Why does R in TNR=abandonment

[susan greene]

Mark wrote:
<<Many prosecuting attorneys (city & county types) have decided that the release of animals on property other than another meets the definition of "abandonment" under the code and could prosecute for it.>>

I hate to beat the subject to death, but I assume this means without landowner permission? If cats are sterilized, vaccinated, have shelters, and the business owner or homeowner or park manager gives permission, I assume this is not abandonment? This is how we manage things. We have yet to find a landowner, or at least an adjacent landowner, who won't give permission for the cats to stay. Usually they are feeding the cats themselves, anyway, and feel bad for them. If one landowner doesn't like the cats living under his porch, we just fix his porch so the cats can't go under there and find someone nearby instead, and install shelters. Usually there's more than one landowner concerned about the cats, anyway.

What is the legal difference if I neuter unpettable feral cats at a lumber yard in the city, and they know I'm there, and I neuter barn cats that wander between farms in the country, for a farmer? Fish and Game in some states seems to think the first is abandonment, and the second is just plain good livestock management.

Thank goodness the Farm Bureau spoke up at the Pennsylvania Game Commission public meeting to point out they hoped PGC wasn't thinking of telling them they can't fix their barn cats!

So I guess my question is: wouldn't TNR with landowner permission be perfectly legal if the cats are fed, sheltered, and receive veterinary care and vaccinations? (in the absence of pet number limits or cat leash laws).

(for the record, if the landowner gives permission but doesn't want to accept ownership, I consider myself the legal owner, and I tell them that. So far, no problem, although I'm sure if the owner wanted to sell, I'd have to convince the next owner, or move my cats).

Thanks very much for your responses to this flurry of questions you are getting.

Susan

 

[jcat]

Fascinating thread! I have no idea whether this would be legal/feasible in most states, but some privately funded animal protection groups operating in Mediterranean countries circumvent "abandonment laws" which could be applied to TNR operations by neutering/spaying on site. Generally, a mobile home is converted into an operating room, and "vacationing" vets/vet techs provide their skills. The animals (both dogs and cats) are trapped, taken into the OP, spayed/neutered, and then released immediately after they have (more or less) fully regained consciousness. As the mobile OP remains on site for 2 or 3 days, the volunteers can monitor the animals for complications to some extent. One such group (Tierhilfe Süden) persuaded a cat litter company to donate 25 c from each $5 bag of litter sold, which is great advertising for the company, too.

 

[kittenkiya]

I realize I am a newbie here, but I was wondering if I could put my 2 cents worth in.

I called Animal Control here in Tucson, and they told me that feral cats are just that, feral cats. They are not "owned" in the sense that house cats are "owned". The only time they would consider "abandonment" is if I were feeding a colony, and up and moved away without making some arrangements for someone to take over the feeding. I could be prosecuted for "abandoning" the colony. Having them spayed, neutered and returning them from where you got them was not considered "abandoning".

 

[ldg]

KittenKiya, what is their definition of "owned?" and how do they distinguish between ferals that are cared for and "owned" cats? Because in many places it is if you are feeding them and providing them medical care - and having them spayed or neutered qualifies as medical care. It is places like that for which we're trying to pick Mark's brain / struggling with these legal definitions and how to potentially redefine "ownership" (or another issue, "abandonment") or structure the laws to enable feral cat management without technically breaking the law(s).

 

[kittenkiya]

This is kind of sticky, isn't it? I guess it just matters who you talk to and how THEY feel. Tucson Animal Control was so happy to hear that I had spayed and neutered mine, they would have put me up for president if I had asked them. According to my trailer park, because I spayed and neutered them, they are mine and I will be held responsible for any damage they do. Go figure. I stop them from breeding and just feed and water them like I've been doing for two years or so, and all of a sudden they are "mine". I guess it is now they have someone to blame.

 

[linda_of_pgff]

KittenKiya,

You have my gratitude, too! But you do raise the very point that is a problem with the legal situation, from the standpoint of concerned, compassionate citizens:

Do nothing, and save yourself risk but watch cat problems develop;

or

Take action, and find yourself burdened with the ENTIRE responsibility.

Neither one is right, in my view. Yet many laws force you to choose. My group finds it very difficult to organize caretakers of feral cats, even though the caretakers on their own are in need, simply because they feel (rightly!) that by revealing their caretaking, they will be forced to bear the responsibility for animals they had no say in creating.

It is so morally offensive to me, I sometimes shake my head at many conventional animal organizations that refuse to face this. Blame the victim, is what it amounts to!

 

[hissy]

It is also this type of thinking that sways people away from wanting to take care of a stray cat, for fear of what that will mean down the road for them. It even causes some rescuers to stop taking on new colonies, based on the ordinances facing them, such as fines for feeding the cat or for being charged with abandoning them. YET some counties think nothing of it to openly put out poison to kill these animals without thinking twice about it. It really stirs me to anger that this problem created by PEOPLE not cats, has not been addressed. That people rescuers, and animal control alike cannot band together to come up with effective measures to stop the proliferation of kittens, and instead seem to be standing back and beating their heads against a wall trying to figure it all out- and while they are figuring, the cats are multiplying........

