Shame on everyone in this thread that wants to have an argument about indoor v outdoor cats. 99 problems this isn’t one we need to pull out the torches for.
I've seen the stats on cats v birds, but I live in the country and there are feral and outdoor cats galore. I've literally never seen one even noticing birds except to chatter lazily at them.
But in every field there is at least one cat sitting patiently over a gopher/rodent hole waiting. Sometimes once they catch a rodent, a raven will come screaming down on them and they drop their snack and run away while the raven flies off with it.
Ravens on the other hand, love nothing more than fledgling song birds and eggs.
Live in Sweden and have 3 cats. Two are outdoor cats and one wanted to be an outdoor cat but he kinda realised he is fat and lazy and wants to stay home. So this felt very accurate for the cats who live with me!
Oh and in Sweden all cats are tagged and registered in case any should go missing. I could not imagine a world where I would deny my cats the right to go outside. Then again I did move to the countryside just so my cats could have a better life far away from traffic.
I feel like this line of reasoning works for all pets. Like tigers, who cares about some dumb mammals. Also the damage cats do the ecosystems is part of the harm humans do.
Well if some dude went around climbing trees, destroying nests and killing the native birds people would probably complain. The harm humans cause is due to their pets too, cats wouldn't be where they are without humans. When there are too many outdoor cats in an area they breed a lot and effect bird populations which effects other parts of the ecosystem. Idk if it needs to be illegal but if it's discouraged the numbers of cats killing off birds can be reduced. If people can teach their cats not to eat birds then maybe it would be fine.
The damage done by cats is part of the human related harm. The cats did not relocate of their own volition. We put them there.
If you think any animal small enough to fit in a cats mouth is "some dumb bird," then I gotta say Mr. Random Dumb Ape, you sound like you would lose an intelligence test to the bird
Cats ranking on a nonexistent list of """most invasive""" doesnt matter.
Cats degree of invasion is directly controlled by humans. They are, arguably, an extention of us outside of their native ranges.
Reducing the impact of cat damage is a direct reduction of human damage. Because the cat was only able to do any damage at all because you let it go outside unsupervised.
My cat's quality of life was dogshit indoors. She had bad allergic reactions all the time, would stop eating, Vet bills piled up with no explanations. I let her roam the neighborhood now, shes happy as a pig in shit. Her weight is stable, shes not breaking out in rashes all the time, and she entertains the neighbors. Cry me a river about all the mice and bunnies she kills.
Cool, but my cat has nothing on me as a human. Just by living you contribute to the death of millions, by your own logic. Are you gonna feel bad about that?
This person is an idealist. If there was a retarded bird that couldn't feed itself they would try to solve that problem instead of just letting it go extinct.
You do realize Humans are the one who spread cats across the globe right? The extinctions caused by outdoor pet and stray cats wouldn't have happened if human's hadnt have brought them with them you absolute ham sandwich.
I don't remember seeing so many comments when i first clicked it 🤣 although tbh thats always been a hot debate topic on Reddit so it makes sense that it would have carried over
You'll also need to ban pet cats from walking outside without a leash. Our cats were neutered, didn't stop them from killing any mice or birds they could get their paws on.
The reason they need to be spayed and neutered instead of outright killed is because culls don't really work on animals that reproduce that quickly. Whenever a spot opens up for another cat to make its territory, it gets immediately claimed. There are a ton of research papers that show spaying and neutering is more effective at lowering stray populations, and that euthanization is more costly on top of being less effective.
I was talking about the cats that are kept as pets, not stray cats. I guess it varies from country to country, but most cats walking around outside in Norway are pets (~90%). Reducing the stray cat population to zero wouldn't fix the issue of cats killing all the small wildlife unless pet cats are also kept inside.
If the cat never exits the home then idgaf honestly, but if it escapes then it should be eliminated in the most effective way possible. That is my stance, an unattended cat is a stray for all intents and purposes.
But letting it slaughter little birds is not cruel, somehow? A manmade pest with no beneficial role to nature is somehow much better to you than functioning ecosystems? If a cat gets out, the owner has made a mistake and will now deal with the consequences.
You mean allowing those cats to follow their instinct doesn't compare to a human making a rational decision to straight up kill someones cat because they slipped through a door?
Who would have thought?
Do you also kill your spouse when they eat a steak?
No, because as a Human I don't have any authority to weigh the value of other Humans, but we do have that right and in fact the responsibility over Cats which exist in absurd numbers everywhere as a result of human incompetence. Your cat should never escape if you're responsible, and if it does then I hope you can catch it before it causes any harm and is exterminated.
I know a guy who went through 5 cats in a few months because he was getting them, letting them out, and they were getting hit by cars since he lives on a super busy road that has heavy semi traffic.
