From the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature
Related Categories: California | Environment & Forest Defense
Nathan Winograd talks birds, cats and Nazis
by Squiggly the cat
Wednesday Apr 14th, 2010 6:47 PM
April 13, 2010 Nathan Winograd a so called "NoKill" guru gave a talk at the LA County Bar Association about birds, cats and TNR (trap, neuter, return of cats to outdoor feral colonies). As an animal law student and cat lover I thought I would learn about the issues, get some CE credit and eat some Vegan food. Instead I was forced to listen to two hours of Winograd rabble rousing and spewing hate speech about environment groups such as Audubon. He insisted that they were just kitten killing Nazis. Besides that the food was 45 minutes late and there were no forks.
The audience consisted of maybe five lawyers there to get CE credit and 60 older cat ladies. They treated Winograd as if he were the messiah coming to save kittens. They hissed and boo'd every time he mentioned the "enemy." They giggled and mewed in delight when he talked about the "TNR revolution" that will save all the cats in the world. I felt like I was in a Baptist church where the priest has a constant back and forth with the church goers.

Winograd's talk and power point presentation started off by calling the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) and all animal shelters "killers." His believer's hissed and boo'd at the enemy on cue. He then started throwing out false and unreferenced statements to "prove" his points. He stated that "cats don't hurt the environment. TNR actually solves all the problems that the bird people say it creates. Even the health department endorses TNR. The only TNR hold-outs are the environment and bird groups." More hissing and growling from the crowd of angry cat ladies.

The talk was supposed to be about a case entitled Urban Wildlands et al vs the City of Los Angeles. It was supposed to deal with the legal implications of doing city-wide and endorsed TNR without a California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) environmental review. Urban Wildlands had sued the City of LA because they were doing TNR without doing the study. They stated feral cat colonies harm the environment. The environment groups won the lawsuit. Nathan Winograd here is now trying to intervene in the lawsuit to try to change the verdict. He lost his first round in court but of course he doesn't mention that at the meeting. I had to look it up online after class. He does state that his case is weak because local TNR people did not intervene sooner. He said if he loses, it will be on their heads. If he wins, he deserves all the glory as the one true god of cats.

Instead of talking about the lawsuit he spent the first hour and a half attacking everyone who does not agree with him. HSUS is the devil. LA Animal Services are murderers. The environment groups eat newborn kittens alive. Okay, I added that last part but I bet he had to bite his tongue to keep from saying that. He was on a roll.

He didn't let facts or common sense stand in his way. Out of one side of his mouth he said "domestic feral cats are identical to African wild cats. They are supposed to be in the wild." Yes, in AFRICA, not in the US in parks, shopping mall parking lots and wildlife sanctuaries eating endangered bird eggs. His minions didn't seem to mind or care that he contradicted himself. They meowed in unison "you're right!"

He went on to say that "cats belong outdoors. It's better for them. Indoor cats get fat, get diabetes and die." He followed it up by saying "if you live next to a freeway of course, don't let your cat out." No one seemed to notice the hypocrisy of his statements. I'd rather have my cat alive and indoors then killed by a dog or run over by a truck outdoors. I'm sure my cat Squiggly would agree. And FTR he's not fat.

The environment groups' main concerns are feral cats killing birds and other wildlife. Winograd said that birds make up "only 5% of a cat's diet. Cats actually weed out over populated birds. They are assisting Darwin with evolution." I don't think the birds feel the same way about it. The bird groups definitely do not. If my neighbor's dog's diet was "only" made up of 5% kittens, I would have a problem with that.

There have been many independent peer reviewed research studies which show that TNR colony cats eat birds and wildlife, negatively affect bird populations, spread disease and contaminate water supplies. TNR was supposed to be a way in which the population of feral cat colonies would go to zero within one generation or about seven years. Instead the colonies have grown as people continue to dump cats and not all cats get neutered. Despite this Everest sized mountain of research Winograd said ALL of the researchers are just lying. "They have an agenda. They are intellectually dishonest. They are masquerading as science." He cites nothing to support his theory of mass lying among many researchers in many different countries. The cat ladies didn't care. They mewed in agreement. I think I even heard some purring.

