10 Stupid Arguments Cat Crazies make for Outdoor Cat Roaming

Source

Disclaimer

All cat whacks/crazies/nutters are cat lovers, but not all cat lovers are cat whacks/crazies/nutters.

It is perfectly possible to love cats without creating ridiculous arguments for cats roaming at large.

Many cat lovers actually feel that confinement promotes the cat’s welfare as the outdoors hosts many dangers for them. But even if you think that freedom outweighs these risks, if you ignore the impact that allowing pets to roam has environmentally and morally, you’ve gone beyond loving cats and entered the territory of delusionally obsessing over them to the point that you will undermine our society. Essentially, cat whacks are those that only care about cats and nothing else.

You might be a cat crazy if you:

  • Allow or support pet cats roaming outdoors
  • Find their torturing of small animals cute or funny.
  • Become angry that a dog or coyote has killed a cat.
  • Hold up photos of your cats when they disappear as to imply it is the fault of others.
  • In the event of a cat attack you always blame the victim ("they kicked snow at the cat, they looked at it provocatively, ect.).
  • Find the term 'animal welfare' to mean cat welfare because no other animal matters to you.
  • Become irritated with people who do not want your cat on their property.
  • If you have ever said "dogs have owners, cats have servants" or any variation.
  • Make any of the arguments in this article.

Cat crazies only care about cats

1. Cats are wild animals

Pet cats are not wild animals in any shape or form. Period.

  • No animal, domesticated or not, is truly ‘wild’ if it has been raised as a pet.
  • No animal, wild OR domesticated, should ever be introduced to an environment it is not native to.
  • Some cats are feral, which technically means ‘wild and domesticated’. So while domesticated animals can become 'wild', this provides an argument for their free-roaming about as much as it does for lions and tigers in zoos.

Ironically, since people believe cats are ‘wild animals’, that is just another excellent reason why exotic pet owners should not be stripped of their freedoms, as that would make cat owners exotic pet owners, and their animals are already ridiculously destructive (if not more so than most exotic pets) yet cat owners enjoy acceptance everywhere.

The concept of domestication is difficult to define given the enormous variation of animals bred under human influence, many lacking significant distinction from their wild ancestors. So the fact that a debate exists as to whether or not cats are ‘wild’ reveals holes in the argument that so-called wild animals should be treated differently and be made illegal as pets to the public.

A Serval Hisses
A Serval Hisses | Source

2. They’re just doing what cats do. That’s nature!

Nature is cruel and not something anyone should be seeking to replicate.

Many cat nutters have decided that the circle of life is the reason it is OK for pet cats to predate (read: torture) numerous small animals even while their caloric requirements are satisfied by the livestock animals in cat food, yet it is typically never OK for cats to die for the same exact reason.

Cats are essentially awarded ‘human status’ in the eyes of cat nuts because, like humans, the ‘circle of life’ is not allowed to touch them. This particular brand of cat-loving troll is perhaps the most insidious and perplexing.

When dogs kill cats, even though this comes completely natural to them, there is often outrage. Cat whacks demand that the dog owner is brought to justice and their dog muzzled and confined, perhaps even killed. Cat whacks will scoff at a neighbor that complains their roaming cats are harassing their caged birds or any other small animal they might happen to keep on their property.

You might be a cat nutter if...

You find this picture cute or funny.
You find this picture cute or funny. | Source

Cat nutter logic

3. Cats control rats, mice, and snakes

All invasive species are undesirable.

There is only one possible benefit of free-roaming cats; amongst their pile of dead and dying victims a there might be some species that are just as invasive as they are. Big deal. Cats kill indiscriminately and are not magically seeking out the species humans happen to find undesirable. Some cats might specialize in killing creatures humans don't like, but that is not an excuse for keeping cats outside overall, and even less so when these 'undesirable' species are actually native species.

Not all rodents and reptiles are non-native, and native snakes, regardless of how people feel about them, are beneficial predators and have important roles in the ecosystem, one of those roles being rodent control!

Fighting fire with more fire is absurd, and 10 dead house sparrows does not negate one dead golden finch.

When a cat nutter proudly tells you their pet is killing snakes, they are actually just celebrating the destruction of native wildlife at the claws of their animal that doesn’t belong there, which is particularly reprehensible.

Well, wildlife kills birds too!

The snake is NATIVE WILDLIFE. The cat is NOT.

