Note: Transcripts may contain errors. If you wish to re-use all, or part of, a transcript, please contact CBC for permission. Please check the corresponding audio before quoting in print. Copyright © CBC 2020

The AIH Transcript for March 12, 2020

Hosts: Carol Off and Chris Howden

HELEN MANN: Hello, I’m Helen Mann, sitting in for Carol Off.

CHRIS HOWDEN: Good evening, I'm Chris Howden. This is As It Happens.

[Music: Theme]

Prologue

CH: Tonight:

HM: Banned together. Sort of. To slow the spread of Coronavirus, the U.S. has banned most flights from Europe, The v.p. of the European Parliament objects to both the content and the tone of the plan. She'll tell us why.

CH: Ahead of the curve. New research out of Ontario suggests that if the province wants to reduce the impact of COVID-19, its citizens will have to come together now ... and commit to staying apart.

HM: Games over. The NBA suspended its season over COVID-19 fears ... after a player, who later tested positive, touched reporters' microphones at a press conference. We hear from a sports reporter who was there... but wishes he hadn't been.

CH: Throwing a spanner in the scanners. Artists in England are protesting against the use of facial-recognition technology by police by painting their faces with patterns designed to fool the cameras.

HM: To catch a cow. Police say the suspect is has demonstrated "surprising speed" and "amazing fence-jumping skills." Now, they are seeking the public's help.... and, milking it for all its worth.

CH: And: Canaries in a mine. A Sudbury, Ontario, band has broken a record for the "deepest underground concert". And all they had to do was perform two kilometres below ground — at the bottom of a mine shaft.

CH: As It Happens, the Thursday edition. Radio that digs a good mine-bending experience.

[Music: Theme]

Part one: Europe-U.S. travel ban, COVID-19: Gobert presser

Europe-U.S. travel ban

Guest: Heidi Hautala

CH: With the coronavirus rapidly spreading, U.S. President Donald Trump made a major announcement last night: he said he was ordering all travel halted from select European countries. But the subsequent reaction suggested that his major announcement was a major misstep. Firstly, the ban does not apply to the U.K, which currently has hundreds of positive cases. Also, it's too little, too late, considering the virus already has a foothold in the U.S. Heidi Hautala is a Finnish politician, and the vice-president of the European Parliament. We reached her in Helsinki, Finland.

HM: Ms Hautala, despite the criticism, is it perhaps not at least a sign that President Trump is doing something that he's made this announcement to try to stop the spread of this virus?

HEIDI HAUTALA: Well, to me, it seems totally arbitrary and scary that he is now talking about a foreign virus as if it will be some kind of terrorist attack against the United States. And he, of course, is the one to rescue the nation from the terrible threat. His way of trying to show that this is, indeed, it's a kind of an attack coming from abroad. And that's why by far most of the European countries cannot anymore send aeroplanes to the United States. It’s really quite a massive slap on the face of Europeans [dry laughing].

HM: You said you find his characterization of this scary, why?

HH: Yeah. Because what he should do is that he should make sure that the American healthcare system is able to respond to an obviously growing epidemic, which now has been characterized as pandemic by the World Health Organization. I believe that the United States will face approximately the same situation as China did, and some European countries, one-by-one. It's just the question of the pace. So why doesn't he make sure that all Americans have access to testing, that they have access to basic health care and, of course, maybe some very specialized health care might be needed as well.

HM: Now what do you make of the list of countries that are subject to the U.S. travel ban — and those few that are excluded?

HH: Well, I don't think it's a very rational measure to do this kind of prohibition. I mean, I truly understand that travel restrictions now are needed. But why does he spare, for instance, the British people from this? It's totally un-understandable. So I don't think he's listened to public health experts.

HM: So you know on that point, the U.K. has as we know hundreds of cases. Today, its chief medical officer said the true number was much likely to be higher than, of course, what they have now. That's many more than your country — that Finland has. So why would you think that President Trump would exclude the U.K.?

HH: Well, I think he has a lot of sympathies and antipathies. And he has become quite used to blame the Europeans for many things. And now, it's very comfortable for him to say that it's the Europeans who didn't take care of their own prevention of the illness. And now, we are kind of exporting it to the U.S. — which is, of course, not true. There are lots of restrictions. Today, the Finnish government has decided that there will be no more events where more than 500 people participate. And then I am pretty sure that in the coming days many schools will be closed. So action should be something that that really should be close to the heart of the president of the United States as well.

HM: Would you have been more supportive of a travel ban if it had happened sooner or had applied to more countries?

HH: Well, it seems to be a rather sort of massive, massive measure. So I wonder if it's if it's justified by public health experts? What sort of made me a bit suspicious is that I saw that the adviser who guided the president in this is a migration expert — or should I say anti-migration expert. So they seem to be dealing with this question about in the same way as if they would be combating international terrorists trying to hit the United States. It's not convincing to me.

HM: You have said that you think that the President Trump should be more concerned with his own country's preparedness and how it's addressing this situation. Europe though is dealing with most serious coronavirus outbreaks right now, outside China — which appears to be improving. Obviously, it would appear the continent was not prepared for this either. So is there not something here perhaps of people in glass houses should not throw stones?

HH: Well, I think nobody really was prepared. But it was not unimaginable that such a pandemic would appear in the world. So I think the main thing is to make sure that the preventive measures are in place. And let's think about the future. It may very well be that there's a more fatal virus that spreads in this way and becomes a pandemic. So now is the time really to see if the health systems are capable of dealing with it. And I would say that in a many European countries, the mere principle and the access of universal health care is something that doesn't discriminate against poor people — which basically is a guarantee that everybody is then protected and then everybody's also in a situation not to endanger the other people. So I would say that Europe is in that sense better off. But, of course, we have free movement, and then we have civil liberties and all that. And so does Canada, I believe. Even the United States, so there will be restrictions, but they have to be measured.

HM: What measures are you taking personally during this outbreak?

HH: All the members of the European Parliament — the 700 of us or so which staff and assistants — we were all sent home. So we are not on holiday, but we are working from home. And even for more than a week now, the parliament has not accepted any visitors to its premises, in order not to become kind of an incubator. Because, of course, it's people coming from 27 countries, and you can understand that it is a risky place. So we had to take these measures.

HM: What kind of numbers are you seeing in Finland right now?

HH: It's something between 100 and 200, but it's peaking, it's going to peak a number of days. So we expect that every day will bring more new cases.

HM: Okay. Well, Ms Hautala, I really appreciate you joining us today, at a difficult time for everyone. Thank you.

HH: Yes, yes, thank you very much. Bye-bye.

HM: Okay, bye-bye.

CH: Heidi Hautala is the vice-president of the European Parliament. We reached her in Helsinki, Finland.

