bobepipe wrote [quote]Killing animals doesn’t work. CNR on the other hand can achieve wonders. All under a no-kill approach. Far more compassionate and responsible I think. [/quote]
Sometimes, but it’s not a blanket solution. The important matter of cost shouldn’t be forgotten either. With limited funds you want more bang for your buck.
For a start, I would like to see all the feral dogs and cats in Taiwan’s national parks exterminated as best we can.
Dogs are a man’s best friend. Culling them to me would be like culling a family member.
Kangaroos, on the other hand, can be pests and there are simply too many of them. Joey (baby kangaroo) meat tastes damn good in burgers.
No. Culling is not a solution. Catch-Neuter-Return (CNR) is the only method that works to reduce the stray population. It is also the most humane.
I have to go to bed to get my beauty sleep for the quiz tomorrow, so excuse me if I cut and paste from a few sites.
From http://www.vetwork.org.uk/abc.htm
This from http://www.animalpeoplenews.org/98/6/intl.html (an article about TAS schoolgirl and champion of stray dogs, Mina Sharpe:
[quote]Sharpe
Then you will be opening up the resources to neighbouring dogs, who will move in and breed. You may ‘like’ seeing that, but it will not bring about the results you seek.
Try catching them, neutering them, and releasing them, and then you will see results.
Interestingly, the larger ‘packs’ of dogs you see aren’t actually packs - they are a group of males attracted to a single female in heat. CNR eliminates the incidences of large ‘packs’ of dogs roaming the streets.
Also, the number of stray dogs in Taipei went down after the new garbage collection policy went into practice. With no easy food source waiting for them on every street corner, dog populations decreased.
‘Exterminating’ animals whom you regard as a nuisance is like playing with fire, especially when you consider that humans are the real nuisance on this planet. But that’s for another thread, I guess. 
It’s actually not a solution - see the culling thread:
http://www.forumosa.com/taiwan/viewtopic.php?p=540880#540880
Stray Dog wrote [quote]
Then you will be opening up the resources to neighbouring dogs, who will move in and breed. [/quote]
Okay, fair enough, but how about if we were talking about a small off-shore island where it was indeed possible (through a combination of poisoning, trapping, and shooting) to get rid of the feral pets?
[quote=“almas john”]Stray Dog wrote [quote]
Then you will be opening up the resources to neighbouring dogs, who will move in and breed. [/quote]
Okay, fair enough, but how about if we were talking about a small off-shore island where it was indeed possible (through a combination of poisoning, trapping, and shooting) to get rid of the feral pets?[/quote]
If such a place existed, you’d have no need to do such a thing, for if you could get them all, they would hardly be large enough in numbers to be regarded as a nuisance.
It’s such a shameful reflection on man when he considers killing the first option for solving a problem, don’t you think?
It’s actually not a solution - see the culling thread:
http://www.forumosa.com/taiwan/viewtopic.php?p=540880#540880[/quote]
It’s one kind of solution. It’s just not a perfect one. (Does one exist?) It’s not beyond the parameters of discussion, is all I’m saying.
Very common indeed. New Zealand has lots of such places.
Not true. They cause emormous damage.
[quote]
It’s such a shameful reflection on man when he considers killing the first option for solving a problem, don’t you think?[/quote]
Not really, especially when it is to save other animals.
Feral dogs are not much of a threat. In Taiwan’s case there are problems with packs taking down young sika deer, but it is a relatively minor problem. The problem is feral cats. These cute critters are killing machines, and a curse on any habitat unfortunate enough to have them.
[quote=“Stray Dog”]
It’s such a shameful reflection on man when he considers killing the first option for solving a problem, don’t you think?[/quote]
I would be happy to agree with you, Stray Dog, if killing was the first option. However, on this crowded isle of ours, many “owners” seem to believe it’s more humane to abandon their pets to fend for themselves.
The dogs can’t be expected to consider the cultural issues. Unfortunately, the problem doesn’t go away by itself, either.
[quote=“Dr_Zoidberg”][quote=“bobepine”] I posted this in another thread but I’m posting it here too. Live with it. 
bobepine[/quote]
What? I’m not some condescending prig who thinks, because he has moderator status, he is the well-spring of all knowledge, and anyone voicing an opinion contrary to his own is uneducated and/or stupid.
No, you must be thinking of someone else.[/quote]My apologies if being the first post in you thread looked like I was addressing you. To clarify, I was more thinking about Namahottie’s comment about “guilt trip.” That’s why I said “live with it.”
I don’t mean to make anyone feel guilty, but again, if presenting the facts the way they really are makes anyone guilty, they can comment on the facts and not on how the facts make them feel. If we are going to abandon animals and then say “you’re pulling a guilt trip on me” that doesn’t seem right.
People are responsible for this problem and if it makes you feel guilty, live with it, do not criticise others for presenting simple yet solid facts.
bobepine
Very common indeed. New Zealand has lots of such places.
Not true. They cause emormous damage.
