Cat is a Killer

pilly

riffmongous wrote: »

But cats are not natural anymore. If you compare their habits and their impacts to actual Wildcats they are completely different even though they are visually and physically very similar

What's not natural about them?

Shivi111

kathleen37 wrote: »

To be fair, it can be done by building catio's. Basically fencing the cats in.

Not an expense most people are willing to spend.

Also, not possible in all situations, you have to have a big enough garden.
Some of the catio's out there are fab, but they need to be a very good size (in my opinion) to be worthwhile.

pilly

riffmongous wrote: »

I know plenty of people with normal healthy cats living in apartments who don't kill a single animal

How do you know they don't kill any animals? Are they never allowed out?

kathleen37

Shivi111 wrote: »

Also, not possible in all situations, you have to have a big enough garden.
Some of the catio's out there are fab, but they need to be a very good size (in my opinion) to be worthwhile.

Very true. I've never had the money to invest in something I think would be good enough.

We do what we can...

Lumen

kathleen37 wrote: »

To be fair, it can be done by building catio's. Basically fencing the cats in.

If cat keepers were up for that sort of hassle they'd have got a dog instead.

pilly

pilly wrote: »

How do you know they don't kill any animals? Are they never allowed out?

They physically can't go out and nothing can get in, they can go onto the netted balcony though.

sidious-sam

kylith wrote: »

What can I say? People refusing to take responsibility for their pets pisses me off.

Dogs are not allowed to roam because they are a danger to large animals, sheep, goats, cows, etc. They are also not allowed because they can be a danger to adults and children. Cat's are a danger to none of these things.

Now, speaking of people refusing to take responsibility for their pets ...
1) Do you know that if your dog runs out onto the road and causes a crash, you are responsible? I've had two run ins with dogs left loose on the road, I'm a biker and I was lucky that neither encounter killed me. Was either owner interested in what almost happened? Not really.

2) Do you know that you are required by law to have your dog on a leash when out in public, regardless of the breed? (This is ignoring the addendum that certain breeds are also required to wear a muzzle)

So knowing the above, don't you think that you should be more outraged that people are ignoring the applicable laws in relation to dogs?

Returning to Cats. As I earlier stated, in urban environments, an Australian study found that Cats were successful in their hunts about 3 times in 10 rising slightly in open terrain. Birds are well aware of predators, and aren't exactly slow when it comes to being alert for threats. They are well able to look after themselves.

In regards to the differences between cats and dogs as hunters, dogs are pack animals and hunt better as a group than on their own, they also tend to go for larger prey. Cats tend to be solitary hunters and hunt smaller things. Both animals are suited perfectly to their mode of hunting, so there's little point in comparing them to be honest.

In all honesty, cats, while they do have an affect on prey numbers, I doubt it's as catastrophic as you seem to think. There are several species native to this island that have gone extinct in recent and not so recent times, that could or did prey on birds and small mammals. There are also species that are either endangered or greatly reduced that also prey on the above. Songbirds are numbers appear to be fairly steady, despite the level of cat hatred going on here.

It should be obvious that I'm a cat lover, I'm indifferent about dogs. Do I let my little asshole roam around devastating the local fauna? No, due to my proximity to a major road very close to my house. Would I let him roam if the road wasn't an issue? Sure. I used to before I moved to my current location. People tend to forget that your domestic killing machine is not as domesticated as your dog. They, despite their apparent sleeping tendencies, need to roam, otherwise they become board and can start misbehaving. They are hardwired to roam and hunt, dogs, for the most part, have had that bred out to a degree.

So give cats a break. They're doing the best they can

pilly

pilly wrote: »

What's not natural about them?

A few thousand years of human interference have long removed them from anything natural. Look up European wildcats and see how different they act

B0jangles

pilly wrote: »

Cats are by their very nature wild animals, "worthless" too in some peoples eyes.

It is not natural to keep them indoors or restricted. Do you also object to them killing mice and rats? What about the prey that birds kills? Where does is end? Nature is nature and it works.

By that standard all domestic dogs are 'wild animals' who should be free to roam and hunt wherever they want, so it's clearly laughable logic. The cats we are talking about are owned domestic pets, not wild animals hunting to survive. If you choose to keep any animal as a pet then you are accepting responsibility for its behaviour. By allowing your cat to roam freely you are failing in your responsibility as a pet owner.*

*the 'you' in this context is not directed at you Pilly , it is at any and all cat owners who think it is reasonable to let their cat roam wherever it wants without taking any responsibility for its behaviour.

pilly

riffmongous wrote: »

They physically can't go out and nothing can get in, they can go onto the netted balcony though.

