18 ms·

Generally we care about a bird species as a whole rather than about individual birds of that species. If something is killing birds, even a lot of birds, but i

by tzs 3y ago

Generally we care about a bird species as a whole rather than about individual birds of that species. If something is killing birds, even a lot of birds, but in a place where those birds are abundant and whatever is killing them will just lower lower their equilibrium population a bit rather than set it on a decline or lower it so far that they might die out in the area then there generally isn't a lot of concern over it. Hence activities in places with species of birds that have low population or are threatened or endangered tend to draw more concern than activities in places where that isn't the case even if the latter kills way more total birds.

uoaei 3y ago
This is a thoughtful response, put in words I've been missing for a while, to some reasons why the EA crowd seem to be hyperoptimizing on the wrong cost functions (not to mention the ethical dangers that come about when insisting all questions of ethics can be quantified).
coryrc 3y ago
Cats are killing endangered birds everywhere outside their native range. They are killing them in the Americas, in Australia, in New Zealand... basically everywhere that's not Europe, Africa, or West Asia IIUC. One reason you might not think it's a big deal is because the genocide is almost complete. They've already killed off 63 species and more in progress: https://abcbirds.org/program/cats-indoors/cats-and-birds/ https://abcbirds.org/program/cats-indoors/cats-and-birds/
- nullstyle 3y ago
  Felis Catus doesn't have a native range in any meaningful manner, IMO. They are a global species like us, because of us. You can't put that cat back in the bag no matter the .22 cartridges you expend.
  - throwaway03675 3y ago
    That shouldn't stop us from trying to limit their growth. "The cat is out of the bag" so to speak, but a lot of the growth comes from runaway cats, or cats that have been abandoned by their owners (happens more often than you think) We could start by requiring all domestic cats to be sterilized, so that they don't breed. Then the cat population would be limited to certified breeders and wild cats. We could also have the same restrictions on cats as dogs. They should not be allowed to be outside unless they are in leash or in a controlled environment (the latter is hard, as cats can climb over standard fences). I guess fully enclosed "cat parks" would be an option. You may have a harder time training a cat to wear a leash compared to a dog, but it's possible. It's strange to me that we think cats need to be outside to satisfy their predator instincts, as if dogs and other animals like to be inside all day while we are at work. If someone doesn't like that thought, they have the option of not owning a cat.
    - pvorb 3y ago
      That's my take. I like animals, so I decided to not own any of them. I wonder how people manage to love their animals and remove them from their natural environment. I know that we've come a long way and pets have had humans around them for ages, but to me it still feels like we're doing them harm. I know that nature is even harder, but it's not like pets decided to live that way. It's also hard to understand why people love one species, but also breed others on an industrial level, so they can eat them more easily. Probably going to get a few downvotes for this.
      - bruce511 3y ago
