Community | January 13, 2009 | 38 comments

Cat removal devastates island

source: http://edition.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/asiapcf/01/12/eco.macquarieisland/index.html

Image
TravG73
The removal of cats in 2000 caused "catastrophic" damage to the ecology of a sub-Antarctic island, a study says.

Since cats were removed from Macquarie Island, rabbit numbers have soared, and the animals are now devastating plants.
  1. groups:
    Community,   Green,   WTF,   Earth and Science,   1 more
  2. tags:
    News,  WTF,  Green,  Earth and Science,  4 more
  3.     
    |

38 comments // Cat removal devastates island

  • dariusvons
  • barkway
    • 0
      barkway  

    • Our stupid Property Manager at our HOA just had ALL the ducks removed from our lake by some toothless yahoo in a beat up old pickup stacked high with cages because of a few grumpy old farts complaining aout the duck poop on their back porches. The guy told the property manager they would be "relocated" and not killed. I checked him out, his address is a complete fake (property records) and I think the guy took them and sold them for food (among them my own pet ducks who stupidly followed the lake ducks to where he was throwing bread and snagging them). Oh and get this; the guy who "manages" our lake (with chemicals of course) told the Property Manager that the ducks were "bad for the lake." WHAT??? Since when are waterfowl bad for the water bodies they inhabit?? You can sure tell these are city-folk transplants who don't know diddley about animals or Nature (and hate both).
      I can only hope that something awful happens to this lake and development now that the ducks are gone in retaliation for having my ducks stolen from me.

    • 3 years ago
  • katedarling
    • 0
      katedarling  

    • Isn't it just simple science that a removal of a species from an eco system can and will cause dramatic change?
      I just wonder how much thought they gave to this decision, and what they predicted as the consequences (if they even did that).

    • 3 years ago
  • Elligirl
  • SHAWN_RITTIMAN
  • MavericktheMaverick
  • chokolat3warmth
  • crazykatlady
    • 0
      crazykatlady  

    • So let me get this straight:

      1) island discovered, people saw money-making opportunity in seals and pengunines for the fur trade

      2) cats brought in to eat rats that threatend to eat said sailors food

      3) rabbits brought to the island for sailors to eat

      4) a fatal disease was brought to the island to keep rabbit numbers in check

      5) too few rabbits to eat means the cats started preying on birds for food

      all this interference from people onto a previously undiscovered island resulted in...

      " a cat eradication program began in 1985 and the last cat on the island was killed in 2000"

      WTF, we should have just left everything alone to begin with.

    • 3 years ago
  • csmonut
    • 0
      csmonut  

    • Once an animal species becomes over-populated, a disease will usually come long and wipe them out. It's Mother Natures way of controlling things.
      However, when humans interfere, as they always have and will, things usually go awry.

      Islands are especially at risk. Any island, whose animal populations have evolved to be stable, become devastated once a non-native species is introduced.

      There have been attemps to remedy some places, and it appears to be working. But once again, it takes interference from humans.

      BTW...this goes for plant species, too.

    • 3 years ago
  • andieviacurrent
    • 0
      andieviacurrent  

    • in 1955 the World Health Organization( WHO) sprayed Borneo with dieldrin to kill Malaria-carrying mosquitoes. this unexpectedly caused drastic problems within the food chain. many animals died from lack of food or eating food containing dieldrin. one of the few animals that did survive were rats which then overran Borneo. To make a long story short, the WHO developed " Operation cat drop" , the parachuting of healthy cats onto the island and it worked!

    • 3 years ago
  • sgwhites
  • justright
  • charlynovember
  • m4l1c3
  • Eis4Epic
    • 0
      Eis4Epic  

    • this wouldnt have anything to do with global warming or the incease of the water flow on the picture!
      i mean sure... rabits do reproduce a lot. just send some lynx in there... there have fun

    • 3 years ago
  • covelogibbs
    • 0
      covelogibbs  
    • Image

    • Some animals, unlike cats, can never be fully removed from an ecosystem. The possum in New Zealand is a prime example.

      Possums were brought to New Zealand to start a fur industry beginning in 1837. At the height of the fur trade, trappers killed 20 million possums in a year.
      But that did not make much of a dent in possum numbers.

      Today in New Zealand there is so much pesticide, left to kill possums, in the bush (forest) that you have to be very careful where you hike. It is a hazard for humans and pets. In New Zealand possums have no natural enemies.

      New Zealand and Macquarie Island have natural enemies though, man.

    • 3 years ago
  • ChewWawa
  • thewarnerla
  • ChewWawa
    • 0
      ChewWawa  
    • thewarnerla:

      If you think that's photo-shopped check out pictures of the land surrounding Lago Guri: before and after a hydroelectic dam was decommissioned in Venezuela and allowed to flood a valley. The resulting 'islands' that formed ended up covered with lianas, an ivy like weed, sans wildlife. It was generally considered to be an ecological hell, and is proof that we live in a predator based ecological biosphere. Remove the predators, and you don't get utopia, but you get the ugliness that you see in that real photo.

    • 3 years ago
  • mhembree09
  • krush_productions
  • telcod
    • 0
      telcod  

    • I think is was Sculley who said, "You had better respect Mother Nature, because she has absolutely no respect for you." Power to the cats.

      Captain Bruce

    • 3 years ago
  • ChewWawa
    • 0
      ChewWawa  
    • Image

    • Allowing top predator species to thrive should be a main priority of conservation biology. Read the review, better yet, read the book.

    • 3 years ago
  • ClareW
    • 0
      ClareW  

    • This is an interesting story, I'm sure it'll be used in science classrooms for years to come.
      Why were the cats removed in the first place?

    • 3 years ago
  • Ervserver
  • ecto_man3
  • chowmein2012
  • Cheeeba
  • bansheewail
    • 0
      bansheewail  

    • "Why not introduce a fox or and eagle"......or two WV teenage rednecks with a shotgun, four beagles, a case of beer and thirty-minutes to spare.

    • 3 years ago
  • TravG73
  • dudeabides
  • petarro
    • 0
      petarro  

    • It's simple. Introduce whatever it is needed, then charge $2000 for people to go hunting eliminating the species that are harming, to maintain a cycle. After all, we are part of the food chain? :D

    • 3 years ago
  • denport
  • Flyan
    • 0
      Flyan  
    • denport:

      Have you not noticed how this trend of adding new animals into unfamiliar environments always backfires? If they followed your plan they'd have too many fox or eagles within 5 years and they'd have to add something else to tackle them....

    • 3 years ago
  • denport
  • iloveravi
  • katedarling
  • inspirationseeker
    • 0
      inspirationseeker  

    • Back in the 1800's a certain type of flea was introduced to the island to reduce the rabbit population.

      Since there were no more rabbits to eat, the cats started eating the island birds.

      Then they had to get rid of the cats, which took them 15 years.

      Now the rabbits have taken over the island.

      Have we learned anything yet?

    • 3 years ago
more from Community:
from the community

top videos