View Full Version : Killing Cats

04-12-05, 10:16 pm
I'm thinking this isn't the best solution to the problem.

04-12-05, 10:36 pm
Thats horrible. What if they shot someones pet?

04-12-05, 11:13 pm
That's what I was wondering.

04-12-05, 11:20 pm
Do they just say "oops" and go out and shoot another cat?

Quiet Things
04-12-05, 11:31 pm
I think in Australia you can hunt feral cats but you have to get licenses or something. I may be wrong.

Thats actually a very wrong thing, shooting indiscrimantly at cats, imagine the old guy next door with a loathing of cats shooting your new cat saying he thought it was stray. How is that ever going to get passed? how could anyone vote yes for it?

04-13-05, 05:22 am
6,000 some people did say yes opposed to 5,000 some saying no :(

Slap Maxwell
04-13-05, 07:11 am
That's horrible. I can't imagine if that was my cat. I hope it dosn't become law.

04-13-05, 10:28 am
I'm not sure where but there is a state where it is legal to shoot stray cats.

04-13-05, 02:49 pm
Shooting a gun in a city is always dangerous. Most cities have a law prohibiting the discharging of firearms (anything beyond a paintball gun, airsoft gun, 4.5mm BB/pellet air gun, etc.) within city limits. Any time you fire a gun in a city, you are creating a real hazard that could result in the death of a bystander or other innocent victim.

I don't know if the article is actually refering to shooting the cats or not, but common sense dictates that one wouldn't shoot cats in the city in the first place. More likely I think the hunters would use traps or a device like a blowgun / dart gun designed for use on animals of that size (like the "guns" some zookeepers have that fire tranquilizer darts).

04-14-05, 10:47 am
I'm gald I don't live there. I'd be in tears. My indoor cats have escaped before (for no more than a couple minutes I assure you. Pesky little critters) and even though they have collars with tags it is possible for a cat to lose it's collar. That's why microchipping is popular in conjuction with a collar. Even though you can't see the chip the cat can't lose it.

What happens when they shoot a chipped cat? That proves it's a pet. Are they just going to say oops and be on thier way. I can see big lawsuits happaning.

The song bird explination makes no sense. A couple starys cannot bring down an entire state's song bird population. Song birds belong to an eco system. They must have natural preditors to keep thier numbers in check or they will over populate and compete with other animals for food. Other animals eat birds. Heck some birds eat birds. Why don't we shoot seagulls while we're at it. They eat birds too.

Sometimes I wonder about politicians. Don't they have something better to do, like helping the poor or making the state more efficient.

04-14-05, 12:42 pm
Although I do not agree with this, from experience I can say that the problem itself does make sense. Around 20 years ago we had a severe problem with wild dogs in our area that have been in the wild for at least a couple of generations. These dogs were not part of our natural ecosystem because man had put them there. Well, they began killing off animals like foxes and raccoon, along with large animals like deer. It was not legal to shoot them, but nothing was done if you did shoot one. They were a severe treat to our animal population. Well, all the wild dogs are now gone, but about 1 month ago the local SPCA went to a local reserve and captured over 40 dogs who were all euthanized shortly after. These dogs had no actually hurt anyone, but they scared people. All i'm trying to say is that this type of stuff happens all of the time, but it is not usually passed into law. Also, nowadays, if their truly is a problem, the spca should be handeling it, not local hunters.

The reason that we don't shoot other animals that kill birds is because they are part of that ecosystem. Domesticated cats are not. They were introduced by us. It can be very harmful to many species of animals and plants any time that there is an overbundounce of animals that are not native to that particular area. I an not sure how big this problem is, but I know that we had at least a few hundred wild dogs at that point and that many animals can cause a severe problem.

I am not trying to condone what they are doing at all, because I think that there are much better ways to handle this situation, but it is quite common. It is a classic example of why spaying and neuturing animals is so important. This problem probably only started with a few strays that were not spayed and it continued to multiply.

04-14-05, 01:10 pm
Makes you wonder what kind of Government system we are working with doesn't it?

They are willing to pass a law to hunt and kill cats. YET, there is no talk whatsoever for passing a law to implement mandatory spay/neuter or to create stricter breeder licensing/regulation.

