Extra, Extra
Extra, Extra
Extra, Extra
Extra, Extra
Early Addition
Today at noon, animal advocates will be holding a rally outside the Port Authority's headquarters at 225 Park Avenue South (between 18th and 19th Streets) to protest the PA's decision to round up feral cats at JFK Airport. The rally is organized by Neighborhood Cats and In Defense of Animals, two of many rescue groups who question the agency's reasoning that cats pose a danger to air traffic safety. In fact, Neighborhood Cats offers two counterarguments to the PA's claims:
LIE #2:That comes on the heels of the agency admitting the cats cannot be adopted out immediately, even though that's what concerned citizens are being told when they call the Port Authority.
"Feeding the cats attracts seagulls and the birds are an aviation threat."THE TRUTH:
Seagulls are at the airport because JFK is NEAR THE OCEAN!! And because there are tons of trash strewn about the airport's grounds. There is not enough cat food to attract large numbers of birds and there is no food left anyway when the cats finish eating. Cats hunt birds, they don't attract them. There is ZERO evidence proving a link between the presence of cats at an airport and an aviation risk. DON'T BE GULL-IBLE!!!LIE #3:
"We can achieve a cat-free airport."THE TRUTH:
You can't wipe out the presence of feral cats in a 5000 acre area in which new, unneutered cats are constantly being abandoned or lost and then reproducing, and where there are plentiful food sources. Only Trap-Neuter-Return can, over time, reduce the numbers. The Port Authority's extermination effort is futile and will only result in new furry faces, not fewer. The killing is senseless.
The press release for the rally is after the jump. And these photographs are of some JFK Airpot kittens that have been rescued over the weekend - readers, submit your JFK Lolcats to photos(at)gothamist(dot)com or tag them "gothamist" on Flickr!
TODAY – MON, OCT 29: ACTIVISTS BARE CLAWS AT PORT AUTHORITY UNION SQUARE HEADQUARTERS IN RALLY FOR END TO JOHN F. KENNEDY AIRPORT CAT EXTERMINATIONSPort Authority Continues to Rebuff Assistance Offered by Humane Groups and Begins Roundup
WHAT: Pressure builds for Port Authority to end its killings of the hundreds of cats and kittens who live in managed feral cat colonies at the John F. Kennedy Airport. Neighborhood Cats and In Defense of Animals are holding a public rally today at Port Authority headquarters from noon to 1p.m. near Union Square at 225 Park Avenue South, between 18th and 19th Streets in Manhattan. The rally follows national and international outcry sparked by the Port Authority’s crude cat extermination program that came to public light last Thursday.
Animal advocates are demanding for an end to the J.F.K. Airport cat extermination program and for Port Authority officials to meet in good faith with animal rescue groups and experts in animal care and population control for a humane solution.
Tended by sympathetic airport employees and animal rescuers for decades, the cats are believed to be descendants of or are the lost pets of travelers as well as some abandoned pets who started to breed. Each year, dozens of dogs and cats are lost and found at the five thousand acres of land at the John F. Kennedy Airport.
For more information please visit www.NeighborhoodCats.org or www.idausa.org
WHEN: TODAY: Monday, October 29, 2007 from Noon to 1p.m.
WHERE: Port Authority headquarters at Union Square, 225 Park Avenue South, between 18th and 19th Streets in Manhattan
add to digg
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
email this
add to facebook
add to del.icio.us
Thank you, Jen, for posting this!
How would any organization know which cats are neutered and which are not? It seems that all the cats would need to be "trapped", neutered and labeled somehow, otherwise there would be a problem in controlling the cat population by just neutering and releasing them back in the general airport population.
Snoopy, cats that have been neutered/spayed are eartipped afterwards. Read more at Neighborhood Cats.
Believe me, everything aspect of creating colonies of cats has been thought of! :)
cuties.
Neighborhood Cats also asks that you call the PA today as the extermination of the cats began this weekend and the PA, especially their marine biologist, refuses to work with rescue organizations.
