An Essay by Mojtaba Tabatabai: “Love, but Do It Right!”

Love, but Do It Right!

An Ethical Examination of Feeding Street Cats

Mojtaba Tabatabai^1,2*

¹ Department of Mineral Environment, School of Mining Engineering, College of Engineering, University of Tehran

² Hydrogeology and Mineral Environment Laboratory (MEHR Lab), College of Engineering, University of Tehran

*Corresponding author: [email protected]

Recently, there has been much debate surrounding the feeding of street animals. One group, out of affection and kindness, insists on feeding the animals, while another, considering the problems arising from the reproduction and unchecked population growth of these animals, deems feeding them to be wrong. But which group is right? Unfortunately, neither. The current form of feeding these animals is not correct, nor can these animals simply be left to fend for themselves.

The first problem is that responses are usually given generally, concerning all street animals, including dogs, cats, birds, and other animals. Given the differences among these animals, such general responses are neither possible nor desirable. Therefore, this article will solely address the issue of street cats.

It is quite astonishing that many specialists, academics, and environmental activists express opinions without bothering to study the available resources (international and national regulations of environmental protection or animal welfare organizations). Although having the "courage to know" (in Kant's words, the motto of the Enlightenment[1]) is desirable, putting pen to paper merely by virtue of holding a university degree, without study and review of sources, is irresponsible and unjustified. In the following, while critiquing both sides, I will examine responsible and ethical methods, in accordance with existing regulations, for dealing with the issue of street cats.

The Current Situation:

What is happening today is widespread mistreatment of street cats, for which, unfortunately, due to the lack of strong advocacy organizations, precise statistics on its severity and scale are unavailable. The situation differs in other countries; for example, the organization People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (Peta[2]) in America provides relatively comprehensive statistics on cat abuse, including beating, setting on fire, poisoning, using as bait for vicious dogs, and other horrific cases. But unfortunately, in Iran, we do not even have much information about the current situation. Nevertheless, homeless cats usually "do not die of old age"[3]; rather, they perish from common contagious diseases, bone fractures, urinary infections, accidents, attacks by predatory animals or cruel humans, and other terrible causes.[4]

In the face of such a situation, many of our compatriots, in order to alleviate the suffering of cats, kindly take to feeding them, which unfortunately, in many cases, due to ignorance, is inappropriate and dangerous. For example, among the unsuitable yet common foods given to cats are: raw meat and chicken, regular milk (with lactose), meat or chicken cooked with onions and spices, tuna (because it contains a level of mercury that is standard for humans but toxic for cats), dog food, and so on...[5] But the main problem here is that even if this feeding is done correctly and properly, it does not, in practice, reduce the suffering of these animals. Eating healthy food leads to a longer lifespan, reproduction, and the birth of healthy kittens that are ready to reproduce in less than a year. Of course, this in itself is not a problem; the major issue is the number resulting from this population growth. Just one female cat and her offspring can lead to the birth of 370,000 cats over 7 years.[6] (As you know, population growth and decline follow an exponential function; however, if you doubt the magnitude of this number, be sure to consult the source).

It is clear that no one has the capacity to support this number of cats, and in practice, such a number is never realized. Rather, very soon, with the increase in population, the act of feeding encounters problems, and during the competition for food, many cats perish. This very issue causes more pain and suffering for these animals. It is here that opponents, emphasizing this population increase and the resulting environmental effects, consider feeding to be wrong. As a result of not feeding, cats face a serious problem in securing food. These cats are different from mountain and forest cats; although they have hunting skills, after centuries of coexistence with humans, they cannot manage to secure their own food alone and without the presence of humans. They are forced to laboriously obtain food from garbage, which will certainly not be suitable; they quickly become weak and sick, consequently having a shorter lifespan and producing fewer healthy offspring, and as a result of this short, pain-filled life, their population is also controlled.

- Is starving cats and leaving them to fend for themselves a practice endorsed in other countries (especially developed countries)? Or is the prohibition of feeding recommended and promoted by animal protection organizations and associations in other countries?

- Answer: No, absolutely not. If we adhere to environmental ethics, such an act is unethical, irresponsible, and cruel.

Environmental Ethics and Ethical Conduct:

Unfortunately, environmental ethics is often greatly misunderstood in Iran. In summary, environmental ethics stands in opposition to anthropocentric ethics. According to anthropocentric ethics, the environment has merely instrumental value. Therefore, preserving the environment is important only to the extent that it is necessary for the human species or has some benefit for humans[7]. Assuming anthropocentrism, in deontology, only duty towards other humans is considered important; in utilitarianism, only increasing utility or reducing the pain and suffering of humans is of concern; and in virtue ethics, only kindness and compassion towards other humans counts as an instance of moral virtue. According to this view, the environment is only valuable insofar as it serves as an instrument for humans. Thus, the pain and suffering of street cats, if it does not cause disturbance to humans, holds no moral importance from an anthropocentric perspective, and there is no duty towards it.