 

[linda_of_pgff]

Originally posted by LDG
That is having tremendous benefit in communities implementing this type of program, and I do see this more and more. However, in my dream world where the law is structured in a way that works to promote rescue and yet punish cruelty, "mandatory" spay/neuter means that unless you're a licensed breeder, it is illegal to have an unsterilized pet rabbit, cat, dog, rodent....

Hi LDG, and All,

I'm thrilled to see so many good minds addressing this issue! Great dialogue! Let's keep at it, please!

Everything I have ever been taught and read tells me that the law and forces like education and support need to work in concert. And, I've always heard that a law that does not codify what is already normal behavior for a good part of the population (60 percent?) is a bad law -- unenforceable, and likely to lead to scoffing of laws in general. So to me, the key is to BOTH move toward legalizing TNR (where it's not currently an option) AND educate people on why it is needed and how it is done. This is a tall order, I know. And that's why it will take cooperation among various parties (government, private animal organizations, schools, community groups of other kinds . . . . "it takes a village" comes to mind) to achieve the kind of change needed.

I have realized that changing the law in my area will still probably not change my local SPCA's minds. But I CAN change the minds of the local neighbors of all those feral cat colonies, if I can offer them the facts and data that they can draw their OWN conclusions from. And that is data that show that TNR DOES work, where for 30-some years, the alternatives have NOT addressed our homeless cat problems!

 

[linda_of_pgff]

Hi All,

Originally posted by LDG

2) In communities with pet licensing laws (any idea what percentage of communities in the U.S. have these laws in place?), generally speaking, is licensing the animals the only way for "backyard" rescuers to "legitimize" (or generally legally comply with local codes) their work? In essence, to become their "owners" as opposed to their "caretakers"? (If the question is too general, perhaps just speak to your community).

This is precisely how it works in my county in Maryland. Actually, it's worse: a caretaker once made known to Animal Control must license for each cat, must obtain a cattery license if he or she is caring for more than four cats, and must guarantee their confinement indoors to avoid future fines and charges. We have a contact who spent upwards of $15K fencing in her entire beautifully landscaped back yard. She had retired, and actually returned to the workforce to be able to pay for it. I think her next-door neighbor was ultimately too amazed to complain any more, though I am not convinced that the fencing can truly permanently contain a colony of feral cats.

It is frustrating to me that we are discussing this so abstractly, because it's one thing to say, gee, be careful, don't be found out. It is quite another thing to be faced with a choice to become an unfeeling slob v. to spend you rown funds and risk your own reputation and record. That's the kind of choice that I just do not think is right.

Another frustration about the current laws is that they are used to maintain the status quo. We have presented the TNR approach, but been told "we can't agree to that because WE HAVE TO ENFORCE THE LAW." And so, killing feral cats for an accident of fate remains perfectly legal in my county. I hope to see that change during my lifetime.

 

[tnr1]

I was asked to pose this question by a friend:

which is better - sterilized, vaccinated feral cats or
unsterilized, breeding feral cats?

The law was never intended to address feral cats. If it's illegal to
prevent a feral cat from breeding while it is perfectly legal to allow
an intact, unvaccinated cat to remain out there, there's something
wrong
with the law!

 

[luvmyfurbabys]

Sounds like the law needs to change , maybe contacting a person in the VA gov to see if you could get a bill sponsored , would be a way to take action.

 

[kittenkiya]

Part of the problem is that some "agencies" don't really care about the situation until one of their own complains. Then it is hell for everybody who is involved with caring for ferals. If I had not said anything to my management about the spaying and neutering, those cats would not be "mine" because they knew darn well I was feeding them and had been for years. But because I was honest and told them that they didn't have to worry about my colony breeding, Bang!!! I am the troublemaker and problem. "Well, if you hadn't fed the cats......."
My Animal Control person that I spoke to was so grateful that the cats had been spayed. She knew they would not have to come out to my place because of breeding, problems, etc. I have spoken to all my neighbors, even the one I don't like, and told them if the cats cause them a problem, or poop in their yards, let me know and I will clean it up. No one in two and half years has taken me up on it. These people don't mind the cats. It's management that gets their shorts in a knot and then all hell breaks loose.

I wish you all could see my babies. The spaying and neutering has worked wonders. They have calmed down quite a bit, they are quiet, they don't bother anyone. I am working on getting Princess to trust me and I will eventually get her into my house. I know it. She is so sweet.

If I have taken on the responsibility of animals I do not "own", have spayed and neutered them, feed and water them WITHOUT asking for anyone else to share expenses, why can't people just leave us alone?

 

[mark kumpf]

Originally posted by LDG
really the issue.