Anthony Shorris
Executive Director
Port Authority of NY and NJ
(212) 435-7271
ashorris@panynj.gov
Shawn Larenti, Director
Government and Community Relations Dept.
Port Authority of NY and NJ
(212) 435-6903
Charles E. Meara
NYC Community Relations Dept.
Port Authority of NY and NJ
(917) 596-0492
Port Authority Corporate Headquarters
(212) 435-7000 (get a live person on the line and demand to speak to someone about the JFK situation)
Susan Baer
General Manager, JFK Airport
718-244-3501
sbaer@panynj.gov
Of all the issues in the world, maintaining the lifestyles of feral housepets is very low on my list of priorities.
Thanks Elderta for the info. I was going to ask why the cat in the second photo looked strange with the funny left ear, now I know. Doesn't that hurt the cat?
Thank you, MissPinkKate, for making your priorities known. You may go back to saving your piece of the world, and I'll go back to mine.
Snoopy, I don't know if it hurts the cat, probably a tiny bit. It's the same as trimming doberman ears, I suppose, but just a very tiny bit. I think that part of the cat's ear heals quickly and may not have too many nerveendings to cause severe pain.
When cats are found by the ASPCA that are eartipped, they are registered by a number and the NYC Feral Cat organization is alerted. A message then goes out to the group list that an eartipped cat has been found. From what I understand, eartipped cats get back to their colonies with this system very fast as the caretakers see the alerts and know their cats. If the cats aren't claimed, they can be absorbed into another colony.
Thanks for asking, btw.
These cats should be captured and put up for adoption, not allowed to continue to live pseudo-wild lives in an airport facility where they do not belong. Not only are feral cats one of the worst things for the natural environment (killing many species of native birds), they are heavy disease-carriers.
It's quite unfortunate that instead of educating oneself about the problem, all sorts of things that are not true are propogated. First of all, JFK airport is huge and these cats are living almost two miles from the runways. Second of all, birds are smart enough not to frequent areas with cats. Three, rats are diseased, too, and cats take care of rats. This was a very good thing during the plaque. Fourth, feral cats are not adoptable and do very well in an outdoor setting where they are cared for and allowed to live their lives out in the open.
Education: it's a good thing.
People! They're cats! How about spending your time, money and effort on doing something for the homeless instead. They're not as furry and cute, but they're HUMAN BEINGS which ought to count for something.
And cat people wonder why the rest of the world has such disdain for them.
As always, people can think of more than one thing at a time. I truly hate the false analogy that people cannot do right by people and animals. I spent three years working hard with Billionaires For Bush regarding the current plight of the country. See? You can think of animals and human beings at the same time! Imagine that!
:)
Good job Elderta... so you spent 3 years helping people (?) and now you're wasting your time.
Let's not attack her. Sheesh.
Well, lemon, my sour friend, it's my time to waste, isn't it. I do many things politically. And you? I'm really sorry if folks think this way, but I'm sure there will be some others who don't think that way, and will want to reach out and help as they can. To them, thanks. You help humanity by helping the creatures around us as well. Every helping hands counts.
Elderta, the phrase is "bird brained" for reason. Birds are not smart creatures, cats do eat birds, they are hunters. Birds do not know "cat areas" anymore than they know "airport areas".
Snoopy, does ear tagging them hurt? They just had their reproductive organs removed! They were anesthetized! I would call trimming a dobermans ears a lot more cruel than knicking the cats ear.
I really can't care too much for this story, wild cat populations need to be controlled but I'm happy some will be adopted and hopefully kept indoors.
So apparently Neighborhood Cats and In Defense of Animals have no problem with cats being sucked into jet engines creating minced cat.
It's ok, smitty, thanks. I was a bit attacky, too, so I apologize.
As to birds, yes, cats do eat birds, once birds start to understand the territory, they are smart enough to avoid the cats. Again, the areas in which these cats are located are almost two miles from the runways.
