Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0091.064 2022-2024 p/ c,ouricit dill 22 Gow.91 From: Sylvia Dolena Sent: Tuesday, March 07, 2023 9:15 AM To: Roth, Mitch D; Lord, Lee E; Council Testimony; Evans, Cynthia F.W.; Kimball, Heather Subject: Fwd: My testimony: Bill 22: Systemic Issues with Animal Control Attachments: Systemic changes for animal laws-11.pdf n Aloha Mayor Roth, Managing Director Lee Lord, Council Chair Kimball, Committee Chair Eviins, Z4 Council Members, Mahalo for your attention to the plight of animals on this island and for the community memo rs \l compassionately care for them. .9 There are many issues and problems to resolve, and the time is now. As you know, over 20 years ago there were two assessments on Animal Control completed with recommendations for solutions, yet those seemed to have been ignored and here we are-20 years later looking at the same issues having exponentially gotten worse. The issues and recommendations by local and national experts are not being heeded. We don't have time to reinvent the wheel. Many of these solutions were determined to work on this island with the current issues and demographics. These are not mainland theories. I am attaching a document with the intention that someday soon, the new agency will take a peek and use the knowledge. I also have a copy of the Strategic Plan reviewed and approved by Best Friends, No-Kill Advocacy and Alley Cat Allies and several local animal welfare organizations which details all of the areas needed to improve the current animal control, save tax dollars and save animal lives. At this point, I would like to address three systemic issues: 1. Trust and Transparency. This became a major problem when HPD took over animal control and is not a residual from the two previous vendors. AC in its current form has executed protocols that cause mistrust and perpetuated a lack of transparency. We can go into excruciating detail at some point if anyone is interested. And the number one complaint is that owners cannot visit the shelter or even get information from the shelter about a missing beloved pet!!! Yes, there are reasons why the shelter is closed; however, HPD did have HIHS remain open by appointment AND demanded that HRR remain open during the end of COVID. There are protocols that ensure safety, yet AC did not use these during the current administration. They remained completely closed for the most part. 2. Reaction versus prevention. Yes, the laws need to change; however, even with the current laws, it appears that preventative laws are not enforced. Two examples are the Leash/Loose Dog Law and the Animal Abandonment Law. If the Leash/Loose Dog Law was enforced, there would certainly have been fewer animal attacks and maulings on other animals and humans. Many people have reported that dogs who have mauled, killed, and injured humans and other animals were repeat offenders. Yet nothing was previously done, until the unthinkable happened. Mahalo to Councilwoman, Ashley Kierkiewicz for taking this on! 1 Comm.No. Cil.4)4 Ref.To:Date p lf—t ReLIU Pet MAK 3. Humane Animal Population Management This is a huge issue that no County agency seems to own. Yes, it is a hot topic and I understand that any agency who owns this would be under the "gun"; however, just as DLNR owns the wildlife overpopulation issues and USDA owns the farm animal issues, some agency needs to own the pet species animal overpopulation issues. See the attached document for more details. This can be done humanely. I am available to consult with you independently or as part of the task force, pro bono if you choose to engage. I have over 30 years of organizational and operational experience in high- tech companies. And yes, that experience does transfer. Mahalo, Sylvia Dolena Aloha Animal Advocates Pele Lani Farm LLC 2 SYSTEMIC CHANGES FOR ANIMAL LAWS ANIMAL CONTROL ISSUES AND PROPOSED SOLUTIONS The recommendations in this document are from recognized animal welfare and animal control experts nationwide. The protocols and programs have been modified for this island's demographics. Issues listed in the document are from the residents of Upper and Lower Puna both and Kau. There are seven issues regarding Animal Control. For Hawaii Island, the Animal Control contract has not been changed, except for animal quotas and tax dollars, in 25 years. In 2020, due to public pressure, the Purchasing Department of Hawaii County did make some positive changes. More is needed along with significant law changes. PRINCIPLES USED AS THE CONTEXT FOR THE PROPOSED SOLUTIONS ARE -A well thought out strategy and long-term plan will show positive results. -Mindset and approach to solutions must be PROACTIVE VS. REACTIVE. Preventative measures go a long way to get results. -Systemic causes (root cause analysis) must be identified and solutions developed with the entire system considered. -Community support and involvement are keys to success. Legislation e station is useless if there is no enforcement. -Most legislation is adequate; however, resources for enforcement is a major issue in most Counties. With a Reactive approach, more and more resources are needed as the problem gets bigger each year. -Funding is needed for adequate, qualified, experienced personnel and equipment. Some of this funding must be utilized for new protocol procedures which are preventative. -Community support is key in successful delivery of animal control services. -Protocols must be PROACTIVE VS. REACTIVE. Community programs must be in place in hot-spot areas. Implementing strategies which are proactive, and preventative will reduce tax-payer dollars within four years for the same level of services. -Our laws and Government services must be long-term focused and address the systemic causes of the issues rather than the symptoms. In this analysis, there are seven issues addressed: -vicious dog attacks, -animal overpopulation, -stray/lost/abandoned animals, -humane animal population management, such as, spay/neuter, -high kill-rates of pet species, -overcrowded shelters and unnecessary impounds, -funding. Project UNITED TO BRING CHANGE — HAWAII A Facebook page was created to gather information regarding dog attacks, mostly on the East Side of Hawaii Island. The response has been overwhelming. Many of the dog attack incidents are heart-wrenching, such as, the incident when a war Veteran suffering from PTSD witnessed his therapy dog mauled and killed. Another was when Dolores Oskins was severely mauled by several dogs, attacking her on her face, throat and chest. She died three weeks later from those injuries. Most recently, Violet, a six-year old child was seriously mauled. She is recovering from her injuries; however, the emotional trauma has been overwhelming for her family. Many of the incidents have not been reported to the police because most residents are not confident about what will be done by the Police and the Prosecutor. Case in Point: Margaret Bartlett, who had her arm mauled and almost lost her arm two years ago still has her case sitting in the Prosecutor's office. For this Project, we will compile all of the incident reports submitted to us by residents who have been victims of dog attacks, to identify hot-spot areas, types of attacks, and specific preventative protocols. We made recommendations for amendments to the laws or new laws which will be deterrents. Again, a commitment to enforce those laws is necessary for results. As of April 6, 2022, Bill 125 was proposed by Councilwoman Ashley Kierkiewicz along with a team of residents and it passed unanimously by the County Council. PART 1 . (Issue 1 of 7) Vicious Dogs Dog attacks are on the rise. Humans and animals are being attacked and most of the animals (pets and farm animals) attacked die from their injuries. Recently, Dolores Oskins, an 85 year-old woman, died from her injuries. 