Don't throw cats

Guest_2 · Post by **Guest_2** » 25 Sep 2005 18:41

At this point in the conversation, I know this person had to throw away his shoes because his cat urinated in them......

[this is just a funny conversation I had to share]

------------

MarvlMan [9:32 P.M.]: Rofl, cats are gross
[9:32 P.M.]: I know i already got rid of him
[9:32 P.M.]: =)
[9:32 P.M.]: well kinda
[9:32 P.M.]: he ran away
MarvlMan [9:32 P.M.]: =-O
[9:32 P.M.]: i threw him over the fence
MarvlMan [9:32 P.M.]: Fuck dude
MarvlMan [9:32 P.M.]: Why
[9:32 P.M.]: Ummmm well it was kinda accident
[9:32 P.M.]: i was trying to throw him towards the house
[9:32 P.M.]: and our fence is low
[9:33 P.M.]: and hes a dumb cat
MarvlMan [9:33 P.M.]: You threw a cat over a fence on accident?
[9:33 P.M.]: no
[9:33 P.M.]: the fence
[9:33 P.M.]: is liike 2 feet high
[9:33 P.M.]: and he never goes over it
[9:33 P.M.]: hes duimnb
MarvlMan [9:33 P.M.]: Maybe you shouldn't fuckin throw cats like footballs

[9:33 P.M.]: I didnt
[9:33 P.M.]: i just tossed him
[9:33 P.M.]: and he like leanded back
[9:33 P.M.]: and went over the fence
[9:34 P.M.]: then ran of
MarvlMan [9:34 P.M.]: You should not be a pet owner
[9:34 P.M.]: lol
MarvlMan [9:35 P.M.]: I laughed so hard
MarvlMan [9:35 P.M.]: This is going on modified

Nightmare · Post by **Nightmare** » 25 Sep 2005 18:45

Wow who was that? ((No names lol))

james_dean · Post by **james_dean** » 25 Sep 2005 19:11

[9:32 P.M.]: i was trying to throw him towards the house
[9:32 P.M.]: and our fence is low
[9:33 P.M.]: and hes a dumb cat

Throw your cat over a fence and then blame it on the cats stupidity... right. Cause that's smart and all.

NotHisRealName · Post by **NotHisRealName** » 25 Sep 2005 23:06

Fuckheads should not own animals!

Jeremy · Post by **Jeremy** » 25 Sep 2005 23:39

Sue Taylor wrote: Recently I was in Rutherglen, principally to stock my cellar, but as always, wanting to do as much bird watching along the way as possible. A farmer noticed the binoculars around my neck and told me where I could see a pair of Bush Stone-Curlews.

Of course I immediately forgot my wine tasting and followed his directions. I had a good look, but unfortunately I didn't find the curlews.

I was back at the farmer's place again later in the day and told him I hadn't been able to locate the birds. He said that he'd seen them in the vicinity for years, although he didn't think they'd ever successfully reared young.

Bush Stone-Curlew are extremely well camouflaged; if they stand perfectly still, you can look directly at them and not see them. This man was a farmer, and I respected his knowledge of the land, but I was not convinced about his ornithological credentials. I wanted to believe that the Stone-Curlews had bred but he hadn't been aware of it. I commented that they were very difficult to see if they stood still, and perhaps there had been young and he hadn't seen. In a tone which said he expected such ignorance from a city slicker, he explained that Stone-Curlews are ground birds so it is most unlikely that they could have reared young, with so many foxes and cats around.

As he spoke, I saw a cat behind him, basking in the sun!

'There's one now,' I said, pointing at the cat.

'Oh, he wouldn't do any harm', the farmer said, 'he's very well fed.'

I felt quite exasperated. I knew he would not be persuaded by anything a mere city slicker could say. He is a man of the land who cares sufficiently to regret the fact that the Bush Stone-Curlew can't raise young successfully, and who knows that cats are a part of the problem, but who can't accept that his precious well fed moggy could be to blame.