It really reminds me of that one joke "I keep having to buy a new car because my neighbors dog keeps eating it" " it sounds like you're just feeding cats to the neighbors dog"
Dude just didn't seem to grasp simple addition that his new cat + outside in a bad area = squish
The only cat I've had that I've felt okay with letting roam was a stray that came to us declawed, so he was mostly harmless. We still ended up making him an inside cat because we caught him sneaking into the neighbor's house to steal their cat's food and poop in its litterbox.
We actually found out when my wife was over visiting, and he came in through the cat door, locked eyes with her, froze, and slowly backed out of the house. 😅
Not a lot of coyotes in our neck of the woods, but the little orange moron kept writing checks with the neighbor cats that his disarmed front paws couldn't cash, so he was always coming back with scratches. One of the other reasons we stopped letting him out.
No. I don't know coyotes. They hunt deer? In packs? Or are they large enough to do it solo?
I thought these things were like mangy dogs the size of, well, a mangy dog.
My point is, they wouldn't know the cat is clawless. I'd think most animals would give cats a wide berth, but then again dogs do chase them... Until they catch one and find themselves regretting it.
They wouldnt care the cat isnt obviously clawless, they would just thank their lucky stars when the cat cant climb a tree. Coyotes dont like clawed cats because they can get up the tree, not because the claws deter them.
A coyote is like a mangy dog in the same way a colt 45 is like a slingshot, in that they could both throw lead. Theyre smaller than wolves, but thats like saying "oh elk arent big, theyre smaller than moose," or "my truck isnt big, its smaller than a tank," or "oh my floodlights arent bright, theyre dimmer than the sun."
Most predators dont give cats a wide berth unless they arent hungry. But if the belly needs filling? Yum yum
Unless you can bench press 3x+ your body weight, you would be a roo warm up. Even ignoring their muscle, they fight with 4 arms, each with claws as long as your pinky finger.
I do not underestimate a slingshot with any ammo, but I also dont underestimate dogs with mange.
And while coyotes are definitely a big deal for things smaller than us, we are big enough to give lone yotes pause. Wolves? Fuck, dude, wolves are huge. A lone sick wolf could kill you without effort. Thats a boar level threat. Wolf to coyote def makes the yote look like a sling shot
HAHAHAHAHA! That's the second out loud laugh I've had today! That's funny, not underestimating dogs with mange!
But the real joke is that you think I can't take out a kangaroo in solo hand to hand combat. I'm not talking the biggest ones, like maybe a smaller one, like a female or a youngling, but let's say if I'd be about the same weight class.
I'd move in so fast in and under and start grappling, ju jitsu it on the ground likely with a leg sweep and a throw, then move my way into a rear naked chokehold, just choke the sucker out.
I also think I can outrun a Komodo Dragon with a piece of raw meat strapped to me on a 5 meter length rope. I can outrun it without the rope, but for insurance reasons I'd rather not.
I am also (kind of) joking and only mean all of it in good humor. :)
Edit: Although... Getting into a kicking session could maybe kind of work. Kangs got range, of course, but let it come at me with one of those tail-standing-leg kicks and me countering with a mofunking low kick to its shins or the quads and see how it feels after that. I also think they might get tired quickly doing that shit, although they're wild animals so I'm not so sure.
Edit again: Also, don't forget that humans can also bite and gouge out eyes and headbutt and kick em in the groin, every groin equipped animal underestimates the kick to the groin.
Edit once more: Of course most importantly, humans can also love, and everyone underestimates the power of love.
I would never do it to a cat, but when this particular one wandered into my then-girlfriend's house one night and decided he lived there, he was already declawed. He never seemed to suffer too badly from it, fortunately.
They're projecting. There is an industry killing billions of animals which is also very bad for the environment and ecosystems. If only they could be as passionate about that as about someone else's cat…
"Who cares that I club seals? Johnny next door clubs 50 walruses. Sure theyre both going extinct now, but he gets 50 a day! I only get 1!! How could you care that Im clubbing seals with all those dead walruses?"
Do you get off on animals going extinct? What is wrong with you?
"Outdoor domestic cats are a recognized threat to global biodiversity. Cats have contributed to the extinction of 63 species of birds, mammals, and reptiles in the wild"
Yeah in their natural habitats, humans are the ones that brought cats with them enabling them to hunt species to extinction. Cats could not have done it without humanity's help.
Cats are part of the human problem. If you cant reason that bit out, you 100% should not be responsible for another living thing, and probably need regular supervision from an adult to keep you from hurting yourself
Compare the damage humans have done to this planet compared to cats, and tell me THAT'S the problem we should be focusing on.
This planets fucked precisely because people like you worry about the smallest part of the problem possible while championing yourselves as intellectually and morally superior. You're just stupid.
