# Vet kills cat with bow and arrow



## chillminx

BREAKING: Vet Fired After Bragging About Killing a Cat on Facebook - The Catington Post


----------



## jill3

words fail me! 
I just don't know what's in peoples heads these days.


----------



## Honeys mum

I saw that, how awful is that, and a vet as well, who are supposed to save animals lives.


----------



## Ceiling Kitty

Abhorrent. I do wonder if she is mentally unwell.


----------



## leashedForLife

.
.
.
Wait a minute - if the vet went archery-hunting for DEER, would that be just as "awful"...?
What makes killing an animal with a bow & arrow "cruel"...?
.
.
Arguably, the cat DIED much-faster than he would have died, if a euthanasia drug were given -
an arrow in the head is a very fast death, with instantaneous shock. I'm speaking here as a medical
pro, as well as a wildlife-rehab volunteer - arrows to the BODY can kill very slowly, or cause massive
infection & a slow, miserable death. This was nothing similar - it was very quick, the cat would hardly
have had time to realize that something had happened before he died.
There would not have been time to register much pain - just a shock, & then death very soon after.
.
.
Also, QUOTING from the article:


> _
> .
> .
> Lindsey could [face] *animal abuse charges*._
> .
> .


.
.
Why?
Archery is not illegal; hunting with a bow-&-arrow is not grounds for a cruelty or abuse charge.
.
.
Cont'd:
.


> _
> 
> *True Blue Animal Rescue* in Brenham claims the cat is one of their fosters,
> [& is] not feral._
> .
> .


.
.
.
Why would a RESCUE GROUP allow any foster-pet to roam at large, when they're supposedly available
for adoption? --- How can U ensure the safety & well-being of any free-roaming animal, or that s/he
will be around if a potential adopter contacts the rescue, & wants to meet that pet?!... That's dumb as H***.
.
.
Cont'd:


> _
> .
> ...One of Lindseys neighbors also *claims the cat looks like theirs* -- missing for two days. _
> .
> .


.
.
.
Even if the cat that was killed resembles their missing pet, if they allow their cat to roam, there are no
warranties to protect their cat from wildlife [Redtailed Hawks & Great Horned Owls both take cats;
so do coyotes, feral or stray dogs], nor from all the other threats that abound for a small animal - cars,
antifreeze spills, rodents dead or dying of poison that the cat will eat or catch & eat, other toxins, violent
fights with skunks, raccoons, or opossums, tainted water, & so forth.
.
.
IMO, if U allow Ur cat to roam, U have zero rights to protest against anything that happens to her or him.
YOU were the one who allowed the cat out - YOU are the one who was, IMO, criminally negligent. :Shrug:
Whatever happens - *short of* actual deliberate torture of an animal, such as crucifixion, setting afire,
cutting tendons to cripple an animal, etc - it's on the owner's head.

Being killed as a "probable feral" is the owner's fault - not the hunter's.
If the pet had been at home on the owner's property, or indoors in the owner's house, s/he would be
at no risk whatever of being shot, run over, killed by a roaming dog, eaten by a coyote, infected by FIV,
___________ .
.
.
.
Cont'd:
.


> _
> .
> .
> 
> Either way, feral or not, *it is against the law to kill a cat*... _
> .
> .


.
.
Who said so? :blink:
.
Just because cats are a domestic species does NOT make it illegal to kill them - "pet" status does not
confer any special legal status; dogs running wildlife, especially deer, are specifically permitted, indeed
they are SUPPOSED to be, shot on sight.
.
Why should cats be "different"?
.
Feral hogs are now in nearly 30 of the 48 mainland states of the U-S; they are listed as pests, & hunters
are being strongly urged to kill them. They're incredibly destructive, but IMO no more so than cats, if we
look dispassionately at the impact cats have on wildlife. Feral hogs are just more visible in the havoc
they wreak - cats' depredations simply aren't as bl**dy obvious. :thumbdown:
If anything, that makes cats more dangerous - not less.
.
.
Cont'd:
.
.


> _
> .
> .
> .
> ...even more despicable, [the cat was killed with an arrow shot from a bow], at the hands of a veterinarian
> *who has the means to euthanize a pet humanely*._
> .
> .


.
.
How in H*** would U *euthanize a free-roaming cat?...*

That's a truly incredibly-stoopid statement. :nono: Euthanasia requires that the animal be, not only in one's
POSSESSION, but under one's PHYSICAL CONTROL - restrained for the safety of the nonhuman & the human,
so that a needle can be introduced to a vein, & a lethal dose of a liquid compound is then injected.
.
How in God's name do U do that when the cat - or whatever species the animal might be - is free-roaming,
& is many feet, or even many yards, away -- AND MOVING?
.
.
Firing an anaesthetic dart at a free-roaming animal outside a fence is very dangerous - to both the target
& to other persons of any species. The darted animal can become combative as the drug affects them, can fall
into water & drown, can collapse in full sun & die slowly of hyperthermia, can be run over by a vehicle, attacked
by another animal & unable to defend her or himself, etc, etc.

Nonhumans are normally only darted WITHIN a fence - to ensure their safety, & others' safety.
If the darted animal were to weave drunkenly into a roadway, ppl would turn themselves inside-out in an
effort to avoid HITTING them, which could easily result in multiple human injuries, & even deaths.
Multi-vehicle accidents are horrific, & can happen in a matter of seconds on a crowded roadway.
.
.
.
I don't applaud the gloating tone of the Facebook brag; i do, however, think the shooter was very skilled,
the cat did not suffer, & i don't think that she should be prosecuted - let alone "have her veterinary license
revoked", IOW be unable to practice vet-medicine after more than a decade of specialized schooling.
That's a waste.
.
.
There are many vets who hunt - for the pot, to eat; for trophies; for the thrill; for whatever reason.
It's neither illegal nor immoral - IF it is a fair hunt, not a canned hunt with animals released from cages.
There are also vets who fish - nobody agitates to have their licenses revoked, do they?
.
.
This article is exceptionally emotional & glosses over many facts - such as the cat, feral or not, being
free-roaming on property where hunting was legal.
In many USA-states, there is no "season" for cats, they are considered pests & can be shot year-round.
.
.
If U live in the USA, & want to keep Ur cat safe - keep her or him at home.
Feral cats can be legally hunted in many areas. They are not "exempt" in any way.
.
.
Also, if U are indeed so pigheaded that U *Do* let Ur cat roam at large, for God's sake, at least get her
or him DESEXED before loosing them on the local wildlife - adding unwanted, unplanned, & very-likely feral
litters to the damage done is only further proof of criminal irresponsibility, IMO.
U will note that the vet refers to the cat as a TOM - presumably, she can visually I-D an intact male.
.
.
I think she killed the animal with the absolute minimum of pain; the only improvement might have been
the use of a long-0.22 rifle load, & a similar head-shot. But given the weapons at hand, she killed
the cat cleanly & very quickly; it was virtually pain-free.
The hydrostatic shock of the arrowhead would have ensured that. He literally would not have time to know
what hit him, before he died.
.
.
There are many, many ways for a free-roaming animal to die that are much-slower & far-more cruel.
.
.
.


----------



## Knightofalbion

She is a vet? The adage 'for some it's a vocation, for others it's a job' comes to mind. 

It would be comforting if we could trust in every vet having compassion and concern for animals first and foremost in their hearts. 
Some aspects of veterinary care do involve taking life, and in some fields that might add up to a lot over the course of a year. Presumably in this case enough so as to become indifferent to and detached from the very core principle of the profession.

Sacked? The only possible response. A vet of all people should be setting an example of kindness to animals, certainly not mindless violence like this.


----------



## lilythepink

Killing a deer in this way is also disgusting....but you would have to assume the deer would be for food.


----------



## Knightofalbion

leashedForLife said:


> .
> .
> .
> Wait a minute - if the vet went archery-hunting for DEER, would that be just as "awful"...?
> What makes killing an animal with a bow & arrow "cruel"...?
> .
> .
> Arguably, the cat DIED much-faster than he would have died, if a euthanasia drug were given -
> an arrow in the head is a very fast death, with instantaneous shock. I'm speaking here as a medical
> pro, as well as a wildlife-rehab volunteer - arrows to the BODY can kill very slowly, or cause massive
> infection & a slow, miserable death. This was nothing similar - it was very quick, the cat would hardly
> have had time to realize that something had happened before he died.
> There would not have been time to register much pain - just a shock, & then death very soon after.
> .
> .
> Also, QUOTING from the article:
> 
> .
> .
> Why?
> Archery is not illegal; hunting with a bow-&-arrow is not grounds for a cruelty or abuse charge.
> .
> .
> Cont'd:
> .
> 
> .
> .
> .
> Why would a RESCUE GROUP allow any foster-pet to roam at large, when they're supposedly available
> for adoption? --- How can U ensure the safety & well-being of any free-roaming animal, or that s/he
> will be around if a potential adopter contacts the rescue, & wants to meet that pet?!... That's dumb as H***.
> .
> .
> Cont'd:
> 
> .
> .
> .
> Even if the cat that was killed resembles their missing pet, if they allow their cat to roam, there are no
> warranties to protect their cat from wildlife [Redtailed Hawks & Great Horned Owls both take cats;
> so do coyotes, feral or stray dogs], nor from all the other threats that abound for a small animal - cars,
> antifreeze spills, rodents dead or dying of poison that the cat will eat or catch & eat, other toxins, violent
> fights with skunks, raccoons, or opossums, tainted water, & so forth.
> .
> .
> IMO, if U allow Ur cat to roam, U have zero rights to protest against anything that happens to her or him.
> YOU were the one who allowed the cat out - YOU are the one who was, IMO, criminally negligent. :Shrug:
> Whatever happens - *short of* actual deliberate torture of an animal, such as crucifixion, setting afire,
> cutting tendons to cripple an animal, etc - it's on the owner's head.
> 
> Being killed as a "probable feral" is the owner's fault - not the hunter's.
> If the pet had been at home on the owner's property, or indoors in the owner's house, s/he would be
> at no risk whatever of being shot, run over, killed by a roaming dog, eaten by a coyote, infected by FIV,
> ___________ .
> .
> .
> .
> Cont'd:
> .
> 
> .
> .
> Who said so? :blink:
> .
> Just because cats are a domestic species does NOT make it illegal to kill them - "pet" status does not
> confer any special legal status; dogs running wildlife, especially deer, are specifically permitted, indeed
> they are SUPPOSED to be, shot on sight.
> .
> Why should cats be "different"?
> .
> Feral hogs are now in nearly 30 of the 48 mainland states of the U-S; they are listed as pests, & hunters
> are being strongly urged to kill them. They're incredibly destructive, but IMO no more so than cats, if we
> look dispassionately at the impact cats have on wildlife. Feral hogs are just more visible in the havoc
> they wreak - cats' depredations simply aren't as bl**dy obvious. :thumbdown:
> If anything, that makes cats more dangerous - not less.
> .
> .
> Cont'd:
> .
> .
> 
> .
> .
> How in H*** would U *euthanize a free-roaming cat?...*
> 
> That's a truly incredibly-stoopid statement. :nono: Euthanasia requires that the animal be, not only in one's
> POSSESSION, but under one's PHYSICAL CONTROL - restrained for the safety of the nonhuman & the human,
> so that a needle can be introduced to a vein, & a lethal dose of a liquid compound is then injected.
> .
> How in God's name do U do that when the cat - or whatever species the animal might be - is free-roaming,
> & is many feet, or even many yards, away -- AND MOVING?
> .
> .
> Firing an anaesthetic dart at a free-roaming animal outside a fence is very dangerous - to both the target
> & to other persons of any species. The darted animal can become combative as the drug affects them, can fall
> into water & drown, can collapse in full sun & die slowly of hyperthermia, can be run over by a vehicle, attacked
> by another animal & unable to defend her or himself, etc, etc.
> 
> Nonhumans are normally only darted WITHIN a fence - to ensure their safety, & others' safety.
> If the darted animal were to weave drunkenly into a roadway, ppl would turn themselves inside-out in an
> effort to avoid HITTING them, which could easily result in multiple human injuries, & even deaths.
> Multi-vehicle accidents are horrific, & can happen in a matter of seconds on a crowded roadway.
> .
> .
> .
> I don't applaud the gloating tone of the Facebook brag; i do, however, think the shooter was very skilled,
> the cat did not suffer, & i don't think that she should be prosecuted - let alone "have her veterinary license
> revoked", IOW be unable to practice vet-medicine after more than a decade of specialized schooling.
> That's a waste.
> .
> .
> There are many vets who hunt - for the pot, to eat; for trophies; for the thrill; for whatever reason.
> It's neither illegal nor immoral - IF it is a fair hunt, not a canned hunt with animals released from cages.
> There are also vets who fish - nobody agitates to have their licenses revoked, do they?
> .
> .
> This article is exceptionally emotional & glosses over many facts - such as the cat, feral or not, being
> free-roaming on property where hunting was legal.
> In many USA-states, there is no "season" for cats, they are considered pests & can be shot year-round.
> .
> .
> If U live in the USA, & want to keep Ur cat safe - keep her or him at home.
> Feral cats can be legally hunted in many areas. They are not "exempt" in any way.
> .
> .
> Also, if U are indeed so pigheaded that U *Do* let Ur cat roam at large, for God's sake, at least get her
> or him DESEXED before loosing them on the local wildlife - adding unwanted, unplanned, & very-likely feral
> litters to the damage done is only further proof of criminal irresponsibility, IMO.
> U will note that the vet refers to the cat as a TOM - presumably, she can visually I-D an intact male.
> .
> .
> I think she killed the animal with the absolute minimum of pain; the only improvement might have been
> the use of a long-0.22 rifle load, & a similar head-shot. But given the weapons at hand, she killed
> the cat cleanly & very quickly; it was virtually pain-free.
> The hydrostatic shock of the arrowhead would have ensured that. He literally would not have time to know
> what hit him, before he died.
> .
> .
> There are many, many ways for a free-roaming animal to die that are much-slower & far-more cruel.
> .
> .
> .


I kind of take your point. I think it's the tone and manner of her behaviour that has caused the outrage. In particular, the gloating. How can anyone justify that? It brings the whole profession into disrepute.

And posting it on Facebook for all the world to see?! What was she thinking?

When there is so much cruelty inflicted upon animals, and indifference to that cruelty, if we can't look to a vet to set at least some sort of positive example, it's a poor show.


----------



## leashedForLife

Knightofalbion said:


> .
> .
> ...
> 
> Sacked? -- *The only possible response.*
> 
> A vet... should [set] an example of kindness to animals, certainly not *mindless violence* like this.
> .
> .


.
.
Should every vet who goes hunting or fishing be summarily fired, without any legal recourse?
:blink: Why?
.
.
.
When did archery-hunting become _"mindless violence" ??_
.
.
She didn't beat bunnies in a cage to death, using a ballpeen hammer; she shot a cat, very accurately,
in the head, with an arrow - killing him virtually instantly.
That required a very steady hand, & lots of practice with targets; U don't achieve that level of expertise
by taking random shots at passing critters.
.
.
It was actually very 'mindful', if by that U mean deliberate, not accidental, & done with skill.
.
.
*Mindless violence* occurs when an overexcited dog begins to kill every hen s/he can catch in a pen,
or begins to rip at the backsides of fleeing sheep as they careen in panic, or when a drunken human
batters a drinking companion over the head with a beer mug & fractures their erstwhile buddy's skull.
.
.
It's not taking an accurate sighting on a target animal, & killing her or him quickly & painlessly.
U may or may not agree that hunting is a wholesome activity, but it's perfectly legal, nevertheless.
.
.
Is it "mindless violence" only because [presumably] she didn't intend to eat the cat, once killed?
Would it be better if she has a recipe-card for 'cat fricassee' in her index file? -- Or worse?
.
.
.


----------



## leashedForLife

.
.
.
.
We don't require all vets to be vegetarian, let alone *vegan* [using zero animal-sourced products - no eggs,
no wool or angora or llama or cashmere or other animal fibers, no honey, no dairy products whatever,
no leather, no beeswax, no Worchestershire sauce due to the anchovies, etc, etc].
.
.
Vets can eat meat, it doesn't HAVE TO BE pasture-reared or non-CAFO, they are "allowed" to eat battery eggs
or rBGH dairy-products or GMO grains, vegies, nuts, meats, etc.
They can drink hard liquor or smoke cigarettes or chew snuff or smoke a pipe, buy suede jackets or
wear cultured pearls or have leather upholstery on the family sofa, & no-one will scream that s/he should be
disbarred from practice.
.
.
Vets have precisely the same freedom of choice vis-a-vis animals & animal products, hunting or fishing,
& other animal-related issues as the public at large. They can buy pate'-de-fois-gras or caviar, eat live
clams or oysters just shockingly split open & still writhing - & no one will react with horror, by & large.
.
.
It would be nice if all vets would decide collectively to choose pasture-reared meats & other animal products,
not CAFO; make a policy of buying only cage-free eggs, from hens who live in humane-certified conditions;
to choose to actively boycott force-feeding producers; to refuse to buy all endangered animal products,
such as the Green Turtle hand-cream my mother's boss would bring back from Mexico; & so on.
.
.
But for now, it's not REQUIRED - it's optional. if Ur vet does something that U disagree with, vote with Ur
wallet & find another practice. :thumbsup: If s/he serves pate-de-fois-gras to the family at Xmas, & U find that
abhorrent, give Ur custom to someone else - who serves hummus & pita for Xmas, & keeps a pet turkey,
perhaps. There's all sorts of vets, just as there are all sorts of pet-owners.
.
.
.


----------



## Ceiling Kitty

"Lol. The only good feral tomcat is one with an arrow through it's [sic] head."

^ I am a vet. I disagree with her statement; in fact, I (and many other people in the world) do what we can to help the feral cat situation without making insensitive statements such as the above. I understand that in some parts of the world feral cats are an invasive species, but that still doesn't require gloating over a 'kill'.

I don't believe all vets should be vegan/vegetarian (I'm certainly not), or even that they shouldn't hunt or go fishing - but I think all animals should be treated with respect and I don't think comments such as hers convey respect for the animal she has killed - whether humanely or inhumanely, and whatever the reason.

I'm not one for trial by social media, but it has since emerged that the cat in question may well be a neighbour's cat that had been missing for three days - and not feral at all. Setting aside the argument about whether or not we should let cats roam for a moment, if my cat disappeared and I saw someone post a gloating photo of him with an arrow through his head on the internet, I would be extremely upset - understandable, surely?

I am in a position to have also seen the profession's reaction to this, via fora not accessible to the public. Her actions have been condemned.

I don't pretend to know the law in her part of the world, and I won't try and do a quick Google search to make it look as if I do. According to a different Texan veterinarian who has commented in the discussion I have read, in Texas it is a crime to shoot domestic animals which are astray (except animals endangering people or livestock). If this is true, she has committed a felony.

_42.09 Animal Cruelty: Any person who shoots a non-livestock animal, which includes any stray or feral cat or dog, and a wild living creature previously captured, can be charged with a felony offense. Penal Code 42.092 of the State of Texas law states that a person must have the owner's consent to kill the animal (exceptions to prosecution are provided in Section 42.092(e)(1)). It is clear that a "stray" dog or cat either has no owner or that the person who shoots the animal did not get the owner's consent._

There is also speculation that the cat may have been snared/trapped first, as indicated by a visible injury to its leg in the photograph. I don't know for sure. I can't tell.

She has been fired from her position as a small animal veterinarian in a local practice, and her former employers have publicly stated that they are 'shocked, upset and disgusted by the conduct'. The TMVA (Texas Veterinary Medical Association) have issued a public statement condemning her actions. The profession, within the confines of a non-public forum, have done the same. All these people can't be wrong.

Assuming she hasn't been hacked, I find her actions insensitive and inappropriate. Even if that cat dropped out of the sky with an arrow through its head already, she should not have posted it on social media in the context she did, with the comments she did.

Just my opinion; I realise others' may differ.


----------



## Cleo38

Great post Shoshannah! Unfortunately I fear that for some this will just be another excuse to have another rant about keeping cats indoors 

I completely agree about 'trial by FB' but what was she thinking posting such a pic?! 

Further reports suggest that it wasn't a stray cat at all but a family pet


----------



## Calvine

leashedForLife said:


> .
> .
> .
> 
> .
> .
> _Arguably, the cat DIED much-faster than he would have died, if a euthanasia drug were given -
> an arrow in the head is a very fast death, with instantaneous shock. I'm speaking here as a medical
> pro, as well as a wildlife-rehab volunteer - arrows to the BODY can kill very slowly, or cause massive
> infection & a slow, miserable death. This was nothing similar - it was very quick, the cat would hardly
> have had time to realize that something had happened before he died.
> There would not have been time to register much pain - just a shock, & then death very soon after._
> 
> Except that a euthanasia drug is normally administered after careful consideration re: the animal's health and circumstances and discussion with the owner, if it has one. As a caring vet, the way to go if this had truly been a ''feral'' cat (which appears doubtful) would be to trap it humanely, neuter and if possible return it to its territory if no suitable farm/stable home can be found.
> So it died more quickly than if it had been euthanized...but the question is why did a healthy cat have to die at all? It didn't. This woman boasts that this was her ''first bow kill''... so not even experienced, so could quite well have gone wide and left it injured to run off and die slowly in agony. TBH I would _not trust_ someone who enjoys killing an animal like this to decide whether my pet had got to the point where he/she needed to be pts. And for a so-called vet to be seen holding up a healthy creature with such a self-satisfied smirk I truly find quite disconcerting.


----------



## Calvine

Shoshannah said:


> Abhorrent. I do wonder if she is mentally unwell.


