Overzealous game warden should be stopped
DEAR DR. FOX: One of my good friends in Minnesota just completed her training to become a wildlife rehabilitator. Now a game warden in North Dakota is fighting her over a baby duck she took from North Dakota.
There is also a woman in Fargo who has taken in baby birds for about 30 years. She has about a 90 percent rehabilitation success record. Well, this game warden got wind of her, raided her house and took all the birds, some of them in various stages of recovery and others still fledglings. He then fined her and her veterinarian.
My land is a wildlife haven, and I have spent 20 years making it that way. Now when I raise a baby robin, which my mother taught me how to do, I may be raided by the cops. (My mom wrote a pamphlet for the North Dakota Audubon Society years ago titled “How to Care for Baby Birds and Animals.”)
This is North Dakota. Sometimes it’s torturous to live out here, where I seem to be the only animal lover. Everyone shoots everything; shelterbelts are clear-cut in the middle of nesting season; people have cat factories at their farms; and dogs are full of ticks and cockleburs. It’s sickening. — J.Z., Ayr, N.D.
DEAR J.Z.: Some readers may find your letter inappropriate for my column, if not offensive. But what is truly offensive is how the land and animals, wild and domestic, are mistreated in much of rural America.
The fact remains, as I emphasize in my new book, “Healing Animals and the Vision of One Health,” that our physical, mental and spiritual health and long-term economic well-being depend on us keeping animals and the environment healthy.
Years ago, Arizona Sen. Barry Goldwater intervened when the state Game & Fish department confiscated a baby quail, I think it was, that a boy had rescued. Surely the governor of North Dakota or some caring members of the state legislature could intercede and restrain this overzealous, if not uncaring, game warden from causing further harm.
Wildlife, including what are often called trash and nuisance species, may be the “property” of the state, but that does not mean the state has no responsibility with regard to their health and well-being. The state has no right to prevent experienced, if not licensed, citizens from caring for sick and injured animals, especially when there are few or no state-run wildlife rescue and rehab facilities.
DEAR DR. FOX: Please help settle an argument I am having with the staff at our local animal shelter. They insist that any kitten(s) I decide to adopt must be spayed/neutered and vaccinated before I can take them home.
I say that’s too stressful (after reading about vaccination risks on your website). I would bring the kitten(s) in to be spayed/neutered after a few weeks, getting them used to living with me first. What is your opinion? — M.L., Miami
DEAR M.L.: I understand and respect the adoption protocols of animal shelters and local humane societies, which have evolved because so many people never followed through on the promise to have their animals spayed/neutered after adoption. I also agree with you.
There should be some flexibility and room for negotiation with the administrators of adoption protocols. I would have you pay in advance for the spay/neuter and allow you to bring in your kitten(s) for the operation after they have lived with you for a few weeks.
Part of the adoption fee should also include the cost of a home visit by shelter staff to check up on the care of adopted cats and dogs. Many shelters and pet-fostering/adoption networks do this, while others just seem to want to adopt to anyone regardless, because they lack adequate funding, staffing or space for all the animals they receive every week.
DEAR DR. FOX: I adopted two kittens from our town shelter. They were about 10 weeks old and from the same litter. Now they are 1 year old and I want to thank you for writing in your column that it’s best to have two cats, ideally from the same litter. Jim and Jane get on so well as playmates — they always sleep together, groom each other and look out for each other.
One question, though: Is there more than the fact that one is male and one female (both neutered) to account for their very different personalities? Jim is more the introvert, while Jane is the tease and into everything. — J.M., Alexandria, Va.
DEAR J.M.: I appreciate your confirmation that raising two cats together is better than having just one cat deprived of ever realizing and enjoying all that it means to be a cat.
Cats “mirror” each other’s behavior and provide reciprocal social enrichment and emotional stimulation. As for their very different personalities, one can rule out environmental influences because they were raised together. So it is primarily their genetic differences that determine how they react and initiate responses, as well as their likes, dislikes and motivations.
The more one gets to know different cats and becomes attuned to their subtle behaviors and to their likes, dislikes and quirks, the more one realizes what complex personalities they possess, often paralleling the kinds of differences we see in our own species!
Send all mail to Dr. Michael Fox in care of Universal Uclick, 1130 Walnut St., Kansas City, MO 64106. The volume of mail received prohibits personal replies, but questions and comments of general interest will be discussed in future columns.
Visit Dr. Fox’s website at www.twobitdog.com/DrFox.