Horrible way for a cat to live imo, it's the equivalent of putting a human in prison for life.

sidious-sam

riffmongous wrote: »

But cats are not natural anymore. If you compare their habits and their impacts to actual Wildcats they are completely different even though they are visually and physically very similar

Not true. Feral moggies and wildcats are very very similar. In fact, in Scotland the biggest threat to the Scotish wildcat are ferral moggies. They hunt in similar areas, hunt similar prey and can interbreed. The latter is the greatest threat to the Wildcats. They are being bred out of existence. The problem is being addressed by neutering the Feral Colonies rather than interfering with the wildcats themselves and it appears to be working.

In short, the problem is not that feral cats are totally different and are killing all the wildcats prey but that they are too similar and can interbreed.

sidious-sam

riffmongous wrote: »

A few thousand years of human interference have long removed them from anything natural. Look up European wildcats and see how different they act

Look up Scottish Wildcat and see how wrong you are.

Lumen

If ever a thread needed a LOLcat, this is it.

pilly

B0jangles wrote: »

By that standard all domestic dogs are 'wild animals' who should be free to roam and hunt wherever they want, so it's clearly laughable logic. The cats we are talking about are owned domestic pets, not wild animals hunting to survive. If you choose to keep any animal as a pet then you are accepting responsibility for its behaviour. By allowing your cat to roam freely you are failing in your responsibility as a pet owner.*

*the 'you' in this context is not directed at you Pilly , it is at any and all cat owners who think it is reasonable to let their cat roam wherever it wants without taking any responsibility for its behaviour.

You can direct it at me all you like, I do let my cat wander freely as I believe it's in her nature.

People seem to believe there's a huge difference between a domestic cat and a feral one, in some cases cats who are feral may still have a "home" as in they have someone who feeds them regularly. In a lot of cases cats are a mixture between the 2.

The majority of people who have cats either get them from shelters or adopt them by default when they wander in off the street.

Suggesting that cats are kept indoors or restricted in the laughable idea in this situation. Even if people kept so called "pet" cats indoors you'll always have a feral cat population.

I notice you didn't answer my question about the birds "prey". Do you suggest we should save them also?

Do you really believe that we can control the environment so much that animals will not kill each other?

kylith

sidious-sam wrote: »

1) Do you know that if your dog runs out onto the road and causes a crash, you are responsible? I've had two run ins with dogs left loose on the road, I'm a biker and I was lucky that neither encounter killed me. Was either owner interested in what almost happened? Not really.

2) Do you know that you are required by law to have your dog on a leash when out in public, regardless of the breed? (This is ignoring the addendum that certain breeds are also required to wear a muzzle)

On point 1 you are correct, and I am well aware of that. I believe it should be the same for cats also. I've never had a dog run out in front of mulycar, but I have had to slam on the brakes for cats and if an accident had been caused who would have been responsible exactly?

On point 2 you are incorrect. Dogs, other than RBs, are required to be under control, not leashed.

pilly

pilly wrote: »

Horrible way for a cat to live imo, it's the equivalent of putting a human in prison for life.

And yet they are healthy and as affectionate as any other cat I've known.

Lumen

riffmongous wrote: »

And yet they are healthy and as affectionate as any other cat I've known.

Well...there is certainly an argument that allowing a cat out into a small garden in a densely packed urban area (with lots of overlapping cat territories) makes them more anxious and stressed.

I think the reality is that cat owners don't want to be cleaning up the faeces and so are happier with their cats roaming, even if the cat is not. As I said earlier, if they wanted responsibility, inconvenience and smells, they'd have a dog.

On the other hand, since you can't walk a cat how is it possible for a house cat to get sufficient (i.e. natural amount of) exercise?

kylith

Lumen wrote: »

Well...there is certainly an argument that allowing a cat out into a small garden in a densely packed urban area (with lots of overlapping cat territories) makes them more anxious and stressed.

I think the reality is that cat owners don't want to be cleaning up the faeces and so are happier with their cats roaming, even if the cat is not. As I said earlier, if they wanted responsibility, inconvenience and smells, they'd have a dog.

On the other hand, since you can't walk a cat how is it possible for a house cat to get sufficient (i.e. natural amount of) exercise?

Cats can be trained to walk in a harness. There are also exercise wheels suitable for cats, toys, and climbing frames.

sidious-sam

sidious-sam wrote: »

Not true. Feral moggies and wildcats are very very similar. In fact, in Scotland the biggest threat to the Scotish wildcat are ferral moggies. They hunt in similar areas, hunt similar prey and can interbreed. The latter is the greatest threat to the Wildcats. They are being bred out of existence. The problem is being addressed by neutering the Feral Colonies rather than interfering with the wildcats themselves and it appears to be working.