'On Nov. 5th, 2021, Violet, a six-year-old girl was severely mauled by neighborhood dogs. Dog attacks are not always reported. Residents say that it does not do any good, no results, and then the owner of the dog(s), tend to retaliate. Residents feel like that have no viable option for resolution. Residents are in fear of walking in their neighborhoods and also in fear of the vicious dog owners. Dog attacks on pets or small farm animals receive even less attention. Yet for these pet owners, witnessing the vicious mauling and many times, death of their pet is traumatic. If the case does go to Court, the victim is typically awarded the monetary value of the purchase of the pet. For many, these pets are like their children, yet they are treated as if there is no real value beyond the purchase price. Irresponsible dog ownership, negligence and honest accidents are causes of animals getting loose. Most dog owners know what their animals are capable of. Owners must be held accountable for animals. If an animal is euthanized as a result, that should not be the end of it. The owner is liable and restitution, fines, and/or jail time would be deterrents. Many times, the dog owners replace their dogs to start the cycle again. Mechanisms must be put in place to ensure the victims and the complaining parties are protected and not set up for retaliation. Not only are residents in fear of the dog attacks, but also of the owners of the animals. Some of the vicious dogs are guarding a "grow" operation or a "meth" house. This serious consideration, to protect victims and whistleblowers, must be part of any plan. Funding for adequate, qualified, experienced personnel and equipment, along with community support is key in successful management of vicious animal attacks. Protocols must be PROACTIVE VS. REACTIVE. Preventative Community programs must be in place in hot-spot areas. Animal Control officers must be in the field at least 70% of their time patrolling these hot-spot areas. They must be authorized to issue citations, do investigations and confiscate animals. Currently HPD must be called to do this. The Sweeps in communities to capture loose, roaming dogs is a hit or miss situation. Residents do want dogs captured, but they want the vicious dogs captured, not the neighbors' pet who happened to get loose. Residents are also concerned about all the dogs captured and how to retrieve their pets. With the shelters closed to the public and many times the animal control voice mail is full, residents who have lost pets wonder if their pet was picked up during a sweep. This method is a temporary fix and not very effective long-term. Currently, there is adequate budget to fund stricter law enforcement. See Part 7. By identifying issues in a community and the dogs who are frequently the trouble-makers, a community can be empowered to take certain actions. Neighborhood Watch type of groups can be invaluable in identifying new and ongoing issues. A complaint can be made to animal control by Neighborhood Watch groups to identify the potential issues and with Animal Control, they can put a corrective order/plan in place with the dog owner to prevent future issues. Then if the animal and owner are in violation again, heavier consequences must be administered. For severe violations, such as, maulingof humans and killingof otherpet species p or farm animals, the laws must be enforced, and the Prosecutors Office must charge these cases. Owners must be held responsible in a Court of Law. Example of vicious animal laws and penalties (VA) § 3.2-6540.1. Vicious dogs; penalties. A. As used in this section: "Serious injury" means an injury having a reasonable potential to cause death or any injury other than a sprain or strain, including serious disfigurement, serious impairment of health, or serious impairment of bodily function and requiring significant medical attention. "Vicious dog" means a canine or canine crossbreed that has (i) killed a person, (ii) inflicted serious injury to a person, or (iii) continued to exhibit the behavior that resulted in a previous finding by a court or, on or before July 1, 2006, by an animal control officer as authorized by ordinance that it is a dangerous dog, provided that its owner has been given notice of that finding. B. Any law-enforcement officer or animal control officer who has reason to believe that a canine or canine crossbreed within his jurisdiction is a vicious dog shall apply to a magistrate serving the jurisdiction for the issuance of a summons requiring the owner or custodian, if known, to appear before a general district court at a specified time. The summons shall advise the owner of the nature of the proceeding and the matters at issue. If a law-enforcement officer successfully makes an application for the issuance of a summons, he shall contact the local animal control officer and inform him of the location of the dog and the relevant facts pertaining to his belief that the dog is vicious. The animal control officer shall confine the animal until such time as evidence shall be heard and a verdict rendered. The court, through its contempt powers, may compel the owner, custodian, or harborer of the animal to produce the animal. If, after hearing the evidence, the court finds that the animal is a vicious dog, the court shall order the animal euthanized in accordance with the provisions of§ >2_15562. The court, upon finding the animal to be a vicious dog, may order the owner, custodian, or harborer thereof to pay restitution for actual damages to any person injured by the animal or to the estate of any person killed by the animal. The court, in its discretion, may also order the owner to pay all reasonable expenses incurred in caring and providing for such vicious dog from the time the animal is taken into custody until such time as the animal is disposed of. The procedure for appeal and trial shall be the same as provided by law for misdemeanors. Trial by jury shall be as provided in Article 4 (§ 19 2-260 et seq.) of Chapter 15 of Title 19.2. The Commonwealth shall be required to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt. C. No canine or canine crossbreed shall be found to be a vicious dog solely because it is a particular breed, nor is the ownership of a particular breed of canine or canine crossbreed prohibited. No animal shall be found to be a vicious dog if the threat, injury, or damage was sustained by a person who was (i) committing, at the time, a crime upon the premises occupied by the animal's owner or custodian; (ii) committing, at the time, a willful trespass upon the premises occupied by the animal's owner or custodian; or(iii) provoking, tormenting, or physically abusing the animal, or can be shown to have repeatedly provoked, tormented, abused, or assaulted the animal at other times. No police dog that was engaged in the performance of its duties as such at the time of the acts complained of shall be found to be a vicious dog. No animal that, at the time of the acts complained of, was responding to pain or injury or was protecting itself, its kennel, its offspring, a person, or its owner's or custodian's property, shall be found to be a vicious dog. D. Any owner or custodian of a canine