Shooting Cats?

Arcadian

Is there something seriously wrong with these people?

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=51839095

As someone who has adopted a cat that was previously used for target practice and still bears the scars i know what i'd like to shoot:mad:

Ruu_Old

I don't know, one of the users claims they are or were diseased animals that claimed the life of a child.

muckwarrior

They're talking about diseased vermain, no different than rats. Not somebody's pet!

junkyard

I really can't see what pleasure there is to be had by going out killing animals tbh. I'd be the first to admit that I don't particularly like cats as they them selves are killers but I wouldn't go around killing them. I'd say anyone who enjoys killing animals for sport or pleasure must have a very cruel streak in them.

golden

Although not really a cat lover, dont like to see any cruelty to any animals. how do people know that the feral cats (which at one stage where domesticated) have so called diseases, surely to clarify things you have to capture the animal and do a blood test to see whether or not the cat has infections. Perhaps the only way to try and alleviate the feral problem is to capture feral cats and neuture them and release when they are ready to go back. All owners of any cats/dogs who are not going to breed should really get the job done both on the male and female animals.

RandomOne

Arcadian wrote:

Is there something seriously wrong with these people?

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=51839095

As someone who has adopted a cat that was previously used for target practice and still bears the scars i know what i'd like to shoot:mad:

It's quite clear they're shooting on a farm to clear vermin. Whilst I have a problem with using the wrong ammo and being a crap shot causing suffering (not aimed at original thread poster, general issue) whether it's rats, rabbits, foxes or wild cats, if they're causing a problem to the farm, it's a time-old (traditional) pest control thing.

Just because we see them as cutesy creatures who (possibly) could be domesticated, doesn't mean the farmer does, especially whenhis livelihood's at stake. Someone who's a good shot, shoots to kill, vermin and diseased creatures is a far preferable control method than setting traps or poison IMO. They have as much right to protect their animals/livelihood as we do to object.

Arcadian

Yes they do have the right to protect their livestock, we all know that a 3 or 4 kilo feral cat can easily bring down your average heifer:rolleyes:

muckwarrior

Arcadian wrote:

Yes they do have the right to protect their livestock, we all know that a 3 or 4 kilo feral cat can easily bring down your average heifer:rolleyes:

Well done on such a strong arguement there. I'm sure nobody will be able to pick a single hole in it :rolleyes:

grimloch

Arcadian wrote:

Yes they do have the right to protect their livestock, we all know that a 3 or 4 kilo feral cat can easily bring down your average heifer:rolleyes:

Possibly true, but the thread, which I assume you didn't read in full, states that the cats have been eating his rabbits.

Jotter

yeah but if it wasnt the cats eating the rabbits it would be a fox and if it wasnt a fox it would be a dog etc so I think hed be better off making sure his rabbits are in a safer area than trying to shoot every animal that comes on his farm.

junkyard

He's probably going to shoot the rabbits anyway.:(

nando

Quote:
Originally Posted by Arcadian
Yes they do have the right to protect their livestock, we all know that a 3 or 4 kilo feral cat can easily bring down your average heifer

Maybe not, buy cat faeces is the primary source of Toxoplasma gondii (toxoplasmosis) infection to sheep in Ireland.

EDIT: Not that I'm necessarily advocating shooting feral cats! Just recognising that cats can in fact pose a health risk to livestock in Ireland despite their small stature.

TempestSabre

I'm curious what other (cost effective) methods would people who have a problem with shooting, suggest in dealing with feral cats. Trapping them and lethal injection?

newby.204

Not that im sure it matters to you "far more intelligent than i". I had a rabbit, have a cat, used to have about 10 and i own a dog, who came to me because he was killing a farmers chickens and the farmer didn want to kill him/have him put down.

I also own a shotgun and a rifle(ill keep it simple for the uneducated folk) and it has NOTHING to do with killing.NOTHING TO DO WITH KILLING.

With regards to my "cruel streak" i shoot and hunt as a sport and the enjoyment comes from the SKILL involved to perfrom the shot.

The post you refer to is for the purposes of animal control(vermin) that includes wild cats, crows, foxes and other such threats to a mans livelyhood, if a restaraunt ownner had rats you wouldnt care about rat poison now would you!!

Ill leave it at that as im sure you will have so sefl-righteous rant that pulls my simple explanation apart, as all you PC crowd do!!

Garth

http://www.neighborhoodcats.org/whatistnr.htm

TempestSabre

Garth wrote:

http://www.neighborhoodcats.org/whatistnr.htm

How expensive is that compared to shooting the cat?

Riamfada

[Angerandrage]I read that thread yesterday and I was sickened at the types of people there are out there. The Op in that thread was more concerned with the pleasure in taking a life as he dosnt seem like a farmer.(hes prob already killed all the bunnies) I hope somday Mr Barretta gets turned on him .

