Cat license issue

[Guest]

From the July 7, 2008 Board of Health minutes:

"Cat Licenses – Chairwoman Coyle advised that she has spoken to Pari Stave, the Township Committee Board of Health Liaison, regarding the Board’s desire to have cats licensed. It was determined that the matter should be placed on the Agenda of a Township Committee meeting. It was suggested that Michael Melchionne, President of the New Jersey Certified Animal Control Officers Association and author of “The Time is Now for Cat Licensing” be invited to the meeting. Ms. Gerberich suggested also inviting a local veterinarian."

http://www.cranburytownship.org/BOH_minutes_2008_july07.pdf

[Guest]

This is nothing but a revenue generator.

First, it is dangerous to put a collar on cats.

Second, there is no way to ensure a house cat is licensed in every home. It's an unenforcable law.

Third, unlike dogs there are lots of strays so you can't control them. Those are the bigger risks.

Fourth, the risk of rabies from a domestic cat is minimal.

[Guest]

Ha Ha Ha! I'd like to read that book about "Now is the time to license cats". Cant believe it missed my summer reading.

This may be one of the most absurd things to ever be proposed when there are many more urgent matters at hand. I'd go down the line of pets after cats if they need more money...

[Cat Fanciers Association]

The Cat Fanciers' Association (CFA) is an organization dedicated to enhancing the well-being of all cats, both pedigreed and random bred. Cat licensing has been promoted as a way to help cats "find their way home" if lost. It is often seen as a revenue source for animal control agencies and humane societies. And it has even been supported by some as a way to increase the status of cats. CFA supports these objectives; however, we continue to question whether cat licensing is the means to achieve any results that truly benefit cats or provide funding. We are aware of the failure of cat licensing to accomplish the goals put forth. Our opposition is also based on skepticism concerning the motives for cat licensing, which involve identification of owners as well as the cats. Moreover, cat licensing is rejected by CFA because we recognize that this regulation is essentially a "cat tax" unfairly targeted to segments of the public who are most visible - those individuals involved in caring for and helping to gain appreciation for cats - responsible cat owners, breeders/owners of pedigreed cats; unowned/feral cat caregivers.
....................
Cat licensing does not improve community attitudes

Most of the public has a high level of contempt for laws that can not be enforced except by complaint or canvassing. Enforcement action creates fear and sometimes results in cat owners' avoidance of veterinary care or rabies vaccination. In some communities vigorous cat licensing laws expose over one third of the cat owning population to violation of current animal limit laws

Cat license laws primarily affect the most responsible and visible individuals. Often these are breeders of pedigreed cats, those who rescue cats and dedicated caregivers who neuter and spay and look after unowned/feral cats in established colonies or in their backyards. When these efforts are discouraged there is an increase in unchecked reproduction of cats with eventual additional burdens on animal control agencies to handle homeless cats and respond to nuisance complaints.

Government expense and the bureaucratic burdens of cat licensing are detrimental to the well-being of many cats and a deterrent to cat ownership and care-giving in America.

http://www.cfa.org/articles/legislative/cat-licensing.html

[Kitty Kat]

What? Where does the TC think they are living? This is the suburbs surrounded by farms and preserved land. Do we have a feral cat problem? Then why don't we have a catch and release program like so many other towns. Anyone living next to a farm, preserved land, or next to an open field can attest to all the field mice, moles, etc. Cats are beneficial to the community.

[to-TC-candidates]

I would like to know the TC candidates' view on this issue.

[Guest]

[Cranbury Cat]

Where does John Ritter stand on this issue?

[Guest]

Ummmm....NO!

[International Cat Assoc]

Cat Licensing
The International Cat Association
Jay Bangle

Cat licensing is based on the premise that “what is good for dogs is applicable to cats”. Cats have become the more popular pet species over the last couple of decades, and local animal control issues have looked for ways to continue to acquire enough funds to continue to provide the services they do.

At the risk of being facetious, one has to point out that cats are not dogs. Their housing, care and habits are very different. So, animal control ordinances designed to protect people from nuisances that may work for, dogs, will not necessarily work for cats. Let’s look at these things one by one.

Roaming Behavior
Domestic cats are small, territorial carnivores capable of scaling tall fences but rarely do they cause the property damages that roaming dogs can cause. They are solitary hunters, sticking close to “their” home range. Domestic dogs are pack animals that work with others in their pack to satisfy their needs. For dogs, the needs of the group outweigh the needs of the individual. Individual cats can live unassisted by humans, individual dogs cannot. This is why there is not the large number of feral or unowned dogs as can be seen in cats.