Many of the experts who express opinions in Iran, including veterinarians, environmental experts, or ecologists, since they usually have little familiarity with environmental ethics and their presuppositions are anthropocentric, while rejecting feeding street cats, recommend leaving them to their own devices. Because in anthropocentrism, expending cost and effort solely to reduce the pain and suffering of creatures, if it has no particular benefit for humans, cannot be justified or acceptable. However, anthropocentrism is not a justifiable position for reputable animal support or environmental protection organizations in the world.

In environmental ethics, by rejecting any instrumental value, the environment possesses intrinsic value.[8] The value of the environment is not dependent on humans and has moral value for itself. Therefore, if we are deontologists, this duty remains in full force towards animals as well (Tom Regan) [9]; if we are utilitarians, to maximize pleasure and minimize pain and suffering, it is necessary to consider the suffering of all beings (Peter Singer)[10]; and in virtue ethics, compassion and benevolence towards non-human beings are also counted among the moral virtues and a requisite for the flourishing of a moral life (Van Swin & Sandler)[11] [12]. Manifestations of such virtue ethics can also be found in Shakespeare's play Cymbeline, when Queen Cymbeline intended to test a kind of poison on animals, the physician Cornelius protests: Your Highness! By doing this, you will harden and make cruel your own heart![13]. Furthermore, such consideration can also be found in the essays of Montaigne, the Renaissance philosopher and essayist[14].

At first glance, conceiving of intrinsic value for the environment may seem difficult, but it must be borne in mind that defending anthropocentrism also requires assuming a special privilege for the human species over other beings. Singer argues that presenting any anthropocentric criterion for the superiority of the species Homo sapiens is arbitrary, tyrannical, and a kind of speciesism[15] that, like racism and sexism[16], is unjustified[8].

Now that we have specified the ethical approach to correctly confronting the issue of street cats, we will describe and examine the principled method available.

The TNR Method:

The TNR method, an acronym for Trap, Neuter, and Release[17], is a humane method for managing street cats. This method involves trapping street cats, then neutering and ear-tipping them, vaccinating them if possible, and then releasing the cats back into their original living location[18]. If the cat's original living environment is deemed unsafe, the cat must be relocated to another environment, such as farms or support centers. According to this method, as much as possible, adult cats that exhibit friendly behavior, or kittens, instead of being returned to the original environment, should be fostered as pets [18]. Feral cats cannot be socialized and do not fare well in cages; therefore, they must be returned to their original living environment, and cats with severe medical problems or those suffering from an incurable contagious disease must be euthanized [18]. This program is usually carried out with these goals: providing a better quality of life for cats in the community, preventing the population growth of these cats in the communities where they live, and also reducing the rate of cat euthanasia in communities facing a large number of cats.

Among the similar but more comprehensive programs are:

TNVR: meaning Trap, Neuter, Vaccinate, and Release[19].

TNRM: meaning Trap, Neuter, Release, and then continued care including providing appropriate food and monitoring for medical care[20].

TTVAR: meaning Trap, Test, Vaccinate, Alter, and Release[21].

Prominent and Reputable Organizations Supporting TNR:

The American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (ASPCA) supports TNR as the only proven humane and effective method for controlling cat colonies[22].

The Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) supports TNR and similar sterilization programs, emphasizing that it should be placed on the government's agenda as a program implemented with the cooperation of community leaders and citizens[23].

The Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (RSPCA) of England supports TNR for street cats, declaring that healthy cats should be sterilized, marked (ear-tipped), and released, and returned again if necessary[24].

However, TNR also has its critics. Some animal welfare organizations fundamentally do not consider the street a safe place for cats, and emphasize that these animals should be taken to shelters and, if possible, adopted. Furthermore, the American Bird Conservancy (ABC) states that although cats may not be able to eat birds, their hunting instinct causes serious harm to birds and torments them by playing with their prey. Therefore, cats should be kept in custody after sterilization[25] .

TNR in Various Countries:

We will now mention a few examples of TNR implementation in various countries. TNR was first started on a limited basis in England in 1950, and in 1960, when euthanasia was the only available option, it was proposed and promoted as an ethical method. In 1980, the first conference on the ecology and control of street cats was held, and subsequently, with further publications in 1982, 1990, and 1992, it became the primary scientific reference for practical actions[26]. In Denmark, this method has been in practice since the mid-1970s; cats are sterilized and ear-tipped[27]. In France, in 1978, Paris issued a declaration of the rights of free-roaming cats[28], then in the same year, TNR was implemented for the first cat and subsequently helped thousands of cats[29]. In South Korea, a negative attitude towards cats is culturally ingrained. Some regions of South Korea have government-supported TNR programs, but unfortunately, they are often ridiculed by the public and poorly managed. The negative attitude and fear of cats in South Korea is changing slowly, yet it has improved in recent years[30]. Turkey is among the countries facing a serious problem with large populations of street dogs and cats. The majority of Muslim people in Turkey oppose killing or euthanizing these animals for religious reasons. In recent years, TNR has been implemented as a method for controlling the population of these animals[31].

