In a few years when I graduate from college, start my career and settle down in an apartment, there will be a small, furry addition to my home-Little Lottie. After I left the nest, my parents decided to get a second cat. She was rescued from the wild and, although a great pet, she and the first cat just have never managed to get along. But over winter break Little Lottie and I bonded and it seems like moving in with me is the best option for her and everyone else.
Fortunately, Lottie was rescued and put up for adoption, but under a proposed Wisconsin law this would no longer be the case. Instead, Mark Smith, a firefighter from La Crosse, is proposing that hunters be allowed to shoot feral cats. Rather than rescue the cats, he believes in simply issuing a small-game hunting license which will allow hunters like himself to effectively slaughter any cat they choose.
After the initial shock of hearing that a bill like this is even being considered, one has to ask what kind of monster would propose it? Killing a cat, traditionally a pet, even if it's feral brings up many questions, the main one being: How can we be assured that the hunter will make the ight"" choice when deciding whether or not to shoot the cat?
My first thought is that anyone who even considers killing a cat should be sent straight to jail, but that aside, this legislation would open a variety of opportunities for animal haters. Someone could just shoot their neighbor's cat and justify it by pleading ignorance on their own part or negligence on their neighbor's part.
Furthermore, people who hate cats could apply for this license and then be legally justified in killing as many cats as they want. It could also lead to the disgusting display of their carcasses in a similar fashion to deer heads on a wall in an office.
Moreover, feral cats that have been either abandoned by their owners or were born to a cat that was will most likely lose their lives because of the law. Although some feral cats cannot be domesticated, it is better for them to be caught and neutered or spayed and then re-released than for them to lose their lives.
Although some argue that the ecological balance will be ""restored"" through the killing of these cats, there must be other ways to do this without butchering all of these animals. When the Humane Society traps them, it releases the feral ones into colonies where they are fed and cared for by volunteers. Perhaps a better solution would be setting more traps rather than allowing people to shoot them.
Killing cats is just plain wrong. This legislation focuses on a quick fix instead of a long-term solution. If Smith is truly interested in the environment, why can't he come up with a less violent solution to the problem?
It appears his selfish interests as a hunter are taking precedent over a more humane solution. In an interview with the Wisconsin State Journal he commented, ""There needs to be something to protect the average guy."" The question is: From what?
Smith also points out that pet owners need to take more responsibility, and I agree. However, should an innocent animal die because of its owner's negligence? If Smith really cares that much, he should start a shelter for these animals rather than proposing this atrocious solution. He could lobby for animal neglect legislation. His choice to lobby for a hunting license instead shows his callousness. We must recognize the selfish and inhumane intent behind this proposal and reject it.
