Feral Cat control being taken seriously

u140acro3xs7dm

Baybay wrote: »

I have avoided this thread since my last response as it makes me a little emotional.

So.

Total species eradication is contraindicated as exemplified by Maquerie island, off the coast of Australia. I can’t link it (think wifi is weak) but it’s easily Googlable.
Base problem: humans
Possible better solution: TNR

Also, the Smithsonian in an article a few years ago, which I also can’t link says that unlike dogs, bred for purpose over thousands of years & are domesticated cats, choosing to live alongside humans themselves are considered semi domesticated.

Looking over some past posts in this thread, I think there is almost a glee in the tone when people take about eradicating cats, killing cats, shooting cats that I find hard to hear in posts about killing other animals.

Where is the conservation of all species, the biodiversity, the responsible ownership of any pet? Are the concerns for life in our hedgerows a thinly veiled excuse for killing cats when unscrupulous landowners, councils & road makers probably do at least as much damage to fauna & flora as a cat population, feral or otherwise?

TNR programmes are shown to work in areas where they’ve been put in place.
And in my opinion, rather than a cat licence (do all dog owners, responsible or otherwise, have these?) what owners should have instead is a neutering certificate. Kinder for all the cats abandoned, rather then feral in my opinion.

I am not sure this would work, does the owner of a purebred Springer need to neuter? or is it only mongrels that get neutered?

I do think every pet should have a licence whether its a Cat, Dog or Donkey.

I do agree that the above seems like an excuse to kill cats. If there was no cats in Ireland, and there was an extra 10 million birds flying around, they would be giving out about their fruit trees, or the sh1te all over their cars.

Baybay

Alejandro Hundreds Puck wrote: »

I am not sure this would work, does the owner of a purebred Springer need to neuter? or is it only mongrels that get neutered?.

I was unclear. I meant specifically in relation to cats.
Unless there’s a good reason not to neuter, ie pedigrees for humane breeding perhaps, I think all should be.

Time

dodderangler wrote: »

Yes. If a dog kills sheep do we not do anything because it’s a pet?
And imo a cat owner should be held responsible aswell.

How often do you hear of cats killing livestock or even other pets? At the end of the day you cannot shoot a cat that is not feral anyway, and the onus is on you to demonstrate that you 100% knew it was feral too. I doubt you could afford the court case that could be landed on you by a pet owner, and i wouldn't put it past people to take it that far either, pets are basically family to most people.

dodderangler

Where’d all these anti hunting clowns pop out from? I swear they contact each other in private messages to say “ hey tony. Check out hunting forum. They’re so mean.”

shootemall

Alejandro Hundreds Puck wrote: »

What an insightful response.



I stumbled across this thread from the front page, it's hilarious. You are in a hunting forum moaning that cats kill for sport. I'm no vegan eco-warrior cyclist, i eat a lot of meat and drive a car, but this is such an ironic post - it's like the sort of sh1te Trump would come out with.

What’s wrong with trump?

gozunda

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

That's fine,they have a food source,IE vermin in a farm yard.Different story when they go utterly feral and then move into a area l full of game and song birds.Then you have a problem
Wouldnt have made the blindest bit of difference apprently.It seems that Mr Rat might have been an inncoent party in all this. Looking at the historical records,it seems the bubonic plauge has alot more in common with Ebola than we realise.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2027347/Black-Death-backtrack-Dont-blame-rats-plague-spread-PEOPLE.html
Of course we could do what the Eco Fash want to do with rewilding half the countryside.Reintroduce Lynx! They are marvellous feral cat killers.:p Seeems to be they are very partial to German house and feral cats where they have been reintroduced.Ironic a bigger cat killing off its smaller relative.