COVID-19: Gobert presser

Guest: Ben Anderson

CH: Yesterday afternoon, most of North America's biggest sports leagues were still chugging along. What a difference a day makes. As of today, the NBA, the NHL, and the MLB have all announced they're suspending the seasons, because of COVID-19. The NBA made the first move. Last night, they confirmed that Utah Jazz player Rudy Gobert had tested positive for coronavirus — which made some reporters queasy. Because earlier in the week, when Mr. Gobert was leaving a press conference, he jokingly grazed his hands all over reporters' microphones. Ben Anderson reports on the Utah Jazz for KSL Sports, and he was at that Monday press conference. We reached him in Salt Lake City.

HM: Ben, when you first learned the news last night that Rudy Gobert had tested positive for COVID-19, what went through your mind in that moment?

BEN ANDERSON: I mean, I guess the initial shock is, okay, what's this going to happen for the Utah Jazz? because that's the beat, I cover. And then kind of on second pause, you think, oh wait, [chuckling] I've been close to him. I was in the press conference where he's seen touching the microphones. So it does pretty quickly shift to realizing, hey, this is no longer about other people. The other person is gone. Now it starts to hit very close to home, and you wonder how you're infected.

HM: Well, how close were you to Rudy Gobert during that press conference?

BA: I mean, if you've seen the video, you can see somebody stand up and kind of block his way as he's touching the microphones, and that's me. So I was maybe five feet away total from Gobert at the end of the press conference.

HM: And you’ve been mentioning that the touching of the microphones, in case people haven't seen that video clip, Rudy is sort of rubbing his hands all over everyone's microphones. But in hindsight, that looks kind of irresponsible. Did it seem that way at the time?

BA: You know, honestly, I think it's the opposite of how a lot of people are approaching it. When they put in these new guidelines, it's keeping the media away from the players. The thought was that, hey, we don't want the media to infect the players, or potentially expose them to COVID-19 and coronavirus. When he touches the microphones, it's almost like he's erasing that space of the media needs to be quarantined from the player. I think a lot of people are viewing it as, oh, the players are kind of erasing the safety of the media — which is in retrospect what happened. But that was just not the feeling that anyone thought those protective measures were being taken for when we went into the press conference. Rudy Gobert very much has that personality and has that relationship with the media. I mean, he jokes around, he's goofy, we joke around with him. And it certainly is not this you know angry or vitriolic approach to it. I mean, everyone likes each other in that group.

HM: Now, have you or any other the reporters that you know at that presser have been tested?

BA: I haven't been tested. A couple of the other reporters that had travelled with the team and were in Oklahoma City last night when Rudy Gobert actually tested positive for coronavirus — and the game was postponed — several of them have been tested. All of those results came back negative. Of everyone that was tested, I believe it was 58 total test administered last night in Oklahoma City; only two came back with Rudy Gobert being one of them.

HM: You know, we're told that testing is really behind in the U.S. And that only people who meet certain criteria of either exhibiting illness or travel-related illness that sort of thing are the ones being tested. It doesn't sound like that's the case when it comes to the players?

BA: Right. The players clearly had access to it. And in some sense, it's understandable. I mean, they have the potential to be what they would call a “super spreader” — somebody who travels different cities, interacts with hundreds of different people. But then again, you know it is a little concerning that I was in the room with him — and several other media members were in the room with him — and we honestly can't get access to those tests. I've called the coronavirus hotline. I've called the Health Department locally. And they said, well, stay home and monitor your symptoms, and self-quarantine if you can.

HM: And are you doing that?

BA: That's what I'm doing, yeah. I've had my kids with me. So they're quarantined with me for the next few days, just as we monitor the symptoms. And, hopefully, nothing develops.

HM: You know, it's I guess pretty clear that Toronto fans are gonna be thinking about the Raptors, who played as I mentioned the Jazz on Monday. You cover the game; you know how much NBA players interact when they're playing. Do you have concerns that others are at risk of the virus now?

BA: Yeah. I mean, we have to assume that other players have been. If the symptoms can remain dormant or unnoticed for 12 days, 14 days, well, that takes us back to February 27th. Well, since then, the Jazz played the Washington Wizards here in Salt Lake. And the Wizards have then gone off and traveled to several different teams. And Rudy Gobert’s touching all those players — as was Donovan Mitchell, who has tested positive as well. Then the Jazz went to Ohio, they went to New York, they went to Boston, they went to Detroit, which are all major metropolises here in the United States. I mean, the idea that somebody else hasn't been exposed to it is very naive at this point.

HM: I guess it's one thing for many of us to have coronavirus fears. But you're now seeing the NBA season suspended, the NHL, MLB followed suit. What does that say about the significance of this moment?

BA: I think mostly, it still shows our lack of understanding exactly of how dangerous this might be. So we're taking now at this point absolute precaution. But it's bizarre that just 24 hours ago, all we were talking about was, hey, maybe there will be a few games without play or without fans in attendance, without nonessential personnel. That's how quickly this changed. And when you have radical changes like that with something this serious, it screams to be a lack of understanding of exactly how bad it could be. So we go from nothing to scorched earth. And that's the situation we're sitting in now, where you know better preventative understanding, better care, better protocol put in place originally when we were getting these reports out of China, Iran, South Korea Italy. If we had start kind of modeling our health care system after that sooner, maybe we wouldn't be in this situation.

HM: So do you think the NBA should have acted sooner?

BA: Cities and the NBA absolutely could have acted sooner. Now it's nice that it's been — at least in our understanding — limited to one player and their exposure. But you know, not half the NBA, but a huge number of the NBA is built up of international players that family come and go — and understandably so. A lot of players play in the All-Star Game — which was in mid-February. I mean, exposure to different viruses — especially a pandemic like this — was inevitable. And it didn't seem like sports leagues were quite understanding just how serious it could become.

HM: This is a busy time of year for reporters who covered sports, for Sports channels. I mean, how’s it going to change what you do, what you cover in the coming weeks and months?

BA: Yeah, I think we're all kind of standing around waiting to figure that out. Generally, you know March is extremely busy because not only do we have the NBA wrapping up to the playoffs, but Major League Baseball is back, the NHL is in full swing getting ready for the playoffs. But we've got the biggest college basketball tournament in the world that happens in March — March Madness was just weeks away — and it's been canceled entirely. Not just postponed, it's been canceled. And that's a multi-billion dollar event. So it's an enormous loss of finances. It's a normal loss of coverage. Though, I'm sure we're all going to be busy trying to track exactly what these sports leagues are going to do to postpone, makeup, or altogether get rid of the leagues.

HM: [deep sigh] It’s extraordinary times. I'm glad to hear you're well at this point. I hope that continues to be true. And I appreciate you talking to us.

BA: I appreciate you having me on.

HM: Bye.

