jimk@tekcae.tek.com (Jim Kimball) (11/11/89)
In article <2759@cbnewsl.ATT.COM> nora@cbnewsl.ATT.COM (nora.y.mclaughlin) writes: > >I have been feeding birds at my house ... >... But Now I worry about the cats >hunting the ground feeders. Anyway, my question is, is there any >way to keep cats from feeding of the the birds I am feeding? Sure...trap 'em, shoot 'em...hell, it's your property. 'Course you might want to preserve friendly neighbor relations. There's the rub. A non-hostile request to rein in their cats would be the first move. If they don't respond to politeness, however, get serious. Anyone who lacks consideration for wildlife and your love of birds is probably going to be a lousy neighbor generally, so you might as well find out early. (Flick the bic, Roger, and let's get the flame fest going.)
denise@dadla.WR.TEK.COM (Denise Caire) (11/23/89)
In article jimk@tekcae.tek.com (Jim Kimball) writes: >In article nora@cbnewsl.ATT.COM (nora.y.mclaughlin) writes: >> >>I have been feeding birds at my house ... >>... But Now I worry about the cats >>hunting the ground feeders. Anyway, my question is, is there any >>way to keep cats from feeding of the the birds I am feeding? > >Sure...trap 'em, shoot 'em...hell, it's your property. 'Course you >might want to preserve friendly neighbor relations. There's the rub. >A non-hostile request to rein in their cats would be the first move. >If they don't respond to politeness, however, get serious. >Anyone who lacks consideration for wildlife and your love of birds >is probably going to be a lousy neighbor generally, so you might as >well find out early. > >(Flick the bic, Roger, and let's get the flame fest going.) My name is not Roger but I will gladly defend my cat any day Jim! I am truely torn both ways because I love cats and birds. Cats do provide a valueable service -- they kill rodents! Sure they, as predators, will also kill a bird with its guard down occasionally, but to promote shooting any animal (cat or other) is sick. How about negotiating the difference and placing the feeder in as cat-proof a place as possible? (I can think of a few as I'm sure everyone can.) Exactly what ideas would you "politely" suggest to a neighbor as a viable means to "rein" in a cat? Are they aware that you intend to shoot the cat if they don't comply? There are no leash laws for cats but I'm sure there are laws with regards to maliciously killing a neighbors cat. Think about it (please). denise@dadla.WR.TEK.COM
ooblick@intercon.com (Mikki Barry) (11/24/89)
Cats are entitled to roam on your property. Shooting them (poisoning them, hurting them, trapping them, etc.) is cruelty to animals and fines and/or jail terms are the usual punishment. You would also be civilly liable to the owner of the cat. I suppose that the poster who advocates killing cats would do the same if a neighbor's child wandered onto his property? Sure, it's your property. Blow the kid away, right? :-(. Regardless of how you feel about cats, killing them is against the law. Mikki Barry
christ@ccnysci.UUCP (Chris Thompson) (11/24/89)
In article <1565@intercon.com>, ooblick@intercon.com (Mikki Barry) writes: > Cats are entitled to roam on your property. Shooting them (poisoning them, > hurting them, trapping them, etc.) is cruelty to animals and fines and/or > jail terms are the usual punishment. You would also be civilly liable to > the owner of the cat. > > I suppose that the poster who advocates killing cats would do the same if > a neighbor's child wandered onto his property? Sure, it's your property. > Blow the kid away, right? :-(. > > Regardless of how you feel about cats, killing them is against the law. > I think that depends upon which state you live in. In some states, certain birds are protected, and it is legal to kill any animal which is found killing one of those birds. Also, do you feel this way when some of the birds in the area might be members of a threatened/endangered species? Also: all (read ALL) migratory birds are protected by international treaty and federal law: the owner of a cat is obligated to ensure that their pet does not kill protected animals. I ran into a case of this over this past summer: a dog rampaged through a shorebird colony, and ate many of the eggs/chicks in the colony. The local DEC/Warden was ready to shoot the dog on sight if it ever did that again. Cruelty to animals usually does not include killing them, if it is done in a (relatively?) humane manner. Cruelty to animals is usually defined in terms of torturing or mistreating them. So, if you kill a cat by burning it to death, yes, that is cruelty to animals. If you shoot it, it isn't cruelty, it is merely expedient. I can't believe you equated killing a child with killing a cat. That is definitely one of the more asinine things I've heard, and to ascribe that feeling to someone you don't even know is obscene. Finally, cats do not have the right to roam my property if I don't want them to. Else, why is it my property? Chris Thompson
ooblick@intercon.com (Mikki Barry) (11/26/89)
In article <3757@ccnysci.UUCP> christ@ccnysci.UUCP (Chris Thompson) writes: >Also: all (read ALL) migratory birds are protected by international treaty >and federal law: the owner of a cat is obligated to ensure that their >pet does not kill protected animals. I ran into a case of this over this >past summer: a dog rampaged through a shorebird colony, and ate many of the >eggs/chicks in the colony. The local DEC/Warden was ready to shoot the dog >on sight if it ever did that again. Dogs != cats. Let's try this one again. Dog owners must, by most local laws, keep control of their animals by keeping them on their own property, or keeping them on a leash. Cats are considered by the law to be DIFFERENT THAN dogs. Cats are *entitled* to roam on your property. >Cruelty to animals usually does not include killing them, if it is done >in a (relatively?) humane manner. Cruelty to animals is usually defined >in terms of torturing or mistreating them. So, if you kill a cat by >burning it to death, yes, that is cruelty to animals. If you shoot it, >it isn't cruelty, it is merely expedient. I suggest you check your state cruelty laws. Most INCLUDE death. >I can't believe you equated killing a child with killing a cat. That is >definitely one of the more asinine things I've heard, and to ascribe that >feeling to someone you don't even know is obscene. I was ascribing that feeling to someone who advocated killing cats. That, to me, is as obscene and asinine as killing any other living creature, up to and including people. Blatent disregard for the lives of creatures that roam upon the earth can easily, if left unchecked, turn into blatent disregard of the lives of human creatures. >Finally, cats do not have the right to roam my property if I don't want them >to. Else, why is it my property? You really need to check on legal definitions of property. There are clear exclusions to your soveriegn rights as property owner. These include not being able to shoot things like cats, birds, meter readers, bulldozers who are tearing up your sidewalk with a permit (or even shooting them for not having a permit), mailcarriers, etc. etc. Being a property owner in this country includes these little inconveniences. Besides this, check your local municipal ordinances about discharging firearms in a residential area. Ditto with trapping animals within city limits, leaving poisons where domestic animals can get to them, etc. etc. For starters, try your local law library. Spend some time there. Get to know the law before spouting off about it. It seems pretty strange to me that one can advocate protecting one species of animal while promoting killing another. Mikki Barry
usenet@cps3xx.UUCP (Usenet file owner) (11/26/89)
From article <1566@intercon.com>, by ooblick@intercon.com (Mikki Barry): Lots of drivel deleted Let's not start this argument all over. Shooting cats was discussed to death in rec.pets just a couple of months ago. This discussion has quickly digressed to something having nothing to do with birds. Move the discussion back to (1) rec.pets, (2) /dev/null, or (3) e-mail. j |%|John Lawitzke, Dale Computer Corp., R&D |%|UUCP: uunet!frith!dale1!jhl Work |%| uunet!frith!ipecac!jhl Home Inquiring minds just wondering. |%|Internet: jhl@frith.egr.msu.edu
riehm@maccs.dcss.mcmaster.ca (Carl Riehm) (11/30/89)
