- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
Archived version: https://archive.ph/Di0Xj
Archived version: https://ghostarchive.org/archive/AKJzQ
Archived version: https://archive.ph/Di0Xj
Archived version: https://ghostarchive.org/archive/AKJzQ
Good, should be enforced world wide.
Along with mandatory spay/neuter. Make it a crime to intentionally avoid spaying and neutering cats and dogs.
Oh, you’re a breeder? I used to work at a no kill animal shelter. You’re the bane of my, and every stray animal’s, existence. FUCK animal breeders.
Remember folks, adopt, don’t shop. Not only is it just significantly more moral, mutts are far less likely to have health issues from inbreeding that will shorten their lives. You get more time with your four legged loved ones
And the pet stores that buy from those breeders.
I mean, if such a campaign is ever completely successful, along with one for capturing or fixing stray and feral animals, there would need to be some amount of breeding of them or they’d eventually go extinct. Perhaps with regulation on both practices that lead to unnecessary health problems (like inbreeding or breeding for harmful traits like squashed faces) and on numbers to avoid breeding more of a specific sort of animal than there exists demand for.
Maybe add a safeguard to it, so that when local animal shelters are at 10% capacity the regulation is temporarily lifted or something. Realistically, it would never be totally successful anyway.
Are you confusing ‘breeder’ with ‘pet mill’? Ghetto breeding was horrible to my family involved in animal care and salvation. Actual breeders, though, not so much.
I’m talking about anyone who intentionally takes an unneutered male animal and an unspayed female animal and intentionally puts them together to make and sell babies. Especially inbreeders. The only purebred animal that I can accept is sheepdogs, because they aren’t bred for looks, they’re bred for intelligence.
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
Unless the shelters in your area are consistently well below capacity, it’s still incredibly immoral
deleted by creator
Good luck getting the UK on board, something like 90% of cats are outdoor cats here
Domestic cats have been in the UK for ~2000 years, and wildcats for >~8000 years.
Their only real predators in the UK are cars and dogs, and most British bird species are well acquainted with cats, and on the whole aren’t at high risk. Recommendations say an outdoor cat is a healthy, happy cat.
The RSPB (bird conservation charity) doesn’t find them a major problem here, but do recommend:
Which seems a reasonable set of recommendations.
On the other hand, the USA and Australia don’t have the thousands of years of history of cats as part of the ecosystem, and they have all these wild dog-type-things and snappy reptile things etc, so the cats are in more danger, and the native bird species are at higher risk. Recommendations say an outdoor cat is a bird-murdering machine that’s about to get run over by a giant SUV and then eaten by drop-bears.
My Eastern European neighbours think it’s weird that we let the cats inside at all. They think they should live entirely outside.
So I guess “different countries, different rules”.
Finally some sense in these cat posts
More than countries, different ecosystems different rules. Mainland USA and Hawaii have different ecological rules for good reason.
deleted by creator
Of the mountain lion and bobcat variety, yes. Not of the small cat variety.
They’ve definitely got big cats (which seem to be named after Mac OS versions), though I’m not sure if they have smaller wildcats which occupy the same ecological position as domestic cats.
From a UK perspective, it seems unbelievably cruel to keep a cat locked indoors. The hunting instinct is one of a cat’s main drives, so to take that away is equivalent to removing sleep or food. I understand the issues around cats and wildlife in other countries, but I think the solution is to just not have domestic cats rather than trying to imprison them.
The answer is to give them toys and playing with them
I agree, it’s a cruel to keep a cat indoors than to put a goldfish in a very small bowl or feeding an animal vegan food. Unpopular opinion, seeing how fond people are about their furry killers, but it’s the only real way to remedy this problem.
I think it depends where you live. Here in the UK, cats have no predators, and bird populations have survived predation by cats for thousands of years, cats mostly pick off the weakest examples. Maybe there are regions of the us where cats are not problematic as outdoor pets, I don’t know for sure. I’m fond of my “furry killer” too, and occasionally she does take out a bird or small rodent, but I see it as part of the natural order.
This is the key. Just because it works in the UK does not mean it does elsewhere. There are plenty of places where cats are essentially very dangerous invasive species and are wrecking absolute havoc on the wildlife populations. This includes the majority of North America.
I do agree. I mean I came across as pretty anti-cat, but the lady I love (and therefore myself) are servants to one. I do not particularly care either way, but if I had to keep the poor thing indoors all the time I think he would be miserable.
So if one has to make regulations I’d rather vote for banning cats altogether, rather than banishing them to the indoors. It’s a rather strict stance, but you cannot really expect to be able to enforce a curfew (or purrfew, if you will) on cats. It is ridiculous.
Not everywhere are cats a problem.
They are literally native to Africa and parts of Asia. In most of Europe they have been held for thousands of years and are not a threat to the ecosystems.
Taking Countries with invasive species as a global role model makes no sense.