I have no problem with cats. They do what they do. Tbh the ones I have range over the fields. I've seen them with young rabbit, rats, mice and Jackdaws etc. Not so much song birds in my experience. So no I do not have any problem here tbh. As to that article - it's one archaeologist making that claim that rats were innocent. Rats are vile disease carrying yokes and give me a cat anyday. Yeah that would be hilarious if some eejit were to reintroduce lynx . I'd buy ringside tickets to watch as sheep farmers and others tear them some new ones. In rural areas cats ain't a big problem in my experience. I allow hunting here but anyone getting pot shot happy around here wouldn't be coming back ...

dodderangler

gozunda wrote: »

I have no problem with cats. They do what they do. Tbh the ones I have range over the fields. I've seen them with young rabbit, rats, mice and Jackdaws etc. Not so much song birds in my experience. So no I do not have any problem here tbh. As to that article - it's one archaeologist making that claim that rats were innocent. Rats are vile disease carrying yokes and give me a cat anyday. Yeah that would be hilarious if some eejit were to reintroduce lynx . I'd buy ringside tickets to watch as sheep farmers and others tear them some new ones. In rural areas cats ain't a big problem in my experience. I allow hunting here but anyone getting pot shot happy around here wouldn't be coming back ...

Have you got feral cats in your housing area? Because I do. And it got to the stage that there was so many that my young kids couldn’t play out the back garden because of them. Children as innocent as they are see a cat and think oh look a pet to play with. Feral cat will do a **** load of damage to anyone’s face. Then the tetanus shot which is pretty painful so worse for a child.
They’re vile horrible creatures. I’d take rats over a cat any day of the week. ( has a rat as a pet and it was great little thing to have )

Time

dodderangler wrote: »

Where’d all these anti hunting clowns pop out from? I swear they contact each other in private messages to say “ hey tony. Check out hunting forum. They’re so mean.”

I must be going blind, i haven't seen one post that says hunting is bad, should be banned etc.. I've no problem with hunting i've even gone out hunting a few times myself, but i wouldn't go shooting what might be someones pet unless it was endangering livestock etc..

dodderangler

Time wrote: »

I must be going blind, i haven't seen one post that says hunting is bad, should be banned etc.. I've no problem with hunting i've even gone out hunting a few times myself, but i wouldn't go shooting what might be someones pet unless it was endangering livestock etc..

So livestock is bad. But the ground nesting native animals we have is perfectly ok for cats to kill at their leisure ?

u140acro3xs7dm

shootemall wrote: »

What’s wrong with trump?

The main issue with Trump is that he appeals to people who don't understand what is wrong with Trump.

Time

dodderangler wrote: »

So livestock is bad. But the ground nesting native animals we have is perfectly ok for cats to kill at their leisure ?

Thats how the law stands at the moment, you can reactively protect livestock, but you couldn't just shoot a dog in a field with no livestock on the chance he'll chase the sheep the next field over. You can cull feral cats, but you can't shoot a pet, and if you do shoot a pet, theres many a pet owner wouldn't take that lying down and would happily make your licence renewal a nightmare, or ruin you financially if they could.

u140acro3xs7dm

dodderangler wrote: »

Have you got feral cats in your housing area? Because I do. And it got to the stage that there was so many that my young kids couldn’t play out the back garden because of them. Children as innocent as they are see a cat and think oh look a pet to play with. Feral cat will do a **** load of damage to anyone’s face. Then the tetanus shot which is pretty painful so worse for a child.
They’re vile horrible creatures. I’d take rats over a cat any day of the week. ( has a rat as a pet and it was great little thing to have )

There are so many cats in your area that the children cant leave the house? Seriously? You could make a documentary out of that situation.

Did you ring the ISPCA or a local group that run a Trap, Neuter, Release programme? They will even release them away from your house.

On your earlier comment, I'm not anti-hunting. Plenty of my mates hunt, I have went with them the odd time - I found it boring more than offensive if I'm being honest.

shootemall

Alejandro Hundreds Puck wrote: »

The main issue with Trump is that he appeals to people who don't understand what is wrong with Trump.

So you don’t like him because he appeals to people

gozunda

Time wrote: »

I must be going blind, i haven't seen one post that says hunting is bad, should be banned etc.. I've no problem with hunting i've even gone out hunting a few times myself, but i wouldn't go shooting what might be someones pet unless it was endangering livestock etc..

This. As vociferous as the bunni&bambi brigade can be it's fairly stupid thing to risk shooting what might be anyones pet / farm cat and even if where believed something is feral - most often it's a guess at best.. One way of going the wrong way with this imo whether you dislike them or otherwise. - keep it in your own pocket.