Well intentioned people will persist in believing that their dear little Fluffy couldn't harm native species. How can we educate them? People who might otherwise be responsible pet owners still allow their cats to roam at large, not knowing or caring where they go or what they do, but kidding themselves that their cat is well fed, so it wouldn't harm anything. People get very emotional about their cats and refuse to let facts stand in their way. If they grudgingly admit that some cats might be a problem, it is always other people's cats, never theirs.

Cats are a problem. Cats share with mankind the dubious distinction of killing for fun. Cats hunt by instinct. In Australia, cats are known to feed on more than 347 native species: that's 186 species of birds, 64 mammals, 86 reptiles, at least 10 amphibians and numerous invertebrates. We know that feral cats are a problem but there is little point in targeting feral cats and leaving domestic cats uncontrolled. A domestic cat will hunt and kill no matter how well fed it is. One study estimated that on average each pet cat kills 32 vertebrates each year. It is estimated that there are 3-million pet cats in Australia. This adds up to a total of 96-million birds, mammals and reptiles killed each year by domestic cats alone.

I know people, people who would call themselves 'animal lovers' who put a bell around their cat's neck and think that they've done all they can for the birds. These bells rarely work. It seems to me that in fact they have a negative impact because they allow the cats' owners to think that they are doing something positive, that they have addressed the issue and it's no longer a problem.

There are too many cats in Australia and numbers are increasing. In Victoria, each year 45,000 cats end up in animal shelters. Fewer than 1% are claimed by owners. One in three Australian households keeps domestic cats. Domestic cats kill millions of birds annually and thousands of native animals, such as Ring-tailed Possums. Domestic cats provide a high density reservoir of breeding animals for feral populations.

But just how big a problem are feral cats? Based on a very conservative estimate of one cat per 150 hectares, Australia supports over 5-million feral cats.

If a female cat lives for three years and produces two litters per annum, averaging 4.4 kittens, in her life she and her female progeny will produce over 100 cats. If she lives another year, the total will be nearly 350. These are very conservative figures because cats can produce four litters per annum, and can have up to nine kittens per litter.

Cats have been in Australia a long time, but they are not indigenous, they do not belong. It is commonly accepted now that cats were present on this continent before Captain Phillip brought them with him on the First Fleet in 1788. They could have arrived via Dutch shipwrecks on the west coast in the 17th century. They could also have been introduced by Indonesian fishermen. In any case, the Aborigines in Central Australia were familiar with cats before the white explorers arrived there. Cats are adapted to get sufficient moisture from their prey and they do not require drinking water, so they can survive well in Australia's arid outback.

Henty brought some to Portland in 1834. Eric Rolls tells us that in 1888 cats were being advertised in the newspaper as a means of keeping rabbits under control. Thousands of cats were released in an effort to solve the rabbit problem. Studies have shown that rabbits are the main food item of feral cats in Victoria. It is fair to assume that this is also the case in some other parts of Australia.

Man introduced one problem, the rabbit, so he then introduces another, possibly greater problem, the cat, in an unscientific, unproven attempt to eradicate the first problem. Then with a little help from mankind, calici virus is spread to control rabbit numbers. But what is the effect on introduced predators like the fox and the cat, and native raptors that have adopted to prey primarily on the rabbit? We do not yet know the effect of reduced rabbit populations on the Wedge-tailed Eagle, for example. And the cats whose diet is predominantly rabbit, what will they feed on? Presumably they will turn to native wildlife.

A cat eats 300 grams of meat each day. A male blue wren weighs 8.9 grams. A male brown antechinus weighs 35 grams. So, a feral cat surviving on blue wrens and brown antechinus would need to kill the equivalent of seven antechinus and six blue wrens each day. These are average figures. A larger cat would require more food.

The average rabbit weighs two kilograms. That's equivalent to 225 male blue wrens. The figures speak for themselves.

