Not how cats work. Nice job getting butthurt about a funny comic on the internet, though.
And just so you can be better informed in the future. Feral cats are the ones affecting the ecosystem. Outdoor house cats have a negligible influence on wildlife. Let your cat go outside sometimes.
And, just a guess, you should probably go outside sometimes too.
"The magnitude of mortality they cause in mainland areas remains speculative, with large-scale estimates based on non-systematic analyses and little consideration of scientific data. Here we conduct a systematic review and quantitatively estimate mortality caused by cats in the United States. We estimate that free-ranging domestic cats kill 1.3–4.0 billion birds and 6.3–22.3 billion mammals annually. Un-owned cats, as opposed to owned pets, cause the majority of this mortality."
Downvoting doesn't make you right and it doesn't make your cats less miserable.
"The magnitude of mortality they cause in mainland areas remains speculative, with large-scale estimates based on non-systematic analyses and little consideration of scientific data. Here we conduct a systematic review and quantitatively estimate mortality caused by cats in the United States. We estimate that free-ranging domestic cats kill 1.3–4.0 billion birds and 6.3–22.3 billion mammals annually. Un-owned cats, as opposed to owned pets, cause the majority of this mortality."
Loss, S., Will, T. & Marra, P. The impact of free-ranging domestic cats on wildlife of the United States. Nat Commun 4, 1396 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms2380
There. Do I have to do all you peoples' thinking for you?
If you want anyone to take your argument seriously, then you do the opposite of thinking for others - you provide your sources so your audience can review and then think for themselves based on the data. Otherwise you're just expecting people to take your word for it, which means you would be doing all of the thinking for the people who don't question which, based on your comment, is not what you want.
This study is about the immense magnitude of cat predation, and your takeaway is that we shouldn't limit owned cat predation simply because un-owned cat predation is higher...
We estimate that cats in the contiguous United States annually kill between 1.3 and 4.0 billion birds (median=2.4 billion) (Fig. 1a), with ∼69% of this mortality caused by un-owned cats. The predation estimate for un-owned cats was higher primarily due to predation rates by this group averaging three times greater than rates for owned cats.
This study estimates that annual bird deaths by owned cat predation in the US is around a 750 million median figure, and you're just fine with that?
If you quote an authority source you are obligated to cite it. It is not other's job to backwards full-text-search a quote to determine who your were referencing. Pretty common academia stuff, but as you said you're an ecologist and for sure know that, so you must have omitted it purposefully
It kind of sounds like this is part of a paper that is detailing seemingly large amounts of predation from cats of which the majority is attributable to un-owned cats which I gather you reckon means "outdoor" owned cats aren't a big threat to wildlife populations since they aren't responsible for the greatest amount of the total predation from cats overall.
But, without the context, the numbers cited sound instinctively like 'big' numbers so if the total magnitude of predation from cats is large and "owned" cats are responsible only for a fraction of it, their contribution could well be substantial nonetheless. Not knowing the scope or the details of the quoted paper it's unclear if it goes in to what the estimated proportion is other than not the majority and its unclear how much predation can be tolerated by the populations upon which cats, both owned and unowned, prey.
For example maybe owned cats are responsible for 40% of the total predation by cats on local wildlife in an area with the remaining 60% being attributable to un-owned cats. This would make un-owned cats majority responsible for the predation yet you could reduce the total predation by 40% if owned cats were all kept indoors in that hypothetical. The actual numbers are likely different and could well be much more slanted between owned vs un-owned cats' share of predation but if the estimates for the sustainable amount of predation certain populations can withstand are below the current total amount of predation then removing even a smaller fraction might be the difference between endangerment and extinction.
Exactly this, as Signtist posted above, about 31% of deaths are predicted to be from owned cats which is around 750 million birds per year. That's horrific.
"The magnitude of mortality they cause in mainland areas remains speculative, with large-scale estimates based on non-systematic analyses and little consideration of scientific data. Here we conduct a systematic review and quantitatively estimate mortality caused by cats in the United States. We estimate that free-ranging domestic cats kill 1.3–4.0 billion birds and 6.3–22.3 billion mammals annually. Un-owned cats, as opposed to owned pets, cause the majority of this mortality."
