Cats

kildare lad

Has anyone notice the amount of cats either feral or pets that are around at night time. I was having a smoke outside my mates had the other night and within the space of 10 mins there was 3 different cats went by, only one had a collar on. One looked pregnant aswell. I do a good bit of fishing aswell and nearly every evening driving the back roads I see cats . It's can't be to good for native wildlife to be having that many free roaming cats . Is there any laws in place to deal with it. I've had arguments with cat owners before but you may as well be talking to a wall as trying to educate them on the damage cats cause .

dodderangler

They do alot of damage out there. Especially the feral ones. I had them for years out the back garden. Got rid of them. Got to a stage I was terrified to let my kids play out the back in case one if them spotted a cat and went to pet it. They are capable of alot of damage to a child.
Watced a YouTube vid of a lad who makes hats and all oit of them in Australia.

kildare lad

dodderangler wrote: »

They do alot of damage out there. Especially the feral ones. I had them for years out the back garden. Got rid of them. Got to a stage I was terrified to let my kids play out the back in case one if them spotted a cat and went to pet it. They are capable of alot of damage to a child.
Watced a YouTube vid of a lad who makes hats and all oit of them in Australia.

They've major problems with them over there since they were introduced in oz they've been responsible for 20 or 30 extinctions, we'd a family of wild rabbits out the back garden a few years ago. Someone's cat killed them all , they used to leave the rabbits at the back door. The young lad was watching telly one morning and a cat when by the window with a baby rabbit in it's month , he went bananas when he seen it. I know its not the animals fault but something needs to be done about them . The uncle had to take in his feeders because a woman next door to him started feeding all the strays in the area. They started killing the birds in his garden .

New Home

Mod: Once again, may I remind everyone that suggesting to harm any animal is unacceptable, especially in this forum; if the animal is a pet species or a protected species or it's outside its hunting season, it's also illegal. If these are feral/ semi-feral cats, there are groups that arrange Trap/Neuter/Release, that would help contain the population - contact a local vet or a local rescue for advice. They're probably roaming more than you're used to see them because they're likely to be in season. Also, I'd like to point out that a fed cat is less likely to hunt (I'm not saying it won't, I'm saying it'll be less likely).

Storm 10

dodderangler wrote: »

They do alot of damage out there. Especially the feral ones. I had them for years out the back garden. Got rid of them. Got to a stage I was terrified to let my kids play out the back in case one if them spotted a cat and went to pet it. They are capable of alot of damage to a child.
Watced a YouTube vid of a lad who makes hats and all oit of them in Australia.

I'm curious to know how you got rid of them, I sincerely hope you did not harm them but I have my doubts.

kildare lad

New Home wrote: »

Mod: Once again, may I remind everyone that suggesting to harm any animal is unacceptable, especially in this forum; if the animal is a pet species or a protected species or it's outside its hunting season, it's also illegal. If these are feral/ semi-feral cats, there are groups that arrange Trap/Neuter/Release, that would help contain the population - contact a local vet or a local rescue for advice. They're probably roaming more than you're used to see them because they're likely to be in season. Also, I'd like to point out that a fed cat is less likely to hunt (I'm not saying it won't, I'm saying it'll be less likely).

Why is it alright for cats to go around harming and killing birds and other animals, just for fun a lot of times. But if you were to harm a cat , people are up in arms about it. Cats that are feed still hunt, they mightn't eat the animal but they'll kill it cos it's in their nature .

New Home

Because it's illegal? And because it's not right?

ExMachina1000

kildare lad wrote: »

Why is it alright for cats to go around harming and killing birds and other animals, just for fun a lot of times. But if you were to harm a cat , people are up in arms about it. Cats that are feed still hunt, they mightn't eat the animal but they'll kill it cos it's in their nature .

