Cat is a Killer

Ashbx

pilly wrote: »

In what way? Are any extinct?

Oh come on....cows and sheep aren't extinct either and no matter how many dog attacks there are on them, they will never be instinct. These dog attacks are not wiping out full species, so by your way of thinking, this means its absolutely fine then is it?

Can we please stop with the "the birds are not extinct so its not a problem yet". Why does it have to become a serious problem before anyone is willing to do anything about it? Why does an entire species have to be on their last legs before people open their eyes and acknowledge the problem?

I said right at the beginning of this thread that I do think its nature for cats to hunt prey and I personally don't have an issue HOWEVER its the sheer amount that's a problem. And if cat owners insist on letting their cats roam free (which I somewhat agree with) why cant they put on a collar and a bell. Its quite simple really!

ganmo

kathleen37 wrote: »

Indeed - where would the funding come from? Without studies and actual evidence proving the issue - I don't doubt there will be none.

I had no idea the dog licence fee was meant to deal with stray dogs - how does that work? Is the money ring fenced for council pounds? Does the money cover the pound costs? Anyone know?

I'm not sure how well a cat licence would work? Perhaps it may be a start?

(Could I have got any more question marks into this post???)

where would the funding come from for your study?
what do you want your study to identify?

Lumen

Ashbx wrote: »

And if cat owners insist on letting their cats roam free (which I somewhat agree with) why cant they put on a collar and a bell. Its quite simple really!

I don't think anyone is advocating not putting on a bell, are they?

sidious-sam

Lumen wrote: »

I don't think anyone is advocating not putting on a bell, are they?

The problem of belling a cat is that first the collar needs to be one specifically designed for cats, not everyone knows this or is willing to go find one. The collars are designed so that if they get hung up on a branch the cat can slip out and thus not be choked to death. These collars are not perfect either however, as pointed out, they can become entangled with the cat's front legs and if not corrected on time can lead to horrific injuries, which may result in the medical amputation of the limb.

Furthermore, cats are absolute masters of escape, so even though you've bough the most expensive collar you could find, one with all the bells (pun) and whistles you could want ... there's a fair chance that after a few days, you'll meet your furry little monster returning home, sans collar.

So while it's easy to say, put a bell on your cat, putting a bell on isn't the hard part, it's keeping it there. Nobody wants to buy a new collar each and every week.

kathleen37

ganmo wrote: »

where would the funding come from for your study?
what do you want your study to identify?

Not my study.

I seem to be repeating myself, so again, whilst I appreciate cats do impact wildlife, and it makes sense to put money into TNR to lessen the impact - I have no idea what the impact is. No one does. So on that premise alone it probably wouldn't be a bad idea to find out the size of the issue.

DBB

kathleen37 wrote: »

I had no idea the dog licence fee was meant to deal with stray dogs - how does that work? Is the money ring fenced for council pounds? Does the money cover the pound costs? Anyone know?

Yes
Dog license fees go back to funding the county pound in the county each dog is licensed.
In the vast majority, if not all pounds, the license fees do not cover the full cost of running each pound.
I got this info from the last National Stray Dog and Cat Forum meeting, at which the Louth County Vet presented various national stats, including the above.

kathleen37

DBB wrote: »

Yes
Dog license fees go back to funding the county pound in the county each dog is licensed.
In the vast majority, if not all pounds, the license fees do not cover the full cost of running each pound.
I got this info from the last National Stray Dog and Cat Forum meeting, at which the Louth County Vet presented various national stats, including the above.

Honestly, I had no idea. I'm really surprised that it manages to cover any of the costs really. I never knew anyone other than us that ever had dog licences...

I wonder if cat licences could work?

One_Of_Shanks

All cats are killers. They might look fluffy and big eyes and all that stuff but they kill all sorts of wildlife and do it slowly as if its a game and thats just what they do.

If the opening line above didn't give it away, I'm not their biggest fan. I get it that they look cute but they're foreign to our natural environment here and the collective damage they do to wildlife is fairly big.