It seems to me that the only reason to have an unaltered cat or dog is to breed it. Therefore shouldn't all people that own unaltered pets be forced to pass a qualifying exam and buy an expensive breeder license with yearly licensing fees? Any unaltered pets who's owners do not have the appropriate and updated breeder's license should be subject to a hefty fine. I betcha if people were facing this type of barrier to own an unaltered pet they would choose the cheaper route of spay/neuter.

04-14-05, 01:30 pm
Not all unaltered pets are kept for breeding. Some people are afriad that their pet will become lazy when they alter it. Some people also show thier cats. I've been to a cat show or two. That cats seemed quite content to be lazy and pampered. I know my mom's cat would have loved it :) Not that the same applies to guinea pigs. I think some animals enjoy attention more than others.

04-14-05, 01:46 pm
Winning show cats/dogs are often bred. Thinking your pet will be lazy is just an excuse. I know some men who will not have their male dogs' neutered because they hate the idea of their own testicles being removed (pretty dumb equation huh?). I know that not all unaltered pets are bred but I still feel the same breeder status should apply.

I know I'm strict but look where being lax has gotten us.

Baby Bears
04-15-05, 01:32 pm
Oh boy. This is gonna be ugly.

Everyone keeps saying "there are better ways to take care of the problem."

No one is saying what the "better way" is?

04-15-05, 03:58 pm
well, right now the only real solution is probably euthanization, but I don't believe they should be shooting them. The shelters are probably already overun with cats who are being euthanized because nobody wants them, so as much as I hate to say it, there is no good solution to this problem. However, to stop this type of thing from happening, spaying and neuturing are really the only solutions, but I am against the idea of having to say that we are "breeders" is we keep unaltered pets. I myself have 10 animals and all are fixed except for my 4 guinea pigs and my two oldest male dogs who are brothers. My male dogs are not breed and they have never seen a female dog in their life (besides my little terrier, who is spayed). I am not a breeder and I just didn't know any better, however, I would still not neuter them to keep them from breeding, because I do not breed. I would neuter them because one of my dog's has a terminal illness that is a direct consequence of him still being intact.
I have taken in stray cats all of my life and I am very pro-animal welfare and would be extremely upset if I were labelled a breeder, because this has already been done to me by the local SPCA. I wanted to foster homeless cats, but they said that "responsible" owners get their animals spayed/neutured, which I do agree with however, if situation is different. My dogs are now to old to neuter (11 years), so I will not be able to provide a temporary home for homeless cats until they pass away, which is such a morbid thought. So, basically I do agree 100% with spaying and neuturing, but just because someone doesn't do it doesn't mean that they are a breeder or an irresponsible owner.

04-16-05, 03:13 am
Thats stupid, cats should be allowed to roam freely around their neighbourhood.

04-16-05, 08:26 am
Actually I'm under the opinion that there are already too many dangers outside to let my cats out. This just worries me because what if an indoor cat escaped? They aren't very street smart and those cats would probably be the first to be shot. (My husband points out, How hard is it to remove a colar?)

04-16-05, 08:44 am
I am very pro-animal welfare and would be extremely upset if I were labelled a breeder,


I think you are taking this the wrong way. I willingly admitted that not all people that own unaltered animals breed. I certainly believe that a person that owns an unaltered animal can be a responsible owner. Unfortunately we are dealing with a multitude of irresponsible people that will allow their animals to breed if stricter rules are not enforced. After all how do you think the cat population got to be so out of control that people felt shooting them was a viable option?

Studies have proven that altered animals suffer less health risks, have the probability of living longer lives, are less aggressive and are less likely to roam. Therefore my opinion has not changed that the only reason to have an unaltered animal is to breed it. It only takes one accident to allow an unaltered animal out of a confined and safe setting and impregnation can occur.

Perhaps a compromise could be made. As you said, you didn't know any better" when you decided not to alter your dogs. Everyone's education on the animal overpopulation problem starts somewhere. I think it would be reasonable to give the owner of an unaltered/non-breeder licensed animal a fine and a warning with 2 options.

1. Pay the fine and have the owner and animal apply for a license and pay to register themselves and the animal as a breeder (even if the animal is never bred).

2. If the animal is altered then the fine will be waived if the surgery is done in the allotted time limit. The only option out of altering would be if an SPCA approved vet exam and waiver proves that altering is too risky because the animal is deemed too elderly or medically unfit for altering.

Like I said I’m strict in my views. Don’t take it personally. Besides I have been pushing this remedy to the animal overpopulation for years and while I have plenty of support we meet a lot of resistance when it comes to getting local government to listen. Most likely I will not see progress any time soon.