I second that...I would not trust this woman to make a life-or-death decision for any of my cats if she likes killing so much...no way!


----------



## Sparkle22

I can understand I suppose vets eating meat, and I can understand them killing that meat I guess.
After all, shooting a rabbit or pigeon is probably a lot more humane that your average farmed chicken, it's had a full, natural life etc.

But I cannot comprehend how or why a VET would engage in activity to harm an animal for pleasure - hunting/fishing. I just can't. 

If a 'vet' harms creatures for fun then they have no place being a vet. 

I like to think that someone becomes a vet be cause they love animals and want to help them, blood sports arent compatible with that type of person or career.
How could I possibly trust my beloved animals under the hands of a person who derives pleasure from harming others? 

If I found that my vet hunted or fished or caused harm in some other way they would cease to bs my vet and I think most people would feel the same


----------



## Cleo38

Sparkle22 said:


> I can understand I suppose vets eating meat, and I can understand them killing that meat I guess.
> After all, shooting a rabbit or pigeon is probably a lot more humane that your average farmed chicken, it's had a full, natural life etc.
> 
> But I cannot comprehend how or why a VET would engage in activity to harm an animal for pleasure - hunting/fishing. I just can't.
> 
> If a 'vet' harms creatures for fun then they have no place being a vet.
> 
> I like to think that someone becomes a vet be cause they love animals and want to help them, blood sports arent compatible with that type of person or career.
> How could I possibly trust my beloved animals under the hands of a person who derives pleasure from harming others?
> 
> If I found that my vet hunted or fished or caused harm in some other way they would cease to bs my vet and I think most people would feel the same


I disagree, I don't think most people would would stop going to a vet if they participated in hunting or fishing .... but they probably would if that vet was 'hunting' pet cats as this one was


----------



## Sparkle22

Cleo38 said:


> I disagree, I don't think most people would would stop going to a vet if they participated in hunting or fishing .... but they probably would if that vet was 'hunting' pet cats as this one was


But If a vet enjoyed killing wild animals how could you trust them to care for your animals in a kind, considerate way? Truly?
Surely you want a vet that is somewhat disturbed by suffering and goes out of their way to care for and reassure those who are suffering?
Animal cruelty and vets, I just can't picture it, I can't understand how someone in a career to save animals could possibly harm one.


----------



## Cleo38

Sparkle22 said:


> But If a vet enjoyed killing wild animals how could you trust them to care for your animals in a kind, considerate way? Truly?
> Surely you want a vet that is somewhat disturbed by suffering and goes out of their way to care for and reassure those who are suffering?
> Animal cruelty and vets, I just can't picture it, I can't understand how someone in a career to save animals could possibly harm one.


But miost people who fish don't kill the fish (unless it's to eat), they catch then release. Hunting animals for food isn't something I am against if i is done effectively. My vet fishes at weekends yet I wouldnt doubt his expertise in dealing with my pets or have any concerns regarding his compassion.

If he were to be out shooting cats though I would have a different take on this!


----------



## Calvine

Knightofalbion said:


> I kind of take your point. I think it's the tone and manner of her behaviour that has caused the outrage. In particular, the gloating. How can anyone justify that? It brings the whole profession into disrepute.
> 
> And posting it on Facebook for all the world to see?! What was she thinking?
> 
> When there is so much cruelty inflicted upon animals, and indifference to that cruelty, if we can't look to a vet to set at least some sort of positive example, it's a poor show.


People cannot resist telling the whole world of their (sometimes dubious) 
activities via FB. I have noticed that many benefit cheats are caught the same way, boasting of their £20k wedding/ £5k holiday when they are on income support, or showing pictures of themselves mountaineering with huge smiles when they are claiming disability benefit...they just HAVE to tell all their imaginary FB ''friends'' of their escapades, even tho' they end up in court. Like you say, K o B...what was she thinking?


----------



## Sparkle22

Cleo38 said:


> But miost people who fish don't kill the fish (unless it's to eat), they catch then release. Hunting animals for food isn't something I am against if i is done effectively. My vet fishes at weekends yet I wouldnt doubt his expertise in dealing with my pets or have any concerns regarding his compassion.
> 
> If he were to be out shooting cats though I would have a different take on this!


And by catching and releasing they put the fish under extreme stress (can't breathe in air remember) and damage the slime coat even if handled with wet hands thus increasing the risk that the fish will catch an infection and consequently die.

Additionally, the belief that fish have 3 second memory has been disproved and it is now believed that fish can in fact feel pain. 
I imagine that a metal hook piercing the mouth (one of the most sensitive body parts loaded with nerve endings) is likely to be exceedingly painful.

So I would not be impressed at a vet fishing (inflicting pain and suffering for pleasure).
But as you say, I don't suppose some people would be bothered. After all fish aren't that cuddly, a bit slimy, don't do anything entertaining.


----------



## leashedForLife

Calvine said:


> .
> .
> ...
> As a caring vet, *the* [*apropos action re*] *a truly ''feral'' cat... would be to trap* [*her or him*] *humanely,
> neuter, & if possible return* [*her or him*] *to* [*their*] *territory, if no suitable farm or stable home can
> be found. *
> ...
> .


.
.
.
- there are far-fewer STABLES & FARMS in the USA per 100K citizens than in the UK.
That means far-fewer "farm or barn" homes for free-roaming, outdoor cats.
.
.
.
- I very-much disagree with TNR, Trap / Neuter / Return, as a supposed "solution" to free-roaming cats.
All it does is lower fertility in the local cat-popn, but it also encourages cat-owners to dump their pets, as 
then they rationalize that SOMEBODY will "take care of" their unwanted pet, who may well be intact or even
be pregnant when they abandon the animal.
The lag-time between when the cat is dumped & when s/he is seen by a colony caregiver [if they're
seen at all] can mean more litters are born, & there are often only a few well-controlled, well-cared-for
colonies even in major cities.

Meanwhile, hordes of feral, semi-feral, & recently-abandoned or escaped cats are NOT cared for by anyone,
because they are scattered over the landscape, often only appear after dark, & are frequently entirely
unknown, even to long-time residents. They are invisible.
.
.
.
- I am going to catch a lot of flak for this.
Personally, I would strongly advocate for a program to LICENSE every doggone cat owned in the USA,
mandate microchips for *every pet of any species*, vigorously prosecute anyone who abandons their pet,
require anyone who had even ONE litter to buy a breeder's license & alow their premises to be inspectable
for as long as the young are on site, & require all pets who are not future sires or dams to be desexed.
.
.
Moreover, i'd support legislation to allow hunters to kill cats year-round, anywhere that hunting is legal.
IOW, if it's not a dense suburban area & it's safe to hunt with either a .22 or a pellet gun or a bow, I'd like
to encourage hunters to kill feral & free-roaming cats, & i'd even contribute to a bounty fund.
.
.
Cat-owners never want to admit to the carnage their pets wreak when outdoors & out of sight.
I spent 6-years listening to cat-owners who phoned the Wildlife Hotline, demanding we have someone
"pick up this [bird, reptile, amphib, small mammal] so they can be taken care of", but not ONE in all that
time ever offered a dime to contribute toward the drugs, food, housing, vet care, etc, required.
.
.
A cat-attack victim gets mandatory antibiotics - which are not cheap! - for 14 to 21-days, depending upon
the species, their tolerance, & the drug given. They are caged, fed, cleaned, bandages are changed, the vet
does any radiographs or fracture settings, etc.
It's costly, time-intensive, & an utterly needless waste of resources.
.
.
*Year-round, Wildlife Response Inc. has an intake that's 75% cat-attacks.
The other 25% make up EVERYTHING ELSE - hit-by-car, poisons, fish-hooks,
fish-line, window strikes, accidental trauma, orphans, ill, exposure, frostbite,
heat stroke, _______ .

During spring / early summer nesting & fledging, & again in autumn small-
mammal season, that fraction becomes 90% cat-attacks. Perfectly healthy 
young animals are brought in with PREVENTABLE injuries, & many will die
of those injuries, despite care - because the infections are so massive & 
lethal.*
.
.

Please don't bother telling me, _"my cat never hunts"._
Never is a bl**dy long time, & U aren't there to see it happen. :nono:
.
.
Please don't tell me, _"my cat needs the natural environment"._
The 'natural environment' doesn't NEED Ur cat. S/he doesn't enhance the environs
for native species, doesn't provide essential services, & isn't a native species. S/he is a pest,
causing considerable damage - all of which cat-owners tend to rationalize away.
.
.
I wouldn't believe a cat-owner who claimed _"My cat never hunts"_ if s/he swore to it in a court of law.
The owner may sincerely believe it - but the facts can be very different from their fond belief.
.
.
All the studies on depredation have indicated serious impacts.
It's my considered personal opinion that free-roaming cats are a plague, & should be illegal -
& as only OWNED cats can be kept on the owner's property by cat-proofing [fence, screen-room, etc],
UN-owned cats will need to be removed, & either re-homed or euthanized to eliminate them permanently.
.
.
That means hunt them in areas where hunting is safe, & trap them where it's not; euthanize those cats
who are unadoptable or unhandleable, & don't waste vet-resources on desexing them first.
If they cannot be handled safely, they should be euthanized.
.
.
Feel free to tell me what a monster i am, at length.
I have grown-up with free-roaming cats, & seen the incredible damage they do on our family farm.
I have lived in a neighborhood in Norfolk, VA, where intact-cats came out by the dozen as dusk fell,
& kittens were born under apt-house dumpsters all spring & summer into autumn, to die under cars,
to starve, to be killed by disease, to suffer.
.
.
Don't tell me that YOUR well-fed cat deserves to roam freely. I firmly & vigorously disagree -
even DESEXED cats have a terrific impact on wildlife diversity & numbers. It's blatantly wrong to allow
cats to wander over the landscape & prey at will.
.
.
.


----------



## Cleo38

Oh here we go .... as expected the old 'outdoor cats wreak havoc & destroy all wild life, all the time' rant


----------



## Calvine

Cleo38 said:


> Oh here we go .... as expected the old 'outdoor cats wreak havoc & destroy all wild life, all the time' rant


That's right...it's great that she kills cats, but not so great that cats kill rats and birds?


----------



## Cleo38

Calvine said:


> That's right...it's great that she kills cats, but not so great that cats kill rats and birds?


But didn't you know that ALL cats kill wildlife ALL the time ...

In fact they are planning on taking over the world & wiping out EVERYTHING .... evil [email protected] that they are!!


----------



## chillminx

Shoshannah said:


> ]"Lol. The only good feral tomcat is one with an arrow through it's [sic] head."
> 
> ^ I am a vet. I disagree with her statement; in fact, I (and many other people in the world) do what we can to help the feral cat situation without making insensitive statements such as the above. I understand that in some parts of the world feral cats are an invasive species, but that still doesn't require gloating over a 'kill'.


I agree with all your comments entirely.

I too read the condemnation of this woman's actions by the Texas Veterinary Medical Association, so that I understood it is not acceptable in that part of the USA (or possibly anywhere else in the country) for a cat to be hunted, whether it's a feral or a straying pet.

As others have said it is not an issue of whether the death was _humane_ but why the death was necessary at all

As for the woman boasting on FB about her "first kill" with a bow, she must be utterly bonkers if she didn't realise what a storm of worldwide vitriol and anger would be unleashed against her for her actions.


----------



## Calvine

leashedForLife said:


> .
> .
> .
> - there are far-fewer STABLES & FARMS in the USA per 100K citizens than in the UK.
> That means far-fewer "farm or barn" homes for free-roaming, outdoor cats.
> .
> .
> .
> - I very-much disagree with TNR, Trap / Neuter / Return, as a supposed "solution" to free-roaming cats.
> All it does is lower fertility in the local cat-popn, but it also encourages cat-owners to dump their pets, as
> then they rationalize that SOMEBODY will "take care of" their unwanted pet, who may well be intact or even
> be pregnant when they abandon the animal.
> The lag-time between when the cat is dumped & when s/he is seen by a colony caregiver [if they're
> seen at all] can mean more litters are born, & there are often only a few well-controlled, well-cared-for
> colonies even in major cities.
> 
> Meanwhile, hordes of feral, semi-feral, & recently-abandoned or escaped cats are NOT cared for by anyone,
> because they are scattered over the landscape, often only appear after dark, & are frequently entirely
> unknown, even to long-time residents. They are invisible.
> .
> .
> .
> - I am going to catch a lot of flak for this.
> Personally, I would strongly advocate for a program to LICENSE every doggone cat owned in the USA,
> mandate microchips for *every pet of any species*, vigorously prosecute anyone who abandons their pet,
> require anyone who had even ONE litter to buy a breeder's license & alow their premises to be inspectable
> for as long as the young are on site, & require all pets who are not future sires or dams to be desexed.
> .
> .
> Moreover, i'd support legislation to allow hunters to kill cats year-round, anywhere that hunting is legal.
> IOW, if it's not a dense suburban area & it's safe to hunt with either a .22 or a pellet gun or a bow, I'd like
> to encourage hunters to kill feral & free-roaming cats, & i'd even contribute to a bounty fund.
> .
> .
> Cat-owners never want to admit to the carnage their pets wreak when outdoors & out of sight.
> I spent 6-years listening to cat-owners who phoned the Wildlife Hotline, demanding we have someone
> "pick up this [bird, reptile, amphib, small mammal] so they can be taken care of", but not ONE in all that
> time ever offered a dime to contribute toward the drugs, food, housing, vet care, etc, required.
> .
> .
> A cat-attack victim gets mandatory antibiotics - which are not cheap! - for 14 to 21-days, depending upon
> the species, their tolerance, & the drug given. They are caged, fed, cleaned, bandages are changed, the vet
> does any radiographs or fracture settings, etc.
> It's costly, time-intensive, & an utterly needless waste of resources.
> .
> .
> *Year-round, Wildlife Response Inc. has an intake that's 75% cat-attacks.
> The other 25% make up EVERYTHING ELSE - hit-by-car, poisons, fish-hooks,
> fish-line, window strikes, accidental trauma, orphans, ill, exposure, frostbite,
> heat stroke, _______ .
> 
> During spring / early summer nesting & fledging, & again in autumn small-
> mammal season, that fraction becomes 90% cat-attacks. Perfectly healthy
> young animals are brought in with PREVENTABLE injuries, & many will die
> of those injuries, despite care - because the infections are so massive &
> lethal.*
> .
> .
> 
> Please don't bother telling me, _"my cat never hunts"._
> Never is a bl**dy long time, & U aren't there to see it happen. :nono:
> .
> .
> Please don't tell me, _"my cat needs the natural environment"._
> The 'natural environment' doesn't NEED Ur cat. S/he doesn't enhance the environs
> for native species, doesn't provide essential services, & isn't a native species. S/he is a pest,
> causing considerable damage - all of which cat-owners tend to rationalize away.
> .
> .
> I wouldn't believe a cat-owner who claimed _"My cat never hunts"_ if s/he swore to it in a court of law.
> The owner may sincerely believe it - but the facts can be very different from their fond belief.
> .
> .
> All the studies on depredation have indicated serious impacts.
> It's my considered personal opinion that free-roaming cats are a plague, & should be illegal -
> & as only OWNED cats can be kept on the owner's property by cat-proofing [fence, screen-room, etc],
> UN-owned cats will need to be removed, & either re-homed or euthanized to eliminate them permanently.
> .
> .
> That means hunt them in areas where hunting is safe, & trap them where it's not; euthanize those cats
> who are unadoptable or unhandleable, & don't waste vet-resources on desexing them first.
> If they cannot be handled safely, they should be euthanized.
> .
> .
> Feel free to tell me what a monster i am, at length.
> I have grown-up with free-roaming cats, & seen the incredible damage they do on our family farm.
> I have lived in a neighborhood in Norfolk, VA, where intact-cats came out by the dozen as dusk fell,
> & kittens were born under apt-house dumpsters all spring & summer into autumn, to die under cars,
> to starve, to be killed by disease, to suffer.
> .
> .
> Don't tell me that YOUR well-fed cat deserves to roam freely. I firmly & vigorously disagree -
> even DESEXED cats have a terrific impact on wildlife diversity & numbers. It's blatantly wrong to allow
> cats to wander over the landscape & prey at will.
> .
> .
> .


Write as much as you like, it does not alter the fact that her employers, presumably themselves qualified vets, considered her behaviour so unacceptable that they gave her the boot. It probably also occurred to them that having her on their team would not exactly be good for business.


----------



## leashedForLife

Calvine said:


> ...
> it's great that [this particular vet] kills cats,
> but not so great that *cats kill rats & birds*?
> .
> .


.
.
The vet killed ONE cat. :nono: ONE. Not "untold numbers". Don't inflate the facts.
.
.
in strong contrast, *free-roaming cats do kill untold numbers of other species,
& they're not ALL either "rats" or "birds".*
.
.
Their incredibly-catholic tastes & preferences are precisely why cats are so problematic.
They'll pounce on things that they have zero interest in eating, just for fun - but it's just as fatal,
so what's the difference?
.
.
They will rupture eggs long-after they've filled their stomachs, & leave the nest without a single
intact egg. They will kill animals when they aren't even hungry, for the fun of it. They torture live victims,
again because it's fun - they kill anything & every thing, from large insects to shrews, birds, rodents, snakes,
lizards, marine animals, freshwater animals, terrestrial animals, arboreal animals, anytime they see
or hear something that seems intriguing.
.
.
Butterflies, katydids, moths, crickets, salamanders, lizards, hatchling turtles, gators' eggs, bats, birds,
squirrels, rabbits, poultry, grasshoppers... whatever. If it's SMALLER THAN THEY ARE, they'll take it.
.
.
That's WHY they are on the Top-10 list of Worst Introduced Species, World-Wide.
.
.
.


----------



## Guest

chillminx said:


> I agree with all your comments entirely.
> 
> I too read the condemnation of this woman's actions by the Texas Veterinary Medical Association, so that I understood it is not acceptable in that part of the USA (or possibly anywhere else in the country) for a cat to be hunted, whether it's a feral or a straying pet.


Of course it is not acceptable behavior on the part of a veterinarian, and her actions were rightly condemned and she was rightly fired from her job.

Cats do get shot in rural areas (as do dogs) for many reasons. In areas where rabies is rampant folks tend to not take chances with strays.

However, just as many folks will opt for more compassionate options first, like trapping and checking for ownership. At the very least a veterinarian should know that. The cat was in great shape, not a struggling or sick stray by any stretch.



leashedForLife said:


> .
> Moreover, i'd support legislation to allow hunters to kill cats year-round, anywhere that hunting is legal.
> IOW, if it's not a dense suburban area & it's safe to hunt with either a .22 or a pellet gun or a bow, I'd like
> to encourage hunters to kill feral & free-roaming cats, & i'd even contribute to a bounty fund.


No, no, no, no, no, no.... Oh god no... With as many trigger happy cat haters as there are out there, thats just inviting open season on all cats owned or otherwise. 

Whats wrong with TNR? Is your issue that cats predate on species? So? Its not like the US is a predator-free zone. In my area wildlife has to learn to stay safe from bobcats and owls and other BOP as well as coyotes, and foxes and all sorts of predators. Cats are not doing anything the local foxes, and bobcats arent doing. And with a healthy predator population, the feral cat population stays in check too.


----------



## Calvine

leashedForLife said:


> .
> .
> The vet killed ONE cat. :nono: ONE. Not "untold numbers". Don't inflate the facts.
> .
> .
> in strong contrast, *free-roaming cats do kill untold numbers of other species,
> & they're not ALL either "rats" or "birds".*
> .
> .
> Their incredibly-catholic tastes & preferences are precisely why cats are so problematic.
> They'll pounce on things that they have zero interest in eating, just for fun - but it's just as fatal,
> so what's the difference?
> .
> .
> They will rupture eggs long-after they've filled their stomachs, & leave the nest without a single
> intact egg. They will kill animals when they aren't even hungry, for the fun of it. They torture live victims,
> again because it's fun - they kill anything & every thing, from large insects to shrews, birds, rodents, snakes,
> lizards, marine animals, freshwater animals, terrestrial animals, arboreal animals, anytime they see
> or hear something that seems intriguing.
> .
> .
> Butterflies, katydids, moths, crickets, salamanders, lizards, hatchling turtles, gators' eggs, bats, birds,
> squirrels, rabbits, poultry, grasshoppers... whatever. If it's SMALLER THAN THEY ARE, they'll take it.
> .
> .
> That's WHY they are on the Top-10 list of Worst Introduced Species, World-Wide.
> .
> .
> .


I doubt that this woman will stop at one...she was obviously proud of the one she killed (I wonder how many more she maimed before getting a clean shot?).


----------



## Cleo38

Funny how some people only pop up in the cat section to have an evangelical rant about how destructive outdoor cats are 

Many animals are destructive, I watched a pair of crows decimate a wrens nest last year. They simply destroyed it, leaving the wren fledglings dead. I was going to intervene but thought they may be killing them to eat .... they didn't.

Shall I shoot them then?


----------



## Britt

Glad she was sacked. She shouldn't be a vet. Vet are supposed to do everything for the welfare of animals whatever they are.


----------



## Calvine

Cleo38 said:


> Funny how some people only pop up in the cat section to have an evangelical rant about how destructive outdoor cats are
> 
> Many animals are destructive, I watched a pair of crows decimate a wrens nest last year. They simply destroyed it, leaving the wren fledglings dead. I was going to intervene but thought they may be killing them to eat .... they didn't.
> 
> Shall I shoot them then?


Have you seen the havoc a fox can wreak on a chicken coop... and no, they don't just take one to eat, they go on a killing spree and leave a load of casualties.