Report me , ban me .. whatever but Sick Piece of ****

in their thread they call people who object to their sadistic practises "Trolls" . I guess somone with mental issues never know they have mental issues . [/Angerandrage]

I have had my cat for two years. Saved him when he was only 5 weeks old .

junkyard

You don't need any SKILL to kill something with a shotgun ffs.:mad:

TempestSabre

Its a bit gung ho alright. Doesn't seem as clinical as you'd expect for pest control. Or maybe hes just a dire shot. (no offense) Personally I don't have a problem with shooting, or shooting as a form of pest control, if its done properly. But its not the most effective as some searching on the net shows. It also indicate that feral cats are "primarily the result of pet owners' abandonment or failure to spay and neuter their animals". I do have a problem with people buying "pets" in urban areas, failing to manage them, and everyone else suffers, including the animal.

http://www.irishanimals.com/cats/21.html
http://www.feralcat.com/
http://messybeast.com/feralkit.htm

I was of the perhaps misunderstanding that stray animals that get caught, if not rehomed are usually put down eventually as the centers do not have the resources to house them indefinately.

...U.S. animal shelters are forced to kill an estimated 15 million homeless cats and dogs annually. The alternative to humane euthanasia for almost every stray is a violent end or slow, painful death. Many "throwaways" die mercilessly outdoors from starvation, disease, abuse --- or as food to a predator...

TempestSabre

junkyard wrote:

You don't need any SKILL to kill something with a shotgun ffs.:mad:

I would have thought a scoped rifle of some kind would be more effective. I assume...You'd be more likely to wound or maim with a shotgun.

junkyard

I'd be more inclined to trap them and get them put down humanely if there was a real problem or else secure your own animals. Even though I own a shotgun myself the last thing I would do is kill an animal no matter what type of gun I had.

Garth

TempestSabre wrote:

How expensive is that compared to shooting the cat?

Well, more expensive but given that "feral cat control" via killing has been proven in country after country after country to be completely ineffective (cats are incredibly efficient breeders), chosing a method that actually works (but doesn't make people feel powerful or big) might be wiser.

TempestSabre

Garth wrote:

Well, more expensive but given that "feral cat control" via killing has been proven in country after country after country to be completely ineffective (cats are incredibly efficient breeders), chosing a method that actually works (but doesn't make people feel powerful or big) might be wiser.

Funny, thats the impression I get from the link I posted....:)

grimloch

Garth wrote:

Well, more expensive but given that "feral cat control" via killing has been proven in country after country after country to be completely ineffective (cats are incredibly efficient breeders), chosing a method that actually works (but doesn't make people feel powerful or big) might be wiser.

I don't think it's entirely fair to compare the two like that. Unless we employee dedicated cat shooters it's not the same thing.

With the way animal shelters are at the moment, sans government funding for example, does the TNR method have any chance of success? I wouldn't think so. At least not for the time being. Now not that I actually pay tax or anything, but I certainly wouldn't be opposed to paying an extra euro or two a year to get this project off the ground if it's actually been proven to work.

Kazu

ive shot at least 25 cats which where wild and no one pets with a shotgun

An organism called chlamydia,. causes abortion during the last month of pregnancy, ... The organism is a coccidium of cats spread to sheep

You don't need any SKILL to kill something with a shotgun ffs.

yes you do there not stupid :rolleyes:

nando

Kazu wrote:

An organism called chlamydia,. causes abortion during the last month of pregnancy, ... The organism is a coccidium of cats spread to sheep

Just to keep the facts straight:

Chlamydia is not a coccidium, it is a bacterium.
Chlamydia felis that commonly infects cats is not linked to abortion in sheep.
Chlamydophila abortus is the chlamydial species that causes abortion in sheep.

Toxoplasma gondii is a coccidium of cats that can cause abortion in sheep.

FranknFurter

The idea of shooting cats is ridiculous.
Cats are not native to this country, we, us humans intriduced them. It is our mess and we have a responsibility to fix it humanely.

Shooting is not humane, at the best, you are dependant on how good the shot is, where it hits and cats are quite amazing, they can often carry on with horrific painfull injuries for days before death.

The only humane method is to have them caught in a humane trap and brought to a rescue, or at worst, euthanised properly by a vet if there is absolutely no other option.

(By the way, does a gun licience give permission for the shooting of domestic pets owned by somone? Because unless you can prove 1000% an animal is "feral" you would be breaking the terms of your licence surely? Its rarely possible to be 100% positive of anything).

b

Umiq88

How is it people can argue so much about something they know so little about.

Some seem to be under the impression that there are lunitics with guns rampaging around the country killing defencless little kittens for amusment.

We're talking about wild cats here which have been wild for 1 or 2 generations who are damaging a farmers property and possesion by what ever means taking his hens and the like. Do you not think the farmer has the right to dipose of the vermin. Shooting is a cheap humane effect way of killing vermin. Obviously the farmer has an obligation to be competant with the gun and be able to hit what he's aiming at.

Some people seem to be ender the impression that a shotgun is not a very accurate or dangerous gun. This just goes to show some of the naiveness of the posters here there are lots off different loads for a shotgun and chokes a thight choked shotgun with a heavy load of bb's is extremely lethal even at ranges of 100yards and more than sufficent for killing feral cats.