or canine crossbreed or other animal whose willful act or omission in the care, control, or containment of a canine, canine crossbreed, or other animal is so gross, wanton, and culpable as to show a reckless disregard for human life and is the proximate cause of such dog or other animal attacking and causing serious injury to any person is guilty of a Class 6 felony. The provisions of this subsection shall not apply to any animal that, at the time of the acts complained of, was responding to pain or injury or was protecting itself, its kennel, its offspring, a person, or its owner's or custodian's property, or when the animal is a police dog that is engaged in the performance of its duties at the time of the attack. Read more: 5 3.2-6540.1. Vicious dogs; penalties (virginia.gov) Class 6 felony- Class 6 felony carries a maximum punishment of 2 years in prison, 3 years of supervised probation and a $150,000 fine and surcharges. Class 6 felonies can include charges such as possession of drug paraphernalia, resisting arrest, aggravated DUI, etc. PART 2. Overcrowded Shelters / Impounds: Issue of shelter overcrowding is perpetuated by the mindset that the animal must be taken away and jailed. This next point is controversial; however, some people should never own pets or any animals because they lack the responsibility and accountability to properly manage the pets. Animals are allowed to leave their yard unleashed, allowed to stray sometimes getting lost, allowed to trespass without regard for others. Some owners are no longer able to care of their animals due to financial issues, health issues or other life disruptions. Many animals are not licensed or microchipped. Animals are being abandoned by their owners at an alarming rate. Potential Solutions and Transformation if all are implemented Field Reunions, is a successful method to reduce impounds thereby reducing the kill- rate because strays are reunited with owners rather than being impounded. Animal Control Officers should all be equipped with scanners to determine if animal is microchipped. If not, then ACO should begin talking to neighbors in the area the stray was found. Neighbors will, many times, recognize the animal who has strayed. Diligence and persistence, along with all of the tips and tricks of how to reduce impounds when in the field, will go a long way to reducing impounds and saving taxpayer money. Mitch Schneider, former head of Washoe Regional Animal Services has provided training on this protocol on Youtube.com. https://www.voutube.com/watch?v=LnNRbu5mtRc&t=1181s Mitch Schneider-Getting to zero-YouTube Social Media Reunions, is another very successful method to reunite lost pets with their owners. This County has several social media sites where owners who have lost a pet can post the picture and location where it was last seen. Likewise, finders can post pictures of animals found and location last seen. Many times, these Good Samaritans can shelter the animal, mostly dogs, until the owner is found. Animal Control needs to work with these groups to reduce intake of lost/stray animals. The national lost/found websites are not conducive to the residents of this island according to the residents. They do not know what information is being shared and seen. There is hesitancy to use these websites not local to this island. (PetcoLove.com) Breeding Permits, can reduce the number of dogs being bred, who later become abandoned if they don't make the "cut" for breeding intention. This is difficult to enforce; however, out-of-the-box solutions are being implemented in mainland communities which can be accessed. Since this is a complaint-driven County, if there is a way for community residents to file a complaint anonymously, many of these issues will surface. Mandatory Licensing and Microchipping will reduce the number of strays by finding the owner quickly. This has passed!! It will make finding the owners easier. Mandatory spay/neuter is required unless there is a Breeding Permit. Yes, this is controversial but we are in an animal crisis with breeders selling puppies and kittens and those who are not sold or don't make the "cut" are abandoned to fend for themselves until a Good Samaritan shows up to help. These GS community members are exhausted, frustrated and angry that the County is not doing more. Surrender Counseling is key for owners who can no longer care for their animals and use abandonment as their only option. Programs are needed to support retention and/or rehoming of pets. Mandatory spay/neuter is required. Leash Law Enforcement and Abandonment Law Enforcement. There has been a significant rise in pet abandonment during the 2018 lava flow and during COVID. Animal Control officers need training in the law enforcement part. It is very vague if a citation can be issued if an ACO does not witness the abandonment or see the stray animal. There are specific hot-spot areas where animals are typically abandoned. Signs and video surveillance can be strong deterrents. For animals off leash and roaming the neighborhoods, neighborhood witnesses, videos, personal knowledge of the animals' owners, must be utilized rather than call it "hearsay". Again, Neighborhood Watch type groups in communities can be invaluable in this work. They typically are familiar with the animals and their owners. Most of these methods are included in the Strategic Plan for the three functions of animal control: Animal Law Enforcement, Shelter Operations, and Animal Population Management. These plans were given to HRR/Rainbow Friends Animal Sanctuary partnering with Best Friends Animal Society. These plans were NOT implemented. PART 3 High Kill-Rates (Catch & Kill Model) In 2017, the County Council stated they wanted more Spay/Neuter, less Euthanasia. Council members eye more oversight of Humane Society - Hawaii Tribune-Herald (link) The "catch and kill" model has been used worldwide with major unintended consequences. And if"catch and kill" worked, we would be done by now after 25 years of using this model in this County. The proactive and preventive spay and neuter program does work. This is addressed in the next section. Reviewing 10 years of data, with over 114,000 mostly healthy dogs and cats were killed during this time period, we still have the same growing problem, something needs to change. The graph below depicts the kill rate from 2007 to 2016, meaning that average 70% of the dogs and cats entering the shelter system are killed and dumped in the land fill. 1 Fa ei tit_ - pi , Historical data which has ! ,•AS� been going on for 25 years. Anvilr:aTFc CHAMPIONS OF THE SAVE 90^6 REVOLUTION Tax Dollars and Kill Rate for Hawaii County* • • 10,000 to 14,000 animals killed each year. 0% 75.40% 75.40 e+• 79.0% 75.2% 78.1% 78.SY. 75.8% 71.5% 71.0% 67. + O additio$lQKnal to increase the coupon program 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2011 2014 2010 2016 Tax dollars $1.9 M $1.9 M $1.9 M $1.9 M $2.0 M $1.9 M $2.O M $2.0 M $2.0 M $2.1 M 'Source- SASS from HIHS,2006 through 2015 years and County Contract Supplemental Agreement.No.1 Aloha Animal Advocates I)2016 OVERPOPULATION CONTRIBUTES TO HIGH KILL-RATES which is becoming more and more abhorrent to residents. In the previous Animal Control Contract, prior to the HRR RFP, there is a performance measure that states the animal control vendor will euthanize 14,000 animals annually. This contract had not been changed in 25 years! This old contract was in effect until the previous vendor decided not to bid on the RFP for animal control 2020-2021. Due to public outcry, a new RFP was written to eliminate many of the Kill mandates. This new RFP was published May 2020 and was bid upon by Rainbow Friends Animal Sanctuary (RFAS). There is a very high barrier-to-entry in the genre that Rainbow Friends Animal Sanctuary found it very challenging to establish three shelters and deliver operations at the same time. RFAS only received 54% of the allocated funding, $94K per month for Limited Services but the public expected FULL services and generated many complaints which ultimately cause the contract not to be renewed. Here are the current statistics of the kill-rates. The last column represents the UNKNOWN data since HPD took over animal control on July 1, 2021. riff £P4 Ft nl-k2or ATES Pi Mint.b ar We*urm d Humor,Animals CHAMPIONS OF 1HF SAVF„. 