CH: Ben Anderson covers the Utah Jazz for KSL Sports in Salt Lake City. That's where we reached him. Rudy Gobert has since put out a statement on Instagram. Quote, "I have gone through so many emotions. Mostly fear, anxiety and embarrassment. I would like to publicly apologize to the people I may have endangered. At the time, I had no idea I was even infected. I was careless and make no excuse. I hope my story serves as a warning and causes everyone to take this seriously. I am under great care and will fully recover." End quote. And speaking of the NBA, it didn't start out as Vince Carter's last game in the league, but it may have ended that way. He and his team — the Atlanta Hawks — were playing against the New York Knicks yesterday when the NBA announced that it would be suspending the season "until further notice." In the final seconds last night, Mr. Carter checked back in. With the crowd cheering, he went for a three-pointer, and made it. Here's some of what he had to say at a press conference, afterwards.

SOUNDCLIP

VINCE CARTER: It's a weird way to say I'm calling it a career [laughing]. It really is. I mean, you used to you know you don't have any more games left. Instead, I technically have what I will consider eligibility; I have 15 games left. Technically, but if not, I'm one with it. And it's just, like I say, it’s just weird you know as we were kind of getting being briefed on everything, what's going on, you know, what you guys been seeing all the second half. You know, I was just sit there like, all right, this is it. Like that. It ended like that, you know? So probably tonight, I'll reflect like golly, this is weird. I didn't foresee you know I went from the hesitation of starting the season and going through the season to not really saying the word retirement to you know having a conversation with Kobe gave me the confidence and comfort to talk about retirement to this point where the season is over when, in my mind, I know there's 15 games left, but we're not sure yet. So it's cool though. You know, basketball has been good to me. You know, I've enjoyed each and every moment of it — good and bad. So if this is it, it’s all good. At least I made my last basket [laughing].

CH: NBA All-Star Vince Carter speaking yesterday, after what might have been his final game with the league. He's the first person ever to play 22 seasons. Mr. Carter started his NBA career with the Toronto Raptors.

[Music: “Creighton Deep” by the Shaft Bottom Boys]

Shaft Bottom Boys

Guest: John Shelegey

CH: That was "Creighton Deep" by the Shaft Bottom Boys — a band from Sudbury, Ontario, that's celebrating a new low. On Saturday morning, they set a new Guinness World Record for the "deepest underground concert" — after performing in Sudbury's Creighton Mine, 2,194 metres below the earth's surface. That's 7,200 feet. This isn't the first time the city has played host to the world's deepest concert. Previous record holders include a local high school band, who snagged the title in 2007. John Shelegey plays bass for the Shaft Bottom Boys. We reached him in Sudbury.

HM: What do you get when you set a Guinness World Record?

JOHN SHELEGEY: Well, I'll tell, you certainly get a lot of fanfare and attention when you live in a mining community like Sudbury. And you've broken a record that is very relevant to a city where we've been mining for over 100 years. But, ultimately, you do get this really nice certificate, and you are in the Guinness Book of World Records — which is a bit of a novelty for sure.

HM: Yeah. Now, you also raised the money for charity as I understand it?

JS: Well, yes, absolutely. And the Shaft Bottom Boys are four local Sudbury guys. We've all been friends for a long time. We're all very linked to the community. So when we came up with the idea, we absolutely wanted to link in some of the charities that are very important to us. One being Miners for Cancer — which started back in 1996. And that charity raises funds that stay in the North, related to patient care, purchasing equipment, even some research. And the other one is Science North kids summer camps. So this gives underserviced children an opportunity to go to summer camp.

HM: Nice!

JA: That's through Science North — which is a science centre up here in Sudbury.

HM: Right. Now, you say you came up with the idea with the other guys. I mean, where did it come from?

JA: Well, I got to rewind the tape a little bit. The Shaft Bottom Boys really started out in 2004 as a kind of novelty band. And we've been continuing to play since then. So fast forward, something happened in 2007 in the city of Sudbury. There was a high school band that played at about a 3,000 foot level at South Mine, and originally captured the Guinness World Record for the deepest underground concert. It was quickly snapped up by a Finnish group called The Agonizers about a month later. So they basically robbed it from our high school children. And at the time, that's where the idea came from that we wanted to bring the record back, not only to Canada, but back to Sudbury. And it's very complicated to pull off this kind of feat because it requires so much coordination from multiple teams, right?

HM: Right.

JA: And in 2007, the just stars weren't aligning for us. Up until we got a phone call last month from Science North, and it was to play at their gala dinner as entertainment. When I found out that the gala dinner was to help unveil their new exhibit called The Science of Guinness World Records. I also found out that some dignitaries from Guinness World Records and Ripley’s were going to be there. That's where it catalyzed the idea. This is our chance now to make this happen.

HM: So tell me a bit about the logistics then? How do you put this into place?

JA: Right. So you don't just wake up and play at the bottom of a mine. Mining is a pretty complicated operation. And a little fun fact here, I worked for Vale for over 28 years. I'm now retired. But I know I've been down in the mines many times. It requires planning. Obviously, we have our gear that's required as a band. So we had meetings with the team at Creighton Mine. We had tremendous support from them on how we would marshal our equipment, get the people down, have the underground transportation ready through jeeps and tram trains and that sort of thing. So the planning that went into this was executed perfectly. Things went off without a hitch. And it's going to be a hard record to beat because there are no mines in Finland or in Europe that are deep enough. You'd basically have to be in South Africa. So it is a tough record to beat, and we're pretty proud of it.

HM: So in terms of Guinness, the Guinness World Record Book people, do they have special requirements? I mean, can anybody just go down and play? Are there certain rules?

JA: So I've learned a lot about Guinness World Records. They are very diligent and very, very meticulous on the guidelines around this record. so I'll just give you a few of them. So their benchmark is sea level. So even though we were 7,200 feet below surface at Creighton Mine, we lost roughly a thousand feet because we're below sea level. So we need surveying data to support all that. We had to play for a minimum of ten people. We had to play for a minimum of 15 minutes. We couldn’t have more than 30 seconds between songs. We couldn’t repeat songs. They had to be recognizable songs. So those were those were guidelines that we had discussed ahead of time. We played a 50-minute set. And we actually wrote a song four for the event called “Creighton Deep” — which has been played live on other radio stations. But I could tell you that the people from Guinness World Records and Ripley's, they love a good story. So you know if someone just randomly breaks a record. Yeah, that's great. It's always interesting and fun. But they told us personally that this is a really cool record because of the story, our deep roots with mining, how we lost the record, had the record lost the record. We were at a dinner, and I was explaining how there's a bit of a rivalry between Canada and Finland because in 1998 Nagano Olympics, Finland beat Canada. And that was our dream team with Wayne Gretzky. So this rivalry between Canada-Finland started, and now we've got the record back in Canada, we tied it into the community, we raised a bunch of money for two great charities. So it's a really nice story.

HM: And as a musician, what about the acoustics? What's it like down there?

JA: You know what? I'm really glad you brought that up because I've been in the garage while I was working for the company. And I was concerned about, you know, echoing and having bad acoustics. But remarkably enough, with the number of people there, the acoustics were fantastic. It was the people in the audience — and I should give another shout out to the team Creighton Mine — they were gracious enough to actually shut the mine down and bring roughly 50 miners into this garage where they repair mobile equipment and drilling equipment, et cetera. So we had a really… If you go on our Facebook page, you'll see a picture taken from behind the band, and you'll see all the miners with their cap lamps lit. It was surreal actually to play down there.

