Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Killer Cats Are Winning

nybooks.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 139 posts

Re: The Killer Cats Are Winning

#101

Post by openasocket »

keithly wrote: post #90
rwmj wrote: post #4

It's worth reading the author's actual peer reviewed paper: http://www.nature.com/articles/ncomms2380

I wonder to what extent domestic casts have replaced mustelids (weasels, badgers, etc.) and similar small predators in North America. If there were fewer cats, would there be more mustelids? Would they then have a similar effect on the bird and rodent populations?

I imagine they make a poor replacement for mustelids. Mustelids tend to prefer small mammals and birds, but they usually vary their diet with insects, fruits, some plants, carrion (I think cats generally don't go in for scavenging, not sure) etc. They also have different hunting approaches: weasels will go into burrows or dig into vole dens. Cats wouldn't be able to fit, and I've never seen a cat actually dig to get at prey. So the small mammal and bird population is adapted to predators with different tactics. Plus cats have a habit of hunting even when not hungry, which amplifies their effect on the ecosystem.

Re: The Killer Cats Are Winning

#102

Post by gumby »

eridius wrote: post #94
gumby wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes but it's not clear that the life expectancy is shortened by disease rather than accident (interactions with cars, coyotes or unpleasant people, for example). That indoor cats live longer seems reasonably well attested. However here's some anecdata: sum of my parents' 8 indoor/outdoor cats + my 3 indoor/outdoor cats: none have lived less than 13 years (two made it to 18). My parents two indoor-only cats both died…

It seems kind of obvious that indoor cats would have less disease. Outdoor cats are exposed to a lot more than indoor cats are. And there's a few big ones, like Feline leukemia or Feline Aids, that indoor cats simply don't get because they don't come into contact with other cats that have them. As long as the cats eat a healthy diet and have enough exercise, indoor cats should be expected to live longer than outdoor…

It does seem obvious but plenty of things that seem obviously so turn out not to be after a study is done. I don't know of any actual studies of it. It might be possible to get the data simply by reviewing at records from pet veterinarians.

There are other reasons to keep cats inside, as is the subject of the article. The problem is much worse in Australia where birds and small marsupials nest on the ground.

Re: The Killer Cats Are Winning

#103

Post by tunesmith »

smallnamespace wrote: post #57
BFatts wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just stop. Stop bickering about cats being the problem. The problem is humans... We are the problem. Their existence is due to us. Their domestication is due to us.

Certainly. So what should humans do about the cats?

I did some back-of-the-envelope math a while back that showed that if we wanted to make demand-of-pets match the supply-of-cats-and-dogs in the US, we'd basically each have to have one pet, at all times, for our entire lives. So, a family of four would need four pets. New baby: additional pet. Pet dies: get a new pet. One for each person at all times.

Barring that, if you want to minimize suffering of future stray cats/dogs (or limit environmental impact), it makes sense to do a one-time massive nationwide effort of scooping up all stray cats and dogs, and either spaying/neutering them, or culling them.

Re: The Killer Cats Are Winning

#104

Post by sien »

khalilravanna wrote: post #49
lnanek2 wrote: post #33

> This is a ridiculous point to waffle on: pet cats should no more be allowed to roam around at will than should pet dogs, horses, pythons, or pot-bellied pigs. Actually, my Dad grew up on a mountain where, every day after school, he would come home and gather up the pig and cows that had been let free to eat for the day. So there's certainly use cases for letting a pig roam free and gather some forage. By the time I…

Are you suggesting we should ignore an ecological disaster because the perpetrators are "just doing their job"? Citing the historical reasons for their existence doesn't really help the case that they aren't a problem now because the exact reason that it's now and not then . Cats may have had a purpose when they were introduced but in most cases they don't actually serve that purpose anymore. And we can ignore that p…

There is a new view in biology that accepts that humans have introduced new species and there are many examples where mass killing just won't work anymore.

http://e360.yale.edu/feature/courting_controversy_with_a_new...

It's too late to go and kill all the cats. It's been tried in Australia for decades and it's a dismal failure.

It's arguable that trying to kill cats or rabbits or whatever now is just species Xenophobia.

Re: The Killer Cats Are Winning

#105

Post by icantdrive55 »

khalilravanna wrote: post #49
lnanek2 wrote: post #33

> This is a ridiculous point to waffle on: pet cats should no more be allowed to roam around at will than should pet dogs, horses, pythons, or pot-bellied pigs. Actually, my Dad grew up on a mountain where, every day after school, he would come home and gather up the pig and cows that had been let free to eat for the day. So there's certainly use cases for letting a pig roam free and gather some forage. By the time I…

Are you suggesting we should ignore an ecological disaster because the perpetrators are "just doing their job"? Citing the historical reasons for their existence doesn't really help the case that they aren't a problem now because the exact reason that it's now and not then . Cats may have had a purpose when they were introduced but in most cases they don't actually serve that purpose anymore. And we can ignore that p…

What if cats were god's way of controlling human population?

