51–60 of 96 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Pretty sure it’s just bad logic informed by propaganda.
Excuse me what propaganda? This is informed opinion.
You said that "we need to phase out cats and dogs completely". This is the most extreme solution I've heard in any debate about household pets.
I've read multiple times that there've been discussions in a few places around the world to ban cats, or certain breeding of cats to save wildlife, or birds specifically. But I haven't heard any law become real, anyone?
Unfortunately, no me neither. I think this issue extends beyond cats, it's the uncontrolled breeding of animals, which imo leads to all sorts of abuse. I find it amazing that anyone can decide I'm going to buy a breeding pair of cats with the end goal of making money. We need to phase out cats and dogs completely. This saddens me deeply because I love my dog but the damage these animals do to the environment is so la…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Excuse me what propaganda? This is informed opinion.
If one was to replace "cats/dogs/animals/horses" in your statements with "humans", one could get another informed opinion. A bit cynical perhaps, but informed nonetheless.
Cats can slaughter bird colonies (though somehow they never slaughter the ugly pigeons, nor the invasive parrots in the area I live in) so they are best left to themselves instead of going the "beautiful kitty that is starving" way and artificially growing their population.
Finally, I have a stray/rescue cat at home that stays at home (not interested in going outside), just in case someone though I was promoting the dog league.
There recently was a finding about power lines that also kill numerous birds. What I'd those are attributes to cats?
I've read multiple times that there've been discussions in a few places around the world to ban cats, or certain breeding of cats to save wildlife, or birds specifically. But I haven't heard any law become real, anyone?
Cats roamed free for hundreds and hundreds years now. It is not like their presence was a new change.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Cats roamed free for hundreds and hundreds years now. It is not like their presence was a new change.
A primary difference is that cats were introduced into environments as a non-native species and have become the apex predator. This is especially true in New Zealand and Australia. Unlike native carnivorous mammals such as the Tasmanian Devil, Quall's, and Bandicoots, cats hunt for food and sport rather than act as scavengers. Cats in Tasmania have no natural predators other than humans. I've had many cats for pets a…
Most everything was non-native at some point. I mean of course it depends on (potentially huge) timelines but at some point in the past land bridges between continents didn't exist and then existed and then didn't exist. At some point some seed got lucky enough to be carried across a sea either by an animal or just wind.
I know this is a naive point of view, but nature adapts pretty well to this, it's kinda _what it does_, even if in the short-term and from a human lens it causes damage. What does damage mean exactly.. a drop in population of some particular species or plant that we are used to having in an area. Are we sure that's damage and not just normal evolution of ecosystems?
I certainly prefer that to happen than have local governments pass laws saying cats must be kept inside, lest they upset the environment that us humans are used to.
I've read multiple times that there've been discussions in a few places around the world to ban cats, or certain breeding of cats to save wildlife, or birds specifically. But I haven't heard any law become real, anyone?
Cats roamed free for hundreds and hundreds years now. It is not like their presence was a new change.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Cats roamed free for hundreds and hundreds years now. It is not like their presence was a new change.
Exactly. All of the species have adapted long ago. I let out my cats, they hunt lots and lots of mice and like less than 1% of prey is birds.