04-16-05, 08:55 am
Oh boy. This is gonna be ugly.

Everyone keeps saying "there are better ways to take care of the problem."

No one is saying what the "better way" is?

My community has seen great success in the spay/neuter/release program. In my city we have a major cat overpopulation problem. To deal with it we have implemented a program where humane traps are set out, feral and free roaming cats are caught. They are brought to the SPCA where they are scanned for microchips, tested, immunized, surgically altered and their ears are notched (all free of charge). Notching is where a notch is cut out or the tip of an ear of cut off to identify the cat as having already been altered.

The cats are then rereleased back into the neighborhood they came from. This way if an owned cat is accidentally trapped it can get back home...it’s just altered now...which it should have been anyway especially if it’s allowed to roam. Each neighborhood where the program is used must have people that have signed up to provide food for the cats (so they don’t starve or get sick).

Neighborhoods that have been using this program for a couple of years now have shown a marked cut-off in the number of feral cats. If we slow down one or two generations of cats’ breeding then time will naturally take care of the overpopulation problem.

04-16-05, 09:17 am
Really the only good solution is to spay and neuter all cats. And catch the feral ones, spay/neuter them and release them again. All abandoned and homeless strays can be rescued..and spayed/neutered.

04-27-05, 12:28 pm
Cats should not be allowed to ROAM around their neighborhood. I have seen too many cats come into my clinic that have been attacked by dogs or wild animals, hit by cars, or gotten in cat fights. My cats are allowed outside under my supervision and only then that way I know they are safe and they aren't eating the wildlife.

04-27-05, 01:39 pm
I agree with you there 100%. My cats are allowed to go outside, however, they have never once left our yard. If I ever found out that one of my cats did leave my yard, they would never be allowed outside again without my complete supervision. I cannot understand how people who live in more urban areas, can let their cats go outside when they onyl have a small little yard and expect them not to roam. I mean, I have 100 acres of fields and forests, so they have lots of place to go and have never ventured onto the road or someone elses property, but I can't imagine letting them outside without complete supervision if the road is just a few feet away. Also, in many urban areas the houses are closer together and cats are more likely to wander off with another neighborhood cat or even a child.

I know that some people hate that my cats go outside whenever they want, but I must tell you that I have lived in this place for about 15 years now and have yet to lose a cat here except for when we first moved here. We had taken in stray cats where we lived before and they were very hard to keep around because they were completely wild and one day they were jsut gone, but I suspect they survived anyway. We have never had a cat get hurt by an animal, car, or any type of infections or diseases that are caught outside or from other animals, but I know that this isn't the case with most cats. I guess what I find hardest to comprehend is when people let a cat outside and it doesn't come back and then they just forget about them without even going out an looking. When I sometimes have trouble get my cats in at night (they love summer), I go out and call them until they come home, luckily this doesn't take very long. But how can someone just forget about their cat and let it become yet another stray.

04-27-05, 01:46 pm
Notching is where a notch is cut out or the tip of an ear of cut off to identify the cat as having already been altered.
That sounds like a form of mutilation. I know they do something like this to great danes, cutting out a piece of the ear and then sewing it back together in order to make the ears stand erect, and it ought to be illegal IMO.

Under the hippocratic oath, a doctor is supposed to give treatment to a patient only in such that the treatment benefits the patient. For instance, if the patient's ear has developed gangrene or malignant carcinoma, the doctor may need to remove the ear, or a portion of the ear, in order to stop the infection from spreading to the rest of the patient's body. In a modern setting, reconstructive surgery may also be avaliable.

Cutting out a portion of a cat's perfectly healthy ear doesn't provide any medical benefit to the cat. Cats have very senstive hearing, and their ears are contoured in a certain way by design, to maximize the sensory response over a large range of frequencies (moreso than humans). In the example you gave, it seems the only purpose is to make it a little more convinient for the human authorities. Additionally, it may create problems since a stray cat whose ear was injured in a fight may be mistaken for one that has already been fixed. There are more modern ways, such as the already mentioned microchipping, for tracking medical treatments, or the good old fashioned method of just checking the underside of the cat.

The real solution here is just to get the strays off the street and adopted back into loving homes, not some poorly conceived 'catch and release' strategy.

If you doubt that you can change frequency response of the ear with a simple notch, consider that you can ruin a perfectly good stereo speaker's sound quality by doing the same.