Just put a bell on your cats and try to give the birds and rabbits a better chance and the damage would be reduced a lot but most people don't for whatever reason.
Laziness or not giving a damn about the other wildlife they kill would be the most obvious reasons.

I've seen stories on here about cats getting killed by dogs and people trying to sue the dog owner but it's fine when the cat is the one killing other animals.

Dog owners are required by law to have a licence and as a dog owner myself I know where she is all the time and yeah she's a bit mental in her own way but if I ever saw her kill a bird or rabbit she'd have a bell on her the next day.

It's only right to do the same with cats.

And sorry OP, but jesus a cat torturing a crow for a few mins and you couldn't try to intervene....... I'd have jumped the wall or whatever it took instead of letting it happen and doing a thread about it.

But in a way, maybe some good will come of it if a few cat owners consider putting a bell on their fluffy pal.

ganmo

DBB wrote: »

Yes
Dog license fees go back to funding the county pound in the county each dog is licensed.
In the vast majority, if not all pounds, the license fees do not cover the full cost of running each pound.
I got this info from the last National Stray Dog and Cat Forum meeting, at which the Louth County Vet presented various national stats, including the above.

Here was me thinking it was common knowledge

sidious-sam

One_Of_Shanks wrote: »

All cats are killers. They might look fluffy and big eyes and all that stuff but they kill all sorts of wildlife and do it slowly as if its a game and thats just what they do.

If the opening line above didn't give it away, I'm not their biggest fan. I get it that they look cute but they're foreign to our natural environment here and the collective damage they do to wildlife is fairly big.

Just put a bell on your cats and try to give the birds and rabbits a better chance and the damage would be reduced a lot but most people don't for whatever reason.
Laziness or not giving a damn about the other wildlife they kill would be the most obvious reasons.

I've seen stories on here about cats getting killed by dogs and people trying to sue the dog owner but it's fine when the cat is the one killing other animals.

Dog owners are required by law to have a licence and as a dog owner myself I know where she is all the time and yeah she's a bit mental in her own way but if I ever saw her kill a bird or rabbit she'd have a bell on her the next day.

It's only right to do the same with cats.

And sorry OP, but jesus a cat torturing a crow for a few mins and you couldn't try to intervene....... I'd have jumped the wall or whatever it took instead of letting it happen and doing a thread about it.

But in a way, maybe some good will come of it if a few cat owners consider putting a bell on their fluffy pal.

I get that you don't like cats, that's your own loss, but before you go on a bit of rant at least read some of the preceding posts. Further up the page I mentioned bells and why many cats don't have them. If you cared to check, you'd have also discovered that cats don't play with their prey. What they're doing is making sure that the prey in question is weak enough that it doesn't pose a threat to the cat as it goes in to finish it off. It may seem nonsensical, in particular when we're talking about something like a mouse, but also realise that cats can't focus their eyes on anything closer than 30CM, so ensuring the prey is stunned better ensures a kill. It's not play, it's survival tactics.

In regards to dogs killing cats; If my dog kills your dog, I'm sure you'd expect some recompense, likewise, if your dog kills my cat I'd expect the same, but when was the last time you saw a cat kill a dog? You can't compare pets to wild animals in this context. Apples and oranges my friend.

Now, fair enough for Rabbits and birds, people dislike seeing cats kill these, but what about mice and rats? If you bell every cat, then how will they prey on rats and mice?

People keep comparing cats and dogs, as they're our primary pets, but they are night and day! Dogs are pack hunters for the most part and so tend to absolutely suck when it comes to solitary hunting. Cats are solitary and very, very good at it. One of the main reasons for the dog licence, as mentioned above, is to fund the control of strays. Why do you think that might be? Could it be because, as I mentioned, dogs are pack hunters and strays tend to form packs which can cause untold damage? I'd say that's a strong yes. A pack of dogs can take down large prey, which in this country means farmed animals, deer and people. So in the interest of safety, the licence covers this problem. Cats aren't a danger to farmed animals and so there is little interest in licencing them. Is that correct? Probably not as they do cause damage to the ecology.

And just to say, one of the biggest reasons that people don't bell their cats is that cats are escape artists of the highest degree. Don't believe me? Try belling a cat.

