Citation: everything in this thread about them shitting on other people’s property and killing the local wildlife.
“A lot of people are saying it, so it must be true” convinces Trump voters, but not many readers here.
That’s about outdoor cats. Are you paying attention?
And this part
Doesn’t make any sense. Reducing cat ownership won’t reduce the number of cats in shelters in a humane society. It will increase it. Or lead to more feral/street cats.
I’m really not the one making the “common sense” appeals here. Pointing out that other people in other countries can see things differently is not some Fox News ploy.
That’s about cats. Choosing to make them indoor cats and curbing that behaviour is one way of dealing with the issues I mentioned. The other, and I think less cruel, option is very simple: don’t own a cat.
Gerbils take up far less room, and if they escape, they don’t kill anything. So why own a cat at all if you’re aware that they have the potential to harm the local ecosystem if/when they escape?
A humane society wouldn’t keep cats at all, for the sake of local wildlife and for the cats themselves. The answer to the problem of how best to keep animals in urban/suburban contexts is generally not to keep them at all. By “reducing cat ownership” I mean “make people understand that keeping a cat is an inherently selfish act, and thereby reduce overall demand for cats.”
When I was young, it was considered completely okay to keep goldfish in tiny fish bowls with no ornaments and barely enough room to swim. I have memories of going to the circus and watching dancing bears perform.
Neither of those things are okay now, so why is keeping a cat indoors for its entire life okay, but something like Seaworld (rightly) has people railing against it for animal cruelty?
I can see that I’m not going to convince anyone that keeping an animal indoors for its whole life is anything other than perfectly reasonable behaviour (and the snark is becoming unnecessary) so I’m going to leave it there.
I work closely with our local shelter. The reason they’re overrun with cats right now is not due to “overall demand for cats,” it’s due to cats that have been outdoor cats and left to breed freely. Adopting one of those cats is not increasing the demand for cats, it’s providing a home for a cat that already exists.
You’re very hung up on this “cats should be outdoor animals” thing, but you’ve not acknowledged all the posters pointing out bird collapse, disease, and other concerns related to letting cats live outdoors.
To be clear, some people have outdoor cats. Some people on these threads do, for various reasons. Some of us disagree with that, in general, but understand it, and are happy they’re caring for our feline friends.
But you’re the only one coming in saying that anything else is unspeakable cruelty.
Every fucking time.
And I had such high hopes this thread was going to reach a consensus that cars need to be spayed and kept indoors to prevent them from straying and killing people and cats and dogs.
Two of my cats actively chose to become my indoor pets (Pastel and Dulce – the two strays from my neighborhood) in order to escape the chaos that is free-range Tijuana. It was an open-door policy, and they demonstrated that they much preferred to be inside, safe from the street dogs and other cats, as well as having a fairly stable food supply. Having been born only a year ago, Charlie and Ripley pretty much stuck to mama, but whenever I open the door these days, there really seems to be no indication that they wish to leave.
That’s not a knock against cats. It’s a knock against irresponsible pet owners.
You’re the only one in this thread who seems to believe that denying one’s pet the opportunity to shit on other people’s property and kill local wildlife is an act of animal cruelty.
It was a composted commercial product that seemed like any other compost, but it made me uncomfortable.
There’s only evidence for one of those assertions, though.
But having an outdoor cat is definitely not ethical, so…
Even as I posted my initial message in this thread, I knew that it was a topic that has already come up in “things that will cause endless BB arguments” and I realised it was stupid to wade in. I said I was giving up on this thread and I genuinely meant it, but I feel like I have to respond to this:
The only reason I posted in this thread at all is because @Shuck said:
This assertion is observably untrue in countries in which cats roam outdoors by default. This assertion is also not backed up by any kind of decent clinical study, as I argued in my first post, given that none of the three (3) studies to date on the subject in which this figure appears differentiates between “outdoor cats” and “strays and feral cats” in their data.
There is, however, some evidence to date that keeping mammals confined is unhealthy for them psychologically if you don’t limit the research to specifically cats. Yes, all mammals are different, but equally, I don’t believe that it is humane to keep animals in artificial enclosures, no matter what the context.
How a person differentiates between the acceptable and unacceptable layers of “context” in this case seems to be a matter of socialisation and personal rationalisation. That said, please don’t pretend that the idea that keeping indoors cats is humane is Scientifically Proven™ because it really, really isn’t.
Yes, we all get that you’re trying to Bothsides™ this, but the two sides aren’t equal. Keeping cats indoors may be psychologically unhealthy for the animals but letting them roam does cause ecological and property damage. You’re quibbling over whether the cats in 3 studies were owned or not, but you’re willing to lump all mammals together to make another study match the point you’re trying to make. C’mon.
I can match your anecdata just fine, too. My wife’s family has always had outdoor cats, and they last 5-7 years. My family has always had indoor cats and they last 15-20 years. Are they unhappy? Hard to say. They cuddle, play, and don’t display any outward signs of stress (pacing, over-grooming). And oh yeah, they’re not dead, not killing the wildlife, and are no one else’s problem than their owners’.
I don’t think it’s too much to ask people to keep their property in their own damned yard. If a neighbor comes over and stomps my flowers, I can call the cops. If their cat comes over and digs them up, everyone pretends like there’s no solution. It’s asinine.
…and I’m genuinely, finally, noping the fuck out of this conversation. I don’t have anything productive to add to whatever is left of the thread (apologies for derailing) and I don’t think there’s any point in me continuing to take part in it.
… there is nothing more annoying than a car in heat
Well, cats don’t have owners, they have sponsors (or maybe useful idiots that harbor them).
I do have a feeling that there is a bit more going on here…the neighbor may very well be feeding or luring the cat…but still not sure why the “owner” is so upset about that other than maybe his daughter is upset that her pet doesn’t spend time with her anymore.
With that said, the neighbor/owner doesn’t seem like a completely crazy person in his mannerisms and the fact that the “cat harborer” is publishing this on the Internet in a putative manner appears to indicate to me, again, that there is a lot more going on here.
Yeah, that’s a fair point. Not sure what was going on there.