Because its their nature and they are animals.
If a human purposely wants to hurt an animal that human is choosing to because that human is scum and could end up hurt

dodderangler

ExMachina1000 wrote: »

Because its their nature and they are animals.
If a human purposely wants to hurt an animal that human is choosing to because that human is scum and could end up hurt

So its in a cats nature to kill for the fun but if a human does it to protect other species he is scum??
By taking the numbers of feral cats down you give small birds, ground nesting birds and other animals a chance to come back!! Ignore it and youll end up with just cats.
Open your eyes. Just because people have them as pets doesn't mean they don't do damage. Leave a dog out in the wild and youll end up with same problems that Australia has. Look at whats happening there!!! Feral dogs and cats bringing native species to extinction.
It'll happen here aswell!!!

dodderangler

New Home wrote: »

Because it's illegal? And because it's not right?

trapping and neutering a cat won't stop it from killing thousands a year. Seriously thats just ridiculous.
Taking away an predators balls won't stop it being a predator.

Sardonicat

dodderangler wrote: »

trapping and neutering a cat won't stop it from killing thousands a year. Seriously thats just ridiculous.
Taking away an predators balls won't stop it being a predator.

You do understand that neutering will bring down the population, yes? Less cats = less predators.

ExMachina1000

dodderangler wrote: »

So its in a cats nature to kill for the fun but if a human does it to protect other species he is scum??
By taking the numbers of feral cats down you give small birds, ground nesting birds and other animals a chance to come back!! Ignore it and youll end up with just cats.
Open your eyes. Just because people have them as pets doesn't mean they don't do damage. Leave a dog out in the wild and youll end up with same problems that Australia has. Look at whats happening there!!! Feral dogs and cats bringing native species to extinction.
It'll happen here aswell!!!

Fair point about ferel cats. I just presumed you wanted to kill people's pets.
My bad

New Home

Mod: Fair point my foot. There are legal and right ways of dealing with things, then there's taking things into one's own hands. Last warning - cut it out, everyone, or cards and bans eill be issued.

dodderangler

Sardonicat wrote: »

You do understand that neutering will bring down the population, yes? Less cats = less predators.

One cat is still too much out there among somg birds. They done studies showing one cat contributes to thousands of birds a year. Fledglings and chicks at most risk. And feral cats are alot more aggressive and larger too.

New Home

Is any predator one too many? Or do you pick and choose? Do you accept that a fed predator is less likely to hunt? How about deterring the predator instead of causing it harm?

kildare lad

ExMachina1000 wrote: »

Because its their nature and they are animals.
If a human purposely wants to hurt an animal that human is choosing to because that human is scum and could end up hurt

Do you eat meat ?

kildare lad

New Home wrote: »

Is any predator one too many? Or do you pick and choose? Do you accept that a fed predator is less likely to hunt? How about deterring the predator instead of causing it harm?

Cats aren't native to a lot of environments that they're in now. So adding an extra predator that hasn't evolved with the native wildlife is having a knock on effect around the world. How can you deter a cat from coming into your garden ? They can jump over most garden walls . Here's a good article if anyone wants to read it

https://www.zmescience.com/ecology/animals-ecology/cats-kill-up-10-times-more-wildlife-than-natural-predators-so-keep-them-indoors/

dodderangler

New Home wrote: »

Is any predator one too many? Or do you pick and choose? Do you accept that a fed predator is less likely to hunt? How about deterring the predator instead of causing it harm?

A fed predator will not hunt true. But most predators don't kill for pleasure. Its a known fact that cats kill and play with their food.
A fox coukd kill 2 chickens for example if it gets ti a coop. Bury one and eat the other. Or if it has cubs bring both home and not hunt for a day or two.
A cat will kill everything in a coop and may not even eat one.
A cat could have a dead rabbit in its mouth and spot another and drop it and grab the other one. Cats are nkt like our native predators here. Cats are also not native either as explained before.
And because of peoples ignorance because they are seemed as pets itll lead to natice birds and small wildlife hitting a massive decline. Pet or not it'll still do alot of damage to small wildlife

New Home

Start learning a bit more about cats' actual behaviour, too.

