If all, or even most, cats were neutered and contained then there would
probably be very few comments about them on this list. I agree that
people like Bill should be commended for going to the trouble and
expense of properly containing their pets, while their neighbours' cats
most likely wander at will. They certainly do here.
As for the idea that suburban cats don't do that much damage, I hope
it's true. But do the professor's comments take into account the
possibility that if cats take all species at random, then pretty soon
they'll have eliminated the rarer ones and only be seen to catch common
ones? It may also be incorrect in areas that border more sensitive
areas such as parks and bushland.
Peter Shute
wrote on Friday, 13 June 2008 11:21
AM:
> Instead of attacking cat-owners who clearly have a
> strong sense of ecological responsibility (like Bill, who keeps his
> cat contained), they should be congratulated and held up to the
> general public as a shining example of responsible cat ownership.
> Then petition your local council to make cat neutering, registration
> and containment compulsory. It is much more productive than "the only
> good cat is a dead cat" email or conversation.
==============================www.birding-aus.org
birding-aus.blogspot.com
To unsubscribe from this mailing list,
send the message:
unsubscribe
(in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
to:
=============================
|
