Email
Print
FeedAudubon feral cat fight has claws in Pennsylvania
.jpg)
The Northeastern Pennsylvania Audubon Chapter was perhaps the first to step up and chastise National Audubon for firing Ted Williams, a highly respected freelance writer and long-time columnist for Audubon Magazine in response to an op-ed piece he recently wrote for the Orlando Sentinel, entitled, "Trap, neuter, return programs make feral-cat problem worse."
His central point in the article was the ineffectiveness of trap-neuter-return programs and the devastating effects of feral cats on bird populations.
Feral cat activists started a petition calling for Audubon to break ties with Williams. National Audubon responded with a strongly worded statement written by president David Yarnold, posted both on the organization's Facebook page and on its website, which effectively fired Williams.
"Ted Williams is a freelance writer who published a personal opinion piece in the Orlando Sentinel. In the course of the original piece, which has since been edited by the Orlando Sentinel, Mr. Williams described using over-the-counter drugs to poison cats," part of the National Audubon statement said.
"And because of Mr. Williams' stated affiliation with Audubon in that original piece, some readers assumed that Audubon was endorsing this approach. We do not. We regret any misimpression that Mr. Williams was speaking for us in any way: He wasn't.
"Audubon magazine today suspended his work and will remove him as 'Editor at Large' from the masthead pending further review."
Read Rob Drieslein's, our managing editor, response to the Audubon's decision.
Northeast PA Audubon's president, Chris Fischer, responded to Yarnold's statement, expressing extreme disappointment with National Audubon's "short-sighted" response to the article published in the Orlando Sentinel by Williams.
"National Audubon's response on Facebook and on audubon.org starts off with a statement rejecting the idea of 'people taking matters into their own hands' and ends with a statement that "backyard poisoning isn't the answer," Fischer wrote. "Neither of these statements are advocated in Ted's article. When writing about alternatives to TNR, it is clear from the context that Ted is referring to options available to authorized agencies ("state and federal wildlife managers').
"He also argues that action needs to be extended to the 'municipal' level - the last I checked, 'municipal' refers to local government. Why are you apologizing for things Ted didn't say? For those who don't bother to look up and read the original article (which include many, judging from the comments I've read online), you are misleading people to believe that Ted's article actually did advocate 'people taking matters into their own hands' and 'backyard poisoning.'
In the response to National Audubon, Fischer noted that William's articles in Audubon Magazine are well-researched, well-reasoned, and written with a strong voice. She contended that Audubon needs more of that kind of writing, not less.
"Unfortunately a newspaper opinion column doesn't allow for the same in-depth treatment as does Audubon Magazine," she wrote. "But at least it's bringing this important issue to public attention. But instead of taking advantage of the opportunity to engage in real debate and discussion, National Audubon has responded by going on the defensive and throwing Ted Williams under the bus.
"The way you've attempted to distance yourself from Ted Williams is disgraceful (especially given that the Sentinel article nowhere states that Ted was speaking on behalf of Audubon). We find this unprincipled and lacking in integrity - and quite frankly, we expect better from you.
"Feral cats are a real problem, killing billions of birds in the United States annually. While an emotional issue for many, an informed public discussion of the issue and alternatives involved is essential if progress is to be made. There is still time to turn this around. We strongly encourage you to do the right thing."
Audubon is a joke, and so is Ted Williams. This is the same clown that wrote articles imploring enviro-crazies to join hunter groups to help further their own environmental political agendas. Judging by the current make up of the vocal mouthpieces at Pa federation of sportsmen clubs, they were articles that were taken to heart.
Thanks Ted.
While I agree feral cats are a problem, I think Audubon as usual, is paranoid. Dont worry bird nutz. Mr. Whiskas aint gonna eat all of your birds theres plenty. No need to be a "bird behind every tree" type...
"Rob Drieslein's, our managing editor"
Considering he is a self professed good friend of environmental extremist to the MAX "Ted Williams", that is more than a bit disturbing.
In case you aren't fully aware of the kinds of people these cat-lickers are, you would do well to educate yourselves. What they did to Ted Williams is nothing.
Google for: Loews Hotels Feral Cats, if you want to see just what kind of whack-jobs they are.
After reading what they did to Loews hotels, any sane person realizes to not bring these TNR sociopaths and psychopaths right to your door.
Here's another replay of what these cat-licker sociopaths did to Loews: www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-stray-cats-20121026,0,6245372.story
A $150 million renovation project for low-income housing, put on hold, jobs lost, money lost, homeless still homeless, court costs and lawyers, just to save a few of their feral vermin cRats. The stupidest part of all, the vast majority of their TNR'ed cats had already died inhuman deaths from TNR-practitioners' own "death by attrition". (Road-kill, diseases, parasites, injuries, environmental poisons, cat & animal attacks, exposure, etc. etc.)
Identical scenarios can be found across the globe every month by Googling for feral cats and churches, universities, hospitals, shopping centers, malls, apartment-complexes, etc. They believe any property on which a cat has stepped foot is their own property and they can control the owners and every life and law on it.
