On Fri, 15 Oct 2004 07:52:49 -0400, "Bobcat"
wrote:


"Electric Nachos" wrote in message
...
Gee. Just think. NONE of this valuable information would have been
known if
the animal mutilators (a.k.a. spay-ers and neuter-ers) in this group
got a
hold of them first.

I can't stand to go into an animal control building where they house
unwanted cats and kittens until they find homes for them, or euthanize
them. The odds of the latter fate are high enough,even with
conscientious cat-owners (you call us "animal mutilators") neutering
and spaying their animals. Imagine the numbers of little tragedies if
no one did.


One queen and one tom - live 15 years and have one litter of four
every year; each litter has two females. Assume all kittens survive
and live to age 15.

At the end of the first year, there are three females. At then end of
the second year there are nine females (three adult females and six
female kittens - plus the males equals 18 cats where there were two);
the end of the third year brings the total females to 27 and the total
cats to 54. When the original female dies after her fifteenth litter,
she leaves 14 348 906 female descendents - 28 697 812 counting the
males.

In order to avoid obvious hypocracy, anyone advocating that kind of
population explosion, which is what someone objecting to neutering is,
in effect, advocating, would have to provide homes for all those
cats. I'm not sure Bill Gates could afford to keep a female cat and
meet his responsibility for all the offspring for any length of time.



T.E.D. )
SPAM filter: Messages to this address *must* contain "T.E.D."
somewhere in the body or they will be automatically rejected.