The fact that cats are not naitve to this country further supports the idea that they have to be controlled. Deer can be used as an example. Deer are not native to this country have no natural predators and roam the country side if they were not kept in there numbers by hunters (who i might add need to have licences and permits its not just any old joe smoe who can aquire a rifle licence) they would cause awful grief and damage to the country in the US there are hundreds of accidents with deers hitting cars and they do awful damage to crops and trees

You bring up the note that you cant be 100% sure if an animal is feral. Well we had a dog who we had as a pet who was a family dog and played with us as kids. The dog attacked some neighbours sheep and killed one or two the farmer went out with the shotgun and put the dog down. This wasnt a wild dog but was causing the farmer grief who had ever right to put the animal down


And as for other methods poison is hardly humane or safe for that matter we put down rat poisin at home. Once our dog got at it and ate some. The dog was howling all night long and died in the morning hardly humane. A single shot with a rifle or shotgun does the job much better wtih little or no pain to the animal.

The fact of the matter is that vermin need to be diposed of and shooting is a simple cost effective humane ay of doing it

FFS Why dont you go port your anger somewhere usful try ring up the american military and inform them of the TNR (trap neuter release) system maybe they can try it on the iraqis

Some people have completely lost touch with realitiy.

FranknFurter

psittacosis wrote:

How is it people can argue so much about something they know so little about.

You know this about people how? Just because people don't agree with you does not mean they know nothing of which they speak.

psittacosis wrote:

Some seem to be under the impression that there are lunitics with guns rampaging around the country killing defencless little kittens for amusment.

Show me where anyone has said that?

psittacosis wrote:

We're talking about wild cats here which have been wild for 1 or 2 generations who are damaging a farmers property and possesion by what ever means taking his hens and the like. Do you not think the farmer has the right to dipose of the vermin. Shooting is a cheap humane effect way of killing vermin. Obviously the farmer has an obligation to be competant with the gun and be able to hit what he's aiming at.

You are assuming a lot here. You are assuming a farmer will wait till his property is damaged before shooting, most won't.
You are assuming each cat is feral. Again, thats being assumed. The cat he shoots "just in case" could be the much loved pet of jane or johnny down the road.
You are assuming the farmer's idea of being "competant with a gun" is actually right. I might be "Competant" at swimming in my eyes, to a professional I'm certainly not. Or maybe I *was* at one time but my eyesight has got bad and I've not noticed. "ooops, me old eyes aint as good as they used to be haha" = some injured animal wandering in agony for god knows how long.

psittacosis wrote:

Some people seem to be ender the impression that a shotgun is not a very accurate or dangerous gun. This just goes to show some of the naiveness of the posters here there are lots off different loads for a shotgun and chokes a thight choked shotgun with a heavy load of bb's is extremely lethal even at ranges of 100yards and more than sufficent for killing feral cats.

Who cares frankly? A gun is a gun as far as the cat is concerned when it is shot or injured with one.

psittacosis wrote:

The fact that cats are not naitve to this country further supports the idea that they have to be controlled. Deer can be used as an example. Deer are not native to this country have no natural predators and roam the country side if they were not kept in there numbers by hunters (who i might add need to have licences and permits its not just any old joe smoe who can aquire a rifle licence) they would cause awful grief and damage to the country in the US there are hundreds of accidents with deers hitting cars and they do awful damage to crops and trees.

The subject is cats not deer. Where in the licence does it state that potential pets can be killed in case they may some day kill a chicken?

psittacosis wrote:

You bring up the note that you cant be 100% sure if an animal is feral. Well we had a dog who we had as a pet who was a family dog and played with us as kids. The dog attacked some neighbours sheep and killed one or two the farmer went out with the shotgun and put the dog down. This wasnt a wild dog but was causing the farmer grief who had ever right to put the animal down

In your opinion. Mine would have been to discuss the issue with the farmer, compensate him for his loss, and then be a responsible pet owner and decide upon the fate of the dog in question. Anyone, farmer or not, taking the law into his / her own hands is wrong.

psittacosis wrote:

And as for other methods poison is hardly humane or safe for that matter we put down rat poisin at home. Once our dog got at it and ate some. The dog was howling all night long and died in the morning hardly humane. A single shot with a rifle or shotgun does the job much better wtih little or no pain to the animal.

See above. And again, the issue is the shooting of cats.

psittacosis wrote:

The fact of the matter is that vermin need to be diposed of and shooting is a simple cost effective humane ay of doing it.

Cats are not considered "vermin" by the majority of people in this country or by law, you may want to look that up.
As for "a single shot with a rifle does the job quicker etc etc"... again, see above.

psittacosis wrote:

FFS Why dont you go port your anger somewhere usful try ring up the american military and inform them of the TNR (trap neuter release) system maybe they can try it on the iraqis.

:rolleyes: Why does that remark not surprise me?

psittacosis wrote:

Some people have completely lost touch with realitiy.

We agree there.

