An incident in which a woman walking with a poodle near a forest in eastern France was attacked by a group of six cats. According to the publication, the cats attacked the woman and the dog, knocked the woman down and bit her legs and arms with bites that required stitches and treatments to prevent rabies. The dog was also attacked, seriously injured and treated at a veterinary clinic
In the past I have already referred to the problem that arises when domestic animals, especially dogs and cats, wander without supervision. The problem is multiplied when those dogs and cats become feral and live "independently" in urban, rural areas and even in nature reserves.
Recently published in The Independent An incident in which a woman walking with a poodle near a forest in eastern France was attacked by a group of six cats. According to the publication, the cats attacked the woman and the dog, knocked the woman down and bit her legs and arms with bites that required stitches and treatments to prevent rabies. The dog was also attacked, seriously injured and treated at a veterinary clinic.
Veterinarians and local residents disagree as to the cause of the attack. Some say that the heat wave prevailing in the area is the reason for the strange attack. There are those who suggest that "the cats were protecting their living space (territory) and the woman and her dog simply invaded the space". I say that cats, like any other territorial animal, defend their environment against members of the same sex and not against members of another sex.
Therefore, if the explanation of living space protection is correct, then this is only possible when these are domestic cats that have gone wild. Domestic cats see humans as part of the feline pack, so there is a possibility that when a human invades their living space - they will react aggressively.
Whatever the reason for the attack, it was carried out by six domesticated cats. Wild animals are afraid of people. Domestic animals that went wild, as in the case of the attack, are cats that are used to the human environment and therefore are not afraid. This is where the most difficult and dangerous problem for the natural environment is manifested. Feral cats have the "backup" of the human environment. In many cases the backing is real and manifests itself in feeding by "good people". This backing gives cats a significant advantage over any other animal in nature, and results in damage to nature.
A study conducted in the USA showed that cats - domestic cats and feral animals alike - kill every year about 2.5 billion birds and about 15 billion mammals (mice but also squirrels and other small mammals). I wrote domestic cats and animals that went wild because even cats that "belong" to their owners go out alone from their house and engage in hunting everything that is available. Anyone who raises a cat knows that sometimes the cat (who gets all his food at home) brings home a "gift" in the form of a hunted bird, lizard or small mammal.
Dogs are no more "righteous" than cats. Already in the past I have referred to dogs that have gone wild and form hunting packs that threaten wild animals. As for dogs that "belong" to their owners, even we have laws that prohibit dog owners from letting their dogs roam. A dog must be on a leash at all times outside the home.
As for cats, there are no restrictive laws and the result is that the fluffy and soft animal that sits on the lap of its owner and purrs with pleasure, upon leaving the house becomes a skilled predator.
For a long time, conservationists have claimed that feral dogs and cats should be removed from the wild (by any means). Since it turns out that a large part of the damage is caused by such "house cats" who left a good home and return to it, and since it is clear that these have a hand and foot (fangs) in seriously harming the variety of animals in the wild - then laws must be enacted and regulations amended that prohibit the release of house cats outside to the house without supervision. Domestic cats should be subject to the same restrictions that apply to dogs, thus reducing the damage to the natural environment.
According to the news in The Independent, about 8000 feral cats are born in France every year. Who knows how many of these are born here? The need to get rid of this damage is clear to almost anyone with eyes in their head. In front of any activity to eliminate the damage, there will be loud and sometimes aggressive "animal lovers", who do not understand that their "love" causes an environmental hazard that endangers animals and people.
Dogs and cats that are not fully controlled by their owners are a serious environmental hazard and a danger to living in the wild and it turns out that they are also for people. Skeptics are invited to read what is published on the subject in the Biological Conservation monthly and understand that everything must be done so that pet owners do not release their animals without supervision. Also, everything necessary must be done so that in the natural environment (and also in settlements) there are no domestic animals that have gone wild.
As has already been said, the time has come that instead of controlling the environment for the sake of the human population, there will be control of the human population for the sake of the environment. Or in the present case, there will be control over the side effects of part of the human population.
31 תגובות
If you believe so much in exterminating "wild" animals in any way to preserve urban "wildlife" then you are very welcome to start with the human race, the main exterminator on the planet
Cats have existed in the area since the time of the pharaohs and helped them protect the food and I have not seen any evidence that they are responsible for the extinction of species any more than we are
Since the appearance of Homo sapiens, on the other hand, a mass extinction has begun that is getting worse all the time.
So if you are in favor of final solutions, start with the main culprit and not with the one who is weak and comfortable and is at fault. Until then, please think of more creative and humane ideas and spare us such digs.