----------



## leashedForLife

.
.
.
I haven't ONLY come by to "complain about cats killing wildlife".
.
.
I've also complained about free-roaming cats spraying, sh*tting in gardens, shredding outdoor furniture,
fighting with one another, fighting with wildlife, dying under car wheels, catching contagious diseases,
screaming at 3-AM as a prelude to a fight, calling [toms & queens both], & otherwise ruining NON-cat-owners'
enjoyment of their own property -
.
.
.
which the roaming cats make free use of, or ruin, or p*ss all over, or otherwise interrupt, such as one's
peace & quiet in the wee hours. 
Why in H*** can't cats fight at 2-PM, instead of 2-AM?... I dunno.
.
.
.
And i will also note that i've posted plenty of helpful tips for re-feeding, ear mites, fleas, wt-loss,
indoor enrichment, introducing a new cat to a resident cat, etc, etc, yadda yadda yadda.
.
.
I don't "hate cats". I *do * despise those owners who let their cat roam,
who dump their pets, who allow entire litters to wander off & disperse, who can't be arsed to desex, who don't
[in the USA] keep their cats CURRENT on rabies-vax - every 3-years isn't exactly a budget-buster -
& are otherwise, IMO, irresponsible jerks.
.
.
.


----------



## Cleo38

Haha, irresponsible jerk here then! 

I live in a rural location & would be over run with rats & mice if it weren't for the cats so will continue to let them out


----------



## chillminx

Leashedforlife, you sound as though you live somewhere you are absolutely inundated with cats (strays, or other people's pets) roaming onto your property!  Perhaps that's why you have such a very jaundiced view of their behaviour. It is not like that in most of the UK. 

I live in a rural area and there are not many cats around me. We are not troubled by cats spraying, destroying garden furniture, using neighbours' gardens as toilets, killing vast numbers of wildlife, or yowling at 2 am. 

True there are occasional brief fights when a new cat (and its owner) moves into the area and the cat establishes its territory. But as most people shut their cats indoors at night the odd fight doesn't disturb anyone's sleep. 

I have lived most of my life in different rural areas of the UK and found the situation with cats the same as I've described above. 

It's true there are some inner-city areas of the UK where there are high populations of stray cats, feral cats and un-neutered pet cats. By definition these are not areas where there would be much wildlife, other than large numbers of mice and rats, which householders are only too happy for the local cats to catch to keep the numbers down!


----------



## Calvine

Cleo38 said:


> Haha, irresponsible jerk here then!
> 
> I live in a rural location & would be over run with rats & mice if it weren't for the cats so will continue to let them out


My Jack is in fact _a professional mouser_...so there. He has three times been taken ON LOAN by friends who had a mouse problem in the cold weather and whose Councils would only get involved if they had rats. They were delighted with his expertise. Finding mouse droppings on the work surfaces had not been exactly pleasant. You (LforL) will be happy to hear that he was a house cat on each occasion, and not ''p***ing, sh***ing, spraying or writing graffiti on garden furniture. God only knows where you live, the cats round my way are really harmless by comparison.

Jack actually received a Christmas card from one ''satisfied customer'' with a picture of...yes...a MOUSE wearing a Father Christmas hat; and a tin of tuna from another.


----------



## Cleo38

Calvine said:


> My Jack is in fact _a professional mouser_...so there. He has three times been taken ON LOAN by friends who had a mouse problem in the cold weather and whose Councils would only get involved if they had rats. They were delighted with his expertise. Finding mouse droppings on the work surfaces had not been exactly pleasant. You (LforL) will be happy to hear that he was a house cat on each occasion, and not ''p***ing, sh***ing, spraying or writing graffiti on garden furniture. God only knows where you live, the cats round my way are really harmless by comparison.
> 
> Jack actually received a Christmas card from one ''satisfied customer'' with a picture of...yes...a MOUSE wearing a Father Christmas hat; and a tin of tuna from another.


Now that is very impressive, a cat with a job! !! Keeps him off the streets causing trouble then  :thumbup1:


----------



## Blitz

Sparkle22 said:


> I can understand I suppose vets eating meat, and I can understand them killing that meat I guess.
> After all, shooting a rabbit or pigeon is probably a lot more humane that your average farmed chicken, it's had a full, natural life etc.
> 
> But I cannot comprehend how or why a VET would engage in activity to harm an animal for pleasure - hunting/fishing. I just can't.
> 
> If a 'vet' harms creatures for fun then they have no place being a vet.
> 
> I like to think that someone becomes a vet be cause they love animals and want to help them, blood sports arent compatible with that type of person or career.
> How could I possibly trust my beloved animals under the hands of a person who derives pleasure from harming others?
> 
> If I found that my vet hunted or fished or caused harm in some other way they would cease to bs my vet and I think most people would feel the same


People do not hunt and fish to cause animals harm. I would have nothing against my vet partaking of bloodsports.



Sparkle22 said:


> But If a vet enjoyed killing wild animals how could you trust them to care for your animals in a kind, considerate way? Truly?
> Surely you want a vet that is somewhat disturbed by suffering and goes out of their way to care for and reassure those who are suffering?
> Animal cruelty and vets, I just can't picture it, I can't understand how someone in a career to save animals could possibly harm one.


I hope that no one who hunts is being cruel or causing suffering, they will mostly be animal lovers.

That vet must have been bonkers to put a photo on facebook. She certainly deserves to lose her job over that but actually killing a cat is not so bad - unless it really was a pet cat of course. I am sure lots of people shoot feral cats, they are a pain in the neck. I am not a shooter so would not kill one but I think I would find them fair game if I was.


----------



## Ceiling Kitty

I don't want to take part in the thread any more if it has become another debate on indoor-outdoor cats (which it looks like it has), so I shall be bowing out now.

But I shall do by just pointing out that humans have destroyed indigenous wildlife on a scale so large that it makes what cats do look like peanuts, and the fact that my cat occasionally goes out and might kill a mouse is made slightly irrelevant by the fact I live in a relatively new-build house that probably resulted in the destruction of the home of thousands more so it could actually be built in the first place.

Mankind is the issue here, not cats.


----------



## Sparkle22

Blitz said:


> People do not hunt and fish to cause animals harm. I would have nothing against my vet partaking of bloodsports.
> 
> I hope that no one who hunts is being cruel or causing suffering, they will mostly be animal lovers.
> 
> That vet must have been bonkers to put a photo on facebook. She certainly deserves to lose her job over that but actually killing a cat is not so bad - unless it really was a pet cat of course. I am sure lots of people shoot feral cats, they are a pain in the neck. I am not a shooter so would not kill one but I think I would find them fair game if I was.


I'm genuinely interested to know how hunting or fishing does not harm animals or cause suffering? And how hunters are mostly animal lovers?!?! Have I read that right?? I can't have done.

Blood sports...
Fishing - it is thought that fish can feel pain so the act of impaling their mouth then using that small hook to pull their entire weight out of the water is immediately, obviously cruel. They can't breathe in air, same as a person in water so the exposure to the air will be causing pain and fear, then when the angler handles them the slime coat is damaged making it more likely the fish will get an infection and die

Shooting - well that's pretty self explanatory seeing as the animal dies...
If you make a bad shot the animal will suffer terribly, in the case of certain game birds, there is an argument for the illegal slaughter of native wildlife to protect the birds.

Ferreting/terrier work - like shooting the death may be quick but the animal still dies. And will undoubtedly be anxious and traumatised just before death.

Fox hunting - you could have pages of debate on this one but the pursued doc will be distressed, if caught there is numerous footage proving that the dogs grab and pull. I suppose a lone dog might shake and snap the neck but in a group environment they all tend to want to do the job so it gets torn apart. That's horrendous beyond belief. 
And that's just the fox! Look at all the cases (including video evidence) of cruelty to hounds and horses, the illegal blocking of badger setts, I could go on.

One thing your average hunter most definitely is not is an animal lover!
To suggest they could be is just ludicrous


----------



## leashedForLife

ouesi said:


> .
> .
> ...
> With as many trigger-happy cat-haters as there are, out there, that just invites
> *open season on all cats, owned or otherwise.*
> .
> .


.
.
I'll reiterate, in clear, lucid, un-mistakeable language:
if Ur cat roams at large, IMO s/he should be live-trapped & removed in a densely developed area.
If Ur cat is at large & is live-trapped, is NOT chipped & can't be re-united with a presumed owner, & cannot
be HANDLED - then s/he should be euthanized, because any cat who cannot be handled cannot be re-homed,
& cats should not be released to roam - intact or not.
.
In areas where hunting is allowed, I would encourage hunters to shoot roaming cats - & i would
support a bounty to pay hunters for every cat they kill.
.
.
Does that make it crystal-clear?
If Ur cat ESCAPES & isn't wearing an easily-visible INTErNATIONAL ORANGE collar & isn't MICROCHIPPED
for lifetime I-D, i have no great store of empathy for U - some for the cat, yes; not for the owner.
.
.
Similarly, i would happily pay into a state fund to pay a bounty for hunters who kill MUTE SWANS -
another invasive species that is wreaking havoc, especially on the Chesapeake Bay. Or for that matter,
i'd pay into a bounty fund for trappers who take NUTRIA - also invasive & destructive; or for those few
specialists who remove & exterminate AFRICANIZED BEES - who are still spreading, & quite lethal.
Or a bounty on FIRE-ANT colonies - a single soccer-field in Va Beach had over THIRTY fire-ant nests! -
their stings can cause not only agonizing pain, but nasty & dangerous allergic reactions.
.
.


ouesi said:


> .
> .
> Whats wrong with TNR?
> Is your issue that cats prey on [many other] species?... So? Its not like the USA is a predator-free zone.
> 
> In my area, wildlife must learn to stay safe from bobcats, owls & other BOP, coyotes, foxes, & all sorts of predators.
> 
> Cats [do nothing] that local foxes & bobcats dont do. And *with a healthy predator population,
> the feral cat population stays in check, too.*
> .


.
.
- Feral cats or OWNED free-roaming cats are not NATIVE predators.
Does that matter? -- Yes, it does.
.
.
- Large areas of the USA have *no predators that kill cats.*
One of the many reasons that i'm a fan of Eastern Coyote & the urbanization of coyote across the USA
is that where coyote move in, feral cat numbers drop - precipitously.
Not to "none", but way-down.
.
.
Aside from coyote, only a few Redtailed Hawks & Great Horned Owls have yet learned to take cats.
In Va Beach, we had ONE GH-Owl who liked to feed her owlets fresh cat, & there was another - ONE -
in Chesapeake. That's nowhere near as many large raptors who'd be needed to even slow-down the annual
increase in kittens born to ferals around the area.
.
.
Cat is an acquired taste; too many predators ignore them.
Cats, OTOH, ignore nothing in the way of potential prey - as toys, as food, as a snack.
.
.
.


----------



## Cleo38

Of course cats ignore certain prey animals, mine do all the time. Yet again we have another thread hijacked ...... Funny how if a person were to post in the dog section about shooting dogs they would be reprimanded yet it's OK when it comes to cats?!


----------



## Calvine

*''I'll reiterate in clear, lucid, unmistakeable language.''*
*'Does that make it crystal-clear?'*

I am starting to find your posts arrogant and patronizing. I am sure we are all intelligent enough to get the point without being talked down to.


----------



## Cleo38

Certain people will rant on at every opportunity unfortunately, probably because no one listens in real life 

As has been pointed out, in the case of the vet involved not only did the public feel her actions were wrong but so did her employers.


----------



## Cleo38

Seriously though i think this is another example of people in professional roles posting inappropriate pictures on FB.

Whilst I am shocked that she actually felt this was acceptable to do to the cat & I also cannot understand how she thought this would be ok to post so everyone (including her employers) could see. 

I don't think people seem to understand that depsite privacy settings (or whatever) everything you post online is there for all to see & for you to be judged, if you don't want this then don't post it


----------



## Calvine

Cleo38 said:


> Seriously though i think this is another example of people in professional roles posting inappropriate pictures on FB.
> 
> Whilst I am shocked that she actually felt this was acceptable to do to the cat & I also cannot understand how she thought this would be ok to post so everyone (including her employers) could see.
> 
> I don't think people seem to understand that depsite privacy settings (or whatever) everything you post online is there for all to see & for you to be judged, if you don't want this then don't post it


I cannot believe what some people will post...but yes, they have to share everything with their FB ''friends'', of whom they seem to have hundreds. They post pictures of their lavish weddings then end up in the DM and then jail as they stole the money from their employers who saw the posts and shopped them.


----------



## Dogloverlou

I am genuinely shocked by some of your comments in this thread leashedforlife and I usually respect your posts. But announcing you would find cats 'fair game' to hunt is disgusting IMO. Someone's much loved pet you'd find acceptable to kill? And yes, regardless of your 'despising' of owners who allow their cats out, owners DO love their cats very much. Our old boys were as much a part of our family as the dogs, and hugely affectionate. Who are you to claim otherwise? I see that this did turn out like the other countless cat threads ultimately do, with people wishing harm on them and generally showing themselves up to be anything but an animal lover. 

I had commented on the other thread regarding this topic, but couldn't ignore how shocked I was at the tone of your posts leashedforlife. 

I'm just glad this vile human being is no longer responsible for the care of the general public's beloved pets. Makes you wonder how her care for the cat patients she treated was! 
Kind of reminds me a bit of a boarding kennel I used to work at. One member of staff said she 'hated' small dogs. Her attitude stank and her overall treatment of these dogs was awful. She'd spray the hose pipe through their kennel doors into their faces, bang the kennels with loud objects, sending vibrations down the block, and call them insulting names. I was only very young at the time ( one of my first part time jobs ) and never thought to complain unfortunately, but it broke my heart witnessing her treatment of the dogs. Hence why I've been scared in some respects when thinking about boarding kennels. 
Point being, the vets treatment of cats could have been hugely detrimental behind the scenes.


----------



## Cleo38

Dogloverlou said:


> I am genuinely shocked by some of your comments in this thread leashedforlife and I usually respect your posts. But announcing you would find cats 'fair game' to hunt is disgusting IMO. Someone's much loved pet you'd find acceptable to kill? And yes, regardless of your 'despising' of owners who allow their cats out, owners DO love their cats very much. Our old boys were as much a part of our family as the dogs, and hugely affectionate. Who are you to claim otherwise? I see that this did turn out like the other countless cat threads ultimately do, with people wishing harm on them and generally showing themselves up to be anything but an animal lover.
> 
> I had commented on the other thread regarding this topic, but couldn't ignore how shocked I was at the tone of your posts leashedforlife.
> 
> I'm just glad this vile human being is no longer responsible for the care of the general public's beloved pets. Makes you wonder how her care for the cat patients she treated was!
> Kind of reminds me a bit of a boarding kennel I used to work at. One member of staff said she 'hated' small dogs. Her attitude stank and her overall treatment of these dogs was awful. She'd spray the hose pipe through their kennel doors into their faces, bang the kennels with loud objects, sending vibrations down the block, and call them insulting names. I was only very young at the time ( one of my first part time jobs ) and never thought to complain unfortunately, but it broke my heart witnessing her treatment of the dogs. Hence why I've been scared in some respects when thinking about boarding kennels.
> Point being, the vets treatment of cats could have been hugely detrimental behind the scenes.


Completely agree! A personal opinion regarding outdoor cats is one thing but wishing them dead is another & is quite shocking.

The vet in the stoy (IMO) showed little regard for the poor cat, her eagerness to post the pic as well as her glib comments do not show any concern for the animal or that he maybe a much loved pet. His owners must be devastated.

Whilst I accept that roaming cats can be anuisance to people & I would not have the opinion that my cats are allowed to do what they want regardless of others, but I do not accept that they are the killing machines they are made out to be, many are simply opportunists & will attack injuured or weak animals yet not bother putting in too much effort for with those that are quick & healthy (I have watched my own many times in my garden).

I have posted before that I shot several rats that were stealing food from my chickens & causing them to become unwell. I tried many methods before resorting to this & even then I wasn't going to post pictures of the corpses on FB despite them, being wild & not being loved pets. I wasn't at all proud of myself & even now don't feel particularly happy that I did this.


----------



## chillminx

I have no way of knowing how accurate leashedforlife's comments are about things in her neck of the woods regarding hordes of roaming cats, the untold carnage they wreak on wildlife, and the terrible destruction they do to human 
property.

Whatever the case her comments cannot possibly be applied across the board to other countries. As far as the UK is concerned she is painting a false picture. IMO she should make it clear her comments do not apply to the UK.

Cats in the UK are _not _ wreaking havoc on wildlife. It has been said before many times on this forum, but I will say it again: The RSPB finds NO evidence of cats (feral or pets) playing a significant role in the decline of our UK bird populations. Cats go after weak or ailing birds, often juveniles, who would be unlikely to survive their first winter anyway.

On the contrary it is overwhelmingly humans who are to blame for worrying falls in bird populations, with changes in farming practices, overuse of pesticides etc.

Populations of small rodents are stable in the UK, except in the cities where over the past 20 years there has been a massive increase in the rat population - mainly due to humans dumping fast food leftovers in bins and on streets near take-away food outlets which attracts rats to set up colonies nearby.

Where there are declines in numbers of UK butterflies, moths, bats etc they are all due to negative human intervention - e.g. removal of natural habitat, use of pesticides etc. .

Time methinks, for leashedforlife to acknowledge, as a paid up member of the destructive species **** Sapiens, her share of responsibility for the wholesale slaughter of wildlife and for her to stop ducking the blame and redirecting it onto the innocent.


----------



## dogsaintdumb

I really liked Shoshannah's last post. 

I hope nobody has forgotten that the woman killed the domestic animal with a bow and arrow...A tool that is largely ineffective at making quick kills when compared with other hunting tools. Hardly humane. The majority of deer and large game hunters who use a bow and arrow are comfortable taking a shot to kill no further than 70 yards, with most preferring 40-50 yards. 

I believe just under half of all DEER shot with a bow and arrow survive for long enough to get away and die on their own. They survive the shot as the arrow didn't hit where the hunter was aiming (usually due to the animal moving, bow being unsteady, wind not being accounted for). Cat hunting isn't a recognised sport so I'm not sure there would be any documented statistics in regards to shooting them, but seeing as deer are just a little bit bigger than cats, I would think it's safe to assume it will be more difficult to get an effective kill shot on a cat with a bow and arrow.

Let's imagine she killed a stray dog with a bow and arrow for a second. What's the difference between a stray dog and a feral cat? Not much. Just because owners aren't missing them doesn't mean it's alright to end their lives. 

I'd like to think that everyone who frequents the dog section of this forum would be appalled if a stray dog was shot with a bow and arrow by a vet...the reaction shouldn't be any different for feral cats IMO. 

I suppose if we had a noticeable amount of feral cats in the UK I would feel differently. I hope I never feel that it's okay to kill a domestic animal because it doesn't have a home and makes a bit of a mess. Litter in the street annoys me more than cat crap in my garden.


----------



## Calvine

dogsaintdumb said:


> I really liked Shoshannah's last post.
> 
> I hope nobody has forgotten that the woman killed the domestic animal with a bow and arrow...A tool that is largely ineffective at making quick kills when compared with other hunting tools. Hardly humane. The majority of deer and large game hunters who use a bow and arrow are comfortable taking a shot to kill no further than 70 yards, with most preferring 40-50 yards.
> 
> I believe just under half of all DEER shot with a bow and arrow survive for long enough to get away and die on their own. They survive the shot as the arrow didn't hit where the hunter was aiming (usually due to the animal moving, bow being unsteady, wind not being accounted for). Cat hunting isn't a recognised sport so I'm not sure there would be any documented statistics in regards to shooting them, but seeing as deer are just a little bit bigger than cats, I would think it's safe to assume it will be more difficult to get an effective kill shot on a cat with a bow and arrow.
> 
> Let's imagine she killed a stray dog with a bow and arrow for a second. What's the difference between a stray dog and a feral cat? Not much. Just because owners aren't missing them doesn't mean it's alright to end their lives.
> 
> I'd like to think that everyone who frequents the dog section of this forum would be appalled if a stray dog was shot with a bow and arrow by a vet...the reaction shouldn't be any different for feral cats IMO.
> 
> I suppose if we had a noticeable amount of feral cats in the UK I would feel differently. I hope I never feel that it's okay to kill a domestic animal because it doesn't have a home and makes a bit of a mess. Litter in the street annoys me more than cat crap in my garden.


She quite likely maimed/injured a few before killing that one. It may well have been a domestic cat which got out accidentally when a workman left a door open.


----------



## leashedForLife

Shoshannah said:


> ...
> ... humans... destroyed indigenous wildlife on a scale so large that *it makes what cats do
> look like peanuts* [in comparison].
> .
> .


.
.
In most developed nations, there are laws in place to prevent the wholesale destruction that former
generations of humans carried out - there are hunting seasons, conservation lands, wilderness areas that
are protected from development, fishing LIMITS for commercial & sport fishers, hunting LIMITS for game
hunters, trapping LIMITS for trappers, humane laws on how & when nonhumans can be taken [no hunts
during breeding seasons or when mammals nurse & rear their young, trappers must patrol their lines
daily - a minimum of every 24-hrs & preferably every 8 to 10-hrs, so sunup & before sundown], etc.

In DEVELOPING nations, the taking of bushmeat is, yes, incredibly destructive & completely uncontrolled;
killing nonhumans for supposed Chinese-medicines [tiger bones, bear gall...] or for cultural prestige [rhino horn,
elephant ivory...] is LESS, but continues.
We keep trying to reduce the illegal trade, & we're getting better at it - plus, with education, fewer ppl
are easily convinced to make "easy money" by slaughtering wildlife.