In short, the problem is not that feral cats are totally different and are killing all the wildcats prey but that they are too similar and can interbreed.

That's not what I meant at all.

sidious-sam

B0jangles wrote: »

By that standard all domestic dogs are 'wild animals' who should be free to roam and hunt wherever they want, so it's clearly laughable logic. The cats we are talking about are owned domestic pets, not wild animals hunting to survive. If you choose to keep any animal as a pet then you are accepting responsibility for its behaviour. By allowing your cat to roam freely you are failing in your responsibility as a pet owner.*

*the 'you' in this context is not directed at you Pilly , it is at any and all cat owners who think it is reasonable to let their cat roam wherever it wants without taking any responsibility for its behaviour.

Finally, a reasonable argument. Historically speaking, Dogs have been domesticated for a very, very long time. They live with us, they guard our houses and property and they like to play. Cats are a vastly different story. Cats don't live with us, except in mostly modern times. They lived beside us and we both benefited in a sort of symbiotic relationship. They killed rodents which spread disease and ate our grain, good for us, and we fed them when prey was thin on the ground, good for them. In the countryside, on farms, that relationship is still applicable, most farms in the country tend to have a few cats around the place. In modern times, the cat is a bit of a fish out of water. Their instincts are still sharp, as they've never really been domesticated. Pure breeds are a little different in this case as they clearly have been domesticated, but you're average moggy wants to hunt, needs to hunt and while they can survive indoors fairly well, it's not what they've evolved to do.
Dogs are kept on the property as they are a larger animal and can be dangerous to large animals (sheep, goats, cows, etc) cats, not so much.

Lumen

Lumen wrote: »

Well...there is certainly an argument that allowing a cat out into a small garden in a densely packed urban area (with lots of overlapping cat territories) makes them more anxious and stressed.

I think the reality is that cat owners don't want to be cleaning up the faeces and so are happier with their cats roaming, even if the cat is not. As I said earlier, if they wanted responsibility, inconvenience and smells, they'd have a dog.

On the other hand, since you can't walk a cat how is it possible for a house cat to get sufficient (i.e. natural amount of) exercise?

This of course depends on the owner, but you play with them and give them toys, which they usually 'hunt' at night. They also like to patrol the apartment I've noticed

Shivi111

Lumen wrote: »

Well...there is certainly an argument that allowing a cat out into a small garden in a densely packed urban area (with lots of overlapping cat territories) makes them more anxious and stressed.

I think the reality is that cat owners don't want to be cleaning up the faeces and so are happier with their cats roaming, even if the cat is not. As I said earlier, if they wanted responsibility, inconvenience and smells, they'd have a dog.

On the other hand, since you can't walk a cat how is it possible for a house cat to get sufficient (i.e. natural amount of) exercise?

Eh, my cats are allowed outside and they have three litter boxes in my house - I clean up plenty of faeces

I am an extremely responsible pet owner - my guys were initially indoor cats but after one got out and I saw his sheer joy at being outside I changed my opinion on indoor/outdoor.

I have a very rich cat environment in my house, and the cats are allowed access to the outside - usually in evening for an hour or two and at weekends. Everyone being tucked up in their beds at nighttime.

Just saying... choosing to allow access to the outdoors does not mean a lack of interest in or responsibility for the animal.

pilly

Lumen wrote: »

Well...there is certainly an argument that allowing a cat out into a small garden in a densely packed urban area (with lots of overlapping cat territories) makes them more anxious and stressed.

I think the reality is that cat owners don't want to be cleaning up the faeces and so are happier with their cats roaming, even if the cat is not. As I said earlier, if they wanted responsibility, inconvenience and smells, they'd have a dog.

On the other hand, since you can't walk a cat how is it possible for a house cat to get sufficient (i.e. natural amount of) exercise?

My cat wanders freely in and out of the window and still ****s in litter box, bitch! Because she was trained this way.

Most pet cats if their trained properly will go in a litter tray because they shouldn't be allowed out for at least 2 weeks when they're brought home.

pilly

riffmongous wrote: »

And yet they are healthy and as affectionate as any other cat I've known.

What about their mental health though?

B0jangles

pilly wrote: »

You can direct it at me all you like, I do let my cat wander freely as I believe it's in her nature.

People seem to believe there's a huge difference between a domestic cat and a feral one, in some cases cats who are feral may still have a "home" as in they have someone who feeds them regularly. In a lot of cases cats are a mixture between the 2.