However, what I seek, ultimately, is how to ideally structure the laws/codes, licensing, etc. to support both TNR groups and "non-official" rescue efforts for existing homeless animal populations so that "backyard" rescuers don't have to look at it that they're "not going to get caught." ...how to structure a law that enables rescuers to be in compliance with laws while making things like dumping unwanted animals illegal. So I am interested in the letter of the law, and definitions of "ownership," "abandonment" etc. have to be taken into consideration.

Definitions of each would be a first step. Addressing each issue and the components that make up the different categories would be a subject for some debate. Getting cat advocates, animal control, general citizens and humane groups together to talk is sometimes difficult. Unfortunately, states differ and so do their animal codes. Some solutions are not possible in some states at all without MAJOR revisions to the state enabling legislation. I wish there was an ideal model to work from but as of now, there isn't one that works the same in all jurisdictions.

 

[tnr1]

Mark..thanks for your answer...wouldn't you say that this type of situation where putting a label on caretaking of unowned cats is fairly new?? Thus perhaps it is best for now to simply understand that there is indeed a law out there..but only enforce it when it becomes a problem...not necessarily turn away but not pursue it as an offense until such a time as it is reported to be an issue. Thus, if a person takes care of feral cats and the neighbors do not complain...it really isn't an issue. I think someday it will be easier for groups to come together with a definition that fits..but for now each group has a separate agenda and there isn't a "mid ground" that everyone feels comfortable with. Am I off the mark??

Katie

 

[mark kumpf]

Originally posted by TNR1
Mark..thanks for your answer...wouldn't you say that this type of situation where putting a label on caretaking of unowned cats is fairly new?? Thus perhaps it is best for now to simply understand that there is indeed a law out there..but only enforce it when it becomes a problem...not necessarily turn away but not pursue it as an offense until such a time as it is reported to be an issue. Thus, if a person takes care of feral cats and the neighbors do not complain...it really isn't an issue. I think someday it will be easier for groups to come together with a definition that fits..but for now each group has a separate agenda and there isn't a "mid ground" that everyone feels comfortable with. Am I off the mark??

Katie

Check out the California penal codes attached to the newest thread. They actually address the feral cat situation.

 

[tnr1]

I do appreciate the fact that they do address feral cats separately and do give 3 days for the caretaker to reclaim a feral cat...however, it still seems a far cry from places where they have feral cats registered to the city and caretakers are assisted. After all...feral cats is not a "caretaker's" issue...it is a community's issue...and the caretakers are simply assisting the city in dealing with the situation. I still think that punishing individuals who are trying to help is not a good way to handle the problem.

Katie

 

[jcat]

The laws differ from town/county to town/county, but maybe the following could help somebody. Over a decade ago I found myself feeding a colony of ferals that had previously been cared for by a company that went bankrupt and closed. We lived in close proximity, and couldn't let the cats starve. I was advised by our vet that feeding the cats and getting them medical attention would automatically make me their "owner", and legally liable for them. An acquaintance long active in animal rescue advised me to do the following:
1) become a full-fledged, dues-paying member of a state-recognized rescue organization.
2) save all receipts for cat food and vet bills.
3) submit the receipts to the rescue organization, and have them officially confirm my monetary/in kind donations.
4) list those donations on my income tax statement, and attach the confirmation.
The tax office usually only allows/allowed me to deduct the membership dues (I suspect that it depends on the person dealing with the statement), but: as a member of the rescue organization, I personally was/am not liable for any damage caused by the cats, i.e., any lawsuits pressed by irate neighbors had/have to be addressed to the rescue organization, and not me personally, and were/are covered by the organization's liability insurance. Cats that had actually been moved into our home were excepted. The situtation with the ferals has been resolved, but we're currently dealing with a "runaway" (a cat whose family moved two years ago, but who keeps turning up here). She's a dead ringer for Jamie, except for the fact that he has green eyes, and she has amber ones. Every time she shows up here, the neighbors catch her and deliver her to our door.

 

[linda_of_pgff]

Hi,

That's a pretty sound plan. I would advise that people always ASK about the cat related policies and protections afforded volunteers, before signing on with any organization. I've heard of people finding out (too late) that the group they supported for many years, was not willing to take up the cats' cause after all, or that it turned out the group really didn't understand what TNR is.

In some areas, nowadays, you could reasonably expect more from a rescue organization than just to condone your work -- there should be an effort to actually improve the lives of you and the cats; there could even be some analysis of the effects of you and other volunteers doing similar work. With TNR becoming better-known, I would like to see some of the older rescue organizations "getting it" more than they have so far. That will take people like you working on them a little bit every month! :-)

I like very much the point that the cats become, essentially, the wards of the organization, rather than you the individual. In my personal opinion this is a big deal -- it's what helps a caretaker to remain a caretaker, and to distinguish between cats owned purposely by the caretaker (as pets) and those cared for out of a sense of civic responsibility and compassion (colony cats). For this to work, though, there has to be a very clear bond of trust and commitment between the caretakers and the organization.