decimated. It seems that if it has teeth or looks threatening, we aren’t concerned about its extinction. Ever think we’ll see a “Cougar Plan” before the state legislature?
I once had this argument with a friend who is a manatee supporter. I told him, “You’re worried about the wrong species.” He said I was prejudiced because I’m a boater. I said, "OK, I’ll go 5-7 mph in the ICW if you’ll go 15 whenever you travel through the interior of the state." He said, “That’s not the same, boats are for fun, cars are for serious travel.” So I guess if you’re having fun you can’t accidently kill a critter, but it’s OK if you’re doing something serious. I should introduce him to the feral cat people.
I don’t want to kill a manatee (or anything else) with my boat OR my car. I just wish somebody had asked me instead of a guy at a surf shop where to put the slow speed zones, and if there were other critters that might have a greater need for institutional protection. And thank you for taking the time to wade through a long article.
Last week an article appeared in our local paper about a “raid” on a house that contained almost 100 cats. The house was inhabited by an elderly woman and her daughter, and was located in a lower section of town. The involved law enforcement and animal control people described the house as “fetid, foul, and unlivable.” Many of the animals were malnourished, feces and rotten food were littered about, and the stench was described as “overpowering.” The two women identified themselves as merely “cat lovers,” and seemed otherwise appropriate. The animals were confiscated and transported to the Humane Society, the women were charged with negligence and cruelty to animals. What is striking is that this seems to occur in our community of maybe 300,000 two or three times each month.
My wife has three clients who, along with their spouses, “volunteer” to feed colonies of feral cats. The first couple spends about $400/month on cat food; not the cheap stuff from Wal-Mart, but hi-dollar “gourmet” cat food, because, well, they deserve it. They own a small business in an industrial area, the cats live behind it. They have spent "several hundred dollars" to spay/neuter a number of them. A second couple is more casual: they drive by an established colony twice each day and load food into bowls that stay in the area.
The third and most passionate couple belong to a group of volunteers who for years have “maintained” a large colony, 400-500 animals, that live in a park run by a city north of us. These people are so dedicated that they do not take vacations, and only one of them will leave the area at a time, and then for only the most dire emergency. It turns out that the park is part of a federally mandated flyway and bird sanctuary. As the colony grew and development encroached on the park, neighbors began to complain about the smell, animal carcasses, and then attacks on nesting birds. When local government became involved, the Feds learned about it, as did some people from Audubon and other bird groups, and they demanded that the cat colony be “eliminated.” As you might guess, the Feds won, and after some public howling, some time in court, a little vandalism and some threats, a solution was reached whereby someone in the western section of the county donated some acreage, and the cats are being trapped and relocated. There is some effort to spay and neuter the animals, but it’s expensive, and the cat volunteers have not been as cooperative as they could be in terms of trapping and bringing the cats in for surgery.
There is obviously a small but intensely passionate segment of the population that is obsessed (is that too strong?) by cats. I don’t understand it, and I’m wondering whether there will be this kind of passion if and when the folks on Guana start trapping feral cats.
* * * * *
Almost 40 years ago a survey of the manatee population here in Florida revealed that their numbers had dropped to about 600. Over the ensuing years the issue generated wide public interest, and ultimately wound up before the State Legislature. After much time and debate, laws were enacted that required counties with significant manatee populations to develop management plans, which would then be submitted to the state for approval, and finally enacted and enforced. Part of the law required that commercial interests in each county be consulted during the planning process, such as to minimize the impact of the new regs on people whose economic well-being might be adversely affected. What was missing from the law was any mention of an effort to attempt to determine, in a geographic sense, those areas which should be protected.
For those of us on the Florida East Coast, this principally impacted two waterways: the Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway (ICW), and the St. John’s River. The ICW is the I-95 of boating: it essentially runs from New England to Mexico, and it can be very busy, carrying many thousands of recreational and commercial vessels on a daily basis. The St. John’s is a regional waterway, but is no less busy. Without question both waterways host a significant manatee population. In the interest of full disclosure, at this time I should point out that we run a 33-foot powerboat on the ICW and nearby Atlantic Ocean. I should also note for those of you who are not boaters that there have always been speed-restricted areas on the waterways, usually near marinas, anchorages, crowded areas, launch ramps, narrow bridges, etc. These are typically referred to as “idle speed” or “no wake” zones, and the boater is required to slow to about 5-6 mph, such that his vessel produces no wake (wave).