This is not true
A cat is an animal whose genes have the instinct to attack and defend territory. I have a land house in the north of the country, outside of which 15 cats have been growing in the area for many years (their number is constantly changing but the lineage continues).
I once took my dog (who gets along with cats and vice versa) for a night walk, and on the way we were joined by another dog who accompanied us all the way back home and even went up the stairs towards the door.
But unfortunately the cats surrounded him, the males of course, licked at him and pulled out their claws, and if I hadn't been there to calm them down - it is likely that they would have injured the small, shocked dog. What strengthens my claim that territory in cats is a supreme value, and also the trigger to fight and initiate an attack is something that every cat that lives and survives in the wild, or in the yard, has.
By the way, hello to the little dog. He no longer accompanied us on trips.
A cat that brings its owner chicks of songbirds... http://www.ynet.co.il/articles/0,7340,L-4417702,00.html
"They sit in a row - cat - pigeon - cat - pigeon, but why get confused with the facts?" – This is the funniest part of your comment.
Go to a central station in Tel Aviv. Maybe you will find a Sudanese there who will agree to touch you with a stick.
A Chinese sage said - "Birding is the refuge of cat haters" - you are a repulsive creature who does not hesitate to use false information to strengthen an unfounded thesis that is based on your hatred for cats, for their feeders who are in the vast majority good people who are unable to turn their backs on hunger and distress. You are neither a scientist nor shoes, but a classic cat "hater" (what's with the quotation marks??"""") who must be outraged that cats have been declared protected animals after decades of cruel poisonings. FYI, the yard cats we feed don't bother to move when the pigeons come to nibble on their friskies and wade in the water. They sit in a row - cat - pigeon - cat - pigeon, but why get confused with the facts?
Assaf, "There is no doubt on which side the truth is" is something that a true scientist will never say - second thing - if you have a factual problem with what I wrote - address it - appropriating the truth to yourself is the behavior of a religious person.
To another and co.:
Here, as in the responses to other lists that appear in Hidan, there is a line of "experts"
who express their opinion, an opinion based on... feelings, thoughts and... ignorance,
They should remember that when the debate is between opinion and knowledge, between feeling and fact,
There is no doubt on which side the truth is, because: a discussion is an exchange of opinions and information,
And an argument is an exchange of ignorance,
A fruitful discussion is conducted by exchanging ideas,
When there is a debate between ideas and facts,
The fruitfulness of the discussion is impaired and the discussion turns into an argument.
..."Also, everything necessary must be done so that in the natural environment (and also in settlements) there are no domestic animals that have gone wild."...
It sounds to me that Assaf wants to do more castration and sterilization soup.
Second thing - this is an exaggeration of a problem: songbirds are not in danger of extinction, neither are lizards and mice. Most of the animals that are in the city or in an environment close to the human environment are animals that know how to thrive despite or even thanks to the human presence. They don't need our protection, so it's not clear to me what should protect them. There are places where the presence of cats destroys the natural balance and leads to extinction - but this happens mainly where cats were not part of the system at all. The thing about cats is that many people breed cats in their yard in large quantities or in partial adoptions - they feed them but nothing more than that - it's not like a dog that has to be adopted by law - and that's because big cats are much less of a threat to humans - outside of rabies infected areas at least . If we start treating cats like dogs in terms of the law - many cats will die because their owners will not be able to take care of them.
In other words - the symbiosis of humans with cats includes not only full adoption - but also simply a feeder-fed relationship - a person feeds cats in his yard and in return he has no pests there - he cannot afford to castrate and sterilize them all. And it is problematic to enforce it.
Miracles
You laugh for the only time in your life: "You're not as smart as you think." So if you're not that smart,
Why are you writing your uneducated opinion?
another one
Assaf is right.
It's not clear what you're up against.
You go against cats... it's not clear... you have to respect all human beings and not just humans. to your heart's content.
I am also against killing cats. But have you heard about sterilization and castration?
Miracles - not wise - besides right? You have all the answers….
If the cats are a barrier to another invasive species - then what is the problem?
When we build a city, we have long since shaped nature to suit us, what do you want? Shall we go back to the caves?
I put a person - and real animals according to a personal ranking that I feel is correct - a person above cats, cats above mice and reptiles - you put an amorphous concept - "nature" above all - therefore now that certain animals like cats live in the wild, it is bad for cats because they came with man They are not nature and therefore they are bad - the lizards they eat are not from man and therefore they are good. The main thing is that you say I'm religious.