Yes, the snake was killed and the cat whack snapped a photo.
Yes, the snake was killed and the cat whack snapped a photo. | Source

4. There is no evidence cats endanger species

Privileged cats enjoy the burden of proof while blatantly killing in front of us.

"Alan asked “Is the cat the most dangerous destroyer of birds” and Roger replied no, we are the most dangerous animal. Roger said that he is both a naturalist and cat specialist. Roger pointed out that in the US positions over cats and wildlife are much more polarized than in the UK, where the real test is not numbers caught but whether cats are affecting species survival."

A 'cat specialist' OKs killing birds because he thinks the species isn't affected as a whole.

When a cat gets killed by a dog or even a coyote, why do cat nutters not make this same statement?

While it is agreed upon that removing any and all invasive species (if possible) such as Burmese pythons, lion fish, and kudzu is a desirable action, cats are the only animal that researchers need to definitively prove are impacting the native species in question otherwise, as a cat nutter will tell you, they should be left alone.

Q. Are invasive species bad for the environment?

A. Yes.

Q. Should cats be removed and banned from being outdoors?

A. There is no evidence they are harming anything.

There are laws put in place that make killing or harassing many native U.S. species punishable by law. This is just another reason that letting cats roam and kill is an acceptable form of poaching.

Even without evidence for species decline in Great Britain, ethical people feel that animals should not be killed for entertainment purposes, and this is essentially what happens with cats that have an abundance of food. Just ask the cat lover to envision that the pesky chipmunk being disemboweled alive is a kitten being mauled by a dog, and they can perhaps see that perspective. All of the sudden, the ‘circle of life’ and the fact that there is no evidence (nor will there ever be) that cats will go extinct as a result becomes irrelevant.

By default, the introduction or acceptance of non-native predators in the ecosystem must always be held to the highest scrutiny. We should not wait for catastrophic results to the already compromised ecosystem to take action.

5. Stop the killing/ this study will make people kill cats!

Cat 'advocates' object to science if it threatens outdoor cats.

"Yet an overwhelming majority of Americans believe it is more humane to leave a cat outside than to have her caught and killed, according to a 2007 study conducted by Harris Interactive for Alley Cat Allies."

From the website of Alley Cat Allies, the wackiest of the cat whacks, appeal to majority logic is used no matter how asinine the conclusion. According to their survey, tossing cats outdoors to either die early, or NOT die early and kill wildlife, is more humane than humane euthanasia.

Cat advocates suffer every time an independent study tells them what they won’t to hear, and they spin every logical fallacy at their disposal to try and suppress it.

  • The Wisconsin Study: Bad Science Costs Cats’ Lives
  • Breaking Down the Bogus Smithsonian Catbird Study
  • "Americans are angry that an institution receiving taxpayer money would fund a study that declares war on a beloved companion animal"

It can be objectively stated that regardless of whatever the truth out there might be, you will never get anything other than opposition against any study that paints free-roaming cats in a negative light. Organizations like Alley Cat Allies do not even advocate keeping pet cats indoors, which does NOT cause their deaths. In fact, it does the opposite, it lets cats live longer, and keeps them away from people who might want to shoot them with crossbows.

Source

6. Humans/dogs do more damage

Cats ARE a human impact!

Who said humans aren't destructive? Who said pollution and overdevelopment aren't consequential actions worthy of being regulated? That's right, no one.

In fact, introduction of non-native species is just another anthropogenic environmental impact.

Since cat advocates cry foul over human activities, they should all be perfectly fine with making it illegal to allow cats outdoors as it is for littering, killing or possessing migratory birds (dead or alive), and not picking up after your dog.

Source

7. It is impossible to keep a cat inside

If zoos can keep in chimps, you can keep in a cat.

If you can’t handle keeping a cat indoors, then you should look into a different pet. Those controversial exotic pet owners with truly non-domesticated animals and even wildlife sanctuaries that house actual wild animals all manage to keep their animals confined properly. They would have the book thrown at them otherwise.

So perhaps some of the most baffling claims of cat crazies (and trust me, all are 100% ridiculous) is this idea that people cannot successfully keep cats inside, that they will find their way out eventually or become destructive. This is the battle cry of a bad, lazy and intolerant pet owner that expects a pet to be fully adaptable into their lives instead of having to carry out some basic husbandry like allowing the animal outdoors in a supervised or confined setting, and keeping the cat sufficiently entertained indoors.