As to controlling the populations, Trap-Neuter-Return DOES control the population. Rounding up and killing them periodical en masse only means more cats end up unneunerted and congregating and propagating en masse.
Anyhoo... like I said folks, take at look at Neighborhood Cats and the NYC Mayor's Alliance for Animals. Excellent places to start in order to learn more about TNR.
The cats are two miles from the airport, how are they going to be sucked into jet engines?
the best way? realize that animals are sentient beings & shouldn't be imprisoned in your home for entertainment or as a substitute for a child. nobody should ever own a pet. problem solved.
Zodak, please visit NYC Feral Cat Council to help develop your response.
As to your second paragraph, if they are sentient beings, then euthanasia is the correct way to care for sentient beings?
Elderta, you are a very kind and patient person, one of the few making sense here. It's a breath of fresh air in the musty dankness that the comments become whenever there is an animal story. Keep up the good work(s).
GO Elderta! I, too, love animals AND humans. This IS a worthy cause. Peace.
actually elderta i said euthanasia is the quickest way to deal with this problem. the problem being that because people keep pets & because pets get lost at the airport, the population at the airport increases. an international airport is not a cat's natural habitat & they should be eliminated from it. the objection that people have is that the cats will die sooner rather than later.
to answer your question: the correct way to care for sentient beings is to not imprison them in the 1st place.
ps. I'm just saying...
What do Jeffrey Dahmer, the Son of Sam and the BTK killer have in common?
Besides all being serial killers, noted an official with the Humane Society of the United States, each had a history of torturing animals.
"People who abuse animals often don't stop there," Peter Wood, deputy manager of animal cruelty issues said recently.
The connection between the two types of abuse has long been documented, but with a handful of recent animal cruelty cases across the region, the concerning link has re-entered officials' consciousness.
In Northbridge, a cat was set on fire this spring. In Walpole, a woman has been accused of slaughtering her Great Dane. Police in Blackstone suspect a group of teens beat a great blue heron to death a few week ago.
Those incidents appear to be the most egregious of recently publicized accounts. Attracting just as much attention, however, are examples of animal neglect: dozens of miniature horses that were found emaciated and sickly on an Upton couple's farm; a handful of puppies, one of them badly hurt, abandoned in Milford; three St. Bernards Natick officials seized after finding them kept in small cages with little to no food, living in their own urine and feces.
"There's something underlying there," Milford Police Chief Thomas O'Loughlin said of people who abuse (or neglect) animals.
True humanity means that we do not turn a blind eye to suffering whenever it occurs and to whomever it may occur to. Apathy, like violence, is a contagious social disease. The moment we place value on one group over the other, we are contributing to a sad state of affairs. Gandhi famously remarked:
“The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated.”
Personally, I'm very involved in drawing attention to the JFK cat exterminations and actually just got back from the rally. I've worked for Amnesty International and the Chinatown community, and volunteered for numerous environmental and LGBT organizations.
Nothing stops us from caring about more than one issue from the same time. Just because we're working on homelessness in NYC, it doesn't mean that we should ignore the atrocities in Darfur or at JFK Airport.
those cats are soooo cute!!!!!!! i can is have one????
Well said, Elderta.
To those of you who feel "disdain" for cat people and wonder why they aren't focusing on human suffering, it may interest you to know that Henry Bergh, the founder of the ASPCA, also co-founded the New York Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children, the worlds first child protection agency. Respect for sentient beings doesn't begin or end with one species, and those (like Elderta, VanessaNYC and heypatrick) who work for animals often work for humans as well.
Keep in mind that people also had "disdain" for abolitionists and suffragettes.
lor
(cancer survivor and activist AND TNR supporter)
I love when people take the time out to tell people what to care about, especially when they don't actually know them.
In the time you took to climb on your soapbox to ask people to adopt your priorities, you could have actually done something for your cause instead of just being a petty killjoy.
Unless, of course, that's your cause.
I agree with Elderta, I have many many causes. Some involve people, some involves animals. Neener neener!