Some links:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/doctors/oath_modern.htm (hippocratic oath)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RFID#Types_of_RFID_tags (microchipping)

04-27-05, 02:09 pm
That's absolutely ridiculous. I agree, the animal control should catch the strays, alter them, and then release them where they were first living. There's nno harm in that, is there? However, I don't think cats shoulc be allowed to live outside or even go outside without a leash or very strict supervision. Cat populations have decimated bird and rodent populations before, not to mention the dangers for the cats. A neighbor down the street used to have an outside cat. Nothing happened to him for ten years. But then she went outside and she saw him in the mouth of a roaming dog. Luckily, she scared the dog off and brought the cat into the vet on time, but the cat ended up having to have his tiny little leg amputated. It was terrible. Charlie(the cat) is still alive, and he's doing fine, but I cringe at the thought of what could happen if the owner hadn't gone outside soon enough. He's now strictly an indoor cat.

04-27-05, 02:27 pm
There's no harm, persay, and it may eventually end the overpopulation problem. But a better solution for the cat to be adopted into a loving home than released back onto the street. It's like these soup kitchens that open up on XMAS and easter to give the homeless a good meal and a place to sleep for the night, but then put them back out on the street the next morning...

04-27-05, 02:33 pm
^ But the thing is that some cats don't like being indoor cats after being raised by other wild cats in the wild for five years. often times it's simply impossible for the cats to be happy inside. However, it is possible and I agree it would be a good idea. But the thing is, most of the cats brought into the shelter would probably be euthanized anyway.

04-27-05, 03:44 pm
That sounds like a form of mutilation. I know they do something like this to great danes, cutting out a piece of the ear and then sewing it back together in order to make the ears stand erect, and it ought to be illegal IMO.

Yes, it is a form of mutilation but unlike the cropping of a Great Dane’s ears it is not done for cosmetic purposes. It is done for identification purposes to keep a feral cat from having spay/neuter surgery twice. Microchipping is not visible and costs money...something the already strained SPCA budget can’t afford. Yes there are flaws in the ear notching method but from what I have seen from data collected since the beginning of the Spay/Neuter/Release program the methods used have overall been successful.

The real solution here is just to get the strays off the street and adopted back into loving homes, not some poorly conceived 'catch and release' strategy

Have you been into a SPCA lately? Have you noticed how many cats are up for adoption? I know that the S/N/R program adopts out kittens and young cats that are brought in...but the truly feral cats are another matter.

I did not implement the S/N/R program, I support it because it has had proven results that you do not see. You can read up on it on the following webpage. If you have a problem with it I recommend you call or email the New Orleans SPCA. Here is their website page on the (as they call it) Trap/Neuter/Return program. Phone # and Fax # are at the bottom of the page and Email contact is at the top http://www.la-spca.org/education/feral_cats.htm

04-27-05, 04:12 pm
I know, it's just an idea.
Also Microchipping does not cost a lot of money, I work in this field.
We can tag cows or other livestock for around 1USD. The actual cost to microchip a pet is about 40 cents for the tag and a few minutes for the procedure. Vets can charge more because people are willing to pay more... vets are running a business. But if the city hires someone to do the task, it is no more difficult than giving the pet a shot (immunization, etc.) and buying a 40 cent chip... I assume the shelters already have the scanners.

04-27-05, 04:45 pm
The TNR program sounds absolutely wonderful. I hope that in time it spreads all over the country and then hopefully the world. We have a huge colony of cats living on the land behind us, but I don;t know if our animal control/shelters do this.

04-27-05, 04:53 pm
I know, it's just an idea.

And it's a good idea (my pets are all microchipped) except for one problem. The SPCA relies on civilian volunteers living in the neighborhoods to trap the cats and bring them in.

Personally I HATE trying to handle truly feral cats...it's a nightmare and I am fairly skilled at handling wild animals. I can't imagine a normal person trying to wrestle a feral cat out of a trap to scan it (if they were given scanners) or to peek underneath to see if there is a scar or lack of testicles. Bringing the cat into the SPCA to be scanned would be more traumatic (IMO) then having an ear notched so that it can be quickly rereleased without suffering the stress of transport and handling.

Yes, I wish there was another way that is as easy to recognize as an ear notch. I wish all of the feral cats could be tamed and homed. Unfortunately there is no budget for that type of program in this city and the local Gov keeps cutting back money for the SPCA.