0FVOIU11ON a F. , i cave a Tax Dollars and Kill Rate for Hawaii County* 61.30% 58.9% 57.5 55,A' x}5.9% 4 Years represent County fiscal year. Year end'ng 2017. represents County contract year from July 1, 21)16 to lune 30, 2017 1r 1e x.1 ro3o noxa r to/Zox1 ��^iiiUYJ $2.1 M $2.1 M $2.1 M $2.3 M " 2C I M /Z 13 Mo. 11Mo. ;r 'Source: SAPS from HIHS and HPC);and County Contract Supplemental Agreement.No.1,HPfi Interim Services Contract Catch and Kill / Eradication projects that miserably failed with major unintended consequences. See ADDENDUM A for documented examples. Law Amendment: By adjusting the mandatory hold time from 48 hours to at least 7 days, many of the impounded dogs and cats could be reunited with their owners. Statics show that it takes an average, on this island, of 7-10 days to reunite a pet with its owner. Why wouldn't we allow that extra time for this reunification rather than kill the pet after 48 hours? This does not make sense unless we are just focused on the money part. I strongly believe that taxpayers would allow this extra time to have pets reunited with their families. Otherwise, this is heartbreaking to owners who are desperately wanting to find their pets. Funds can be recuperated when the owner redeems their animal by paying boarding fees for the length of time the animal was fed and sheltered. HCC Section 4-20. Seizure of dogs by officers. (a) Seizure of Unlicensed Dogs. (1) Every officer shall seize any unlicensed dog found running at large or found upon any public highway, street, alley, court, place, square, or grounds, or upon any unfenced lot, or not within a sufficient enclosure, and confine it in a pound or any suitable enclosure for a minimum period of forty -eight hours, during which time it shall be subject to redemption by its owner by payment of the license due, if any, and an impoundment fee of$10. Every dog found without a registration tag affixed to the dog's collar will be deemed to be unlicensed. (2) If not so redeemed, the dog shall be sold by the officer for the amount of the license and impoundment fee,or as much more as can be obtained therefor,and if not so sold, it shall be humanely destroyed . (3) The owner of any unlicensed dog impounded and not claimed within forty-eight hours as provided in this section, may redeem the dog at any time before sale or destruction by paying to the humane society, in addition to the amount of the license and impoundment fee, the sum of$5 per day for the number of days over two days the dog was impounded. PART 4 Overpopulation, Trap / Neuter / Return and Free Spay and Neuter Clinics NOTE: If we really want to save the endangered species, we have to identify the root cause, the actual culprits who are contributing to the decline in the endangered species. Read more at the end of Part 4. Council wants more spay/neuter, less euthanasia - West Hawaii Today The issue with previous Spay/Neuter Coupon Program was that HIHS issued free coupons, 100 monthly, valued at $30. Residents would stand in line on the first of the month to get a limited 2 coupons per family. The $30 did not even come close to paying for the surgical procedure leaving residents with a Vet bill of an additional $150 to $200 per animal. Many people opted out and did not redeem their coupons. This was another side issue with the unredeemed coupons not being accounted for. Taxpayer money was wasted. The preferred method implemented by HRR was to have County funded Spay/Neuter clinics in three or four locations island-wide, monthly. During the 10 months of operations, HRR was able to deliver approximately 4628 sterilizations to the public either free or by voluntary donation. Dog licenses were available at these clinics and microchipping was included. OVERPOPULATION CONTRIBUTES TO HIGH KILL-RATES which is becoming more and more abhorrent to residents. In the previous Animal Control Contract, prior to the HRR RFP, there is a performance measure that states the animal control vendor will euthanize 14,000 animals annually. This contract had not been changed in 25 years! This old contract was in effect until the previous vendor decided not to bid on the RFP for animal control 2020-2021. Due to public outcry, a new RFP was written to eliminate many of the Kill mandates. Analysis of the impact of trap-neuter-return programs on populations of feral cats Patrick I41ev,Inds;Janet I FoIcy,nev+,rho:In lie K.levy,!Arm,Phi), vIM;terry Paik,DVM Objective To evaluate 2 county trap-neuter-return Results —In both counties, results of analyses did not (l NW programs for feral cat population management indicate a consistent reduction in per capita growth, via mathematical modeling, the population multiplier, or the proportion of female Design Theoretical population modelcats that were pregnant. Animals Feral cats assessed from 1992 to 2003 in Conclusions and Clinical Relevance---Success of San Diego County, California fn 14,4521, and from feral at management programs that use TNR can be 1998 to 2004 in Alachua County, Florida (11.8221monitored with an easily collected set of data and sta Procedure -Data were analyzed with a mathematical l tistical analyses facilitated by population modeling Ricker model to describe population dynamics of the techniques- Results may be used to suggest possible feral cats and modifications to the dynamics that future monitoring and modification of TNR programs, occurred as a result of the TNR programs which could result in greater success controlling and reducing feral cat populations. (J Am Vet Med Assoc 2005;227:1775.17811 Source:https://www.avma.org/News/Journals/Collections/Documents/javma 227 11 1775.odf HPD cancelled the TNR pilot program. No reason was specified. In the 20-21 Animal Control RFP 3950, one of the additions was a pilot program for Trap/Neuter/Return for felines. This program would track activities and results regarding cats at the Kealakehe Transfer Station and the Keaau Transfer Station. An analysis was done by Aloha Animal Advocates for the County Department of Environmental Management, Bill Kucharski, during 2017, 2019 and 2021. The analysis and tracking of these locations were to determine number of cats at each location, abandonment rate, number of spay/neuter surgeries, and number of cats relocated through fostering, adoptions, transports, etc. The goal of this pilot was to show results in decreasing abandonment rate, birth rate, which would result in zero population growth and ultimately in continuous decreasing population at the specific locations. To accomplish the goals, at very little investment of animal control funding, signage and video surveillance would be used as deterrents. Signage would include the law about abandonment, and alternative options for animal