2 ms·

Exactly. Please keep cats indoors - they kill all the local wildlife. I have a cat and it stays indoors exclusively.

by Daneel_ 6mo ago

sillysaurusx 6mo ago
This is a widely-cited myth, and almost impossible to measure in practice. What does "all the local wildlife" even mean? Is the threat here that birds are going to go extinct because of cats? Not likely, and the burden of proof is on the people repeating this mistaken belief. Using "think of the birds" as a justification for imprisoning your cat for their entire lives is also pretty crummy. It's called wildlife because they exist in the wilderness. Even if cats kill a large number of birds, so what? Those birds don't have a happy, loving home with emotional bonds to an actual human. If you think this logic is flawed, explain why you're fine with flies dying but not birds. I bet you've swatted a few in your time.
- Brybry 6mo ago
  > Free-ranging cats on islands have caused or contributed to 33 (14%) of the modern bird, mammal and reptile extinctions recorded by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Red List [1] Cats are probably a leading cause of mortality in birds. [2] Domestic cats are not native to North America. The birds here would not have evolved to avoid them (and beyond that, domestic cat numbers are not limited by prey availability because they're pets bred and fed by humans). You'll find plenty of studies with evidence that domestic cats are probably bad for bird populations. [3][4] But to be fair, buildings/glass windows kill a lot of birds too. [5] [1] https://www.nature.com/articles/ncomms2380 https://www.nature.com/articles/ncomms2380 [2] https://www.fws.gov/library/collections/threats-birds#:~:text=Top%20Threats%20to%20Birds https://www.fws.gov/library/collections/threats-birds#:~:tex... [3] https://www.mdpi.com/1424-2818/13/7/322 https://www.mdpi.com/1424-2818/13/7/322 [4] https://wildlife.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/wsb.737 https://wildlife.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/wsb.737 [5] https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0306362 https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal...
  - sillysaurusx 6mo ago
    Thank you for the well-sourced reply. Suppose it's true that cats are bad for bird populations. The implication is that just because birds are dying, it's okay to snatch a cat. More than that, that cats should be imprisoned for their entire lives, when they naturally want to roam. Someone can take one side of this ethical debate or the other, and both sides probably won't agree. I personally find it sad that people would place the well-being of birds above that of a wonderful, furry companion that clearly belongs to someone. The logic also doesn't quite line up: I was hoping someone would try to justify why it's okay to kill flies but not birds, since that's the real counterargument to this one. Especially when they kill flies with their own hands. So much of life boils down to "we're the apex species and we do what we want." But such is life. I find it difficult not to call out the absurdities when they appear, though. To the topic at hand, how exactly is this quantified? I suspect that word "contributed" is doing a lot of work here. [2] seems to admit as much: > True estimates of mortality are difficult to determine. However, recent studies have synthesized the best available data to estimated ranges of mortality to bird populations in North America from some of the most common, human-caused sources of bird mortality. The numbers in [2] are admittedly pretty startling. But it looks like they come from one report labeled "2013a". Any info on where to find it, or what it even is? Otherwise it's easy to call [2] a citation when in fact no evidence whatsoever is being presente. [4] is much better. https://wildlife.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/wsb.737 https://wildlife.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/wsb.737 But cats are still only a contributory factor, not the main cause; the report says they're the second leading cause of admissions, not the first. So, high, and worth thinking about. But again, the cost here is "removing, by force, someone's beloved pet." I'm not above saying that we should probably care about cats more than birds, because of the emotional bonds they form with humans. After all, that's why we're fine with flies being killed, right? No emotional bonds.
    - john_strinlai 6mo ago
      >The implication is that just because birds are dying, it's okay to snatch a cat. the implication is that if you want a cat, you should be responsible and keep it indoors. >But again, the cost here is "removing, by force, someone's beloved pet." no, the cost is keeping your cat indoors.
- nradov 6mo ago
  In my neighborhood some people let their cats run around loose. Then the local wildlife (coyotes) eats the cats, and the idiot cat owners whine that the city needs to "do something" about the coyotes.
- Daneel_ 6mo ago
  In Australia, where I live, pet cats are responsible for a huge amount of damage to wildlife, as per https://invasives.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/Pet-cat-impacts-June-2023.pdf https://invasives.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/Pet-cat-... From the linked paper: Pet cats, despite their valued role as companion animals, are a major threat to wildlife. Collectively, roaming pet cats kill 546 million animals per year in Australia. As such the management of cats has major implications for Australia’s wildlife and ecosystems. [...] Many owners believe their cats don’t hunt because they never come across evidence of killed animals. However, studies of pet cats using video-tracking collars or scat analysis have established that the vast majority (85%) of the animals killed by pet cats are not brought home. On average, each roaming, hunting pet cat kills more than three animals every week. The numbers add up. On average, over a year each roaming and hunting pet cat in Australia kills 186 animals. This number includes 110 native animals (40 reptiles, 38 birds and 32 mammals). [...] [For example] In Mandurah, Western Australia, the disturbance and hunting of just one pet cat and one stray cat caused the total breeding failure of a colony of more than 100 pairs of fairy terns. [...] The findings presented here are summarised from an analysis of the results of many dozens of studies that was undertaken by the Threatened Species Recovery Hub. The research team included scientists from The University of Queensland, The Australian National University, Charles Darwin University, The University of Sydney and Murdoch University. The research received funding from the Australian Government through the National Environmental Science Program and was published in Wildlife Research.