HM: John, good to talk to you. Thank you.

JA: Yeah, that was great. Thanks for your time.

CH: John Shelegey is lead bass player for the Shaft Bottom Boys. We reached him in Sudbury, Ontario.

[Music: Ambient]

Part two: COVID-19 social distancing study, facial recognition artists

COVID-19 social distancing study

Guest: Ashleigh Tuite

CH: Like it or not, kids in Ontario are going to have an extra long March break this year: today, the province announced it is closing schools for three weeks, including the break, to help contain the spread of COVID-19. The move comes hours after Premier Doug Ford told families to have a good time and travel during March Break, despite the pandemic. More than two-million students at some 4,800 schools will be affected. And while parents may not be pleased, the closures reflect a growing acknowledgment for the need for "social distancing" during the pandemic. Ashleigh Tuite is an assistant professor and Infectious Disease Epidemiologist at the University of Toronto's Dalla Lana School of Public Health. Her team has been using mathematical models to predict the spread of COVID-19 in Ontario. We reached Ms Tuite in Toronto — before Ontario announced the school closures.

HM: Ms Tuite, what does your model tell us about the ways an outbreak could play out in Ontario?

ASHLEIGH TUITE: So we ran a couple of different scenarios. And we started by looking at a base case — which is really a worst case scenario. Where we try to play out what would happen if we were to have very limited intervention. So if we started to have community spread of coronavirus in Ontario. And we didn't ramp up testing and trying to find contacts of those cases. And what we find is that about 50 per cent of the population would be infected. Most of these cases would be very mild or moderate and may not even know that they were infected.

HM: What about the more severe cases? What impact would they have under those circumstances?

AT: So at the peak of the epidemic, again, under this worst-case scenario, we would anticipate that there would be more than 32-thousand patients that would be requiring hospital intensive care across the province. And just to give you an idea of how many beds we have in Ontario, our best estimate is around 17-hundred. So basically, that means that there would be about 20 times more people needing a bed than there are currently available.

HM: So what would be an outcome that is more in line with what you're seeing happening right now in terms of the response?

AT: Okay. So what we found is that in order to have a manageable number of people requiring ICU care, we really, really have to ramp up social distancing measures. So this would be along the lines of you know asking adults to work remotely. It would be thinking about possibly closing schools. And if we do that, then we can bring the number of patients that would be requiring intensive care down to a manageable number. So we would no longer be talking about having an overwhelmed health care system.

HM: And when you say a manageable number, given you're talking about 17-hundred of these ICU beds, what would that manageable number be?

AT: So that would be 20 at any given time we would consider at least manageable.

HM: Right. Now, according to your study, the only effective way of flattening the curve is this social distancing that you've mentioned already. Do you sense that people are willing to make that move?

AT: I mean, it's a really difficult question. And I think the challenge with it is that I think people are willing to do it once coronavirus has arrived in a population and they start seeing the consequences of uncontrolled spread. So Italy is an example where you know less than three weeks ago, there were less than ten confirmed cases. They had no reported deaths. Today, there at more than 12,000 cases and over 800 deaths. And you know at this point, they are implementing incredible public health measures. They're talking about quarantine and shutting down schools and universities. So I think that there is a recognition that these sorts of measures are going to be necessary. And it really becomes a question of whether we do this reactively or proactively and it can be really challenging because you know right now we're not seeing transmission in Ontario or in Canada to any sort of large degree. And so that tradeoff between you know asking people to limit their contacts, and their movements can be very challenging. But what we have learned from other countries is that we can change the course of the epidemic. But we all need to play a part in that, and the sooner that we recognize that the greater the impact that we can have.

HM::Today, the U.K.'s chief medical officer said that he believes the outbreak in that country could be many weeks away from peaking, and saying that makes it too early to close schools. We heard something similar from Bonnie Henry — the B.C. medical officer of health. Is there a question of timing this? Does make sense to do it early, or can it be too early?

AT: I think that's a little bit of an unknown. I think in terms of the schools, I agree. I think now is too soon. But knowing when exactly to pull that trigger is challenging. And we know we can use models to try and get at that question. And it's a little bit of a fine line. Because clearly, the disruption associated with closing schools is tremendous. And we don't really have a clear answer in terms of you know what the effect of that will be. We know that children tend to not be very symptomatic. But we also suspect that they are important in spreading the disease to other people — including other family members and grandparents and whatnot. So I don't think it's you know today we need to shut down the city. And I certainly would not advocate that. But it's very nuanced in terms of where you draw that line. And there are a lot of moving pieces that go into making that decision.

HM: When we talk about this flattening the curve, are we talking about the social distancing actually reducing the number of cases, or spreading them out over time, or both?

AT: So it's a little bit of both. The idea there is that one of the components that drives how an outbreak goes is driven by the number of contacts that a person has. And so if we can reduce the number of contacts, you can slow down how a disease spreads. But when you flatten that curve, you know, you're also able to provide more effective care to people. So you know when you're thinking about hospitalizations and deaths as the consequences of this outbreak, you're able to reduce those because you're ensuring that the people who need care are receiving it.

HM: And finally, you submitted a grant application for this research in early February. Back then, could you have imagined, did you foresee where we would be today?

AT: Absolutely not. We knew that it was a possibility. But if you had asked me a month ago what my projections were. I really thought that we would have this under control.

HM: Ms Tuite, I really appreciate you laying this out for us. Thank you very much.

AT: Oh, you're very welcome. Thank you.

HM: All right. Bye-bye.

CH: Ashleigh Tuite is an assistant professor and Infectious Disease Epidemiologist at the University of Toronto's Dalla Lana School of Public Health. We reached her in Toronto — before Ontario announced it will be closing schools for three weeks, including March Break. Around the world, health authorities are struggling to slow the rapid spread of the coronavirus. But in the U.S., access to testing is moving at a glacial pace. And a lack of access to health care insurance could be making things much worse. Right now, 27-point-five million Americans don't have health insurance plans. And testing for COVID-19 can run patients thousands of dollars. Today, Robert Redfield, the director of the Center for Disease Control, appeared before Congress. And he faced some scathing questioning from Democratic Congresswoman Katie Porter.

SOUNDCLIP

KATIE PORTER: We live in a world where 40 per cent of Americans cannot even afford a 400 dollar unexpected expense. Thirty-three per cent of Americans put off medical treatment last year. And we have a 1,331 dollar expense conservatively just for testing for the corona virus. Dr Redfield, do you want to know who has the coronavirus and who doesn't?

ROBERT REDFIELD: Yes.

KP: Not just rich people, but everybody who might have the virus?

RR: All of America.

KP: Dr Redfield, are you familiar with 42 CFR, 71-point-three-one, three-zero, excuse me.

RR: I think if you could frame what it talks about, that would help me.