B

Umiq88

Go over to the thread in question and read the op's reply to the matter

Im not going to bother arguing with you as its not going to go anywhere

You keep sayin that im assuming alot well if your looking at it like that you have assumed as i have i was giving the op the benifit of the doubt

And yes we were talking about cats and not deer but the principal still applies cats are not native and introduced as pets if they become wild there is nothing to stop them breeding out of control

And yes the farmer has right to take action with the dog. The dog took two sheep he took one dog i think its more we should be compensating him he took a pet "we" took part of his income and if the dog was not stopped he would continue doing it.

With anything there is going to be a certain chance for error and yes there can be miss hits but any competant shooter will follow up with a second shot and kill the animal. Whats that you say what if he's not competant everywhere you go no matter what you do theres always someone like that. Take driving how many people die on the roads how many people are not competant to drive how many accidents and hit and runs are there what are we supposed to do there are new measures coming in to try and prevent this. But a certain amount of responsability lies on ther person using the gun driving the car doing whatever.

FranknFurter

psittacosis wrote:

Go over to the thread in question and read the op's reply to the matter

I have done, I dont see your point being made.

psittacosis wrote:

Im not going to bother arguing with you as its not going to go anywhere

Errm, ok, I assume you mean after your argument below?
(BTW, I'm seeing this as a "discussion" thread, not an "argument" thread. Sorry if you're not)

psittacosis wrote:

You keep sayin that im assuming alot well if your looking at it like that you have assumed as i have i was giving the op the benifit of the doubt

I was responding to your post that I quoted specifically.

psittacosis wrote:

And yes we were talking about cats and not deer but the principal still applies cats are not native and introduced as pets if they become wild there is nothing to stop them breeding out of control

I never said they were *not* breeding out of control. Everybody knows the cat population is out of control and somthing needs to be done about. I said, it is impossible to know which cat as feral and which is not. And that (IMO) regular citzens upping and shooting them is not the responsible action, and is not even legal.
IMO, much more defined gun laws need to be introduced if for no other reason than to inform certain farmers that having a gun is not a right to shoot whatever the hell they want instead of taking the proper responsible legal action the rest of the world has to. Why should a farmer be above the regular laws for such problems? How do they think the rest of the world copes? If we all shot everything that caused us problems the country would be in chaos.

Deer are rarely kept as pets btw, and usually are on land for a reason.

psittacosis wrote:

And yes the farmer has right to take action with the dog. The dog took two sheep he took one dog i think its more we should be compensating him he took a pet "we" took part of his income and if the dog was not stopped he would continue doing it.

I already said that part of the responsible action would be for you to compensate him for his loss, (maybe you should re-read), wheres your "argument"? All I said was that in my opinion the decision on the fate of the dog should have come down to the owners. If their decision was inappropriate then there are legal ways to take care of that.
A responsible owner of any animal will try their best to do the right thing, an irresponsible owner lets others sort out their mess for them.
I'm fed up with people thinking that the answer to a behavioural problem in an animal is for it to be PTS, that should be the exception when all other avenues have been explored and eliminated.

psittacosis wrote:

With anything there is going to be a certain chance for error and yes there can be miss hits but any competant shooter will follow up with a second shot and kill the animal. Whats that you say what if he's not competant everywhere you go no matter what you do theres always someone like that. Take driving how many people die on the roads how many people are not competant to drive how many accidents and hit and runs are there what are we supposed to do there are new measures coming in to try and prevent this. But a certain amount of responsability lies on ther person using the gun driving the car doing whatever.

Are you seriously comparing a (albiet bad or incompetant) driver having an accident (ie: not going out with the intent to kill or maim),... to a farmer purposefully opening a gun cabinet, cleaning and inspecting a gun, loading a gun, going out and actively seeking an animal to kill or maim?

The responsible action would be to inform the authorities and while the proper legal actions are being taken I would take measures to insure my chickens were properly secured against such an attack.
Not the "easy way out", certainly not as "easy" as going out and shooting what you think might be the right cat, but the responsible, legal way, yes definitely.

You are entitled to your opinions, just as I am entitled to my opinions.
I am entitled to post my opinions for discussion, just as you are entitled to post your opinions for discussion, this is a discussion board after all is'nt it?

I'm not saying that feral cats shouldnt be removed and controlled, Im saying there are better and more responsible and effective ways other than shooting them.

b

Umiq88

A discussion is one thing this is an argument you've taken alot of stuff out of context and twisted them. You are obviously from the city and have made up your own mind about what goes on and happens in the country side.

FranknFurter

psittacosis wrote:

A discussion is one thing this is an argument you've taken alot of stuff out of context and twisted them. You are obviously from the city and have made up your own mind about what goes on and happens in the country side.

Actually, if you read back you will see I have twisted nothing. Also I have no opinion as such as to "what happens in the countryside" specifically in the context of this discussion. Law is law, and farmers are not above it, and just as it is illegal to do somthing in the city it is also illegal to do the same "in the countryside".

