If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Outdoor vs Indoor Cats Again!
I've followed this debate in many threads across several groups, and there is
one point I have not seen raised. 30 years ago I was coming home from my night job at 4 AM and while walking in the street (NYC) a dozen blocks from my home, I came across a really friendly orange tabby. He kept coming up to me and I would walk away, and he would come back. He was most friendly, obviously people oriented, and in my opinion he was a housecat who for some reason had been displaced from his house. I took him home and named him ECO, or ECHO, Eco, short for economics, because I wasn't sure I could afford to keep him; and, ECHO, because he kept coming back. Once at my home, Eco seemed restless and he often tried to go out the window to the fireescape. Once, he jumped across an open window to the windowsill across an open airshaft. He was stuck there on the ledge and I had to go to the building next door to bring him in. A couple of weeks later, on Thanksgiving, 1974, my younger brother brought me a kitten, which I named Turkey (after all it was Thanksgiving). Turkey and Eco lived together for one week before Eco managed to squeeze through a small opening in the fire escape window, and he disappeared. Why am I telling you this? Well, I think Echo was someone's cat from a half mile away, and I, out of good nature, took him to my home. What was Eco's original owner thinking when he never returned as he usually did? Why did I take him if that is what I thought? Well, it is because I didn't know. Maybe Eco was lost, and needed someone to care for him, he certainly latched on to me. What happened to him? He certainly wasn't familiar with the new neighborhood he found himself in. One of the main reasons I would never let my cat (MY PET, MY COMPANION) out, is because one day he may not return And, it might not be because he or she was a victim of a tragedy; perhaps someone like me took him for his own. I'd never know. I would be left with photos on handbills taped to lamppoles with a LOST CAT headline. I think pet owners should understand the difference between wild, feral animals, and domesticated ones. Our pets need our protection more than they need to be allowed to roam around at will. Just my two cents. If you want to see my most recent additions, follow this link to Mickey & Daisy. http://hometown.aol.com/borninthebronx/index.html |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
If you live in an area where, for whatever reason, you feel unable
to allow a healthy cat its freedom to roam for at least some time each day (and only you can judge your area) then don't have a cat. To have a healthy cat, knowing you will keep it in 24/7 marks you are being cruel, selfish, or both. Liar! LT |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
If you live in an area where, for whatever reason, you feel unable
to allow a healthy cat its freedom to roam for at least some time each day (and only you can judge your area) then don't have a cat. To have a healthy cat, knowing you will keep it in 24/7 marks you are being cruel, selfish, or both. Liar! LT |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
If you live in an area where, for whatever reason, you feel unable to
allow a healthy cat its freedom to roam for at least some time each day (and only you can judge your area) then don't have a cat. To have a healthy cat, knowing you will keep it in 24/7 marks you are being cruel, selfish, or both. I'll agree to the selfish part. Yes, I am selfish. I have decided to take an animal (in this case two homeless animals from an animal rescue service) and keep them locked in my home; for my own selfish amusement. They give me a great deal of enjoyment; they are funny, and warm, and friendly, and in short . .. . just great to have around. I am keeping them captive, quite possibly against their will. In return for their captivity;I feed them better than they would ever eat in the wild, I take them to an animal doctor on a regular basis and keep them in better health than they would have in the wild; I keep them warmer or cooler than they would be in the wild, depending on the season; I keep them away from predators bigger than they are; I buy products which I know they would like or would amuse themselves with; and, they will likely live twice as long as they would in the wild. NO, I am certainly not cruel! Its funny, but I did not invent the idea of keeping pets. For all of my years people have kept pets; in fact, they have been doing it for a very long time. So, I have taken pets which are already on this earth and made the trade I've outlined above. It would be cruel of me to let them go out into the city at will, and invariably shorten their lives. It would also be doubley, no tripley cruel of me to allow them to go into the night and either get knocked up or do the same to another animal, so the population of unwanted animals could explode. So, now that you've taken the liberty to call me selfish and cruel, let me ask you a question. You sound like an outdoorsman! Do you hunt? |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
If you live in an area where, for whatever reason, you feel unable to
