The Pet Shop

[Agent0013]

They are using estimates, and claiming them to be actual numbers. Of course the feral cats will kill what they can catch, as it is their only source of food. In the area where I live, the main diet of feral cats is rats and mice. Our feral cats do kill other species as well, but not as many as the pest species by far. As for domesticated cats, of which I have a lifetime of experience, if they are fed cat food they don't go hunting as often. When it comes to the pest species (rats, mice, etc.), I want my cats to be hunting and killing them. I know that the rats and mice multiply much faster that cats. Killing off all the feral cats in an area will cause a population explosion of those species, even though the domestic cat population remains the same as it has been.
I'm not saying that the population of cats, both domestic and feral does not need to be controlled. Rather I'm saying that removing a very large percentage of their population can be the cause of a devastating population explosion of pest species, that more than likely are carrying diseases, that could decimate the human population by a very large percentage. The European example speaks for itself, concerning that possibility. It has always been true that an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure, and in this case it is actually worth far more.
In our area of the US, we have a program called Catch, Neuter, and Release. It isn't any more perfect than other programs, due to releasing them in areas they did not come from. Many domestic cats and dogs have been relocated by the program, and unable to find their way back to their homes. Their human companions then suffer a loss that they are unable to resolve.
As for putting a chip under an animal's skin for tracking purposes, in my experience, it requires the supporting personnel of the program to be competent in the technology, and we must face the fact that most of them are not competent. There are even members of such programs that just don't care, just being a part of it for their own personal gain.
I really don't know how many apex predators are native to Australia but it makes no sense to me that they are few. Apex predators should be at the top of their food chain, dominating over all other predator species in their area. I know that foxes in the US are known to be killers of cats, though a cat can kill a fox. The difference in the 2 species boils down to how sociable each species is with their own kind. Turns out that foxes, like most canine species are more sociable. Yes there are cat troops, but when out hunting, they prefer to be alone. Most canine species that hunt do so in packs, cooperating with each other to bring down their prey. I see no reason to believe foxes are not the same way, as they too are canines, and they live in packs.
There are also wild dogs, descendants of domesticated breeds, that run in packs, and you will see the evidence of mixed breeds among them, even to the point of mixing with wolves, coyotes, and foxes in the areas where those species exist. Many of those packs will corner a cat and kill it, if the cat is not lucky enough to escape them.
And this brings me back to the question of estimates. How does the authorities know that the studies they do concerning such estimates are accurate, especially when their own experiments are done under controlled conditions. That control is what determines the outcome, forcing the subject being studied to act in conditions that limit their options. I call that "Guided Science", which will never be good enough to show fully true results concerning the whole of a species. Estimates are never accurate, sometimes far over the numbers given, other time far under those numbers. So when I see a report that uses the word estimate, or its derivatives, or synonyms of the same, I must question that. Such things can be estimated with bias toward a desired result, which is what many estimators will do.

[thelufias]

I just found the article...and didn't write it

[sanbie]

Wow Agent, you sure do feel strongly about this...

[Agent0013]

I do feel strongly about it, because it is humans trying to make animals act outside their own nature. Every time humans do this, it turns out to be bad, either for the animals in question, or the humans, or both. Yes in the case of the pest animals, I do wish for them to be greatly controlled population-wise; but mainly because of the extreme problems they cause due to multiplying so quickly, and the fact that they can carry deadly diseases. I'm not saying eradicate them completely, but allow the nature of animals that hunt them to control their populations. The amount of other species that those animals prey upon is usually much less than their predation of the pest species.

[sanbie]

Now that's so true...every time humans interfere with nature nothing good becomes of it.

[McGrandpa]

So true.   Yet, is having them WITH us as pets, family, against the actual nature of any of our non human friends?

[Agent0013]

It is not unheard of for even wild animals to seek out humans for help. I see videos on YouTube about that all the time. Humans have abilities that animals sometime see a need for, which they are unable to do themselves. This shows me that many animals are much smarter than many of we humans are willing to give them credit for. It just might be how certain animals became domesticated. It is known that dogs and humans formed a mutually beneficial relationship very early in human history. Who is to say that other animals, like cats for instance did not do the same? I believe they did. Otherwise, how did humans know cats could be great companions? Then there are animals known as beasts of burden, such as horses, donkeys, elephants, and so on. Even goats have been used to pull carts. And nearly all of the animals that are work animals actually like their work. In the case of cats, I believe they took up with humans to get at the pests that were infesting human homes, and they became friendly with the humans in order to keep that going. So the domestic cat came into existence, and now they have developed a relationship that goes deep into the hearts of both human and cat. Witness the relationship I and my cat companion Cookie Baby have. It's a relationship in which we have worries that we might not see each other again, when one or the other of us is gone for a longer time than we normally are. I'm sure that there are many of us here that have that same type of relationship with their cat companions.

[McGrandpa]

Cats and Dogs are entirely different People.  We here all see this.  I feel that dogs did put themselves forth to BE domesticated, to become "pack" with us.   The rest, is truly history.   Cats saw us, and I think liked us, and came and walked among us before we were even allowed to touch them.   Like I said, they are different people!  Even so, both look for the same things with us human people.  They look for food and safety, sure.  They also look for and find comfort and affection with us.  Often at the same time. 

[thelufias]

Exactly.....

[McGrandpa]

It would be terrific if my bro in law would be allowed to bring Mogwai up here for a little visit, for sure.  But, if it isn't a handicap assist animal, nope.  None allowed at all.
I get to speak to him on the phone occasionally.  But I think Alan figures it just upsets Mogwai when he hears me but cannot see me there.   OK.  I will get my work done in rehab, and get me home quick as I can!