Yea--this is wrong on so many levels, but in my case, cats--I adored, prevented me from having a child, or cut back the probality.

O.k.--yes, my pills haven't quite kicked it, but in my wild dating days in San Francisco, I dated a few women.

Two of which were serious relationships. They both had cats. I am very allergic to cats. This will sound harsh, but when those thoughts of "Could I live with her--for more than a weekend?" The thought of taking Benadryl 24/7 entered into the picture.

Now we did have some fun times. Times where could have produced a baby--many babies?

Statistically those cats cut back on our probality of having a child.

At one point my father, and myself were both dating women in San Francisco at the same time. Don't ask--long story. We had this conversation about cats, and procreation many times. I once took him to the hospital over an asthma attack. He called me from a first date. "Son--pick me up at ______, in the Richmond district. I just noticed a cat in the apartment." I got him to the hospital, but it is was a close call. I injected him with two epi pens while in transit, with no improvement in the car. We got lucky that night.

I still love cats though! Not as much as dogs, but love them.

Re: The Killer Cats Are Winning

#106

Post by CocaKoala »

icebraining wrote: post #61
ionwake wrote: post #60

I am pretty sure the simplest and most humane solution is... to put a small bell on your cat. I am suprised no one else has said this.

What about un-owned cats? Those are what they say kill the most.

Wouldn't work. Every decent cat collar is designed to come off with only a minimal amount of tugging[1], so even if you managed to get a collar on every feral cat in the city, they'd pretty quickly manage to get the collars off.

[1]: This is behavior that you absolutely want to have in a collar that's designed to go around the neck of an animal who's roaming unsupervised. Consider the (likely) scenario where the collar gets caught on something, and the animal panics. If the collar comes undone easily, the cat escapes from being trapped and saunters off, and you need to buy a new collar when you can't find the old one. If the collar is shut in such a way that the cat can't escape, the cat is likely to injure itself.

Re: The Killer Cats Are Winning

#107

Post by brazzledazzle »

mikestew wrote: post #69
BFatts wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'll put my cats up against your terrier any day. Bite, whimper, dead. That would be your terrier. My cats kill moles and mice. They do a damn good job of it. Only thing dogs seem capable of killing: rabbits and themselves.

I'll put my cats up against your terrier any day. Bite, whimper, dead. That would be your terrier. Umm, I think you misread my statement, which was intended as "in a contest of who catches the most rats...". It was not intended as cat vs. dog in a cage match. Though if that's the direction you want to go, the terriers I personally have are "American Pit Bull Terriers". Tell your cat to bring its A game.

And maybe 10 more cats to help.

Re: The Killer Cats Are Winning

#108

Post by billiam »

lnanek2 wrote: post #33

> This is a ridiculous point to waffle on: pet cats should no more be allowed to roam around at will than should pet dogs, horses, pythons, or pot-bellied pigs. Actually, my Dad grew up on a mountain where, every day after school, he would come home and gather up the pig and cows that had been let free to eat for the day. So there's certainly use cases for letting a pig roam free and gather some forage. By the time I…

Uh, the fantasy world your dad described is not the real world. Cows are one thing, they are too big to lose except perhaps in India, but do you have any idea what environmental damage is being done by feral pigs that were "let free to eat for the day' and never came back? If you want to domesticate an animal to work for you, then you take responsibility for it and all it does, plain and simple. Eventually we will use DNA and chipping to charge people for the costs of their "companion" animals, which are only now becoming apparent.

It should not be too surprising what apex predators like cats (we make them tiny, but they are at the top of the food chain nonetheless) can do to ecosystems if crazy people (us) confuse them with cuddly toys and breed and feed them without control.

Re: The Killer Cats Are Winning

#110

Post by sk5t »

oldmanjay wrote: post #88
saidajigumi wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've heard multiple stories on this theme: a farm cat that's lived out in the barn and fields for years, often not particularly concerned with humans, one day decides to hang it up and "retire" to a comfortable old age being a cozy house cat. I find this behavior to be so absolutely fascinating .

Not to dispirit you but the idea that mammals get lazier as they get older is a mighty low bar for fascination

Upvoted for thoughtful phrasing, even though a wild-ish animal deciding to go domestic for retirement does seem interesting.
Post reply on HN