Posted on 07/01/2015 8:36:24 AM PDT by Rio
Your cat is a killer. And we're not just talking about the hit to your soul when Fluffy stares right past you despite your sweetest cooing.
Cats, no matter how adorable, are predators. They stalk, they pounce -- and then they snap the neck of whatever little flying or skittering thing they've just caught.
Most of us view this as a good thing. We're all better off with fewer rodents around, and if some pretty little birds get caught up in the killing spree, we can live with that.
Biologists, it seems, aren't so sure. Domestic cats aren't a natural part of most wildlife ecosystems: that is, they're an invasive species, brought in by their human companions/enablers. Though researchers can't nail down solid data, they fear cats are throwing your neighborhood's natural wildlife biodiversity out of whack, damaging the long-term prospects of actual wild predators that don't have the option of chowing down on a can of Friskies at the end of a hard day.
This might sound familiar to you. Back in January 2013, the New York Times published a story called "That Cuddly Kitty Is Deadlier Than You Think" that topped its most-shared list for ages.
The upshot of that story: "scientists from the Smithsonian Conservation Biology Institute and the Fish and Wildlife Service estimated that domestic cats in the United States -- both the pet Fluffies that spend part of the day outdoors and the unnamed strays and ferals that never leave it -- kill a median of 2.4 billion birds and 12.3 billion mammals a year, most of them native mammals like shrews, chipmunks and voles rather than introduced pests like the Norway rat."
It concluded that "the domestic cat (is) one of the single greatest human-linked threats to wildlife in the nation."
The world read that sentence and went, "Whew! The Smithsonian Conservation Biology Institute (whatever that is), the Fish and Wildlife Service and the New York Times have all gone nuts."
The world's opinion hasn't changed in the past two years.
A new study published in Ecology and Evolution found that "owners fail to perceive the ecological footprint of their cat, and have shown that their opinions on the general problem are not influenced by the predatory behavior of their cat."
In short, people who own cats and let them go outside do not believe their cute furball could possibly be damaging the ecosystem. (They do have a little better understanding of how the outdoors can damage their cat, giving it diseases and subjecting it to bigger, meaner animals and fast-moving automobiles.)
The Ecology and Evolution study tracked both cat-owner attitudes and 86 free-roaming cats themselves in two British towns. The pet owners were generally opposed to keeping their outside cats in the house, either entirely or at nighttime when cats are widely (and erroneously) believed to do most of their killing.
The study found that cats kill "up to three times more prey than they bring back (to the home), either because they consume or abandon their kills at the capture site." How many kills are typically racked up every week varies widely from cat to cat, but suffice it to say, these domesticated pets are prolific hunters.
The researchers determined that cat owners were not "influenced by ecological information" that documented the impact of their pet on the wider world.
"The opposing roles of cats, as both human companions and wildlife predators, are likely to drive divergent interests between cat owners and conservationists and may develop into a socially intractable problem should mitigation strategies be required," the study concluded. It mentioned the possibility -- perish the thought! -- of "Cat Exclusion Zones" to help distressed ecosystems right themselves.
The most unsurprising finding in the study: that the cat owners weren't clear about who was in charge. Wrote one human participant: "My cat chooses for herself whether to stay in or go out."
I told my neighbor I had a mole in my back yard, he said to put a beer on ice for him and brought over his Jack Russel.
The dog had the mole before we finished the beer and yeah, he’s a bird dog too.
Vultures gotta eat, too!
Can I borrow him for the moles in my yard? Our late dog (Lab-Springer mix) used to dig them up and kill them, but our current Black Lab is not much help.
>>“Felis domesticus”
>>>I believe you mean Felis silvestris catus
And then there's the cats from Dune!
Si.
bttt
A bit more silliness from Oregon, for those who give a rat’s *ss.
Domestication of animals, both herbivores and carnivores, was a great step forward for the human race. Hunter teams consisting of humans and dogs were awesome, enabling us to reach to the far corners of the planet. We got the dogs to help with shepherding. And, back at the cave or hut, cats suppressed the local vermin. With regard to the herbivores, sheep and goats, pigs and cows, and beasts of burden including horses and oxen and - in India - elephants - we not only developed better sources of meat, leather, fur, bones and sinews, we greatly increased our ability to lift, pull and carry.
It’s a catastrophe!
(Puns aside, I agree with the article)
>>Bring it ...
Brought!
Go out there and kill something for Mommy. Go! Get out there, kill!
: > )
Outstanding!
I love freepers...
I’m tried of people putting down cats.
Cats cause schizophrenia, some idiot doctor says. Now this.
Cats do nothing but love us. If some asshat hasn’t decided to get rid of cats in the Middle Ages , would there had been bubonic plague?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.