KP: Okay, Dr Redfield, I'm pretty well-known as a questioner on The Hill from not tipping my hand. I literally communicated to your office last night, and received confirmation that I was going to be asking you about 42 CFR, 71-point-three-zero. This provides the director may authorize payment for the care and treatment of individuals subject to medical exam quarantine isolation and conditional release.

RR: That I know about, and my office did tell me that. I just didn't know the numbers, ma’am. Ms Congresswoman.

KP: Great, so you’re familiar. Dr Redfield, will you commit to the CDC right now using that existing authority to pay for diagnostic testing free to every American regardless of insurance?

RR: Well, I can say that we're going to do everything to make sure everybody can get the care they need.

KP: Nope, not good enough. Dr Redfield, you have the existing authority. Will you commit right now, yes or no?

RR: What I’m going to say is I'm going to review it in detail with CDC and the department.

KP: No, I’m reclaiming my time. Dr Redfield, respectfully, I wrote you this letter — along with my colleagues — one week ago. We asked for a response yesterday. Will you commit to invoking your existing authority under 42 CFR, 71-point-three-zero, to provide for coronavirus testing for every American regardless of insurance coverage? You can operationalize the payment structure tomorrow.

RR: I think you're an excellent questioner. So my answer is yes.

KP: Excellent. Everybody in America hear that. You are eligible to go get tested for coronavirus and have that covered regardless of insurance.

RR: And I would just like to echo what you said. A very important public health that those individuals that are in the shadows can get the healthcare that they need during the time of us responding to this outbreak.

CH: Congresswoman Katie Porter putting tough questions to CDC director Robert Redfield today before Congress.

[Music: Ambient]

Facial recognition artists

Guest: Emily Roderick

CH: Some residents of London, England have a message for their city, and its facial recognition cameras: if you're going to watch our faces, we're going to get in yours. London has quietly been experimenting with the technology for months, without the public's consent. The Metropolitan Police says the cameras help keep people safe — and that they even led to an arrest last week of a woman wanted on assault charges. But the newly-formed Dazzle Club doesn't buy that argument. They're a group of artists, protesting the cameras with face paint. And it's working. Emily Roderick is the co-founder of the Dazzle Club in London. That's where we reached her.

HM: Emily, how exactly are you using face paint to protest against these facial recognition cameras?

EMILY RODERICK: We describe it as reverse-contouring, or kind of you're really looking to deemphasize parts of your face that are normally quite prominent. So let's say your nose bridge is very prominent. It will catch a lot of light. You've got dark circles around your eyes that you want to change so that you're actually reversing the way that someone might recognize you.

HM: Right.

EM: Basically, we use face paint to change different areas of our face using light and dark colours to break up the kind of natural ways that your face is recognized.

HM: What is your point in doing this?

EM: Basically, London has recently started using facial recognition in the streets. And at the minute, we are against the idea of use of the usage of facial recognition purely because of the technology not being advanced enough at this point. There's been a lot of trials and tests to prove that the facial recognition that the Met is using, that other companies might be using within surveillance systems, is not fully representative of our population. And I think there's a real problem with recognizing people of colour within facial recognition that normally I think this statistic at the minute is that only 30 per cent of people of colour are actually being correctly identified. And I think that's a real shame within our multicultural population. These systems have been developed by white men, and really we need to do something about that in terms of representation.

HM: The Met Police say that these cameras keep people safe. They say last week, they used the cameras to arrest a woman on assault charges. Aren't the cameras in a way doing the job that they're intended to?

EM: Well, I think also, it's probably worth knowing that whilst they did catch or rightly identify one person, they also wrongly stopped another five people within that same day. It's a troubling scenario to be in that there's this kind of murky use of language around the use of facial recognition. That you know — especially with surveillance — yes, you might be able to catch people that might have done a crime. But also, it's not just this idea of keeping people safe is quite a problematic phrase when you know it's not going to stop crime from happening in a way maybe. I think you know it's this is kind of an afterthought, and we're distancing ourselves from the city. And I think, yeah, the minute with this idea of, yes, it has stopped this one person I think it's still you know at the minute the facial recognition is not sophisticated enough to be used day-to-day — purely because of all these other wrong stops and wrong identification.

HM: In purely practical terms, how do you know that this face paint is actually fooling the cameras?

EM: So we actually when were preparing for all monthly Dazzle Walks, we come together, and we’ll paint our faces, and we will test it even just on our phones. So most of all electronic devices these days will have some form of facial recognition installed within the device. So it will use commonplace social media apps to test the facial recognition. And we've also created some face filters as well to kind of toy with the idea. I know even now, some laptops you can unlock your laptop with your face. So yeah, we’ll test on an array of different devices. I know it's not necessarily testing on exactly the surveillance system that might be used within London streets, but we're getting close to that. And we can still be able to see when the face paint works and when it doesn't. And that's really exciting.

HM: What kind of response are you getting, a lot of people joining your Dazzle Club?

EM: Yeah, I think what's really interesting is it's opening up a really important discussion about the city. And we've had a lot of interest over the past few months now. We're about to have our eighth Dazzle Walk next week. People that keep coming to our walks, it’s really interesting to see in a way the support. And I think in a way the Dazzle Club’s become a sort of support network where we can come together and discuss how we feel about surveillance in the city and how we feel within the city and I think, Yeah, I'm really excited to see how the support will grow in the next few months.

HM: As the technology improves, and companies find more sophisticated ways to read faces, how might you respond?

EM: Oh, I think maybe we need to find the next step from CV Dazzle. I think in a way it's this strange arms race in a way that it wouldn't surprise me, yeah, in the next coming months, you know CV Dazzle doesn't work anymore. That you know they've developed algorithms that can recognize that I am a person wearing CV Dazzle. It’s this kind of, okay, maybe that doesn't work. So is this sort of trial and error. And I think that's quite exciting in terms of where to go next. I know various artists have used projections on their faces, or different sort of fabrics that might reflect lie in some way that stops the cameras from recognizing you. Even infrared lights as well, I know that now there's a lot of thermal imaging being used within surveillance as well. So it'd be interesting to see how kind of developments occur within the next year or so.

HM: When's your next walk?

EM: That's next Thursday. Yeah, so we walk on every third Thursday of the month.

HM: Well, Emily, thank you for telling us about this initiative. Appreciate it.

EM: Thank you very much for your time. Thank you.

HM: Okay, Bye.

CH: Emily Roderick is the co-founder of the Dazzle Club in London, England. We reached her there. And for photos of what that face paint looks like, go to our website: www.cbc.ca/aih.