Everyone is learning to destroy all cats on their properties as quickly and quietly as possible. Telling nobody beforehand about the cats even being there. Long before these psychotic cat-licker sociopaths and psychopaths get wind of the cats. Shoot cats first, tell no-one later. The only thing worse than feral cats are cat-lickers. You can legally shoot the former, not the latter. You need to pay lawyers and courts to get rid of the latter. THEN you can get rid of their cats. The sad part is, that's EXACTLY what happens, each and every time.
People are wising-up. If ANY cats are around they destroy every last one of them first before they make any other move.
People do what they need/want to do about it. That doesnt mean yelling to the masses to feed the cats tylenol, and it doesnt mean ranting and raving on a message post in support of a total enviro-whackjob just because some of the "cat people" might be just as whacky. lol. Just mho..
I once saw a guy badly beaten. Thought it was just two guys working out differences over a woman or something. Found out later the guy that took the beating took it for shooting a womans cat. Her son obvious wasn't too happy about it, and took justice for the 'cat woman'. The shooter looked like a racoon for weeks. And when the black went away his face was about 4 shades of yellows and browns for another month. He did not go to the police, there were witnesses to his shooting the cat.
Take home message here-- Sometimes a cat turd in your flower bed is better than your own in your britches after getting it knocked out of you.
"real hunter", so now you are threatening humans with physical injury if they get rid of vermin cats? That's called being a sociopath and psychopath. The hallmark of every last cat-licker online.
A cat-licker never disappoints. It is legal to humanely kill animals with a gun. It is illegal to harm or shoot humans who aren't doing anything illegal.
Never expect a cat-licker to prove they are anything more than the sociopaths and psychopaths that they truly are. Death-threats from cat-lickers are a dime a dozen these days. These sociopathic and psychopathic cat-lickers even send death-threats to Congressmen, their families, and fellow lawmakers.
Don't believe me? Google for: oda lawmakers shun security threats
Seriously? Did you run out of little old ladies to attack on the internet, so now you are going after anyone that moves? Reading real hunters post, I don't see where your paranoia comes from woodsman. He simply spoke of something he witnessed and I am not surprised.
I understand you hate cats, and frankly most of us probably couldn't care less one way or the other if you kill them all, or end up being put in a rubber room for the attitude and trying.
MEOW!..... lmao!
For Ted Williams:
http://www.talking-cats.com/images/submissions/mySubmissions/my-talking-cat-045.jpg
Destroying cats is neither hating nor fearing cats.
Why do psychotic cat-advocates always presume that if someone is removing a destructive, deadly disease spreading, human-engineered invasive-species from the native habitat to restore it to natural balance that they must hate that organism? Does someone who destroys Zebra Mussels, Kudzu, Burmese Pythons, African Cichlids, or any of the other myriad destructive invasive-species have some personal problem with that species? (Many are escaped PETS that don't even spread harmful diseases, unlike cats.) Your ignorance and blatant biases are revealed in your declaring that people who destroy cats must somehow hate or fear cats. Nothing could be further from the truth.
People who spread a destructive invasive-species that tortures-to-death all other wildlife have zero respect for life. They don't even care about cats dying a torturous death from exposure, animal attacks, diseases, dehydration, road-kill, environmental poisons. etc., the way that ALL stray cats suffer to death. They don't even respect their fellow human being. This speaks more than volumes about their disgusting character. People like that should be locked up in prison for life for their cruelty to ALL animals, their own cats as well as all native wildlife that they let their cats skin alive or disembowel alive. If you let cats roam free you are violating every animal-abandonment, animal-neglect, and animal-endangerment law in existence. While also being in direct violation of every invasive-species law worldwide.
If people have LEARNED to hate cats today, these cat-lovers have nobody but themselves and everyone just like them to blame. THEY are the reason people are now realizing that all excess cats must be destroyed on-site. They've done so much to make people care about cats.
THIS IS THE FAULT OF EVERY LAST CAT-LOVER. They have NOBODY but themselves to blame.
They can take that all the way to the very last shot-dead cat's grave.
Are you Ted? Im guessing either you are, or a close friend. Your inflection & intense emotion that goes above and beyond is similar to that in the writings of his that Ive seen speaking towards his intense hatred of evil wildflower eating deer.
"cats skin alive or disembowel alive"
You mean like a fox, coyote, bobcat or any number of other predators do likewise? Natures a be-otch. Maybe we should teach them all to use rifles and bows & arrows? lol. Your argument is irrational because it didn't focus on the fact cats are not native and don't belong in the wild here. Instead you focus on the ridiculous emotional rant about how "cruel" they are?? When mother nature is crueler than anyone or anything that has ever lived.
Just making a point to point you in the right direction next time you argue with the "cat lickers" you might want to focus on the valid parts of the stray cat argument and less on the "woes is the bird, meeting such a cruel death" line.
Anyway, done with this topic. At this point, I don't know who is crazier. The "cat people" or the "bird people". So right now, I'd call it a draw. lmao.