owners. Continuous trapping, sterilizing and returning animals to these locations would be done at no cost to the County taxpayers by Aloha Animal Advocates and AdvoCats Hawaii. TRAP/NEUTER/RFT'IRN Study: INR reduces feline euthanasia, overpopulation Shelter intakes also drop drastically during two-year Florida program Julie Scheidegger The tvio-year study, published in The Veterinary ► Journal and run by principal investigator Julie Levy, DVM. PhD,the Maddie's Fund professor of shelter medicine at the UF College of Veterinary Medicine, focused its TNR efforts to a region of Alachua County. Veterinarians from the study are pictured performing spays and neuters on "community" cats from a targeted area in Gainesville, Florida. Photo courtesy of University of Florida. Source: hap://veterinarynews.dvm 360.corn h.lf-veterinary-study-finds-success-targeted-tnr FERAL CATS are not the main cause for the decline of Native Species. NOTE: If we really want to save the endangered species, we have to identify the root cause, the actual culprits which are contributing to the decline in the endangered species. FERAL cats are NOT the cats in the neighborhood, parks, or transfer stations. . Feral cats live in the mountains, forests, and jungles, and don't interact with people. To label all unowned cats as feral and as an invasive species, is inaccurate. The "community" cats we deal with, are abandoned, lost, stray or the litters of those animals. All were former pets who were not spayed or neutered and kept breeding. The research shows that the #1 KILLER OF NATIVE BIRDS is the malaria carrying mosquito. As Native Birds move up in elevation to escape the mosquito, the mosquito has been adapting and following them. #2 contributor to the decrease in Native Bird population is loss of habitat (over development); #3 and then environmental pollution. Lastly, are predators who are not just cats. Tree rats kill the baby birds. Mongoose kill the ground nesting birds. At the Kealakehe Waste Water plant, the plant was set up in an area where Native ground nesting birds lived. A few years ago, there was a project to use lethal traps for the cats there. It was found that only one cat was identified. There were many mongoose and Egrets which were disturbing and destroying the nests. Cats are used as a distraction, and they are an easy target. The #1 KILLER OF MONK SEALS is loss of habitat and loss of food source, entanglement in nets and lastly several diseases including toxoplasmosis. Several diseases kill monk seals. These diseases are in farm animals and humans, not only in cats. So all of the sewage spills carry toxo. The overflow of the manure pools from the shut down Big Island Dairy entered the ocean and carried toxo into the ocean. So if we want to solve the problem, we need to focus on the root cause of the deaths of native species. Killing all the cats does not solve problems. Native birds will still die from mosquito-carried diseases and monk seals will still die from entanglement and starvation. The Save 90% Movement The 95% "goal" is for healthy, viable animals. The vicious dogs which need to be put down is not in the save 90% rate. These animals are euthanized according to law. We are talking about the healthy viable animals which are put down because lack of space or other fixable situation, such as, irresponsible ownership and overpopulation. We have several studies of islands which have eradicated cats and then rodents took over and cause more disease and destruction. What is the solution? Eradicate the mosquito, have more environmental rReserves which cannot be developed. Have more ocean Reserves for monk seals where no fishing is allowed. Those are proactive solutions. PART 5 Companion animals ordinance: Our Animals Deserve Aloha AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE HAWAII COUNTY CODE CHAPTER 4: ANIMALS AND ADDING A NEW ARTICLE REGARDING ANIMAL SHELTER STANDARDS TO ENSURE THAT DOGS, CATS, AND OTHER ANIMALS IMPOUNDED BY ANIMAL SHELTERS ARE PROTECTED FROM NEGLECT AND ABUSE RECEIVE APPROPRIATE CARE AND ARE GIVEN EVERY OPPORTUNITY FOR PLACEMENT. See Addendum B for the full ordinance. This ordinance was taken from the Muncie, ID ordinance and various other US counties to promote life rather euthanasia. This has been through legal review by Nathan Winograd, Attorney, in San Francisco. Winograd was brought to Hawaii by an animal welfare organization in 2017 to be key-note speaker at the No-Kill Conference in Kona. Winograd started the No-Kill Advocacy movement and website to help municipalities move to higher live release numbers. He was also Shelter Director of a major shelter in San Francisco which became a no-kill shelter. Winograd is a Stanford Univ trained attorney, consultant, Shelter Director and is considered the "father" of the no-kill movement. Nathan Winograd, Jose Ocano (Western Region Manager of Best Friends Animal Society) and Rebekah DeHaven (Senior Attorney and Director of Humane Law and Policy) with Alley Cat Allies, have reviewed and approved of the Strategic Plan authored by Aloha Animal Advocates for the County of Hawaii, as did the local Animal Welfare non-profit organizations: Aloha Animal Advocates, AdvoCATS- Hawaii, Kohala Animal Rescue and Education Services, Rainbow Friends Animal Sanctuary, Magical Creatures of Hamakua. PART 6 EDUCATION through Community Outreach Programs Community Outreach Strategy and Approach Community Outreach Program: "The time is now" Our outreach program will focus on educating our community from elementary-age children and their parents, to our county officials and staff on the philosophy and protocols of the 90% live release (LR) sheltering model. Our goal is community collaboration and collective responsibility. We understand that all stakeholders in our community must work together to achieve and sustain our common goal. This means cooperation among rescue organizations, government agencies, stakeholders, and community members, all committed to progressive lifesaving. When shelters and communities follow these principles, every animal is recognized as an individual with a life worth saving. Our Island animals deserve a legitimate chance at life. Our innovative sheltering model is necessary for providing this basic right. Our community is the solution and we have the proven methods our community needs to save lives. Nothing is impossible when communities come together. PROGRAM STRATEGIES • Aloha is our foundation, our cultural values are our compass. Love, affection, peace, compassion, and mercy, has deep cultural and spiritual significance. It defines a force that holds together all existence, is all-inclusive extending a reverence for all life. Historically our animal companions are members of our ohana, some embodiments of our ancestors, guardians, and gods. Our program will build community collaboration by adhering to this foundational truth. • Acknowledge the socio-economic challenges regarding animal health and welfare on this island and propose supplemental services to fill community- identified gaps • Working with our community to implement and sustain proven solutions to humanely control the pet population • Education of the residents is a critical success factor. Education should include solutions, benefits to the community, and actions needed by the community. • Children are key to all progress. We are just one generation away from transformational change. By reaching out and teaching children the importance of compassion, care and nurturing of animals and all living beings, they