This subject is literally my job, dropout. Just because you dont grasp what we teach to children about nature doesnt make the facts suddenly warp to your feelings.
Why are you proud of lacking empathy for other living creatures? Are you hollow inside? When will you become part of figuring out a balance, instead of being proud of the problem?
There's not a problem. You guys are worried about pet cats killing birds.
Long list of shit before that's even remotely on my radar. Get a grip man and realize how privileged you are to sit here complaining about bullshit fuckin problems online.
Do you realize how many other places in the universe have birds and cats and whales? They're our only other companions in a cold, hard universe where so much can go wrong.
As such, I care a lot more about flora and fauna than mere human achievements and the problems that have resulted; while I'm proud of my species we also need to protect life in our respective little corners. That starts by not letting cats outdoors, and that's a fact.
A stranger outdoor cat just walked with me for a few blocks on my way home from a dinner party. It was fun to have a five minute feline friend. It's sad to know they will very likely die long before my indoor cat of a similar age.
Fwiw my childhood indoor/outdoor cat lived to 19 whereas my indoor only cats got terminal cancer at 13. But generally speaking I believe you are correct.
Wow, today I learned people think it's better for the cats to keep they locked in... I pity birds who have that kind of life, now I pity those cats too
Imagine getting a highly evolved killer as a pet, perfectly tuned for a life of exploration, combat and death, and forcing them to live a long, soft boring life.
What's that point of living more? You'd prefer to live more in a cage? That's not a point at all. I can understand the wildlife reasoning, but then we should just forbid cats in those places then
I cannot imagine having an indoor/outdoor cat. I'd worry so much about them while they were away. And if they just disappeared and didn't return...I don't know how I could stand it.
We have 3 indoor-only cats. Obviously I'm pretty attached to them.
I really understand that fear, and I do experience that with my outdoor cats. However cats tend to stick to their established territory and patterns and at least for mine, never go far and barely ever out of sight. In the summer being outdoor cats pretty much just means they sleep all day curled up in the garden.
Yeah, I can't do it. We have fox around, and plenty of community cats (one evening, I walked down the ravine looking for our dog after he ran off, and I shined my flashlight upward to see about 6 pairs of eyes staring at me). We had a cat get some sort of blood borne disease, we think she got it from a tick that was in the house when we moved in (it's our only theory, we have no idea what actually happened), and she spent a few days in the animal hospital, and barely survived. (It also cost several thousand dollars.) Unfortunately she passed away from multiple medical issues a few years later. :(
(We adopted another cat after she passed - we've never had more than 3 at once.)
Sorry to hear about your cat!
I'm assuming you're in the states, and I'd agree that I don't think I'd let a cat outside there. One extra bit of support in the UK is that it's pretty unheard of to not routinely vaccinate your cats to protect against random diseases, but of course it can't cover everything.
Outdoor cats in the UK are driving your native wildcats extinct. Even if we ignore that the cat population is bringing foxes and badgers into human settlements because they make easy free meals.
You arent immune to having invasive species. In fact the british are pretty directly responsible for a lot of invasive species problems globally, so I would think yall would grasp the concept by now.
Wildcat extinction is an extremely specific issue. Wildcats only exist in Scotland now, driven to near extinction mostly by humans, not mating with other cats. This happened literally hundreds of years ago and has practically nothing to do with house cats. Now interbreeding is an issue for the preservation of the small number of wildcats left in Scotland. It's sad but hardly a concern for keeping cats in most areas of the UK.
Secondly, I do ignore that cats are 'bringing in foxes and badgers'. Can you present a source on this? I couldn't find anything.
How am I hand waving it? I'm stating an obvious truth. What impact on wildcats do you expect to come from cats in Cornwall, Ipswich, or Manchester?
I think you don't have a clue what you're talking about. Yes, I would like you to google cat death counts and show me any evidence for what you're saying. I wouldn't be surprised at all to find that cats sometimes get killed by other animals, but to suggest that it's a significant cause of death or that they're the reason that foxes are coming to 'human settlements' is complete nonsense. You make it sound like packs of badgers roam the streets of London at night.
Foxes in cities are very normal. They're basically the UK's raccoon. They scavenge things, including the bodies of cats hit by cars.
If you think foxes are normal in cities, I actually dont think a pile of dead cats in front of your house would shake you of your delusions, to be honest.
You keep on hand waving reality bud. Worked stellar for brexit, and its destroying what shred of ecosystem is left on the british isles. But hey, you havent been right yet, gotta keep pushing on until you are right?
I am. We always vaccinate our cats as well, and since that incident we give them regular flea and tick preventatives (well, two of them for the flea and tick - the third one is way too skittish to let us do that). In our case, there's always a risk the dog brings something in, too, so it's good to do.
