The City Council on Monday approved a so-called ?trap-neuter-return? program for the city, though some feral cat supporters say it still doesn?t go far enough to keep the animals from being euthanized by the animal shelter.
Colonies will be banned in city parks and the wetlands area south of town, and any approved feeding stations must have the permission of the property owner.
The shelter will work with a nonprofit group such as Forgotten Felines to manage the colonies, bringing newborn kittens in for adoption and routinely sterilizing feral cats.
After they are seen at the animal shelter, however, feral cats in good health that are unadoptable can be taken back to the colony site to live out their lives, according to the new regulations.
?By managing the colony, you?re able to reduce its numbers through attrition and proper care,? said Petaluma Police Lt. Mike Cook, who worked with feral cat organizations to craft the new ordinance.
It replaces a similar program enacted in 2004 that never took off, advocates say, because colony caretakers were afraid the shelter would euthanize any feral cats brought in for treatment or sterilization.
But with few registered colonies the past five years, the shelter had no records for most feral cats in the city, and the animals usually had to be euthanized because they weren?t socialized and weren?t wanted where they were found, city officials said.
At Monday?s meeting, cat advocates expressed optimism for a new relationship with the city, but questioned some provisions of the ordinance.
Jennifer Kirchner of Forgotten Felines said advocates are concerned that colony caretakers not registered with the shelter could face legal action.
?As it stands today, we still believe that feral cats and their caregivers are not fully protected,? she said.
City officials, however, said the burden will be on volunteers to unite colony caretakers and make the trap-neuter-return program work.
?I think it?s important that we not try to be the feral cat police, going to each house and managing every feral cat,? Mayor Pamela Torliatt said.
?We are not interested in reaching into back yards or expanding our enforcement,? Cook told the council.
The new feral cat language in the city?s animal regulations preserves a buffer area around Shollenberger Park and the wetlands in the southeast part of the city where cat colonies are prohibited. Colonies also aren?t allowed in city parks.
Wetlands docents and bird enthusiasts lobbied to keep the provision, saying feral cats pose a threat to wildlife.
?We cannot have cats in the wetlands,? docent Bob Dyer said. He said the number of feral cats found in Shollenberger Park has declined since the ban was put in place five years ago, ?to the benefit of the wetlands.?
Councilmembers unanimously endorsed the changes regarding feral cats, but differed when it came to another part of the new ordinance ? allowing potbellied pigs and beekeeping within city limits.
The issue of potbellied pigs came to light in 2007, when a Petaluma couple, Angelique and Bill Fry, received a violation notice for having more than one of the animals at their home.
They urged the city to update its regulations, saying potbellied pigs should be treated the same as dogs ? four of which are allowed per home.
?It?s time for Petaluma?s potbellied pigs to be treated as equal to other domestic pets,? Bill Fry told the council.
However, the council approved the recommendation of its animal advisory committee that no more than two pigs be allowed per home.
A third major change to the ordinance allows beekeeping in the city limits if bee colonies are framed, kept a ?safe distance? from pedestrians and don?t create a nuisance.
?We don?t believe it?s going to become an enforcement issue for animal services,? Cook said.
Beekeepers said having more bees inside the city will aid in the pollination of plants and garden crops. The council also received a letter from a resident who worried that allowing backyard bee colonies could pose a greater threat to those allergic to the insects.
Most of the council went along with the addition of potbellied pigs and beekeeping, but Councilmember David Glass voted no.
?I don?t have confidence that this can work out with the potbellied pigs and the bees so as to not constitute a nuisance,? he said. ?But others do, and I defer to that.?
(Contact Corey Young at corey.young@arguscourier.com)
UPDATED: Please read and follow our commenting policy: