|
Location: DISNEYLAND
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 389
|
|
Originally Posted by
Steve
You must know me by now that i'll listen to both sides of an argument!
The difference in my opinion is that foxes are wild animals and domestic cats are someones property.Cats are notorious predators of songbirds,but since they belong to someone nothing can be done short of making them wear boxing gloves to cover their claws! I know what you're getting at in that why should a cats life be worth more than a fox since they're both hunters of native wildlife,but it comes back full circle to the wild/domestic bit.I guess people will always feel emotionally charged when a pet has been killed and is likely worse when its done by another animal so they want revenge.
Which is why youre one of the few pro-hunters that ive come across on forums that i respect
and thats the problem because theyre pets many people turn a blind eye to the damage cats do and just accept the fact that its their 'nature' to kill for fun....but i'll say again they are classed everywhere in the world as an invasive species, they are ruthless killers and also domesticated they can never be naturalised into any ecosystem...so shouldnt be there in the 1st place.
cat owners really should get their emotions in check when they kill foxes to 'protect' cats
... the owners are the irresponsible ones, a) for letting their cats out in the 1st place, and b) for then killing an animal that is indiginous to the UK!
it shows they care nothing for the ecology of our country.
Originally Posted by
Tarimoor
Skip reading, partly a fuzzy head, partly an attempt to confuse the bug by annihilating it with red wine and VSOP Cognac! Anyway, where did the figure 8 million come from? Curious, as I did a very cursory search earlier, and came up with a max figure of about 3 million
Edited to add, first para is just a query to you Noushka, rest is just rambling after reading.....
With the question of trapping feral/wild animals, surely, an animal that is shot, without ever knowing it's been hunted, so stalked effectively, is better than being trapped, transported somewhere and then pts? I know which I think is more human for feral or wild animals.
And back to the cats, if there is such a problem, and they predate so heavily on our natural species, surely re-releasing any into the wild is wrong, they have to be pts? You can't condone allowing the predation to go on to any extent if it's such a problem.
Red legged partridge aren't for the record, a problem in this country, and it is by far, those who shoot that have done the most in recent years for the conservation of the grey partridge, amongst other species. On many shoots, it is prohibited to shoot the indigenous grey partridge, and on others, where they are allowed to be shot, they ensure they release sufficient numbers to try and keep a sustainable population. The red legged partridge has been a more popular bird on shoots, because of the way it flies.
well yes conservationists would most definatley agree that ferals should be killed, but i'd prefer they were neutered
(and conservationists agree 'any' free roaming cat is detrimental to any habitat its at large in)
and heres some figures on our ever growing cat population, theres lots of different sources and they all say pretty much same figure around 9 million....
http://www.moggies.co.uk/articles/top_cities.html
so what about the 'non ferals' then...you know your average pet allowed to roam????? cos you still havent answered yet
lol and youre views that those who shoot have done much for conservation is EXTREMELY debatable
(but thats for another thread i suppose
....by the way the greys decline is down to over shooting in the 1st place