By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General Discussion - My dog killed a neighbors cat! Not sure what to do

Alby_da_Wolf said:

Cats maybe can kill baby rabbits, although they aren't normally very interested in them, but adult rabbits definitely aren't their prey. My cats get along well with the neigbours' rabbits when they escape. Definitely my cats never kill chicks, but only adult birds.
And massacre of more than one animal at a time is not a typical cat behaviour, that's what typically some mustelids like weasels, martens and ermines do when they go into a blood frenzy, but if the animal is defenceless, like baby rabbits, also rats become ruthless killers. BTW, amongst the worst killers of chicks of other birds there are seagulls, and in the last years in many towns and their surroundings, they have become infesting almost like rats, in the park of the children hospital near my home they even kicked out owls.
As usual, PETA and the like, unlike more serious organisations like WWF, mostly say utter bullshit.

Hasn't been my experience. What is seen in this video is pretty typical of cats. 

or this video 

or this video 

But the empirical evidence doesn't come from PETA but actual biologists, ecologists, and ornithologists. 

http://www.deakin.edu.au/about-deakin/media-releases/articles/invasive-predators-major-cause-of-species-extinctions

https://www.nature.com/articles/ncomms2380

"Anthropogenic threats, such as collisions with man-made structures, vehicles, poisoning and predation by domestic pets, combine to kill billions of wildlife annually. Free-ranging domestic cats have been introduced globally and have contributed to multiple wildlife extinctions on islands. The magnitude of mortality they cause in mainland areas remains speculative, with large-scale estimates based on non-systematic analyses and little consideration of scientific data. Here we conduct a systematic review and quantitatively estimate mortality caused by cats in the United States. We estimate that free-ranging domestic cats kill 1.3–4.0 billion birds and 6.3–22.3 billion mammals annually. Un-owned cats, as opposed to owned pets, cause the majority of this mortality. Our findings suggest that free-ranging cats cause substantially greater wildlife mortality than previously thought and are likely the single greatest source of anthropogenic mortality for US birds and mammals. Scientifically sound conservation and policy intervention is needed to reduce this impact."

http://www.pnas.org/content/112/15/4531.full.pdf

So yeah, it's not "PETA ... bullshit" no more than antropogenic climate change is "chinese ... bullshit." 




Around the Network
sc94597 said:

Here's a good read for outdoor cat owners, by the way.  I recommend reading the comments too. Please don't be selfish guys. Think of other people and animals and the welfare of you and your cats.  

https://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/22/opinion/sunday/the-evil-of-the-outdoor-cat.html?_r=0

"ONCE upon a time I had a cat named Lucky, and the name fit. She turned up on our doorstep as a stray and stayed with us for 10 years, until her rather gruesome demise. (More about that later.) I liked her because she was a free spirit, and a survivor, going out for two, three, even five days, in all seasons. She’d show up when it suited her, waiting in the dark before dawn till I came downstairs and turned on my desk lamp. Then she’d make her presence known by rising up on her hind legs and gently scratching with her forepaws on my window.

Sometimes, without stopping to say hello, she’d leave us tattered offerings, with little starbursts of coagulated blood, on the front walk. The birds were disturbing, the moles and deer mice not so much. Jane, the older woman who lived two doors down, mentioned that Lucky sometimes lurked near her bird feeder, but she didn’t seem to think much of it, and neither did we. We put a bell on Lucky, but it didn’t last a week before she shed it in some bush.

If all this sounds lackadaisical, particularly in someone who writes about wildlife, I should note that Lucky, who died in 2008, was our last outdoor cat.

We were about to become early adopters in the trend that is beginning to make outdoor cats as socially unacceptable as smoking cigarettes in the office, or leaving dog droppings on the sidewalk.

What’s driving this trend is a growing sense of alarm about the dramatic decline in wildlife, and especially bird, populations, combined with a new awareness that cats bear a significant share of the blame.

Continue reading the main story

The National Audubon Society tracks 20 common North American bird species — Eastern meadowlarks, field sparrows and the like — that are now in decline. Their numbers have dropped by 68 percent on average since 1967, because of a variety of factors. In Britain, likewise, farmland bird populations have plummeted just since 1995, with turtle doves, for instance, down by 85 percent, cuckoos by 50 percent, and lapwings by 41 percent.

If these were stock market numbers, people would be leaping from buildings. But the peculiar thing about what biologists have called “the second Silent Spring” is that people tend not to hear it.

Like a lot of other cat owners, I used to think that when Lucky went outside and, now and then, killed an animal, she was “just doing what’s natural” for a cat. I was aware that cats have caused or contributed to the extinction of 33 species. But all of those species were living on islands and many had likely never seen a predator before early navigators introduced cats. The mainland nature around me was savvier than that, I figured, and had the scale to handle incidental killings by a few house cats.