B

Umiq88

Taking me out of context again up there i was in no way comparing a road accident to someone purposly setting out the kill an animal. The subject was neglegence and how and animal can be injured from a badly taken shot just as a person can be injured/killed from a bad incompetant driver the common thing here the person responsable not taking the care to be practiced and competant behind their device and consequently causing harm/unnessecary damage

So you think if a farmer has a problem with a wild cat taking some of his chickens he should ring the ring up the guards and have them call out to dispose of the cat. Rather than using his legally aquired firearm to humanly dispatch of vermin which by definition is "Various small animals or insects, such as rats or cockroaches, that are destructive, annoying, or injurious to health OR Animals that prey on game, such as foxes or weasels." which is mentioned on a gun licence as an acceptable reason for owning a firearm and a firearm is an acceptable method of dispatch. You go down to a guarda station and ask them which is the better option.

civdef

Law is law, and farmers are not above it, and just as it is illegal to do somthing in the city it is also illegal to do the same "in the countryside".

There is no law being broken by shooting feral cats in a manner that does not endanger public safety.

Hellrazer

This thread just shows the typical stupid mindedness of farmers and hunters.

I rescued one of these so called "feral" cats after a farmer shot the mother for absolutely no reason whatsoever-just walked up to where the cats were bedding down and shot the mother with the comment that the rest would die now that theyve no food.

That cat is still with me years on and any of the others I found homes for are the same--all are perfectly happy pets.

The sooner the better we have a ban on all guns and all forms of cruel so called "sports" the better.
But it will never happen as the fooking farmers have too much say in the running of this country.
Im not even going to go into shooting for "sports"

If I had my way Id set all you hunters off running in a field and gun you lot down with a few farmers thrown in for the "sport"
Would be better than shooting innocent animals.

And while Im ranting the "shooting" forum may aswell be called the "Animal abuse" forum now with all the "Feral cats/goats/hens" threads and the best method of shooting them.Im sickened that the mods have let those threads continue.

WallysWorld

Hellrazer wrote:

This thread just shows the typical stupid mindedness of farmers and hunters.

This post just shows your stupid mindedness.

Hellrazer wrote:

I rescued one of these so called "feral" cats after a farmer shot the mother for absolutely no reason whatsoever-just walked up to where the cats were bedding down and shot the mother with the comment that the rest would die now that theyve no food.
That cat is still with me years on and any of the others I found homes for are the same--all are perfectly happy pets.

I live in the country, I hunt but my family have also taken in the odd stray cat over the years, Im not a heartless b*astard either but every stray cat in the country cant be taken in, even if they could find enough people it still wouldnt work many of these cats are too wild to be domesticated, unless maybe you find them young.

Hellrazer wrote:

The sooner the better we have a ban on all guns and all forms of cruel so called "sports" the better.
But it will never happen as the fooking farmers have too much say in the running of this country.
Im not even going to go into shooting for "sports"

Yeah this is your opinion thats fine, I dont ever expect everyone in the country to like shooting, but maybe your opinion on the matter would matter a bit more to me and other people if you didnt come out with stuff like whats quoted below.

Hellrazer wrote:

If I had my way Id set all you hunters off running in a field and gun you lot down with a few farmers thrown in for the "sport"
Would be better than shooting innocent animals.

Death threats?!!, fair enough you probably dont have a gun to carry through on this but its still a bit much, your a mod for f*cks sake act like one and try to argue your point, FranknFurter while I dont agree with him (or her) hes at least kept it above the level of idle threats.

Hellrazer wrote:

And while Im ranting the "shooting" forum may aswell be called the "Animal abuse" forum now with all the "Feral cats/goats/hens" threads and the best method of shooting them.Im sickened that the mods have let those threads continue.

The mods let them continue because its a shooting forum, where we talk about shooting:rolleyes: , if you dont like it dont read it.

Hellrazer

WallysWorld wrote:

This post just shows your stupid mindedness.

Your opinion--Ill stick to mine.

I live in the country, I hunt but my family have also taken in the odd stray cat over the years, Im not a heartless b*astard either but every stray cat in the country cant be taken in, even if they could find enough people it still wouldnt work many of these cats are too wild to be domesticated, unless maybe you find them young.

Maybe you`re not a heartless bastard but from spending most of my summers in the country a lot of what I saw is downright cruelty to animals--horse gets a bad leg--its shot,dog worries sheep--its shot,a sheep falls--its shot and the list goes on and on.

Yeah this is your opinion thats fine, I dont ever expect everyone in the country to like shooting, but maybe your opinion on the matter would matter a bit more to me and other people if you didnt come out with stuff like whats quoted below.

Im not anti-shooting.Im anti-shooting animals just for the fun of it.

Death threats?!!, fair enough you probably dont have a gun to carry through on this but its still a bit much, your a mod for f*cks sake act like one and try to argue your point, FranknFurter while I dont agree with him (or her) hes at least kept it above the level of idle threats.

Come on seriously--youre taking that as a death threat(ever hear of sarcasm??).Enough said really.Its obvious that you take you`re shooting seriously-Well I take my stance on animal cruelty seriously so much to the point that I made that statement(which by the way is not a death threat although saying that maybe I was wrong to say Id like to take pot shots at you lot---releasing the hounds might be a better option and let the animals get their own back(hint--sarcasm again in case you dont get it this time) and if you notice the very first post in this thread states the same point.

