LemminaryFeeding local wildlife
That argument is made by a particular group. It’s really important to include the context of when cats are “harmful” to the wildlife. It can only be in a setting where humans have completely modified the environment…**then** you create a scenario where cats become just another pest species. It should go without saying that when the anti cat people get all the feral cats eliminated…then many other pest species with a different set of problems come back. What it comes down to is which pest species you prefer.
Anyways…that’s all off topic because this post was about a cats being eating by coyotes….which are also both pest species. But from experience in a setting where you have pest weasels, raccoons, skunks, weasels, foxes, etc…it’s preferable to have cats…because if you don’t have enough coyotes a skunk is going to move under your house if you don’t have a cat. It’s all the weird version of the animal kingdom that humans create around us.
It can only be in a setting where humans have completely modified the environment…then you create a scenario where cats become just another pest species.
I’m not sure what you’re saying here. But, like most suburbs do in fact host some songbirds- especially during migration. Parks, wooded areas, etc. Cats don’t really care if it’s a suburban park or a shitty nature preserve that apartments maintain because they bought the land but it’s wetlands (and set it up as a sort of “we bait deer and racoons and shit so your kids can catch rabies and other exciting diseases pet them.”
There are very, very few places that humans haven’t modified in some way. and I’m not sure they even exist at all.
There’s peregrine falcons that hunt doves in downtown minneapolis (and they’re super fun to watch if you can catch them. Animals can and do adapt to humanity’s bullshit. feral cats are more of that bullshit.
Cats should absolutely not be let out. it’s not safe for the cat (Coyotes, owls. diseases. cars. Just getting stuck. and enviromental exposure.) and it’s not safe for other wildlife (songbirds, rodents. etc,)
Not a lot to disagree with here, except your conclusion is really out of place.
Those falcons don’t really hunt doves…they mostly hunt imported pigeons…and that’s not a unique thing…I live in Canada where we have far more exciting prey birds in every city.
Anyways. People in cities get really weird about focusing on things that really aren’t significant…this kind of reminds me of wind turbines killing birds. Sure…it’s true…but neither cats nor wind turbines could possibly threaten birds. What threatens birds more profoundly is subscribing to Netflix so you can watch a documentary about how evil cats are.
I could wax philosophical and wonder if it’s a general aversion to witnessing predation that makes people anti cat…but it’s probably just people who have bird feeders being really loud. Hope you win, and have fun with all the rats…another totally natural species lol.
Lots of claims from you in here about being personally fine with allowing invasives into your area, but is there any researched evidence for it?
I never said I was “personally fine with invasive species” you’re projecting.
Looks like he’s just trying to steelman the things you say into something that is at least logically defensible.
Pretty much. To me it’s such a “boutique” opinion to get outraged about how dangerous cats are…without any context or consideration for the context in which cats exist in the first place.
Like…it’s akin to a first world problem…a bunch of people saw a documentary about cats, felt that they had some measure of power to deal with cats…and haven’t considered any of the major problems created by problems that they participate in that actually mean something.
Yes, cats are terrible. But killing all the owls (another commenter brought this up) and putting up all the bird feeders that gave the cats so much easy “prey” is also worth considering.
The weird thing is the OP is about cats getting killed by coyotes…who are a much more dangerous pest species (in the contexts that they’re eating cats) than the cats.
I’m definitely overthinking this…but my angle is I’m a rural person who has livestock and rodent problems. A much different scenario to somebody who lives in an apartment and got radicalized by some amateur birder who hates cats because they don’t want to leave the city to see birds
Radicalized?
lol. That’s right. We’re going to show up and terrorize you. Make you eat tofu and crunchy granola.
There are better, more effective and less expensive methods of control that don’t harm native life nearly as much. But given your a rural farmer raising livestock, you’re insistence cats aren’t that bad is rather telling. Though I’m uncertain as to why you’re unwilling to educate yourself about more modern controls… quite literally better for your bottom line.
This “educate yourself” nonsense is rich…given you didn’t engage with anything I said.
I’m an off grid subsistence farmer and an anti-materialist. It’s exactly because I “educated myself” that I’m out here. Cats are pretty fucking low on the list of harm the humans cause to the environment…they only exist as a “problem” in fake environments created where humans mass together.
You clearly haven’t studied anything, and frankly, your rhetoric is ignorant. Haven’t engaged with anything you’ve said is also a lie.
Go back and read my comments.
By the way, “fake environments” is a pretty fucking ignorant thing to be saying. Urban environments may be dominated by humanity, and transformed to fit us- for better or worse- they’re certainly real, and wild animals are evolving and adapting as they do.
You’re the one who sounds like a radicalized nut job. Keep talking I’m done listening to some one who equates me with white supremacists and Islamic jihadists. (Yes. That’s what “radicalized” means you asswipe.)
Rhetoric? I wish my arguments were rhetorical.
Yes, if you live in city and you’re a materialist you live in a fake environment and you’re the problem. If you think that’s radical, pour it on me.