Maybe don't believe every sensationalized social media article that's really just a barely disguised cat litter ad.
Im a professional ecologist. I have to listen to one of my colleagues rant about this topic on a nearly weekly basis, because its the focus of her grant work.
There are multiple groups of actual researchers in nearly every institute of biological study on the planet dedicated to spreading local awareness about wild cats.
There are multiple websites entirely dedicated to trying to inform people that the small apex predator from a far off desert doesnt actually belong wandering the wilds of your neighborhood.
There are a few actual native species of wild felines currently threatened due to feral domestic cats, that are having trouble becoming stable again because of folk like you.
The kind of person who doesnt really grok that owned cats are where feral cats come from, because your cat is fucking left and right in the bushes.
The kind of person who thinks their cat can win a fight with a car, or coyote, or wolf, or fox, or badger, or weasel, or any other predator in the wild that youre gleefully feeding it to.
The kind of person who is to blame for multiple feline diseases spreading and festering in local populations because you let your cat go pick them up from the source and spread them about willy nilly.
The kind of person who failed to pay attention in grade school science.
But please. Go on, tell me how the majority of science is a pop article about cat litter, flunkie.
I mean... I know Im not lying, and my comments are repeating the current standard. So either you retired 4 decades ago, or youre about as successful an ecologist as you are a conversationalist.
Letting your cat outdoors means its interacting with wild populations. That makes it succeptable to the same problems. An ecologist would know this.
A responsible pet owner doesnt let their pets roam outdoors, so thats a confirmed lie. But at least its not breeding, yes.
Wildcats are often refered to as apex predators in their native environments, because they dont live near all those predators. But piddling over the exact definition of apex doesnt really stop your cat becoming a coyote meal.
This basic concept is a grade school science lesson. If you dont know algebra, why would I assume you took calculus classes?
Some of us, sure. I dont think youre part of that collective group though.
For starters, Ive never met an ecologist who wants to feed their pets to the local wildlife, or who completely ignores the massive issue of feline disease spreading.
E: I just noticed your edit, on apex predation. Do you genuinely think that cats cannot be an ecological threat to small mammal, reptile, and amphibian populations just because they can be eaten by larger locals? By that logic, you are counting on your pet getting eaten. Thats.... Thats insanely fucked up.
You cited a decade old research paper with funding conflicts.
But my awareness of cat risk makes me not an ecologist?
Lol, ok. Your cat is likely riddled with parasites and other diseases, and might vanish one night in a smear of red alongside the road to die a slow, painful, lonely death.
But you keep spreading your lies. Im sure the slow, painful, lonely deaths of other peopled beloved pets makes it worth it to you.
Ill be completely honest, I am well aware this guy will change nothing. I feel horrid for their cat, who will certainly die young and die violently. But this isnt about facts, its about feeling right about past actions. And they dont want to face that previous pets probably died because of them.
But my comments serve as signposts for passersby, who will hopefully actually care about their pet and their local ecosystem, and do the right thing.
Lowkey sucks to deal with a whiney cat who is used to going outside, I get it, but you can harness train cats. Or build a catio.
AS a bystander in all this, could all of you... CITE YOUR DAMN SOURCES! If you have proof of your assertions via studies or research papers, LINK THEM!
Why?
Because this topic is of interest to me and I want to be informed with actual scientific data. Not by a person, but by peer-reviewed studies.
Im not going to do anything different than you would. Open google scholar, put in various searches about outdoor cats, and read the newer articles.
Im not going to badger any of my real world friends about sources for a dumbass internet argument, and my memorized sources are all about my actual work, which is specialized in botanical study specifically.
Or reach out to your local university. Im sure there are a few local researchers who are plenty passionate about this and are invested in giving you specific local examples.