Exactly. Please keep cats indoors - they kill all the local wildlife. I have a cat and it stays indoors exclusively.

by Daneel_ 6mo ago

Exactly. Please keep cats indoors - they kill all the local wildlife. I have a cat and it stays indoors exclusively.

This is a widely-cited myth, and almost impossible to measure in practice. What does "all the local wildlife" even mean? Is the threat here that birds are going to go extinct because of cats? Not likely, and the burden of proof is on the people repeating this mistaken belief. Using "think of the birds" as a justification for imprisoning your cat for their entire lives is also pretty crummy. It's called wildlife because they exist in the wilderness. Even if cats kill a large number of birds, so what? Those birds don't have a happy, loving home with emotional bonds to an actual human. If you think this logic is flawed, explain why you're fine with flies dying but not birds. I bet you've swatted a few in your time.

Brybry 6mo ago
> Free-ranging cats on islands have caused or contributed to 33 (14%) of the modern bird, mammal and reptile extinctions recorded by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Red List [1] Cats are probably a leading cause of mortality in birds. [2] Domestic cats are not native to North America. The birds here would not have evolved to avoid them (and beyond that, domestic cat numbers are not limited by prey availability because they're pets bred and fed by humans). You'll find plenty of studies with evidence that domestic cats are probably bad for bird populations. [3][4] But to be fair, buildings/glass windows kill a lot of birds too. [5] [1] https://www.nature.com/articles/ncomms2380 https://www.nature.com/articles/ncomms2380 [2] https://www.fws.gov/library/collections/threats-birds#:~:text=Top%20Threats%20to%20Birds https://www.fws.gov/library/collections/threats-birds#:~:tex... [3] https://www.mdpi.com/1424-2818/13/7/322 https://www.mdpi.com/1424-2818/13/7/322 [4] https://wildlife.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/wsb.737 https://wildlife.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/wsb.737 [5] https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0306362 https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal...
- sillysaurusx 6mo ago
  Thank you for the well-sourced reply. Suppose it's true that cats are bad for bird populations. The implication is that just because birds are dying, it's okay to snatch a cat. More than that, that cats should be imprisoned for their entire lives, when they naturally want to roam. Someone can take one side of this ethical debate or the other, and both sides probably won't agree. I personally find it sad that people would place the well-being of birds above that of a wonderful, furry companion that clearly belongs to someone. The logic also doesn't quite line up: I was hoping someone would try to justify why it's okay to kill flies but not birds, since that's the real counterargument to this one. Especially when they kill flies with their own hands. So much of life boils down to "we're the apex species and we do what we want." But such is life. I find it difficult not to call out the absurdities when they appear, though. To the topic at hand, how exactly is this quantified? I suspect that word "contributed" is doing a lot of work here. [2] seems to admit as much: > True estimates of mortality are difficult to determine. However, recent studies have synthesized the best available data to estimated ranges of mortality to bird populations in North America from some of the most common, human-caused sources of bird mortality. The numbers in [2] are admittedly pretty startling. But it looks like they come from one report labeled "2013a". Any info on where to find it, or what it even is? Otherwise it's easy to call [2] a citation when in fact no evidence whatsoever is being presente. [4] is much better. https://wildlife.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/wsb.737 https://wildlife.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/wsb.737 But cats are still only a contributory factor, not the main cause; the report says they're the second leading cause of admissions, not the first. So, high, and worth thinking about. But again, the cost here is "removing, by force, someone's beloved pet." I'm not above saying that we should probably care about cats more than birds, because of the emotional bonds they form with humans. After all, that's why we're fine with flies being killed, right? No emotional bonds.
  - john_strinlai 6mo ago
    >The implication is that just because birds are dying, it's okay to snatch a cat. the implication is that if you want a cat, you should be responsible and keep it indoors. >But again, the cost here is "removing, by force, someone's beloved pet." no, the cost is keeping your cat indoors.
nradov 6mo ago
In my neighborhood some people let their cats run around loose. Then the local wildlife (coyotes) eats the cats, and the idiot cat owners whine that the city needs to "do something" about the coyotes.
Daneel_ 6mo ago
In Australia, where I live, pet cats are responsible for a huge amount of damage to wildlife, as per https://invasives.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/Pet-cat-impacts-June-2023.pdf https://invasives.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/Pet-cat-... From the linked paper: Pet cats, despite their valued role as companion animals, are a major threat to wildlife. Collectively, roaming pet cats kill 546 million animals per year in Australia. As such the management of cats has major implications for Australia’s wildlife and ecosystems. [...] Many owners believe their cats don’t hunt because they never come across evidence of killed animals. However, studies of pet cats using video-tracking collars or scat analysis have established that the vast majority (85%) of the animals killed by pet cats are not brought home. On average, each roaming, hunting pet cat kills more than three animals every week. The numbers add up. On average, over a year each roaming and hunting pet cat in Australia kills 186 animals. This number includes 110 native animals (40 reptiles, 38 birds and 32 mammals). [...] [For example] In Mandurah, Western Australia, the disturbance and hunting of just one pet cat and one stray cat caused the total breeding failure of a colony of more than 100 pairs of fairy terns. [...] The findings presented here are summarised from an analysis of the results of many dozens of studies that was undertaken by the Threatened Species Recovery Hub. The research team included scientists from The University of Queensland, The Australian National University, Charles Darwin University, The University of Sydney and Murdoch University. The research received funding from the Australian Government through the National Environmental Science Program and was published in Wildlife Research.