[quote]
It’s such a shameful reflection on man when he considers killing the first option for solving a problem, don’t you think?[/quote]
Not really, especially when it is to save other animals.
Feral dogs are not much of a threat. In Taiwan’s case there are problems with packs taking down young sika deer, but it is a relatively minor problem. The problem is feral cats. These cute critters are killing machines, and a curse on any habitat unfortunate enough to have them.[/quote]
Are you saying that NZ has islands where small populations of dogs do untold damage? If the population was small enough to catch and kill all, then surely it wouldn’t be causing that muc damage.
Now, when you discuss non-native species being released and becoming overpopulated and therefore threatening the local species, then you do have an argument for culling. But it shouldn’t be the first option. If this tiny place can get all the feral pets, they could be redistributed, for instance.
Culling, by the way, does not, by it’s definition, necessarily involve killing.
I agree it’s discussable, but evidence shows it isn’t a solution - it doesn’t help the problem at all … is all I’m saying.
Nighty night.
[quote=“Infidel”][quote=“Stray Dog”]
It’s such a shameful reflection on man when he considers killing the first option for solving a problem, don’t you think?[/quote]
I would be happy to agree with you, Stray Dog, if killing was the first option. However, on this crowded isle of ours, many “owners” seem to believe it’s more humane to abandon their pets to fend for themselves.
The dogs can’t be expected to consider the cultural issues. Unfortunately, the problem doesn’t go away by itself, either.[/quote]Well thought out post Infidel. The things is, culling is just putting a band-aid on the problem. To CNR the animals instead is more humane and it has more beneficial results in the long run. Statistics are showing just that.
Besides for some of us it’s a more logical and responsible way of addressing the consequences of our own actions. Quite controversial obviously and I sense that this is the kind of thread that could just go around in circles while pulling equally good people apart even more…
bobepine
Damn it - a double post; it was my computer’s fault, not the booze.
Stray Dog wrote [quote]Are you saying that NZ has islands where small populations of dogs do untold damage?[/quote] No, not at all. My reference to dogs was about Taiwan, but even here dogs only do minor damage. My point was that cats are the problem. [quote]If the population was small enough to catch and kill all, then surely it wouldn’t be causing that much damage.[/quote] Even a small population of cats (or other vermin like stoats, weasel etc.) can do enormous damage.
I agree.
In an ideal world.
Think of the cost of catching feral cats. And who is going to want to adopt them? How about the stoats and weasels?[/quote]
Anyway, I very much admire the work you do Stray Dog. You’re doing more to solve the problem than me, so I’ll shut up and let you get on with your work.
It’s late and I have to go crash for the night but what I want to say is that all of us here are concerned for this problem and we should keep that in mind.
While DR Z started this thread, he’s also volunteering for Animals Taiwan and I think that it comes to show how this conversation was initiated with intentions that are far from ill advised.
I’ll admit, even though I prefer a more humane approach to sloving the overpopulation of stray dogs in Taiwan, I’m not convinced that a state sponsored island-wide cull would not have benefits. But my god it sounds awful… 
I have now made friends with about 6 out of ten dogs in the pack outside my house. Some of them even recognize the sound of my scooter when I come home and it breaks my heart everyday to leave them outside, they are such great animals! Yet, people are still paying 35000NT for some pure breed dogs. It doesn’t make any sense and I can fully comprehend with Stray Dog’s question.
bobepine
The number of stay dogs in Taipei may have gone down, but how can we be sure the populations decreased, that they didn’t simply moved on to where the pickin’s were good?
[quote=“Stray Dog”]No. Culling is not a solution. Catch-Neuter-Return (CNR) is the only method that works to reduce the stray population. It is also the most humane.
We were presented with fact sheets at the Asia for Animals Conference in Singapore last summer that went into detail about how ‘culling’ stray dogs had no effect on Calcutta’s strays, despite their best attempts to kill as many dogs as possible, by poisoning, etc. Around 200 people per year were dying from rabies contracted after being bitten by stray dogs; after finally realising the ineffectiveness of the catch-and-kill programs, Calcutta government decided to try the CNR approach, and reports now show that the number of deaths has dropped to one per year. Bear in mind that Calcutta used the catch-and-kill approach for over 100 years.
[/quote]
Those are some very interesting facts. There appears to be a paradox here. How can the culling of stray animal populations be so ineffective when we seem quite capable of wiping whole species from the face of the Earth?
The annual seal cull in Newfoundland, for example, is very effective in controlling seal populations, so much so it had to be discontinued for something like thirty years for the seal population to recover.
I would be interested in knowing why it’s ineffective with one species, but brings another to the point of extinction. Could it be the methods employed? Putting out poison versus a bullet in the brain?
One species is “cuter” that the other. There is no rational explanation for why we do our best to cull locusts and cockroaches, which are living beings, but cringe at culling seals and ferals cats & dogs. Oh right, one are cute furry mammals and the other are disgusting little insects. People need to get over their sentimentality.
One species doesn’t have irresponsible owners who soon tire of their ‘pets’. One species is able to hide its young instead of leaving them out in the open.