If being told that a random knock off reddit forum is not a high enough priority for me to go google things for you that you are fully capable of googling yourself, translates in your head into "theres no data at all" then you didnt want facts in the first place.
No one memorizes all studies ever written anywhere about anything. I specialize in botanical science. Cats? Not plants. So I dont have those studies titles and authors memorized.
To go find them, I would do what every other researher or grad student would do. Use google scholar. Which is very easy to use, and you can do it just fine yourself.
If you actually cared about the data, you can easily and quickly find it. But, you dont, so you wont.
By that logic, you are counting on your pet getting eaten. Thats.... Thats insanely fucked up.
And something an actual ecologist would have thought of, as you are essentially considering your pet cat as part of the food web, a high school level ecological concept.
If you don't think outdoor cats, not just feral cats, are destroying the ecosystem, then you're not only an ignorant ecologist, but a fucking dangerous one. God only knows what other goody-ass looney tunes theories you have. Not only are you misinformed, but you go so far as to defend and spread that misinformation. Jfc.
If you're a professional ecologist, then you should know full well that even if a cat is perfectly sedentary and kills nothing, and is neutered, they can still get and spread diseases, they can still get run over, and they can still be attacked and killed by other outdoor animals
As a "professional ecologist" you should be aware of the concept of "landscape of fear".
Non-consumptive effects have an equally strong (some argue an even stronger) effect on prey populations compared to consumptive effects.
Letting domesticated cats roam freely creates an unnaturally high predation pressure in the area and has more effects on the local wildlife than just killing it.
Nope. And the RSPB doesn't believe cats are a concern:
The UK’s largest bird charity, the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB), is not particularly concerned about the impact of cats on the British mainland.
Cats have also been around in the UK significantly longer than many other places. Here in Hawaii they’re a plague on native species that had no such predators before.
That's a big part of the difference. Cats in the old world are probably fine since everything there has evolved alongside them. But the native species in the Americas haven't had housecats to worry about until relatively recently in evolutionary terms.
I'm a outdoor cat person but in fairness one issue to consider is that while cats are natural in Europe, their current numbers and general location are something that's pretty unnatural. I definitely err on the side of not being concerned about it, but I do think it's something to consider as people have more pets.
Personally I have one cat that has brought in a single frog, and another that exclusively brings in recycling.
Since 2017, the Cat Classification Task Force of the Cat Specialist Group recognizes Felis silvestris silvestris as the valid scientific name for all European wildcat populations, arguing that it is doubtful that the Scottish wildcat is sufficiently distinct to accord it separate subspecific status.
It's just a plain old cat, it's not going extinct.
My neighbour at the time was a lovely rough diamond type with a big knife scar down his face. He said he had an idea who it might have been and was going to have words.
Of course, anybody who used to be on reddit with more than half a brain would rather be here instead. Feel free to keep running from regular public opinions on public forums.
I'm not so sure both about Americans having their cats indoors, and "others" having it the opposite way. I have never been to the UK or the US, but most owners I had seen kept their cats indoors. Except for Georgia (the country), where cats seem to be treated as some sort of weed that grows on it's own
There are a lot of strays around at first sight, but then I found out that at least about a third of them have owner/owners because they sometimes stick to several places. A lot of people also care for the strays and check them for issues not taking 'em home, some initiatives are doing neutering and finding homes for treated cats.
I heard it's somewhat similar in Türkiye, everyone loves cats but mostly don't want to care about them above feeding them when met. Don't know if outdoor cats are popular there, though
Yeah the British really do have a history of royally fucking over whole eco systems. Brought rabbits to Australia thinking they would be a good food source.
Except they bred like well rabbits. And destroyed whole eco systems. So the British imported foxes to eat the rabbits. Except literally every other native species is easier for a fox to kill than a fast rabbit.
That's a bit of a harsh take considering it was one guy on the 19th century who didn't know better. Looking at it he brought 13 rabbits for his private estate - I don't think the science was there for extended Environmental Impact Studies back then - just some rich guy making a minor change to his place having unintended consequences so branding an entire country as fucking morons is a bit much.