Sometimes, you gotta do what's best for your cat. We have one that just couldn't handle being indoors full-time. We put a Tractive GPS tracker on his collar. It gives peace of mind and if anything happens, at least we'll know when to find him. He's living his best cat life.
Never seen any cat that chose to stay inside even 50% of the time when given a choice. I'd rather they enjoy their life than make me feel better be cause they're penned up all the time.
My cats come and go as they please, one spends about 90% of her time indoors, the other mostly nights, but is gone during daytime. I usually see her when I walk my dog, she'll creep up from behind a bush and finish the walk with us, come in for a snack and then be gone again.
we have an indoor cat. I was worried about it so started taking it outside. It would sprint back inside.
So then I took it out and closed the door. It clawed at the door.
I picked her up and moved her off the deck. She bolted under the deck and I had to take up one of the boards to get her out and she ran back inside faster than ever.
Far better to die young under a car tire, bleeding out slowly and painfully alone on the asphalt. Totally agree, way better than living your entire lifespan.
If your house is a gilded prison to your pets, youre a shit pet owner and you shouldnt own any animal of any kind.
Like sorry bud, you can give a small mammal a fulfilling life inside your house pretty fuckin easy. Harness training a cat is so straight forward, too, so its not even a life permanently indoors.
I get youre probably so fuckin lazy that you would prefer your pet gets its guts ripped out and dies slow in the worst pain of its life. But any normal adult capable of washing their ass can do better than you, so maybe you leave the big boy responsibilities to better people.
the most i've ever done is let my first cat go on the deck on a leash and even then i panicked the whole time. one time she got out of the slider at night and i couldn't handle it thankfully she came back like an hour or so later
In the UK, the RSPB determines no negative impacts on bird populations. And the ecosystem is irrecoverably damaged from 3000 years of human impact on a relatively small island. Unlike new colonies like NZ, USA etc.
The UK is losing its wildcat population because of british arrogance about cats.
Youre also bringing in all your local predators into human settlements with the free food that cats become. Foxes love outdoor cats, theyre easy meals. You know what else loves cats? Tires. Smears a cat like jam.
But whats another destroyed ecosystem to the brits? Yall love ruining ecosystems, may as well fill your own backyard with piss.
The wildcats are in Northern Scotland. I'd be OK with the Scots banning outdoor cats.
Foxes like bins, they don't fight back.
I've seen maybe 1 domestic cat hit by a car, I've seen hundreds of hedgehogs, foxes, badgers and deer. That's not an outdoor cat problem.
It's easy to sit on a moral high horse about a country you don't really know anything about. We didn't come to this land 300 years ago. The concept of an intact ecosystem vanished about 1000 years ago. It is a completely different island. The best we can do is keep the last of our wild species ticking over.
Unlike the Americans, who exploited and continue to exploit one of the most beautiful lands in the world, when they should have known better.
The wildcats are now surviving in northern scotland. That was not their original range.
Your lot thought a serial killer was on a cat mutilation spree, for 4 years, only to find out it was a fox that wasnt hiding its kills. So.... No, sorry, you dont actually seem to know the country you live in very well. Foxes eat cats like candy, they just prefer to hide while they eat.
But Im glad cat deaths only count when you see them, Im sure you cover your eyes often.
"Unlike the americans." Lol, ok bud. Because I know from actual formerly british researchers that you take care of your ecosystem as well as well as you take care of your relationship with the mainland.
That's not what I'm saying. Not only the USA. Other places where domestic cats are very new, like USA, NZ, etc also probably shouldn't do outdoor cats.
In countries where cats are native, they have significantly less impact on wildlife, or at the very least form a part of an ecosystem rather than being a manual introduction (admittedly one complication here is cat populations grouping up in suburban areas). As for safety for the cats, in their native countries they don't have any serious predators to harm them.
I don't know if Finland is considered native for cats but it's against the law to let cats roam freely because there's a very real risk of them getting injured, disease or dying. Not just from predators but from humans and cars and so on. A dead cat on the side of the road is a too common of a sight. I think the effect on wildlife is seen as secondary and the welfare of the cat is the foremost reason for it.
I live in the UK where there are an estimated 10.8 million cats and have literally never seen "a dead cat on the side of the road". I appreciate that it is a real risk and that it does happen, but you're either blowing things out of proportion or there is something weird going on with Finnish cats and or Finnish drivers.
Statistically only 25% of road traffic accidents involving cats are fatal, so the chances are good the cat can survive with urgent care - instead of being left to suffer a painful death.
I was just showing you that there's a lot of cats dying from accidents with cars. A lot more getting injured from it. And it's just one hazard of many. That's why it's not seen as responsible pet ownership (and not legal) where I live to let them roam without supervision. Could get hit by a car and suffer horribly from it without you being able to do anything about it, which would be horrific.
