41–50 of 52 posts
Wait until you hear about humans.
From the abstract: Our findings suggest that free-ranging cats cause substantially greater wildlife mortality than previously thought and are likely the single greatest source of anthropogenic mortality for US birds and mammals. I.e. cats might kill more birds and mammals than humans.
Well yeah obviously. Cats kill relatively few humans, they're too little
And how can we tell for sure if it's good or bad? Does killing these birds and mammals help maintain the ecosystem balance (due to these birds and mammals not killing billions other animals down the food chain, or not spreading infections and viruses), or the other way around?
In the US, I went to a university (sarcastically referred to as find another university) where the mascot was the burrowing owl. They build nests in the sandy soil in Southern Florida. They are becoming endangered due to feral cats hunting them. And there is always some battle between preservationists and crazy cat lovers.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burrowing_owl
Cats have a hunting instinct. No matter how well fed, they will continue to hunt. I remember living with a woman who rescued ex-breeder cats, which were all very fat. They still tried hunting lizards even being so fat that their belly hair rubbed off on the carpeting. Cats are not quite as bad as adult raccoons (who will kill every chicken in your coop just to eat one), but are not capable of hunting only what they need to eat.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Are they counting the loss due to human-induced reduction of biodiversity? E.g. wiping native land and replacing it with houses/cities/roads. Humanity has a cost on nature, that should be mitigated. Humans like domestic cats, which is one contributor to the overall human-induced reduction in biodiversity. I wonder also whether there's something about towns/cities that makes birds flourish, compared to other wild anim…
>I wonder also whether there's something about towns/cities that makes birds flourish, compared to other wild animals. I would assume it has got do with the reason pigeons are sometimes called "flying rats", i.e. they can subsist on human trash, can survive in the environment and are not seen as negatively as rats and thus have less pest-control efforts pointed at them.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
From the abstract: Our findings suggest that free-ranging cats cause substantially greater wildlife mortality than previously thought and are likely the single greatest source of anthropogenic mortality for US birds and mammals. I.e. cats might kill more birds and mammals than humans.
Are they counting the loss due to human-induced reduction of biodiversity? E.g. wiping native land and replacing it with houses/cities/roads. Humanity has a cost on nature, that should be mitigated. Humans like domestic cats, which is one contributor to the overall human-induced reduction in biodiversity. I wonder also whether there's something about towns/cities that makes birds flourish, compared to other wild anim…
Their predators are more scared of humans, enough to avoid urban areas. Most suburbs are kept in unnatural states with lawns and inedible plants, giving the predators no place to live. Some birds are capable of learning which humans are "safe" and which should be avoided.
And how can we tell for sure if it's good or bad? Does killing these birds and mammals help maintain the ecosystem balance (due to these birds and mammals not killing billions other animals down the food chain, or not spreading infections and viruses), or the other way around?
And how can we tell for sure if it's good or bad? Does killing these birds and mammals help maintain the ecosystem balance (due to these birds and mammals not killing billions other animals down the food chain, or not spreading infections and viruses), or the other way around?
Very bad. Cats are fluffy little psychos. They'll clear out anything that moves for fun
Istanbul has very few rats compared to other major global cities, largely because hundreds of thousands of community street cats keep the rodent population under strict control.
As a cat lover this only strengthens my opinion that they should stay inside the house, humans cause enough damage to the ecosystem without needlessly unleashing pretty efficient predators for no gain.
> Cats should stay inside they house Isn't putting them on a leash, or having them wear a bell around their neck outside, enough for all parties?
And how many do wild cats kill? And how many would wild cats kill, if we allowed them to multiply as they want?