But that is no longer true, if it ever was. Intensification of agriculture is eliminating millions of acres of habitat from the countryside. The relentless development of cities and suburbs has also squeezed out wildlife, and will squeeze harder over the next few decades. Urbanized land area in the Lower 48 states is on track to more than triple between 1990 and 2050, according to the United States Forest Service. In four Northeastern states, more than 60 percent of the total land area will be urban by midcentury, up from about 35 percent in 2000.

Wildlife increasingly hangs on in the margins, in parks and on forgotten scraps of land, which function, as it happens, a lot like islands.

And wildlife in this country must share this land with a growing population of about 84 million owned cats, and anywhere from 30 to 80 million feral or stray cats. When all of them do “what’s natural” in a fragmented natural world, it adds up. Using deliberately conservative assumptions, federal researchers recently estimated that free-ranging cats killed about 2.4 billion birds annually in the Lower 48 states, a substantial bite out of the total bird population. Outdoor cats also kill about 12.3 billion small mammals a year — not just the proverbial rats and mice but also chipmunks, rabbits and squirrels — and about 650 million reptiles and amphibians. In some cases, they are pushing endangered species toward extinction.

But here is the number that sticks in my mind: Letting my own cat, Lucky, outdoors may have consigned as many as 33 birds and dozens of mammals to death every year. If you have ever seen a cat toy with its victim, you know these are not quick, or pretty, or painless deaths. So you might expect animal welfare groups to be ardently campaigning against outdoor cats, and particularly against the care and feeding of feral or stray cats, which do most of the killing.

Instead, these groups have mainly addressed the feral cat problem with a strategy called T.N.R., which involves trapping cats, neutering and immunizing them, and then releasing them again. Scientific studies have generally found that T.N.R. is not particularly effective at reducing feral cat colonies. The practice has also come under attack from one animal welfare group: PETA has described T.N.R. as a way for shelters to put a better spin on their image, because they don’t have to euthanize as many unwanted cats. But given the number of birds and small mammals the released cats go on to kill, I question whether the Humane Society and other T.N.R. backers should call themselves “animal welfare” groups anymore.

None of this may sound as if outdoor cats are on the way to becoming socially unacceptable, although when birders and cat lovers start shouting at each other about outdoor cats, it can seem as if we are en route to open warfare. But the change in attitudes toward smoking didn’t come easy, either. The smoking analogy is also more apt than may at first appear because outdoor cats, like secondhand smoke, also threaten the health of innocent human bystanders.

Cats are three to four times more likely than dogs to carry rabies, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. They also share many other parasites or infectious microbes with humans, including roundworms, hookworms, giardia and campylobacter. When cats live outdoors it is almost impossible to predict what they will bring home next. In Massachusetts and New York, for instance, cats recently turned up infected with a worm normally found in raccoons. One owner pulled four of them, about six inches long, through her cat’s skin, “which isn’t the best idea,” says one of the Cornell University scientists who reported the cases.

Most insidiously, outdoor cats are the primary hosts of toxoplasmosis, which is estimated to infect almost 30 percent of all humans worldwide. Toxoplasmosis produces lifelong parasitic cysts in the brain, and though it is generally asymptomatic it has been linked to neurological impairments, depression, blindness and birth defects. Even in asymptomatic individuals, the infection is associated with significant loss of memory in later life, according to a study last month in the journal Brain, Behavior, and Immunity. But I’m not really arguing that outdoor cats will become socially unacceptable because they are bad for humans. Rather, I think ardent cat lovers will eventually see that the multiple hazards of outdoor living are also terrible for cats.

And that brings me back to Lucky, and the night that her good name failed her. We never really found out what happened. But the other outdoor cat in the neighborhood, also a longtime survivor, died that same night. And the next morning a bobcat crossed right in front of my car and stopped in the middle of the road to fix me with a brazen I’m-walking-here-and-what-are-you-looking-at glower.

Most of Lucky turned up in the yard next door. Another piece was served up on the picnic table. A third, with a starburst of coagulated blood, appeared on the sidewalk, right where Lucky used to leave her offerings. I suppose it was a fitting end, in a live-by-the-sword sort of way, and for once, wildlife triumphed.

But I also know that I will never own an outdoor cat again."

Good post.

It's morally wrong to own out-door cats because they kill so many small animals.

To the OP, I think you should advice him to get a dog, and you can offer to buy him a puppy.



sc94597 said:
Alby_da_Wolf said:

Cats maybe can kill baby rabbits, although they aren't normally very interested in them, but adult rabbits definitely aren't their prey. My cats get along well with the neigbours' rabbits when they escape. Definitely my cats never kill chicks, but only adult birds.
And massacre of more than one animal at a time is not a typical cat behaviour, that's what typically some mustelids like weasels, martens and ermines do when they go into a blood frenzy, but if the animal is defenceless, like baby rabbits, also rats become ruthless killers. BTW, amongst the worst killers of chicks of other birds there are seagulls, and in the last years in many towns and their surroundings, they have become infesting almost like rats, in the park of the children hospital near my home they even kicked out owls.
As usual, PETA and the like, unlike more serious organisations like WWF, mostly say utter bullshit.