Conclusion:

Prohibiting the feeding of street cats can be a strategy to prevent the increase in the population of these animals, but firstly, it is by no means capable of ultimately solving the problem of street cats, because these animals continue to reproduce amidst a life of pain and suffering. Furthermore, any population control strategy that in some way causes pain and suffering to these animals or is indifferent to their suffering is rejected and unjustified according to environmental ethics. As mentioned, the prohibition of feeding is not recommended or promoted by any reputable organization. In contrast, instead of emotional feeding and limited, unprincipled affection that causes more pain and suffering for cats, it is necessary to consider TNR as the only effective ethical method. Instead of encouraging citizens not to show affection to animals, the correct way to show affection must be taught; TNR and subsequent medical care must be carried out alongside feeding.

The People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) has stated: We believe that sterilization, vaccination, release, and medical support alongside feeding are respectful, valuable, and acceptable[32], but nevertheless, the ideal path is adoption; street cats need and deserve to live in a safe and calm environment[33].

Therefore, in Iran as well, animal rights and environmental activists, instead of entering into fruitless, unscientific, and unethical debates about feeding or not feeding animals, must strive for the universal implementation of TNR, a practice that has been carried out for years in developed countries and is supported by reputable international organizations. It is necessary for TNR to be placed on the government's agenda and to be supported by citizens. There are certainly obstacles to the implementation of this effective practice, but what of it, for ethical actions have never been simple.

.

---

.

[1] Immanuel Kant (June 1999). "An answer to the question: What is enlightenment?". In Mary J. Gregor (ed.)

[2] Peta: People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals: http://www.peta.org/

[3] The Great Outdoors? Not for Cats!

[4] Trap, Neuter, Return, and Monitor Programs for Feral Cats: Doing It Right

[5] Foods that are Dangerous or Toxic to Cats

[6] Spay and Neuter

[7] Tabatabai, M., Maghsoudi, S., Dolati Ardeh Jani, F., (2018). "Environmental Ethics and Anthropocentric Ethics: An Inquiry into the Principles and Foundations of Environmental Ethics", International Conference on Society and Environment, University of Tehran, September 2, 2018, Tehran.

[8] Brennan, Andrew and Yeuk-Sze Lo, "Environmental Ethics", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2020 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL

[9] Regan, T., 1983. The Case for Animal Rights, London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.

[10] Singer, P., 1975. Animal Liberation, New York: Random House.

[11] Wensveen, Louke van 2000. Dirty Virtues: The Emergence of Ecological Virtue Ethics. Amherst, NY: Humanity.

[12] Sandler, R., 2007. Character and Environment: A Virtue-Oriented Approach to Environmental Ethics, New York: Columbia University Press.

[13] Shakespeare, W. (2017). Cymbeline: Third Series. Bloomsbury Publishing.

[14] Brennan, A., & Lo, Y. S. (2014). Understanding environmental philosophy. Routledge.

[15] speciesism

[16] sexism

[17] trap–neuter–release

[18] Kortis, Bryan (2013). Neighborhood Cats TNR Handbook: The Guide to Trap-Neuter-Return for the Feral Cat Caretaker. Susan Richmond, Meredith Weiss, Anitra Frazier, joE. Needham, Lois McClurg & Laura Gay Senk (2nd ed.). Link

[19] trap–neuter–vaccinate–return

[20] trap–neuter–release–maintain or manage

[21] trap test vaccinate alter release

[22] A Closer Look at Community Cats

[23] Our position on cats

[24] RSPCA policies on animal welfare

[25] cats indoors

[26] Slater, Margaret R.; Shain, Stephanie (2005). Feral Cats: An Overview

[27] Berkeley, Ellen Perry (2004). TNR: Past, Present and Future: A History of the Trap-Neuter-Return Movement. Alley Cat Allies. pp. 2–3.

[28] Declaration of Rights of the Free-living Cat (translation)

[29] History of École du chat (translation)

[30] South Korea’s Animal Protection Laws

[31] Furler-Mihali, Andrea Irina (April 2017). "Stray Dog and Cat Feral Populations in Europe: from Culling to Care" (PDF)

[32] Animal Rights Uncompromised: Feral Cats

[33] Homeless Cats: Trapping Is the Kindest Solution

.

---

.