Accused of Trespassing, Tampering With Equipment After Freeing Cat
My question is about cats that have been previously owned and then let go to fend for themselves. Ten years ago I got married and bought a house. Soon after, a cat started coming around that was very friendly. I started feeding the cat. Five years ago another cat found its way to my house. So I started feeding that cat. (Both cats are fixed and declawed) I also owned 2 cats that were kept inside my home. As I started meeting my neighbors, the one said that some one's cats have been eating the cute chipmunks in his yard. He then proceeded to tell me, that he was going to poison, shoot or hang my cats from his shed. Since that time, I have not spoken a word to this man. Now 9 years later, I get a knock on my door from animal control. I gave my name and description of my outside cats. Two weeks after that, I woke up to go outside and feed my cats. I could not find one of them. I walked around the neighborhood calling her, and soon found her crying in a cage in my neighbor's yard. Yes, the one that had threatened me before. So I automatically opened the cage and grabbed my cat. The neighbor came out and said he is charging me with trespassing and animal control is charging me with tampering with their equipment. I thought seeing my cat in this cage on his lawn, that he was going to kill her. I did not realize it was animal control's cage until later that day when they came out, along with an officer. I have since learned that in my township, animals are not allowed to be in the neighborhood left unattended. Since then, I have brought my 2 cats inside my home. Am I in serious trouble on the trespassing charge?
Re: Don't Animals Have Rights Too
In almost EVERY jurisdiction in the country, animals that are allowed to roam out of your yard (mostly cats, as in your case), will be considered nuisance animals if they enter neighboring property - and thus can be trapped and even killed by those property owners, so long as the killing is done in a manner where the animal experiences minimal suffering and the death is quick. Poisoning is a violation because it can contaminate groundwater, and kill/impact other forms of wildlife, like birds, which (with a few exceptions) are protected at the federal level. Shooting or breaking their necks, on the other hand, are generally accepted methods so long as they fall within local rules regarding firearms. Once the cat leaves your yard, it's fair game.
The neighbor and animal control can make police reports. It'll be up to the DA to decide whether or not an actual criminal case will be brought. If such charges ARE brought, and if you have an otherwise clean criminal history, fines and probation are the most likely outcome.
Re: Don't Animals Have Rights Too
Thank you for your response. New Jersey law also has something called neuter/spay and release program. Wouldn't that also be taken into consideration in court? And nowhere on the trap did it say property of animal control. I am going to voice this information in court to the judge. I think it should have been clearly stated whose cage it was. I think maybe animal rights should be involved in this fight. I am not the only one in New Jersey who is doing this or for that matter, in the world.
Re: Don't Animals Have Rights Too
Wait a darn minute.
You want to make a federal case out of the fact that your two outdoor cats were captured on someone else's land?
While you have animal control on the phone, ask what the life span of an outside versus an inside cat is.
YOUR want to have cats flowing through the neighborhood like a fuzzy river does not supersede your neighbor's right to NOT have cats defecate and urinate in his yard.
The fact that you don't know the law does not mean it doesn't apply to you.
Re: Don't Animals Have Rights Too
There is a HUGE difference between combating wild (feral) populations via spay/neuter programs, and cats that are being treated as PETS (ie they are being fed). When you use the phrase "my cats", you are clearly indicating their status as pets, but in EITHER case, whether pets OR feral, once those cats roam onto private property, they can be trapped and humanely put down. Cats are NOT part of the natural environment, despite what many cat owners believe (and yes, I'm a cat owner myself), and they take a toll on the native populations of birds, small mammals, and other naturally occurring wildlife - which is exactly WHY we have things like "animal control", who, unlike agencies further up the ladder of enforcement of animal-related laws, works to keep those populations controlled.
Re: Don't Animals Have Rights Too
Quote:
I think it should have been clearly stated whose cage it was.
Alternatively, if you love your pets as much as you claim, you'd keep them properly confined, so they would be safe. Leaving them to roam invites the risk that a pissed off neighbor would poison them...or run them over.
You had no right to step onto your neighbor's property, whether the cage was labeled or not.
Quote:
I think maybe animal rights should be involved in this fight.
They don't have any. Animals are property, not people. They have the right to be treated humanely by their people, and that's about it.
Quote:
Quoting
cyjeff
While you have animal control on the phone, ask what the life span of an outside versus an inside cat is.
Data point: My strictly indoor Siamese/mutt lived to the age of 20. His littermate, who went to a different family and was left to roam, only lived to 7.
Re: Don't Animals Have Rights Too
Here's a thought.
Those cats you care so much about... when did they last have their shots or a visit to the vet?
Re: Don't Animals Have Rights Too
Every year. Plus fle and tick medicine applied monthly.
These cats are now close to 15 years old.