The majority of people who have cats either get them from shelters or adopt them by default when they wander in off the street.

Suggesting that cats are kept indoors or restricted in the laughable idea in this situation. Even if people kept so called "pet" cats indoors you'll always have a feral cat population.

I notice you didn't answer my question about the birds "prey". Do you suggest we should save them also?

Do you really believe that we can control the environment so much that animals will not kill each other?

Weirdly, I tend to distinguish between wild animals, like birds of prey which are hunting to survive and which are a functioning part of an established ecosystem and an introduced pet animal which is allowed to hunt purely for its own entertainment. In the same way I understand that farmers are allowed to shoot dogs that come on to their land to worry sheep but are not allowed to poison red kites that they think are hunting their lambs.

By allowing your cat to roam freely and do whatever it wants, you are putting your own sense of satisfaction and your cat's needs correction your cat's entertainment well ahead of the wellbeing of our shared environment.

Some countries which have introduced cats recently enough to see the damage they do to native animal populations put extreme restrictions on their ability to roam freely; In Australia cats are either kept indoors or allowed outdoors in runs. Cats seen roaming freely are shot. It's not nice but it has been deemed necessary to protect native species.

I'm not asking for cats to be shot on sight, I just wish Irish cat owners like you could think a bit beyond 'what my cat wants' and find a balance between their cat's well-being with that of the Irish wildlife it kills for fun.

B0jangles

sidious-sam wrote: »

Finally, a reasonable argument. Historically speaking, Dogs have been domesticated for a very, very long time. They live with us, they guard our houses and property and they like to play. Cats are a vastly different story. Cats don't live with us, except in mostly modern times. They lived beside us and we both benefited in a sort of symbiotic relationship. They killed rodents which spread disease and ate our grain, good for us, and we fed them when prey was thin on the ground, good for them. In the countryside, on farms, that relationship is still applicable, most farms in the country tend to have a few cats around the place. In modern times, the cat is a bit of a fish out of water. Their instincts are still sharp, as they've never really been domesticated. Pure breeds are a little different in this case as they clearly have been domesticated, but you're average moggy wants to hunt, needs to hunt and while they can survive indoors fairly well, it's not what they've evolved to do.
Dogs are kept on the property as they are a larger animal and can be dangerous to large animals (sheep, goats, cows, etc) cats, not so much.

If cats are as undomesticated and wild as you claim then surely that's all the more reason for the people who claim to care for them to exercise a modicum of control over their behaviour?

pilly

pilly wrote: »

What about their mental health though?

Well they are still affectionate, and display no destructive behaviour (scratching poles are provided), they seem more mentally sound to me than dogs 😛

sidious-sam

kylith wrote: »

On point 1 you are correct, and I am well aware of that. I believe it should be the same for cats also. I've never had a dog run out in front of mulycar, but I have had to slam on the brakes for cats and if an accident had been caused who would have been responsible exactly?

On point 2 you are incorrect. Dogs, other than RBs, are required to be under control, not leashed.

Interestingly, it might depend on the type of accident. Someone runs into you, that's a claim on their insurance, you lose control then it should, I think fall on the owner of the animal in question. That said, you are directed, at least it used to be this way, to not to attempt to avoid said animal but to maintain your course. Granted this will most likely result in the death of the animal. Any damage to your vehicle will have to be paid by the owner of the animal. If you lose control of your vehicle while trying to avoid the collision, then the owner might argue that you were clearly not in control. It's a bit messy.

Point 2, I'll grant you that the law does not, that I've seen, explicitly state that the dog is to be on a leash, with the exception of the listed breeds, but it does state that any dog found wandering, not under control, will be classed as a stray. To that point, dogs can and will suddenly take off after something such as a cat, at which point they are not under control. In my mind, they should be on a leash regardless, but that's just my thinking on the matter.

B0jangles

Lumen wrote: »

Well...there is certainly an argument that allowing a cat out into a small garden in a densely packed urban area (with lots of overlapping cat territories) makes them more anxious and stressed.

I think the reality is that cat owners don't want to be cleaning up the faeces and so are happier with their cats roaming, even if the cat is not. As I said earlier, if they wanted responsibility, inconvenience and smells, they'd have a dog.

On the other hand, since you can't walk a cat how is it possible for a house cat to get sufficient (i.e. natural amount of) exercise?

That is just a shamefully selfish way to behave IMHO, I really hope you're wrong about it being true of most cat owners.

sidious-sam

riffmongous wrote: »

That's not what I meant at all.

A few thousand years of human interference have long removed them from anything natural. Look up European wildcats and see how different they act

What did you mean then?