Grolschevik

Just a few points.

A distinction must be made between cats introduced to environments such as, for example, Pacific islands and even Australia, where evolution took a different path to Euope, Asia and the Americas. There is no doubt that feral cats can be devastating to native wildlife in such contexts.

However, the context in Ireland, Britain, Europe etc is very different. There is evidence of cats living alongside humans (a cat buried alongside an adult human in Cyprus, dated to about 7500 BCE) for millennia. So it's most likely that cats migrated to Ireland with humans. Hardly the archetype of an invasive non-native species that some seem to suggest.

Second, the evidence of cat predation on bird numbers is radically inconclusive, to the extent taht the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds has published advice stating:

"Despite the large numbers of birds killed by cats in gardens, there is no clear scientific evidence that such mortality is causing bird populations to decline. This may be surprising, but many millions of birds die naturally every year, mainly through starvation, disease or other forms of predation. There is evidence that cats tend to take weak or sickly birds.

"We also know that of the millions of baby birds hatched each year, most will die before they reach breeding age. This is also quite natural, and each pair needs only to rear two young that survive to breeding age to replace themselves and maintain the population.

"It is likely that most of the birds killed by cats would have died anyway from other causes before the next breeding season, so cats are unlikely to have a major impact on populations."

(https://www.rspb.org.uk/birds-and-wildlife/advice/gardening-for-wildlife/animal-deterrents/cats-and-garden-birds/are-cats-causing-bird-declines/)

Again, to put this in context, and to take Blue Tits alone, it is estimated that 25 million more Tits hatch each year than are necessary to sustain the Blue Tit population as it stands. That many die anyway. Arguably, that number needs to die to maintain population equilibrium.

There is evidence that cats disproportionately take the 'low hanging fruit' here: that is, the ones who would likely die anyway through disease and winter starvation.

Storm 10

What about the millions of Birds taken by Magpies, Seagulls, Hawks, Owls etc I could go on I have seen a Hawk take birds from my feeders. I have a house cat and on a fine day if we are sitting outside we bring him out, he shows no interest in all the birds at feeders just strolls around and lies down. A friend of mine this week rescued a baby House Martin whose nest was smashed up by a Seagull he survived because he was hidden underneath the nest, took him to Bird Rescue he was lucky its not all about cats.

magicbastarder

I don't see that as particularly relevant. A pet killing wildlife for 'fun' (I do use the term advisedly) is not the same as wildlife killing other wildlife for food.

'sure I saw a seagull do it' could also be used to justify a human destroying a nest if you're using it to justify a pet destroying one.

dodderangler

New Home wrote: »

Start learning a bit more about cats' actual behaviour, too.

You should take your own advice. Do you go out and view what they do?? I've seen it personally. Ive seen the damage done. I've talked ti the farmers and they've told me they've even got them on the cameras.

dodderangler

Storm 10 wrote: »

What about the millions of Birds taken by Magpies, Seagulls, Hawks, Owls etc I could go on I have seen a Hawk take birds from my feeders. I have a house cat and on a fine day if we are sitting outside we bring him out, he shows no interest in all the birds at feeders just strolls around and lies down. A friend of mine this week rescued a baby House Martin whose nest was smashed up by a Seagull he survived because he was hidden underneath the nest, took him to Bird Rescue he was lucky its not all about cats.

Magpies are ahot and trapped and it helps. Seagulls are still protected! Why i don't fecking know. There's enough to start shooting or trapping them now. A hawk will kill once maybe twice a week. Owls near the same.
A cat will kill multiple times whether it has eaten or not. Especially feral cats. Thats the problem. They will kill either way!!! Seriously just look at the damage they do all over the world. Because they are viewed as pets its a touchy subject that can end up in protests. People that own cats are blind to it. A cat is not a pet either imo. It comes and goes. And thats totally irresponsible of a cat owner to allow it.
I cant get my head around why none of you get this. Its like a dog. A dog won't just kill one sheep. It'll kill most because it enjoys it.

o1s1n

People really need to keep their cats indoors. I've two happy indoor cats and they spend their life safe, clean and not out murdering everything.

dodderangler

o1s1n wrote: »

People really need to keep their cats indoors. I've two happy indoor cats and they spend their life safe, clean and not out murdering everything.