As for intervening between a cat and a crow ... I'd be hesitant to do it myself. Crows can be pretty dangerous birds when they need to be, and cats, once latched on to prey, are very disinclined to let go. The act of getting the cat off the crow would probably have killed the crow.

ganmo

sidious-sam wrote: »

I get that you don't like cats, that's your own loss, but before you go on a bit of rant at least read some of the preceding posts. Further up the page I mentioned bells and why many cats don't have them. If you cared to check, you'd have also discovered that cats don't play with their prey. What they're doing is making sure that the prey in question is weak enough that it doesn't pose a threat to the cat as it goes in to finish it off. It may seem nonsensical, in particular when we're talking about something like a mouse, but also realise that cats can't focus their eyes on anything closer than 30CM, so ensuring the prey is stunned better ensures a kill. It's not play, it's survival tactics.

In regards to dogs killing cats; If my dog kills your dog, I'm sure you'd expect some recompense, likewise, if your dog kills my cat I'd expect the same, but when was the last time you saw a cat kill a dog? You can't compare pets to wild animals in this context. Apples and oranges my friend.

Now, fair enough for Rabbits and birds, people dislike seeing cats kill these, but what about mice and rats? If you bell every cat, then how will they prey on rats and mice?

People keep comparing cats and dogs, as they're our primary pets, but they are night and day! Dogs are pack hunters for the most part and so tend to absolutely suck when it comes to solitary hunting. Cats are solitary and very, very good at it. One of the main reasons for the dog licence, as mentioned above, is to fund the control of strays. Why do you think that might be? Could it be because, as I mentioned, dogs are pack hunters and strays tend to form packs which can cause untold damage? I'd say that's a strong yes. A pack of dogs can take down large prey, which in this country means farmed animals, deer and people. So in the interest of safety, the licence covers this problem. Cats aren't a danger to farmed animals and so there is little interest in licencing them. Is that correct? Probably not as they do cause damage to the ecology.

And just to say, one of the biggest reasons that people don't bell their cats is that cats are escape artists of the highest degree. Don't believe me? Try belling a cat.

As for intervening between a cat and a crow ... I'd be hesitant to do it myself. Crows can be pretty dangerous birds when they need to be, and cats, once latched on to prey, are very disinclined to let go. The act of getting the cat off the crow would probably have killed the crow.

I call bullcrap!

firstly check http://www.moredun.org.uk/research/practical-animal-health-information/disease-summaries/toxoplasmosis-sheep
especially

Toxoplasma oocysts (eggs) are produced by cats in their faeces.

secondly a few years ago we were loosing a few lambs, thought it was a mink, put down a trap...only caught a cat and lost no more lambs after it was caught

pilly

ganmo wrote:

secondly a few years ago we were loosing a few lambs, thought it was a mink, put down a trap...only caught a cat and lost no more lambs after it was caught

Ah now you're claiming a cat can kill a lamb? Really?

ganmo

pilly wrote: »

Ah now you're claiming a cat can kill a lamb? Really?

I'm telling ya what happened, the trap was reset after the cat was caught and caught nothing else.

why would a cat not kill a lamb? if it will kill rabbits,mice etc

kylith

sidious-sam wrote: »

In regards to dogs killing cats; If my dog kills your dog, I'm sure you'd expect some recompense, likewise, if your dog kills my cat I'd expect the same, but when was the last time you saw a cat kill a dog? You can't compare pets to wild animals in this context. Apples and oranges my friend.

I'm sorry, but no. If my dog kills your cat it's because your cat is in my garden, where it shouldn't be, and you'd get the same tough luck from me as if it ran under the wheels of my car.

sidious-sam

ganmo wrote: »

I call bullcrap!

firstly check http://www.moredun.org.uk/research/practical-animal-health-information/disease-summaries/toxoplasmosis-sheep
especially

secondly a few years ago we were loosing a few lambs, thought it was a mink, put down a trap...only caught a cat and lost no more lambs after it was caught

Call bullcrap if you like, but it's hardly a measured response. I meant in terms of killing animals, I was unaware of the effect of toxoplasmosis on sheep, but sure, ok, let's go down the rabbit hole. There is a vaccine for this available to sheep, if it's not being used, why is that? are there statistics on the number of affected sheep? Number of deaths? Etc. How do they compare to sheep, goats, horses, cattle, etc. that are injured / maimed or killed each year by dogs? I'm genuinely curious.