[Music: Instrumental]

FOA: Florida cow

CH: In attempting to bring in a bovine fugitive, police in Florida have committed at least one serious moo-sdemeanour. Look, I know that's awful. All "moo" puns are awful. But it's better than what the Pembroke Pines Police Department tweeted yesterday. The department is trying to capture a brown cow on the loose since January. So they tweeted: "Wanted: Unknown Cow". And then, just for fun, it read: "pending charges" against the cow include "MOOving Violations." Well, that's an outrage. Not from a legal standpoint, but from a pun standpoint. I mean, I guess it's better than say, "first-degree MOOER-der". But still: until the rogue cow is caught, maybe no more moo-related puns. In other words: a "moo-ratorium". Now, you can discuss fugitive cows without resorting to awful puns. In 2011, Germany was transfixed by the story of Yvonne, a cow who was on the loose for weeks. And throughout that summer, As It Happens spoke repeatedly with Michael Aufhauser, who ran an animal sanctuary called Gut Aiderbichl. He intended to give Yvonne a home, eventually. But, as he told Helen while the search was still going on:

SOUNDCLIP

MICHAEL AUFHAUSER: Yeah, I would like to have her. And it's really like waiting for Godot.

CH: See, that's the kind of thoughtfulness Mr. Aufhauser also brought to another conversation that summer — this time, with guest host Jim Brown.

SOUNDCLIP

JIM BROWN: You really tried just about everything to find her, didn't you?

MA: Well, you know something? I've learned in my life is always to have something up your sleeve. And I didn't play the last card, which is her son. And that didn't bring that son to the forest and not to the fields. But we did try everything. I mean, we had this little sweet dachshund, who can smell any cow. He was walking through the forest. Then we had people going through the forest. We had this warm Camera, you know that that special camera that can X-ray practically everything. We flew over. We could locate her. But you know what? She wants to be free right now. And you know how it is with love. If you love somebody — and we all love Yvonne — you respect what she likes. And she wants to be free now.

JB: Well, if Erntz the handsome bull couldn't drag her out of the forest, nothing could.

MA: I'll tell you something. I bet you, I bet you, she's going to spend Christmas with us. Winter time, I tell you, that's the time that we all make compromises.

CH: Michael Aufhauser, from the Gut Aiderbichl animal sanctuary in Germany in August of 2011. Yvonne was found a few weeks later, and did spend Christmas at the sanctuary to relax for the rest of her days.

[Music: Instrumental]

Part three: Old Residential School, Beothuk remains, house cat study

Calgary daycare

CH: Alberta doesn't have the highest number of coronavirus cases. But it is where the first known Canadian case — of a child contracting COVID-19 happened. The child attends the Pump-kin Patch Child Care Centre — which is mostly used by parents who work in the Suncor office in downtown Calgary. Korrie-Mae Wiszniak is the CEO of Kids at Churchill Park, which operates the daycare. She told CBC Calgary about how daycare officials reacted to news of the infection.

SOUNDCLIP

KORRIE-MAE WISZNIAK: We were contacted by Alberta Health Services yesterday, that the team there was informed that there was a confirmed case. Actually, at that time, it wasn't confirmed. So there's a little bit of a mixed message, but it's a confirmed case of COVID-19 with one of the children that attends the centre. And at that time, they let us know that we would need to close the centre, quarantine both the staff, the children and strong recommendation that the parents of the children also quarantine.

JENN LEE: So that must have been a bit of a busy flurry for you. So you would have been madly trying to reach people last night then?

KMW: The team actually mobilized immediately. And we did have the support of Alberta Health Services there. So they were with the team. And as parents came into the centre, Alberta Health Services informed them — along with our program manager, who was there — in addition to that, we made calls. And then Alberta Health Services was following up all the families. The centre's licenced for 98 children. I'm not sure during that time how many children were there, but on any given day necessarily. But it is licensed for 98, and there are 24 staff employed at the centre. You know, I haven't had the opportunity to speak with the parents yet. But, and obviously, they're in isolation. So you know it's devastating for any of us. When it's this close to home — especially happening in one of our centres — everyone's understandably upset by the news. And we're just ensuring that we follow all Alberta Health Service protocols.

CH: That was Korrie-Mae Wiszniak — the CEO of Kids at Churchill Park, which operates the daycare in Calgary where a child tested positive for COVID-19. She was speaking with Jenn Lee of CBC Calgary.

[Music: Sombre]

Old Residential School

Guest: Harlan Schilling

CH: The building is called the Old Residential School — because that's exactly what it is. It's located in Lower Post, a First Nation community in northern B.C. And since the residential school was shut down in the 70s, it's the only building that the community has for essential services — including the band office — which means former students are forced to walk through the front door all the time. For years, the community has been asking the federal government to have it torn down. And now Harlan Schilling has joined that fight. He is a councillor for the Daylu Dena Council, and his mother attended the school. We reached Harlan Schilling at the Old Residential School.

HM: Counsellor Schilling, what kind of services are found now in the Old Residential School?

HARLAN SCHILLING: Essentially, everything that runs our community. We have our social programs, our justice programs, our education department. On paper, this building is currently our community hall — which is held in the basement — which is in very bad shape. We actually don't even allow anybody to go into the basement for health concerns.

HM: So why is this building your only option?

HS: So once the residential school was shut down. From my understanding, I'm a fairly younger counsellor for our First Nation, they needed a building for us to be able to work out to be a self-governing First Nation. But you know, of course, once the school shut down, the First Nation, we essentially had nothing. So they retrofitted the school to be our place of administration.

HM: Now, we've reached you there today. What is it like for you to go to work in this old residential school?

HS: For me, I know the history. And I know and I work with many people in our community that attended this school. So it's almost personal to me that they've asked to continue on with the works to getting it torn down. And I really don't like having to ask. And we hold meetings here to ask the people of the community to come back into a building where you know there's such bad history and bad memories.

HM: Um-hm. Your mother, as I understand it actually attended the former school. Is she comfortable going inside?

HS: No. Along with my mother, like you know I believe the school sat down in 1975. So there's still a lot of members in the community, and not just family members of mine, but family members from all community members that attended this school. And you know our post office is here. You know, a community building is supposed to be the heart of the community. And it's just not a good place. You know, when you have a building that no one is comfortable of coming into, it's really hard to make your community grow.

HM: What effect does it have on them going in there?

HS: Well, you know being gone and being able to kind of look into the box from the outside is the social issues — the different forms of abuse that happened here. It definitely has a psychological effect on them. Even so, we have our court system held in the building every three months. So even when they get into trouble with the legal system, they are forced back into this building to have to deal with it.

HM: And just to be clear, we're referring to it as the Old Residential School, but that that's actually the name on the building, right?

HS: Yes, that's what we've changed it to be called. Because you know that's what it is.

HM: And you changed it, why?

HS: I think it was just because that's how the community referred to it. And working with the different government organizations, they would refer to it as your administration building, or you know your band office. But over the years, it's just been Band-Aid over Band Aid trying to cover up what it truly is. It is it really is an old school, and it's just office spaces that have been put into it.

HM: Right, so you’re trying to send a message by labeling it what it was?

HS: Exactly.

HM: Now, you have raised this issue before. Why do you believe the government has been taking so long on doing something about it?