Licensing is based on an animal being owned and an individual taking responsibility for that animal. While being owned almost always true for dogs, it is not true for nearly half the cats.1 The largest number of cats in shelters are ferals who were born without any planning or assistance by humans. Who is supposed to pay for these licenses? In general, it will be the kind old cat lady up the street who is feeding and caring for the neighborhood cats. Unable to afford this, she will stop. And the cats will suffer for it.

Rabies
Licensing is also a vehicle for requiring rabies vaccination in rabies prone states. Despite a very low incidence of rabies in cats, they are considered a common vector for disease transmission.2 The risk of injection-site sarcomas and allergic reactions in cats to the vaccine may cause a reluctance of the owners of exclusively indoor cats to vaccinate annually when risk of exposure is minimal.

Owned Cats
Attitudes are changing for owned cats. Where once they were put out at night, to fend for themselves, more and more people are getting the message that “indoor is best”, and do not allow their owned cats to roam. This is great. Education has worked. But why should an owner have to pay a fee to animal control for no services? Owned cats that are lost, are very rarely picked up by Animal Control and returned to their owners. According to a survey by Kat Albrecht of the Missing Pet Partnership, 53% of indoor-only cats that escaped were found in a 1 house radius of their home. Of all cats turned in to shelters, only 2% are reunited with their owners3[i] In light of this, cat licensing clearly is simply an unpopular pet tax which generally goes into the general fund and does nothing to help resolve animal control issues a community really faces. Furthermore, cat licensing has little to do with reducing euthanasia rates when the return rate is so small.

As licensing fails in its stated purpose of reuniting owners with lost pets, fewer people are willing to comply with such laws. This can have a domino effect of fear. Lower income pet owners or people over local limit laws may not seek even routine pet care for fear of identification and subsequent confiscation of their pets. Managers of feral cat communities will not claim the cats once license fees and fines become a fixture in the law, and may stop caring for those feral cats as a result. This is a lose-lose situation for the cats and the community.

Conclusion
Cat licensing hurts cats, conscientious cat owners, and feral caretakers while doing nothing to cure the underlying problem. Animal control should be funded by the municipality, and focus on irresponsible animal ownership. They should not punish responsible pet owners of any species. Animal control should focus on controlling the feral cat population with TNR whenever possible, working with the community in an atmosphere of cooperation, not condemnation.

http://www.ticaleg.org/cat_licensing.htm

[Guest]

According to the NJ Dept of Health and Senior Services, there were 18 cases of rabies for cats in NJ during 2007, with 2 being in Middlesex County. Since 1989, there have been 303 cat cases in NJ, with 15 of those in Middlesex County. So while cats have accounted for 89% of the domestic animal cases since 1989, of the total rabies cases since 1989, they accounted for only 5.6%. Raccoons and skunks accounted for 89% of the total cases since 1989.

Given this statistical data, I don't think rabies among cats is a real health threat and should not be used to justify licensing. Pet owners need to be responsible and have their pets of any variety vaccinated, as well as spayed/neutered.

It seems to me that having to license a cat is just another example of government intruding in our lives "for our own sakes" or in the name of "safety" and of giving the government more power and finding yet another revenue source for government overspending.

STOP THE PET TAX!

[publius]

I'd like to get a license for my pet fish......Eric.

[Cranbury BOH]

Rabies Protocol - Cat Licenses – Chairwoman Coyle met with Christine Smeltzer, Township Administrator, and received preliminary approval to move forward. Money for the revision of the Animal Ordinance and implementation of licensing for cats will be included in the budget for 2009. Michael Melchionne, President of the New Jersey Certified Animal Control Officers Association and
Board of Health Meeting October 6, 2008

author of “The Time is Now for Cat Licensing” will be invited to speak at a future Board of Health meeting. The Township Committee will also be invited to attend. The information will then be presented by the Board at a Township Committee meeting. The Board will address the jurisdictional issues of the Ordinance with the Township Committee at the same time.

NEW BUSINESS
Neutering of Feral Cats – Chairwoman Coyle advised that Christine Smeltzer was not aware of the “catch and release” of cats in the Township. Mr. Longo informed the Board that the County does not approve of this procedure and it should be stopped. It was agreed that feral cats must be addressed when drafting the cat licensing ordinance. Dr. Notterman suggested making it illegal to feed unregistered cats. Mr. Van Hise will prepare a draft.

http://www.cranburytownship.org/BOH_minutes_2008_oct06.pdf

[Guest]

[Guest]

This is another issue of Cranbury not thinking. First, who will license a cat? Second, there is no way we recoup the money. Third, the cats who are licensed won't be an issue. Fourth, I have never seen a cat on the street come up to me, they always run. So if there is an issue, how am I supposed to see the license information. This would be a good April fools joke.

The next TC member should advocate this as insanity.

[Guest]

I oppose the BOH's cat license idea.

I would like to know which TC members will vote for it. At least the two votes from my household will NOT be casted for those members in the future.