Grizzly 45

Hardly that effective and humane if PETA[no friends of animals them lot either] say they dont recommend it.
http://www.tnrrealitycheck.com/studies.asp

http://www.takepart.com/article/2014/03/31/sorry-cat-lovers-trap-neuter-release-flat-out-doesnt-work

Cass

gozunda wrote: »

Sounds pretty much like most posters here

Yeah, but you have to prove they're feral too.

gozunda wrote:

They only other point I make in relation to your very long post ..........

My apologies. There is a lot of information to reply to an unlike others i tend to use as many words and characters as i can so my meaning is not lost because the written word has no context i don't want people to be under any under assumption of impression bar that of what i mean.

gozunda wrote:

is that many of the control, restrictions and licensing issues with dogs is due to the risk of physical harm dogs pose to people and livestock and the issue of dangerous dog breeds (very few cats will take on people / domestic poultry etc) ......

No it's not, or more accurately, not only.

I listed some of the many issues surrounding dogs that are regulated/legislated for. The control of dogs act which deals specifically with dogs, livestock, harm to people, etc. is only one of many acts. There is legislation for absolutely every aspect of dog ownership including being licensed. So tell me how a dog being licensed or not would stop it from any of the problems you listed?

It wouldn't but yet we have licensing, and microchipping to ensure the owner is held responsible.

gozunda wrote:

......... and also as a physical danger on road or straying so yeah in that regard cats more or less get a free pass.

Excuse me being brash but that is utter tosh.

You are making out that all dogs are of such huge size that it causes pile ups on the motorways. Yes some dogs are larger than cats, others the same size, and some smaller.

gozunda wrote:

Even if they get run over - the motorist nor the owner wont have issues tbh.

How do you?

If a cat gets hit by a car and the car is damaged i'm sure the car owner will want the name of the owner and in such a case you can be sure the cat owner won't have "any problem" with no being able to be identified.

Cass

Baybay wrote: »

Looking over some past posts in this thread, I think there is almost a glee in the tone when people take about eradicating cats, killing cats, shooting cats that I find hard to hear in posts about killing other animals.

Inference is different to implication.

Baybay wrote:

Where is the conservation of all species, the biodiversity, the responsible ownership of any pet?

Sports shooters are regarded, even by the NPWS, as one, if not the, largest contributor to breeding programs and conservation. We see on a daily basis the damage caused by unchecked breeding and this mentality of "they're free spirits" is a cop out as is any other excuse for not wanting legislation/regulation of a species. Dog owners don't get the choice and those that deny the need for this with Cats only show the true driving force behind their apprehension of any possible legislation.

Baybay wrote:

Are the concerns for life in our hedgerows a thinly veiled excuse for killing cats when unscrupulous landowners, councils & road makers probably do at least as much damage to fauna & flora as a cat population, feral or otherwise?

Last time i checked it's still classed as murder if you are suggesting a cull on people for cutting hedgerows, etc. Also any works carried are usually done under license authorisation, unlike cats.

Baybay wrote:

TNR programmes are shown to work in areas where they’ve been put in place.

Who foots the bill for these programs? Say what you like about the costs, etc. when it comes down to it, it always ends with "how much". Considering sporting shooters put hundreds of millions of Euro into the exchequer every year in fees, licenses, taxes, as well as supporting local businesses we can hold our heads up with pride knowing we practice what we preach.

Are there some bad apples in the sport, of course. To deny it is naive and ignorant, but they are the exception, not the rule. Also don't mistake people bragging or mouthing off on an internet forum as proof this is representative of real world actions.

Baybay wrote:

(do all dog owners, responsible or otherwise, have these?)

Probably not, but it's an offence not to have it, whereas Cats are not subject to it at all. So for a dog owner it's an offence and punishable, for a cat owner, no biggie.

Baybay wrote:

And in my opinion, rather than a cat licence what owners should have instead is a neutering certificate. Kinder for all the cats abandoned, rather then feral in my opinion.

Absolutely.

There is no call for outright culls with no regard of ownership status, regardless of what people have inferred from reading the posts in this thread. However it comes back to cost/money. If owners foot the bill then great, but that still leaves the feral population (and i include animals that while not feral, have no known owner).