The mods let them continue because its a shooting forum, where we talk about shooting:rolleyes: , if you dont like it dont read it.

Well if you dont like my stance on animal cruelty then dont bother posting your support of it here.
Richie

Garth

The facts are that

1. it's been proven time and time again that simply killing domestic felines (as a species) is ineffective at controlling the populations.

2. no matter how many times you say this, show the studies, offer alternatives, people will guns persist in killing them, and saying they're doing it to "control" pest populations. DESPITE it being completely ineffective.

Pissing in the wind. Essentially. Or they enjoy it, which most deny.

Somebody is lying or deluding themselves.

Look at it this way.

Two scenarios

1.

You look out your window and there's a cat. You see him around a number of times. There are birds, mice, etc in the area so the cat stays and perhaps a female joins him. Soon enough, there are kittens. The next year you have 8 cats in your back field. They soon mate (the whole brother/sister/father/mother thing means little to the feline world) and you have, oh -- (assuming 4 are female) approx 16 new cats, bringing you to a frustrating 24 total. Now, you're finding faeces everywhere, you can't sleep for the fighting and mating and the neighbours (or hens, whatever) are complaining.

The cats are also skinny and sickly, and sometimes you find ones that have simply died of natural causes. There isn't enough food to go around anymore.

So you shoot them, but scare a couple away with the noise and next year, you have 10 again.

So you shoot them, but more wander over. You shoot cats again this year.

It becomes an annual thing. Seems fairly futile if you have a brain in your head at all.

2.

You notice a cat in your back field. You see him a number of times. He's not tame, but he keeps the mice at bay, so you don't mind. You borrow a humane trap off your local veterinarian and in two days have the old boy back on his patch -- only he's not spraying anymore. He also doesn't really fight much, or have the desire to mate.

One or two more cats join the area and you have them spayed/neutered as well. It hasn't cost you much, and they aren't reproducing. What they are doing, however, is defending their territory. No other cats are arriving.

At your vets advice you stick food out once every couple months with wormer in it, to keep the cats healthy and minimise risks associated with cat faeces.

---

If everybody TNR'd their cats, we'd be in the same situation as in many countries now where all kittens born are wanted ones, and there simply are not any unwanted domestic felines.

People have been shooting cats for years, it obviously has not worked as the stray cat problem is worse than ever.

Gordon Gekko

Excellent post.

WallysWorld

Hellrazer wrote:

Maybe you`re not a heartless bastard but from spending most of my summers in the country a lot of what I saw is downright cruelty to animals--horse gets a bad leg--its shot,dog worries sheep--its shot,a sheep falls--its shot and the list goes on and on.

Horse gets a bad leg and suffers until it dies of starvation because it cant move around enough to graze, a horse's leg say if it was broken is extremly difficult to heal and probably very expensive too, the average farmer would not be able to afford it so whats the alternative? Is the suffering and slowly dieing preferable to a quick painless death?

A dog worries sheep until the sheep has a heart attack from fright and exhaustion and dies, the dog starts chasing another sheep, whats more important the sheep or the dog? whats crueler a dog dieing or a sheep dieing?

A sheep falls you just stand it up again! (sheep aren't very bright) I dont really know where you got that example.

Farmers and people in the country have to make hard choices about animals and their welfare, its not so cut and dried.

Hellrazer wrote:

Come on seriously--youre taking that as a death threat(ever hear of sarcasm)

Yeah it was sarcasm, I know. What I meant was your a mod, I thought your job was to keep boards free of the sort of posts where you just insult everyone and make no real relavant point whatsoever, like your first post on the subject.

Hellrazer wrote:

Well if you dont like my stance on animal cruelty then dont bother posting your support of it here.
Richie

I just wanted to make the above points. I have no doubt that you spent your summers in the country but I also have no doubt you understood very little of what was going on there

Hellrazer

WallysWorld wrote:

Horse gets a bad leg and suffers until it dies of starvation because it cant move around enough to graze, a horse's leg say if it was broken is extremly difficult to heal and probably very expensive too, the average farmer would not be able to afford it so whats the alternative? Is the suffering and slowly dieing preferable to a quick painless death?

Typical country response that one is anyway--Cant afford it???Most of the farmers I know are not the poor people they`re made out to be.
I offered to take a horse from a farmer and pay for the Vets bills and he refused and went out and shot the poor thing.

A dog worries sheep until the sheep has a heart attack from fright and exhaustion and dies, the dog starts chasing another sheep, whats more important the sheep or the dog? whats crueler a dog dieing or a sheep dieing?

Well in my opinion the dog is only doing whats natural,wheras the farmer gets his shotgun and blows away a family pet.In 2 instances Ive seen the dog that was shot was accused in the wrong.Bit late when the dog is dead to apologise.
And yeah a dog is more important than a sheep.More loyal as a pet,protector and friend.