will integrate these values as they reach adulthood. OUR APPROACH The Proposer/SubProposer's Community Outreach Program will exemplify activities that take into consideration the cultural heritage of the diverse racial/ethnic populations, as well as the divergent socio-economic diversities among our Hawaii residents. Although services to support the sheltering and care of animals in the three functions of the RFP 3950 is essential, an equally critical endeavor is community education to introduce and integrate the 90% Live Release model. We endeavor to work with community leaders to genuinely lead our diverse Island population towards a progressive and permanent change by introducing the policies and programs of our shelter model. includes spay and neuter (S/N) of both pet animals and community cats (trap/neuter/return and management TNR-M) programs, foster care, rescue groups, adoption programs, pet retention, behavior, and medical programs, community involvement, volunteers, proactive redemption and a compassionate director. It is equally important to have the Animal Control services provider be diverse in its leadership and staff and committed to the foundational principles of aloha. WHO WE SERVE The population estimate in Hawaii County is 201,513 residents (7.1.2019) with 21.7% under the age of 18. The race/ethnicity includes 34.2% who are white, 21.2% Asians, 13% Native Hawaiians and other Pacific Islanders, and 13% Hispanic/Latino. The median household income is $59,200 with 15.6% living below the poverty level versus 10% for all of the islands of Hawaii. (https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/hawaiicountyhawaii,Hl/PST045 219). In addition to the `coconut wireless', 86% of households have a computer and 75.2% internet subscriptions, thus social media represents a valid resource for dissemination of educational messages, announcements of spay/neuter(S/N) clinics and Coalition animal welfare services, and community events. CHALLENGES Several factors contribute to the failure to maintain a healthy and sustainable pet population on our Island. The most obvious is the lack of adopting a strategic plan at the county level. Although millions of dollars are invested in the animal control contract and tens of thousands of dollars are awarded in grants on an annual basis there is no uniformed plan of action to bring our Island pet population to a sustainable level through a targeted high-volume approach to spay and neuter programs and animal health care. Other factors include: • A depressed economy; high rates of unemployment • An appreciable number of families living at or below the poverty level who cannot afford S/N surgeries or preventative care for their pets • A population increase in some areas, e.g. - 12% in some towns (Kea'au), a 40% increase in Mountain View • The reluctance of sectors of our Island community to utilize S/N • Unaffordable cost of S/N surgeries at private vet clinics or the inability to afford the purchase of S/N vouchers from the Hawaii Island Humane Society (HIHS) • Release or abandonment of unwanted adult pets and their litters into the wild to fend for themselves rather than having them killed by surrendering them to the shelter. • Lack of understanding that S/N means fewer pets entering the shelters means fewer will be killed. • "Catch and Kill" is too often the standard "solution" for dealing with the stray cats and dogs roaming in the community, • Lack of a convenient resource for "free" S/N with the exception of programs conducted by nonprofit organizations (e.g., Rainbow Friends Animal Sanctuary, KARES, AdvoCats, Hui Pono Holoholona, CatSNIP) which are all currently overwhelmed with the elimination of County funded spay/neuter clinics. • Misconceptions about the effects of S/N on cats and dogs COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT Community Outreach Programs will have opportunities for community education in conjunction with schools, community cultural events, organizational presentations, opportunities to educate county staff, officials, and social media as follows: School programs: presenting what a Live Release shelter model encompasses and how kids can be part of it; recruiting for volunteer programs at shelter branches; kids writing contest on taking the pledge to save lives. Sharing artwork and stories on their own pets and how they fit into a live-saving sheltering. Social media: Coalition-website with announcements of S/N clinics and events; video sessions/write-ups on the care of kittens & puppies; care of your aging pet; becoming a foster caregiver; how to care for an adopted cat, dog or other animals, basic training and grooming instruction. Facebook postings of pets for adoption. Community events: empty the shelter events, pet coffee shop day, dog washing, a blessing of the animals, donations stations, pet photo shoots, information tables, dog walks, pet runway events, animal art festivals, pet adoptions are integrated at each event. We intended to be included in the following community events: Queen Liliuokalani Long Distance Canoe Races Merry Monarch —follow Easter Sunday in March or April Kona Coffee Cultural Festival — November The Farmers' Market at Hamakua Harvest— (Sundays May-Dec, food, live music and free educational events weekly) King Kamehameha Celebration Lei Draping Ceremony Experience Volcano Festival - July Big Island Chocolate Festival - August Hawaiian Slack Key Guitar Festival "Kona Style" -August Hawaii Kuauli Pacific & Asia Cultural Festival — October Kona Pride Festival - September Hawaii Island Festival of Birds— October Vegan Fest Gay Pride festival Special Holiday-themed events Howlin' Holidays during Christmas Season Easter Egg Hunt with your pet Saint Francis Day - Blessing of the Animals (various locations) in October Coordination of specific events through town halls, educational movies, free training and grooming events. PHASED PLAN APPROACH Phase 1: Learn about the issues and distinctive character of the specific community. Engage with community leaders. Work with "early adopters" to promote and present programs at fun events and schools. Provide incentives and acknowledgement for those engaging in the programs. Phase 2: Upon Phase 1 foundation, expand the reach into areas of the community, County officials and staff, most resistant to spay and neuter and other programs. Reach out to understand the perspective of those most resistant. Understanding is key to building trust and finding acceptable solutions. Engage with the resisters to find a middle ground. Phase 3: Continue to work toward solution with agreed upon strategies. A comprehensive plan can be developed once we understand the key resistance factors. PART 7 Funding: Where is the funding? As the Council approved the animal control budget for $2.1 million dollars for fiscal year, July 1 , 2020 through June 30, 2021 and only 54% was spent to fund HRR for 11 months, where is the rest of the funding? HRR was funded approximately $1 .3 million taxpayer dollars and there should be $800K + taxpayer dollars? Where is it? As the Council approved the new animal control budget for $2.1 million dollars for fiscal year, July 1 , 2021 through June 30, 2022 and only a small staff of animal control officers allowed by HPD to be hired, and the services are limited to Priority 1 calls where is the rest of the funding going? Services are seriously limited with a minimal staff to operate island wide. This does not make sense to withhold needed services when funding was available. Residents