Take that, cat lovers.

Endangered worm. Now there's an interesting thought.
 
Regarding the House Sparrow (and the other HUGE invasive damaging bird in North America, the Euro Starling), every single one of those that a cat kills is doing a service to the native bird populations.
 
Ziggy Stardust said:
How many worms do those birds kill? Birds clearly have a detrimental effect on their environment.
Click to expand...
If they are not invasive birds, then the question is beside the point. Besides, two wrongs don't make a right - that dogs or birds or any other invasive species does harm does not negate in any way that cats are really bad for certain ecosystems.
How many animals are killed each year to support dogs?
Click to expand...
Per capita (er, canida?) probably less than cats. Cats are obligate carnivores, as in they can only eat meat products. Cat food is 100% animal derived because it has to be for them to digest it, which isn't the case for all dog foods.

Vis a vis damage :)
Click to expand...
If packs of wild dogs were common in the US (can't speak for Europe), I'd be just as against them as I am against feral cats and so-called 'outdoor' cats. Further, I have no problems whatsoever with indoor cats, they aren't a concern really. Just to reiterate, two wrongs don't make a right.
 
In an attempt to make this a pet owners vs non pet owners heated discussion, I'll just paste this...


Rules for non pet owners who visit and like to complain about our pets.

  • The dog lives here. You don't.
  • If you don't want dog hair on your clothes, stay off the furniture.
  • I like my dog a lot better than I like most people.
  • To you, she's a dog. To me, she's an adopted daughter who is short, hairy, walks on all fours and doesn't speak clearly.
  • Dogs are better than kids. They eat less, don't ask for money all the time, are easier to train, usually come when called, never ask to drive your car, don't hang out with drug-using friends, don't smoke or drink.
  • They don't worry about buying the latest fashions, don't wear your clothes, don't need a gazillion dollars for college, and if they get pregnant, you can sell the pups.
  • The same applies to cats, except they ignore you until you are asleep.
 
hobbsyoyo said:
Per capita (er, canida?) probably less than cats. Cats are obligate carnivores, as in they can only eat meat products. Cat food is 100% animal derived because it has to be for them to digest it, which isn't the case for all dog foods.
Click to expand...
And you'd be wrong.

The eco-footprint for both mainly consists of the food they eat. In that regard the dog has a similar footprint of 2 SUVs, a cat has the footprint of a VW Golf.

http://www.jamaicaobserver.com/busi...e-a-bigger-carbon-footprint-than-SUVs_7817227

I don't know where you get the idea that cats only eat meatproducts. The things our cats go wild over are: yoghurt, broccoli and peanuts.


edit: I support all what VRWC said, except the second bit of the last point.
 
SS-18 ICBM said:
Damning for dogs on islands or developing countries. Or both.

I think the problem is here is whether the domestic animal is free-roaming, not the species of the domestic animal. A dog or cat under control won't really be a problem. But if you let that dog or cat run wild and reproduce freely...then there are environmental consequences.
Click to expand...
Indeed.

That was the point I first made when Cami opted that having a cat was special because it's impact on the wildlife. Cats are not exceptional in that regard. The second time I didn't bother and didn't put an effort in the reply, and Hobbs rightfully called me out.

Point remains, cats are not exceptional in this regard.
 
Ziggy Stardust said:
And you'd be wrong.

The eco-footprint for both mainly consists of the food they eat. In that regard the dog has a similar footprint of 2 suv's, a cat has the footprint of a VW Golf.

http://www.jamaicaobserver.com/busi...e-a-bigger-carbon-footprint-than-SUVs_7817227
Click to expand...
Well, if they are supplementing their diets with endangered Kiwis....
:lol:
Point taken.
I don't know where you get the idea that cats only eat meatproducts. The things our cats go wild over are: yoghurt, broccoli and peanuts.
Click to expand...
It's a well know fact, though let me rephrase:
They can only digest meat products. Sure you can get them to eat broccoli in some cases (though it makes many cats sick). That doesn't mean they derive nutrition from it or can survive on it. Please don't switch your cat to a vegetarian diet to prove a point - you'll kill it.

Now I get to tell you that you'd be wrong and wag my finger thusly: :nono:
All felids, including domestic cats, are obligate carnivores. But, the cat is not alone in being a strict meat-eater. Other mammals that are classed as obligate carnivores include mink, tarsiers, dolphins, seals, sea lions and walruses, to name a few.² Non-mammal obligate carnivores include rainbow trout, salmon, hawks, eagles, crocodilians, many snakes and lizards and most amphibians.³

All of these animals became obligate carnivores as a result of their ancestral diets. Because eating a meat-only diet provides some vitamins and fatty acids in their pre-formed state, cats and many other obligate carnivores have lost the ability to make these amino acids and vitamins in their own bodies the way herbivores or omnivores do. They don't need to since the animals they are eating have already done it for them.