Because you are responsible and i thank you for doing so.

c.p.w.g.w

dodderangler wrote: »

Because you are responsible and i thank you for doing so.

Cats can develop bladder issues as a result of stress which is very common among house cats...

My cats are left out for 4-6 hours most days, they have caught a number of birds, between them, have been able to take the birds off them alive in most cases and had to bring a few to rescues whom I donated a few Bob too...

Pretty certain that the use of roundup in gardens has done more damage than cats, with loss of biodiversity of insects etc...and folks use that for everything (I too was once guilty)

OpenYourEyes

dodderangler wrote: »

Magpies are ahot and trapped and it helps. Seagulls are still protected! Why i don't fecking know. There's enough to start shooting or trapping them now. A hawk will kill once maybe twice a week. Owls near the same.
A cat will kill multiple times whether it has eaten or not. Especially feral cats. Thats the problem. They will kill either way!!! Seriously just look at the damage they do all over the world. Because they are viewed as pets its a touchy subject that can end up in protests. People that own cats are blind to it. A cat is not a pet either imo. It comes and goes. And thats totally irresponsible of a cat owner to allow it.
I cant get my head around why none of you get this. Its like a dog. A dog won't just kill one sheep. It'll kill most because it enjoys it.

'Seagulls' consist of 7+ species and they're protected because of the huge declines most of those species have undergone in recent decades. Suffice it to say that your observation that "there's enough to start shooting or trapping them now" won't be taken above the data gathered by actual experts in the field :rolleyes: Also sheer numbers aren't an argument for trapping or shooting anything.

I'm on your side for the mostpart with the cat thing, but jesus christ you sure know how to undermine your own arguments with an ill-informed trigger-happy attitude!


Also no animal kills because it enjoys it, and again you're highlighting your own lack of knowledge and assumptions that only undermine the decent points you're trying to make. A friend of mine who used to do a huge amount of predator control as well as recreational hunting explained it to me. In nature, a predator generally has the chance to catch one prey item and while it does that, the rest of the flock or herd or whatever flies or runs away - so predator gets prey, flock/herd etc survives. So by virtue of the lack of other animals around, that "kill switch" in the predators brain gets switched off and it can start eating or moving the prey so that in can eat it in peace. In the case of sheep in a field, or chickens in a coop, the rest of the flock don't have that chance to escape - so they're all standing there, and as a result the predators "kill switch" doesn't get turned off and it'll go kill the next thing, and the next thing etc. So it's not for "fun" and it's not because they're "bloodthirsty", it's the fact that they're encountering artificial situations (prey in a confined location) that they haven't evolved long-enough with to deal with appropriately. Not that there's any excuse for someone allowing their dog to kill sheep, but the argument that it or any other carnivore/predator "enjoys" killing is just an idea people get in their heads to justify demonising something.

OpenYourEyes

Storm 10 wrote: »

What about the millions of Birds taken by Magpies, Seagulls, Hawks, Owls etc I could go on I have seen a Hawk take birds from my feeders. I have a house cat and on a fine day if we are sitting outside we bring him out, he shows no interest in all the birds at feeders just strolls around and lies down. A friend of mine this week rescued a baby House Martin whose nest was smashed up by a Seagull he survived because he was hidden underneath the nest, took him to Bird Rescue he was lucky its not all about cats.

Thats nature (gulls, corvids, birds of prey) versus an artificial scenario that you've created (cats!). You might as well ask why you can't take pot-shots at the birds on your feeder because Sparrowhawks are allowed kill them!

OpenYourEyes

New Home wrote: »

Is any predator one too many? Or do you pick and choose? Do you accept that a fed predator is less likely to hunt? How about deterring the predator instead of causing it harm?