His next argument made me hold back the chuckles. He said "some birds are killed when they fly into windows. Should we outlaw windows? Should we remove all windows?" Um, Winograd, death by windows is not the issue. Death by cats is the issue. Using Winograd-logic, some cats fall off cliffs. Should we level the earth? Some cats are hit by cars. Should we get rid of all cars? His lack of logic didn't matter as the cat ladies meowed "you're right!"

To show how "unfair" the bird groups were being he said "what about worms and caterpillars? Shouldn't we save them from birds?" I felt like I was at a debate for three year olds. He continued with "cats are just the scapegoats for the damage caused by man." Let me get this right. A man went into his backyard, killed and ate a bird, stuffed the feather's in a cat's mouth then posted that photo on his Facebook page with the word "murderer" under it?

His next argument had me scratching my balding head. He said "natural selection is survival of the fittest.That is what cats are doing. They are better suited to survive in these areas than the native wildlife. It's wrong to label them 'alien.' It's inhumane to get rid of them, and it doesn't work."

So if I were to buy some bears, release them in a local park, Winograd would not have a problem if they killed and ate everyone. He thinks that would just be "natural selection." Of course if a bear ate a kitten, he would call the bear a "murderer" and send his cat ladies to claw it to death.

One last little illogical bit of Winograd speak. He said the environment groups state that cats could give people rabies. Winograd says that is not the case. Based on Winograd logic and total lack of evidence, he said "cats should actually worry about getting rabies from us." More giddy kitty laughter from the forum.

His next comment was very irksome. I'm sure the people whom he labeled will not be pleased. As a Jew whose grandparents were in the Nazi concentration camps, these words were way below the belt. He said "environmental groups want to protect one species over another. Doesn't that remind you of the Germans in WW II who wanted to protect their own and exterminate the others?" He basically called the environmental groups Nazi's. The cat ladies of course all loudly growled, "They're Nazi's! Nazi's!"

I was actually hoping to learn a little bit about CEQA and animal law but unfortunately he talked about kitties and Nazi's so much that there wasn't any time left. You could tell who were just lawyers there for some CE credit and food. They had uncomfortably puzzled looks on their faces as they quickly exited the room. Some even left during his class. They came to get some CE credit and instead were forced to listen to the ranting of a lunatic and hate speech. I really hope the LA County Bar Association vets their speakers better in the future.

Signed, Squiggly the cat (I hear Winograd likes to threaten to sue anyone who doesn't agree with him so I had my cat type this out for me)

Comments  (Hide Comments)

by Kitty Kat
Wednesday Apr 14th, 2010 7:21 PM
It was actually a book signing disguised as a continuing education class. He did it to sell books and get more PR. In fact, that is why he filed the intervention. He wanted his name in the press.
by LA TNR person
Wednesday Apr 14th, 2010 8:59 PM
Nathan Winograd was alerted to a possible lawsuit by Audubon before it was even filed. We asked him for help as he is an attorney and knows that TNR works. After it was filed we again pleaded for help. He said he was busy with other issues. He abandoned us even though we followed all his TNR instructions. He was busy trying to sell his book and have cities pay him to consult. Every month we called and emailed him, pleaded with him, begged him. He said "they won't win." Well, they won in December 2009.

His book sales were falling. No one was paying him to consult. All of a sudden in February he decided to help us. In retrospect we realize he used this issue to try to sell his book and consulting services. Plus, his main supporters were TNR people.

For him to say that it is our fault for not legally intervening earlier is dishonest. We begged him. TNR people have no funds for lawyers. He's a California lawyer. If we lose this case, it's on his head, for not stepping up earlier. Shame on Nathan for not helping all the helpless cats earlier. If they die, it will be on his head. I no longer support Nathan Winograd. He uses us for accolades and money when it suits him. He does not care about the cats. I'm ashamed for ever supporting him. He is a fraud to animals.
by seabee4x
Thursday Apr 15th, 2010 12:07 AM
The LA Bar Association did something incredibly irresponsible here.

First, Winograd has been involved with a group of people who have terrorized others, vandalized, lit off smoke bombs, etc in support of him and to get him a job. We are talking about things that have been termed terrorist activity.

