The Press Herald’s editorial board echoes the Maine Audubon Society in declaring “that fowl populations are in danger from cats is in little doubt” (“Our View: Hey, Legislature, depart these cats alone,” March 4). The truth is, the scientific consensus is far more nuanced (although it’s typically agreed upon that birds undergo way more from habitat loss than from cats).
First, no scientific proof demonstrates that cats trigger fowl populations to say no.
Second, the impact of cats in a single ecological context can’t be generalized to a different. Making use of findings from extremely particular case research to the world at massive merely doesn’t yield helpful data.
To make this laws credible, L.D. 644‘s backers ought to doc the affect of free-roaming cats on particular fowl populations in Maine, and will try to outline a suitable degree of predation for this predator-prey relationship. They need to examine the prices and advantages of this extremely restrictive laws to different approaches in lowering fowl predation which have proven a lot promise, similar to: equipping cats with bells, bibs or sonic collars; preserving cats well-fed, and restraining from feeding wild birds.
In any other case, L.D. 644 will needlessly hurt the well-being of Maine’s cats with out offering any considerable advantages for the birds.
Michael Burrows
Windham
« Earlier
Subsequent »
Associated Tales
Invalid username/password.
Please examine your e-mail to verify and full your registration.
Use the shape under to reset your password. Whenever you’ve submitted your account e-mail, we’ll ship an e-mail with a reset code.