Cass

Alejandro Hundreds Puck wrote: »

........ - it's like the sort of sh1te Trump would come out with.

Alejandro Hundreds Puck wrote: »

The main issue with Trump is that he appeals to people who don't understand what is wrong with Trump.

First off, this is the hunting forum not he political forum, however you brought the topic up so i'm happy to entertain it.

What is wrong with President Trump? None of the usual leftist, liberal name calling and "won't someone think of the children" crying, followed swiftly by name calling.

Explain to me in detail, and using data points to support your argument, what is wrong with the President, and how horrible he has has been for America. Otherwise it's an ignorant, baseless, uninformed, and sad virtue signalling attempt to be one of the flock rather than an independent and constructive thinker.

Cass

dodderangler wrote: »

Where’d all these anti hunting clowns pop out from? I swear they contact each other in private messages to say “ hey tony. Check out hunting forum. They’re so mean.”

Mind the language.

Everyone is welcome as long as the forum rules are adhered to.

Grizzly 45

Alejandro Hundreds Puck wrote: »

The main issue with Trump is that he appeals to people who don't understand what is wrong with Trump.

So thats the majority of Americans then??[And dont mention the Electoral college being a fault unless you know how it works? It's never a problem when Democrats win] Hmm that kind of attiude will ensure him being there until 2024.

gozunda

Cass wrote: »

Yeah, but you have to prove they're feral too.
My apologies. There is a lot of information to reply to an unlike others i tend to use as many words and characters as i can so my meaning is not lost because the written word has no context i don't want people to be under any under assumption of impression bar that of what i mean.

No it's not, or more accurately, not only.
I listed some of the many issues surrounding dogs that are regulated/legislated for. The control of dogs act which deals specifically with dogs, livestock, harm to people, etc. is only one of many acts. There is legislation for absolutely every aspect of dog ownership including being licensed. So tell me how a dog being licensed or not would stop it from any of the problems you listed?

It doesn't stop it - it helps identify any dog who may exhibit dangerous, out of control, straying worrying livestock yada yada. It sometimes claimed as an element of being a tax on ownership to pay for dog wardens etc pounds

Cass wrote: »

It wouldn't but yet we have licensing, and microchipping to ensure the owner is held responsible.

Indeed

Cass wrote: »

excuse me being brash but that is utter tosh. You are making out that all dogs are of such huge size that it causes pile ups on the motorways. Yes some dogs are larger than cats, others the same size, and some smaller.

Brash and tosh returned. Nope - not making anything out. But yeah a small or big dog may do serious damage to a person and a bigger dog may cause serious damage if hit or straying etc. Whilst dog sizes do have huge variations. Domestic Cats tend to be cat sized. That's how it is. Cat attacks unlike dog attacks tend to be quite rare events imo. So again not really comparable.

Cass wrote: »

How do you?If a cat gets hit by a car and the car is damaged i'm sure the car owner will want the name of the owner and in such a case you can be sure the cat owner won't have "any problem" with no being able to be identified.

Cats tend to get flattened by vehicles as their bones are relatively soft compared to a dogs.. Biggest risk is possibly bits get plastered over the car.

The point is cats are cats and dogs are dogs. As a farmer I don't see them as comparable in terms of danger to livestock (regardless of size or breed) or generally likely to cause damage to vehicles etc etc. Someone could drive over a cat and be none the wiser - with a dog that's more likley not the case.

Tbh you may as well argue that all pet hamsters should also be licensed and microchipped because they are the same as dogs. However that argument doesnt translate imo.

Is there an argument for all pets to be licensed across the board - yes there is.

Cass

gozunda wrote: »

It doesn't stop it - it helps identify any dog who may exhibit dangerous, out of control, straying worrying livestock yada yada.

How?

You have to catch the Dog first, see if it's microchipped or have a collar, and if not then it's a dead end.

It sometimes claimed as an element of being a tax on ownership to pay for dog wardens etc pounds

That is all it is, a taxation on ownership.

The fees i pay in gun licenses don't go to the NPWS to improve services. It goes into the exchequer and get distributed to whatever scheme or department needs it. It is not singled out for one particular use, and the same with Dog license fees.

Brash and tosh returned.

I know, i couldn't think of another word that didn't sound like an insult.