Some people with the room also opt to construct catios or tunnels. If you aren’t willing to step up to the plate to deal with a genetically high drive cat, you should either adopt a cat from a shelter with a known history of being a couch potato, or consider a small pet like a ferret that can meet its energy needs indoors.

Source

8. Cats mainly kill wounded and sick animals and not many birds

Some of the prey being injured and sick doesn't justify those which aren't.

This argument runs off the mentality that cats are special and therefore we should consider any possibly that cat predation might not be ‘that bad’. Only in the mind of a person with deluded favoritism does this argument spring forth.

No reasonably intelligent environmentally responsible person tries to create reasons for an invasive species to remain where it doesn’t belong, given the myriad of potential negative impacts, many of which are already known or proven.

Do cats kill mostly small rodents and less birds? Yes. Why is it that these bird deaths do not matter, when even one cat death matters so much? If wildlife was given the same treatment as cats, ONE dead bird or even those shunned small mammals dying per year would be UNACCEPTABLE. And if cats are killing wounded animals, that could have been prey for other native species. The number of cats are at completely unnatural densities, and they do not substitute for extirpated predators.

9. Would you like to be cooped up all day?

All pets, being pets, should be confined.

Would I like to be tortured and killed by a mountain lion? No. A cat whack cannot see their impact beyond cats. They simply cannot. To them, a perceived cat's boredom is more important than a dead wild animal, or even hundreds of them. If killing animals and annoying neighbors is what needs to be done to make kitty optimally happy, then there is no question that there is no choice other than to comply with its 'needs'.

Even the free-roaming rights of dogs are not allowed to interfere with a cat's. Cats, and cats only should be allowed to roam as their instincts are the only ones important enough to warrant free-reign over the land.

Source

10. You just hate cats/stop blaming cats!

Cat nutters must hate wildlife and property rights

At some point in the argument every cat crazy will tell you this. I don’t hate cats, but it wouldn’t matter if I did. This is just an example of ‘poison the well fallacy’ to make you look bad in the face of other cat crazies. Don't trust a cat hater, there is something wrong with people who do not obsess over cats.

Many cat lovers hate dogs, and that doesn’t make them wrong in saying that dogs should not be running loose or defecating without the owner cleaning it up. Numerous cat lovers maintain their sanity and believe in responsible pet care for all pets, including cats. They do not perceive cats as an exception for no reason.

As for placing the blame on a clueless animal, the same way we’re not blaming plastic bags for ending up in the GI tract of wildlife, we’re not blaming cats for what they do, we are just demanding the humans resolve the problems they’ve created.

If a feral cat needs to be euthanized, apologize to it, curse the humans that allowed the problem to get out of control all you wish, but do what needs to be done, and prevent future cats from suffering the same fate.

  • Note: there are also dog, reptile, and horse crazies, but they are not as prolific as cat crazies.

More by this Author


Comments 36 comments

Doug Cutler profile image

Doug Cutler 15 months ago from Temperance. Mich

I don't think cats or dogs should be kept indoors permanently. We let both in and out any time they wanted. Then in the 60's dog laws became more stringent. We had to tie up the dog when outside or walk the dog on a leash.

There was a lot of freedoms we had then that are goon now. How bad will it get before people have had enough?


DrMark1961 profile image

DrMark1961 15 months ago from The Beach of Brazil

Great information here. Unfortunately there will be people like the first commenter who always ignore what they learn and think it is infringing on a cat´s freedom to be kept inside.

I could really relate to the cartoon about "prove it". One of my neighbors cats climbed into my rabbit pen several times and brutally killed and dismembered two litters of baby rabbits. When I told him to keep his cat confined in the evenings when the baby rabbits were out eating, he told me "It wasn´t my cat! You can´t even prove it--do you have any pictures?"


Herban Cowgirl profile image

Herban Cowgirl 15 months ago from Wyoming, USA

Well, I think it all depends on where you live, who your neighbors are, and your how you view the world. If you live in town, cats outdoors is probably going to be bad for everyone; urban cat populations are a real problem.

Working cats are a lot like working dogs IMO. Both are pretty helpful on the farm, and I prefer organic controls when I can use them. Traps don't actively seek out and destroy small varmints (which spread disease and ruin both human and animal food storage), and they don't cause any less pain. If you've ever watch an animal die from mouse poison, then you know why I don't have it on my place. I do believe every domestic animal not being used in a responsible breeding program should be fixed and fully vaccinated.