I am not suggesting that we shouldn't do what we can to eradicate rabbits. I am suggesting that we should first consider the effect of our action on other species. It may be that there should be concurrent programs aimed at eradicating foxes and feral cats.

In fact the Draft Threat Abatement Plan for Competition and Land Degradation by Feral Rabbits issued by Environment Australia in April 1998 stated that, 'In some areas it might be deemed prudent to control programs targeting introduced predators during any rabbit control program so that encounters between threatened fauna and predators are minimised.'

The bad news is that as far as I have been able to ascertain, with the premature release of the calici virus, no control programs targeting feral cats have been undertaken. I understand that in South Western Western Australia there was a control program targeting foxes.

The good news is that, and again I quote the Draft Threat Abatement Plant for Rabbits, 'In the long term a permanent reduction in rabbit numbers may be sufficient to reduce densities of introduced predators such as the fox and the feral cat.'

But how long is the long term? And how many native animals will be killed in the meantime? How many will succumb to extinction?

In the last 200 years, dozens of animals have become extinct in Australia; 23 birds are extinct and a further 127 are rare and endangered. I do not know what part cats have played in these extinctions. According to the Victorian Department of Natural resources and Environment in that State today there are 27 species of wildlife threatened by the cat. There are 14 birds, 11 mammals and 2 reptiles. And remember, domestic cats in Australia are killing 96-million vertebrates each year.

What more can be done? There is legislation in most States regulating domestic cats. Brochures from local government encourage responsible pet ownership. Kits are available for use in schools. Burke's Backyard produced an excellent segment on domestic cats which is available on video from the Department of Natural Resources and Environment in Melbourne. But still people do not understand. They register their cat, put a bell around its neck and think it is OK. If they do concede that it does kill birds, they will justify it by saying that they're not native birds. They don't stop to think that cats in suburbia can't kill what is no longer there. Or even why it is no longer there.

Pet owners pay the cat registration fee to their municipal council and think they are then absolved of responsibility. Where I live in suburban Melbourne there is a $150 on-the-spot fine if you allow your dog to wander at night. There is no fine for allowing your cat to wander at night. This anomaly should be rectified.

Still people dump their unwanted kittens in the bush, thinking it is kinder than putting them down. Kinder to whom? Not to the native wildlife the kittens will have to kill if they are to survive.

I do not know if it will ever be possible to eradicate feral cats from Australia. But I do know that the very least we can do is to stop making the situation worse. To stop pretending that the domestic cat is not part of the problem. To educate cat owners that cats are bred to kill, no matter how well fed they are. To ensure domestic cats are not allowed to run loose where they are not welcome. To make people understand that dumping unwanted kittens in the bush is not a kindness, it is cruel and irresponsible.

We should be doing our best to eradicate feral cats and to control domestic cats.

The night-time inquiry 'Have you put the cat out, dear?' should become 'Have you put the cat in dear?' Cats and wildlife are incompatible.

source

Belling the cat — is it effective?

There are an estimated 8 million domestic cats in Britain. A recent survey by the Mammal Society suggested that these cats have a significant impact on wildlife, being responsible for some 300 million wild animal and bird deaths a year. In addition, the welfare impact on prey species that escape alive can be severe. One traditional method employed by concerned owners in attempts to reduce predation is to attach a bell to the collar of their cat, hoping to alert potential prey to their cat’s presence. However, evidence from previous studies on cat predation suggested that wearing a bell might actually be counter-productive and increase predatory success. Jessica Wright, a 1999 Vacation Scholar, decided to investigate how effective a bell was in reducing predation.