My father - my conscience says it is immoral to kill cats to save lizards. I don't know about you - in any case Assaf's formulation was completely religious. ..."and to which we are commanded to keep"....
another one
The one who expresses a religious position is you. You put man above the environment in which he lives. And this is exactly what religion does - in the name of "God", man has special rights.
The spread of man in the world has brought destruction, and this destruction is also the need to continue spreading. This is one of the reasons for wars - lack of natural resources. This is true for any living creature that reproduces without control - at first everything looks good, but in the end even the "dominant species" becomes extinct.
Untamed cats are part of this problem. True - they are an excellent barrier for mice - but they are also an invasive species due to human fault.
Look - I'm only saying 2 things. The first is that we are not as smart as we think. And the second thing is that history proves that I am right about the first thing.
Another one - have you heard about the decree of conscience?
..."and which we are commanded to keep"...
And now you have reached the religious angle of your worldview.
Who ordered us to keep them? Animals that are not even extinct. That their existence might even harm us? Who are you to say that the lives of these reptiles are more important than the lives of more developed mammals like cats and humans? What divine agency told you that?
--------
What ignorance do you attribute to us?
Your links require payment, therefore they are not considered and they are talking about dogs and not cats - the only breed of cats I know that attack the most in isolation are lions. It is also written in the article that this is unusual behavior.
---------
To the supplier:
You are right … partially …. Because it is true that: "dogs and cats are in our immediate neighborhood",
It is not true that: "Their behavior is quite familiar to all of us", certainly not what they do outside the home,
To improve your knowledge, it is appropriate to read the lists whose links I provided above,
Small dogs do become extinct, but the big ones form predatory and dangerous packs for wild animals and people,
Such dangerous gangs are all over the country, even within settlements.
Cats are indeed not "social animals" by nature, but live in a human environment
causes behavioral changes, see how there are no "fights and fights" at the "feeding points",
"Birds, lizards, mice, and reptiles" are part of the natural environment in which we live
And to which we are commanded to keep, (even when a part is a problem),
It turns out that sometimes even "fairy tales" become a real problem,
And once again the "arrogance" comes from being engaged (practically and theoretically) on the subject for many years,
An occupation in which we learn to differentiate between "love of animals" and the need to protect wild animals and the natural environment,
Knowing the problems of domestic animals that go wild and trying to find solutions,
I already wrote in the past that there is a big and many difference between the things,
A difference that mainly stems from emotionality but also from clarity,
And it has already been said that:
Discernment (knowledge) - defined as "cynicism" (in this case "arrogance") by those who lack discernment (knowledge).
Asaf - Cities are not a "natural environment" - as Hagi said - it is important to co-exist with a population of cats - unlike other animals - they are usually not dangerous to humans (except in areas infected with rabies) - and the human is what is important here and not the pest population. In some cases they pose a danger of living in danger of extinction - a local danger of extinction - but why sparrow birds or pigeons - which are very common birds - why is their blood redder than the blood of cats? Why is the blood of mice, rats, lizards redder than that of cats?
Asaf
You are just arrogant. What is the excessive ignorance you attribute to Hagi, another and Rocky?
Dogs and cats are in our immediate neighborhood and their behavior is quite familiar to all of us. Abandoned dogs are usually neglected without causing harm. Rarely, under certain conditions the abandoned dogs form aggressive packs, under other conditions domesticated dogs attack humans especially if they are of aggressive breeds. Cats are only aggressive towards small animals, say up to the size of a poodle and that is also quite rare.
A pack of cats sounds like fairy tales. Unlike dogs who have sociable tendencies to join groups - cats are individual animals and males even tend to fight over territories mainly.
The proliferation of birds, lizards, mice, and reptiles in the living environment of humans is not something we should protect.
Sorry to be blunt (and maybe even rude)
But these are the feelings that ignorance evokes in me that are waved like a flag,
Because the reactions of: Hagai, one other and Rocky are perhaps based on love for animals,
But they certainly do not have the slightest understanding of the natural environment
and the behavior of wild animals,
Therefore again: ignorance is not a flag worth waving.
My dog was scratched by a cat, probably to protect her puppy, and has been afraid of cats ever since.
The only ones that are dangerous to humans are dogs. There are many cases of dog attacks on humans, but I have never heard of a similar case from cats.
Cats may not be dangerous to humans, but to lizards and other animals in the wild they are dangerous.
By the way, in complete contrast to cats, stray dogs are indeed a problem - packs of stray dogs can and do form in different parts of the world. Usually when these leave the city they also become dangerous hunting bands (even for humans to a certain extent) and you don't need articles to see that - you can find out what is already happening today in the Galilee and Nahal Sorek in Israel.
Does this mean that "animal lovers" can go and sterilize dogs? Does this mean that they should be destroyed or other solutions? I don't think so, but we do need to find a solution that will prevent the danger of stray dog groups. It is to distinguish a thousand thousand differences from cats, even if once in tens of years they find somewhere on the globe a single and strange case of aggression, this too is not really dangerous for humans.
Unlike most articles in science, this article is very short and decisive, which is a shame.
Even if the research in the USA is correct, cats are not exactly a normal natural animal - they are a communal animal, meaning one that thrives in the human environment. In fact the best natural environment for a cat is... the city.
I (fortunately) live in Moshav. There are a lot of cats in the moshav, some more domesticated and some less so. My parents have dozens of outdoor cats with whom the relationship is only feeding twice a day. Except for the few who have gotten used to it - these cats are outdoor cats that run away from contact with humans.
Do 20 cats in my parent's house create a sterile space from other animals around them? Do the moshav cats unconsciously hunt the animals around them - hardly. The cats affect the area very close to them and in a way that people really want it to happen - at a distance of no more than 500 m from my parents' house, there is no problem with poisonous snakes, scorpions and absolutely no problem with mice or rats. It was enough that one of the neighbors' new dog kept the cats away from wandering around her yard, and all these pests immediately reappeared. By the way, there are many other animals in abundance in my parents' house as well - birds, insects of various kinds that hang around in the same garden with the cats. By the way, the pigeon population thrived well in the area of my residence (after they were released into the wild by someone who tried to breed pigeons) and was really not harmed by the cats, except when the Thais arrived in the residence (after they stopped hunting, the bird population returned to thriving despite the large number of cats).
Another example - in the area of the market in Jerusalem (which you are invited to visit and also hear the chirping of the birds), street cats began to be spayed and neutered (whose existence, by the way, never interfered with the birds' existence in the city), the immediate result was that a decrease in the cat population caused an increase in the appearance of rats and mice.
Now, in the global experiment - almost every city has stray cats. especially in Israel. Somewhere in a remote place in nature in a distant country a woman was probably attacked by cats (if the news is indeed true). From this information to draw all these conclusions? With judgments and knowledge? Because of a study that my seat and the city of Jerusalem can disprove with a single look at the cat population in which to draw conclusions about the confinement of the cat indoors?
Go out and learn history - what the Egyptians already knew a long time ago "animal lovers" who are actually their own lovers and not animal lovers fail to understand today. The cat is one of the most useful animals for humans - we can choose in our living areas whether we prefer cats or we prefer the rats and mice and other pests. Even with the cats, the damage to nature is minor and limited to areas where man himself has already damaged nature much more. Cats that attack humans? It's possible, maybe, it's not certain that here happened one case after decades of billions billions of encounters between people and cats that occur every year - if you were to do a scientific experiment it would be considered more negligible than negligible and the explanation was that there was probably another reason why in that particular case the behavior was different . What is certain is that they would not have published an article so decisive and tainted by a pre-decision of the conclusion.
In my opinion, the science editor should remove this article because it really does not reflect the quality of other news on the site.
The animals that the greens love to hate are because of humans and all the animals that are here because of humans. Why is the blood of birds redder than the blood of cats? Because birds are part of the environment and cats are part of humanity?
"As has already been said, the time has come that instead of controlling the environment for the sake of the human population, there will be control of the human population for the sake of the environment. Or in the current case, there will be control of the side effects of part of the human population."
Said an eco-fascist par excellence. I suggest to the writer to start asking the opinions of people who think differently - he is so deep inside his own world of opinions that he is not at all able to appreciate that he might be wrong.
Cats can only catch weak, old and sick birds, so they only benefit the birds' gardens.
I have seen dozens of failed attempts by cats to catch birds, and not even one success.
The birds even communicate and make warning sounds.
And as for an attack on humans, by a bunch of domestic cats, it looks like fairy tales.
Although other species of cats do have the ability to attack,
Since in the body of the article only the name of the monthly appears without a link
After all (for skeptics and others) here are the links that describe the problem:
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0006320712003151
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0006320712003151
Even if the "information is false" and not reliable,
This does not detract from the seriousness (and truth) of the problem for which the news was leaked,
The news served as an "appetizer" for me to bring up the problem of domestic animals going wild
or are not fully controlled,
Wild animals that cause fatal damage to the natural environment
and endanger the human environment,
Please send a link.
The news in Idfandt turned out to be false news