Poll: Cats: Indoors or Outdoors?
You do not have permission to vote in this poll.
Indoors only
6 60.00%
Outdoors only
3 30.00%
1 10.00%
Total 10 vote(s) 100%
* You voted for this item. [Show Results]

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Cats: Indoors or Outdoors?
(05-06-2019, 09:01 AM)Mondas Wrote: No.

"Constantly killing them" just makes surviving cats extra careful, & more difficult to kill, as research shows.

It is a wasted effort, only serving to falsely assuage the angst of cat-haters, & makes hypocrites of animal carers.

& your admitted ignorance about cats, along with an evident anti-cat bias, means your views are quite distorted.
Killing feral Hogs is a difficult effort, but if it is not done, the population expands. If the population expands, more mouths needs to be fed. If more mouths needs to be fed, the faster other species will go down in number and potential go extinct.

Hunt the ferals for sport like you do Hogs. Being more aware or not, does not make these already skittish animals unable to be kept down. Which they can be. And even be exterminated from vital areas.
If a country or an island wants to be free of cats, then they should kill their entire cat population and to ban new cat breeding in that territory. Otherwise, the cat population will grow again.
There is a possibility of that on New Zealand, Australia can only hope to keep them down with various means to let natives recover, unless they seek genetic altering that could be dangerous outside Australia.
The arguments that keeping them indoors is cruel and unfulfilling sounds less like an argument in favor of letting cats outdoors and more like an argument in favor of not allowing cats to be kept as pets at all.
[-] The following 1 user Likes M4A2E4's post:
  • ScottishWildcat
The thing is cats are part of humans life, as a domestic mammal. If a country or an island will be free of cats, then the human society of that territory will be incomplete. So what people really want? A country or an island teeming with native wild animals but without cats, or a human society with all the major domestic animals around (including cats) but depleted in native small wild animal species.
The harm cats do on a country varies from country to country, but a place such as New Zealand, it would probably be best to get rid of cats. Or find ways to limit their wild populations. As well as the amount of people who own them, like I said with farm cats.
I personally would not visit as a tourist a country which kills feral or introduced species to save the native wildlife.
Then you are a very strange person and not very fair. Basically Every. Single. Country. Does that. The US, the UK, Denmark, Norway, Russia, Australia, Hawaii, most, if not all of Europe now that I think about it and many more. It is normal and should be viewed as a good thing.
[-] The following 1 user Likes Ryo's post:
  • ScottishWildcat
Guess we should kill native wildlife instead and make it easier for the domestics and ferals.
[-] The following 2 users Like zergthe's post:
  • Ryo, ScottishWildcat
We already kill native wildlife (hunting and poisoning). I have visited as a tourist five foreign countries in the past four years (Greece, Turkey, Egypt, Bulgaria, and Serbia), but I have not seen there people hunting feral cats and feral dogs. And there were plenty of wildlife too.
Just because you don't see it does not mean it does not happen. Mid Europe has some issues with feral dogs and wants them eradicated. And most of these countries, maybe except for Egypts, actively seek out and destroy invasive plant and animal species, sometimes only things that are clams, Shrimps and plants if that is the only invasive species.
And don't worry, lose dogs attacking their livestock are likely to be shot.

Then again, none of those countries have it as bad as Australia and New Zealand, which cannot handle feral cats as European countries can, nor do I think there is as many. And luckily, Europe got some predators to eat them. Jackals probably don't do it often, but it is something, Wolves and Lynxes might predate on them as well, likewise large Birds of Prey. We just needed the Fisher and we were good to go.

But so what if they actually killed feral dogs and cats (which they probably do)? It is not a bad thing. The plenty of wildlife you see can often handle it, but there are many smaller species that may risk go permanently dead if we give the ferals and invasives free range. Endangered birds, small rodents and carnivores, some bird species, it varies. There is nothing bad in it.
[-] The following 1 user Likes Ryo's post:
  • ScottishWildcat
^ Ryo, you are letting your anti-cat biases run away with you.

If, instead of relentless fantasizing, you actually look into the facts of the matter, you might learn something useful.

'Pandora's box' has been opened, & there is zero practicable chance/methodology to eradicate cats from mainland Oceania.

For two significant reasons:

1, Ad hoc persecution, via shooting, does not work, it simply selects for those cats which keep hidden from people.
A similar situation apends to trapping & baiting schemes, since cautious cats will also avoid these methods,
& they will remain to breed new generations that do likewise.

2, A 'biological warfare' scheme, involving a viral/bacterial epidemiological approach will also never be used, for
political reasons. Cat keepers are voters, & anything that would kill their pets too, is not going to happen.

The fact is, like humans, cats once introduced to a congenial habitat, just aint going to fade away, its a reality.
The best that can be done is to encourage responsible keeping, to reduce straying, for what that's worth.
I am not anti-cat. I would say the same about Raccoon Dogs and feral dogs and even Rabbits and whatnot.

Oceania are islands, which makes it easier if the right amount of effort is put into it, not counting in Australia due to its size. We have done so on same amounts of area with Raccoons Dogs, Coyotes and Hogs before.

1: Perhaps, but if you don't do it, then the population is going to be many times larger, which will kill many more animals, and they will do so at different times of day, instead of primarily night.

2: Depends, New Zealand already consider to gas their forests to get of Possums, and they are also looking into genetic altering CRISPR technology to potentially help eradicate their invasives. Australia itself has also wondered about the limitations of placental pets.

But while reducing straying is good, you can also help by being the cats native predator. If you don't, its population will sky rocket. People are killing Hogs in mass. Sure, some of they way they hunt them makes them breed faster, but don't hunt them at all and their population will still boom with no limitations.
^ Ryo, you do not have much experience with cats, quite evidently. No human hunting will make any actual difference.

Possums in New Zealand are ferals, & being undomesticated, also do not make a good pet ( along with hogs, deer & etc).

None of your "wondering" is reality based.
Of course it will. If it does a difference with Raccoon Dogs who breed much faster than cats, and we are more than capable of hunting species as elusive or more than cats, then it will make a difference.

I am aware of that.

Like what? Are you sure it is not just something you say, because I want people to hunt an invasive animal that you like for sport and fun to protect native wildlife?

Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)