Hasn't been my experience. What is seen in this video is pretty typical of cats. 

or this video 

 

or this video 

 

But the empirical evidence doesn't come from PETA but actual biologists, ecologists, and ornithologists. 

http://www.deakin.edu.au/about-deakin/media-releases/articles/invasive-predators-major-cause-of-species-extinctions

https://www.nature.com/articles/ncomms2380

"Anthropogenic threats, such as collisions with man-made structures, vehicles, poisoning and predation by domestic pets, combine to kill billions of wildlife annually. Free-ranging domestic cats have been introduced globally and have contributed to multiple wildlife extinctions on islands. The magnitude of mortality they cause in mainland areas remains speculative, with large-scale estimates based on non-systematic analyses and little consideration of scientific data. Here we conduct a systematic review and quantitatively estimate mortality caused by cats in the United States. We estimate that free-ranging domestic cats kill 1.3–4.0 billion birds and 6.3–22.3 billion mammals annually. Un-owned cats, as opposed to owned pets, cause the majority of this mortality. Our findings suggest that free-ranging cats cause substantially greater wildlife mortality than previously thought and are likely the single greatest source of anthropogenic mortality for US birds and mammals. Scientifically sound conservation and policy intervention is needed to reduce this impact."

http://www.pnas.org/content/112/15/4531.full.pdf

So yeah, it's not "PETA ... bullshit" no more than antropogenic climate change is "chinese ... bullshit." 


Although it can happen, as I wrote too, rabbits aren't the typical cat prey (dwarf rabbits can be more vulnerable, being the size of young plain rabbits, and surely a strong and hungry feral cat will eat whatever it can easily kill). And as YOU wrote, unowned cats are the most regular and mass killers, not owned ones, even if left free to roam. Pets should never be abandoned, as they can become more destructive than true wild animals, but this applies even more to dogs, as feral dogs in most countries are responsible for most livestock kills for which wolves and other wild predators are wrongly blamed.
Those kills estimates roughly imply that there should be more than 10 millions, using the lowest numbers, and up to 70 millions using the highest ones, un-owned free-ranging domestic cats in the USA. I don't know if this is possible or not, each predator needs a large hunting area, but USA are very big. And if the number of those cats is actually unsustainable, it means that they have a smaller area than what a true wild cat needs to be in balance with the environment.
But this has nothing to do with free-ranging owned cats.

PS Even when there are actual scientific data and knowledge, PETA almost always manages to estract bullshit out of them, they just aren't able to correctly  understand what they read, due to their bias.



Stwike him, Centuwion. Stwike him vewy wuffly! (Pontius Pilate, "Life of Brian")
A fart without stink is like a sky without stars.
TGS, Third Grade Shooter: brand new genre invented by Kevin Butler exclusively for Natal WiiToo Kinect. PEW! PEW-PEW-PEW! 
 


Alby_da_Wolf said:

Although it can happen, as I wrote too, rabbits aren't the typical cat prey. And as YOU wrote, unowned cats are the most regular and mass killers, not owned ones, even if left free to roam. Pets should never be abandoned, as they can become more destructive than true wild animals, but this applies even more to dogs, as feral dogs in most countries are responsible for most livestock kills for which wolves and other wild predators are wrongly blamed.
Those kills estimates roughly imply that there should be more than 10 millions, using the lowest numbers, and up to 70 millions using the highest ones, un-owned free-ranging domestic cats in the USA. I don't know if this is possible or not, each predator needs a large hunting area, but USA are very big. And if the number of those cats is actually unsustainable, it means that they have a smaller area than what a true wild cat needs to be in balance with the environment.
But this has nothing to do with free-ranging owned cats.

Rabbits are very common for cats to eat, and tear apart while they're doing so. Sure they aren't the most desired prey, cats prefer birds and mice, but they still love to kill, play with, and eat rabbits also. 

The study said the majority comes from unowned cats (which is defined as cats which don't ever go into somebody's house, even if they feed them. 

"Although our results suggest that owned cats have relatively less impact than un-owned cats, owned cats still cause substantial wildlife mortality (Table 2); simple solutions to reduce mortality caused by pets, such as limiting or preventing outdoor access, should be pursued. Efforts to better quantify and minimize mortality from all anthropogenic threats are needed to increase sustainability of wildlife populations."

"
The magnitude of wildlife mortality caused by cats that we report here far exceeds all prior estimates. Available evidence suggests that mortality from cat predation is likely to be substantial in all parts of the world where free-ranging cats occur. This mortality is of particular concern within the context of steadily increasing populations of owned cats, the potential for increasing populations of un-owned cats12, and an increasing abundance of direct and indirect mortality sources that threaten wildlife in the United States and globally."

Furthermore, all unowned domesticated cats were either previously owned and neglected (not fed) or descend from previously owned cats that were allowed to roam and have babies. 



Aeolus451 said:
sc94597 said:

See my other post. There is no reason to believe that just because a dog killed a cat that it will kill a human. Likewise, feral mammals can carry rabies, cats included. 

 

"For instance, from 1999 to 2014...."

"....Meanwhile, 486 people died from dog attacks and 1,163 people died from attacks by other mammals, such as cows or horses. About 4.5 million dog bites occur each year."

Dogs are ranked 3rd highest in lethal animal attacks to humans in the us from the total of deaths caused by animal attacks that occured between 1999 to 2007

 

http://www.cnn.com/2016/06/17/health/animal-attacks-statistics/index.html

CNN reporting actual real news for once....

 

Pet cats aren't considered feral just because they go outside.

Any stats for how many lives have been saved/helped by dogs over the past few thousand years?



Nov 2016 - NES outsells PS1 (JP)

Don't Play Stationary 4 ever. Switch!

Around the Network
Jumpin said:
Why do so many of you guys believe this post is real?

It seems only 2-3 other people picked up how incredibly odd it is that a person would come to an online video game forum for advice, if this was actually real.

It's real. 

No different than someone posting about politics or other unrelated topics. Plus I want to stay anonymous and would rather not face the scrutiny of facebook. 



Aeolus451 said:
sc94597 said:

See my other post. There is no reason to believe that just because a dog killed a cat that it will kill a human. Likewise, feral mammals can carry rabies, cats included. 

 

"For instance, from 1999 to 2014...."

"....Meanwhile, 486 people died from dog attacks and 1,163 people died from attacks by other mammals, such as cows or horses. About 4.5 million dog bites occur each year."

Dogs are ranked 3rd highest in lethal animal attacks to humans in the us from the total of deaths caused by animal attacks that occured between 1999 to 2007

 

http://www.cnn.com/2016/06/17/health/animal-attacks-statistics/index.html

CNN reporting actual real news for once....

 

Pet cats aren't considered feral just because they go outside.

Most of these deaths don't come from domesticated dogs we would have as pets. Most to all of these deaths are from feral and stray dogs who can be infected with rabies, attack people and spread the disease. Just because a dog can doesn't mean it will. Otherwise those numbers would be extremely higher and come mostly from pets not feral and stray dogs. This dog who killed one little cat isn't going to hunt down every kid it see's on the street because of it.



Well you were irresponsible indirectly as you're accountable for your visitors as well. It was an honest mistake that resulted in a tragedy and you will have to face the consequences of that. I would not fret about the idea of your buddy being put down, that seems extremely unlikely. Generally that type of thing only happens when a dog shows a pattern of violent behavior such as biting various humans causing them some type of actual harm.

I think your buddy will be fine but I think you have learned a good lesson here about the seriousness of securing your property in order to avoid these scenarios in the future.

Best of luck with everything.

PS: Offering a new cat sounds a terrible idea. Were it my cat that was lost I would want to punch you in the face for saying that to me. I'm not a cat person either.



I was talking to some friends yesterday when I went to the bar and all of them agreed that putting the dog down was unnecessary.
My former roommate has the same breed as me and said his dog has killed 3 cats before and would never attack a person or another dog. My sisters friend has the same breed as well and killed a squirrel before and her dog is probably the sweetest dog I know. A friend of my dads has a lab that killed a cat before. My coworkers pit-bull killed a bird and has never bit a person before. What I'm saying is, these type of breeds have a high prey drive but that doesn't mean these dogs will be aggressive towards people.

We see these videos of cats and dogs being best friends so we assume dogs and cats have to get along with one another, but the vast majority of dogs and cats really don't like one another.



betacon said:
Your dog should be put down, it's your responsibility to train the dog properly which you've failed to do. Husky's are one of the most dangerous dog breeds right up there with Pitbulls, they're not a social breed and need to be well trained.


If he attacked and killed a cat, don't kid your self and think he wouldn't attack a child, he would.

Wrong, Huskies are very social, but usually just with dogs and humans. They really need training with any other kind of animal though. Problem is they are very often either treated and trained wrong, kept in the wrong environment or both. And most Huskies and Husky mixes simply don't have enough to do.

dark_gh0st_b0y said:

why the heck do the f***ing dogs like to kill cats

if it was my cat, you'd still be looking for your dog btw :P

Why do those f***ing cats like to kill animals?

That's basically interpreting human behaviour into animal behaviour, people do that far to often.