Nope - not making anything out. But yeah a small or big dog may do serious damage to a person and a bigger dog may cause serious damage if hit etc. Whilst dog sizes do have huge variations. Domestic Cats tend to be cat sized. That's how it is. Cat attacks unlike dog attacks tend to be quite rare events imo. So again not really comparable.

That is all speculative. Without data on Dog attacks (people/livestock) and similar studies on Cat attacks (people livestock) it's only guess work.

However the thread is about feral Cats and the lack of legislation/regulation which can lead to serious harm to the environment and fauna. While the exact toll of the damage that both feral and "owned" Cats can do there is not doubt that there is a cost.

Cats tend to get flattened by vehicles as their bones are soft. Afaik a driver doesn't even have to stop when a cat is hit. Biggest risk is possibly bits get plastered over the car.

Again you're implying all car strikes on Dogs are on large Dogs or that the damage inflicted is more severe. Again without actual Data i cannot confirm but i'd agree anything larger may cause more damage.

That point is not really something i'd dispute as much as the responsibility of the Dog owner compared tot he Cat owner. I hit a small bird the other day and it cost me €60 to replace the mesh grille on the lower part of my car.

I really don't want to get side tracked on the level of damage, my bigger concern is the legal responsibility of the animal's owner.

........... I don't see them as comparable in terms of danger to livestock, or generally llkley to cause damage to vehicles etc etc.

On these exact points, i'd actually tend to agree if for no other reason than damage to cars is somewhat irrelevant for the reason above, and damage to livestock i couldn't argue with a serious face in terms of livestock. Birds, pens, etc. are a different story, but for another day, and another thread.

Someone could drive over a cat and be none the wiser - with a dog that's not likley the case.

All small dogs comparable in size to the average Cat.

• Australian Terrier
• Bichon Frise
• Border Terrier
• Cairn Terrier
• Cavalier King Charles
• Chinese Crested
• Chihuahua
• Corgi
• Dachshund
• Fox Terrier
• Glen of Imaal Terrier
• Jack Russell
• Japanese Spitz
• Lhasa Apso
• Maltese Terrier
• Miniature poodle
• Norfolk Terrier
• Parson Russell Terrier
• Pekingese
• Pomeranian
• Pug
• West Highland Terrier
• Shih Tzu
• Yorkshire Terrier

Tbh you may as well argue that all pet hamsters should also be licensed and microchipped because they are the same as dogs. However that argument doesnt translate imo.

The day a hanster stalk and kills song birds, mice, rats, and other "game" i'll lead the charge against Hamsters. Until then, it's a moot point.

Is there an argument for all pets to be licensed across the board - yes there is.

Look i'm the first to argue against Government interference with all aspects of life. The argument about licensing Cats is the same one i hear from cyclists on a number of subjects.

Last year the Gov. tired to implement a mandatory helmet law and it was met with incredible resistance from a lot of cycling organisations. They will, not maybe, save lives but there is opposition. I'm not one of those "they should pay road tax or get off the road" types, but when the onus is always on the motorist, cyclists will suffer little to no repercussions for their actions.

Same with Cat owners.

Cass

This thread was already riding the line of appropriateness for the hunting forum, but is now beyond off topic, and it's my fault for opening the door.


That will now end i'll edit the posts above to rectify it so no one feels hard done by.

The discussion of the shooting of feral cats on this forum has always been a taboo subject which always ends in stalemate or name calling and the thread being shut down. However we [the Mods] try to let threads run for the sake of fairness and everyone to have their say.

However we seem to be going back and forth, and around and around. Cats are not a game species and for the most part i don't think many even cull the feral ones. This topic will always be emotive because of the relationship between cats and people and given past threads/history i cannot see this thread coming to any sort of ground breaking conclusion that other threads have not.

As such i'm closing this thread and requesting another Mod that was not involved to check it over and either open or leave closed.

Vegeta

Hey folks, firstly let me commend everyone on their attempts to remain courteous on an emotive subject. It is always a difficult topic on this forum, cats are truly fantastic pets but cats are capable of hunting night and day, including up trees and breeding multiple times a year.

I feel leaving the thread closed is the right thing here, so will leave the thread closed.