With respect, a cat is an artifically-introduced predator and not a natural one. Also, I have experience with my dad feeding a cat on the basis that "if it's full it won't hunt", and a subsequent shed full of the remains of different passerines that said "full" cat caught at the same time. As Dodderangler suggested, a native/natural predator will hunt to feed and that's it, but the same is not true for cats.

magicbastarder

c.p.w.g.w wrote: »

Cats can develop bladder issues as a result of stress which is very common among house cats...

Have not heard this before, but I have seen cat rescue organisations recommending keeping cats indoors because it can be safer for them, both from a physical injury and a disease viewpoint. Our two, and our last cat, have all been indoor cats.

Grolschevik

dodderangler wrote: »

You should take your own advice. Do you go out and view what they do?? I've seen it personally. Ive seen the damage done. I've talked ti the farmers and they've told me they've even got them on the cameras.

I really can't see a domestic cat doing much damage to farm livestock. Would those cameras be picking up mink instead?

Cats also kill rats; a service to most farms. I've known cats to 'specialise' in rodents and ignore birds. And I've known cats to die from eating rats poisoned indiscriminately. The same goes for bird raptors and carrion eaters.

Grolschevik

magicbastarder wrote: »

Have not heard this before, but I have seen cat rescue organisations recommending keeping cats indoors because it can be safer for them, both from a physical injury and a disease viewpoint. Our two, and our last cat, have all been indoor cats.

I've heard it. But if they're used to being indoors from kittenhood, it's less of an issue. It can be very stresssful for cats that are used to being outside to be confined, Indeed many vets recommend that cats only be kept totally indoors if they are happy to be.

Anyway, to go back to the very OP, the reason you see more cats at night is because that's when they evolved to prefer being out and about. (Actually, during crepuscular hours).

Grolschevik

OpenYourEyes wrote: »

, a cat is an artifically-introduced predator and not a natural one.

native/natural predator will hunt to feed and that's it, but the same is not true for cats.

How long does an animal have to exist in an ecosystem before it stops being "artificially introduced" and "non-native"? I've head the same claims about magpies, for example. Usually from hunters/trappers.

It's not like cats only got here in the '40s!

c.p.w.g.w

magicbastarder wrote: »

Have not heard this before, but I have seen cat rescue organisations recommending keeping cats indoors because it can be safer for them, both from a physical injury and a disease viewpoint. Our two, and our last cat, have all been indoor cats.

It's called FIC... if cats are stimulated it's less likely to happen...my vet was telling me about it when we were getting ours neutered & sprayed...

Markcheese

Grolschevik wrote: »

How long does an animal have to exist in an ecosystem before it stops being "artificially introduced" and "non-native"? I've head the same claims about magpies, for example. Usually from hunters/trappers.

It's not like cats only got here in the '40s!

Rabbits aren't exactly native either ...
Think there are still wild cats in Scotland.. pretty rare ( not feral cats ) ,so I'm guessing they wouldn't do so well in the wild on this side of the world if humans didn't keep feeding them , and breeding a reserve population to keep reintroducing to go feral ..

dodderangler

Markcheese wrote: »

Rabbits aren't exactly native either ...
Think there are still wild cats in Scotland.. pretty rare ( not feral cats ) ,so I'm guessing they wouldn't do so well in the wild on this side of the world if humans didn't keep feeding them , and breeding a reserve population to keep reintroducing to go feral ..

Wild cats are not like feral correct. And are very rare. The original cat.
Much like a pig if it gets loose. A pig turns wild if it gets loose. Plenty of documents about it. Even dogs do the same. Theyll go wild and enough will form a pack like a wolf pack.

dodderangler

OpenYourEyes wrote: »

'Seagulls' consist of 7+ species and they're protected because of the huge declines most of those species have undergone in recent decades. Suffice it to say that your observation that "there's enough to start shooting or trapping them now" won't be taken above the data gathered by actual experts in the field :rolleyes: Also sheer numbers aren't an argument for trapping or shooting anything.