Second, Winograd is more recently involved with one of the most corrupt lobbyists in the country and

This is where Winograd is getting his slandering tactics from, as well as the tactic of just making things up, falsifying statistics, and the rest of the fabricating, as well as the shilling for contributions to himself by slandering other groups.

Consumer Freedom is a lobbyist for puppy mills, dog fighters, animal killing corporations, etc.

Here is one other lobby they are connected to

These are really really bad lobbies that support the worst kind of animal abuse in the name of money.

Winograd has been getting supported, having press releases issues for him, and literally getting promoted by these lobbies.

This is what is behind Winograd's play acting. This is an attack on real, valid humane organizations built on a base of trying to manipulate naive people who don't understand his true agenda.

Winograd is involved with the interests of tobacco lobbyists who also lobby for animal killing corporations.

Someone lied about this situation to trick the Bar Association into letting him appear to shill for his associates, and sell himself.
by Steve
Thursday Apr 15th, 2010 5:47 AM
Perhaps we need to show some compassion for Nathan and the other crazy cat ladies. There's a brain parasite Toxoplasma gondii you can pick up from cat feces and whose cysts embed in the brain. In a rat study, these cysts caused the rats to lose their natural avoidance of cat smells (urine). It actually caused them to seek out cats. Because, you see, these parasites need to get back to their cat host to sexually reproduce. So.....crazy cat ladies simply can't help themselves. Their parasites are driving their behavior and telling them that they 'need more cats'. It's sad really.

by No Kill - No Way
Thursday Apr 15th, 2010 1:52 PM
Dog gone it, Steve, we wanted to keep that quiet so people would just think they are crazy not sick!
by Todd
Thursday Apr 15th, 2010 5:15 PM
I thought his most ridiculous argument was the claim that we should not value native species and eco systems. He claimed that this is a quaint idea whose time has passed, and that after all, we all arrived on the scene somehow. Winograd clearly has not bothered to think this through. CEQA, NEPA, CESA and ESA are in whole or in part based on the imperative to preserve bio-diversity and native species. If there is no value to preserving native species, then there is no point in environmental protection at all, because even if some species or systems are destroyed, they will be replaced by other opportunistic species. Overall though, I totally agree with the premise of the article that this was a big waste of time, not educational at all, and not even good advocacy, as the arguments did not pass the straight face test.
by Got His Number
Thursday Apr 15th, 2010 6:18 PM
When you look at his failures in Philly, Indy, Rancho Cucamonga, etc., you see that his program is not friendly to the shelter animals. Their suffering increased with his program. He claims success in Washoe/Reno when actually Washoe County slapped him in the face last year with a vote not to use the term "no kill".
"After hearing that current practices ensure that few healthy animals die at the Regional Animal Control Services Center, the Washoe County Commission on Tuesday agreed not to adopt an official "no kill" policy. In 2008, Washoe County animal control euthanized 188 dogs and 238 cats because the center had run out of space, and no one wanted those animals, Schneider said.
"There were a lot of pit bulls. There's just not enough homes who want them," Schneider said. "The Humane Society is not going to take all pit bulls."" So he is claiming that the Nevada Humane Society is doing such a great job when they are turning away pit bulls which according him get a "bad rap". Does that sound successful to you?