It's euthanasia or this...so far S/N/R seems to be working...if it fails in the long run then at least it was tried.

04-27-05, 05:44 pm
If the objective is simply to control overpopulation, I don't see how it could fail, or at least not have a significant effect. I guess it depends on what percentage of strays are abandoned pets vs. cats that were born stray. If the stray population consists of mostly abandoned pets, another type of program like the one in Japan would be a better solution.


Some countries take this to the next level, proposing that every pet must be microchipped before it can be sold. When sold at a pet store or by a breeder, the sale is reported to the government along with the unique microchip ID and the identity of the buyer. If the pet is later found abandoned, the government will fine the original owner (like they do for traffic tickets, etc.) If a family does not want a pet, they can still "euthenize" it or "put it to sleep", they just can't abandon it.

05-04-05, 10:37 pm
Feral cats cannot be adopted out because they can't be domesticated. They are essentially wild animals. If not neutered and released, they would have to be killed. Far better a small notch in the ear and living in what has become their natural environment than dead. Chips would be a waste of effort because cats would be caught, transported, scanned and then have to be returned once it was found they were already altered. A visual indicator is far more effected. Tags could get caught, tear and cause more injury. Collars are a danger too. I think the notch is the least of all the evils.

05-05-05, 10:23 am
Actually some feral cats can become quite nice pets, especially if you get them when they are young. I have had many cats and only my 2 most recent ones are actually fully doesmticated. We have a male cat now that we got when a business advertised that they had stray kittens to sell. It ended up being kittens from a feral mother and they were actually older than 6 weeks. Its difficult at times because he is not cuddly exept for during the winter and he tends to spend many nights outside during the summer. Many people say just to keep him in, but that would be cruel to me. He is a wild cat and he cries for hours if he cannot go outside (he is neutured). He comes home to eat and sleep and generally stays in on cold and rainy days, but the rest of the time he wants to be outside. He does not leave our yard, so I am not worried about things like cars or anything and he is up to date on all of his vaccines and worm treatments. His main diet is mice and birds and he only eats cat food every so often. However, he is a great pet. I guess I am use to this becuase we have taken in well over 20 to 30 strays or ferals. Some stay and some don't, but we at least try to offer them a nice place to sleep. Taken in a feral requires a different attitude. They are not your pets, you are simply given them shelter and food and a little companionship if they want it, but you must realize that they are essentially wild animals and need freedom. I do not beleive that most can be happy as house cats (there are some that are, so I'm not saying that it is impossible). Either way, ferals deserve a chance. I prefer them to fully domesticated cats for the most part and will continue to adopt them.

05-07-05, 04:52 pm
wow... that cat in the picture looks JUST like mine... she doesnt wear a collar because she gets her foot stuck in it and gets stuck in a tree by it or comes limping home on 3 legs

05-07-05, 09:20 pm
I think that the idea of individuals shooting cats for population control is a barbaric idea. I believe that even the governor of Wisconsin stated that he did not want his state known as the state where they shoot cats. (side note: it *was* Wisconsin, right, where they proposed this idea?)

However, I see that the overpopulation of cats is a problem. The house my husband and I own has a creek running behind it. Along the creek is a "colony" of feral cats. We feed about 7 of them consistently; others drop in from time to time. A lot of our other neighbors do the same, and there is a feral cat league in our area that does the spay/neuter/release with them and also ensures that they get vaccinations for rabies and FIV. But is this a good existence for them?

There are a number of business that are also along this creek, and these feral cats often come onto the business property, probably looking for food and water. A few of these business started putting out bowls of anti-freeze for the cats to drink, so that the cats won't come onto their property anymore. Of course, these businesses received extensive negative publicity about their actions and incurred a boycott, but a great number of these feral cats suffered anti-freeze poisoning before they quit this practice.

There are also a number of coyotes that live along this creek. A number of our "regulars" have just quit showing up for food, and I imagine that they were probably attacked and killed. Others have shown up injured, and we have found mutilated bodies along the creek bed.

It is not an ideal existence. I think the spay and neuter program is excellent in keeping populations down ... but what about the cats already in existence? We (human beings) allowed them to be created, so don't we own them a more dignified life than to scrounge around for food and shelter and to live a perilous existence, fraught with dangers?

I don't know what the answer is, and until one is found, I accept that the spay/neuter/release programs are probably the best bet. But I think we should work towards something better for these animals.