Nobody today could wipe out the Passenger Pigeon, the Auk, or an entire island popn of unique Giant
Tortoises by taking them as living larders for sailors on ocean-going wooden ships. The colonial era & its
accompanying Age of Exploration & Depredation is over.

Does that mean that we humans, as a species, should just pretend that cats' depredations are so petty,
they really don't matter? ------ I don't think so.

When the number of feral cats in the Outback of Australia hit an estimated 30-M & many native species
were on the brink of extinction, the Aussie govt decided they had to act - immediately & with strict controls.

The estimate of feral-cat popns across the USA is approx TREBLE that, now - *over 90-M feral cats* are
feeding themselves by killing wildlife in the USA, in urban, rural, & even in desert wildernesses. Anywhere
on this continent that life is remotely possible, there are cats - hunting & killing.

That's not counting the arsewipes in urban & suburban areas who let their owned cats roam, which only
adds to the cumulative problem, & decimates further wildlife popns that are already under severe pressure.

Tropicene birds MUST PASS THRU human-populated areas, during their spring & fall migratory passages.
Even if they don't nest in human-residential areas & nest in deep woods [rare] or the Far North [rare],
they must move thru a landscape that is vastly altered, & cats are just one more additional stressor.

Small mammals are also under severe pressure - shrews, in particular, as they are active year-round,
self-talk when they are foraging, & cats find them endlessly amusing to hunt. I wish to H*** that shrews'
venom caused severe illness in cats, so they'd learn to leave them ALONE after the 1st one. Sadly, shrews
are being wiped-out in many areas by cats - & they are just the canary in a massive & very dark, largely
unknown coal-mine of cat predation & its eventual results.

We won't know for decades what this uncontrolled experiment in slaughter will do; it's a global grab-bag.
We only know it won't be good.
.
.


Shoshannah said:


> .
> .
> ...that *my cat occasionally* goes out & *might kill a mouse* is made slightly irrelevant by the fact that
> I live in a relatively new-built house that probably [destroyed the homes] of thousands more, so it could
> actually be built, in the first place.
> 
> Mankind is the issue here, not cats.
> .
> .


.
.
Mankind is PART of the issue - as are CATS, feral or owned, abandoned or free-roaming pets.
.
.
Minimizing the effect of YOUR personal pet is mere hyperbole; the sum is the effect of every cat,
some of whom are out every day, some out all night & IN during the day, many living outdoors with
no human help, no food provided, no vet care, no desex to prevent the constant cycle of estrus & litters,
& as we all know, *cats are phenomenally prolific.*
.
.
.
ONE female cat who gets pregnant on every heat can produce an incredible number of kittens in 1 year;
queens can have a litter at heel, out of the nest, another nursing in the nest, & be carrying a 3rd in utero.
.
.
The average # of kittens per litter is 7 - not all of whom will survive to breed, & approx half are F.
If we presume even half of them live to breed, the 3rd year will see unbelievable numbers - & in many
instances, 60% of kittens live to produce at least one litter.
.
.
Male cats, of course, aren't limited by a 60-day pregnancy before they can get preg again - they can breed
any available female during any long-day season who's in estrus, & she doesn't ovulate UNTIL she's bred.
One tomcat can cover a phenomenal number of Fs over a wide geographic area. Multiple toms mean fights,
& some kittens will be deliberately killed by toms, too - but overall, that doesn't reduce fertility & recruit
numbers, as the nursing female quickly comes into heat & is bred again.
.
.
Here's a calculator - 
.
.
420,000 Kittens? The Unspayed Cat To Kitten Calculator | Calculate This!
.
.

Their numbers are LOW, as they assume that SOME feral cats will be desexed - a stoopid factor, IMO, 
since only dumped pet-cats who are already spayed or neutered are among the roaming popn, & they aren't 
"feral", by definition - they're abandoned.
There are very few cats in actual managed cat-colonies in the USA; most are free-breeding & self-feeding, IOW
they hunt to eat - & also for amusement.
.
.
The 1st million comes slowly - the 2nd quickly, the 3rd on the heels of the 2nd.
.
.
Let's figure it simply:
1 cat, 3 litters annually, 50% F, 7 per litter, half survive to breed.
Year 1, 21 kittens, 10 F, 5 breed; 6 M. Of 5 Fs, 3 have 1 litter their 1st year.
That's 21 grandkittens, 10 F, 5 live to breed; 6 Ms.

Mum had 21 kittens; 10 F, 11 M. That's 22 cats; we assume half die,
that's 11 survivors, or 12 cats in one year; 3 of THEM had 21 kittens -
half die, that's 11 survivors, 5 F, & 6 M.

We now have 16 Fs, & 18 Ms - a total of 34 cats in one year.

Year 2, 
Mum does it again - 21 kits, 5 Fs who live to breed, plus 6 Ms.
This year's crop: 11 - now we have 45 cats.
3 of her 5 F kits breed in their 1st year - producing 21 kits, 
5 F & 6 M survivors each. ... 3 x 5 = 15 Fs; 3 x 6 = 18 Ms.
We now have 15 + 18 = 33 grandkittens from year-2. 
Including this year's grandkittens, we have 34 + 33 = 67 cats.

Her 1st-year daughters [5] have 21 kits each in 3 litters apiece; 6 Ms
& 5 Fs survive to breed from each of the 5 daughters. 5 x 6 = 30 Ms.
5 x 5 = 25 Fs. 
67 + 30 + 25 = 122 cats.

The 5 grandkittens from year-1 also have 3 litters & 21 kits each; 
5 Fs & 6 Ms live to breed from each litter, so 25 Fs, & 30 Ms.
That's 55 great-grandchildren in year-2.
*Total: 122 + 55 = 177*
The F kittens in their 1st litters of the year breed this year - 5 x 5 = 25
F kittens who have one litter each, 5 Fs & 6 Ms survive, 25 queens with
6 M kits = 150 great-great-grandsons; 25 x 5 Fs = 125 great-great-granddaughters.
150 + 125 = 275 great-great-grandchildren in year-2.
*Total: 
177 + 275 = 440 + 12 = 452 cats at the end of breeding season, Year-2.*

At the beginning of year-3, with 50% M / F & 50% fatality, we have 452 intact survivors.
Anyone want to continue?...
.
.
.


----------



## Guest

This thread is not about feral cats. The tom in the OP was an owned pet. Not feral. 

And even if it were about feral cats, there are far better ways of dealing with the feral cat issue that don't involve shooting them in the head with an arrow and bragging about it on FB.

In my area feral cats are not a problem. Coyotes, bobcats, BOP, and farm dogs keep their populations in check. Our own ferals don't welcome visitors anyway. 

When we had barn cats, I was happy for them to get on with their job too, there is more than enough to keep them and our resident black snake and owl very happy.


----------



## Cleo38

She shot a pet cat & gloated about it on FB ..... & some people support this on a PET forum??? REALLY??

I think she showed her lack of compassion & respect for her patients with this one act. Sacking her was the right decision as far as I'm concerned.


----------



## chillminx

leashedforlife, well all I can say is that things must be very different in the USA to the way they are here in the UK.

FYI: here is a report from the UK Government Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (known as DEFRA)

http://jncc.defra.gov.uk/pdf/pub03_areviewofbritishmammalsall.pdf

Scroll down to Page 15 for information on Shrew populations and see the reasons given for changes in populations. Please note there is no mention whatsoever of cats [feral or otherwise] being implicated in any way in population changes.

Also please note that Shrew populations are recovering [from loss of habitat and use of pesticides] since the introduction of "set-aside" land in the last 20 years or so.

QUOTE:

"Common shrew Sorex araneus

Distribution: Found throughout mainland Britain......and on many islands except Isles of Scilly, Orkney, Outer Hebrides, Shetland and some of the Inner Hebrides.

"Population trends: .......loss of ancient grassland and meadows, plus the continuing widespread use of insecticides (MacGillivray 1994), have probably led to a population decrease, but numbers may have been locally increased by long-term set-aside (Brockless & Tapper 1993).

Population threats: continued loss of prime habitats (see above) and use of agricultural insecticides may cause continued declines. Also, one study found that liming upland catchment areas to improve water quality reduced surface activity by common shrews for two to three months but, in contrast to pygmy shrews Sorex minutus, had no effect on common shrew numbers (Shore & Mackenzie 1993). "

QUOTE:
Pygmy shrew Sorex minutus

Distribution: Found throughout mainland Britain at all altitudes.

Population trends: ....increasing use of insecticides and the loss of habitat have probably led to a population decrease, but numbers may have been increased locally by longterm set-aside (Brockless & Tapper 1993).

Population threats: Liming of watersheds used to mitigate the effects of acidification on water quality - one study found this practice reduced the surface activity of pygmy shrews for up to 18 months, and this was associated with reduced food availability (Shore & Mackenzie 1993). Furthermore, liming also reduced the populations of pygmy shrews by 30-55%. This effect lasted from five months to over three years at different sites.

Hence liming of upland catchment areas can have detrimental effects on pygmy shrew populations. Heavy grazing of moorlands by increased upland sheep and deer populations potentially also have removed much of the thick vegetation which pygmy shrews require. Conversely, Environmentally Sensitive Area schemes and better grouse moor management should
favour this species"/UNQUOTE

I could go on, but I think you get my drift.


----------



## leashedForLife

Dogloverlou said:


> .
> .
> ... announcing you would find cats 'fair game' to hunt is disgusting IMO.
> Someone's much loved pet you'd find acceptable to kill?
> ...
> .
> .


.
.
.
Lou,
U did read my posts, in toto?

Did i say that i'd find shooting someone's pet IN * THEIR * HOME or even ON * THEIR * PROPERTY
acceptable? --- No, i did not.
.
I said, *if* their pet-cat ROAMS at large, & *if* their pet-cat WEARS NO visible collar,
& *if* their pet-cat is in an area where hunting IS ** ALLOWED - which means, obviously, outside
urban & suburban areas where there could be injury to others, human or nonhuman - THEN - i'd say
that cat is fair game.

IOW, all pet-cats would live on their owner's property - just like Australia, no owned cats would roam.
End of sentence. Staying home would be mandatory, microchips would be mandatory, breeding license
would be mandatory, inspectable premises would be part of the breeding license.

No more kittens would be sold with goopy eyes & ear-mites, fleas & roundworms. Because the 1st
complaint would bring an ACO to the house to see the remaining litter & the dam, & they would have police
powers to require the owner / breeder to take their pets to the vet, & have them treated - & no more kits
could be sold, or even given away, until the vet said they were cleared.

It's not a horror story.
Nobody's breaking into Ur home & murdering Ur pets in the living room.
Yes, if Ur cat roams, & s/he roams in hunting-permitted areas, s/he'd be a target.
But hopefully that would be doggone good motivation to ensure Kitty stays home - since they are
so very loved. Correct?

Our Siamese were part of our family for over 20-years, dam & daughter - the dam 19, her daughter 21.

My first outdoor kitten lived to be 7-YO, & died in the neighbor's dog's teeth. Her daughter Figgie
only lived to be 9-MO before the dogs caught & killed her in a foot of fresh-fallen snow, ripping
her left rear leg off her body as they played tug-of-war, & she bled out in front of my eyes, as i stood
in shock on the porch.

Outdoor cats face hazards no indoor-cat ever does - & it often shortens their lives.
How often i've seen PF-uk members claim that, _"it's better for them to live THREE years & have a fun life,
than to live TWENTY & be imprisoned"._
I'm sure U've seen it, too. The supposed "richness" of an outdoor life doesn't make up for accidental trauma,
infectious disease, parasites, & an earlier death - IME, & that is my personal experience.

The lives of our Siamese indoors & our farm-cats outdoors could not possibly have been more
different - & their deaths were also very, very different.
.
.


Dogloverlou said:


> .
> .
> ...regardless of your 'despising' of owners who allow their cats out, owners DO love their cats very much.
> Our old boys were as much a part of our family as the dogs, and hugely affectionate.
> 
> *Who are you to claim otherwise? *
> ...
> .
> .


.
.
Where did i claim that owners don't love their cats? -- Nowhere.
.
Altho i must admit, i find it very suspect that supposedly-loving owners turn Fluffy loose to roam,
& when Fluffy goes missing or is hurt or is killed or is sick BECAUSE s/he went roaming, they expect
the members of PF-uk to post nothing but supportive, empathic comments.
.
.
I argued with my parents for at least 15-years, trying to convince them to desex our outdoor cats
AND to bring them inside - they were adamant that they'd stay out, & that S/N was "too expensive".
.
.

Where did i claim that cats aren't affectionate to their families? - Nowhere.
.
.
I said that cats are hard-wired predators with very catholic tastes, & that cats are highly destructive
of wildlife when they roam at large. Those are facts.
.
.
I said domestic cats are listed among The Top-Ten WORST Invasive
Species Worldwide -
that too, is a fact. Feel free to google "Top 10 invasive *animals*" - cats are on every list i've seen.
.
.
On this one, they beat out Cane Toads, kudzu [20-million acres & counting, of the Southeastern USA],
Asian Carp, Burmese Pythons, & Pacific Lionfish for the #1 spot - congratulations, kitties!
.
.
Worst Invasive Species: 10 Frustrating Plants And Animals That Make You Scream (PHOTOS)
.
.
Note that the 40-M European Rabbits do over $400-M in damages in the UK annually. We don't measure
the damage done by cats ECONOMICALLY - because they don't damage Ag crops, as bunnies do.
Their effect is harder to put a dollar amount on.
.
.
How about 2.4 billion birds & 12.3 billion mammals?
.
.
That's the estimated USA death toll annually due to cats, per Smithsonian's *Conservation Biology Institute*
& the Federal *Fish & Wildlife Service* - obviously, they're just rabid cat-haters, right?...
they also note that most cat-victims in North America are native species, not Norway rats & _Mus musculus_, 
the house mouse - altho cat-owners fondly fantasize their beloved kitty would never kill a butterfly, shrew,
rare New England cottontail, hummingbird, or other useful, decorative, or iconic species. 
.
.
Domestic cats are destroying the planet
.
.
Calif 'invasive-spp fact sheet' on cats:
Cats and Wildlife - California Department of Fish and Wildlife
.
.


> _
> .
> .
> The estimated kill rates are two to four times higher than mortality figures
> previously bandied about, & position the domestic cat as one of the single greatest
> human-linked threats to wildlife in the nation.
> 
> More birds & mammals die at the mouths of cats, the report said, than from auto-
> mobile strikes, pesticides & poisons, collisions with skyscrapers & windmills, & other
> so-called 'anthropogenic causes'.
> .
> .
> _


.
.
That was January-2013, as see here -
.
.
Log In - The New York Times
.
.
For the original report, see
.
http://www.nature.com/ncomms/journal/v4/n1/full/ncomms2380.html
.
.
.
But they're all just cat-haters, right?... And they're obviously lying.
.
.
.


----------



## DogLover1981

That lady is either nuts or a world class idiot bragging about killing a cat on facebook. Personally I wouldn't shoot someone's cat that's on my property although I believe it's technically legal here. I would get a trap to trap it at most.


----------



## leashedForLife

ouesi said:


> ...
> The tom in the OP was *an owned pet*. Not feral.
> 
> ...
> .


.
.
.
Who sez?
.
So far as i know, ONE rescue-group claims he was a foster of theirs. Funny, that - a rescue group that
not only has intact-males as adoptables, but allows their fostered cats to roam at large?...
And at the same time, a neighbor CLAIMS he "looks like" their missing cat.
.
.
.
Was the tom micro-chipped? ---- Of course not.
Were his ears tattooed? --- of course not.
Does he have any distinguishing marks that are unique? --- Not so far as i can see.
.
.
Until i see a definitive claim & proof of ownership - such as a vet-record --- he's a feral cat.
.
.
.


----------



## leashedForLife

.
.
.
Aussie fact-sheet on cats as an invasive spp:
The feral cat (Felis catus) - Invasive species fact sheet
.
.
Why Are Conversations About Free-Roaming Cats So Difficult? | ASPCA Professional
.
.
.
Animal Control, NJDOH - Office of Animal Welfare
.
.
https://www.avma.org/KB/Policies/Pages/Free-roaming-Abandoned-and-Feral-Cats.aspx
.
.
Nuisances and welfare of free-roaming cats in urban settings and their association with cat reproduction. - PubMed - NCBI
.
.


> _
> .
> .
> Abstract
> Free roaming cats (FRC) are highly abundant in cities around the world. Increasing populations of these cats
> might result in impairment of cat welfare, & cause nuisances and public health risks.
> 
> In order to study the seasonal dynamics of FRC populations & its association with events of cat welfare
> impairment & nuisances, we analyzed a database of FRC-associated citizens' telephone complaint events,
> which were registered in five cities in Israel (total human population of 1.42 million residents) during years
> 2007 to 2011.
> 
> These complaint events were classified to the following six categories:
> cat's carcasses,
> kittens,
> parturition,
> aggressive behavior toward people,
> invasion to human facilities,
> & cat injuries and distress.
> 
> Overall, *87,764 complaint events* associated with these categories were registered in the 5 cities
> during the study period (123.2 complaint events per 10,000 citizens per year).
> 
> Length of daylight was moderately correlated with the rate of complaints on kittens in the same month
> (r=0.64) & parturition in the previous month (r=0.54) (P<0.001).
> 
> Both kitten & parturition-related complaints showed a prominent seasonal pattern, peaking in April & May,
> respectively, & declining gradually until November.
> 
> 'Kittens' or 'parturition' were explicitly mentioned in 38%, 39% & 19%, respectively, of complaints
> re cat aggressiveness toward people, cat invasion to human facilities, & cat injuries and distress.
> 
> In most of the cities the rate of citizen complaints re carcasses, aggression, invasion, & injuries were still
> significantly correlated with rate of complaints re kittens after omission of these joint complaints & remained
> significant after controlling for seasonality.
> 
> These findings imply an association of cat welfare impairment and nuisances with FRC reproduction intensity.
> 
> The current study revealed the high rate of nuisances & potential public health hazards related to FRC,
> as well as the impairment of cat welfare, which might be merely 'the tip of the iceberg' of the real welfare
> situation of these cats.
> 
> Further studies should examine the effectiveness of FRC population control strategies for the reduction
> of the rate of nuisances & public-health risks re FRC, as well as for improving their welfare.
> 
> _


.
.
.


----------



## Calvine

One of the things I find totally unacceptable is the lack of respect this woman showed to the cat, before or after its death. Killing an animal should be a matter taken seriously, and (one hopes) especially by a vet. But this woman thinks the unnecessary death of the cat is a cause for celebration, gets her mother to take a photo of her gloating and grinning with it. Champagne anyone?
You sort of wonder if she would do the same if she had just euthanised it...hey Mom, I just euthanized this cat, you got the camera there?


----------



## Cleo38

Calvine said:


> One of the things I find totally unacceptable is the lack of respect this woman showed to the cat, before or after its death. Killing an animal should be a matter taken seriously, and (one hopes) especially by a vet. But this woman thinks the unnecessary death of the cat is a cause for celebration, gets her mother to take a photo of her gloating and grinning with it. Champagne anyone?
> You sort of wonder if she would do the same if she had just euthanised it...hey Mom, I just euthanized this cat, you got the camera there?


Exactly! This is what I find so disturbing, especially for a vet who probably works with cats & their owners every single day. How could she consider her actions justifiable? Did she really think that her clients would also find this 'funny'?


----------



## Calvine

Cleo38 said:


> Exactly! This is what I find so disturbing, especially for a vet who probably works with cats & their owners every single day. How could she consider her actions justifiable? Did she really think that her clients would also find this 'funny'?


And, having killed it, she describes herself as ''awesome'' and ''vet of the year''. And the 'LOL' in particular makes it into some sort of joke. Truly, if she's the vet of the year, God save me from the others!


----------



## Cleo38

Calvine said:


> And, having killed it, she describes herself as ''awesome'' and ''vet of the year''. And the 'LOL' in particular makes it into some sort of joke. Truly, if she's the vet of the year, God save me from the others!


'Vet of The year' ??? I wonder if she will even be a vet after this? I can't imagine many employers rushing to take her on as I can't imagine she will be good for business


----------



## lovemybabies

I was sooooooooooooo disgusted by this. Not only my eyes... but my heart cried!!!


----------



## Waterlily

Wow just appalling and devastating for the poor cats owners.


----------



## Get Bunny Box

I saw this article the other day, made me feel sick. These people have no feelings what so ever.


----------



## leashedForLife

Waterlily said:


> ...devastating for the poor cat's *owner*.
> .
> .



.
.
.
Has there been an update i missed? ---
.
.
WHO supposedly owned that free-roaming tomcat, & what proof did s/he or they offer of their
claimed ownership?
- vet records?
- microchip?
- a license?
.
.
For UK readers, most of the USA requires that dogs & cats be licensed - equally, the vast
majority of cat-owners blithely ignore the law, just as they frequently ignore any laws that ban
free-roaming cats ---
as i know very well, after living in Va Beach, VA, for a decade, where free-roaming cats have
been banned for a very-long time, & owners pay absolutely no attention to the city ordinance.
_"La-la-la... I can't hear U!..." :--D _ --- Apparently, cats have good hearing, but their owners are
universally deaf to complaints or anything that might interfere with their cat-owning habits, such
as keeping Kitty on their own property.
.
.
Personally, i'd suggest that Va Beach adopt an automatic euthanasia policy for any owned cat
who is live-trapped 3X whilst roaming at large, with a whopping fine for the 1st 2 violations, PLUS
mandatory microchips for all owned pets, including caged pets [birds, herps, etc].
That would certainly reduce the number of abandoned animals, & would also make prosecuting
the owner who dumped their pet a simpler process.
.
.
Praps that would get the attn & compliance of cat-owners - altho at this point, i wouldn't really
lay down cash to bet on compliance.