In article <1565@intercon.com> ooblick@intercon.UUCP (Mikki Barry) writes: >Cats are entitled to roam on your property. Shooting them (poisoning them, >hurting them, trapping them, etc.) is cruelty to animals and fines and/or >jail terms are the usual punishment. You would also be civilly liable to >the owner of the cat. > >I suppose that the poster who advocates killing cats would do the same if >a neighbor's child wandered onto his property? Sure, it's your property. >Blow the kid away, right? :-(. > >Regardless of how you feel about cats, killing them is against the law. > >Mikki Barry So cats are entitled to roam on my property! According to whom? Anyway the community that I live in has a bylaw stating that cats are simply not allowed to run free. If one's neighbors insist on allowing their cats to do so, then one can rent a live trap from the Humane Society and any cats delivered unto them are retrievable by their owners *after* they pay the fine. That's precisely what I am going to do next spring. I have asked my neighbors to obey the law, but like the above correspondent, they think that cats have some unalienable right to hunt and kill. Perhaps others saw the article in Time (or was it Newsweek) last summer that said that a study in England showed that the average neighbourhood cat killed about 200 birds and small animals each year. And we're supposed to put up with this? I became enraged last year when a nest of rabbits in our back yard was cleaned out by a neighbor's cat. I must say that I really cannot see what would be wrong with killing such a cat, but fortunately I don't have to do that because of our local bylaw.t
denise@dadla.WR.TEK.COM (Denise Caire) (12/06/89)
In article <257498A5.4028@maccs.dcss.mcmaster.ca> riehm@maccs.dcss.mcmaster.ca (Carl Riehm) writes: >some unalienable right to hunt and kill. Perhaps others saw the article in >Time (or was it Newsweek) last summer that said that a study in England showed >that the average neighbourhood cat killed about 200 birds and small animals >each year. And we're supposed to put up with this? No offense, but isn't England a much smaller mass of land, as in an island? Also, the attitude towards stray cats and cat control is much different than in the US. One really must take such things as cultural differences into account when making comparisons. I became enraged last >year when a nest of rabbits in our back yard was cleaned out by a neighbor's >cat. It's funny. I can't figure out why you are upset. Is it because you wanted nature to be so close you could see those bunnies from your window? Why not get down on farmers for killing rabbits in droves? Instead you want to kill one animal to save another. And, rabbits and birds are pretty much fair game for a lot of preditors besides cats. As much as I love all animals, I truely cannot stand the possum. (The raccoon is as big of a culprit as any also.) These animals pillage ground bird nests such as pheasant, chucker, grouse, and quail. They don't just kill a bird. They eat entire nests of eggs. And, what about Blue Jays? I must say that I really cannot see what would be wrong with killing such I gotta go, Denise "I love cats" Caire denise@dadla.WR.TEK.COM
dc@jake.UUCP (Don Chiappone) (12/07/89)
In article <1565@intercon.com>, ooblick@intercon.com (Mikki Barry) writes: > Cats are entitled to roam on your property. Shooting them (poisoning them, [ text deleted ] > I suppose that the poster who advocates killing cats would do the same if > a neighbor's child wandered onto his property? Sure, it's your property. > Blow the kid away, right? :-(. Would you please explain to me how in hell you arrived at the conclusion that the cats are somehow entitled to roam freely and kill the birds on my property? I have a fairly large flock of ducks that live on my property and I feed them on a regular basis. It is *GREAT* to see the roaming cats and dogs in our area attack the flock and sometimes kill one or more ducklings, or infrequently, an adult duck. I do NOT advocate killing the animals, yet I ask you, what right do you have to deny me the pleasure of the presence of that flock of birds and then get indignant if I wish to do the same to you regarding your cat or dog? Can you at least BELL the animal? The poster of the article was probably venting frustration at all the inconsiderate MORONS who let their animals roam to destroy things and then get upset because *we* cannot understand how FIFI and FIDO have an *entitlement* to do so. BTW, the last statement of yours was a tad ridiculous, yes?