Between good fences, watch dogs, and mousers, my place is quite safe from predators that would harm cats and almost completely free of varmints--no poison, no traps. I compost their waste and use it for ornamental plants in my yard. Mother nature may be a ruthless mistress, but if you learn to work in harmony with her it's not senseless violence.


poetryman6969 profile image

poetryman6969 15 months ago

I am much more annoyed at uncontrolled dogs than cats.

Whenever I see that old saying that the more a person knows of a humans the more they like dogs, I am reminded that no human ever pooped on my front lawn.


notnr 15 months ago

There is nothing environmentally friendly about cats as rodent control. They are as indiscriminate as poison. Cats are just as destructive on the farm as they are in urban areas. Cats kill non-target beneficial insect eating species. They kill snakes. They take food that the native predators depend on to survive. Cats are the definitive host of toxoplasma gondii. Cats don't belong around food producing animals or fields. The "varmints" that cats torture, kill, and sometimes eat are the source of infection of diseases and parasites that cats carry. Toxoplasmois, leptospirosis, campylobacter, bartonella, cryptosporidosis, plague, rabies, ringworm, toxocara, and salmonella to name just a few.


Herban Cowgirl profile image

Herban Cowgirl 15 months ago from Wyoming, USA

Do you know how very low infection rates of everything on your list are? Even salmonella, which is the most common infection you mention only affects about 1.2 Million people a year or than 1% of the population--most of that comes from second rate produce sold in supermarkets & restaurants. The rest of the diseases you mention are even smaller, in some cases you'd be more likely to win the lottery or be struck by lightening.

Properly composted cat and dog waste should not be near plants or watersheds intended for food (duh), but when properly composted in a very high heat bin kills 98% of the nasties in it. Obviously, you don't mix it in with the rest of the compost. While it still has a very high ammonia content, it's perfectly fine for several types of ornamental shrubs (which is a million times better than the untold tons of clay cat litter being put in landfills every year).

The morality of predators and prey doesn't keep me up at night. Life and death on the farm are part of the process. Away from the house in the pastures and fields, I've helped encourage habitat for hawks, owls, and bobcats; all amazing predators doing the same thing the cats do on a much larger scale.

I don't really mind that you disagree with me, that is your right and you've been very polite about it. What does bother me is when we start trying to force our ideals on others, which is where this is going right? The intent here is to raise awareness and the get people to "Demand something be done about it." Abuse and neglect are wrong, letting domestic animals loose without boundaries is wrong, and we already have effective laws for dealing with those issues. More laws about how and where you can keep/employ cats (or any domestic animal) infringes on our rights as a property owners, and it will have a negligible effect the feral cat population in rural areas. Urban and Suburban areas are a different story, but none of my business (that would be forcing my ideals on them).


Melissa A Smith profile image

Melissa A Smith 15 months ago from New York Author

Dr. Mark, how awful. Definitely a 'cat crazy' you have to deal with, I'm sorry.


Melissa A Smith profile image

Melissa A Smith 15 months ago from New York Author

poetryman6969-- Luckily uncontrolled dogs are less common and easy to enforce action against.


Melissa A Smith profile image

Melissa A Smith 15 months ago from New York Author

Herban Cowgirl-- If the cats stay on your property, that's your right. Even if the cats hunt on it. The article is about people who let their cats go wherever they want. And, about 60 million people are said to be infected with T.gondii in the U.S., not what I consider a low infection rate. I wouldn't want any unnecessary vectors of the disease roaming around my pregnant livestock.


Herban Cowgirl profile image

Herban Cowgirl 14 months ago from Wyoming, USA

30 years and 15,000 calves; never been a problem.


Melissa A Smith profile image

Melissa A Smith 14 months ago from New York Author

I know next to nothing about cows but, that doesn't sound statistically possible. A researcher needs to come study your farm.


Doug Cutler profile image

Doug Cutler 14 months ago from Temperance. Mich

I go along with Herban Cowgirl. Enough with the laws and forcing people to loose more freedoms. Trump got property by forcing current eminent domain laws. There are two 1880's old Brownstones in among a huge building project. Rockefeller could not buy them because the owners refused to sell. You can see where things are going.


Kyle 14 months ago

I'm with you, Doug. I miss the good old days when we didn't have to think about the consequences of our actions...