As for your lamb story, just because you caught a cat is not evidence that the cat was doing the damage, and just because it stopped after the cat was caught is not evidence either. No matter how you cut it, it's circumstantial at best.

Junkyard Tom

As an Alien I find it quite hilarious that you humans argue with each other about the impact your pets are having while completely ignoring that it is your species that is destroying the ecosystem.

sidious-sam

kylith wrote: »

I'm sorry, but no. If my dog kills your cat it's because your cat is in my garden, where it shouldn't be, and you'd get the same tough luck from me as if it ran under the wheels of my car.

That's a bit of a heartless response isn't it? Does that mean that if you ran over a neighbors cat, or your dog killed a neighbor's cat the only response you'd give is, "tough luck" ? Does this mean that if you killed it you'd leave it on the road or if it was your dog, what, throw it in a bin?

Ignoring that and moving on, I hadn't realised the need to be so specific, but ok. If your dog runs on to my property and kills my cat, would that necessitate an apology? What if both your dog and my cat are on public ground ... is that still a "tough luck" from you?

I get that some people don't like cats, but they're hardly the monsters some of you are making them out to be.

sidious-sam

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

As an Alien I find it quite hilarious that you humans argue with each other about the impact your pets are having while completely ignoring that it is your species that is destroying the ecosystem.

Pretty sure that was mentioned a few pages back ... by several different people. Besides it's easier to magnify small problems and make them huge issues, rather than address the fact that the house is burning down around you

kylith

sidious-sam wrote: »

That's a bit of a heartless response isn't it? Does that mean that if you ran over a neighbors cat, or your dog killed a neighbor's cat the only response you'd give is, "tough luck" ? Does this mean that if you killed it you'd leave it on the road or if it was your dog, what, throw it in a bin?

Ignoring that and moving on, I hadn't realised the need to be so specific, but ok. If your dog runs on to my property and kills my cat, would that necessitate an apology? What if both your dog and my cat are on public ground ... is that still a "tough luck" from you?

I get that some people don't like cats, but they're hardly the monsters some of you are making them out to be.

If the cat had a collar on I'd call the owner to let them know, but I wouldn't be apologising for anything and I certainly wouldn't entertain any demands for reparations if it happened on my property or on public property. So yes, it would be 'tough luck', even to my neighbour. If there was no collar then yes, I'd put it in the bin. What else should I do with it? I had pond fish killed by neighbourhood cats, would the owners have offered me compensation if I'd found them, do you think?

If you let your cat roam then these are the risks that you force it to take, you know that.

My dog is a predator with predatory instincts, just the same as your cat. If people don't feel that they need to apologise for their cat's predatory behaviour then why should I have to apologise for my dog's?

If my dog runs onto your property and kills your cat that is a different situation, and I would feel obliged to pay for vets bills or get them a new cat because one's pet should not be on someone else's property uninvited.

I don't dislike cats, in fact I quite like them. I certainly don't believe that they're monsters; they're animals. And as they are animals it falls to us, as their owners, to take responsibility for their wellbeing and for ensuring that they do not cause an issue for other people.

pilly

sidious-sam wrote:

Pretty sure that was mentioned a few pages back ... by several different people. Besides it's easier to magnify small problems and make them huge issues, rather than address the fact that the house is burning down around you

Easier to blame the evil cats on destroying the universe.

They're killing lambs now don't you know?

DBB

pilly wrote: »

Easier to blame the evil cats on destroying the universe.

They're killing lambs now don't you know?

Pilly, quit the bitchy hyperbole please. I'm not going to ask nicely for a THIRD time.
Thanks.
DBB

rgace

pilly wrote: »

Easier to blame the evil cats on destroying the universe.

They're killing lambs now don't you know?