Cat-owners are quick to condemn dog-owners for nuisance barking, or the slobs who can't be arsed
to pick-up dog poop in public spaces, but apparently it's de rigeur for cats to poop anywhere they dam*
well please, simply because they TRY to bury it.
[Sometimes the cat succeeds; sometimes s/he fails - but in either case, there's cat-sh!t left about for
someone, generally NOT the owner, to deal with.]
.
.
.


----------



## Calvine

It is worthy of note that both her employers and the college where she qualified have condemned her behaviour. Microchips are of course fine, but when I took a stray to be scanned, yes she had a chip, but no, the owner/s could not be traced as they had presumably moved and not updated their ownership details. The cat, heavily pregnant, stayed with me, produced seven healthy kittens, all of whom were homed thro' a local charity...except mum who was spayed and now lives with me.


----------



## leashedForLife

.
.
I'm not discussing the VET at the mo', but the claimed OWNER - where is the update
that includes information on the supposed owner, & what proof did s/he offer of that
supposed ownership?
.
.
Please don't drag in irrelevant stories of abandoned / lost / preg cats.
Let's focus on THIS cat, & his supposed owner - who were at best irresponsible jerks, 
& either dumped him or let an intact tom roam at large, in an area where hunting is legal - 
as if it were not, the vet would face charges from Fish & Game for violations.
.
No charges have been forthcoming, so the area had to be open to hunting.
.
.
.


----------



## leashedForLife

.
.
Another excellent reason to HATE the new format - 
struck-thru type that doesn't show until U post the comment.
.
.
Congrats, Mark - another brilliant flaw.
.
.
.


----------



## Calvine

leashedForLife said:


> .
> .
> I'm not discussing the VET at the mo', but the claimed OWNER - where is the update
> that includes information on the supposed owner, & what proof did s/he offer of that
> supposed ownership?
> .
> .
> Please don't drag in irrelevant stories of abandoned / lost / preg cats.
> Let's focus on THIS cat, & his supposed owner - who were at best irresponsible jerks,
> & either dumped him or let an intact tom roam at large, in an area where hunting is legal -
> as if it were not, the vet would face charges from Fish & Game for violations.
> .
> No charges have been forthcoming, so the area had to be open to hunting.
> .
> .
> .


OK, so you want to stick to what YOU want to say, I will drag in whatever I like, which _you_ have been doing since this thread started... why not. I thought in fact the thread was supposed to be about the vet but you, ever correct, are sure to know better. I don't imagine for a minute that this so-called vet checked if the cat was entire or whether it had a microchip before she killed it. SO...it was scanned after its death, what was she going to do, do you suppose, ring the owners and say 'Hey, I'm a vet, and guess what, I just shot your ginger Tom with a bow and arrow''? I give up.


----------



## Calvine

leashedForLife said:


> .
> .
> Another excellent reason to HATE the new format -
> struck-thru type that doesn't show until U post the comment.
> .
> .
> Congrats, Mark - another brilliant flaw.
> .
> .
> .


Just speak to Mark politely, I'm sure he will try to help when he has time, no need to be so rude. You're not the only person having problems at the moment, it's new, there are teething issues...give us a break! People have worked very hard to get things sorted, they are still working. Chill out.


----------



## leashedForLife

.
.
Once again - no one that i saw posted any update that includes NEW info that
says this tomcat *had an owner*, nor any *evidence* to support that statement.
.
.
Saying, _"he looks like my kitty!"... _ isn't evidence of anything whatever.
.
.
Until i see some actual proof,
- he's a free-roaming feral.
Moreover,
- he was in an area where hunting is legal.
.
.
https://www.legalzoom.com/articles/wisconsin-considers-legalizing-cat-hunting
.
Feral cat hunting is specifically legal in Minnesota & South Dakota, which adjoin Wisconsin.
Many other states do not specifically ALLOW cat-hunting, but don't ban it, either.
.
Experts estimate that, globally, feral cats may have wiped-out more bird species than anything
else, other than habitat destruction. In Wisconsin, about 2 million feral cats roam; every year,
they kill something between 39 & 139 million songbirds, plus an undetermined number of small
mammals. That ignores invertebrates, amphibians, & reptiles, among other popular cat-toys.
.
.
.
http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news...to-eat-dogs-and-cats-in-44-states-101714.html
.
.
U cannot *sell* cat-meat or dog-meat; U can, however, *eat *cat-meat or dog-meat in 44
of the 50 states.
As i said - if U want Kitty to be safe, _*keep her or him at HOME. *_Otherwise, when s/he is
hit by a car, taken by an owl or hawk, killed by a roaming dog or even by a dog in her or his
own yard / garden, eaten by coyote... don't whine, & expect sympathy.
.
My sympathy is with the cat; the owner KNEW what chances they took. The cat didn't.
.
.
.


----------



## Guest

leashedForLife said:


> .
> .
> I'm not discussing the VET at the mo', but the claimed OWNER - where is the update
> that includes information on the supposed owner, & what proof did s/he offer of that
> supposed ownership?
> .
> .
> Please don't drag in irrelevant stories of abandoned / lost / preg cats.
> Let's focus on THIS cat,
> .
> .
> .


How does that work? You get to drag in the indoor outdoor cat debate, but others are not allowed to branch off on what they want to? This thread IS about the vet and her behavior, whether or not it was acceptable, and what the repercussions were/should be. Whether or not you want to discuss the vet is your prerogative, but if others want to it's theirs just as much don't you think?


----------



## leashedForLife

ouesi said:


> You get to drag in the indoor outdoor cat debate, but others are not allowed to branch off on what they want to?
> 
> This thread IS about the vet and her behavior...
> .
> .


.
.
.
WaterLily said, _"this was devastating FOR THE OWNER"._

same Q as before:
WHO is the owner, & WHAT is the evidence of ownership?
.
.
I'll keep asking until someone answers - just so ya know. 
.
.
.


----------



## Guest

Whatever blows your skirt up....


----------



## Guest

> Meanwhile, a woman who is cat sitting for Lindsey's neighbors who are out of town says the cat that is dead was not feral, in fact it belongs to a couple.
> 
> "We believe that this is the cat, since it is a neighbor of the current owner, and we kind of want to see the body but we don't know where the body is. But the markings are identical to the picture that was on Facebook, so we just need some answers to if this was their family cat," she said.


http://krqe.com/2015/04/20/texas-ve...ragging-about-killing-cat-with-bow-and-arrow/

And even if the cat was a feral, does that justify killing him with a bow and arrow?


----------



## leashedForLife

.
.
QUOTE,
"_*We **believe** that *this is the cat, *since it is a neighbor *of the current owner..."_ 
.
.
.
Just precisely what the H*** does that mean?
.
.
WHO is the "neighbor of the current owner"???
.
.
Exactly WHAT does the "current owner", *own* ?
.
.
Who or what is "*it*" - the "it" who lives next door???
.
.
"Believing" that the cat belongs to So-&-So doesn't make that belief a fact.
.
I can "believe" the world is flat, but that won't explain many facts about the
solar system or the local climates, hemispheric seasons, annual cycles, etc.
.
.
U don't even say who is being QUOTED in that statement, Ouesi.
It's quite apparently *not** the alleged owner.*
*.*
*.*


----------



## Calvine

Stick to the point. The point is that her employers dropped her like a hot brick and the vet school where she qualified have also condemned her actions. So they are wrong and you are right...again?


----------



## Calvine

leashedForLife said:


> .
> .
> Once again - no one that i saw posted any update that includes NEW info that
> says this tomcat *had an owner*, nor any *evidence* to support that statement.
> .
> .
> Saying, _"he looks like my kitty!"... _ isn't evidence of anything whatever.
> .
> .
> Until i see some actual proof,
> - he's a free-roaming feral.
> Moreover,
> - he was in an area where hunting is legal.
> .
> .
> https://www.legalzoom.com/articles/wisconsin-considers-legalizing-cat-hunting
> .
> Feral cat hunting is specifically legal in Minnesota & South Dakota, which adjoin Wisconsin.
> Many other states do not specifically ALLOW cat-hunting, but don't ban it, either.
> .
> Experts estimate that, globally, feral cats may have wiped-out more bird species than anything
> else, other than habitat destruction. In Wisconsin, about 2 million feral cats roam; every year,
> they kill something between 39 & 139 million songbirds, plus an undetermined number of small
> mammals. That ignores invertebrates, amphibians, & reptiles, among other popular cat-toys.
> .
> .
> .
> http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news...to-eat-dogs-and-cats-in-44-states-101714.html
> .
> .
> U cannot *sell* cat-meat or dog-meat; U can, however, *eat *cat-meat or dog-meat in 44
> of the 50 states.
> As i said - if U want Kitty to be safe, _*keep her or him at HOME. *_Otherwise, when s/he is
> hit by a car, taken by an owl or hawk, killed by a roaming dog or even by a dog in her or his
> own yard / garden, eaten by coyote... don't whine, & expect sympathy.
> .
> My sympathy is with the cat; the owner KNEW what chances they took. The cat didn't.
> .
> .
> .


Your sympathy is with the cat? Well, you had me fooled there for a while.


----------



## Waterlily

who are you talking too, I cant see anyone replying to you lol.


----------



## Cleo38

Calvine said:


> Stick to the point. The point is that her employers dropped her like a hot brick and the vet school where she qualified have also condemned her actions. So they are wrong and you are right...again?


Exactly, I think their reposnse shows how they feel about her actions.

All this waffle about 'proof' that this was a pet cat .... how about proof that it wasn't? And even if it were a stray is shooting it withen posting a pic on FB really the attititude of a responsible vet????
Oh yes, I suppose it is as the cat was allowed outside by his awful, uncaring owners where he would be single-handedly decimating the local wildlife ..... & attacking babies .... probably


----------



## Waterlily

have i got someone blocked lol


----------



## Waterlily

oh nvm.. just read it offline to see... who gives a flying fark if it had an owner or not, it was a heinous act on an innocent a animal. What kind of meathead would focus on that part of a post like a rabid pig instead of the actual act itself.


----------



## Guest

Comparing photos the cat killed and the neighbor’s cat look very much alike. Not sure what the odds are of two male cats in the same neighborhood with the exact same markings? The neighbors were out of town at the time of the incident, had left the cat in the care of a caretaker. 

In any case, IT DOES NOT MATTER if the cat was owned or not. There are better ways of dealing with feral cats that don’t involve shooting them with an arrow, posting a picture of yourself holding the now dead cat, smiling, and then sharing the photo to brag about the kill. 

I am curious about the cat’s hind leg. It appears to be badly injured or even missing. If the cat was that badly injured and could not be safely caught, yes, you put the cat out of his misery. However, that still doesn’t explain the photo taking. The other possibility is that the cat was caught in a trap before being shot, which would make it even more heinous. 
The whole thing is just tragic all around


----------



## lorilu

The leg is normal, it's just hanging behind a bush. The case is up for Grand Jury hearing on April 29.

(From what I've read following this case) Texas has strict anti animal cruelty laws, but not sure if they are ever enforced.

http://www.examiner.com/article/justice-for-tiger-austin-county-grand-jury-meeting-set-for-april-29


----------



## leashedForLife

.
.
If the cat was feral, yes - I think killing a feral cat is preferable to letting them live,
& especially a tomcat, who isn't limited by pregnancies as an intact F .
.
.
I don't see any difference between shooting a cat with a rifle, or using a bow & arrow,
if it's a lethal shot - & this one obviously was. He was dead in seconds.
.
.
It can easily be argued that live-trapping & neutering would be more traumatic to any
feral cat than simply killing her or him while at large, & that live-trapping followed by
euthanasia is also crueler than a sudden death - without the added trauma of panic
in the live-trap, transportation, handling, etc.
.
I'll wait to hear the verdict - but IMO, aside from being tactless & boastful, the actual
killing wasn't a crime.
.
If the cat WAS owned, then he could just as easily have died under the wheels of a car,
or been killed by a dog, or _____________ . Owners who let their cats roam must be
prepared not to have them come home - & IMO, the OWNER is irresponsible.
.
.


----------



## Calvine

leashedForLife said:


> .
> .
> If the cat was feral, yes - I think killing a feral cat is preferable to letting them live,
> & especially a tomcat, who isn't limited by pregnancies as an intact F .
> .
> .
> I don't see any difference between shooting a cat with a rifle, or using a bow & arrow,
> if it's a lethal shot - & this one obviously was. He was dead in seconds.
> .
> .
> It can easily be argued that live-trapping & neutering would be more traumatic to any
> feral cat than simply killing her or him while at large, & that live-trapping followed by
> euthanasia is also crueler than a sudden death - without the added trauma of panic
> in the live-trap, transportation, handling, etc.
> .
> I'll wait to hear the verdict - but IMO, aside from being tactless & boastful, the actual
> killing wasn't a crime.
> .
> If the cat WAS owned, then he could just as easily have died under the wheels of a car,
> or been killed by a dog, or _____________ . Owners who let their cats roam must be
> prepared not to have them come home - & IMO, the OWNER is irresponsible.
> .
> .


Dying under the wheels of a car, of course would be accidental, whereas this was carried out deliberately by a vet who had (presumably) taken a veterinary oath...and YOU do not know if the cat was feral and neither did she. She could not possibly have known that it had no microchip before she killed it. Why did she/someone else even bother to scan it? Were they intending to return the carcass for a decent burial or...?You have an uncanny way of not answering posts which you find difficult, I must say.


----------



## Cleo38

leashedForLife said:


> .
> .
> .
> If the cat WAS owned, then he could just as easily have died under the wheels of a car,
> or been killed by a dog, or _____________ . Owners who let their cats roam must be
> prepared not to have them come home - & IMO, the OWNER is irresponsible.
> .
> .


What a ridulous way of thinking .... so just because something is a risk (however big or small) killing an animal is justified because something MAY happen to it????!!! Do you apply this to people as well? I drive my car to work, there is a possibility that I could have an accident so am I fair game for some lunatic to shoot me with a bow & arrow?

I have owned cats since I was a child & all (bar one) have been outdoor cats. None of my cats has ever been hit by a car, all have lived until good ages.

Seriously, your comments get more ludicrous the more you post!!


----------



## Guest

I have a neighbor who shoots feral cats. 

About a year ago, there was a tuxedo cat hanging around his property. He texted and asked us if we had a new cat, it was not ours. He called the other nearby folks and did the same. 
I saw him on the road (the dirt road that we share) a few days later, asked about the cat, he said he hadn’t gotten it yet, I asked him to let me try and catch it, he was fine with that. Turns out the cat disappeared anyway. Hopefully it found its way home, but more likely a predator was involved. 

There is an argument to be made for killing feral cats, but that’s NOT what this is about. 
Simply comparing my neighbor’s actions with the vet in question should show the difference in acting compassionately and responsibly.

There is no defending this vet’s actions.


----------



## Dogloverlou

I'd have an issue with anyone shooting a cat, feral or not. I can only imagine it being a cultural thing. Cats seem to be wild beasts out there leashedforlife who need disposing of! I can honestly say the same does not apply to UK cats and I can't ever seeing there being a big enough feral cat population here that the matter even needs considering.


----------



## leashedForLife

Calvine said:


> Dying under the wheels of a car, of course would be accidental, whereas this was carried out deliberately by a vet who had (presumably) taken a veterinary oath.
> .
> .


.
.
Taking a vet oath DOES NOT preclude HUNTING - or FISHING, which both involve KILLING nonhumans.
The vet oath doesn't mean cr*p in this context; she wasn't diagnosing or treating a medical condition.
.
.


Calvine said:


> YOU do not know if the cat was feral and neither did she.
> She could not possibly have known that it had no microchip before she killed it.
> Why did she/ someone else even bother to scan it?
> .


.
.
It is reasonable to presume that an intact tom, at large in a legal hunting area, is NOT owned.

I also don't KNOW that anyone SCANNED the cat for a chip.
If U have info on that, please POST A LINK? - thank U.
.
.


Calvine said:


> You have an uncanny way of not answering posts which you find difficult, I must say.
> .


.
.
U didn't ASK me anything. U made cutting remarks & pointed personal comments,
to which there is only one response - U are now the latest addition to my 'ignore'
list.
.
.


----------



## Cleo38

ouesi said:


> I have a neighbor who shoots feral cats.
> 
> About a year ago, there was a tuxedo cat hanging around his property. He texted and asked us if we had a new cat, it was not ours. He called the other nearby folks and did the same.
> I saw him on the road (the dirt road that we share) a few days later, asked about the cat, he said he hadn't gotten it yet, I asked him to let me try and catch it, he was fine with that. Turns out the cat disappeared anyway. Hopefully it found its way home, but more likely a predator was involved.
> 
> There is an argument to be made for killing feral cats, but that's NOT what this is about.
> Simply comparing my neighbor's actions with the vet in question should show the difference in acting compassionately and responsibly.
> 
> There is no defending this vet's actions.


I can completely understand that feral & pet cats, can be a nuisance particularly of they are bothering other animals or livestock. I think there was a post on here about a pet cat breaking in to an aviary & killing birds which is completely unacceptable. I can also understand people wanting to prevent the cat in question reoffending & to prevent it continuing to be a nuisance. Cat owners do have to accept responsibility for their pets actions, I would not dispute that but I also do not think that outdoor cats are 'fair game' simply becuase their owner has chosen to let them experience the outdoor world.


----------



## Calvine

leashedForLife said:


> .
> .
> Taking a vet oath DOES NOT preclude HUNTING - or FISHING, which both involve KILLING nonhumans.
> The vet oath doesn't mean cr*p in this context; she wasn't diagnosing or treating a medical condition.
> .
> .
> 
> .
> .
> It is reasonable to presume that an intact tom, at large in a legal hunting area, is NOT owned.
> 
> I also don't KNOW that anyone SCANNED the cat for a chip.
> If U have info on that, please POST A LINK? - thank U.
> .
> .
> 
> .
> .
> U didn't ASK me anything. U made cutting remarks & pointed personal comments,
> to which there is only one response - U are now the latest addition to my 'ignore'
> list.
> .


----------



## Calvine

Personal comments? Such as?? Talk about the pot calling the kettle black!


----------



## Calvine

L for L states that he/she does not know if the cat was scanned for a chip...however, in his/her post of 21/4/15, we read:

Was the tom microchipped?...of course not.
Were his ears tattooed? ...of course not.

How do we know this unless it was scanned?
I rest my case.


----------



## Guest

Calvine said:


> L for L states that he/she does not know if the cat was scanned for a chip...however, in his/her post of 21/4/15, we read:
> 
> Was the tom microchipped?...of course not.
> Were his ears tattooed? ...of course not.
> 
> How do we know this unless it was scanned?
> I rest my case.


We don't know what the vet did with the body it seems 
Surely the responsible thing would be to bring the cat in to the clinic to be scanned?


----------



## chillminx

leashedForLife said:


> .U are now the latest addition to my 'ignore' list.


Sounds like you're in the habit of falling out with folk if you have a "LIST" of people you ignore!

Yet in some of your posts on the Dog Forum and in General Chat you come across as being quite a reasonable person sometimes.


----------



## leashedForLife

Dogloverlou said:


> I'd have an issue with anyone shooting a cat, feral or not. I can only imagine it being a cultural thing.
> 
> Cats seem to be wild beasts out there leashedforlife who need disposing of!
> 
> I can honestly say the same does not apply to UK cats and I can't ever seeing there being a big enough
> feral cat population here that the matter even needs considering.
> .
> .


.
.
Feral cats *are, by definition, "wild beasts" - *they are free-breeding, invasive, & an
introduced AKA non-native AKA alien species.
.
.
That doesn't even consider the large numbers of OWNED cats who are allowed to
roam at large, daytime only, nighttime only, on request, or living outdoors 24 / 7.
.
.
Feeding cats does not prevent them from killing wildlife. Cats don't kill out of need -
they kill any animal that moves or sounds like prey, & isn't bigger than they are.
Well-fed cats will still pounce on anything that intrigues them.
.
.
As for the popn size, an estimated *90-million feral cats - 3X the size of the popn*
*estimated to roam the Outback of Australia when Oz passed laws to confine*
*all owned cats to their owner's PROPERTY -*
*currently roam the USA, in dense urban & suburban areas, in rural areas,*
*& in remote, barely-habitable wilderness such as the Four Corners desert,*
*& the Everglades swamps. *They live, breed, & hunt cheek-by-jowl with humans,
& nowhere near humans.
They are rarely seen - because they are *feral. *They don't drop by to cadge a meal.
They don't hang out, sunning themselves in ppl's backyards. They are *wild.*
*.*
*.*
*"FERAL" *means a domestic species that has escaped human control, & is living
& breeding, unchecked, in the wild. Wild horses are *feral. *Feral goats are *wild.*
U aren't going to be saddling the one, & milking the other.
.
.
There are nowhere near the number of homes to take in every HANDLEABLE,
friendly, domestic cat in every USA shelter & rescue. And who in H*** wants a cat
who cannot be picked up, petted, or approached when cornered?
YES - U can take in a feral cat, & over months or years, arrive at a truce where
s/he might approach U, or might allow petting - but rarely HANDLING, in many
cases, which means needed vet care requires sedation before Dx or Tx.
.
Ppl who want PET cats don't want a captive wild animal - which is what a feral
cat is, after all. They can get a friendly adult cat or a friendly kitten - why take in
a cat who will cheerfully rip the bejeezus out of Ur arm if U try to pick 'em up?
Why spend months or years trying to "make friends", if U don't have to?
.
.
And where are we going to PUT 90-million feral cats?
Leaving them at large only means their numbers will continue to
grow, & the devastation of wildlife will continue - permanently.
Pretending "it's OK" isn't a solution.
.
If U have any brilliant suggestions to reduce their numbers without
killing them by hunting them where hunting is legal, & live-trapping
to euthanize them where it's not, i'm all ears.
"Adopting them" isn't an answer, nor are large-scale fenced areas
to confine them in cat-proof enclosures. Who'd fund the feeding?
Who'd provide vet-care for 90-M cats, in pens, at large - darting
them for exams, vax, & any Dx or Tx?