Doug Cutler profile image

Doug Cutler 14 months ago from Temperance. Mich

Kyle: Most did think about not hurting people and animals. The consequences of today were not a problem back before the 70's as they have become recently.


Kyle 14 months ago

Doug: Might it be that the problems today are, at least in part, due to the way we lived in the 1970s? Best case scenario there just weren't as many people or opportunities to harm the environment back then as there are today. It's simply not possible to continue living the way we did before or are today.


Doug Cutler profile image

Doug Cutler 14 months ago from Temperance. Mich

Woodsman: Were these inhabited islands? Where the only food was the wildlife? That was a dumb a..s.d idea to start with. When I was growing up in a city there were big rats everywhere. Until we got a family cat. Took care of the problem. We also fed the cat regularly, mostly table scraps. You have to take care of any animals you bring in. Not just throw them out to do one job. Sounds like you know a lot of stupid people. I avoid cat and animal haters like they are the bubonic plague!


Doug Cutler profile image

Doug Cutler 14 months ago from Temperance. Mich

How deep do you bury dead cats and other? I live on a busy road and have animals dead in my yard at times.


ManNewt 14 months ago

Where do you find these ms paint comics? They really added a pinch of humour to the post.


Doug Cutler profile image

Doug Cutler 14 months ago from Temperance. Mich

ManNewt:

What do you mean by ms??? Mad scientist, micro soft, .....? It could mean one of over 200 things when I checked on line.


Melissa A Smith profile image

Melissa A Smith 14 months ago from New York Author

ManNewt -- I drew those, they are NOT good lol. But that adds to the humor.


Melissa A Smith profile image

Melissa A Smith 14 months ago from New York Author

Woodsman001-- Lol thank you, yes they are intentionally crude, that way I don't have to waste time trying to make them 'perfect' and I think the silly way they are drawn compliments the message. I thought it would be more fun than posting more HQ photos of cats, and the ones I found of them killing made me too mad (there were also some terrible ones of road kill I spared people). Why look for pictures when you can create an amusing cartoon? And yes, if anyone wants to 'meme' them I am OK with that, I don't really care about credit, I just want to get the message out there.


AP 14 months ago

I just ran across an article about a cat that killed 102 New Zealand lesser short-tailed bats, many of them for fun, in a single week. These are the only bats which forage on the ground, which makes them both fascinating and wicked easy prey. They're endangered and their relatives, the New Zealand greater short-tailed bats are likely extinct. (The greater short-tails also foraged on the ground, though they primarily ate fruit and carrion rather than insects.)

The things that struck me was both how many were killed, and that a good many were uneaten. Even when cats kill for food, they still kill for fun. But it appears that even in New Zealand, which has some of the strictest conservation measures in the world, and for good reason, the cat lovers many to keep anything from being done about feral felines until it's too late.

Any rate, fuel for your next anti-outdoor-cat article:

http://www.doc.govt.nz/news/media-releases/2010/ca...

Also, here's the article that first told me about these bats:

http://scienceblogs.com/tetrapodzoology/2007/04/18...

They also appeared in David Attenborough's /The Life of Mammals/. They're really neat critters, and I'd say each one is worth the lives of at least a hundred domestic housecats, rather the other way around.


Doug Cutler profile image

Doug Cutler 14 months ago from Temperance. Mich

Walruses kill seals for sport. Are you going to kill all of them off too?

Have you ever read in the bible about taking care of domestic animals?

I leave God to judge your sick acts and thoughts.


Melissa A Smith profile image

Melissa A Smith 14 months ago from New York Author

"Walruses kill seals for sport."

No, they don't, but who cares, they are not a non-native introduced species. You don't seem to understand basic logic.


Melissa A Smith profile image

Melissa A Smith 14 months ago from New York Author

Thanks AP.


ManNewt 14 months ago

Well Mr. Doug, you do understand that we cannot restrict the actions of a HUGE WILD hormone-filled walrus unlike the way we can restrict a SMALL DOMESTIC house cat. Do you ?


IBrakeForBirds profile image

IBrakeForBirds 14 months ago

Free-roaming domestic house-cats are not part of "nature" or the "circle of life". They are not "natural" or "God's creation". House-cats were developed from African wildcats by man around 10,000 years ago, much in the same way that we started with wolves and now have dachshunds and schnauzers. House-cats were brought to North America a mere 600 years ago. They have no ecological niche in the environment anywhere in North America or the Western Hemisphere. Native birds and animals evolved here together over MILLIONS of years, predator and prey, without the domestic house-cat. Native predators such as hawks, owls, bobcats, mink, etc do kill birds. We accept that because they are native and they belong in the environment here. Those native creatures ARE part of the cycle of life and nature. House-cats, whether they are pets, strays, or ferals do not belong in the environment here. They need to be contained or removed.