I am nominating MissPinkKate ambassador to Darfur even though she wants to be ambassador to Brittney Spears.
Dr Kevorkian has some medication for Zodak. Since he approves of euthanasia.
I have a kitten for Badtzmaru.(Call me)
Peace!!!
Zodak is obviously not a cat person. Otherwise he would know that you don't own cats. They own you. And if they were "imprisoned," then why are they so content to be near their humans, with warmth, food, shelter and cuddling readily at hand? These rationalizations of what constitutes "natural habitat" are just that. What is "natural" for a cat? What's "natural" for humans? Is an airport "natural" in any sense of the word? The fact that the cats are doing well and multiplying shows that they're natural survivors. If you really want to nitpick, domestic cats are not native to the Americas (or for that matter, Europe, Asia, etc., only Africa, where they originated), so maybe we should remove all of them from the "unnatural" habitat of this continent?
One question for all the people who go around posting "Forget cats, plastic bags, etc. Won't somebody think about the people?" What have you done for people in need recently other than mention them here? Nothing? That's what I thought.
you cat people were doing so well arguing with me until heypatrick equated darfur with jrk: "it doesn't mean that we should ignore the atrocities in Darfur or at JFK Airport." & joe_vegas51 suggested i kill myself "Dr Kevorkian has some medication for Zodak." & Spiritof76 showed that he has no knowledge of nature, biology or eco-systems (a little something i like to call "science") when he said: "These rationalizations of what constitutes "natural habitat" are just that. What is "natural" for a cat? but that's what happens when you abandon logic.
anyway getting back to the problem which is: eliminating cats at jfk. i agree with doing it quickly & putting them to sleep, while these organizations want to do it slowly by 1st mutilating the genitals & ears of the cats & then hoping they die of old age & not starvation. the outcome is the same: a decrease in the cat population at jfk.
if telling yourself that mutiliating the cats' genitals & ears is better than just quickly euthanizing them, helps you to sleep at night, then i say, "pleasant dreams."
Zodak, I was going to respond to you yesterday but I got busy doing other things. Your rationale for killing the cats seems to me a bit skewed, but each his own.
If there ever comes a time when having pets are banned, then your plan sounds like just the thing. However, in the meantime, what do we do with the ones that have made it to life? Your answer involves something 'simple': kill them. To me, that answer lacks the compassion that you seem to be articulating about animals in the first place. How do you know that these cats, in their habitat at JFK, aren't living a good life? They have shelter, food and water, and an area to roam (though cats do not roam very far from their home turf, something else that JFK doesn't want you to know). They have each other's companionship, tall grass to play in, sun in the summer and shelter in the winter.
So, if these animals have a relatively good life and will die out by attrition instead of mass killing, why is mass killing better for them?
You need to understand that they animals are and have been taken care of by caretakers. They are spayed and neutered (which sounds a whole lot more humane than just putting them out of what you think is their misery), fed, and sheltered. What is wrong with dying of old age? I hope that I can die of old age and not forced euthanasia myself. I can probably guarantee that the cats more than likely feel the same way.
Anyhow, cats came to humans first to live in their houses and find shelter. When you say that cats shouldn't be pets, then what do you do with all the other cats in the world? Should we kill them to, just in case they decide again to come in from the cold and shelter with humans?
Anyhoo, pleasant dreams to you, too, as you dream of gassing cats en masse at night. That is more cruel to me than cutting off their balls and giving them a place to roam and food to eat. But hey, that's me. Cheers.
This attempt to remove all cats is yet another
bureaucratic quick-"fix" initiative to make it appear
as though someone is taking action in the name of
safety. Just because someone got it in their head
that the absence of cats will reduce airport birds
does not mean it will happen. Don't you realize that
the birds are at JFK due to its proximity to the ocean
and waterways? If anything, the cats are a deterrent
to the birds. This mass feral cat roundup is
guaranteed to be unproductive in the long run.