It is fairly clear to me that people are blaming humans for introducing, keeping and failing to control their cats.

The only ones mentioning "evil" are hysterical cat lovers.

ganmo

sidious-sam wrote: »

Call bullcrap if you like, but it's hardly a measured response. I meant in terms of killing animals, I was unaware of the effect of toxoplasmosis on sheep, but sure, ok, let's go down the rabbit hole. There is a vaccine for this available to sheep, if it's not being used, why is that? are there statistics on the number of affected sheep? Number of deaths? Etc. How do they compare to sheep, goats, horses, cattle, etc. that are injured / maimed or killed each year by dogs? I'm genuinely curious.

As for your lamb story, just because you caught a cat is not evidence that the cat was doing the damage, and just because it stopped after the cat was caught is not evidence either. No matter how you cut it, it's circumstantial at best.

the vaccine is around 7 quid a head the last I checked I don't use it as its a live vaccine getting a good supply year on year is unpredictable. an effective pest control programme is far more cost effective.

lets get goin on numbers...2.5mil ewes. guestimate 0.5% affected with an average of 1.6 lambs thats 20,000 lambs dead. Whats more I know of people who have lost babies from it
theres 4000 dog attacks reported pa, I suspect theres more though but at least with dogs theres responsible owners with dog licences and the control of dogs act for the rest, people can get prosecuted

and yes I know my tale won't change your mind, hell if I thought at the time it was what was killing the lambs I probably wouldn't of reset the trap

sidious-sam

kylith wrote: »

If the cat had a collar on I'd call the owner to let them know, but I wouldn't be apologising for anything and I certainly wouldn't entertain any demands for reparations if it happened on my property or on public property. So yes, it would be 'tough luck', even to my neighbour. If there was no collar then yes, I'd put it in the bin. What else should I do with it? I had pond fish killed by neighbourhood cats, would the owners have offered me compensation if I'd found them, do you think?

The appropriate response to this her is clearly asking whether you had taken appropriate precautions to protect your fish from predation. If not, then surely that's just your bad luck, by your reasoning of course. If I was your neighbour and you had proof that my cat had killed some of your fish, yes, I would of course apologise and offer to replace them, because that's the sort of good natured person I am. That said, I'd only offer once. Anything after that and well you haven't learnt to protect your fish and that's your foolishness more than my apparent lack of control.
So even if you knew the uncollared cat was belong to your neighbour, you'd still throw it in the bin? Would you even tell them?

kylith wrote: »

If you let your cat roam then these are the risks that you force it to take, you know that.

As I mentioned above, the same could be said for your fish.

kylith wrote: »

My dog is a predator with predatory instincts, just the same as your cat. If people don't feel that they need to apologise for their cat's predatory behaviour then why should I have to apologise for my dog's?

Because it's the right thing to do. If your dog kills on your property then generally the owner of the cat knows that it's not your fault, the cat messed up. It's about saying sorry for your loss. Obviously, there may be one or two people who will go ape over it, but your property is your property, end of story. On public ground however, it may not be so cut and dried. The law may have to step in and depending on how it all went down, you could be fined, etc etc.

kylith wrote: »

If my dog runs onto your property and kills your cat that is a different situation, and I would feel obliged to pay for vets bills or get them a new cat because one's pet should not be on someone else's property uninvited.

I don't dislike cats, in fact I quite like them. I certainly don't believe that they're monsters; they're animals. And as they are animals it falls to us, as their owners, to take responsibility for their wellbeing and for ensuring that they do not cause an issue for other people.

While I agree with you in principal, the fact is that cats are escape artists and almost impossible to keep within your own property. The smaller the property the easier it will be obviously, but even then, no easy thing. It may escape your notice, but there are many people who don't own cats and have no problems with rodents on their property because a neighbour has a cat, surely being rodent free, without the use of toxins, is something to be happy about.

rgace wrote: »

It is fairly clear to me that people are blaming humans for introducing, keeping and failing to control their cats.

The only ones mentioning "evil" are hysterical cat lovers.