Also FYI:
*Everybody has an Ignore List; *it's on every account on PF-uk. It can have 0
members listed, or as many as the acct-holder puts on it. U opt in to add a
member's name to it - but we ALL have one, just as we all have a Friends List,
which is also opt-in: U ask to befriend someone.
The sole difference is that adding someone to a Friends List is mutual - while
putting someone on an Ignore List is unilateral.
.
.


----------



## Calvine

ouesi said:


> We don't know what the vet did with the body it seems
> Surely the responsible thing would be to bring the cat in to the clinic to be scanned?


I doubt she would do that ouesi as the staff of her own clinic were none too impressed with the ''incident''.


----------



## Calvine

Here we go again...(yawns). The thread is about the so-called vet who killed a cat. The thread is not about feral cats, or wasn't meant to be.


----------



## Guest

leashedForLife said:


> And who in H*** wants a cat
> who cannot be picked up, petted, or approached when cornered?


I do. I want good hunting barn cats, and I don't care if they don't want anything to do with me. I'm not alone either.
As it is of our two ferals, one is super tame, the other is not. Neither are cuddly, but I'm okay with that. Not everyone thinks the same way about ferals, not everyone has the same needs in a cat.


----------



## Waterlily

Seems leashed just wants to support hunting regardless of the actual topic or of anything anyone says. Almost frothing at the mouth in her text lol


----------



## Calvine

Waterlily said:


> Seems leashed just wants to support hunting regardless of the actual topic or of anything anyone says. Almost frothing at the mouth in her text lol


You're right, and yet we are told not to digress from the subject, which on the whole we are not doing. The expression ''tunnel vision'' comes to mind.


----------



## leashedForLife

lorilu said:


> The leg is normal, it's just hanging behind a bush.
> 
> The case is [scheduled] for a Grand Jury hearing on April 29.
> 
> ...


.
.
Today is Friday, May 1st. The hearing *should have been held* on Wed, Apr 29th.
So where's the update link?...
.
.


----------



## leashedForLife

Waterlily said:


> Seems LFL just wants to *support hunting, regardless of the actual topic,* or of anything anyone says.
> Almost frothing at the mouth in her text lol
> .


.
.
A, i support HUNTING OF FERAL CATS - not "any" hunting, anywhere, anytime -
& B, *only where hunting is legal - *which in the USA is over considerably larger
areas than in the UK.
.
.
C, i asked for any workable ideas OTHER THAN hunt / kill, & live-trap / euthanize,
to eliminate feral cats. Perhaps U'd prefer they be poisoned? - What's left?
.
D, leaving them to continue breeding isn't an option.
.
.
E, i'll now go delete that post of mine on Ur "vegetarian" thread.
Obviously, U won't want advice from some random mad person, _"frothing at the mouth"._
Sorry i bothered U.
.
.


----------



## leashedForLife

.
.
I went looking for myself. Sometimes U just can't depend on others.
.
.
http://www.kbtx.com/home/headlines/Sheriffs-Office-Finishes-Cat-Killed-Investigation-300815061.html
.
.
Also, please see the update here, which i QUOTE below:
.
http://www.kbtx.com/home/headlines/...illing-Cat-with-Bow-and-Arrow--300293461.html
.
.


> Wednesday (April 29)
> *10:13 a.m.*
> The case will not be presented to the Austin County Grand Jury, which convened today.
> .


.
.
No charges have yet been filed. Ergo, we'll have to await developments -
if any.
.
.


----------



## chillminx

leashedForLife said:


> .
> .*Everybody has an Ignore List; *it's on every account on PF-uk. It can have 0
> members listed, or as many as the acct-holder puts on it. U opt in to add a
> member's name to it - but we ALL have one, just as we all have a Friends List,
> which is also opt-in: U ask to befriend someone.
> The sole difference is that adding someone to a Friends List is mutual - while
> putting someone on an Ignore List is unilateral.


Now you're just quibbling about semantics and being pompous!  I'm sure you knew exactly what I meant. You used the phrase "the latest addition to my Ignore List", and the words *latest addition *can reasonably be interpreted to mean you've more than one person, perhaps several people, on your Ignore List. An alternative interpretation would be that you are in the habit of frequently putting members on your Ignore List. Either way your words imply you are in the habit of falling out with folk on this forum.


----------



## chillminx

leashedForLife said:


> .E, i'll now go delete that post of mine on Ur "vegetarian" thread.
> Obviously, U won't want advice from some random mad person, _"frothing at the mouth"._
> Sorry i bothered U.


Temper, temper!


----------



## Waterlily

I dont give a flying fark what you do in regards to my thread. I barely read you anyway, ... lol.... No offence but you have a way to just rave on and fkn on about crazy shit. Feral cat or not a vet stuffing an arrow in the back of its head for a thrill,when its only crime is wanting to live, when some irresponsible farkstain bred it in the first place is cruel and anyone that supports that is a wannker imo.


----------



## Calvine

chillminx said:


> Temper, temper!


Don't worry, Chillminx, at least you are not on the FBI ''most wanted'' list as I now appear to be!:Bawling LMAO!! I tend to think that people who post in unnecessarily large font and garish colours (let's just say lilac, for example) are really saying 'I would dearly love to shout this at you, to make you listen, but obviously, as this is a forum, you would not hear me''.


----------



## Calvine

Waterlily said:


> I dont give a flying fark what you do in regards to my thread. I barely read you anyway, ... lol.... No offence but you have a way to just rave on and fkn on about crazy shit. Feral cat or not a vet stuffing an arrow in the back of its head for a thrill,when its only crime is wanting to live, when some irresponsible farkstain bred it in the first place is cruel and anyone that supports that is a wannker imo.


Waterlily...I do believe that a wannker over there is referred to as a ''jerk-off''. Not trying to be clever or anything but he/she might not understand the Anglo-Saxon version! ROFL! Sorry to be a smart ass.


----------



## Guest

leashedForLife said:


> .
> C, i asked for any workable ideas OTHER THAN hunt / kill, & live-trap / euthanize,
> to eliminate feral cats. Perhaps U'd prefer they be poisoned? - What's left?


TNR. 
Supported by many animal welfare societies like the ASPCA 

I think you're overdramatizing the feral cat issue just a tad.

Built-up areas are causing far more damage to wildlife with human presence as any colony of feral cats could hope to cause, and rural areas don't have a major problem because we have predators that keep cat populations in check.

And yet again though, I have to say, *this is not about feral cats*!!!!!! It is about a veterinarian acting irresponsibly, utterly lacking in compassion, and completely at odds with the profession she chose. She should be fired and was rightly so. Her behavior was appalling.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Gawd blimey - I thought I knew most things about mans inhumanity to animals but I never knew it was legal to hunt feral cats in some places. How very charming.


----------



## Ceiling Kitty

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Gawd blimey - I thought I knew most things about mans inhumanity to animals but I never knew it was legal to hunt feral cats in some places. How very charming.


I'm still not convinced it is in Texas, where this took place...

_42.09 Animal Cruelty: Any person who shoots a non-livestock animal, which includes any stray or feral cat or dog, and a wild living creature previously captured, can be charged with a felony offense. Penal Code 42.092 of the State of Texas law states that a person must have the owner's consent to kill the animal (exceptions to prosecution are provided in Section 42.092(e)(1)). It is clear that a 'stray' dog or cat either has no owner or that the person who shoots the animal did not get the owner's consent._


----------



## Guest

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Gawd blimey - I thought I knew most things about mans inhumanity to animals but I never knew it was legal to hunt feral cats in some places. How very charming.


In most parts of the US you can legally shoot a stray animal that comes on to your property. Not only to protect livestock, but because we have rabies here and some things are not worth chancing. 
However there is a huge difference between shooting an animal that comes on to your property and actively going out to hunt them. And no, it is not legal to go out and have an open season on feral cats  Nor is L4L representative of how all Americans feel about feral cats


----------



## leashedForLife

.
.
http://www.aspcapro.org/blog/2014/10/16/why-are-conversations-about-free-roaming-cats-so-difficult
.
.


> *Why Are Conversations About Free-Roaming Cats So Difficult?*
> 
> BLOG | Thursday, October 16 2014
> 
> _She's been studying free-roaming cats for years-but what happens when guest blogger Dr. Margaret Slater discusses felines with a philosopher?_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Although I am pretty good at seeing all sides of a position and at really listening to others' views, I often wonder why the discussion about free-roaming cats is so contentious, and why people hold such strong perspectives. Just so we are on the same page, _free-roaming cats_ are any cats who aren't on their owners' property, and may be owned or unowned.
> _Feral cats_ are unsocialized free-roaming cats who are not accustomed to being around humans.
> 
> I recently met with a philosopher who has been writing about animals and values and how we think about different animals differently. We talked for a long time that afternoon, after I met the two cats she had adopted from a rescue group. I was looking for an answer, being the science and data person that I am. Instead, I found some explanations, a context that drives our responses, opinions and viewpoints that I hadn't really ever heard articulated before. And just so you know, philosophical discussions about cats in particular and how they fit with our current understanding of morality and ethics are really just beginning.
> 
> Dr. Clare Palmer, the philosopher, had also just published a chapter on the conflicts about TNR vs. trap and euthanize, and how human values lead to the arguments for and against each option. I found it fascinating, and she included comments on how the existing philosophical theory would lean in different cat-related situations. I'm going to highlight the three values she discussed, which I think really help to explain why people feel the way they do. And that context of values is critical in recognizing why we have different opinions. It doesn't usually tell us what do to, or what the solution is, but it does help bring into focus where the other person is likely coming from. And we know that it is important to meet people where they are.
> 
> There are three major values that are helpful in illustrating the different views of people in the free-roaming cat debate.
> The first relates to the _value of lives_, and those can be cats, humans or wildlife. Relative to cats, this addresses the question about whether shortening a cat's life by euthanasia is wrong if that cat would have had a reasonably good life.
> This then begs the question of what would a cat want, and what is in a cat's best interests? Also, is it moral for humans to kill cats, an arguably sentient being? However, cats aren't the only species of concern.
> What about prey animals? Is it acceptable to just add individual animal deaths and say that killing one cat saves X birds and rodents? We don't intervene routinely to prevent other types of predations, so why is it okay to do so for cats?
> What if all lives aren't equal? Do we have a special moral responsibility to cats? What about a special moral responsibility towards wildlife we live in close proximity to, whose environments we have already changed?
> These questions are just beginning to be set into the framework of philosophy. But a person's answers do provide some insight into why different humans believe different control options for cats are morally acceptable.
> 
> _The second value relates to welfare_, defined here by subjective experiences such as pleasure, excitement, pain, distress or frustration. Our understanding of cat welfare, especially for free-roaming cats, is rudimentary.
> Do feral cats have a life worth living? A U.S. random digit-dial national poll asked which was more humane - trapping and putting the cat down or leaving the cats where they were, and the overwhelming response was the latter. That question was further qualified by asking, is that true even if the cat would be killed by a car two years later? - and 72% still said leave the cat where the cat is.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What is good welfare for a pet cat? Is keeping that cat indoor only okay?
> In England, many residents think keeping a cat inside only is cruel. Is keeping a cat outside but living in a nice barn okay if the cat is friendly and has human companionship, medical care, food, water and shelter? We don't really have any deeply explored consensus about this, making a unified view about a free-roaming cat's welfare even murkier.
> However, we do know that at least a proportion of cats who have been trapped, neuter, returned, fed and monitored live long lives, are able to perform normal cat behaviors and die at ripe old ages of the same diseases that finally kill our companion cats. We have some data on survival of cats in different environments, fed and unfed, altered and intact. There is quite a bit of variability in survival, but survive they do.
> Is that enough? Is that a start? Again, the cats aren't the only species with welfare concerns.
> 
> What about the suffering endured by the prey of cats? Are the cats really only killing prey with existing illness or injury who might have died or been killed by another predator anyway? It is likely that decisions about welfare will need to be viewed locally and based on evolving knowledge and discussion.
> 
> The final value to consider is _that of the different species involved_.
> Does biodiversity itself have an intrinsic value that is worthwhile? Do we say that only endangered species have more value than cats? Discussions about the value of species have to consider both the group (the species itself) as well as the individual animal within a species. Some species are more important to humans and to ecosystems (which has indirect human implications) that others.
> Should that lead to more value of one species than another? How do we prioritize different species? What is the true nature of conservation, and what is the role of human influence on environments and species and individual animals? These are ongoing discussions in the arena of philosophy.
> 
> Most of these questions, of course, don't have yes or no answers, even for a given individual. I find that my gut responses to some of these questions in the abstract are different than my responses to a specific situation or individual. However, I do find that these ideas help me understand where others are coming from, & why they may disagree with what seems obvious to me.
> What I am still working on is how to then move the conversation to the more practical aspects about what can we do in a given location that will actually result in the outcome needed: fewer cats, fewer complaints, less predation, better cat welfare, etc.
> 
> What do you personally believe about these values? Have you heard points of view that are related to the values I've outlined?
> 
> *References:*
> 
> Palmer, C.
> "Value conflicts in feral cat management: Trap-neuter-return or trap-euthanize?"
> In: Appleby MC, Weary DM, Sandoe P, eds. _Dilemmas in animal welfare. _Oxfordshire, England: CABI; 2014:148-168.
> 
> Karyen Chu, Wendy M. Anderson.
> "U.S. public opinion on humane treatment of stray cats." _Law and Policy Brief, _ 2007.


----------



## Guest

This is not about free roaming cats.
This is not about feral cats.

This is about a veterinarian who used a cat as target practice, showed total lack of compassion and responsibility, then bragged about her actions on social media. 

Her behavior is simply indefensible.


----------



## Calvine

ouesi said:


> This is not about free roaming cats.
> This is not about feral cats.
> 
> This is about a veterinarian who used a cat as target practice, showed total lack of compassion and responsibility, then bragged about her actions on social media.
> 
> Her behavior is simply indefensible.


Thoroughly agree, it shows a complete lack of professionalism and lack of respect for an animal. This is why she has been shown the door by her bosses _and_ her college. They do not wish to be associated with her because to do so would make them appear to be condoning her behaviour and hence show themselves in a very poor light.


----------



## Cleo38

leashedForLife said:


> .
> .
> http://www.aspcapro.org/blog/2014/10/16/why-are-conversations-about-free-roaming-cats-so-difficult
> .
> .


Because the thread wasn't about free roaming cats that's why ... although you turned it in to one so you can rant about them .... as you always do :Singing


----------



## diefenbaker

"Total: 370 (members: 71, guests: 286, robots: 13)"

13 robots.... I think I found one right here in this thread.


----------



## Cleo38

diefenbaker said:


> "Total: 370 (members: 71, guests: 286, robots: 13)"
> 
> 13 robots.... I think I found one right here in this thread.


    :Joyful


----------



## sskmick

Where an animal is found with horrific injuries I would expect a vet to try to save an animal and where this is impossible to humanely euthanise the animal. I would not expect a vet to cause such injuries or allow an animal to suffer. 

This incident highlights the fact that this person has serious mental health issues to be able to cause harm to an animal for self gratification and was certainly in the wrong profession.


----------



## leashedForLife

.
.
I want to be sure i've got this right.
.
.
- Vets CAN hunt or fish - that's OK.
.
- Any good ol' boy with a rifle or bow-&-arrow could have killed the cat, & that, too, would be OK.
.
- the primary objection would appear to be that a CAT was shot & killed by a vet.
A deer, grouse, rabbit, pheasant, moose, woodcock, snipe, whatever - if she'd shot one of those,
that would be OK.
.
.
So it all comes down to the fact that she shot a domestic species?
If she'd shot & killed a feral pig, then what?
.
.
If she'd shot & killed a dog who was running game - which BTW is legal in, i think, 48 of 50 states -
then what? Is that horrifying & a sign of her "mental issues", or is that acceptable?
.
.
Sorry, but i think if it's OK for vets to hunt & fish, & it was legal to hunt where she was hunting,
then a difference in *targets* [cat vs deer, dove, rabbit, grouse, et al] making the difference between
the vet being obviously off her nut, & simply hunting & killing a non-human, is a bit schizoid.
.
.
And whether he was owned or not, he was free-roaming in an area that's legal to hunt.
Cats, like crows, starlings, & a few others, are listed as varmints or pests in some areas, & there is
no season on them - they can be hunted year-round, with no limit on the number that can be shot.
.
I still find it impossible to believe that any "rescue group" would let adoptable animals roam at large,
ESPECIALLY an intact-tomcat, who can sire more unwanted kittens, & fight with other animals - cats,
coons, possums, etc - injuring himself & others, helping spread disease via close contact [including
rabies thru bites & scratches].
If this "rescue group" DOES let adoptable animals roam at large, i hope their license is revoked -
immediately.
.
.


----------



## Dogloverlou

leashedForLife said:


> .
> .
> I want to be sure i've got this right.
> .
> .
> - Vets CAN hunt or fish - that's OK.
> .
> - Any good ol' boy with a rifle or bow-&-arrow could have killed the cat, & that, too, would be OK.
> .
> - the primary objection would appear to be that a CAT was shot & killed by a vet.
> A deer, grouse, rabbit, pheasant, moose, woodcock, snipe, whatever - if she'd shot one of those,
> that would be OK.
> .
> .
> So it all comes down to the fact that she shot a domestic species?
> If she'd shot & killed a feral pig, then what?
> .
> .
> If she'd shot & killed a dog who was running game - which BTW is legal in, i think, 48 of 50 states -
> then what? Is that horrifying & a sign of her "mental issues", or is that acceptable?
> .
> .
> Sorry, but i think if it's OK for vets to hunt & fish, & it was legal to hunt where she was hunting,
> then a difference in *targets* [cat vs deer, dove, rabbit, grouse, et al] making the difference between
> the vet being obviously off her nut, & simply hunting & killing a non-human, is a bit schizoid.
> .
> .
> And whether he was owned or not, he was free-roaming in an area that's legal to hunt.
> Cats, like crows, starlings, & a few others, are listed as varmints or pests in some areas, & there is
> no season on them - they can be hunted year-round, with no limit on the number that can be shot.
> .
> I still find it impossible to believe that any "rescue group" would let adoptable animals roam at large,
> ESPECIALLY an intact-tomcat, who can sire more unwanted kittens, & fight with other animals - cats,
> coons, possums, etc - injuring himself & others, helping spread disease via close contact [including
> rabies thru bites & scratches].
> If this "rescue group" DOES let adoptable animals roam at large, i hope their license is revoked -
> immediately.
> .
> .


Never mind the fact she boasted about her 'kill' online like some sadistic trophy hunter......

I'm yet to hear you say anything about THAT fact. Just the point that the cat was fair game because he was roaming.


----------



## Guest

leashedForLife said:


> - Any good ol' boy with a rifle or bow-&-arrow could have killed the cat, & that, too, would be OK.


 Nope, that wouldn't be okay either. 
.


leashedForLife said:


> - the primary objection would appear to be that a CAT was shot & killed by a vet.


My main objection was the vet's attitude about the killing. Callous, disrespectful, and lacking in empathy for the animal and potential owners.

I'm not against hunting for food, I'm not against shooting an animal to protect others, or to put the animal out of misery. But in all cases it needs to be done with respect for the animal in question.

And in this case, there was no need to shoot the cat to begin with. Not gonna eat it, not endangering anyone's immediate welfare, not in pain. All of that equals trophy killing which IMO is heinous.


----------



## Calvine

ouesi said:


> Nope, that wouldn't be okay either.
> .
> 
> My main objection was the vet's attitude about the killing. Callous, disrespectful, and lacking in empathy for the animal and potential owners.
> 
> I'm not against hunting for food, I'm not against shooting an animal to protect others, or to put the animal out of misery. But in all cases it needs to be done with respect for the animal in question.
> 
> And in this case, there was no need to shoot the cat to begin with. Not gonna eat it, not endangering anyone's immediate welfare, not in pain. All of that equals trophy killing which IMO is heinous.


And the cat was only scanned* after* its death to check whether it had microchip/tattoo. So what if he was ''entire''? OR did she (the _so-called_
vet) scan it prior to killing it and say, well, what the hell, it is entire and, as far as we can see, there is no chip, so I will release it into my back yard and kill it. Terrible story and ghastly woman. . Being entire is not a reason to kill the cat...there is no indication that he was a liability...killing hens/pigeons. NO...this cat was target practice for a ghastly woman.


----------



## leashedForLife

ouesi said:


> ... there was no need to shoot the cat to begin with.
> 
> Not gonna eat it, not endangering anyone's immediate welfare, not in pain.
> All of that equals *trophy killing,* which IMO is heinous.


.
.
I disagree.
An intact-tomcat, roaming at large in a hunting-permitted area, is IMO a legitimate target.
_*"Make more kittens!" *_isn't a rallying cry for anyone, that i know of.
.
.
I also saw nothing that said the vet would have the cat's head taxidermied for mounting - 
did U? If so, please post a link - thanks. If there were no plans to make the cat's head or
body part of the home-decor, i don't think a "*trophy*" was the reason to shoot him.
.
.
And i've seen no update re charges filed, pending, etc.
The only place this case was tried has been the court of public opinion - &, if U've forgotten,
that's also where lynchings, witch-burning, & public stoning have been popular. Mob rule isn't
a good idea.
.
.
Several ppl have said the vet should be killed, on other forums / social media.
Should she be stoned? -- Publicly hung? --- Burned alive? -- Shot by firing squad?
.
*or*... to prevent any future, similar events - should cat-OWNERS be required to keep their cats
on their own property, confined by cat-proof fences? I'd vote for the latter.
.
.
.