Also, cats are specifically fed with a little
covering, or roof, over the food just so the birds
cannot eat the food, and even if there were no
covering the cats never leave any leftovers. Again,
please consider the airport location and waterways.
This is the south shore of Long Island!
This planned assault is so unnecessary. By the way,
if and when you do this, new cats will move into the
area and the whole thing will begin again - with or
without dedicated caretakers who are
spaying/neutering, stabilizing and then reducing
feline population levels. This has already been
proven.
Ellen Jassem
a little something i like to call "science"
Whatever you like to call it, I doubt very much that it's genuine science. What you tirelessly propound on this page shows your understanding of science rivals that of our esteemed president. You've mouthed off nothing but unfounded and unsupportable theories based on bad assumptions. Mensa won't be knocking on your door.
this is silly. i can hardly see feral cats causing a problem in this sort of situation. at my university we have tons of feral cats that run around freely. they keep the mouse population down and are just generally cute. i'm pretty sure they don't even neuter them.
All the article writtten and all that is posted, seems pointless. Should the Port Authority feel it shall stay the high and mighty, then they should pay the cost. A BOYCOT of Delta and all airline should be called by all animal rights activists! Money will make them listen. A small cardo area for these animals is not alot to ask for since our taxc money has been spent many of time for the Port Authority-ex. Plane to the Train. Who's backyard was that put in. Now the ferral from JFK will inavde your backyard as they will be rescued and let out in other colonies and it has started. The trickle down effect you will feel in years to come since cats will be dumped at JFK and TNR as at Rikers, which is effective is not accepted by Port Authority. Why has no elected official come fourth on this issue. Animal lovers beware of the villians. Call you officials and state your outrage and support an location at JFK, their problem and a humaine direction should be taken.Don't let big business quick fix this!
Feral cats are unsocialized and unadoptable. They are also extremely territorial and cannot be easily relocated, assuming there's anywhere for them to go in a city with a feral cat overpopulation crisis already on its hands. The humane, enlightened way of dealing with them is to neuter, vaccinate and return them to their territory, a method known as Trap-Neuter-Return (TNR). TNR is also the only known method for permanently reducing the number of feral cats in an area. Extermination efforts like the Port Authority's only cause temporary dips in feline populations. Newly lost and abandoned cats, as well as uncaptured cats, quickly reproduce and soon bring the numbers right back up. TNR is supported by every major humane organization in the country, including The Humane Society of the US, ASPCA and Mayor's Alliance for NYC's Animals.
TNR is the only HUMANE and EFFECTIVE way of controlling the feral cat population.
In order to fix the perceived problem, you have to "fix" the feral cats, literally, by spaying or neutering them.
NOTHING ELSE WILL WORK!
It has been my experience that people who kill always seem to lack creativity, courage, compassion and knowledge. If they didnt lack knowledge, they would know that there are NON-LETHAL ways of solving "problems" in this world. If they didnt lack compassion, they would find a way, ANY way to solve the "problem" without murdering the problem(s).
If they had courage, they wouldnt take the easy, ignorant, arrogant and NON-EFFECTIVE way out, they would use their brains and their muscles and do things right.
And if they had creativity, they would never have allowed themselves to create such a ridiculous, ignorant, arrogant, uneducated "plan" to begin with.
Cats dont carry boxcutters, people.
Cats dont bring down planes.
The 18 HUMAN terrorists who were allowed to board planes on 9/11 DID bring down planes. Not one of them was a cat.
Bombs DO bring down planes, yet the Port Authority doesnt seem to care that fake explosives have SUCCESSFULLY been placed onto planes, in order to test airline security (which obviously has some flaws to put it kindly).
Yet, instead of looking within, at the GENUINE threats to airline safety, namely their lack of proper security measures and quality bomb detecting devices, and instead of worrying about the Bin Laden's of the world, Port Authority and JFK Airport instead goes after......CATS?
In all of history, from the moment the Wright Brothers took to the skies, cats have NEVER brought down a plane.