I'm on your side for the mostpart with the cat thing, but jesus christ you sure know how to undermine your own arguments with an ill-informed trigger-happy attitude!


Also no animal kills because it enjoys it, and again you're highlighting your own lack of knowledge and assumptions that only undermine the decent points you're trying to make. A friend of mine who used to do a huge amount of predator control as well as recreational hunting explained it to me. In nature, a predator generally has the chance to catch one prey item and while it does that, the rest of the flock or herd or whatever flies or runs away - so predator gets prey, flock/herd etc survives. So by virtue of the lack of other animals around, that "kill switch" in the predators brain gets switched off and it can start eating or moving the prey so that in can eat it in peace. In the case of sheep in a field, or chickens in a coop, the rest of the flock don't have that chance to escape - so they're all standing there, and as a result the predators "kill switch" doesn't get turned off and it'll go kill the next thing, and the next thing etc. So it's not for "fun" and it's not because they're "bloodthirsty", it's the fact that they're encountering artificial situations (prey in a confined location) that they haven't evolved long-enough with to deal with appropriately. Not that there's any excuse for someone allowing their dog to kill sheep, but the argument that it or any other carnivore/predator "enjoys" killing is just an idea people get in their heads to justify demonising something.

Surplus killing is a known study of animals that kill for pleasure or purposely because they can.
Documented in plenty of animals not just pack animals. 12 wolves took out 37 elk in the space of a weekend in Canada. A rogue leopard took out 48 springbok on a 4 day stint. Surplus killing is more common than you think.

dodderangler

Another case of it
19 elk in one night. https://www.google.ie/amp/s/api.nationalgeographic.com/distribution/public/amp/news/2016/03/160325-wolf-pack-kills-19-wolves-surplus-killing-wyoming
Animals do kill for sport and dont bother eating alot of it

Eddie B

I am actually shocked that people on this forum are OK with allowing cats to roam the countryside to kill our native wildlife species. CATCH, NEUTER, RELEASE. What a load of bull. CATCH, and PUT TO SLEEP, is the only way to deal with this menace. Shame on those who turn a blind eye.

O by all means, have whatever pet you want. Be it cat, dog, goldfish, or whatever. BUT keep them on your property, or on a leash. No it's or buts, just be a responsible pet owner.

Grolschevik

Markcheese wrote: »

Rabbits aren't exactly native either ...
Think there are still wild cats in Scotland.. pretty rare ( not feral cats ) ,so I'm guessing they wouldn't do so well in the wild on this side of the world if humans didn't keep feeding them , and breeding a reserve population to keep reintroducing to go feral ..

Much the same could be said about humans!

Grolschevik

Eddie B wrote: »

I am actually shocked that people on this forum are OK with allowing cats to roam the countryside to kill our native wildlife species. CATCH, NEUTER, RELEASE. What a load of bull. CATCH, and PUT TO SLEEP, is the only way to deal with this menace. Shame on those who turn a blind eye.
.

A load of hyperbolics. The point is that, no matter what people believe, the evidence suggests that their impact on wild birds is negligible.

The 25 million 'surplus' Blue Tits each year I referenced in my first post in this thread? The ones who die anyway, and the ones who have to die to keep the Blue Tit population in equilibrium? That's in Britain alone.

Again. Negligible impact.

o1s1n

c.p.w.g.w wrote: »

Cats can develop bladder issues as a result of stress which is very common among house cats...

My cats are left out for 4-6 hours most days, they have caught a number of birds, between them, have been able to take the birds off them alive in most cases and had to bring a few to rescues whom I donated a few Bob too...

Pretty certain that the use of roundup in gardens has done more damage than cats, with loss of biodiversity of insects etc...and folks use that for everything (I too was once guilty)

No bladder problems here with my two or any of my friends indoor cats, first I've hard of it.