----------



## Guest

leashedForLife said:


> .
> .
> I disagree.
> An intact-tomcat, roaming at large in a hunting-permitted area, is IMO a legitimate target.
> _*"Make more kittens!" *_isn't a rallying cry for anyone, that i know of.
> .
> .
> I also saw nothing that said the vet would have the cat's head taxidermied for mounting -
> did U? If so, please post a link - thanks. If there were no plans to make the cat's head or
> body part of the home-decor, i don't think a "*trophy*" was the reason to shoot him.
> .
> .
> And i've seen no update re charges filed, pending, etc.
> The only place this case was tried has been the court of public opinion - &, if U've forgotten,
> that's also where lynchings, witch-burning, & public stoning have been popular. Mob rule isn't
> a good idea.
> .
> .
> Several ppl have said the vet should be killed, on other forums / social media.
> Should she be stoned? -- Publicly hung? --- Burned alive? -- Shot by firing squad?
> .
> *or*... to prevent any future, similar events - should cat-OWNERS be required to keep their cats
> on their own property, confined by cat-proof fences? I'd vote for the latter.
> .
> .
> .


First off, *I* have said nothing about the vet being killed, nor has anyone on this thread. 
And by "trophy" killing, I'm talking about exactly what I said. She's not eating the cat, protecting anything, or humanely ending suffering. Nor is there any mention on her bragging FB post that accompanied the picture of her attempting to rid the world of feral cats. The cat was target practice. And then she held him up by the arrow, no respect shown to the animal, and posed next to him grinning. If that doesn't smack of trophy killing to you, then IDK what to say.

I'm sorry, but I just don't see the parallels you're making nor do I follow your logic. I think you're so blinkered by your "no outside cats" agenda that you're just not making sense.

I am against trial by social media, and I think if you follow my record on here, I am beyond fair about that. There is little if anything to defend about this vet's actions. Had she shown any respect for the animal or the owners after killing him, we would be having a much different conversation.

One of my friends is a veterinarian who only eats meat she kills herself. That means she shoots deer, turkey, and raises poultry and goats. She figures the only way she can assure an animal has had a humane life and death is if she hunts or raises the animals herself. I have all the respect in the world for her and her choices. 
I have zero respect for the actions of this vet who killed the cat with a bow and arrow and then bragged about it all over FB.


----------



## leashedForLife

ouesi said:


> ... by "trophy" killing, I'm talking about exactly what I said. She's not eating the cat, *protecting* anything,
> or *humanely ending suffering*.
> 
> Nor is there any mention ... of her attempting to *rid the world of feral cats*.
> ...
> .
> .


.
.
Free-roaming cats kill smaller animals. That's a given. Even cats who never "trophy" anything [i-e, take it home]
pounce on & kill other animals, either directly on site, or later, due to overwhelming infections introduced by
cats' teeth & claws.
.
So removing a free-roaming cat - alive or dead, either way - from the landscape is both protective & preventive;
it does not STOP current suffering, but it would PREVENT future suffering by preventing the cat from pouncing 
on future victims.
.
If she was completely unconcerned about feral cats, why did she make such a point of the fact that this was an
INTACT tom? -- If his reproductive status didn't matter, she wouldn't have remarked on it.
.
.
IIRC, she said something like, _*"The only good feral tomcat is a dead feral tomcat." *_Wasn't that it, i think?
.
.I can't see the 1st page, where this was quoted repeatedly, so i'm forced to rely on memory.
.
.
.


----------



## Guest

"My first bow kill lol. The only good feral tomcat is one with an arrow through its head! Vet of the year award.... Gladly accepted."
http://kron4.com/2015/04/18/veterin...estigated-for-killing-cat-with-bow-and-arrow/

If she had said "I hate it, but had to kill this feral tomcat for the benefit of the other animals in the area, and to prevent litters, please keep your cats responsibly" or something to that effect, I would feel very differently.

But that's not at all what she said.

She laughed, enjoyed killing the animal, and did it for what appeared to be target practice and a photo op. How many other animals did she practice on before she got her "first kill"?


----------



## leashedForLife

.
.
Well, in that case, she only needs to hire a social-media specialist to write her captions.
Problem solved. The PR-person can write it with the apropos spin, & no one is upset.
.
.
I practiced plenty on targets before i was ever allowed to shoot AT a living animal.
I was also repeatedly warned to never, ever, ever point a gun at anything or anyone that i didn't
intend to shoot. As a direct result, i never wounded anything - i either hit & killed it, or missed it cleanly.
.
.
And BTW, the record number of times i had a rifle pointed at me?...
on a daytime hunt with a half-dozen older men, outside of Altoona, PA. I was in my mid-20s, they were
in their 40s & 50s, & i looked down a rifle barrel at least 12 or 15 times that day. They "knew better" -
they just didn't ACT better, they were careless & sloppy. I was lucky to come home with my skull intact
& my brains still in it. We were deer-hunting, & a 30.06 isn't a pea-shooter.
.
.
.


----------



## Calvine

Still ranting and raving on, I see! The fact is, this so-called vet (having presumably taken a veterinary oath) shot a cat without knowing if it was microchipped or castrated (not that I think lack of microchip and the fact he was entire was a reason to kill him but L for L obviously does). I wonder how she would have felt if, when it was scanned, it turned out to be a pet which had inadvertently been let out and which just happened to be registered at the practice where she was employed at the time and from which she was promptly dismissed? Would she still have smirked and chortled on FB ... _'Just killed one of my patients for fun LOL!'_


----------



## Cleo38

leashedForLife said:


> .
> .
> Free-roaming cats kill smaller animals. That's a given. Even cats who never "trophy" anything [i-e, take it home]
> pounce on & kill other animals, either directly on site, or later, due to overwhelming infections introduced by
> cats' teeth & claws.
> .
> *So removing a free-roaming cat - alive or dead, either way - from the landscape is both protective & preventive;
> it does not STOP current suffering, but it would PREVENT future suffering by preventing the cat from pouncing
> on future victims.*
> .
> If she was completely unconcerned about feral cats, why did she make such a point of the fact that this was an
> INTACT tom? -- If his reproductive status didn't matter, she wouldn't have remarked on it.
> .
> .
> IIRC, she said something like, _*"The only good feral tomcat is a dead feral tomcat." *_Wasn't that it, i think?
> .
> .I can't see the 1st page, where this was quoted repeatedly, so i'm forced to rely on memory.
> .
> .
> .


Hahaha, so she was being a considerate person???!! I don't think so ....

Let's wipe out lots of animals then to prevent the suffering of others ... we could also apply the same priniciple to people as well ..... what tosh!

Ranting about outdoor cats is simply showing your lack of understanding & blinkered approach. You are obviously so blind to any other opinions or facts, other situations in other countries, etc as you continue to spout your so called 'facts' & ludicrous opinions at any opportunity in the cat section


----------



## Calvine

Cleo38 said:


> Hahaha, so she was being a considerate person???!! I don't think so ....
> 
> Let's wipe out lots of animals then to prevent the suffering of others ... we could also apply the same priniciple to people as well ..... what tosh!
> 
> Ranting about outdoor cats is simply showing your lack of understanding & blinkered approach. You are obviously so blind to any other opinions or facts, other situations in other countries, etc as you continue to spout your so called 'facts' & ludicrous opinions at any opportunity in the cat section


Hey, careful, Cleo, or you will end up like me being added to LforL's ''posters to ignore'' list, which I believe is quite lengthy!!:Hurting Yes, of course she only killed it to stop it killing a moth.


----------



## Cleo38

Calvine said:


> Hey, careful, Cleo, or you will end up like me being added to LforL's ''posters to ignore'' list, which I believe is quite lengthy!! Yes, of course she only killed it to stop it killing a moth.


Haha, I am far too nosey to have an ignore list ..... well done in your achievement though


----------



## leashedForLife

.
.
It's May 12th.
.
.
No charges have been filed, & there are no rumors of pending charges that i can find.
.
.
the *Court of Public Opinion * has no legal status, & can't fine, jail, or deport anyone.
This was nothing more nor less than a social media feeding-frenzy.
.
.
I've seen nothing from the supposed "owners", only the so-called RESCUE claimed the cat
belonged to an anonymous "elderly couple". That leaves me wondering if there is any actual
'couple' or just a convenient nonexistent phantom image of 2 appealing old folks as a target
for all this unfocused empathy.
Just another un-real reality-TV episode, played out on social platforms.
.
.
The only real part was that the cat was roaming at large, & was shot & killed.
Owned or not, feral or not, that's inarguable fact. Maybe more cat-owners will consider keeping
Fluffy at home, where s/he belongs. Maybe more cat-owners will get concealed-carry permits,
& start shooting hunters. Who knows?

But i'll remind UK-readers that in the USA, shooting dogs who are harassing wildlife or live-
stock is the norm, has been for decades, & is perfectly legal. I don't see why cats should get
a pass.
The vet's big mistake was that the rule for shooting game-chasing dogs is *"Shoot, shovel,*
_*& SHUT UP." *_ U don't brag around the cracker-barrel at the general store, & U don't put it on
Ur FaceBook feed, with or without photos. U might tell Ur spouse, & U'd probly tell the game 
warden, but no one else.
.
.
I'd suggest the vet use that rule for any future hunting - of cats or any other species; & maybe
she should stop mentioning eating sushi, the family reunion with a whole hog barbecued in a
barrel grill, her favorite recipe for chicken with dumplings, and any other carnivore tendencies.
.
.
After all, IMAGE is everything. Forget reality. - that's old-fashioned.
.
.
.


----------



## Guest

@leashedForLife, I can't even begin to tell you how offensive your last post is. 
Years ago, I had two dogs shot. It was in part a mistake on my part, as they were not supervised (I was working a horse, it was hot, they returned to the barn on their own and on the way encountered a trespassing hunter and I'm sure put on a good show. The dogs were on our land, and the hunter who shot them was on our land ILLEGALLY. But because our dogs had no witness in their favor, we had no legal recourse. He got a warning for trespassing.

Your callousness at the way this cat was killed and the way the vet handled the killing - bragging about it and posting a smiling triumphant photo holding the dead animal by the arrow, complete and utter disrespect for the life she just took... And you not only support her action, and then turn around and post something as offensive and callous as shoot shovel and shut up, has me honestly at a loss for words. I'm SO upset right now that on a forum of PET lovers I'm having to read this....

In the real world I walk away from hunting conversations, I walk away from cat killing braggart conversations. I don't subject myself to this sort of attitude on purpose. And I can't believe I'm seeing it on a pet forum. I'm just truly sickened right now


----------



## chillminx

@leashedForLife - In the UK it is legally permissible for farmers to shoot dogs who are harassing or attacking their livestock. The farmer needs a licence to own a shotgun for the purpose.

It is not legal however in the UK to shoot a dog that is chasing or worrying wild life, and I sincerely hope it never comes to that point here!! A straying dog chasing wildlife might well be trapped by a Dog Warden and taken to a pound, and if the owner couldn't be traced the dog would be put up for adoption.

Cats of course do not harass livestock, so it's never likely to be permissible here to hunt and shoot cats, even ferals, thank goodness.


----------



## Calvine

ouesi said:


> @leashedForLife, I can't even begin to tell you how offensive your last post is.
> Years ago, I had two dogs shot. It was in part a mistake on my part, as they were not supervised (I was working a horse, it was hot, they returned to the barn on their own and on the way encountered a trespassing hunter and I'm sure put on a good show. The dogs were on our land, and the hunter who shot them was on our land ILLEGALLY. But because our dogs had no witness in their favor, we had no legal recourse. He got a warning for trespassing.
> 
> Your callousness at the way this cat was killed and the way the vet handled the killing - bragging about it and posting a smiling triumphant photo holding the dead animal by the arrow, complete and utter disrespect for the life she just took... And you not only support her action, and then turn around and post something as offensive and callous as shoot shovel and shut up, has me honestly at a loss for words. I'm SO upset right now that on a forum of PET lovers I'm having to read this....
> 
> In the real world I walk away from hunting conversations, I walk away from cat killing braggart conversations. I don't subject myself to this sort of attitude on purpose. And I can't believe I'm seeing it on a pet forum. I'm just truly sickened right now


I do so agree with you. The poster to whom you refer recently had a post removed (not from this thread) as it was considered unacceptable, and I thought he/she might at least have got the message that some things are best left unsaid,...but the ranting and raving is seemingly eternal!! I may bow out of this thread as the purple posts are starting to p*** me off more than somewhat.:Arghh


----------



## Cleo38

leashedForLife said:


> .
> .
> It's May 12th.
> .
> .
> No charges have been filed, & there are no rumors of pending charges that i can find.
> .
> .
> the *Court of Public Opinion *has no legal status, & can't fine, jail, or deport anyone.
> This was nothing more nor less than a social media feeding-frenzy.
> .
> 
> No, but from reports her employers sacked her - they thought they obviously had enough reason & acted accordingly. Not sure why you seem to ignore this. Regardless of any other charges being bought her employers took action & she has not challlenged this .... unless I have missed something
> .
> I've seen nothing from the supposed "owners", only the so-called RESCUE claimed the cat
> belonged to an anonymous "elderly couple". That leaves me wondering if there is any actual
> 'couple' or just a convenient nonexistent phantom image of 2 appealing old folks as a target
> for all this unfocused empathy.
> Just another un-real reality-TV episode, played out on social platforms.
> .
> 
> But there's not been anything to confirm this was a feral cat either .... you can't have it both ways!
> .
> The only real part was that the cat was roaming at large, & was shot & killed.
> Owned or not, feral or not, that's inarguable fact. Maybe more cat-owners will consider keeping
> Fluffy at home, where s/he belongs. Maybe more cat-owners will get concealed-carry permits,
> & start shooting hunters. Who knows?
> 
> Where s/he belongs? According to who? You?! Do you make laws throughout the USA or in the UK? No, you don't. Letting cats outdoors is not illegal
> 
> But i'll remind UK-readers that in the USA, shooting dogs who are harassing wildlife or live-
> stock is the norm, has been for decades, & is perfectly legal. I don't see why cats should get
> a pass.
> 
> 
> Errr .... is shooting dogs legal for harrassing wildlife legal? Who says the cats was harrassing wildlife? Were you there? Did you see it? Was it reported as such? No, you are making assumptions ....again
> 
> The vet's big mistake was that the rule for shooting game-chasing dogs is *"Shoot, shovel,*
> _*& SHUT UP." *_U don't brag around the cracker-barrel at the general store, & U don't put it on
> Ur FaceBook feed, with or without photos. U might tell Ur spouse, & U'd probly tell the game
> warden, but no one else.
> 
> So killing animals that may be a much loved pet is fine .... wow, you really should rethink your membership to a 'pet' forum .... maybe not the place for someone like you who holds such little regard for some animals
> 
> I'd suggest the vet use that rule for any future hunting - of cats or any other species; & maybe
> she should stop mentioning eating sushi, the family reunion with a whole hog barbecued in a
> barrel grill, her favorite recipe for chicken with dumplings, and any other carnivore tendencies.
> .
> 
> Here we go .... more silly stuff!! .....
> .
> After all, IMAGE is everything. Forget reality. - that's old-fashioned.
> .
> .
> .


*Unbelievable that someone so hell bent on being right & trying to prove they are would defend such actions ..... you really should rethink your opinions on some subjects!!*


----------



## Calvine

Cleo38 said:


> *Unbelievable that someone so hell bent on being right & trying to prove they are would defend such actions ..... you really should rethink your opinions on some subjects!!*


A dog chasing livestock can be shot (tho' you would not usually use a bow and arrow) to protect the livestock which it is chasing. A cat in a garden is not in this category...Barn owls and Eagles kill all manner of creatures - it is how they survive - but no-one kills them for it and in fact it is an offence to shoot them (or even to take their eggs, destroy their nests etc) and killing these and many other creatures will land the perpetrator with a hefty fine.


----------



## leashedForLife

ouesi said:


> ... I can't even begin to tell you how offensive your last post is.
> Years ago, I had two dogs shot. It was in part a mistake on my part, as they were not supervised (I was working a horse, it was hot, they returned to the barn on their own and on the way encountered a trespassing hunter and I'm sure put on a good show. The dogs were on our land, and the hunter who shot them was on our land ILLEGALLY.
> But because our dogs had no witness in their favor, we had no legal recourse. He got a warning for trespassing.
> 
> ...


.
.
I'm sorry Ur dogs were shot.
My friend Corinne had both her dogs shot - she'd been warned for months about the dogs wandering,
chasing rabbits thru the neighbors' gardens, running along or across the roads, chasing horses in the
pastures, running deer.
She wanted them to be "free", & hadn't even neutered either dog [both male]. She ignored all the
complaints, even the warnings from the game warden.
They were about 2-miles from home, on the power-line right of way, when they were shot. She was a
bit worried when they didn't come home for dinner, but not much; more so when they didn't come home
that night, but not panicked. Three weeks later, they found them both, crumpled in a ravine.
She was heartbroken, especially as Mockturtle wasn't even 18-MO, & vowed no more dogs. I thought
it was a good decision - she wasn't very responsible about her dogs, they were untrained & while affec-
tionate, not well-behaved.
She also let all her cats roam at large - altho THEY were all desexed - but they didn't wander as far, &
the neighbors didn't complain as much about them. Over the years, only one cat was shot; another was
hit by a car, & 3 or 4 had run-ins with various wildlife, especially raccoons.
I loved Corinne, but I wouldn't describe her as a model pet-owner; she got her pets vet-care when they
needed it, but she caused more of their vet care than anything else did, by leaving them roam.

We had our own problems with trespassing hunters, who were angry they couldn't hunt at will after
we bought the farm from the former, elderly owners, who'd let them hunt anything & anytime.
.
.
We had idiots shoot over our heads, climb the stock fences & break them out of the staples, tromp
over our garden & crush plants, steal fruit, & litter - empty bottles, food wrappers, garbage.
Then we came home from shopping to find a neat hole punched by a 0.22 thru the kitchen's back
window - directly across the table, to hit the wall by the front door.
That day our entire property began to sprout vivid "No Trespassing" signs of metal, tacked to trees &
finally covered with wove-wire, as hunters ripped off the first ones & crushed them, furious that their
playground was closed.
.
The second autumn, they opened our pasture gate & chased out all the animals, scattering them in
panic. It took 3-weeks to find & bring home all our sheep, & of course their fleeces picked up all sorts
of burrs, twigs, & trash in that time.
.
We reported it to the game warden - the bullet-hole, the trash, the broken fences, the loose stock.
Eventually, the harassment stopped, but bad feeling persisted for years. We were the "city folk" who
"didn't like hunters", which was asinine - my mother grew up on a farm, as did all my grandparents.
My mother & grandmother didn't hunt, but my mother fished, & all the males hunted & fished.
There are ethical & polite hunters, & there are jerks, too.
.
.


----------



## Cleo38

Calvine said:


> A dog chasing livestock can be shot (tho' you would not usually use a bow and arrow) to protect the livestock which it is chasing. A cat in a garden is not in this category...Barn owls and Eagles kill all manner of creatures - it is how they survive - but no-one kills them for it and in fact it is an offence to shoot them (or even to take their eggs, destroy their nests etc) and killing these and many other creatures will land the perpetrator with a hefty fine.


Yes & it must be awful for farmers to have to do this, I doubt many (if any) would be posting glib message about it on FB.

What is also disturbing about certain replies is the assumption that the cat had been destroying wildlife & therefore the killing was justified .... nothing in the report to suggest this. It is also worrying that the certain poster also feels that an animal should be killed so callously in case it MIGHT be affecting the local wildlife ... no evidence or fact just kill something just in case .... how sad!


----------



## Guest

leashedForLife said:


> My friend Corinne had both her dogs shot - she'd been warned for months about the dogs wandering,
> chasing rabbits thru the neighbors' gardens, running along or across the roads, chasing horses in the
> pastures, running deer.
> She wanted them to be "free", & hadn't even neutered either dog [both male]. She ignored all the
> complaints, even the warnings from the game warden.
> They were about 2-miles from home, on the power-line right of way, when they were shot. She was a
> bit worried when they didn't come home for dinner, but not much; more so when they didn't come home
> that night, but not panicked. Three weeks later, they found them both, crumpled in a ravine.
> She was heartbroken, especially as Mockturtle wasn't even 18-MO, & vowed no more dogs. I thought
> it was a good decision - she wasn't very responsible about her dogs, they were untrained & while affec-
> tionate, not well-behaved.
> She also let all her cats roam at large - altho THEY were all desexed - but they didn't wander as far, &
> the neighbors didn't complain as much about them. Over the years, only one cat was shot; another was
> hit by a car, & 3 or 4 had run-ins with various wildlife, especially raccoons.
> I loved Corinne, but I wouldn't describe her as a model pet-owner; she got her pets vet-care when they
> needed it, but she caused more of their vet care than anything else did, by leaving them roam.


Don't fake sorrow for my dogs being shot and then turn around and tell me about an irresponsible pet owner and their dogs being shot.
I am not your friend Corrine. My dogs were not repeatedly running at large bothering anyone or anything. And even if I were an irresponsible dog owner, my dogs did not deserve to get shot for it.