What’s really more selfish and entitled? Imprisoning an animal for life in return for an increased 0.5% of safety or letting it makes its own choice?
I mean getting a cat is selfish to begin with since you are getting yourself a pet after all, but as a pet owner you're supposed to take as good care of them as possible. It's like with kids. Once you've made the decision to get one you're responsible for it and it would be silly to expect a small child to make the decisions. You're the one who is responsible for their well-being.
If we're going to get philosophical, is there truly such a thing as an unselfish act?
So you wouldn't let a kid ever do anything that had any sort of risk at all? Do you know how many children die in RTAs each year? Would you stop your child from ever walking down the street or being in a car or bus?
If not, why is it ok to put your own child at risk of an RTA but not a cat?
We don't have to get philosophical. It's just that here you're not supposed to let cats roam freely without supervision because there's a fair risk of injury, disease or death and if those happen you might not be in position to help. So it would be irresponsible pet ownership to put them under unnecessary risk.
Uhhh I wouldn't let either roam freely and unsupervised? Seems like the obvious answer to me. Leaving your small child without supervision is guaranteed to get child services called on your. It'd be irresponsible as fuck.
78 children died on the roads in the UK last year. Presumably most of them were supervised at the time.
I'm making the argument that if safety is your only priority that you would never allow a child anywhere near a road, nor would you ever let them travel in a vehicle on the roads. Please understand that I'm not talking about supervision, I'm making the argument that you can guarantee that your child will not die in a road traffic accident if you refuse to ever let them leave the house.
There is a balance to make between safety and freedom that you are being willfully ignorant of.
You right now are claiming the stance that responsible pet ownership or responsible parenthood or in this case not allowing a cat or a small child to roam freely without supervision means you shouldn't allow them to do anything. And that's not what it is about.
You don't allow either of them to freely roam without supervision because you're unnecessarily putting them in danger of injury, disease or death.
If you want to get a cat, a safer way to satiate their curiosity and need of activity would be to spend time with them, give them activities and walk them outside. Not leaving them for their own and hope they'll be fine. That'd be considered neglectful here.
You are correct in that I don't understand the point you're trying to make. This is what I originally said about kids
I mean getting a cat is selfish to begin with since you are getting yourself a pet after all, but as a pet owner you’re supposed to take as good care of them as possible. It’s like with kids. Once you’ve made the decision to get one you’re responsible for it and it would be silly to expect a small child to make the decisions. You’re the one who is responsible for their well-being.
You are responsible for their well being. You wouldn't let a small child roam freely outside without supervision. That would be irresponsible. It's the same with a cat.
If your kid never leaves the house then they will not die in a road traffic accident. I can’t put it more simply than that.
I have no idea what this has to do with the discussion or the point about kids. I wasn't talking about never leaving the house. I talked about roaming around freely without supervision.
The point youre making is brainless shit, if you think a child is of equivalent risk as a cat to a car.
Did you think that through for even a second? I can tell a young child "hold my hand and stay out of the road." The child understands that, and I know the degree to which the child will listen to me.
The fuck do you do with a cat? Are you meowing at it? It doesnr speak, its not human.
Dont get pissy just because your point turns to mush at a lazy flick of water.
Cats survived before us by hunting small mammals and small birds, and they are very effective at getting fed.
The motivation at the core of naming owners of outdoor cats as irresponsible is a sharp decline in songbird populations in direct proportion to the increase in outdoor cat population.
Cats survived before us by hunting small mammals and small birds, and they are very effective at getting fed.
And, conversely, the prey evolved to avoid cats. So it is only a problem if you take cats to a place that historically did not have them. In fact, removing a predator from an ecosystem it used to keep under check can be just as devastating as introducing a foreign species.
Literally nowhere historically has had cats. Wild cats existed in Northern Africa/Mediterranean regions about 10 to 15 thousand years ago and were from there spread by human agricultural revolution to be introduced throughout Egypt, Rome, and then Roman Colonies as well as Asia, and some thousands of years later they exist on every continent except Antarctica.
The tiny speck of area and population that they should naturally have is like a grain of sand on a beach compared to the destructive force they have become.
As you yourself said, cats have been living across most of Africa, Asia and Europe for over a thousand years. So unless you are talking about Australia, the Americas, or a few corners of the old world, cats are either native or naturalised enough that they are now a part of the ecosystem.
A thousand years is nothing to an ecosystem. Birds have been migrating across Europe, Asia, and the Americas for hundreds of millions of years, only to get slaughtered in droves by furry shit machines.