and animals are suffering. Something needs to be investigated. With HPD taking over Animal Control Services, the $2.1 million was allocated to their budget. Yet, Major Aimee Wana says that they are at 30% staffing levels and the unexpended funds would return to the County General Fund. Has this happened? The community needs animal control services. The residents are becoming irate at the lack of services, the growing overpopulation issues, the dog attacks on humans and animals, and lots of secrecy. The public has been told there is a Committee whose members are looking at the future of animal control? Why are these members not identified? What are they working on? Why aren't frontline volunteers and animal welfare organizations who deal with this everyday not included? Why are there no updates from this "committee." And as of this date, the only member of this secret committee is former Councilman Tim Richards. Why is this a secret? The East Side Hawaii Shelter was formerly Bar King Dog Kennels? This had a price tag of $2Million to include purchase of the property and some needed repairs. This is tax payer funds and we still don't know who is running it? Why isn't it open to the public? The Kona Shelter is also closed to the public. Residents want to know if their lost pet is impounded there. There is no way to retrieve their pets now. This is unacceptable because residents know that after the expiration date, the animals will be killed. Heartbreaking, yet no one in authority will take a stand on this! Will you, MD Lee E Lord? SPAY AND NEUTER FUNDING HAS HISTORICALLY BEEN PART OF THE ANIMAL CONTROL CONTRACT. Although Chief Paul Ferreira has stated that the animal control funding does not include specific line item funding allocations for spay and neuter, this funding has historically been included. SUMMARY July 1 , 2013 Spay/Neuter allocation, $121 ,000 Contract year July 1, 2014 Spay/Neuter allocation, $121,000 Extension 1 July 1 , 2015 Spay/Neuter allocation, $121 ,000 Extension 2 July 1 , 2016 Spay/Neuter allocation, $121 ,000 Extension 3 During this fiscal year, the Council added another $100,000 for spay and neuter. July 1 , 2017 Spay/Neuter allocation, $221 ,000 Extension 4 July 1 , 2018 Spay/Neuter allocation, $221 ,000 Extension 5 July 1 , 2019 Spay/Neuter allocation, $221 ,000 Extension 6 July 1 , 2020 Spay/Neuter allocation, $221,000 Extension 7 This contract was extended for an additional month until July 31 , 2020 to allow a new vendor, HRR to begin on August 1 , 2020. Aug 1 , 2020 Spay/Neuter allocation, $21 ,000 monthly for 11 months. During this time, 4,600 spay/neuter surgeries were performed free to the public. This contract ended June 30, 2021 . July 1, 2021 Spay/Neuter allocation, $00.00. Animal Control delivered by HPD. DETAILS In the RFP 2940 which is an animal control contract beginning in July 1 , 2013 with four 1-year extensions, expiring June 30, 2018. $121 ,000 was specifically allocated for spay and neuter. At a Council session regarding Animal Control, the Council asked for more spay and neuter services and less euthanasia. Margaret Wille, Councilwoman of District 9, got an additional $100,000 in funding specifically for spay and neuter. This increased the contract amount annually funded for the following years. In effect, $221 ,000 spay and neuter funding was included in the annual contract amount of $2.1 million taxpayer dollars. Because of the volcanic eruption and devastating lava flow, a new contract did NOT come up for bid and 6-month extensions were given to the vendor, HIHS, for two more years, through July 31 , 2020. Then the new RFP 3950, for Interim Services, also included a budget for spay and neuter of $21 ,000 monthly until that contract ended June 30, 2021 . alRFR291O AGREEMENT WITH NIP IMH51.pdf Adobe Acrobat Reeder DC 46d.brt -- ri X =pie tell V,ev, San W Home Tools RPR 2945 A(:PEE'.'. x O Sign In September 20.2013 nuivimE suet Y aExport POE v County of Hawaii Purchasing Division oo Ed,t POF Department of Finance 25 Aupuni Street.Suite 1101 a Create PDE .e Hilo,Hawaii 96720 1:51 comment RE:Best and Final Offer for RFP2940 Providing Animal Control Services for the Hawaii Combine Goes County Police Department,County of Ifawaii `[l Organize Pages ^ Dear Mr.Dansdill. This funding r..npress nDf Pursuant to your request dated September 19,2013,this letter will act as our Best and Final Continued throughout the Offer to provide Animal Control Services for the County of Hawai'i for the 2014 Fiscal Year. 5 year contract I We will agree to provide Animal Control Services in the amount of 51,982,500, with the C including$121,600 in spay/neuter services addition of an additions Please feel free to contact me at 808-329-8002 with any questions or comments. $100K by the Sincerely, Council in 2017 S(1 �r m P Type here to search J .t, •74°F ^ „5.,227_,,M,„ ADDENDUM A Archaic Programs Fail Big and Cost Big - '.%. ripri 4., i - , _ , The CATastrophic Prime Minister: Demand TNR 140,371 supporters; GOAL 150,000 (Petition) The catch and kill method is the only cat management program used by the Australian Government. It is this model that has produced the unowned cat population catastrophe that we have today. It does not work. Over$1 million dollars of tax payers money is used every year to fund a failed program. The Australian Government has now decided to 'Super Size' this model and they expect different results. The catch and kill model for unowned cats has been semi-successful only on two small islands and caused collateral damage. Marion Island is 335 km2 and Ascension Island is 88 km2. Australia spans 7,692,024 km2 or 4,947,363 sq miles. Compare Island of Hawaii at 4,028 square miles (10,430 km2), The only cat management model that reduces the unowned cat population is trap, neuter, return (TNR). If you would like the Australian Government to fund a TNR program and abolish the catch and kill program, please sign the petition. Several factors are considered to have been critical to the semi-success of the programme on Marion Island. Perhaps the most important of these were --the susceptibility of the population to feline panleucopaenia virus. --the lack of high stands of vegetation, which would have rendered the hunting campaign impossible due to decreased sighting rates and hunting success. --the recolonization of preferred habitats, cleared of cats, from neighbouring suboptimal areas served to continually concentrate surviving cats in smaller areas. Other necessary factors contributing to the success of the programme were: the initial study to obtain detailed knowledge of the cat population; the absence of other terrestrial predators which would have interfered with the trapping and poisoning campaigns; the inclusion in each new team of experienced personnel from previous teams to continue the programme; and finally the resolve of the funding bodies to provide the necessary support. Several of the above-mentioned factors were peculiar to the Marion Island situation, and may not apply elsewhere. The success of the Marion Island programme may therefore not be repeatable in the same way on other islands, and this should be considered when planning control or eradication of feral cats on other islands. 1 Messing with Mother Nature: The Macquarie Island Ecosystem 13 Share lei Miss Cellania filed under:environment, Miss Cellania r haver bav .. ., .,,._LEGF.Mb" , sandv bav i - 4.. 4 • the googv a{irora •oitat 0,4 1 'akc 9rCfn 9orgC ell: $' ( ft "1. 