You have to realize that Winograd has only handled about 10,000 animals in his entire sheltering career. He was director of the San Fran SPCA shelter for only a week and a half. He does misrepresent his credentials when he says he managed that shelter, he didn't even get his feet wet really. And Tompkins County only handles about 3000 animals a year and he was there about 3 years. Not exactly the credentials of an expert.
by admirer
Thursday Apr 15th, 2010 8:29 PM
Why in the world is a first class, extremely intelligent lawyer and animal lover like Orly Degani representing Nathan Winograd and his lies? Did Winograd con her into believing his bull? Intelligent ethical animal lovers should not hang out with morally corrupt animal abusers like Winograd. Overcrowding animals until they die is animal abuse. Winograd does not care about animals at all. He only cares about his ego and money.
by Tim Steinbeiser
Friday Apr 16th, 2010 4:10 AM
Please come to NJ to practice law when you graduate. We need animal law specialists with your attitude here rather than the misguided lawyers we have fighting to keep every cat alive through TNR. The No-Kill movement is a nobel goal but there are just too many companion animals born every day to place into responsible homes for this to work. No-Kill shelters turn animals away at the door.......what do you think happens to these animals? The owners abandon them? Confine them to a cage or basement? Our shelters must accept all unwanted domestic animals and let the professionals decide their fate. Euthanasia is sad but it is not inhumane.
by Katie Burroughs
Friday Apr 16th, 2010 8:57 AM
Wonderful article, and Squiggly is a brillent author. Thanks for sharing with us what we already knew about Wind-bag-rad.
by Ed Muzika
Saturday Apr 17th, 2010 11:29 AM
Actually more than half of the attendees were lawyers, including the city atty, county atty, atty for urban wildlands. Even the interim gm for laas was there. And bickhart. No one was chanting. And most of what she wrote was a lie, right down to her being vegan and a cat lover.
by just me
Saturday Apr 17th, 2010 3:13 PM
I recognized the following people at the event: Christy Metropole, Orly Degani, Bob Ferber, Jim Bickhart, lawyer for plaintiff Baback. It was mainly older female cat people, very few lawyers. There was hissing, booing, growling and name calling going on from the crowd. The quotes in the article sound right. I too was shocked at what the speaker said. Two people left during the meeting.
by Honesty is best
Saturday Apr 17th, 2010 3:26 PM
Nathan Winograd wrote that post which he signed "Ed Muzika." Muzika did not write that post. Shame on Nathan for lying about what happened at the event and for hiding behind someone else. Why not just post in your own real name.
by Nathan Winograd
Saturday Apr 17th, 2010 3:28 PM
I Nathan Winograd was at my own meeting. This article is 1000% correct representation of the events that transpired.

Yours truly,
Nathan Winograd

p.s. I'm not vegan
by Not Nathan
Saturday Apr 17th, 2010 3:31 PM
Nathan didn't write the post directly above/below this one. Just trying to show you that Nathan just signed Muzika's name.
by Ed Muzika
Saturday Apr 17th, 2010 5:12 PM
The comment I made earlier was sent to me by Nathan earlier. I posted his comment to me. He did not sign my name to his comment.
by a reader
Sunday Apr 18th, 2010 1:05 PM
Nathan says these exact same things in his book, word for word.
by Ed Muzika
Sunday Apr 18th, 2010 1:42 PM
From Nathan's blog:

The idea that some animals have more value than others comes from a troubling belief that lineage determines the value of an individual animal. This belief is part of a growing and disturbing movement called “Invasion Biology.” The notion that “native” species have more value than “non-native” ones finds its roots historically in Nazi Germany, where the notion of a garden with native plants was founded on nationalistic and racist ideas “cloaked in scientific jargon.” This is not surprising. The types of arguments made for biological purity of people are exactly the same as those made for purity among animals and plants.

ike Fagerlund, I agree that it is wrong and obscene to label any species an “alien” on its own planet and to target that species for extermination. Disguised under the progressive mantle “environmentalism” , this emerging field of pseudo-science should more accurately be labeled “biological xenophobia.”

As you can see, he is commenting on the enviros valuing "native" over "invading" cat species, and comparing that to Nazi type thinking of racial purity and higher value. Did this argument escape his detractors? Is it too subtle?
by Ed Muzika
Sunday Apr 18th, 2010 1:46 PM
This would be another form of specism, or favoring one species over another for one reason or another. Winograd is questioning that line of thinking, and the rationale and science behind it.

I contacted some of the Audubon groups some time ago, personally, trying to establish a dialogue. The few I talked to did not brook compromise. Their only solution was to round up and kill all feral and domestic roaming cats.
by me
Sunday Apr 18th, 2010 1:52 PM
Here are the pages in his book "Redemption" which say the same things as the article. The Chapter is "Witch Hunt" which deals with TNR.

pg 71 Nathan states domestic cats are identical to the African wild cat

pg 73 Outdoor cats are healthier than indoor. They do better outdoors.

pg 75 Rabies comments, word for word, cats should worry about getting rabies from us.

pg 77 Bird comments

pg 78 Faulty biased research comment

pg 79 Nazi comment.
by me
Sunday Apr 18th, 2010 3:06 PM
Nathan said the same thing in a seminar on nokill in May 2008.

and here in a Best Friends interview

None of this is new from Nathan. How can he deny that he said these things which are in his book, his blog and he said it at many other seminars?
by Winograd logic
Sunday Apr 18th, 2010 9:07 PM
I think I am understanding Winograd's keen sense of logic. Permit me if you may. Feel free to add on.