It depends on the ecosystem. Pollution famously caused certain moths to shift from being mostly light-coloured to mostly dark-coloured in a matter of years. The removal and reintroduction of wolves in Yellowstone caused observable changes in prey behaviour within a decade or so. Of course longer-lived species like trees take much longer to adapt, but we're talking about birds, geckos and rodents here.
Edit: Also, most geckos, birds and rodents are r-strategists, meaning they are limited more by food than by predation.
F. Silvestris, the European Wildcat, is generally considered a separate lineage from domesticated cats, though somewhat capable of crossbreeding, and because of human introduction of domestic cats the Scottish Wildcat in particular is functionally extinct in the wild. Just one of many great examples of the destructive nature of this pet and human negligence.
"That didn't happen.
And if it did, it wasn't that bad.
And if it was, then it's not a big deal.
And if it is, then it's not my fault.
And if it was, I didn't mean it.
And if I did... You deserved it."
The danger isn't to the cats, it's to everything else. Ecologically speaking, cats are an invasive apex predator. They absolutely wreak havoc on local bird populations.
They are still mesopredators. A big bird of prey, a coyote, or a fox wouldn't mind going for a cat.
But it's not even relevant for the discussion whether they are apex predators or not. They are efficient predators and the artificial high number of individuals is harmful for the ecosystem.
You're uninformed. Cats co-evolved with humans to serve a job (pest control, in exchange for safety and the occasional bit of food). There have only been fully indoor cats for a few hundred years. Not all cats have to have a job, but some WANT one, just like dogs. We should let them.
My cat is angry with me if I don't let him spend at least 12 hours a day roaming and catching bugs and mice. He has neighbor cat friends that he goes to see. Why would I deprive him of that?
I think we have different definitions of irresponsible or entitled behavior if you think giving the cat what it wants or otherwise doing whatever our selfish uninformed ancestors did is the correct option.
You should deprive your invasive manmade predator the option to kill local wildlife for sport because the local ecosystem takes irreparable damage every time a species goes extinct due to human incompetence. Cats naturally belonged to a small region of northern Africa and the Mediterranean before humans spread them across the entire earth and let their population boom from hundreds to hundreds of millions.
after finding it quite surprising that folks here feel so strongly about forcing such a depressing life on highly independent creatures, I decided to look for the evidence myself.
sure enough, it's not as clear as you all think. one of the problems with the research is that it is incorrectly applied to all environments without merit. and the biggest issue of all is that most of the problem is caused by feral cats.
so no, your absolute position that all cats must be indoors only is not fully supported by evidence. furthermore it is alarming how quick people are to impose their beliefs on other creatures with only a small amount of reason.
owning pets isn't about maximizing environmental benefits. your own existence is a much larger problem for that but no one is telling you to live your entire life in a boring box because we have too many humans. this hill is not important enough to warrant all you folks dying on it.
If some people can't minimize harm to the environment (and as a result, harm done to countless other people) then those people need their rights restricted. That's the fundamental nature of laws: if you fuck it up for the rest of us then we're going to have to step in.
Yeah, actually, that's accurate. Cats generally stick to a small territory, lots of studies show this behavior to be consistent. The spread of domestic cats has always been understood to coalesce with the spread of human agriculture.
"Outdoor domestic cats are a recognized threat to global biodiversity. Cats have contributed to the extinction of 63 species of birds, mammals, and reptiles in the wild"
You shouldn't be proud of contributing to the extinction of animals...
Your cat is your property. Keep it in your property. If your pet becomes my pest, it will be dealt with as such.
I once had a neighbor's cat almost rip through my window screen to get inside and go after my pet parrot. If the cat had made it inside, he would not have made it out alive.
Then I could return it's corpse to you, and you can tell me all about how they evolved alongside humans, and how that means you're entitled to let your pet fuck up my yard, home and pets
If your pet bird is being attacked by a cat, by all means, do what you have to. Daydreaming about murdering cats because they're scratching at your window is some sick shit, though.
Yes most people I know, and especially those in the city, only keep their cats indoors. Also cats are invasive basically everywhere and can be detrimental to local wildlife.
There was a BBC documentary a few years ago where they gave GPS tracking collars to a bunch of cats in a neighbourhood and tracked where they went. Each of the cats had their own territory and favourite locations.
I loved that doc! It was fascinating seeing the vast differences in territory. I remember one cat who travelled something like a mile back and forth every day on a really narrow area. There was also a pair of cats that had worked out a little territory share amongst themselves, patrolling the same area but always 12 hours apart from each other.
Murder local wildlife, cause property damage to neighbors, kill neighbors pets, spread disease. Roaming cats suck, and so do their entitled owners who think that everyone's property belongs to their pet
I guess some cats love to piss on doors but I don't think much if any property damage is being done by pet cats. I don't think I have ever heard of a cat kiling a pet either.