Awesome, glad that's settled, just a minor blip on what would be Australia's impeccable record of care for both indigenous creatures, and indigenous people.
With a name like Kusimulkku I should have guessed. I wouldn't call you American but you are one of the weirdest countries in Europe. A language designed to confuse with an obsessive dedication to double-consanants. I assume your cats are as unsociable as your people. https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/051a8dd9-2533-415d-8b82-a026eef67a5e.webp
30% of bird deaths is still a lot of bird deaths. I would much prefer if cats were only responsible for 40 small animal extinctions rather than the 60 or so that they've caused so far
Indoor cats are generally healthier, if you give them enough enrichment. I live in a tiny little house but my cat has boxes to hide in, toys to play with, multiple spots to look out windows, etc. She won't get sick or injured as much as an indoor/outdoor cat and will probably live longer.
Where I live you're not supposed to let the cats roam free because it's dangerous to them and they can get ran over, get diseases, hurt themselves without you being able to do anything etc.
I guess the local ecosystem is a plus but it's mostly for the cat's benefit afaik.
Our 3 cats kill maybe a total of 5 birds and 10 mice a year. They can't reproduce and prefer to stay inside for most of the year. They're not a problem, as many new studies have found out. At least in northern Germany. It might be a bigger problem elsewhere though. Just trying to point out that your criticism may only apply to certain areas.
That’s what you know they have killed. Who knows how much more. They also still get hit by cars, mauled by dogs, attacked by other cats, piss and shit in other people’s yards.
Actually managed that once. Basement was half finished by the previous owners but left a hole for the well window. The result was a gap between the window and the drywall. Cat wanted to look out the window and ended up falling onto the insulation. He cried for a while until we figured out where he was, and when we grabbed a ladder to mount a rescue he hauled his own happy ass out unassisted. Same cat also managed to find a way ABOVE the ceiling of a basement closet.
my sister's cat ended up chilling in the walls of our basement, and my brothers kitten discovered a hole she could fit thru between the kitchen counters. they are sneaky
Can confirm. Cats always choose you, but sometimes it's more forcefully. This big boy busted through an open window, used the liter box, and proclaimed himself king.
Mine was hiding herself in my garage. At least the younger one, Siegfrieda; our old lady Kika was adopted almost like you would adopt a dog, but from a home owner instead of a pet shop. (Her mum's owner took a bit too long to spay her cat.)
I don't get what this comment is about. Is suburban North America especially dangerous for cats?
I suspect that they are meaning that suburban Americans are known for being very opinionated, judgemental, and overly concerned with what others do with their lives.
However, for your question, if on the peripheries, yes. There is danger to cats from cars but also coyotes, raccoons, and native big cats (bobcats, lynx, and cougars, as well as humans (was terrified for my cat when I lived in a place where serial cat mutilations started taking place). I grew up with outdoor cats but generally have preferred to keep them inside, unless it was not possible (people who think that it's a case of ignoring a "whiny" cat have obviously never experienced the craftiness and terrorism employed by a feline that grew up semi-feral in the woods).
My reasoning is very similar to you Finns. I distinctly remember, as a child, finding one of my semi-feral cat friends frozen to death next to a pond in the forest during a particularly cold winter. As a child, we also lost near a dozen cats over the years to wildlife and cat haters in cars intentionally hitting them. That's just too much.
I want my cats to live as long and happy a life as possible so, as an adult, when we adopted kittens, we kept them inside. They have windows, toys, and companionship that keeps them from feeling the need to be outdoors.
It is not their habitat, from experience I have had many cats, and in my opinion it is better to be able to leave them free so that they can go in and out without going where it needs to be clean.
If you want to give your kitty companion the best shot at a long comfortable life, keep them indoors, it's as simple as that.
Leads exist, and so do catios and window boxes if you're lucky enough to have the space, they can still enjoy the sunshine and fresh air without risk of them getting run over, attacked by another animal/person, getting injured otherwise. I know I just couldn't bear it if my baby was outside all on her own and got hurt..