Domestic dogs are directly related to wild wolves and coyotes. They belong in the wild. Let's release all dogs into the wild city streets. Let's repeal the leash laws while we're at it. You ever see a wild wolf wearing a leash?

If the "wild" dogs we set free kill cats, mutilate children, eat old ladies, that's okay. It's just survival of the fittest and natural selection. Darwin would be proud.

Dogs are healthier in the wild city streets, especially long haired dachshunds and the hairless chinese crested living in snow country or the desert. If they were indoors, they'd just watch Oprah, get fat and die.

You just have to give a dog one rabies shot for life. If the new wild packs of dogs start spreading rabies and we all die, that's just natural selection again. Team rabies wins!

Feral cats have the right to live. Birds, wildlife and humans of course do not.

Feral cats have the right to live, even if they are suffering without food, water, shelter, medical care, neutering or protection from cars, dogs, coyotes.

A suffering, outdoor, injured, ill, emaciated, dehydrated, dying cat is better than a humanely euthanized cat any day.

Speciesism is wrong. We should not value birds over cats, but it's okay to value cats over birds, wildlife, humans, common sense and basic logic.

Anyone who prefers one species over another is a Nazi. As I Winograd prefer cats over birds, wildlife and humans, I am therefore a Nazi. Heil kitty!

Outdoor feral cats don't harm the environment. They just eat birds, wildlife, leave contaminated feces, urine, spread disease and can contaminate the water.

All the research and scientists are wrong just because I, Nathan, say so.

Cats eat birds and that's okay. It's survival of the fittest. Chinese people eat cats. Kill the Chinese!