Cats should be indoor only because they are murder hobos when it comes to wild birds and small animals.
Spreading diesease I can't comment on. What diesease do cats kept as pets spread?
Roaming pet cats scratch screen doors, destroy door mats, piss on doors, shit in gardens, kill wildlife for sport, fight other cats, catch diseases from other cats (pet and feral), get pregnant, get hit by cars, get mauled by dogs. All of these things happen even in countries where cats are “native”.
Find/replace cat/human. You are a clown to even deign to compare the negative environmental impact of a fucking cat to what we have done to everything we touch as a species
Sure. And if people let their kids roam around killing birds and shitting in people's gardens, they're held responsible for it. The same should hold true for outdoor cat owners.
Exactly. Imagine if dog owners opened their doors at night and just let their pets fuck off to wherever? They would rightly be charged and have their pets taken away. But cat people for some reason do this exact thing and think it's ok
My neighbors cats used to wreck my herb garden and such. One of them once tried to rip through my window screen to get inside my house and get my pet parrot. I would have made that cat disappear if he had gotten in, and his owner would have never known what happened, and that would be their own fault
Can you imagine if dog owners just opened the door at night, and let their dogs fuck off to do whatever? They'd rightly be charged and have their pets taken away
While we're at it, let's get rid of birds that shit on everything, deer that eat our gardens, raccoons that get in our trash, skunks that dig up our grass ....
They brought up how cats disturb the ecosystem and spread disease. You brought up how other animals can disturb people's capital. These two are not equivalent.
There's an enormous difference in the natural occurrence of native wild cats and feral or roaming domestic cats.
No one is arguing against native wild cats being around, but against artificially introducing a mesopredator into the ecosystem.
I have a pet parrot, a neighbors cat almost got through my window screen to attack my pet. That cat would not have survived, and then you can go "OMG A HUMAN KILLED A PEST" and we'll see if you're fair about it
It's entitled of YOU too think that the land, plants, wildlife, and ecology these creatures have lived off of for millennia belong to you. We all share a planet, it's not up to humans to be the arbiters of who can have what and how much and at what time etc etc .
Cats may not be sapient animals, but they are sentient.
No, sorry. We've unintentionally thrown so much of the world off balance by importing creatures that were never in certain places, that we must bear responsibility to bring things back to the balance they were at before we got there, particularly now that we know better.
If that's not possible, we'll do our best to get there. Where are the dodos, buddy? Keep your stupid cats indoors, and stop bothering the local ecosystem more than we already have.
we must bear responsibility to bring things back to the balance they were at before we got there
The idea that nature was in some sort of balance before humans came along is a common misconception. Most ecosystems are dynamic, and change over time. What we are doing is accelerating that change to a dangerous level.
This might seem like an academic distinction, but many conservationists have caused more harm than good by trying to 'freeze' ecosystems at a state that existed at some fixed point in the past. I believe it was George Monbiot who pointed out that the margins of many British roads had higher plant and insect diversity than many 'protected' areas.
Friend, cool it with the pedagogy. If one understands the idea of ecosystems at multiple scales, it follows implicitly that one understands the systems are inherently dynamic.
The point still stands: we've got to understand the environs we've rapidly destabilized and do something to limit our negative influence. Ergo: keeping stupid cats indoors helps the stressed systems by reducing the load caused by a bored apex predator.
Oops I forgot my point in saying all that, which was that if cats have become naturalised to your local ecosystem, then removing them could make things worse. (And by the way, cats are not apex predators.)
By the way, actually, an apex is also known as the summit or peak of a curve, which domestic cats can generally be considered as they are rarely (though not never) predated upon. Wasn't clear that you understood that, but now you do!
Cats are not apex predators. They have predators in both their natural range and some of their introduced ranges. Cats bury their poop (probably) so they don't broadcast their presence to any nearby predators.
Or, see the wildfires in North America, caused largely by prevention of natural wildfires, resulting in a century of surplus of dead organic matter and primed with climate change-induced drought.
Blah blah blah, legally your cat is your PROPERTY. And if your pet becomes my pest on MY property, it will be dealt with as such. I don't live in the wild, I live in my home on my property, keep your shit bag cat off of mine.
We have 3 indoor/outdoor cats because we've just always had indoor/outdoor cats and I never really thought about it.
Being on more cat-related Reddit and Lemmy communities, I've seen more and more of the arguments for keeping cats as indoor-only, and it's been making me think more about how to care for cats we adopt.
From what I've seen of the discussions, a lot of them seem to center around urban areas and towns, where there's a high population density. Some arguments also seem to be based off the assumption that the pets aren't spayed or neutered.
We live in the middle of nowhere and all our cats are fixed as soon as possible (we've had kittens sometimes and they stay inside until then).