HS: Well, I think part of it is just the different levels of government that we've been able to reach out to. And then there's also the transitioning with election to election. You know, not every sane government gets back in. But I'm really hoping that with the NDP and the premier's office of B.C., they actually came to our community in October. And I think it really emotionally struck them having to come here, and having interviewed some of the students — you know which are now in their 60s — on what this building means to them and what it means that they have to drive by it or even come into it.

HM: On the federal level, Justin Trudeau and his government talk a lot about reconciliation. Does that give you any hope that you will see a change this time?

HS: Everybody can be hopeful. I've got a lot of the elders in the community. When I talk to them about you know the small successes we're having on reaching the government levels, to them, they're not hopeful at all. You know, we've got some elders that if they you know they've been around — and they're in their 80s — and they say they've been promising this for 30 years, right? So they're not extremely hopeful. But I'm hoping with the Liberal government in, and Canada's talks of reconciliation, this would be an extremely good start. Considering that it's not only the cask of people that attended this school. This was one of the largest schools in Western Canada. So they're students as far south as Vancouver and as far north as Yellowknife that I've met that said they've attended the school when it was open.

HM: How much help do you need, either from the province, the feds, or both?

HS: It would be both. We are the farthest northern community in British Columbia. And then I have to give thanks to the province of B.C. for them pushing this and kind of putting the spotlight that we are up here. You know, we are a community. We have children. We have hopes of growing. So with the help of the province, it really would benefit the Liberals to jump in and help.

HM: Well, Mr Schilling, I appreciate you taking us through all of this. Thank you very much.

HS: No, thank you.

HM: All right. Good to talk to you. Bye-bye.

HS: Bye-bye.

CH: Harlan Schilling is a councillor for the Daylu Dena Council, and his mother attended the Old Residential School, in Lower Post, B.C.

[Music: Horns]

Canada Reads: Cory Doctorow

CH: In a world as chaotic as this one currently feels, technology can be both a comfort — and a source of further anxiety. And that tension is at the heart of Cory Doctorow's Canada Reads contender, "Radicalized." The book is made up of four novellas exploring everything from police corruption, to darkweb-inspired uprisings, to survivalism. It is — needless to say — it is a timely collection. It will be defended by Toronto Raptors fan-zone host, Akil Augustine — who's currently got some time off from that gig — in next week's battle of the books. In the meantime, here's the author, Cory Doctorow, with a reading from novella Number One: Unauthorized Bread.

SOUNDCLIP

CORY DOCTOROW: Only one of the touch screens is working. And it took a lot of trial and error before she figured out that she needed to tap about one-point-five centimeters South-southwest of the button she was hitting. Once she clocked this, thing's got faster. She switched the screen to Arabic, let the camera over it scan her retinas, and repeatedly pressed her fingers to the pad, until the machine had read her. Once it had validated her, she had to tap through eight screens of things she was promising. That she wouldn't drink, or drug, or steal. That she didn't have any chronic or infectious diseases. That she did not support terrorism. That she understood that at this stage, she was not permitted to work for wages. But that also, and paradoxically, she would be required to work in Wooster to pay back the people of the United States for the shelter bed she was about to be assigned. She read the fine print. It was something she'd learned to do early in the refugee process. Sometimes the immigration officers quizzed you on things you just click through. And if you couldn't answer the questions correctly, they'd send you back to the back of the line, or reschedule your hearing for the next month. Because you hadn't fully appreciated the gravity of the agreement you were forging with the USA. Then she found out which of the former stores she'd be living in, and she was prompted to insert her debit card — which was topped up with credit she could exchange for food at specific stores that catered to people on benefits. As she tapped through more screens, entering her phone number, choosing time for medical checkups, she became aware of a low humming noise growing closer. She turned around and saw a low trolley trundling through the aisles of the derelict pharmacy with a cardboard banker's box on it. It steered laboriously around the corners. Then moved to a gate set into the rolled down cage, which clocked open. The screen prompted her to retrieve the box, which contained linens, a towel, a couple six packs of white cotton underwear, T-shirts, a box of tampons and a toilet bag with shampoos, soaps and deodorants. It was the most functional transaction she'd had in years. And she wanted to kiss the stupid, unlovely little robot.

CH: That was Cory Doctorow, reading from his Canada Reads nominated book, "Radicalized." For all the latest updates on next week's Canada Reads debates, visit: www.cbcbooks.ca

[Music: Ambient]

Beothuk remains

Guest: Mi'sel Joe

CH: They've been gone for nearly 200 years. But finally, the remains of a Beothuk couple have been returned to Newfoundland. That follows pressure from local Indigenous leaders, and the provincial and federal governments — all of whom wanted National Museums Scotland to return the remains. Yesterday, there was an event at the St. John's museum and archive The Rooms to mark the repatriation. Chief Mi'sel Joe was there. For more than five years, he's been part of the push to bring these remains to Canada. We reached him in St. John's.

HM: Chief Joe, what was that moment like for you at the event yesterday to finally know that these remains are in Newfoundland?

MI’SEL JOE: It was an incredible, spiritual, historic moment last night. And, to be honest with you, I feel more spiritual connection today after. I guess because there was so many people in the room. And, to me, there was some pouting going on by people that shouldn’t be doing it. But nevertheless, that happens. But today is… Like, it was a sombre occasion last night, and a long overdue one. It's been almost 200 years since those remains were taken from the grave site. And to finally get them back, they're not home yet. They’re at the museum. But eventually, they’ll go back to their home.

HM: Why has it been so important to you to have them back in Canada?

MJ: Because it's time. You know, we grew up with the stories of Beothuk people. We grew up with the stories that we killed of the Beothuk people simply because the Europeans wanted to have someone to blame for what they were doing themselves. So you know, it was important to me to bring some closure to what happened almost 200 years ago. And they don't belong to me. They belong to all of us in Newfoundland, and to Canada. And we all need that closure. And my hopes is that this will bring us all closer together to work towards something that’s really respectful.

HM: These are the remains of Nonosabasut and Demasduit. Who were they?

MJ: Well, they were a man and a wife and a child. And they were with some other people. And from what I know of the stories that they were actually killed — murdered — on the lake because some people blamed them for things they didn’t do. And the only way to cover up was to murder them.

HM: The story is often told that Demasduit was kidnapped and was given the name Mary March because she lived with her captor, John Payton Junior. And that she later died of tuberculosis. The story continues to say that Nonosabasut died in the process of trying to save her. But that differs from the story you've just told me.

MJ: Well, they were shot on the ice, man and his wife. From what I know of the story, what I've been told of the story, he actually came out of the ice and he was murdered on the ice. Now, I'm not a historian. I can only tell you what I've been told and what I've seen. And I know that Peyton did have people that was captured. My story that I heard is that a lady that was taken from Peyton and into St. John’s was called Mary March. She died in St John’s from tuberculosis. The story gets confused by a lot of people.

HM: Right, so you’re suggesting or saying that Mary March was not Demasduit?

MJ: Not that I'm aware of. Now, I could be wrong. Don't take mine as gospel, because I’m not a historian.

