That's a very sensationalistic subject line, but it's not what I said. (meaning in the email critique I sent out)
I was referring to the attached study, which compares the effort necessary for TNR to reduce populations versus euthanasia (although adoption or removal to sanctuary would have an equal effect, which is why I said "removal" and not "euthanasia").
This type of scientific study (that is, published in the peer reviewed scientific literature) is what would be considered in assessing the impacts and efficacy of any TNR program under CEQA.
Travis Longcore, Ph.D.
Science Director, The Urban Wildlands Group
Research Associate Professor, USC Department of Geography
Lecturer, UCLA Institute of the Environment