Is there different logic for this situation, or is it the same advice to always keep them indoors?
Afaik, the best is to give them enough space but it should be enclosed. They pose a threat to wildlife to some extent, and some of the wildlife can harm them, besides an obvious possibility of being traumatised or lost.
Obviously there's the safety aspect of keeping them indoors, they usually live longer. Aside from that, they're also extremely efficient killing machines. The damage outside cats do to native animal populations is huge.
I suspect the middle of nowhere might be worse given that the wilife there might not see a lot of cats normally and could have more vulnerable populations. Probably depends where you live, but if it has rare wildlife you don't see much elsewhere your kitty is possibly bad news for them. Also depending on where you live the wildlife can be dangerous for tje cat too. Eagles and snakes are a worry.
I think we have coyotes around, but I can only remember 1 or 2 cats disappearing, and I assumed it was because they were old and didn't want to die inside.
The "catio" idea people have been bringing up seems like it's worth a try, but we need to get our deck repaired for that I think.
If you have a big enough space and want to make a sun room for human use, Ive seen lots of sun room modifications that make little side slots for cat lounging and climbing.
And feeders for local wildlife nearby give them free reality tv
I also live in the middle of nowhere, on 6 hectares of land, and have 4 cats. 2 rescues and 2 ragdolls that had free access to the outdoors. Then a roaming dog killed our chickens, and we were worried it could have got the cats, particularly the ragdolls. Not long after, our beautiful 1 year old tortie was run over. We're about 400m from the road.
So now we have a catio and 3 stay indoors. 1 is allowed out because he keeps close to the house.
Cats are actually in more danger on quiet roads than busy ones. Busy roads teach them that cars will always be there and they avoid them. Quiet roads with infrequent cars they don't expect them so they get used to crossing without looking or sunning themselves there in the summer.
Not all cats are killing machines but with 3, chances are at least one of them is. On the other hand, an outdoor life is probably much more fulfilling for a cat.
At a minimum, make sure they have bells around their collar so it warns the local wildlife.
You know, I actually thought about trying to make a product that would have a camera on the cats head and beep aggressively the moment it would detect a bird.
There's one theory that outdoor cats could be what allows the avian flu to become transmissible to humans which would cause a worldwide pandemic comparable to the black plague in terms of death toll. So there's that.
Outdoor cats are the number one killer of native species. They have contributed to the extinction of numerous species. Not to mention there are coyotes, cougars, bears, and hawks that can harm or even kill your cat. Outdoor cats also are a vector for diseases and parasites that can seriously harm them, or humans.
Pets should be kept indoors, for their safety, for the safety of the environment, and for your safety.
Unless you live in the native original range for cats, and your local region has zero automobiles, and you have no issue paying vet bills for random illness or parasite infections, then sure. Its probably not that big a risk to let your cat out unsupervised.
Brits are very arrogantly incorrect about their cat care. They are driving local wildcats extinct, and feeding their pets to local foxes, badgers, and car wheels.
You can still supplement outdoor time for your cat tho. Harness/leash training isnt too difficult, just go in areas you dont expect dog walkers. And you can also build catios, outdoor spaces that are fenced in.
Are these cats native (or naturalised) to your local ecosystem? If wherever you live has had cats for a hundred years or so, the local wildlife would have adapted to them. Otherwise, cats can damage the local ecosystem.
Do you rely on the cats to suppress vermin (rats, squirrels, small birds, etc.)? Even if your cats aren't actively killing them, their mere 'patrolling' can drive these pests away. But if you keep them indoors, you lose this protection.
Are there any local predators that are particularly good at catching cats?
If your answers are yes, yes and no, then let your cats out. If they are no, no and yes, keep them in as far as possible.
I'm not really sure how long housecats have been around in this area. I think historically there were a lot of farms here (in the 1800s) so they may have had cats, but I don't have historical data.
We didn't get cats to hunt down mice, but it's pretty rare that we see them, and it's an old farmhouse, so maybe we're relying on their hunting implicitly? I've occasionally seen them catch and eat mice around the yard, and sometimes they bring one to the door to show off.
There are supposedly coyotes around, but I don't think I've ever seen one here, and we've only ever had cats just disappear a couple times, and they were already 17-19. The bigger danger seems to be other outdoor cats (not sure if they're feral or not) that one of ours occasionally fights with, but the vet knows they go outdoors, and they're up-to-date on all their shots.
but it's pretty rare that we see them, and it's an old farmhouse, so maybe we're relying on their hunting implicitly?
The presence of your cats is probably keeping the mice away.
The bigger danger seems to be other outdoor cats
Cats have their territories and defend them aggressively. Make sure your cats are spayed, but from what I've seen even this doesn't reduce aggression in females.