Jessica, who is studying at the Glasgow University Institute of Biomedical and Life Sciences, asked 22 cat owners in Cumbria and Argyll to record the number and type of prey items returned by their cats between May and July 1999. The predatory success of each cat with and without a bell was compared; each cat wearing a bell for 4 of the 8 weeks of the study period. She found that birds and mammals were the commonest prey, but that significantly fewer birds and mammals were returned during those periods when the cats were wearing a bell. There was no such inhibiting effect of the bell for amphibian prey, although amphibians experienced lower levels of predation than birds and mammals. During the course of the study, Jessica did not find any evidence that the effectiveness of the bells in decreasing predation success declined, as would be expected if the cats were able to adapt their hunting style to compensate for the presence of the bell. Her study strongly suggests that the predatory impact of cats on wildlife could be reduced if more owners attached bells to their cats.

source

In my opinion people who own cats in Australia are making the choice that having a cat is more important than having native wildlife.

NotHisRealName · Post by **NotHisRealName** » 26 Sep 2005 00:00

Jeremy wrote:In my opinion people who own cats in Australia are making the choice that having a cat is more important than having native wildlife.

I agree - to a point.
You can be a responsible cat owner in Australia! Lock the cat in at night (at least) and build a cat run so that your cat can enjoy the out-doors, without the temptation of hunting.
Also, no cat should be sold if it is not desexed (the same should go for dogs, too). A person should have to have a breeders licence to bread the animals!

But, at the end of the day, be it cat or other... FUCKHEADS SHOULD NOT OWN PETS!
And anyone mis-treating ANY animal is a fuckhead!

Edited slightly

qphox · Post by **qphox** » 26 Sep 2005 00:29

Mmmmmm, breaded cat.

Anz · Post by **Anz** » 26 Sep 2005 04:34

Look people...
Cat's can get nasty if you throw them around:

Skeletor · Post by **Skeletor** » 26 Sep 2005 06:22

Anz · Post by **Anz** » 26 Sep 2005 07:37

AAWWWWWW!!!

That's the cutest pic EVER!

Jeremy · Post by **Jeremy** » 26 Sep 2005 07:38

I choose to try and make sure this animal (regent honeyeater - almost extinct due to loss of habitat and introduced predators - cats) remain in existance for my lifetime (and the future) rather than owning an animal that looks cute.

It's all very well to talk about "responsible" owners but the fact is that if you keep control of your cat for 10 years and then it gets out for one day and kills an animal as close to extinction as the regent honey eater (less than 1000 are estimated to be left) then you're responsible through your choice of owning a cat for significantly raising the probability of the regent honeyeater becoming extinct.

source

I would be in full support of any proposal to eradicate all cats from Australia and I hate the fact that people are so blinded by the appearance of an animal to see the consequences of owning one - I think being a cat owner (especially in Australia, but in other countries where they are introduced species) is selfish or naïve decision.

edited because I thought the last sentence was a little harsh and perhaps not accurate to how I feel.

mosher · Post by **mosher** » 26 Sep 2005 07:50

ana_ali wrote:AAWWWWWW!!!
That's the cutest pic EVER!

I agree.

That's my kitty Lotus hanging out with a Marco, a Mosher and a Vida bag.

dragonhack · Post by **dragonhack** » 26 Sep 2005 12:33

What's wrong with throwing cat's?
their going to land on their feet anyways..

NotHisRealName · Post by **NotHisRealName** » 26 Sep 2005 15:20

dragonhack wrote:What's wrong with throwing cat's?
their going to land on their feet anyways..

Are you an idiot?
You can admit it.
It's ok.

Nightmare · Post by **Nightmare** » 26 Sep 2005 19:04

Well i tossed the cat towards the other fence...he pisssed in my fucking shoes. I was mad i found him though today it was great and it feels good ot have kitty home

Guest_2 · Post by **Guest_2** » 26 Sep 2005 19:15

HooD · Post by **HooD** » 26 Sep 2005 19:18

It's the one time i'll agree with dragonhack, they'll land on their feet, so give'em a toss !

Nightmare · Post by **Nightmare** » 26 Sep 2005 19:24

SO FUCKING FUNNY

Anz · Post by **Anz** » 27 Sep 2005 03:13

Nightmare · Post by **Nightmare** » 27 Sep 2005 04:16

lol i think the masturbation ones funnier