by Just Wondering
Tuesday Apr 20th, 2010 8:02 PM
I find it strange that when Winograd moved back to California, he didn't reinstate his license to practice law. We all know that legal services are the first and foremost thing that the humane community needs. Cases such as this one is an example. Yet he still has his license as inactive. Look at Kern County. The attorney that filed that case was awarded her attorney fees, so he could be making a good living and helping the animals. Just kinda makes one wonder what the problem is that he can't put an active status on his license. An attorney told me once that often an attorney on the verge of being disciplined is given an opportunity to "police themselves" and put their license on inactive for a certain amount of time, rather than face full disciplinary action that could completely destroy their future. It just is a little too strange that Winograd would continue to leave his license inactive when 1. he needs money and 2. how much more he could do to help animals with it.
by jt
Sunday May 2nd, 2010 8:38 AM
I worked in Indiana for 8 years as an animal control officer. Nathan was 'hired' to come and speak to the county residents. 2 weeks later, we were all fired and replaced by the 'no animal should die' animal lovers and the shelter was turned into a closed door county run no kill animal facility. Our adoption rate was 75 percent. 75 percent is hard work and a whole lot of time volunteering to transport and meet with rescue groups. Now, the animals in need just sit inside the shelter waiting years for adoption and the others are turned away to end up on the street. Good job Winograd and the people of porter county.
by Honesty Helps
Tuesday May 4th, 2010 7:03 AM
I would like to invite the former AC officer to my blog on exposing "No Kill". to report on your experience with this devient movement. Shame to hear that Porter is now a closed door shelter. Those rejected are left to die horrible deaths on the streets while the morbid "No Kill'ers" sit on their butts, patting themselves on the back that they are saving them all. Bullshit, the "No Kill'ers" have caused more suffering than imaginable.
by Tessy Parsons
Friday Aug 27th, 2010 11:08 PM
No one is addressing the issue of history. In the last 450 years, the domestic cat caused the vast majority of all recorded extinctions.
The second agent of extinction was the European rat. When European fishermen and explorers inadvertently transported and introduced the domestic cat to the Earth's island ecosystems, specie after specie fell extinct. In 1997, an Australian member of parliament called for the total eradication of all domestic HOUSE cats on that island. Cats caused thirteen extinctions of native, indigenous species of fauna. However, Australians are more protective of their native, indigenous species. Upon its introduction to New Zealand, the domestic cat cause eight extinctions of birds, and many extinct species' extinctions were left unrecorded. When introduced to the tiny Guadulupe Island, southwest of San Diego, domestic cats pushed extinct three species of native birds, including the storm petrel, and one lizard specie, and birds are considered a difficult prey specie for cats to slaughter. History paves a bloody and sad path of vast extinction with the major cause, the domestic cat. Cats caused over twice as many extinctions as the rat. Though the mongoose is cited as causal to Hawaii's extinctions, by the time of its transportation to the island ecosystem, cats and rats had caused the majority of the island's extinction of biological diveristy.
by former Hoosier
Monday Sep 13th, 2010 5:25 PM
The tradional path of the Winograd boobs is to fire all existing staff and reboot with newbie's not from an AC background. Please go to the webpage and read his garbage about reforming animal control. It would have been better if they had read it before.
by I am no kill no way
(nokillnoway [at] Monday Sep 13th, 2010 5:59 PM
I did not write the comment to Steve so there must be 2of us...
by no kill no way
(nokillnoway [at] Monday Sep 13th, 2010 6:10 PM
I put the url in wrong before, sorry.Winobrat can scramble your brain. My blog comes out of Sacramento, for a local survior of No Kill check out Advice from Oreo.It is a Reno based blog with solid west coast contributors.
by karen
Monday Sep 13th, 2010 7:58 PM
I have met most of the people who are cat fanatics and they do yowl!! Terrible manners and absolutely not one coherent sentence from their lips, shall fall. ps. loved the wind bag rad title, very appropos
by disgusted
Monday Sep 13th, 2010 8:08 PM
I don't believe Ed wrote on this blog or he would be bragging about it on his. Anybody notice Ed doesn't toss Winograd around now that they have Barnette. Winobrat 's like the vultures, he eats off the leftovers.
I came across this post searching for "Nathan Winograd jerk" (plus NW rude, NW asshole, NW control freak, etc.). While I'm obviously not fond of him based on my search word choices, I must say that your logic is even worse than his. But I have found that the bird crazies are the craziest of them all so that may explain part of it.

First of all, "feral" and "domestic" are common terms used to describe two completely different types of cats and they are dealt with completely differently. TNR takes cats who are ALREADY in the wild and they are put BACK in the wild after they are altered. So, the bear comparison is a bit silly.

But the main difference between the cats and bears and birds is that the latter two aren't trapped and killed in shelters and piled in garbage cans by the millions. If you are having trouble understanding why this bothers some people, I would suggest you visit a high kill shelter and ask to see the back rooms and trash areas. You will find dozens of garbage cans at any given moment filled with dead dogs and cats. Highly adoptable, friendly, loving animals. This still may not bother you, it just doesn't bother some people. Jeffrey Dahmer would not have flinched. You may not either.

But for those who kinda sorta have a problem with humans who like to play God and kill things for their own amusement and/or power trip or just for the heck of it, we like to see that the cats are returned to THEIR NATURAL ENVIRONMENT after being "fixed" so that they do not reproduce and cause more to end up at the hands of God impersonating humans. And if little old ladies dump off more in feral areas, it is clearly evident because the unaltered cats will have both ears in tact. So, the crazy TNR folks who don't like to exterminate cats can easily spot them and have them fixed.

As far as birds...they aren't rounded up and taken to shelters to be exterminated either. They get to be free. Well, until some idiot in camouflage decides to shoot them to remind himself he still has testicles. Birds in the wild get to remain there unless they become prey or killed by a drunk redneck. You know, the way nature intended.

Your comparisons aren't even logical. Feral cats and a wild birds are just living in the wild as nature intended. Its not like transporting bears to Disneyland.

It isn't our right or our place to kill them just for being a nuisance. Because what is a nuisance to one is beauty to another. And they are living beings with every much of a right to live here as we have. But we also have the right to protect ourselves from harm if an animal or human threatens us. But most of the time, these cats are not threatening humans in any way. Birds are a different story...but that is the law of nature. Carnivores have no choice. They gotta eat.