So the planning phase began, which was covered intensely by a number of periodicals, including Florida Sportsman Magazine, to which I subscribed at the time. The first fly-speck in the ointment was a list of the commercial enterprises which were being consulted in Brevard and Volusia counties. There was Ron-Jon’s, a surf shop on the beach, several restaurants, a number of other businesses not related to boating or the waterways in question. What seemed to be missing were guides, marinas, boat-building companies, construction companies, those that would be directly affected by the new regs. After a period of consideration, each county submitted plans, which basically involved designating areas on the ICW, the St. John’s, and its tributaries, as “slow speed manatee zones,” slow speed being defined by statute as “5-7 mph.”
The Save the Manatee Club, which had evolved over the previous two decades, was elated, and the boating community howled. The Club was and still is extremely effective at drumming up public support all over the US for their cause. They provide awareness, raise money, and lobby the legislature. For many boaters, they are “The Enemy,” for basically two reasons: the slow speed zones make it difficult for people such as fishing guides to reach several areas during a day’s outing, and commercial traffic is slowed with attendant delays and expenses. Second, many county plans included severe restrictions and even moratoriums on building docks and dredging channels. Again, this was done without an effort to actually study and locate areas of dense manatee populations.
My friends and I laughed when we saw the plan for our local area. I’ve been boating in the Daytona area since 1962, I can tell you where manatees are most likely to hang out, and the planners missed. It was as if someone set up a dartboard, kind of like the weather guys have, and said, here, throw some darts at a map, and when we get enough mileage to satisfy the plan, we’ll submit it. Fast forward to 2009, and what do we have? There is no question that boats are responsible for the greatest fraction of manatee deaths, and there is no question that it’s rare to see a manatee without prop scars on its back. The current manatee population is now up over 3000 from its low of 600, and each annual count seems to increase. The manatee people say this is simply better counting technique. However, last year the state began to consider removing manatees from the “endangered” status, but the resultant howl brought that to a halt, at least for now. There have been some relaxations in the dredging and dock-building regs, which seemed ill-conceived at the time. Even the most ardent manatee protectionist will not attempt to portray the population as declining; they do contest the numbers that show growth.
* * * * *
Last night our local TV station did a piece on the Florida Cougar (also known as Florida panther). They were celebrating the fact that the latest estimate of the statewide population of this critter could be as high as 100, up from “possibly extinct” a decade ago. Cougars live in the deep woods, they do not like to be anywhere near people, they don’t really interfere with us. They are apex predators, an essential part of the natural ecology, the food chain. Their principle cause of death are automobiles, they are struck by people who drive through remote areas, such as the Ocala National Forest or the Big Cypress area. There has never been a “Save the Cougar” club, even though this critter teeters far closer to elimination than the manatee ever did. No one has ever proposed slow speed zones on I-75 or SR 40, kids up north don’t see pictures of endangered cougars on milk cartons. There are several species of coastal and pelagic sharks whose populations have been decimated. It seems that if it has teeth or looks threatening, we aren’t concerned about its extinction. Ever think we’ll see a “Cougar Plan” before the state legislature?
I once had this argument with a friend who is a manatee supporter. I told him, “You’re worried about the wrong species.” He said I was prejudiced because I’m a boater. I said, "OK, I’ll go 5-7 mph in the ICW if you’ll go 15 whenever you travel through the interior of the state." He said, “That’s not the same, boats are for fun, cars are for serious travel.” So I guess if you’re having fun you can’t accidently kill a critter, but it’s OK if you’re doing something serious. I should introduce him to the feral cat people.
I don’t want to kill a manatee (or anything else) with my boat OR my car. I just wish somebody had asked me instead of a guy at a surf shop where to put the slow speed zones, and if there were other critters that might have a greater need for institutional protection. And thank you for taking the time to wade through a long article.