        No down-votes from me, but as an annecdote I can offer this. We have feral cats in our neighborhood. One of them moved into our house and had a litter in the study. (We kept one, and found homes for the other 3). One of her daughters from an earlier litter moved in and fed the same. All have been sterilised now obviously, but we stoll get regular visits from a local Tom, likely a brother to the first one. The all get along fine, and he's used to us but basically comes in for food or shelter and doesn't socialise with us like the others do. I don't think we "own" them. They all come and go as they please. But I'd say 3 of them definitely live here, and tolerate us. Interestingly none of them seem interested in birds. The occasional mole, otherwise the occasional lizard - mostly for sport. I'm not negating your ethics at all, but it seems some cats like being part of the family, and others are aloof. They all have distinct personalities.
  - arcticbull 3y ago
    I dunno, Alberta has no rats. It's doable if you're willing.
  - mantas 3y ago
    Putting a tiny bell on cats is usually more than enough. At least it gives birds a fair chance.
sprucevoid 3y ago
As a descriptive matter people do support a lot of species preservation efforts. But we have strong reasons to increase our care for birds and other sentient animals as individuals, with their own subjective experiences and the suffering and harms they endure. After all we already take that view when it comes to companion dogs. We know they can feel a range of emotions and we have as individuals and as society taken some steps to limit harms to dogs and promote their wellbeing. Caring for birds as individuals can be expressed in many actions, individual and political, but a powerful step many can take right now is to stop buying eggs and chicken meat and choose plant based alternatives instead.
- jewayne 3y ago
  If we accept that we are responsible for minimizing the suffering of both domestic and wild animals, isn't the logical conclusion that we need to drive those species to extinction as quickly as possible, thus completely ending their suffering? I mean, you are explicitly talking about ending our symbiotic relationship with the domestic chicken. We certainly would not have 20 billion chickens in the world if we all stopped eating eggs.
  - cpx86 3y ago
    That is an interesting argument. Do you believe that the same would apply to humans? I.e. if someone wishes to minimize the suffering of humans, is the logical conclusion that they should pursue omnicide?
    - jewayne 3y ago
      To be clear, I don't believe in that goal in either case. But yes, the only way to truly end human suffering would be to end the humans.
  - sprucevoid 3y ago
    Factory farming of chickens and other animals causes massive aggregate suffering and should be ended, full stop. But chickens can continue to flourish in animal sanctuaries, where they live their own lives without being killed or exploited as food resources. As for wild animals and suffering, that's a big topic. I think for now we need lots more thinking and research, on what is feasible and reasonable there. Reducing suffering is one important consideration among others.
logifail 3y ago
> If something is killing birds, even a lot of birds [..] then there generally isn't a lot of concern over it. ...from cat owners. There's plenty of concern from wildlife-lovers: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/aug/14/cats-kill-birds-wildlife-keep-indoors https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/aug/14/cats-kil... I watched our neighbour's cat take a bird from a feeder in our garden earlier this month, I was pretty unimpressed :( Cats are cute, I get that ... I'm just not sure that's enough of an excuse.
- throwaway290 3y ago
  And I heard a cat being slowly murdered by a bird on the roof, this stuff you can't unhear... Remember that this goes both ways. Birds are probably the deadliest predator for outdoor cats. This is why cats tend to have instinctive acute reaction to big flying objects. I'm not a cat owner, I like both cats and birds
  - gitaarik 3y ago
    What, a bird kills a cat? How?
    - pelasaco 3y ago
      Maybe an Eagle?