Cats do NOT bring down planes.
Cats cannot fly, thus how could they possibly bring down a plane in FLIGHT?
This killing of innocent four-legged souls at JFK is a disgrace, and it is UNNECESSARY.
You want to look at the REAL threat to airline security, look at the terrorists....and I dont mean the ones who are terrorizing and murdering innocent cats at JFK Airport.
Well, ok......those terrorists too.
Port Authority, and JFK Airport, say hello to, and educate yourselves on TNR (Trap, Neuter, Return)
It is the ONLY way to "fix" the problem.
Plus, nobody dies.
Nice bonus, huh?
Cats are living, breathing, feeling, loving, soul-filled beings just like the rest of us.
Treat them as such.
QMD333: You are truly an ignorant human being. I'd wager many of the cats you are crying about are more intelligent than you.
For you to put the life of a cat before those of the thousands of passengers aboard aircraft landing and taking off from JFK daily is amazingly twisted. No matter how remote the possibility, any danger that can potentially jeopardize the lives of great numbers of humans must be mitigated. A cat getting sucked into an engine could kill 500 people on board an aircraft, and many more on the ground. Even if there is a small possibility of this occurring, it must be prevented as much as possible.
For you to compare this to the threat of terrorism is moronic. First off, you are uniformed about the responsibilities of airport security agencies. The TSA, a federal agency, is responsible for screening airline passengers and aircraft for weapons and explosives, not the Port Authority. Secondly, not one bomb or terrorist attack has taken place on a plane departing JFK, whereas it is a fact that several times a year, jet engines ingest birds at JFK, causing moments of extreme danger of a crash, but thankfully no injuries so far. A cat could do just as much damage.
Right, is that why one of the TSA let someone walk in today? Not because of people feeding cats, I'm sure. Wild life happens. Killing one cat today does not mean cats will miraculously disappear, particularly if the airport is next to a bird refuge.
The cats have been there for years without incident. It is not a new phenomenon that birds get sucked into planes. And when, oh when, has a cat ever gotten sucked into a plane at JFK? WHEN? What about farfechted? And how is that even remotely possible?
I think you need to reread the posting with a bit of irony in mind. Is this really a matter of national security?
But, more than that, I really hope people can not yell at each other about this or call each other names. It's a very personal issue, and many people feel that JFK didn't even try and won't talk. It feels like stonewalling and full of dishonesty. People work hard and dedicate hours with these kinds of cats all the time and have gone out of their way to develop these programs. They haven't dropped out of the sky or popped out of the woodwork. They are documented and there are approved manuals. But if everyone in the room is an expert, it's hard to get anywhere. It's unfortunate. It could have been handled much better.
[39] Wow, way to demonstrate your ignorance while accusing others of it. Bird strike FOD has never resulted in the loss of a commercial airliner. All airliners are designed with multiple engines just so the loss of any engine won't be fatal. Even a twin-engine airframe like the A320 is designed to fly with one engine out. FAA regulations specifically require commercial engines to fail gracefully and avoid damage to the rest of the aircraft. See the famous "chicken gun" test.
You rail against how even a nearly nonexistent chance of ingesting a cat in an engine could supposedly bring down a plane (even closer to a nonexistent chance) then casually dismiss the chances of terrorism, given that terrorists have succeeded on numerous occasions in the past and tests with mock explosives have in the vast majority of cases made it past the screeners. So to you, purely theoretical risks outweigh proven risks. I have to wonder if you and Zodak work for the Port Authority.
I would like to thank you for calling attention to the plight of the feral cats at JFK. The only humane solution is to trap the cats, neuter them, and return them to the colony. Ferals generally don't adjust well to living indoors with a human so they are seldom adoptable. The Port Authority's plan to round them up and have them destroyed is not only cruel, it is a useless effort as the remaining cats will simply breed more cats to take the places of the ones that were removed.
Once again, I applaud you for bringing this tragedy to the public's attention.
