Wow, anybody said just go out and shoot cats? Any cat?

Same as, has anybody said go out and shoot foxes, any fox?

You cannot guarantee a perfect shot on a moving target

Who said its a moving target? The idea is a still target, thats why you "squeak" Foxes, they stand still, then come closer, then stand still, thats how you get the clean kill. It would be similar for Cats. A distress call of a Rabbit will bring them in I would imagine.

Not being funny, (not directed at anyone specific) but this is the type of thing people" imagine" and its all wrong, yet they critisise like they have done it for years themselves, when in actual fact they have little clue.

I'm chuckling away, animals do stop moving, and when they're in position for a clean shot, that's when a clean shot is taken. They're not just shot at willy nilly by all and sundry hoping to hit them, not at least by anyone I know of involved with hunting and shooting.

Im talking shooting feral cats

Absolutely NOT necessary, spay/neuter and they wont reproduce. Any ill cats - humanely PTS

If it makes you happy then thats fine by me.

Carry on thinking that all animals are shot cleanly.

I have made my point and I learnt a long time ago that if people want to justify something they will do it regardless.

I know that shooting causes animals to suffer, if there was any honesty it would be admitted by those who support it.

rune

Yes, but then you still have the problem of predation, which is surely the main reason why feral cats need to be controlled? So, it's ok to allow cats to continue to predate until they die out, what happens if they drive a species to the brink of extinction in that time?

A short PS not trying to pick on your posts, I hate coming across as 'pointed' towards anyone, just picking up on your point, seems to have been a good debate so far

But that's just not my experience, so why should I state otherwise?

Just to add, I never said all animals are shot cleanly, but anyone involved in shooting that I know, aims to shoot cleanly, if not, they ensure that the animal is found and despatched. Sorry if your experience is different

Id like to think it wasnt nec, but there are so many and if the land owner doesnt want them or if the places where they live doesnt, they will be culled. It comes down to cost again many times, who will pay for the neutering etc?

I trapped a lot for the Cats protection once and they did relocate them to a stable yard, but of course these places wont keep on taking more, and as cats breed so prolifically its inevitable space will run out. I couldnt harm one, ever, I feel more annoyed at Cat abuse than Dog abuse, dont know why, both repulse me, but Cats are specifically targeted by some people.

I can however see the need to keep numbers manageable if they have produced large colonies and are causing problems.

As I've said before, its all about morality, and that is a matter of perspective.

Some people find shooting wild animals cruel, fine I can accept that.

They'd rather the animal be captured and restrained so that it can be injected, as they think the animal would have a more pieceful end. I can accept that also, though I'll admit, its a somewhat grudging acceptance. As personally, I can't imagine a wild animal, trapped/restrained and being handled by another species, is going to be at piece, lets face facts it'll be terrofied...so how is that any better, then a competent marksman shooting it?

Before anyone says it, again, yes there're crap marksman out there, just like there're crap vets. You'd expect a vet to be able to handle a needle, but I bet there're some who've cocked it right up, just like there'll be marksman who don't kill on the first shot.

Incompetents is down to human imperfection, it can't always be trained out.