Doug Cutler profile image

Doug Cutler 14 months ago from Temperance. Mich

Woodsman001: You are the troll with your blah, blah, blah. Seeking the attention of the readers. Cats aren't the only animals I keep. And when people visit, the cats usually hide. And I do not mention them, as you say, to get attention. You ass-ume way way too much.

A previous post by IBrakeForBirds 9 days ago, mention dachshunds and schnauzers started with wolves. Do you also want to eradicate all of those? How about mules, cross breed of a horse and donkey? Lets kill all of them too! Soon, if not already, you may be wanting to kill all the people that are offspring from the mixing of the races. I will pray for you.


Doug Cutler profile image

Doug Cutler 14 months ago from Temperance. Mich

Woodsman001: Again: You show your lack of reasoning. I said race. not species. Don't you know the difference? I guess not. Too busy trolling with your blah, blah, blah. The Natzi's claimed the Jew were sub human and disease ridden too. You would fit right in!

I get may cats fixed so I don't get too many. And so the area I live in doesn't get too many. One is too many for a cat hating wacko like you. I would guess you don't care if you kill someones' pet. I have plenty of wildlife on my property. The cats I have aren't doing as you ass-ume they are. I take care of them like the other members of my family.

There you go again ass-uming that I am seeking attention. And now you are threatening people that have a different opinion than you.


Doug Cutler profile image

Doug Cutler 14 months ago from Temperance. Mich

You are the wacko that likes destroying things. And I didn't say or even suggest that the inbred races were invasive. That is your gig.

Do as your heartless sheriff says. Gloat in your sickness!


IBrakeForBirds profile image

IBrakeForBirds 14 months ago

Woodsman understands the science and implications of how destructive outdoor and feral cats are on our native ecosystems. Like me, he treasures our native wildlife and has no time or patience for people who put the perceived needs of their pets above that of hundreds and thousands of dead native animals. He is 100% correct in everything he says.


Frederick Minshall 11 months ago

Hey Melissa...

I think it's time we start telling it like it is with respect to the so-called 'circle of life' fallacy. Feral cats have no place in it. Anywhere. Not even in the natural ranges of their (now critically endangered) wild parent species. Felis catus is not a 'natural' predator. Anywhere.

Today's feral cats are the cast-offs of a debased, domesticated animal selectively-bred and ruthlessly culled to attack small moving targets regardless of whether or not it's hungry, as a means of pest control in ancient North African granaries (and possibly tombs).

Domestication has brought about physiological and morphological changes in the animal, just as it has in dogs. That's how over time the once-proud timber wolf was transformed into an overgrown puppy with foreshortened muzzle, smaller teeth and floppy ears that cowers instead of defending itself if a human raises a hand to it.

The Russians performed exactly the same transmutations on Gray Foxes through behavior-linked selective breeding/culling in just 50 years. They bred both submissive 'pet' strains and viciously aggressive ones (a wild fox's natural response to human presence is to flee). And their subjects exhibited morphological and physiological changes analogous to those seen in domestic dog breeds.

Similar changes occurred in cats as well. Through domestication and selective-breeding cats now come into season and breed two to three times more often, are 50-75% smaller, and more tractable and dependent (i.e. less intelligent) than their wild forebears, the African and European wild cats (F. lybicus and F. sylvestris). Their killing and feeding impulses are controlled by separate parts of their little brains.

One can via google easily find peer-reviewed reports of studies outlining these domestication-related morphological/physiological changes wrought by BEHAVIOR-linked selective breeding. But it's not really necessary to do so--simply google images of the few remaining European/African wild cats and visually compare them to the various (and often bizarre) breeds of their domesticated descendants.

Better do it quick, or there won't be any wild cats left with which to compare. By dint of superior (human-engendered) numbers, feral cats have driven their wild forebears to the brink of extinction by displacing (i.e. killing/eating most of the available prey) and genetically swamping them. There are only 40 left in the UK.

But since they'll never be tamed or be anyone's 'pets', the infantile, self-entitled imbeciles you rightly call "cat-crazies" don't care about them.