Slap Maxwell
05-07-05, 09:26 pm
I was just looking through some cat breeder pages. I am shocked that people would INTENTIONALLY breed cats. Cats rescues have it worse than most.

05-08-05, 09:21 am
Just like dogs, people want the perfect cat. They want a perfect persian or a perfect siamese. And just like purebred dogs they too get dumped at shelters or more often then not put out on the street. Purebred cats have similar health problems as purebred anything. My mother's persian has food allergies.

Not to say that non pure breed cats don't have problems. My mother-in-law has a blind multi-toed "mutt" cat.

05-09-05, 12:45 pm
I don't know what the answer is, and until one is found, I accept that the spay/neuter/release programs are probably the best bet. But I think we should work towards something better for these animals.
The thing is, humans built up the city that created this problem in the first place. They try to displace natural, thriving populations of animals, and then complain that the city is being overrun with the animals that they displaced by building it.

05-09-05, 02:32 pm
Humans may have displaced the natural environment in order to build in it, but cats were not a part of that natural environment until we released them into it, therefore, they are our responsibility. It is very unfortunate and really uneccessary to have this type of problem, but not much can be done about it now. It is unrealitic to think that they could all be adopted out...what about all of the cats that are currently in the shelters? I am sure that this solution was proposed, but was deemed impossible. If they are like every other town in North America, their shelters are probably filled to capacity or way beyond. There just isn't enough owners out there for the number of cats in need of them.

05-09-05, 03:06 pm
No... there isn't enough owners out there who are willing to adopt. There are pleanty of owners out there. Pets are something like a 20 billion dollar industry... the number of people who buy pets from pet stores or breeders is huge. The amount that are educated and adopt is relatively small.

05-09-05, 03:27 pm
What I meant is that there isn't enough people who even want animals. You have to remember that some people are allergic, some don't like cats, and others just don't want any animals at all. So if you take away those people, there really isn't enough left to adopt all of the cats that currently need homes. Even if each person that has or wants a cat actually went out and adopted one, we would still have a crisis on our hands. Cats in shelters only make up a small portion of the actual number of cats that are in need of homes and it is unrealistic of us to believe that each person should have a cat or that people should have multiple cats. When I tell people the amount of animals I have I always get a strange look and they say something like "how can you handle that many animals?" or "doesn't your house stink?" So, out of all of the people who want a cat, you also have to take out the ones that don't like shelters or think they are too expensive (which I do....I usually just rescue strays or litters from strays), the ones that in my opinion are ignorant enough to go to a breeder or a pet store, and then what you have left is a relatively small number of people who will go and adopt a cat.

Quiet Things
05-11-05, 06:21 pm
I agree that adopting is a marvelous thing but think about it, it is often cheaper to buy a cat from a pet store than to adopt from your local RSPCA, that is the case in my area. I am fully aware that the RSPCA needs to make a profit to keep the animals healthy, maintained and presentable whereas the pet shop can afford not to. I would adopt a cat if I could but I just do not have the money. I imagine there are a lot of other people out there with the same thoughts. I have one cat, she has been spayed and she can roam where she likes as long as she comes in at night. Because it is at night that cats cause the most damage, they are nocturnal hunters and most native wildlife in Australia is nocturnal.
I think the means of spay/neuter and release is a terrific idea, notching the cats ear is also fantastic. It's not mutilation but a means of preservation. If you had to would you rather kill the fixed or the unfixed?
Have people considered promoting the idea of outdoor pet houses for cats? You build a similar structure to a bird avairy, making sure it is large enough for your cat to run about in, build levels so they can jump, and attach it to your house or have it independant. That idea has been floating around for many years but has never really taken off. It's a great way to give your cat outdoor time without having to watch them all the time, plus they are safe and so is the wildlife.
On to strays again, I have owned strays before, from striaght off the street. It took a long time to gain their trust but when I did it was worthwhile. However they would not come inside, they point blank refused and freaked if I took them inside for any reason (had to once, there was a baby bird on the ground) Neither were fixed, sadly though the female died of cancer, well was euthanised, and the male Harold, dissapeared. I would be devestated to think that Harold was shot by some cat hater weilding a gun.

05-11-05, 10:30 pm
Actually people do have cat runs these days, I do too. And I've seen alot..

Quiet Things
05-11-05, 10:41 pm
Thats awesome, but I've never met a person or seen any locally. I was just speaking from my experience. I wish I could build one but we are already spending too much on some chickens and will have to start saving again.