For example, cats require vitamin A in its pre-formed state, they can’t make it from beta-carotene the way humans or dogs or rabbits can. They have little ability to form niacin from tryptophan.⁴ They have a high requirement for taurine, which is found almost exclusively in animal flesh.⁵ Arginine, also found in animal flesh, is so critical to the cat that a meal without it can lead to death.⁶ Fortunately, all meat sources have plenty. Simply put, cats must eat meat to live.
Click to expand...
Source

Ziggy Stardust said:
http://www.livescience.com/27330-dogs-disrupt-wildlife.html
Click to expand...
That article is about wild dog packs, which isn't a problem here. It also doesn't quantify the issues it raises. The articles I provide do with scientific studies.
 
Cats more cool than dogs. I like dogs and I had one, he was a great friend. but never get another dog since he passed away. I'm thinking of adopting a cat but not now.
 
Ziggy Stardust said:
Indeed.

That was the point I first made when Cami opted that having a cat was special because it's impact on the wildlife. Cats are not exceptional in that regard. The second time I didn't bother and didn't put an effort in the reply, and Hobbs rightfully called me out.

Point remains, cats are not exceptional in this regard.
Click to expand...

They are exceptional in the US in that regard as far as I know. I've specifically restricted my points to the US and Europe* as I have no clue what it's like in the rest of the world. I did point out via articles the impact they've had in places like New Zealand, but that's because what the article stated.

*at least I think I have, apologies if I have not

SS-18 ICBM said:
Damning for dogs on islands or developing countries. Or both.

I think the problem is here is whether the domestic animal is free-roaming, not the species of the domestic animal. A dog or cat under control won't really be a problem. But if you let that dog or cat run wild and reproduce freely...then there are environmental consequences.
Click to expand...

Yes, this exactly. In the US dogs aren't typically free roaming. Therein lies the difference between them here. In less developed countries, who knows what the hell they do with their dogs and cats? I don't have a clue, so I've tried to stick to what I know but again I apologize if I've been misleading.


Edit: About what cats can and can't eat - think of it like this:
People love to eat celery and they pass it just fine. However, it yields negative calories and we get no nutrition from it. Rabbits, I'm sure, can get calories from it. This is what it's like for cats who eat broccoli and there may be a few foods they can derive some nutrition from (or at least not get sick off of it) but they cannot survive off of it.

Did you know they are so dependent on meat that they don't even have taste receptors for sweet things?
 
^Sorry if that was my fault, I'm typing as fast as I can and trying to keep it relatively clean and specific as I go. :\
 
I think I can agree with feral dogs being worse in the developing world. They were a constant back in the Philippines, and the wild cats I've seen there were far and few between. Possible exceptions might be areas where Islam is prevalent, considering their aversion to dogs. If I had visited Mindanao, that might have been an interesting comparison to make.
 
So why do people get dumb "counterculture" pets anyhow? I knew a kid growing up that was so proud of this lizard thing he had, but I was at his house for like 3 hours and the damn thing didn't move. They may as well have just called a taxidermist to save electricity on that stupid plug-in rock thing it wasted its entire life sitting motionless on.

I had a pet turtle and a pet frog growing up. In retrospect they were both just awful, stupid pets. I took good care of them, but I don't think they really provided any kind of value as pets. At least fish are pretty and relatively active within their confines.
 
VRWCAgent said:
In an attempt to make this a pet owners vs non pet owners heated discussion, I'll just paste this...


Rules for non pet owners who visit and like to complain about our pets.

  • The dog lives here. You don't.
  • If you don't want dog hair on your clothes, stay off the furniture.
  • I like my dog a lot better than I like most people.
  • To you, she's a dog. To me, she's an adopted daughter who is short, hairy, walks on all fours and doesn't speak clearly.
  • Dogs are better than kids. They eat less, don't ask for money all the time, are easier to train, usually come when called, never ask to drive your car, don't hang out with drug-using friends, don't smoke or drink.
  • They don't worry about buying the latest fashions, don't wear your clothes, don't need a gazillion dollars for college, and if they get pregnant, you can sell the pups.
  • The same applies to cats, except they ignore you until you are asleep.
Click to expand...
Agreed, except my cats also ignore me until I'm on the computer, playing a game that is timed.

hobbsyoyo said:
They are exceptional in the US in that regard as far as I know. I've specifically restricted my points to the US and Europe* as I have no clue what it's like in the rest of the world. I did point out via articles the impact they've had in places like New Zealand, but that's because what the article stated.
Click to expand...
That article came up in my Care2 newsfeed. I had the pleasure of telling this "don't replace your cats because they're killing all the penguins!!! :run:" jerk exactly where he can stick his opinions.

Because we all know that cats are the only carnivorous species that has ever gone after flightless birds, and canines and humans are entirely blameless in that regard, right? :rolleyes:

Ziggy Stardust said:
No worries, it was a low-effort reply anyway ... but it did remind me of:


Link to video.

:love:
Click to expand...
I fell instantly in love with Broccoli Kitten! :love:

AlpsStranger said:
I had a pet turtle and a pet frog growing up. In retrospect they were both just awful, stupid pets. I took good care of them, but I don't think they really provided any kind of value as pets. At least fish are pretty and relatively active within their confines.
Click to expand...
I have several tanks of fish... on the computer. I'm addicted to Playrix games, and am currently involved in Aquascapes. Tankfuls of koi, turtles, and many others... they're cute, have great personalities, and it's really easy to feed them and clean the tanks.

Unlike the times I tried to raise real fish and they died within the week. :(
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom