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 |
#41
|
|||
|
|||
"kitkat" wrote in message om... Ashley wrote: He also commented that he was not impressed with the American method of managing risks, ie keeping all cats indoors at all times. This is the part where you lost me. I thought you were reporting back about risks in NZ. I was. But I also wanted to point out that the desire to maintain outdoor access for cats is widespread, if not universal, among animal care professionals here, and that while you guys have totally assimilated that world view, most of the rest of the world hasn't! Who cares what he thinks about our way of doing it. Isn't your point that we do things differently than you guys and for good reason on both ends? Yeah, I think we all have good reasons for believing as we do. I suspect if I were in the States my cats would have *less* access to the outdoors than they do here, but they wouldn't be totally confined indoors. I understand why people choose to do that if, say, they live in an apartment (in which case they don't really have a choice!) or in an environment when there are multiple risks to their cats. I would try bloody hard not to live in that environment though. I was starting to understand your position better and to a degree still do, but clearly, as you have even agreed...there *is* more of a risk here in the US...therefore people choosing to keep cats indoors at all times makes sense. For those people. And I respect their right to make those decisions. But there's also been posts here from people in the State who choose to allow their cats access to the outdoors. Depending on the level of risk in the area I was in, I would make sure I had a secure outdoor area they could have free access to, or would allow them out during the day. |
#42
|
|||
|
|||
"Brandy Alexandre" wrote in message news:1112675199.8016a4976d13b4060ed22f2d6bc09934@t eranews... Ashley wrote in That is a very interesting article. Yes, it is, isn't it? Most balanced examination of the pros and cons of both views I've ever seen. I wouldn't be surprised though if people here clamp their hands over their ears and sing "lalalalala" rather than *every* deign to *consider* a point of view other than their own. Indeed, it appears you are right. |
#43
|
|||
|
|||
"CatNipped" wrote in message ... "Ashley" wrote in message ... They're also more likely to find themselves on mood-altering drugs and have their claws lopped off. OK, now we've come full circle - you've just confirmed yourself a troll. Have you *read* any of my other posts in this group?? If you've noticed, since she's been posting to this group (not just this thread), she's never really contributed much useful information, she basically just takes swipes at others' posts and criticizes people. Phil |
#44
|
|||
|
|||
"Diane L. Schirf" wrote in message k.net... In article 1112675199.8016a4976d13b4060ed22f2d6bc09934@teran ews, "Brandy Alexandre" wrote: http://www.fabcats.org/inorout.html That is a very interesting article. It was interesting, but notice not one study was cited for their assertions. As I said, anyone can assert anything. So, until someone posts a peer-reviewed study, this "article" worth the paper it's not printed on. And, no, that's not me covering my ears and going lalala. That's me bringing healthy skepticism and not believing everything I read. Hell, you only believe what you read in scientific journals anywhere, even disbelieving otherwise authoritative sources? Healthy scepticism, is fine, and sometimes it makes you spot a fraud a mile off, or even poke around further to find out the credentials of the person/organisation doing the asserting. Which you can do on this site :-) For example, if you clicked on the "About fab" link, you'd find this Cats are an endless source of fascination, but back in 1958 when the Feline Advisory Bureau (FAB) was founded by Joan Judd, little was really known about them or their veterinary needs. FAB gathered information from a variety of sources and funded vets to specialise in feline care and so had a major influence on early advances in veterinary treatment. And if you look further, you'll find more. |
#45
|
|||
|
|||
"Ashley" wrote in message ... "CatNipped" wrote in message ... but are exposed to an increased risk of diabetes and obesity, not to mention anxiety disorders Does your ignorance know no bounds? These are problems caused the *owner* for not providing proper nutrition and environmental enrichment - *not* a result of indoor living! Indoor cats simply require more effort, creativity, imagination, and involvement - neither of which you seem to possess or are cable of understanding. In fact an outdoor cat lives a *more* stressful life than an indoor cat due to territorial disputes, threats from other animals, people, cars, environmental noises - stress leads to a constellation of physical and psychological disorders. Or do you also live in a sterile, silent vacuum all alone? You don't know enough about cats to even know how much you don't know! IOW, you're an babbling idiot! |
#46
|
|||
|
|||
"Diane L. Schirf" wrote in message k.net... In article , "Ashley" wrote: I think that if they're going to make such flat, bold assertions, they should cite their studies without being asked. Otherwise, frankly, it's a Web site, which anyone can have. But you'll find this on that particular website: snip Anyone would think vets with specialist knowledge of cats contributed to it ... or something That's all very nice, but it's not a citation for their assertions. No. Because it's not a scientific paper. It's a public information site. As I have stated, before, they have different conventions. Me, I get information from both. And I'm sure you do, too. I'm sure we could find hundreds of equally or better qualified veterinarians and behaviourists who could easily refute these assertions (Phil did earlier, I believe -- e.g., Dr Dodman is a guru of cat behaviour, and The Cat Who Cried for Help is an outstanding book). What Phil did was post a selective list of vets he agrees who back up his world view (but I noted that one of them simply said that cats will readily fit into the human family, and he somehow took this as meaning they took readily to indoor life or something. Don't know what he was doing with that quote). The site you are debating is the site of a well-established and respected cat care/research group with the input of many and, I might add, very well-balanced viewpoints. The page that you are dismissing because it did not have scientific cites put a couple of points in favour of indoor cats so rationally, that I considered them whereas I had not before. I would suggest that if you read that page with a truly open mind, it might actually make you think a bit. That is, of course, just a suggestion :-) Hodge came to me with behavioural problems. He is an indoor cat. Therefore, the way your sources' assertions are worded, he's one of those American cats with behavioural problems caused by being kept indoors. What such glib assertions fail to take into account: 1. He had been front declawed at some point prior to his abandonment, which I understand in and of itself can cause behavioural problems. And which is a direct result of keeping cats indoors, no? Outdoor cats don't get declawed. Certainly, I'd never heard of the procedure until I started subscribing to newsgroups and was (and still am) aghast at the concept! 2. He is a dominant-aggressive cat; IIRC, Dr. Dodman calls this dominant dog syndrome. like my Tahi 3. Judging from his initial dominant-aggressive-fear response to almost any gesture (even my walking, let alone trying to pet him), I suspect he was abused. sounds likely 4. There's a possibility he had feral traits. (He's made a lot of progress, by the way. A lot.) Excellent. Without two statistically valid sets of kittens under identical circumstances with indoor/outdoor being the only variable, and a control group, a scientifically valid plan for the study, and peer review of the resulting findings, there's no way to determine the source of behavioural problems as "being kept indoors," as this site asserts. It's anecdotal evidence. you don't know that, you are choosing to assume that. Veterinarians should know better to make such assertions without evidence or, in the absence of it, without qualifiers. ("It is our opinion that American cats," etc.) I wouldn't take Hodge to them, that's for sure. That would be because it's an organisation, not a veterinary practice ;-) |
#47
|
|||
|
|||
"Diane L. Schirf" wrote in message k.net... In article , "Ashley" wrote: For example, if you clicked on the "About fab" link, you'd find this Cats are an endless source of fascination, but back in 1958 when the Feline Advisory Bureau (FAB) was founded by Joan Judd, little was really known about them or their veterinary needs. FAB gathered information from a variety of sources and funded vets to specialise in feline care and so had a major influence on early advances in veterinary treatment. Great marketing copy! Another unfounded assertion dressed up to sell. OK, so you're obviously not going to read the site. You are perfectly entitled to refuse to broaden your knowledge. But I'm perfectly entitled to regard you as a closed mind, as a result. |
#48
|
|||
|
|||
"Ashley" wrote in message ... "Diane L. Schirf" wrote in message k.net... In article , "Ashley" wrote: I think that if they're going to make such flat, bold assertions, they should cite their studies without being asked. Otherwise, frankly, it's a Web site, which anyone can have. But you'll find this on that particular website: snip Anyone would think vets with specialist knowledge of cats contributed to it ... or something That's all very nice, but it's not a citation for their assertions. No. Because it's not a scientific paper. It's a public information site. As I have stated, before, they have different conventions. Me, I get information from both. And I'm sure you do, too. I'm sure we could find hundreds of equally or better qualified veterinarians and behaviourists who could easily refute these assertions (Phil did earlier, I believe -- e.g., Dr Dodman is a guru of cat behaviour, and The Cat Who Cried for Help is an outstanding book). What Phil did was post a selective list of vets he agrees who back up his world view That's exactly what you did you ****ing moron! |
#49
|
|||
|
|||
"Mathew Kagis" wrote in message
newscn4e.110900$KI2.70697@clgrps12... OK, this little debate has become a little too nasty. I respect both opinions, indoor & outdoor... Both have strong reasons behind them & basically it comes down to personal choice. My own choice is to let the cats outdoors... Only in the daytime. They both got gentle introductions to the outside world, short 10 min sessions with me a few times a week, building up to a leashed walk (much of which each of them spent inside my vest) to TED. Meghan: NZ does exist in an enviornmental bubble, it's an isolated set of Islands... Almost all large mamals are imported & considered 'Noxious'. The population is low & even an 'urban' enviornment in NZ would be considered 'large town' to 'Small City' in the USA. Catnipped: Relax darling.... I know your indoor cats will live forever & you can say 'I told you so' when either Chablis or Muscat turn up dead of a car hit or a bear attack (although, Chablis has befreinded the local skunks & that makes it an even match in my book)... But some people are just not going to agree with you. Think back to your 'American Bashing' thread.... As I've been typing this, Chablis has just come in from her sunset stroll, she's fine. I mean, aside from the missing paw, chewed up tail, facial lacerations & the jug of antifreeze she's sipping on, she's fine. Have some catnip & shake it off little girl. Toung still firmly in cheek... -- Mathew Butler to 2 kittens: Chablis & Muscat En Vino Veritas Oh sweetie, I'm perfectly calm. To my knowledge I haven't called anyone any names in these threads (and if I've just forgotten and I have, please point it out so I can apologize). I *am* stating my opinions firmly because I care very much about the welfare of cats - *all* cats. Even if it doesn't worry you to let your cats out, it worries *me* for them! On the other side of the argument, however, I have read "obsessive-compulsive", "over-egged" (whatever the heck that means!), "holier-than-thou pontificating", and in lots and lots of other words (which I don't have the time now to google) the implication that Americans are being overly risk conscious, unaware that the world exists outside of their borders, and basically have our collective heads up our collective posteriors (just another angle of America bashing when it gets down to it - very condescending). However, I am getting out of this debate. As I told Ashley, I'll only bang my head against a brick wall until it hurts, not until I'm bloodied and obviously everything I've had to say on this subject has fallen on deaf ears (er, eyes). I will keep your kitties, and Ashley's kitties, in my prayers and sincerely hope that I don't see anyone here again posting about how they lost their precious cats to the dangers of the outside world. Not to continue the argument, but just as a point of information... Megan, Phil, or Mary (or whoever else may have been posting here for a long time, since I've only been here for a little while)... give me just a guestimate of how many people you've seen who posted here over the years saying something like, "Fluffy has gone missing", or "Mittens was hit by a cat", or "Muffy was mauled by a dog", or "Ajax has an abcess from a cat fight"? Ten, twenty, thirty per year? Less? More? Hugs, CatNipped |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
OT-My Ghost is Back | Bob M | Cat anecdotes | 6 | January 27th 05 07:07 PM |
home for middle-aged cats | carolyn | Cat rescue | 18 | September 21st 04 02:44 PM |
Oh, my aching back... | lrulan | Cat anecdotes | 31 | April 29th 04 05:45 PM |
Back from Burma (long) OT | badwilson | Cat anecdotes | 51 | January 3rd 04 07:57 PM |
Back AGAIN | badwilson | Cat anecdotes | 4 | November 19th 03 04:11 AM |