Ah, that old saw. All cat lovers are hysterical and having an irrational hatred of cats is quite justified and normal.

ganmo wrote: »

the vaccine is around 7 quid a head the last I checked I don't use it as its a live vaccine getting a good supply year on year is unpredictable. an effective pest control programme is far more cost effective.

So maybe getting a good supply year on year is something that should be looked at by everyone? Or am I just being crazy?
The problem with "pest control programmes" is that tend to catch more tame domestics than ferals, which does nothing to help the problem.

ganmo wrote: »

lets get goin on numbers...2.5mil ewes. guestimate 0.5% affected with an average of 1.6 lambs thats 20,000 lambs dead. Whats more I know of people who have lost babies from it

Let's stick to facts and figures here shall we? We all know people who've had something happen, somewhere, at some time. Your guesstimate is based on what? And is average number of lambs and average of the affected ewes or a national average. Also, is this from an irish study or an international?

ganmo wrote: »

theres 4000 dog attacks reported pa, I suspect theres more though but at least with dogs theres responsible owners with dog licences and the control of dogs act for the rest, people can get prosecutedand yes I know my tale won't change your mind, hell if I thought at the time it was what was killing the lambs I probably wouldn't of reset the trap

Is that a national figure? (4000 dog attacks pa)? Can you link me to the report?

ganmo

sidious-sam wrote: »

The appropriate response to this her is clearly asking whether you had taken appropriate precautions to protect your fish from predation. If not, then surely that's just your bad luck, by your reasoning of course. If I was your neighbour and you had proof that my cat had killed some of your fish, yes, I would of course apologise and offer to replace them, because that's the sort of good natured person I am. That said, I'd only offer once. Anything after that and well you haven't learnt to protect your fish and that's your foolishness more than my apparent lack of control.
So even if you knew the uncollared cat was belong to your neighbour, you'd still throw it in the bin? Would you even tell them?


As I mentioned above, the same could be said for your fish.


Because it's the right thing to do. If your dog kills on your property then generally the owner of the cat knows that it's not your fault, the cat messed up. It's about saying sorry for your loss. Obviously, there may be one or two people who will go ape over it, but your property is your property, end of story. On public ground however, it may not be so cut and dried. The law may have to step in and depending on how it all went down, you could be fined, etc etc.



While I agree with you in principal, the fact is that cats are escape artists and almost impossible to keep within your own property. The smaller the property the easier it will be obviously, but even then, no easy thing. It may escape your notice, but there are many people who don't own cats and have no problems with rodents on their property because a neighbour has a cat, surely being rodent free, without the use of toxins, is something to be happy about.



Ah, that old saw. All cat lovers are hysterical and having an irrational hatred of cats is quite justified and normal.


So maybe getting a good supply year on year is something that should be looked at by everyone? Or am I just being crazy?
The problem with "pest control programmes" is that tend to catch more tame domestics than ferals, which does nothing to help the problem.


Let's stick to facts and figures here shall we? We all know people who've had something happen, somewhere, at some time. Your guesstimate is based on what? And is average number of lambs and average of the affected ewes or a national average. Also, is this from an irish study or an international?



Is that a national figure? (4000 dog attacks pa)? Can you link me to the report?

you seemed to want to know how serious the disease is and i guessed you didn't read down to the bottom of the link i provided earlier where it stated that
'Infection in pregnant women may seriously damage or even kill the unborn child.'

you're not grasping the point...its not just feral cats that spread toxo.

disease does not impact lambing percentage
i used an annual report put out by afbi and dafm, so technically its international as its all ireland

https://www.google.ie/search?q=4000+dog+attack&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&gws_rd=cr&ei=8dUYWdS7EKregAbuyJyIBg

i think you'll find that a hatred of cats is quite justified

sidious-sam

ganmo wrote: »

you seemed to want to know how serious the disease is and i guessed you didn't read down to the bottom of the link i provided earlier where it stated that
'Infection in pregnant women may seriously damage or even kill the unborn child.'

you're not grasping the point...its not just feral cats that spread toxo.

disease does not impact lambing percentage
i used an annual report put out by afbi and dafm, so technically its international as its all ireland

https://www.google.ie/search?q=4000+dog+attack&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&gws_rd=cr&ei=8dUYWdS7EKregAbuyJyIBg

i think you'll find that a hatred of cats is quite justified

I'm aware that toxoplasmosis is a danger to pregnant women, I never disputed it, nor did I state that it was spread only by feral cats. But with everyone harping on about owners controlling their cats I raised the point of ferals because they have no owners, so no one to "control" them.