0 ': t 0 t \ belt , _ (to fi+a0,I bay imillii %e Wm' macluIrie r- „� lila ad O ,i,,;_ US(J1 r,Ad. c, - The story of the Macquarie Island ecosystem may remind you of the song about the woman who swallowed a fly. The island was exploited mercilessly, but various plans to repair the damage had their own unintended consequences. Introducing a non-native species to control another invasive species can backfire and escalate the situation to ridiculous and tragic levels. Macquarie Island, part of the Australian state of Tasmania, is a UNESCO World Heritage Site. The island lies in a spot where tectonic plates meet, about halfway between New Zealand and Antarctica, and has unique geological significance. Macquarie is a breeding ground for aquatic life, particularly elephant seals and royal penguins. It is also home to other seals and penguins, several species of albatross and other sea birds, plus a few dozen wildlife scientists and park rangers who work there on a temporary basis.The seals and penguins had no natural enemies on the island until Europeans arrived in 1810. Since then, humans have hatched schemes to either exploit or repair the Macquarie Island ecosystem. Most of these schemes caused further problems. ��. 4 Polynesians may have inhabited the island in the distant past, but there were no people there when it was discovered by Captain Frederick Hasselborough of the ship Perseverance in 1810. He was looking for seals, and Macquarie Island proved to be a bounty. Fur seals and then elephant seals were hunted almost to extinction on the island. When the seal supply ebbed, penguins were hunted for their oil. Photograph by Wikipedia user Hullwarren. Meanwhile, any place on earth that was visited by exploring ships ran the risk of introducing rats to the ecosystem. Macquarie Island had no rodents before the seal hunting began, but mice and rats began to flourish soon afterward. Photograph by Wikipedia user Kilessan. Seafarers knew how to control rats. Most ships had a cat or two just for this purpose. Within ten years of the commencement of sealing, there were feral cats on the island. While rats are omnivores, they only become predators when the easier food is in short supply. Some species of fur seals eat penguins, but the cats were the first land-based true predators on the island. In addition to rodents, the cats ate seabirds. �g fi's. , i i� .R'� .f , ! 4 rel, ".a. �1 le +Mj°'P ' , ` ` -yr � � t ,, 10, / i' . tr i � 7i_ `'� `{1� (` . n -�/ 44.7.,;T:.,.=r ye \ s`„; 'I #... 4�C�E3 _" f William Elder of the Otago Whaling Company brought rabbits to the island as a food source in 1870.They, of course, bred like rabbits. Despite being eaten by both cats and people, the wild rabbit population soared to 130,000 on the tiny island within 100 years. Rabbits ate the grass, which allowed erosion to damage the island, and subsequent storms and tremors destroyed erosion-damaged penguin breeding grounds. Stoats, a species of weasel, were brought in to control the rabbits on Macquarie Island and in New Zealand soon after the feral population of rabbits became established. Soon the stoat population was helping itself to seabirds and their eggs. Photograph by Flickr user Markus Hoppe. fi f�Ia "., ft ttli ,' !sem ),f w t' �" ¢ Ida i. i ,, ,f'MN elitil As possums were introduced to New Zealand to raise for fur,they made their way to Macquarie Island as well.The cats weren't all that interested in possums, so they bred to the point of becoming pests along with the other introduced species. Photograph by Flickr user Peter Firminger. -...r. q. r " " I l ! . it• {pdr) ...-, „ 0. if.s . .�,= 's 1 ^ < 1 i. TT�� 111 As the populations of non-native species grew on Macquarie Island, a time bomb was ticking. When the balance of predators and food supplies reaches a certain point, predators will turn to different species to eat. The Macquarie parakeet flourished on the island until around 1880, when the rabbit supply allowed the number of feral cats to explode, and the cats branched out to eat parakeets. The last Macquarie parakeet was sighted in 1891, and the species became extinct. Of course, the feral cats, while still eating rabbits, went after other native birds. Shown is the red-crowned parakeet of New Zealand, which is similar in appearance to the Macquarie parakeet. Photograph by Thomas Mattern. I ,b 11 When Macquarie Island began to be used as a science station in the 20th century, seal hunting met its end. Antarctic explorer Douglas Mawson spearheaded the drive to declare the island a nature reserve, and it was his efforts that forced the end of sealing. The last load of oil was taken off the island in 1919. In 1933, Macquarie Island became an official wildlife preserve. —AliII" 11166.ft___ , rr yh ' 4 ild bW Meanwhile, as the seal and penguin population slowly began to recover, the island was still overrun with rabbits. Australian scientists hatched a plan to control rabbits (which were out of control in all of Australia) by introducing the virus Myxoma which causes Myxomatosis, a disease fatal to rabbits. First, rabbit fleas were brought to the island in 1968 (yet another invasive species) as a future carrier of the virus.The environment being what it was, the establishment of fleas wasn't as successful as had been hoped.The virus itself was introduced on the island in 1978.The rabbit population plunged from 130,000 to around 10,000, which is the good news. The bad news is that the remaining rabbits were the ones that were immune to the disease. 441 rtT iKA sry r ; With most of the rabbits gone, the estimated 500 feral cats on Macquarie Island knew what to do. They ate the native seabirds -up to 60,000 of them every year.The government of Australia decided the only thing to do at that point was to eliminate the feral cats. Cat hunting was encouraged beginning in 1985. The Tasmanian government intensified the program in 1997, using traps and dogs to catch the cats. The last feral cat was caught in 2000. No more cats on Macquarie Island. ter. : ... Problem solved? Oh no! With the cats gone,those 10,000 rabbits who were immune to the Myxoma virus began to multiply again.The Tasmanian government came to the conclusion that all non-native species had to be eradicated at the same time. That would be the only way to restore the nature preserve to its intended use for the original sea animals. The current eradication program began in 2010. But even that has its problems. The poison bait used to eliminate invasive mammals is working its way through the ecosystem.Just last year,we learned of the death of thousands of seabirds that ate the carcasses of the poisoned mammals. Albatross photograph by Wikipedia user Hullwarren. ' -. .. ,- :. i •f. rr � •' - ;roc ; lir r ). . tr'. _..r-- l . b Will Macquarie Island ever return to its 18th-century ecological state? Let's hope. Photograph by Wikipedia user Hullwarren. Bester et al.: Eradication of feral cats from Marion island 69 Table 1. Night hunting, trapping and poisoning effort and returns on Marion Island from 1986 to 1993. Season' Hours hunted Cats seen2 Cats shot Cats trapped No. traps No. baits Total cats kifled3 86/87 2 768 1 395 393 — — — 458 87/88 2 999 786 174 — — — 206 88/89 3 437 603 124 2 5 — 143 89/90 2 641 310 66 78 144 — 145 90/91 1 378 61 11 109 410 — 120 91/92 1 003 0 0 8 1 279 12 000 8 92/93 131 0 0 0 1 387 18 000 0 Total 14 357 3 155 768 197 1 080 11986/87 to 1989/90 data from Bloomer&Bester(1992). 1990/91 to 1993/94 data from Bester et al. (2000). `Includes resightings of some individuals. 'Includes cats shot during the day. ADDENDUM B (NEXT PAGE) Available upon Request.