Your callous attitude towards animals and how nonchalantly you seem to think it's okay to shoot them is honestly pretty shocking to me, and not a conversation I wish to have or associate with. Done.... :Hungover


----------



## leashedForLife

.
.
I didn't SAY that Ur dogs were on someone else's property, nor did i ever imply it was OK
to shoot them *on their own property*, having done nothing to threaten anyone but bark. 
.
I didn't even say it was perfectly alright to shoot Corinne's dogs - altho Lord knows, she'd
been asked to keep them at home often enuf, & to prevent their chasing critters.
.
I *did* say i was sorry that Ur dogs were shot - & i meant it. I don't know why U think that's
some sort of sham. Would it "mean more" if i said the trespasser should have been shot? - 
because, personally, i think that's excessive & doesn't solve anything.
.
.
Comments on this forum when any animal has been hurt or killed frequently degenerate into
threats or statements that the perpetrator should 'get the same'. I don't think it's any more
humane to shoot / stab / burn / dock / crop / de-claw, etc, the human than it was to do what-
ever it was to the nonhuman.
Two creatures suffering or dead isn't an improvement.
.
Other than jail time, i don't know what the JP / court could have done to the hunter who shot
Ur dogs. U certainly wouldn't want such a man doing community service in the local shelter.
A fine? --- About the only apropos punishment would probly be to cut off his hunting & fish-
ing privileges for a year or 2, but most magistrates would never think of it.
.
.
.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Am I missing something or just being thick? why can't the feral cats be neutered instead of being hunted with arrows (got to be one of the most barbaric things I've heard in a long time). Who would let a vet anywhere near any of their animals who boasts that the old good feral tomcat is a dead one :Jawdrop


----------



## Guest

leashedForLife said:


> Comments on this forum when any animal has been hurt or killed frequently degenerate into
> threats or statements that the perpetrator should 'get the same'.


NOT by me. You've not see any such comment by me, and besides, WTH does that have to do with my dogs getting shot? Where did I say I wanted punishment for the trespasser?

You are showing utterly no compassion, none for the animals that were shot, none for the humans who mourn their pets, none for the animal lovers on this thread who are shocked and saddened. That's why your "sorry" rings hollow. Don't talk to me of being humane when you are showing such lack of basic human compassion.


----------



## leashedForLife

rottiepointerhouse said:


> ...why can't... feral cats be *neutered instead of* *being hunted [& killed]... *
> *...*


.
.
Because simply neutering them isn't a solution, AND because there aren't FUNDS to neuter
the estimated Ninety Million feral cats, roaming across the USA. 

That figure doesn't include free-roaming OWNED cats; nor abandoned or dumped pets.
That's only ferals; born outside human settings. Fewer than 5% of feral cats or street cats
are in "managed" colonies, fed by volunteer caregivers, desexed, UTD on rabies vax, &
ear-notched to identify their desexed status.
.
Over 95% of all free-roaming cats are not tracked or fed by anyone, & are not vaccinated
to prevent rabies. There have been many estimates over the years of the impact of cat
predation on wildlife; cat-owners & lobbying groups always insist that the numbers of wild-
life killed are inflated.
Personally, having lived with free-roaming cats for 20-odd years who hunted at will & lived
outdoors 24 / 7, i'd say estimates of the toll on wildlife are seriously BELOW reality.
.
.
.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse

Gosh I had no idea the US was so overrun with feral cats, can't say as I've seen a single one on any of our travels there or heard my sister mention them (she lives in Texas). If it is such an enormous problem then the odd crack pot going out and shooting them with an arrow is hardly going to solve the problem is it? That language can never be an acceptable way for a vet to speak about an animal - if she feels like that about a feral cat then she probably feels the same about pet cats so who would trust her to be kind and compassionate to their pet?


----------



## Guest

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Gosh I had no idea the US was so overrun with feral cats, can't say as I've seen a single one on any of our travels there or heard my sister mention them (she lives in Texas).


In areas where we have a healthy predator population, and more balance of wildlife, feral cats are no where near the problem some like to make it out to be. We don't have a problem here. We have a very healthy coyote population, plenty of BOP, and even smaller predators like raccoons and possums help keep the cats in check competing for territory.

Bears mentioning that those numbers are only estimates. There is no way to know for sure how many cats there actually are. I've never seen the 90 million figure, or the 95% not vaccinated. The highest number I've seen is 75 million with a lower estimate of 35 million. We just don't know.
I will say, rabies in ferals is most definitely a concern, and this is why many people don't take chances and are quick to shoot strays. In our state we've had several confirmed cases of rabies in cats, so I am understanding of why people worry when they see a cat they don't recognize.

In areas that are less rural, yes, there can be pretty annoying colonies of feral cats. However one has to ask what the issue is, the cats, or the humans who have destroyed the habitat of the local flora and fauna leaving the cats to flourish.

But I can't believe I'm having to repeat this again, the issue is not so much that the vet shot the cat. (Though why she had to use a bow and arrow, which suggest she was looking for something to practice shooting on - itself disturbing.) 
The main issue is her behavior related to shooting the cat. The lack of respect shown to the cat, the gloating and celebration after the kill, the lack of professionalism for not attempting to find an owner but taking the time to take a photo, post it on social media, and post a callous comment along with it. The utter callousness all around regarding both the animal and the potential owners of that animal.


----------



## Calvine

ouesi said:


> In areas where we have a healthy predator population, and more balance of wildlife, feral cats are no where near the problem some like to make it out to be. We don't have a problem here. We have a very healthy coyote population, plenty of BOP, and even smaller predators like raccoons and possums help keep the cats in check competing for territory.
> 
> Bears mentioning that those numbers are only estimates. There is no way to know for sure how many cats there actually are. I've never seen the 90 million figure, or the 95% not vaccinated. The highest number I've seen is 75 million with a lower estimate of 35 million. We just don't know.
> I will say, rabies in ferals is most definitely a concern, and this is why many people don't take chances and are quick to shoot strays. In our state we've had several confirmed cases of rabies in cats, so I am understanding of why people worry when they see a cat they don't recognize.
> 
> In areas that are less rural, yes, there can be pretty annoying colonies of feral cats. However one has to ask what the issue is, the cats, or the humans who have destroyed the habitat of the local flora and fauna leaving the cats to flourish.
> 
> But I can't believe I'm having to repeat this again, the issue is not so much that the vet shot the cat. (Though why she had to use a bow and arrow, which suggest she was looking for something to practice shooting on - itself disturbing.)
> The main issue is her behavior related to shooting the cat. The lack of respect shown to the cat, the gloating and celebration after the kill, the lack of professionalism for not attempting to find an owner but taking the time to take a photo, post it on social media, and post a callous comment along with it. The utter callousness all around regarding both the animal and the potential owners of that animal.


The cat could have been registered with her practice as far as this woman knew (or apparently cared). The lack of respect and lack of professionalism from someone who (supposedly?) took a veterinary oath is what shocks me more than somewhat.


----------



## leashedForLife

.
.
I'd like to point out that BoP aren't "popn control" for feral cats - very few raptors have either
the size or the flexibility to expand their prey-menu to include CATS.
.
Eagles have the size to manage 7 to 10# prey, but seem to lack any interest in feral cats -
or for that matter, free-roaming pet cats - & that includes both Bald [primarily fish-eaters] &
Golden Eagles [primarily mammal-eaters]. 
.
Osprey, another large raptor, are dedicated fish-eaters. 
.
Great Horned Owls enjoy a meal of skunk, & cats are about a 3rd larger, but manageable -
GHO take SOME cats, but as they're strictly nocturnal, cats who hunker down at night can't
be taken by owls. Plus, GHO are thinly distributed - smaller owls are far-more common. 
.
Red-tailed Hawks are mammal hunters & can manage a small to medium sized cat, BUT...
they need open country to hunt productively, meaning open fields or pastures or meadows,
PLUS well-established open woodland, not crowded 3rd & 4th growth woods with branches
growing into one another, but with an understory of shrubs, etc.
So while they're listed as nationally-distributed, Red-tails are actually spotty, with lots of gaps
between occupied territories.
AND - they are strictly daytime hunters. Cats who lay up during the day & hunt by night, or
whose owners keep them indoors in daytime & let them out only at night, can't be taken by
hawks.
.
Other than these 2 species - 1 hawk & 1 owl - i know of no other birds of prey who hunt cats
in North America.
.
Coyote take cats, yes - but again, altho large parts of the U-S have coyote that Did NOT have
them before, as coyote were originally native only west of the Mississippi, & mostly on the
High Plains, they aren't "everywhere".
Feral cats or dumped / abandoned pet-cats can be found in every city, town, & suburb, hiding
under buildings, living in pipe-drains, lurking under or inside derelict cars, in condemned build-
ings, anywhere & everywhere.
Coyote aren't as widespread.
.
And again, it's not *"just" feral cats - *it's also *free-roaming OWNED cats.* There are over
80 million OWNED pet-cats in the USA; at least HALF of them are allowed to roam at large.
So let's take a low estimate of feral numbers - say, 40-million - plus the 40-million owned cats
that are allowed to roam.
That still totals a minimum of *80-mllion predators, owned or not, feral or not - *who aren't 
the least bit picky about which species of critters they pounce on, kill, toy with, or eat. Don't 
bother claiming they have "no effect". That's delusional.
.
*The Global Impact of Feral Cats | The Ecology Global Network*
http://www.ecology.com/2013/08/27/global-impact-*feral*-*cat*s/
.
*14 years ago:*
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/09/0907_040907_feralcats.html
.
.
http://www.dfg.ca.gov/wildlife/nongame/nuis_exo/dom_cat/
.
*Pubd 2013 -*
http://www.nature.com/ncomms/journal/v4/n1/abs/ncomms2380.html
.
.
http://www.eraptors.org/cats.htm
.
http://www.smithsonianmag.com/ist/?...billions-of-small-critters-each-year-7814590/
.
.
.


----------



## Guest

@leashedForLife, your feral/outdoor cat soap box is well used. Got it.

Get off the soap box for a minute, and try to understand what is being said on this thread. Whether the cat was feral, owned, etc., does not change the fact that the vet was callous in her behavior, and disrespectful of the animal she killed. 
It's really not that complicated.


----------



## leashedForLife

.
.
Quoting the Smithsonian article,
_"..._
_the authors think that between 258 to 822 million reptiles,_
_& 95 to 299 million amphibians, may die by cat each year nation-_
_wide [across the USA], although additional research [is] needed_
_to verify those extrapolations._
_
These estimates, especially for birds, far exceed any previous
figures for cat killings, they write, & also exceed all other direct
sources of anthropogenic bird-deaths, such as cars, buildings &
communication towers.

The authors conclude:_
_'The magnitude of wildlife mortality caused by cats that we report_
_here far exceeds all prior estimates. Available evidence suggests_
_that mortality from cat predation is likely to be substantial in all parts_
_of the world where free-ranging cats occur. _
_
Our estimates should alert policy makers_
_[to] the large magnitude of wildlife mortal-_
_ity caused by free-_
_ranging cats._
_
Although our results suggest owned 
cats have relatively less impact than _
_un-owned cats, owned cats cause_
_substantial wildlife mor_
_tality; simple_
_solutions to reduce mortality caused_
_by pets, such as
_

_limiting or prevent-_
_ing outdoor access, should be pur-_
_sued.'_

_[end excerpt]

The authors write that trap-S/N-_
 
_return programs - which catch,_
_"fix", & release feral cats - are_
_undertaken throughout North Am-_
_erica, carried out largely without_
_consideration toward_
_ native ani-_
_mals, & without widespread public_
_knowledge._

_Cat lovers claim these methods re-_
_duce wildlife mortality _
_by humanely _
_limiting the growth of feral colonies,
but the authors point out that the
scientific literature does not support
this assumption.

Therefore, such colonies should be
a 'wildlife management priority',
they write. They don't come out &
say it, but they imply that feral cat
colonies should be exterminated."
.
END Quote

http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/feral-cats-kill-billions-of-small-critters-each-year/
._
_._
_._


----------



## Calvine

ouesi said:


> @leashedForLife, your feral/outdoor cat soap box is well used. Got it.
> 
> Get off the soap box for a minute, and try to understand what is being said on this thread. Whether the cat was feral, owned, etc., does not change the fact that the vet was callous in her behavior, and disrespectful of the animal she killed.
> It's really not that complicated.


And we are not the only people who think so, her employers and Alma Mater thought the same...and one doubts she will find it easy to find another job. And you are right, it isn't the slightest bit complicated unless you really have a severe case of tunnel vision .


----------



## leashedForLife

.
.
The source of the Smithsonian article, including tables of data -
http://www.nature.com/ncomms/journal/v4/n1/full/ncomms2380.html
.
.
QUOTE, emphasis added in *bold & CAPS:*

_"Here we conduct a systematic review, & quantitatively estimate mortality caused by cats_
_in the United States. We estimate that free-ranging domestic cats kill *1.3 to 4 billion birds,*_
_*& 6.3 to 22.3 billion mammals, annually.* _
_Our findings suggest that *free-ranging cats* cause substantially greater wildlife mortality than_
_previously thought, & *are likely THE SINGLE GREATEST SOURCE OF ANTHROPOGENIC*_
_*MORTALITY for U-S birds & mammals.* _
_Scientifically sound conservation & policy intervention is needed to reduce this impact."_
_._
END Quote
_._
_._
_._


----------



## diefenbaker

leashedForLife said:


> .
> .
> I want to be sure i've got this right.
> .
> .


I've been holding my breath while you do this. Please hurry. I'm starting to turn blue.


----------



## leashedForLife

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Gosh I had no idea the US was so *overrun with feral cats*, can't say I've seen a single one on any of our travels there
> or heard my sister mention [feral cats] - she lives in Texas.
> ...


.
.


rottiepointerhouse said:


> ...
> why can't feral cats be *neutered* instead of being hunted [?] ...
> .


.
.
These are the posts i was replying to, with data to support my reasoning.
.
TNR, *Trap / neuter / return,* has been going on since the 1980s. To the best of my knowledge,
not one managed colony in all that time has shrunk to zero, nor has any managed colony stopped
recruiting new, intact, feral cats / kittens, or abandoned intact-pets.
I've asked repeatedly for anyone to give me a reference to a single colony that died out of attrition.
I've yet to get one, from anyone - including colony-carers.
.
.
Supporting free-roaming cats in the wild, forever & a day, as an ongoing, never-ending project, is
frankly nutz, IMO. Native wildlife have a right to live their lives, too. Desexing cats doesn't stop the
killing of wildlife.
.
Expecting native predators to control cat-numbers is ridiculous. There's a reason that cats are a
model for fertility; they can outbreed dam' near any other species but cockroaches & mosquitoes.
.
Red-tailed hawks, Great Horned Owls, & coyote will never "control" cat-numbers sufficiently, &
even a bounty for hunters is extremely unlikely to eliminate them. It will require a combination of
predation, hunting & bounties, plus live-trapping to euthanize feral & unclaimed free-roaming cats,
to get them off the landscape - even then, in rural areas, or in wilderness, they will persist unless
there is a concerted, ongoing effort.
.
.
.


----------



## dogsaintdumb

I don't think you're going to convince people here that killing cats is okay. Might be time for everyone to throw in the towel on this subject for now.


----------



## Rafa

Maybe there is a problem in some Countries with feral cats and maybe birds of prey and other predators won't keep the number under control, but, neither will one vet with a bow and arrow.

It's ludicrous to even try and suggest that this so called 'vet' was attempting to perform a public service with her bow and arrow.

She was simply getting her jollies by putting an arrow through the head of an innocent animal and bragging about it on Social Media.

This thread is not about the rights and wrongs of free roaming cats, domestic or feral, it's about the callous and highly unprofessional behaviour of an individual who has (supposedly) dedicated her life to the preservation of life and prevention of suffering in animals.


----------



## leashedForLife

.
.
ONE cat doesn't create the massive problems that the millions upon millions of free-roaming
owned cats create, let alone the problems caused by millions upon millions of free-roaming
ferals.
.
Cumulative effects are the result of many, many individual actions - such as the pollution caused
by each individual car, collectively raising the temperature & adding particulates to the air in cities,
changing weather patterns [rain & snow are now more likely on weekends, as particulates accum-
ulate over the week's heavy business-days traffic, & raindrops or snowflakes form on the dust &
other particles emitted & wafted up into the atmosphere].
.
So U're right; ONE vet won't make a big difference. However, if we can convince the hundreds of
thousands of hunters in the USA to hunt cats as small game for a bounty, we can effectively re-
duce the breeding & hunting popns of feral & / or owned free-roaming cats in the USA.
It's a mass effect, just like electricity consumption or conservation, mass market fads & trends, or
any other invasive species that gains a secure toehold & starts spreading.
.
.
The first million comes slowly; the 2nd is quick; the 3rd million is there in an eye-blink.
.
.
.


----------



## Calvine

Sweety said:


> Maybe there is a problem in some Countries with feral cats and maybe birds of prey and other predators won't keep the number under control, but, neither will one vet with a bow and arrow.
> 
> It's ludicrous to even try and suggest that this so called 'vet' was attempting to perform a public service with her bow and arrow.
> 
> She was simply getting her jollies by putting an arrow through the head of an innocent animal and bragging about it on Social Media.
> 
> This thread is not about the rights and wrongs of free roaming cats, domestic or feral, it's about the callous and highly unprofessional behaviour of an individual who has (supposedly) dedicated her life to the preservation of life and prevention of suffering in animals.


...and supposedly took a veterinary oath when she qualified if I'm not mistaken. LforL does not think the veterinary oath is significant as this so-called vet was off duty at the time...but then he/she is not getting many ''likes'' to his/her numerous ponderous and repetitive posts and to be honest, if that were me, I would give it a rest.:Yawn


----------



## lorilu

leashedForLife said:


> However, if we can convince the hundreds of
> thousands of hunters in the USA to hunt cats as small game for a bounty, we can effectively re-
> duce the breeding & hunting popns of feral & / or owned free-roaming cats in the USA.


That is about the most disgusting thing I have ever heard. What on earth is wrong with you. What a sick way to think.


----------



## Calvine

leashedForLife said:


> So U're right; ONE vet won't make a big difference. However, if *we* can convince the hundreds of
> thousands of hunters in the USA to hunt cats as *small game for a bounty*, we can effectively re-
> duce the breeding & hunting popns of feral & / or owned free-roaming cats in the USA.
> It's a mass effect, just like electricity consumption or conservation, mass market fads & trends, or
> any other invasive species that gains a secure toehold & starts spreading.


Agree lorilu. The _we _in this quote leads me to believe that the poster includes himself/herself in the group of people who would be prepared to kill cats _for a bounty_, ie for money. I can hardly believe that I am reading this on a pet forum, visited mainly (supposedly) by animal lovers.


----------



## Rafa

Calvine said:


> ...and supposedly took a veterinary oath when she qualified if I'm not mistaken. LforL does not think the veterinary oath is significant as this so-called vet was off duty at the time...but then he/she is not getting many ''likes'' to his/her numerous ponderous and repetitive posts and to be honest, if that were me, I would give it a rest.:Yawn


Oh, I see.

Well, if L for L believes it's okay for a vet to behave this way because she's off duty, then he won't have any objection if his Doctor comes after him with a weapon when he's off duty.

Fair's fair.


----------



## Erenya

it's amazing, my brain has suddenly developed this sort of... purple text filter. I just can't read it, my brain blocks it out, or maybe it's the excruciating use of text speak butchering the English language that my brain objects too....

This is abhorrent, irrespective of how you feel about feral cats, stray cats, roaming cats, just cats generally, the vile thing here is the crowing, self-congratulatory way the vet showed off what she was doing. From the distance she would have been shooting from she did not know the cat was feral, she did now know it wasn't chipped and she did not know it wasn't owned. She shot that cat for entertainment (not out of necessity, not to feed herself, for FUN!) and killing for fun is like bear baiting or cock fighting - it is disgusting pure and simple - as 99% of the posters on this thread agree with.

_"My first bow kill lol. The only good feral tomcat is one with an arrow through its head! Vet of the year award.... Gladly accepted."_
ok sweetheart, just how many animals did you maim before you got that first kill you stupid cruel woman....



Cleo38 said:


> Haha, I am far too nosey to have an ignore list ..... well done in your achievement though


me too, but I would very much like to apply to be on L4L's ignore list, I would consider it an honour


----------



## Cleo38

leashedForLife said:


> .
> .
> 
> .
> However, if we can convince the hundreds of
> thousands of hunters in the USA to hunt cats as small game for a bounty, we can effectively re-
> duce the breeding & hunting popns of feral & / or owned free-roaming cats in the USA.
> It's a mass effect, just like electricity consumption or conservation, mass market fads & trends, or
> any other invasive species that gains a secure toehold & starts spreading.
> .
> .
> The first million comes slowly; the 2nd is quick; the 3rd million is there in an eye-blink.
> .
> .
> .


What a horrible person you really are. What [email protected] you spout with no regard for the feeling of cat owners or the animals themselves. I pity you that you are obviously so intent on being right that you are unable to look beyond your own santimonious rantings


----------



## Calvine

Erenya said:


> I would very much like to apply to be on L4L's ignore list, I would consider it an honour


I was told (in purple I think) that I was ''the latest addition'' to his/her ignore list and I didn't have to apply! I simply pointed out that L4L had contradicted him/herself on whether or not the murdered cat was or was not microchipped. I am now _persona non grata as a result _but I'll get over it in time!! As someone else pointed out, to be ''the latest addition'' to the ignore list makes it sound, rather, as tho' I am not alone on the list (most likely in very good company).:Angelic


----------



## Guest

What's kind of surreal about this discussion is that I imagine the same things being said in defense of erradicating wolves and coyotes. The whole suggestion to have open season on any animal is just disgusting to me


----------



## lymorelynn

This thread is now closed


----------