So fine, the government tomorrow gets rid of all cats. Hurrah say the cat hating masses. What now controls the populations of rodents and general pests that cats up to now have preyed on?

I don't find it justified. Cats, whether you like it or not, provide a service and help stop the spread of certain diseases. Historically speaking, when cat populations have declined, communicable diseases carried by pests have increased.

Finally, by your reasoning, dogs too should be hated. Here's a list of diseases that they can spread to humans;
Campylobacteriosis
Dog Tapeworm
Hookworm
Rabies
Brucellosis
Capnocytophaga
Cryptosporidiosis
Echinococcosis
Ehrlichiosis
Giardiasis
Leptospirosis
Lyme Disease
MRSA
Pasteurellosis
Ringworm
Salmonellosis

Now before you respond, I am aware that most of these are minor inconveniences when compared to Toxoplasmosis, and I'm also aware that some of these also apply to cats. My point is that man's best friend can be just as dangerous to our health as cats, especially in the case of people with compromised immune systems. So hate cats all you want, but don't be under the impression that dogs or other warm blooded pets are perfectly safe.

pilly

ganmo wrote:

i think you'll find that a hatred of cats is quite justified

And this is okay? Fine I'm out!

kylith

sidious-sam wrote: »

The appropriate response to this her is clearly asking whether you had taken appropriate precautions to protect your fish from predation. If not, then surely that's just your bad luck, by your reasoning of course. If I was your neighbour and you had proof that my cat had killed some of your fish, yes, I would of course apologise and offer to replace them, because that's the sort of good natured person I am. That said, I'd only offer once. Anything after that and well you haven't learnt to protect your fish and that's your foolishness more than my apparent lack of control.

More protected than in a pond, on my property, behind 8' walls, in the middle of a terrace? They were in my garden. Other people's pets shouldn't be wandering round my garden, the same as mine shouldn't be wandering round theirs.

sidious-sam wrote: »

On public ground however, it may not be so cut and dried. The law may have to step in and depending on how it all went down, you could be fined, etc etc.[\quote]
If it's on public land how am I supposed to tell the difference between a pet cat and a feral cat? Logically I'd have to treat it like I would if he caught a rabbit.

sidious-sam wrote: »

While I agree with you in principal, the fact is that cats are escape artists and almost impossible to keep within your own property. The smaller the property the easier it will be obviously, but even then, no easy thing. It may escape your notice, but there are many people who don't own cats and have no problems with rodents on their property because a neighbour has a cat, surely being rodent free, without the use of toxins, is something to be happy about.[;quote]
It's not impossible to keep cats contained. Thousands of people worldwide do it.

There are also other ways of dealing with a rodent infestation other than having cats around.

ganmo

sidious-sam wrote: »

I'm aware that toxoplasmosis is a danger to pregnant women, I never disputed it, nor did I state that it was spread only by feral cats. But with everyone harping on about owners controlling their cats I raised the point of ferals because they have no owners, so no one to "control" them.

So fine, the government tomorrow gets rid of all cats. Hurrah say the cat hating masses. What now controls the populations of rodents and general pests that cats up to now have preyed on?

How about their native predators, foxes badgers and raptors.

As I said before with dogs there is legislation to deal with dogs. There's diddly to do with cats and their owners.

Philly, I was responding to Sam when they said a hatred of cats was irrational, don't you agree that there are reasons why someone mightn't like cats

DBB

Folks.
This is the Animals and Pets Forum, and as such, no matter what side of this argument you're on, the use of language such as "hatred" of any type of animal is going to upset and annoy people.
Can you please tone it down? Bearing in mind that this is the 3rd on-thread warning asking people to tone it down?
Thanks,
DBB