A sheep falls you just stand it up again! (sheep aren't very bright) I dont really know where you got that example.

I dont either

Farmers and people in the country have to make hard choices about animals and their welfare, its not so cut and dried.

Maybe its not so "cut and dried" its just that I personally find a lot of the way farmers deal with their animals to be extremely cruel--Thats the point Im trying to make.

Yeah it was sarcasm, I know. What I meant was your a mod, I thought your job was to keep boards free of the sort of posts where you just insult everyone and make no real relavant point whatsoever, like your first post on the subject.

So a mod is not allowed to have an opinion now are they not.When someone posts in the form that I moderate on a subject that I feel so strongly about Im going to post my feelings wheter Im a mod or not.And while we`re on the subject of insults I think you should go back and read a few of the threads in the shooting forum where posters from here have been insulted.As well as one post in particular about myself

holy **** we stirred up a right wasps nest over there on pets forum, even the moderator is screeching like shot cat

I particulary find that post offensive.

I just wanted to make the above points. I have no doubt that you spent your summers in the country but I also have no doubt you understood very little of what was going on there

No I understand completely what is going on there.There is a lot of out and out cruelty being carried out by farmers in this country.

WallysWorld

Hellrazer wrote:

Typical country response that one is anyway--Cant afford it???Most of the farmers I know are not the poor people they`re made out to be.

A typical city response that, there seems to be this opinion that farmers are all more well off than they let on, there not poor but neither are they rolling in cash, the same as the majority in the country. Im talkin thousands of pounds with no garantee of succsess, in fact quite a small chance of it ever healing properly.

Hellrazer wrote:

I offered to take a horse from a farmer and pay for the Vets bills and he refused and went out and shot the poor thing.

Take it and put it where? I assume your a city dweller, correct me if im wrong. If you really did have somewhere to keep it then probably the farmer was wrong and should have let you have it though perhaps he thought it would be prolonging its suffering.[/QUOTE]

Hellrazer wrote:

Well in my opinion the dog is only doing whats natural,wheras the farmer gets his shotgun and blows away a family pet.In 2 instances Ive seen the dog that was shot was accused in the wrong.Bit late when the dog is dead to apologise.
And yeah a dog is more important than a sheep.More loyal as a pet,protector and friend.

If its a domesticated dog, its wild instincts or what comes naturally to it that are dangerous should be trained out of it for its own sake, if it was a family pet and it was let worry sheep then it was neglected or at least not minded responsibly and the owners have to accept the lions share of the blame, which is I think the law on the matter. What were the circumstances surrounding the two dogs shot in the wrong?
To the farmer the sheep is also very important its literally his livelyhood dieing in the field, if the ewe was pregnant then it could be hundreds of euros lost because some fella let his dog down and didnt look after it. Its opening a can of worms trying say one animals life is more important than another.

Hellrazer wrote:

Maybe its not so "cut and dried" its just that I personally find a lot of the way farmers deal with their animals to be extremely cruel--Thats the point Im trying to make.

I get the what your saying but what you personally find to be cruel might be the only practical option open to a farmer, I know of no farmer I have ever known who would purposly be cruel to an animal, there may be exceptions but theres bad apples in every walk of life.

Hellrazer wrote:

So a mod is not allowed to have an opinion now are they not.When someone posts in the form that I moderate on a subject that I feel so strongly about Im going to post my feelings wheter Im a mod or not.And while we`re on the subject of insults I think you should go back and read a few of the threads in the shooting forum where posters from here have been insulted.As well as one post in particular about myself

No you can have an opinion, fair enough judt because your a moderator dosnt mean you cant say these things its not that important, just responding to insult with an insult just makes for a crappy thread - descends into flames - tears in the morning etc. etc.

Hellrazer

WallysWorld wrote:

A typical city response that, there seems to be this opinion that farmers are all more well off than they let on, there not poor but neither are they rolling in cash, the same as the majority in the country. Im talkin thousands of pounds with no garantee of succsess, in fact quite a small chance of it ever healing properly.

Ok Ill not argue the point of whether farmers are well off or not anymore with you but every farmer that I know of in the South East where my wife is from have made millions from selling sites to us Dubs and thats a fact not a generalisation.

Take it and put it where? I assume your a city dweller, correct me if im wrong. If you really did have somewhere to keep it then probably the farmer was wrong and should have let you have it though perhaps he thought it would be prolonging its suffering.

As I said my wifes family is from the South East and they were willing to let me keep the horse on their land indefinately.

If its a domesticated dog, its wild instincts or what comes naturally to it that are dangerous should be trained out of it for its own sake, if it was a family pet and it was let worry sheep then it was neglected or at least not minded responsibly and the owners have to accept the lions share of the blame, which is I think the law on the matter. What were the circumstances surrounding the two dogs shot in the wrong?
To the farmer the sheep is also very important its literally his livelyhood dieing in the field, if the ewe was pregnant then it could be hundreds of euros lost because some fella let his dog down and didnt look after it. Its opening a can of worms trying say one animals life is more important than another.