One last little tidbit...."Feral" cats should remain free in their natural environment and "domestic" cats are the ones we should keep away from highways. You may have dozed off and missed that part. Persians with jingling collars don't have a lot of street cred. Its sort of like how wolves do better in the wild and a Yorkie is better off on a couch.

Okay, sorry to interrupt the year old hate fest with logic and facts. I know what a buzz kill it is.

by good thoughts
Sunday Sep 18th, 2011 2:47 PM
@ Chris, your feelings are appreciated, but as a biologist I need to make you aware that a domestic cat turned loose is not a "wildcat' The euthanasia of any animal is sad at best, and unowned cats are a very high risk group.
That doesn't give them any more permission to destroy species than say my ferrets to be deposited in a non-native envirionment. BTW my ferrets are from the wild, so they could by the specious logic of Mr. Winograd, be forgiven for killing cats. The No Kill promotion is solely about cats, any other species is irrelevant. When the cats are poisoned by the hundreds, like the dogs of India, it will be the Winograds of the world who set them up.
by me
Tuesday Sep 20th, 2011 6:47 PM
As someone who has dealt with feral cats, I can safely say that they are not "wild" animals. First of all, in a natural, wild setting, there is a thing called the 'cycle of life' I learned about it in 3rd grade. Maybe they don't teach it anymore. In either case, there is a cycle that goes with the seasons. At one point the predators become so overpopulated that they can no longer survive off of the prey that has been hunted to near non-existence. This is when the predators begin to die off, or move out of the area until their population is such that they can no longer keep up with the rapidly reproducing prey animals. As prey animals become more prevalent, the predator's population begins to rise again. It's this ever-ongoing circle. This doesn't work so well for cats, because in the wild, you can only live off of the land. There are no 'crazy cat ladies' to feed you. I've also dealt with plenty of feral cats and have been able to get them to be 'domestic'. You set out food for them in the morning and evening, in a month or two they start letting you pet them, and then you've got a best friend. These animals ARE NOT WILDLIFE. They are domestic animals that require humans to survive.

Also, in your response to the bear/cat reference, I believe you misunderstood what the point was. In that arguement the individual was following Nathan's logic on Darwinism/survival of the fittest.

There are thousands of cats being euthanized because they are not being forced to live in the wild, but allowed to live off of humans. They are, in areas where one is unfortinant to have to live near a 'colony', which is as much a neusence as coyotes can be, or rats, if their population is allowed to go unchecked.
by been there
Wednesday Sep 21st, 2011 10:27 AM
I have lived in apartment complexs in the south where people were whacking ferals with baseball bats. Setting out poisoned food was also suspected. I love cats, I own 3, they stay in my house or in the enclosure they reach through their cat doors. Colonies stink, spread disease and promote hoarding. Nathan just never lives in one place long enough to deal with the reality of them.
by Squiggly the cat
Tuesday Feb 12th, 2013 9:45 AM
Thank you Squiggly, your article was nicely written. I am really glad that you got more then just credits being at this class. Winograd is like a virus. TNR has been going on for years and it is not working. I have studied and followed these colonies and I can tell you that these cats suffer. The so called people who "care" for them must be blind when they go to feed these cats. I have found cats dying with ants crawling all over them. I have watch as a cat walk by dragging a gangrene leg behind it. I have seen first hand what a cat looks like after it has been set on fire by people who think it's funny. Winograd and his cool-aide drinking buddies think that these cats are happy.

Please continue to share what you have learned and maybe someday humanity will decide that these cats deserve better then this.
by Felix Pepper
Saturday Dec 7th, 2013 6:57 PM
Nathan Winograd is an arrogant putz who continues to exhibit every negative characteristic trait mentioned above. Now he is mocking people for their belief in the Rainbow Bridge. He is truly vile but his muppets continue to drink his kool-aid. Not sure who is scarier-- him or his acolytes.
by Terry Ward
Sunday Feb 23rd, 2014 4:20 PM
This article is one small step down the Winograd crazy-ladder.
These were apparently the good old days before Winograd's rhetoric ... and the murder word ...tossed around amongst his muppets more times than a Syrian news bulletin.