Thank you for exposing the appalling measures JFK is planning on taking with the feral cat situation. Extermination is cruel and inhumane and should be opposed at all costs.
Elderta: If you are going to be an activist, at least research what you are protesting. Again, the Port Authority has nothing to do with screening passengers for weapons. That is the job of the TSA, a completely separate federal agency which has nothing to do with the cats. The Port Authority owns the airport and is responsible for the safety and security of areas like runways. This includes animal control. They run a continuous bird control effort, which mainly consists of simply scaring the birds away through various means. Cats, however, don't just fly away.
As for comparing the threat of animals to the threat of terrorists, there is simply no comparison. There are literally THOUSANDS of encounters between aircraft and wildlife every year. According to FAA stats, there have been 144 strikes in New York alone from January through June of this year. Most of them were birds, but there have also been rabbits, foxes and even a terrapin. For comparison, there have been zero (0) terrorist attacks on aircraft in the United States in the past 6 years.
Spiritof76: While modern aircraft are designed to takeoff with a single engine in the event of a failure, there are no guarantees. In the event of an aborted takeoff, an aircraft could overrun the runway and hit objects on the ground, causing injuries on board and to others. If you would like to volunteer to be aboard the first jet to suck in a cat during takeoff, please let me know.
Watch this video for an example of what can happen when an engine fails at the wrong moment: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BwQQpJiBJio
People who think that bird strikes are not a serious threat have no idea about the airline industry. Bird strikes HAVE resulted in fatal crashes.
Didn't you guys see Indian Jones and the Last Crusade? (kidding)
Even though aircraft are designed to fly on one engine, it doesn't mean that flight is not affected upon the loss of one. The loss of an engine will result in loss of power, and often altitude, before the aircraft can recover and compensate. It's not as easy as you think.
Landing and takeoff are two critical phases of flight. On landing, when the plane is already going very slow and at low throttle, a bird strike in an engine means that the aircraft is losing a amounts of its power, and would probably lose altitude and probably crash.
As for cats, one getting sucked up into an engine on takeoff can mean the takeoff might be aborted. If the plane is going fast and not yet at "V1" speed, it may not have enough room to slow down, and go off the end of the runway. The video linked above is a perfect example of what a bird or cat very well might do to an aircraft on takeoff.
I myself have seen cats on the taxiways of JFK. It is a TRUE threat. Whether you feel that they should or shouldn't be euthanized upon capture is another issue up for debate. I can only provide my aviation input as of now.
Tell me when a cat has caused harm to a plane. Prove it, show me, tell me exactly when it happened: don't hypothesize about it. Those cats you have seen on the runway; ever see them in a running engine?
JFK: next door to a wildlife refuge, complete with birds. I'm sure you've seen a bird here and there, too.
How many times can it be said that killing the cats won't and have not solved the problem of cats at JFK? Realistic objectives are important for safety, control, and lessen harm to the animals as well as humans. The Humane Society, the NYC Animal Alliance and Neighborhood Cats know they what are doing, just as you may know about aviation. Coming to some sort agreement is better than hyperbole and unproven facts about cats flying into airplanes.
First, I don't need to prove that cats ever caused any crashes. ANY animals presence on an airfield can cause accidents, and it HAS happened in the past. There was an incident not too long ago where a turtle nearly crashed a plane.
The wildlife refuge you are referring to with birds is also not AT or IN the airport. Port Authority does not go to the refuge to kill or get rid of THOSE birds, but only ones that are a threat.
You are acting as though PA is going through the streets of the surrounding towns like Howard Beach getting rid of strays. We are talking about cats that are walking around where the planes are. Do you really not see the need to have them removed from there? As I said before, the KILLING part is another debate, but the cats, or any other animal, should not be on the actually airfield.
I have a feeling that you are the kind of person that would say leave the cats alone, but when your mom dies in a plane crash, you'll be the first one to sue the Port Authority for not handling the situation.