HM: Why are the stories so different, do you think?

MJ: It's anybody's guess. I mean, the story has been confusing for years and years. And probably will continue to be confusing.

HM: How did the remains end up in Scotland anyway?

MJ: Well, they were taken by Cormac. The story is much longer than that. Because in 1822, Cormac hired my relatives.

HM: And can I interrupt you just for one second? Cormac was a Scottish explorer? William Cormac?

MJ: Yes, yes.

HM: Okay. Sorry, go on.

MJ: He hired [my relative] to guide him across Newfoundland. And his purpose for doing that was to go looking for Beothuk people. And Sylvester deliberately steered him south to stay away from the small pockets of Beothuk people that was out there. And it was only five years later I think that he reached out to Sylvester again. What he wanted to do was go up and rob the grave site of those three individuals. Of course, Sylvester refused, from what I understand. And Cormac did go to the site to take the two skulls with him, and brought them to Britain. And then from there, in the 50s sometime, they were shipped over to the museum in Scotland.

HM: And it's taken all this time to get them back?

MJ: Almost 200 years. I made the first journey to Scotland in 2014.

HM: You said earlier that while the remains are back in Canada, and back in Newfoundland, that they're not home. What happens to them now?

MJ: Well, I'm hoping that between our people and the five Indigenous leaders in the province and whoever else gets involved, that’s up to the parliament. I hope that we'll sit down somewhere along the way in a roundtable discussion that really respects the conversation, and where those remains should go. I keep saying that they’re here in Newfoundland, but they're not home yet. That's not my decision to make. I'm just glad and happy at this stage that they’re back in Newfoundland.

HM: Right. Chief Joe, thank you for telling us the story.

MJ: Thank you so much.

HM: Okay.

MJ: Take car.

HM: Bye-bye.

CH: That was Chief Mi'sel Joe of the Miawpukek First Nation. We reached him in St. John's.

[Music: Sombre]

House cat study

Guest: Roland Kays

CH: I know you want to believe your cat loves you. Or at least that it has the capacity to love. But I also know what a new study confirms. Cats are killers. Researchers in North Carolina led the study, in which scientists and ordinary cat owners in six countries monitored the behaviour of nearly one thousand cats. And they came to one undeniable conclusion: "Doctor Whiskerface" is very bad news for local wildlife. Roland Kays is the lead author of the new study. He's a zoologist at the North Carolina Museum of Natural Sciences. We reached him in Raleigh.

HM: Roland Kays, just how many animals is the average outdoor housecat cat killing according to your research?

ROLAND KAYS: Well, we had our lazy cats — which were bringing home about four or five animals a month — killing about four or five animals a month. And then are more active hundreds were more sort of around eleven or twelve.

HM: You're assuming they're lazy. maybe they're just not as good?

RK: Well, yeah. You're right. We're casting them as lazy, but maybe not as motivated, maybe not as good. We're not exactly sure. But there was a lot of variation. So we sort of tried, we ran the numbers with the lower and the upper numbers.

HM: Right. Now, we sort of knew already that cats were killers. We've heard they've had a big impact on songbirds. How does a research add to our understanding?

RK: Right. Well, so the thing that we were able to add was a spatial component. To see how much of an area these cats were using. So we had estimates before of how many that they killed, but we didn't know where they were doing that. And so by adding that, by tracking a bunch of these cats, and seeing how big of an area they used, we could do two things. First, we could say how many animals are they killing per area? And that allowed us to compare them with native predators. And then we could also just sort of say you know where are they hunting? Are they killing animals out in nature preserves or only near their house?

CO: And how do they stack up against native predators?

RK: Well, yeah. The results were a little scary. So they hunt a lot less than native predators. Because they’ve got their food bowl, but the native predators range over such a much larger area that the ecological impact in terms of the impact they're likely to have on prey species was much higher for the pet cats. It was at a population level four to ten times higher than we would expect from native predators.

CO: And is that because of the intensive nature of the hunting? Like a smaller a smaller area?

RK: It's because it’s in such a small area. Their home ranges were tiny. I couldn't believe, on average, it was sort of like three-point-six hectares — which is kind of if you can imagine like a radius of 100 metres around your house. That's kind of the circle that they were going, the average cat. And we had a few that moved a lot further. But we tracked over 900 cats across six countries. And the majority of them were quite the homebody.

HM: How did you monitor all these cats? How did the study actually work?

RK: Well, we did the citizen science approach. So we worked with pet owners. And they wanted to know where their cats go, of course. And so we brought them a G.P.S. tracker that they could put on a cat. And then we would go back and pick up the device later, and share with them, of course, the results. And we did that across North Carolina. And then we got some calls from some colleagues around the world who wanted to do it locally as well. So we ended up with big projects in the U.K., and Australia and New Zealand — all collecting data in exactly the same way — which allowed us to make these direct comparisons. And we all found that none of these cats were moving very far on average.

HM: So were you relying on the owners to tell you how many animals were being killed?

RK: That's right. That's how we got that data as well. And we know that's not perfect because cats are sometimes killing things and not bringing them home. So we had an adjustment factor. And the results that we got on that, like I said, that's in study before, and those were pretty similar to what other studies have found. The movement part was really the new part that let us make these sort of broader claims.

HM: What does your research tell us about the species that are a particular risk thanks to pet cats.

RK: So we know that cats are killing small prey — primarily small mammals like mice, birds and then lizards where lizards exists. The ones that we're most concerned about are when people are living close to endangered species. Rather, it's like this nature preserve in New Zealand that was right by our one of our study sites, or endangered small mammals, or endangered birds in a variety places around the U.S. Those are the cases where we really have to hope that pet owners will realize that their pets are really putting a strain on these species that are at risk and do something to keep their cats inside.

HM: So that's the primary message here to pet owners, to cat owners, is to keep them inside?

RK: Yes, keep them inside. I mean, if you're absolutely against that, you know there are other things. There’s a variety of sort of these super colorful collars that are supposed to keep cats from killing as much. I'm not sure how well they work. But you know, a lot of pet owners could maybe check for themselves, keep track of how many animals their cat brings home for a week or so. And then put the collar on and see if it makes a difference.

HM: Do you have a cat?

RK: I don't. I do not have a cat.

HM: Are you a cat person?

RK: On the on the big world of cat person/dog person, I'm more of a ferret person {HM laughing]. We had pet ferrets. And I really am fond of the weasel family. So I'm kind of none of the above.

HM: All right. Listen, I really appreciate you telling us about all your work. Thanks so much.

RK: Well, sure. Thanks for having me on.

HM: Nice to talk to you. Bye-bye.

RK: Okay, bye.

CH: Roland Kays is the lead author of a new study looking at the predatory behaviours of house cats — and urging you to keep yours indoors. We reached him in Raleigh, North Carolina.

Provide Transcript Feedback

CBC would like to acknowledge the support of the Broadcasting Accessibility Fund.

March 12, 2020 episode transcript

Social Sharing

More from this episode