allow a healthy cat its freedom to roam for at least some time each day (and only you can judge your area) then don't have a cat. To have a healthy cat, knowing you will keep it in 24/7 marks you are being cruel, selfish, or both. I'll agree to the selfish part. Yes, I am selfish. I have decided to take an animal (in this case two homeless animals from an animal rescue service) and keep them locked in my home; for my own selfish amusement. They give me a great deal of enjoyment; they are funny, and warm, and friendly, and in short . .. . just great to have around. I am keeping them captive, quite possibly against their will. In return for their captivity;I feed them better than they would ever eat in the wild, I take them to an animal doctor on a regular basis and keep them in better health than they would have in the wild; I keep them warmer or cooler than they would be in the wild, depending on the season; I keep them away from predators bigger than they are; I buy products which I know they would like or would amuse themselves with; and, they will likely live twice as long as they would in the wild. NO, I am certainly not cruel! Its funny, but I did not invent the idea of keeping pets. For all of my years people have kept pets; in fact, they have been doing it for a very long time. So, I have taken pets which are already on this earth and made the trade I've outlined above. It would be cruel of me to let them go out into the city at will, and invariably shorten their lives. It would also be doubley, no tripley cruel of me to allow them to go into the night and either get knocked up or do the same to another animal, so the population of unwanted animals could explode. So, now that you've taken the liberty to call me selfish and cruel, let me ask you a question. You sound like an outdoorsman! Do you hunt? |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
"GovtLawyer" wrote in message ... If you live in an area where, for whatever reason, you feel unable to allow a healthy cat its freedom to roam for at least some time each day (and only you can judge your area) then don't have a cat. To have a healthy cat, knowing you will keep it in 24/7 marks you are being cruel, selfish, or both. I'll agree to the selfish part. Yes, I am selfish. I have decided to take an animal (in this case two homeless animals from an animal rescue service) and keep them locked in my home; for my own selfish amusement. They give me a great deal of enjoyment; they are funny, and warm, and friendly, and in short . . . just great to have around. I am keeping them captive, quite possibly against their will. In return for their captivity;I feed them better than they would ever eat in the wild, I take them to an animal doctor on a regular basis and keep them in better health than they would have in the wild; I keep them warmer or cooler than they would be in the wild, depending on the season; I keep them away from predators bigger than they are; I buy products which I know they would like or would amuse themselves with; and, they will likely live twice as long as they would in the wild. What does this have to do with cats being allowed to spend some time outside? NO, I am certainly not cruel! Its funny, but I did not invent the idea of keeping pets. For all of my years people have kept pets; in fact, they have been doing it for a very long time. So, I have taken pets which are already on this earth and made the trade I've outlined above. It would be cruel of me to let them go out into the city at will, and invariably shorten their lives. It would also be doubley, no tripley cruel of me to allow them to go into the night and either get knocked up or do the same to another animal, so the population of unwanted animals could explode. Sounds to me like you're just looking for an arguement. So, now that you've taken the liberty to call me selfish and cruel, let me ask you a question. You sound like an outdoorsman! Do you hunt? Bob doesn't need to hunt for total ignorants like yourself. Do you happen to be into fishing? |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
"GovtLawyer" wrote in message ... If you live in an area where, for whatever reason, you feel unable to allow a healthy cat its freedom to roam for at least some time each day (and only you can judge your area) then don't have a cat. To have a healthy cat, knowing you will keep it in 24/7 marks you are being cruel, selfish, or both. I'll agree to the selfish part. Yes, I am selfish. I have decided to take an animal (in this case two homeless animals from an animal rescue service) and keep them locked in my home; for my own selfish amusement. They give me a great deal of enjoyment; they are funny, and warm, and friendly, and in short . . . just great to have around. I am keeping them captive, quite possibly against their will. In return for their captivity;I feed them better than they would ever eat in the wild, I take them to an animal doctor on a regular basis and keep them in better health than they would have in the wild; I keep them warmer or cooler than they would be in the wild, depending on the season; I keep them away from predators bigger than they are; I buy products which I know they would like or would amuse themselves with; and, they will likely live twice as long as they would in the wild. What does this have to do with cats being allowed to spend some time outside? NO, I am certainly not cruel! Its funny, but I did not invent the idea of keeping pets. For all of my years people have kept pets; in fact, they have been doing it for a very long time. So, I have taken pets which are already on this earth and made the trade I've outlined above. It would be cruel of me to let them go out into the city at will, and invariably shorten their lives. It would also be doubley, no tripley cruel of me to allow them to go into the night and either get knocked up or do the same to another animal, so the population of unwanted animals could explode. Sounds to me like you're just looking for an arguement. So, now that you've taken the liberty to call me selfish and cruel, let me ask you a question. You sound like an outdoorsman! Do you hunt? Bob doesn't need to hunt for total ignorants like yourself. Do you happen to be into fishing? |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Don't feed the trolls..they have no brains..and logic is just an undefined word
in the dictionary. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|