Longacre: thanks so much for your points about cat terrorism, and the differences between the Port Authority and the Transportation Safety Authority. You win a gold star for accuracy, but a F in understand the irony. I know that the TSA takes care of security while the Port Authority owns the airport, has predator birds on the property to take care of birds, and has a marine biologist employed there. Her name is Laura and is set in turning a blind eye to people who actually know more than her. Whatever.
Why do you all insist on merging the idea of flying birds with earthbound cats soaring into the engine of a plane? Why is killing the only answer to this issue? Why is scaring the bejesus out of everyone the answer to everything these days? "OH MY CAT! A CAT COULD GROW WINGS AND FLY! I've got an idea: why don't we kill all the wildlife in the refuge next door to JFK, just to make extra, extra, extra careful of the bird and cat boogeyman? Sounds a little over the top? Well, not anymore over the top as both you and Novanglus, too.
The answer you are looking for is not in killing these cats. How many times can anyone tell you that new ones return and they are very good at hiding when hunted down?
Oh, and when throw the word "activist" out again, make sure you spit after you say it, ok? Cheers.
Oh, and Novanglus: WHO EVER SAID THAT THEY WEREN'T CONCERNED ABOUT BIRDS AND PLANES? WHO HERE SAID THAT? And yes. I am screaming just about now.
You know what, Novanglus, fuck you and your "mom dying in a plane crash" line. Yeah, you heard me right. Fuck you for even saying shit like that. Below the belt and completely off the wall. With that, enough said about ignorant-assed comments like that.
Yes, the refuge is next door to the airport, not IN the airport. When I have ever said that they refuge was IN the airport? If so, where?
Yes, birds or cats should not be on the runways. From what I understand of where the cats are, they are in some semi-wooded areas of the airport. With proper caretaking, within the guidelines of sanctioned and tried methods of feral cat control, the Port Authority may find themselves controlling the problem in a better fashion and more efficient manner than they are currently failing at controlling.
Instead of crying about terrorism or safety, things we all care about, better solutions are out there.
Get a grip, increase your dosage, or whatever you've got to do.
You are talking about the actual killing of cats. I am not talking about that. I never said killing them was the answer either. That's not what I'm debating. Please re-read this paragraph several times until you understnad what you are arguing with me.
What I AM debating, or discussing (until you started cursing because you're a loon) is about people's implications that the cats belong on the runways or should be left alone there.
My explanation was only explaining how they need to be removed from the airport. Put them in the streets of other towns, get them adopted, whatever. They just need to have them taken away from JFK. Can you agree with that at least?
My "mom" reference was to point out how peopel only care about the kittens, disregarding the reality of danger until it strikes home. My comment wasn't a threat, wasn't a personal attack, just a reference to what you would think in a certain situation.
Your taking offense to that is merely a distraction that you make yourself look stupid by flying off the handle and not applying logic to your discussion (Since you were talking about things that I wasn't), not reading my posts and making assumptions about what I was saying.
You can provide your aviation experience, and I can provide you with the experience of proven methods of feral cat control. You are not debating, saying that I think the PA is rounding up animals in Howard Beach or "if my mom was on a plane." That is a bit of hyperbole with the intent to sow the idea of 'crazy." Now, jump back on your holier than thou bandwagon and try to understand what I'm about to say.
I have used nothing but patience in regards to this topic, and while some of the others here for and against TNR have been over the top, I have tried to keep it on calm par. I can't help if you think Howard Beach and moms getting incinerated and suing to be calm speech, and I'm sorry if you don't think anyone would take such statements personally.
You are saying that cats should not be at the airport at all, and certainly not on the runways. You are saying that they should be removed, though you don't think killing them is the answer. I am saying that you will never solve your problem with attempting to rounding up the cats and trying to kick them of out of open land, regardless of whether they are killed at JFK or when they are taken to the ACC.
Would you believe that I agree with you that cats and birds on the runway are dangerous? I would. AGain, I believe that there are better methods of controlling this problem than what the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey are using.
Thank you, and good night.