If they can't trap it, castrate it, and get it to come running when they drop kibble on paper plates, they're not interested.

That feral cats are driving their own parent species extinct in and of itself proves they're not part of 'the circle of life', 'nature' or any other Disneyesque label these deluded spinsters and their enablers want to use as an excuse for inflicting their disease-ridden "community" vermin on the rest of us.

Taking into account the unnatural proclivities of this domesticated invasive predator, one can see how deliberately maintaining them at densities far beyond the environmental carrying capacity of any natural meso-predator by FEEDING the little darlings constitutes the primary ingredient of a recipe for ecological disaster:

(1) Unnaturally high birth rate

(2) Unnaturally high population densities through food subsidies

(3) Introduced into places where no apex predators had evolved (example, New Zealand), or where they were killed off by humans (example, most of North America) such that cat numbers aren't suppressed or maintained at environmentally sustainable levels

(4) The few native predators that do regularly go after cats frequently die from ingesting the parasites they carry

(5) They're reflexive thrill-killers that hunt when they're not hungry

If this vocal minority of cat-crazies continues to get its way our 'circle-of-life' will consist of our living in a giant litter-box, surrounded by the incessant mewling of cats, breathing in the acrid stench of cat-piss and inhaling T. gonidii oocytes from cat-crap. And the only place our children and grandchildren will be able to see cottontail rabbits, burrowing owls, western fence lizards, smooth green snakes, bohemian waxwings, northern flying squirrels and gray tree frogs will be in picture-books of extinct animals.


Doug Cutler profile image

Doug Cutler 11 months ago from Temperance. Mich

The Indians say the same about anyone not an Indian N and S America!


Frederick Minshall 11 months ago

Aw boo hoo. Add to that native Hawaiians and native Alaskans (where I live). Can you blame them? It never ceases to amuse me when those who are least affected by goof ol' American institutionalized white supremacy start whining that they're being picked on because of 'race' as you've done here. You remind me of an old song:

"And the unsung western hero

He killed an Indian or three

Then made his name in Hollywood

To set the white man free"

(Ian Anderson--Hymn 43)


Frederick Minshall 11 months ago

To Those Who Demonize Australians For Their Plan to Eradicate Feral Cats

Trap-Neuter-Release charlatans’ argument of first resort is that "trap-remove-euthanize doesn’t work."

I agree wholeheartedly—trapping and euthanasia is too little too late to counter the ongoing feral cat scourge. What must be done instead is systematic eradication of unrestrained invasive felines, everywhere. They must be hunted to extinction. Nothing less will work.

This arguably “extreme” option has never been tried against feral cats. But it has been tried against other very widespread and abundant (usually native) species, and quite successfully—for example, timber wolves, passenger pigeons, great auks (the original “penguins”) and—perhaps the most extreme example in history—the Rocky Mountain locusts (Melanoplus spretus).

These locusts once plagued farms from California to Maine. They formed swarms of tens of trillions of individuals that weighed more than 27 million tons, covered areas larger than the state of California, blotted out the sun when they took flight and ate the very clothes off people's backs.

Their swarms represented the greatest concentrations of animal biomass ever known. Yet we humans eradicated them in a little over three years—from 1877 to 1880. Mandatory extermination programs during peak swarming season (mostly by hand!) and bounties of up to $1 per bushel—big money in those days—reduced their numbers to where their remaining egg-deposition sites could be located, plowed under and/or flooded. Contemporary reports indicated plowing destroyed up to 150 egg-cases per square inch.

But most important, Great Plains states switched to early-maturing winter wheat that was harvested before swarming season, effectively starving the locusts when they accumulated.

Note this is the exact opposite of what the TNR charlatans do. You don't get rid of a pest by feeding it.

Although the insects continued to be seen into the mid-1880s, there were no large swarms after 1877. The species was formally declared extinct in 2014, after comprehensive electrophoresis surveys of North American grasshopper DNA failed to find any remaining evidence of its genome.

Today Australians are as desperate to save their unique and irreplaceable wildlife and protect their citizens from hundreds of deaths and thousands of debilitating illnesses caused annually by cat-vectored zoonotic diseases like toxoplasmosis and bartonellosis, as Americans once were to stave off mass-starvation before onsets of devouring locust swarms. And their desperation is justified. Australian scientists have found that 75 million native mammals, birds, reptiles and amphibians disappear down feral cat gullets each night. How 'humane' is that?