The circumstances surrounding the shooting of the 2 dogs was a case of mistaken identity.
Two dogs were caught "worrying" sheep of a similar breed to the ones my wifes brother owned.The farmer in question came up to the house wherethe farmer told my brother in law told him that the dogs were the ones that killed the sheep which was totally impossible as the dogs were locked in their run at the time.

Farmer came back later that night and shot the 2 dogs in front of the kids who were in bed when he thought there was no one home.Then sent a bill for 2000 euro for the lost sheep.
Worst part of it was that he lost 2 more sheep to the same dogs a couple of nights later and he has still not apologised or offered compensation for the lost pets.

I get the what your saying but what you personally find to be cruel might be the only practical option open to a farmer, I know of no farmer I have ever known who would purposly be cruel to an animal, there may be exceptions but theres bad apples in every walk of life.

Fair point---Im just saying it as Ive seen it.Maybe there are a few bad apples but from my observations farming can be quite cruel.

No you can have an opinion, fair enough judt because your a moderator dosnt mean you cant say these things its not that important, just responding to insult with an insult just makes for a crappy thread - descends into flames - tears in the morning etc. etc.

As I said before what you picked up as an insult was sarcasm.I have already admitted that I am totally anti-blood sports and I stand by my feelings on that matter.
And theres insulting going on from both sides of the argument--Animal lovers are now "Animal Nazis" according to someone else on the Shooting forum.

I suppose in a way all Im trying to say that there are other ways of culling "vermin" than discussing openly the best "bullets" to kill a goat/chicken,"insert name of innocent animal here"

TempestSabre

Nature is cruel.

peasant

Hellrazer wrote:

Farmer came back later that night and shot the 2 dogs in front of the kids who were in bed when he thought there was no one home.Then sent a bill for 2000 euro for the lost sheep.
Worst part of it was that he lost 2 more sheep to the same dogs a couple of nights later and he has still not apologised or offered compensation for the lost pets.

I take it said farmer was taken by the scruff of his neck down to the next garda station, banned from ever owning a gun again and subsequently prosecuted and fined ??

I do know that a farmer has the right to shoot dogs that worry his livestock ...but only if those dogs are caught in the act and on his land. I don't particularly like that law, but can see where it is coming from.

Trespassing onto somebody elses property and subsequently shooting their dogs on the other hand is a criminal offence ...nothing more nothing less.

Garth

peasant wrote:

I take it said farmer was taken by the scruff of his neck down to the next garda station, banned from ever owning a gun again and subsequently prosecuted and fined ??

Yeah, right. Can you imagine trying to ban a farmer from owning a gun (or doing anything he damn well feels like?).

Not here. Farmers are practically worshipped as saints.

civdef

Actually, the gardai will take any complaints involving misuse of a firearm seriously, and will not hesitate to take a gun off someone if they have been using it in an unsafe or criminal manner, farmers very much included.

If the case mentioned took place as described above, I hope the owners of the dog alerted the Gardai.

Dyr

WallysWorld wrote:

the average farmer would not be able to afford it so whats the alternative? I

Most my mothers family were farmers, they moaned about their finances when my parents were barely keeping their heads above water, they had'nt a clue what "poor" actually meant.

The average farmer in this country can well afford it. Whats more likely is that the average farmer is not going to pay a vet's bill when he can just pull a trigger. I've seen people on welfare taking serious whacks for vets bills because they cared enough about their animal's wellbeing to do the right thing "cant afford it" actually means "won't pay it"

fits

Garth wrote:

Yeah, right. Can you imagine trying to ban a farmer from owning a gun (or doing anything he damn well feels like?).

Not here. Farmers are practically worshipped as saints.

There is so much crap being written on this thread on both sides, its unreal!

All farmers are cruel, all city people know nothing...

The gardai do actually take misuse of a firearm seriously. My own dad lost sheep and lambs to a neighbours alsation. He saw the dog worrying sheep constantly. One day he arrived to find more sheep and lambs injured and dead and lost his temper, went home, got his shotgun and shot the dog in the neighbours yard. He was taken to court and lost his license. The neighbour conceded there was a problem with the dog, but quite rightly, wasnt going to let him away with behaviour like that.

Euthanising sick or injured animals such as a horse with a bad leg isnt always such a bad thing. Each individual case is different. Farmers do have to balance the books the same as the rest of us, and most try and do that with trying to treat their animals in the best way possible.

Hellrazer

civdef wrote:

If the case mentioned took place as described above, I hope the owners of the dog alerted the Gardai.

Nope..

They couldnt alert the garda as they were in the process of buying a site off the same fella to extend their house and were afraid that he`d pull out of the deal if they did and which he did threaten to do anyway.

And he kept quoting that he was well within his right to shoot the dogs.My brother in law wasnt even sure if he was lying or not.
And to be totally honest the two of them dont even speak anymore after the land deal went through despite them living 200 yards from each other.

I think this bloke has it in for them cos hes threatened to shoot the new dogs aswell if he caught them loose despite there being a radio fence up now surrounding the property and a huge run for the 2 of them when theres no one home.