We don’t let small children cross the street by themselves. That’s because kids have no concept of what a street is, or how dangerous it is. Same for cats, but add in plenty of predators and diseases. Outdoor cats have a much shorter life expectancy than indoor cats.
Yep, that's my philosophy. Never had a kid age past ten, but they get to live such full lives wandering around the neighborhood until they get run over
That's my thought exactly. But they have the mind of a child, so there has to be a middle ground especially if living in a town or busy street. No idea what that could be. If only cats would stay inside the yard, or a cat park like dogs lol.
But keeping them indoors 100% of the time? Total wrong end of the spectrum, borderline abuse.
I'm guessing your American? If you try finding a rescue cat for indoors they won't let you have one. Most cats in the UK and any given by charities are outdoor cats.
So everyone insisting on one of the other is being very... Annoyingly ignorant!
Yeah I only know this viewpoint from posters in the US. In Europe I only know the prevailing notion that keeping cats indoors is cruel and they should be outside. Exceptions for large cities ofc but I only know social pressure to get cats out, not keep them in.
I guess Finland is an exception. Here you're not supposed to let cats roam free because they could get hurt or die and it would be irresponsible pet ownership. Some still do it ofc.
That's not true. I have 2 rescue cats currently indoor only and have had more previously. There's a few rescues I can think of that look for outdoor homes, and a few who are strictly indoor, but most are quite open minded.
I'm not saying they don't exist. They're just more rare and the default is "outdoor". I've been looking into getting an indoor cat for my flat but couldn't find a single one in Manchester.
As an American, I have never seen an animal shelter adoption contract that didn't have a clause about never letting the cat outside. Obviously there are exceptions for leashes and catios, but you get the idea
It's the opposite in the UK where the default is outdoor. So you end up with these very passionate online debates between outdoor vs indoor which are ore due to cultural & geographical differences between countries than any real science.
Which is which? Because I've seen some show science for keeping cats indoors but I've shared two studies based in the UK that show cats are better outdoors. Like I say it's based on geography too. As some people have pointed out cats have been a wild species in the UK for millenia. So them being outdoors here isn't an issue.
You can't compare the impact of actual native wild cats with the impact of domestic cats. It's such a huge difference in numbers.
As you said, some areas have wild cats and the ecosystem is tuned to that. But even in those areas the comparable extremely high numbers of additional predators (domesticated cats) is damaging to the wildlife.
I don't know where the hostility comes from, but here is a good review article that has a global overview of the impact free-ranging cats have: https://besjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/pan3.10073
It calls out several studies from the UK that do highlight the impact of cats on the wildlife.
An additional interesting point is chapter 4.4 "The interest of cat owners":
Studies show that many cat owners are opposed to banning the free roaming of domestic cats, although the degree of this opposition varies between countries (Ash & Adams, 2003; Crowley et al., 2019; Lilith et al., 2006; McDonald, Maclean, Evans, & Hodgson, 2015; Thomas et al., 2012). Several UK studies are particularly illustrative. According to Crowley et al. (2019, p. 18), cat owners ‘rarely perceived a strong individual responsibility for preventing or reducing’ predation by their pets. Likewise, McDonald et al. (2015, p. 2751) found that many owners ‘do not accept that cats are harmful’, including owners of highly predatory cats, and moreover found that providing owners with ecological information regarding cats’ wildlife impacts does little or nothing to change their views.
My cats are indoors because I lived next to a cat hater and in a busy street when I got them. Back then I would let them outside on a leash. During the day they were too scared, but they loved investigating the garden in the evening.
Now I live at a calmer street and have a small walled garden. They love going outside during the day now without a leash. I always stay with them and if they attempt to jump the wall they have to go inside immediately.
My sisters cats are outdoor cats. They are a lot less affectionate than my cats. My cats greet me when I get home, they like to lay on my lap and they love getting pet. My sisters cats only show up when they're hungry or when the weather is too bad and will scratch if you pet them longer than 2 seconds.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
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
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.
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.
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