Since their introduction into Australia feral cats have eradicated 28 native marsupial species, and they currently threaten 127 more species of native wildlife with imminent extinction. The Aussies have no choice but to proceed with their campaign against the cats—over-the-hill ‘sex-symbol’ Bridgette Bardot’s shrieking and flailing notwithstanding.

I adamantly support Australia’s attempt to eradicate feral cats. Two of my grandchildren, ages nine and six, were born and raised there. They and all Australian children deserve as part of their rightful heritage the opportunity to see wallabies, shingle-backed skinks, kookaburras, White’s tree-frogs, echidnas, numbats and king parrots somewhere other than in a picture-book of extinct Australian animals.

Indeed, Australia will have to do more than merely destroy 2 million of these destructive invasive vermin over the next five years. Per ASPCA 1.3 million feral cats are euthanized annually in shelters here in the US, so we exceed the Australians’ goal every two years—and we still have a horrendous feral cat infestation. If Australia stops at 2 million, by 2020 they’ll be worse off than when they started. The phrase “go hard or go home” applies.

The situation in North America is rapidly becoming as desperate as Australia’s—here feral cats destroy between 1.4 and 3.7 billion wild birds and 6.9 and 20.7 billion wild mammals annually. In the 1980s wildlife ecologist Stanley Temple with the University of Wisconsin at Madison demonstrated that feral, house and barn-cats destroyed 8 million wild birds annually in rural Wisconsin alone, with barn cats being the worst offenders. In one San Diego study, 35 well-fed, at-liberty house cats tortured and killed an estimated 1,960 wild mammals, birds and lizards in a single year. 67% of the mammals, 95% of the birds and 100% of the lizards were native, not pest species.

As the TNR charlatans are so fond of reminding us, we humans are the greatest scourge on earth when it comes to extinction since the comet that took out the dinosaurs. We've proved it time and again throughout history. Well and good. Let's for once apply our destructive capabilities to eradicate an alien scourge we ourselves created, correct our mistake and alleviate the horrendous devastation this human-engendered scourge inflicts on wildlife populations worldwide.

Placing profitable bounties on cats will prove absolutely essential to any serious eradication effort. The late Robert A. Heinlein once wrote "Never appeal to a man's better nature. He may not have one. Invoking his self-interest gives you more leverage." If humans can realize monetary gain from dead feral cats, feral cats will quickly become dead, and in substantial numbers. And the slaughter they inflict on native faunal assemblages, and the zoonotic health risks they present to the public, will diminish accordingly.

Such a campaign might have the added benefits of reducing unemployment, enabling more people to work outdoors, and inducing responsible cat-lovers to keep their pets inside rather than risk them being culled by bounty-hunters—something both wildlife and most cat advocates agree is desirable. I realize not many will like this proposal, but I submit it's the only strategy for which there is historical evidence that it works. What other alternative is there—'TNR'? No, seriously...


Frederick Minshall 11 months ago

Regardless which numbers the feral cat fanatics will or won't accept, the destruction their precious 'pets-gone-wild' inflict on naturally-occurring wildlife assemblages is immense. I'll mention in passing that, despite vociferously denying any and all biologists' estimates, these myopic 'pet' fanciers haven't provided any of their own. None. Not one.

Nor does the fact they find these invasive, disease-ridden "community" vermin emotionally-appealing entitle them to foist feral cats on their unwilling neighbors, their children and their property, or on native wildlife simply because they don't want cats killed for any reason, regardless of the horrendous damage they inflict.

Fine. I find red-bellied piranhas (Pygocentrus nattererii) emotionally-appealing. Raise large numbers of 'em in aquariums. They're just SO cute when they shred goldfish, mice and hamsters alive.

What a FINE reason to give 'forever homes' to about a thousand of my precious 'fin babies' in your local reservoir, swimming hole or fishing lake! Don't worry--I'll TNR four of them so they can't reproduce. Don't laugh--that's about the percentage of feral cats trapped-neutered-released in this country in the last decade and-a-half. And I'll clip part of the gill-flap on those fish so you'll know they're "free-roaming", not "stray" piranha.

That way you'll know they can't reproduce and can return them to the water after they've bitten a chunk out of you. Sound like a plan?

    Sign in or sign up and post using a HubPages Network account.

    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    No HTML is allowed in comments, but URLs will be hyperlinked. Comments are not for promoting your articles or other sites.


    Click to Rate This Article
    working