Even if so, I think it's better for their health than risking them getting mauled by a dog/run over by a car/eating something poisonous/falling off something high and breaking a limb. Indoor cats statistically live longer lives.

I don't want to be getting down on another cat owner, but you really do have no idea what your cats have done while out in the wild. You might have taken a few birds off of them, but they may have left a trail of destruction through nests and other birds that you'll never know about.

I'm not sure if you remember, but when I was growing up as a kid, people would let their dogs out to roam about the place. That was put a stop to and looking back, the idea now sounds ridiculous.

I'd say some day soon we'll be thinking the same way about pet cats.

Choc Chip

You can't eliminate feral cats. This study documents the 19 years it took to eliminate them on an island in the indian ocean: https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/38d3/7165bef076fa5180e531e2141116cac49cbf.pdf It's madness to think that you could eradicate them in Ireland where there is a population of house cats that are allowed to stray and breed with the feral population.

Also, the vacuum effect occurs when you remove a colony, with other cats moving into the area to repopulate it and exploit the resources that attracted the first colony.

Numerous studies have shown that TNR is, long term, the best way to reduce numbers. There are links to various studies here: http://www.animaladvocacy.ie/tnr/scientific-evidence/key-scientific-studies-on-trap-neuter-return/

I do agree that if people want to have a pet cat, it should be kept inside. I don't understand the hatred shown to them though. The ferals I know are scrawny, half starved things.

dodderangler

Choc Chip wrote: »

You can't eliminate feral cats. This study documents the 19 years it took to eliminate them on an island in the indian ocean: https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/38d3/7165bef076fa5180e531e2141116cac49cbf.pdf It's madness to think that you could eradicate them in Ireland where there is a population of house cats that are allowed to stray and breed with the feral population.

Also, the vacuum effect occurs when you remove a colony, with other cats moving into the area to repopulate it and exploit the resources that attracted the first colony.

Numerous studies have shown that TNR is, long term, the best way to reduce numbers. There are links to various studies here: http://www.animaladvocacy.ie/tnr/scientific-evidence/key-scientific-studies-on-trap-neuter-return/

I do agree that if people want to have a pet cat, it should be kept inside. I don't understand the hatred shown to them though. The ferals I know are scrawny, half starved things.

I've seen some big fat ferals over the years. Of course one looked like the elusive black panther of ireland and I could see how that story started but it was a very large tom feral.
Alot of them are healthy. Im talking the countryside feral cat. Theyre normally healthy looking

Acosta

We keep our cat inside, but people that don't should be encouraged by vets etc to put a collar and bell on theirs to help protect wildlife.

We feed 3 feral cats too that have been neutered. If I could get near them without them running off I'd but a collar and bell on them but they're not having it. There is a bit of a rat problem around here so I'm happy they're around.

New Home

We can all agree that pet owners should act responsibly and care for their animals adequately.

New Home

dodderangler wrote: »

I've seen some big fat ferals over the years. Of course one looked like the elusive black panther of ireland and I could see how that story started but it was a very large tom feral.
Alot of them are healthy. Im talking the countryside feral cat. Theyre normally healthy looking

If they're healthy-looking (unless our definitions of healthy-looking differ) they're probably not feral. I'm rural, too, there's a cat colony around here and if they're not scrawny they've invariably injuries or infections or various parasites, and that's just what you can see. They're looking most definitely neglected.

dodderangler

New Home wrote: »

If they're healthy-looking (unless our definitions of healthy-looking differ) they're probably not feral. I'm rural, too, there's a cat colony around here and if they're not scrawny they've invariably injuries or infections or various parasites, and that's just what you can see. They're looking most definitely neglected.

Hunting since I was six. In middle of nowhere in alot of places. These aren't owned by anyone and the farmers around have collars on their cats if they have them.
I kowwhat a feral looks like mate.

New Home

Good for you.

dodderangler

New Home wrote: »

Good for you.

I'm guessing you're a cat owner because youre defending them so much.