by tzs 3y ago

uoaei 3y ago

This is a thoughtful response, put in words I've been missing for a while, to some reasons why the EA crowd seem to be hyperoptimizing on the wrong cost functions (not to mention the ethical dangers that come about when insisting all questions of ethics can be quantified).

coryrc 3y ago

Cats are killing endangered birds everywhere outside their native range. They are killing them in the Americas, in Australia, in New Zealand... basically everywhere that's not Europe, Africa, or West Asia IIUC. One reason you might not think it's a big deal is because the genocide is almost complete. They've already killed off 63 species and more in progress: https://abcbirds.org/program/cats-indoors/cats-and-birds/ https://abcbirds.org/program/cats-indoors/cats-and-birds/

nullstyle 3y ago
Felis Catus doesn't have a native range in any meaningful manner, IMO. They are a global species like us, because of us. You can't put that cat back in the bag no matter the .22 cartridges you expend.
- throwaway03675 3y ago
  That shouldn't stop us from trying to limit their growth. "The cat is out of the bag" so to speak, but a lot of the growth comes from runaway cats, or cats that have been abandoned by their owners (happens more often than you think) We could start by requiring all domestic cats to be sterilized, so that they don't breed. Then the cat population would be limited to certified breeders and wild cats. We could also have the same restrictions on cats as dogs. They should not be allowed to be outside unless they are in leash or in a controlled environment (the latter is hard, as cats can climb over standard fences). I guess fully enclosed "cat parks" would be an option. You may have a harder time training a cat to wear a leash compared to a dog, but it's possible. It's strange to me that we think cats need to be outside to satisfy their predator instincts, as if dogs and other animals like to be inside all day while we are at work. If someone doesn't like that thought, they have the option of not owning a cat.
  - pvorb 3y ago
    That's my take. I like animals, so I decided to not own any of them. I wonder how people manage to love their animals and remove them from their natural environment. I know that we've come a long way and pets have had humans around them for ages, but to me it still feels like we're doing them harm. I know that nature is even harder, but it's not like pets decided to live that way. It's also hard to understand why people love one species, but also breed others on an industrial level, so they can eat them more easily. Probably going to get a few downvotes for this.
    - bruce511 3y ago
      No down-votes from me, but as an annecdote I can offer this. We have feral cats in our neighborhood. One of them moved into our house and had a litter in the study. (We kept one, and found homes for the other 3). One of her daughters from an earlier litter moved in and fed the same. All have been sterilised now obviously, but we stoll get regular visits from a local Tom, likely a brother to the first one. The all get along fine, and he's used to us but basically comes in for food or shelter and doesn't socialise with us like the others do. I don't think we "own" them. They all come and go as they please. But I'd say 3 of them definitely live here, and tolerate us. Interestingly none of them seem interested in birds. The occasional mole, otherwise the occasional lizard - mostly for sport. I'm not negating your ethics at all, but it seems some cats like being part of the family, and others are aloof. They all have distinct personalities.
- arcticbull 3y ago
  I dunno, Alberta has no rats. It's doable if you're willing.
- mantas 3y ago
  Putting a tiny bell on cats is usually more than enough. At least it gives birds a fair chance.

sprucevoid 3y ago

As a descriptive matter people do support a lot of species preservation efforts. But we have strong reasons to increase our care for birds and other sentient animals as individuals, with their own subjective experiences and the suffering and harms they endure. After all we already take that view when it comes to companion dogs. We know they can feel a range of emotions and we have as individuals and as society taken some steps to limit harms to dogs and promote their wellbeing. Caring for birds as individuals can be expressed in many actions, individual and political, but a powerful step many can take right now is to stop buying eggs and chicken meat and choose plant based alternatives instead.

jewayne 3y ago
If we accept that we are responsible for minimizing the suffering of both domestic and wild animals, isn't the logical conclusion that we need to drive those species to extinction as quickly as possible, thus completely ending their suffering? I mean, you are explicitly talking about ending our symbiotic relationship with the domestic chicken. We certainly would not have 20 billion chickens in the world if we all stopped eating eggs.
- cpx86 3y ago
  That is an interesting argument. Do you believe that the same would apply to humans? I.e. if someone wishes to minimize the suffering of humans, is the logical conclusion that they should pursue omnicide?
  - jewayne 3y ago
    To be clear, I don't believe in that goal in either case. But yes, the only way to truly end human suffering would be to end the humans.
- sprucevoid 3y ago
  Factory farming of chickens and other animals causes massive aggregate suffering and should be ended, full stop. But chickens can continue to flourish in animal sanctuaries, where they live their own lives without being killed or exploited as food resources. As for wild animals and suffering, that's a big topic. I think for now we need lots more thinking and research, on what is feasible and reasonable there. Reducing suffering is one important consideration among others.

logifail 3y ago

> If something is killing birds, even a lot of birds [..] then there generally isn't a lot of concern over it. ...from cat owners. There's plenty of concern from wildlife-lovers: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/aug/14/cats-kill-birds-wildlife-keep-indoors https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/aug/14/cats-kil... I watched our neighbour's cat take a bird from a feeder in our garden earlier this month, I was pretty unimpressed :( Cats are cute, I get that ... I'm just not sure that's enough of an excuse.

throwaway290 3y ago
And I heard a cat being slowly murdered by a bird on the roof, this stuff you can't unhear... Remember that this goes both ways. Birds are probably the deadliest predator for outdoor cats. This is why cats tend to have instinctive acute reaction to big flying objects. I'm not a cat owner, I like both cats and birds
- gitaarik 3y ago
  What, a bird kills a cat? How?
  - pelasaco 3y ago
    Maybe an Eagle?