Feral Cats

Euthenize them. The cats, too.

Feral cats are awful.
Kill them all.
Control breeding of tame cats with neutering.
Less feral cats.

All cats outdoors should be euthenized without exceptions, it's the only way to get rid of ferals.

otherwise all missing ferals will just be replaced by people their outdoor cats, they're often not fixed.

>>2025922
this

I'd say euthanasia because they can never be around people without aggression but I imagine it'd be too expensive. Plus they say if a cat is gone for when they try to spay or neuter, a other will just take its place. I remember seeing a video where they cull large pigeon populations in cities with some food and a big net. Too bad they can't do that.

It's sad that they got into that situation but why should their life be preferred over native wildlife?

Shoot or euthanise them. Also shoot anyone with an unaltered outside cat and those who breed their pets so children can experience "the mirracle of life".

>>2025956
>with an unaltered outside cat
fixed cats still do damage.

>>2025938
>>2025928
>>2025959
My state has a spay and release program following the logic that female cats, spayed or not, will maintain a territory and compete with fertile cats and act as did mates for feral males. You reduce the feral's ability to breed better with duds than with empty land to move into.

>>2025959
It does but abolishing barn cat culture will not happen overnight.

>>2025986
that's a myth as far as I know.

>>2025868
kill all cats.

>>2026076

I have 5 or 6 barn cats that I would say count as feral cats, useful little bastards is what they are.

I do shoot them when their numbers get to high though, but now I think I only have males, because I haven't had any kittens in years.

>>2026082
Shoot them all, cunt.

>>2025986

I spent a lot of time looking at the results of TNR studies for a college thing last year, and unfortunately in most cases this just isn't the case. The nurtured/spayed cats are less agressive and less willing to fight, so they just end up being pushed out of the territory by the unfixed and new arrival cats.

>>2026647
Exactly. Why are people so desperate to avoid killing these wild animals that are destroying are ecosystem? Everyone's so quick to destroy every other non-native invasive predator, but why not wild cats?

>>2026667

Because muh
>innocent lives
>they don't know any better
>it's not their fault they escaped
>toxoplasmosis

>>2025868
I do it. You can't take a cat that has lived on the streets for years and just house break it. You can get them acclimated to humans and want to be playful though! We get them fixed and spayed, and we also are sure to adopt their kittens if there are any. I love cats, but I prefer to keep dogs and snakes. I have 3 Cavalier King Charles Spaniels that get along wonderfully with cats, so it also helps with acclimating them. I think when I was in highschool, with my mom, we probably adopted out 4-5 kittens and all the current owners still love them to death!

>>2026667
Because
> aww cute and fluffy
Fuck it, kill em for the sake of birds

I'm very curious though, has there been a huge amount of scientific data and research papers that have been published showing how bad feral cats have been impacting the ecosystem pertaining to U.S. wildlife? No doubt in some way they are but how REALLY BAD is it in the U.S.?

>>2025986
that's a cute excuse
>>2026667
because the public's love for the environment is eclipsed by their love for cats, if I'm not mistaken, some places FORBID cat purging

Eradicate all cats that don't have a house to sleep in.
This is coming from a huge cat lover, stray cats are an environmental disaster.

>>2025868
stray cats should be exterminated

>>2026709
It would be nice, but with the current political state of affairs most funding goes to research larger, more immediate problems like dwindling natural resources or the effects of climate change.

Not to mention a study like that would be widely opposed by those vocal animal rights activists, and the proponents of such a study are much less organized and active.

>>2026709
they are assumed to have essentially no impact in the continental US.

afaik cats aren't responsible for endangering any plant or animal on the continent. Someone may correct me if that's wrong.

>>2027483
>I can't do a basic google search
>I don't understand subsidized predation

"'If we extrapolate the results of this study across the country and include feral cats, we find that cats are likely killing more than 4 billion animals per year, including at least 500 million birds. Cat predation is one of the reasons why one in three American bird species are in decline,' said Dr. George Fenwick, President of American Bird Conservancy."

http://www.wildlifemanagementinstitute.org/index.php?option=com_content&id=610:new-research-suggests-outdoor-cats-kill-more-wildlife-than-thought&catid=34:ONB+Articles&Itemid=54

>>2027490
extrapolate a margin of error of +/- 1 a hundred million times and you're off by a hundred million.

it's strange with 1/3 of US bird species being decimated by cats, nobody can point to evidence of A SINGLE SPECIES THAT IS THREATENED BY CATS.

actually the reason is pretty simple. When your extrapolations don't agree with reality, it's not reality that needs to change.

>>2027055
>This is coming from a huge cat lover, stray cats are an environmental disaster.

So are humans. Eradicate all humans.

>>2027490
Are you saying that cats are just like humans, in that they can't live in balance with their environment? Or perhaps it is human made environments which have made it harder for those birds to live, and thus cats APPEAR to be the problem when really its human habitat encroachment?

The witch huntery shit doesn't stop with the human race apparently.

>>2026082
>I do shoot them when their numbers get to high though
You sick fuck.

>>2027499
it's essentially just bullshit.

the US has a stable population of about 10 billion birds, of which any 5 billion are expected to die of natural causes each year.

if cats actually contributed another 4 billion deaths a year we'd expect birds to be extinct in the US in less than a year.

>>2027502
And everything has to eat. If cats are so good at ruining the environment, that makes them unlike any other species of predator that has lived, aside from man.

That doesn't make sense.

>>2027494
You are an idiot. They are assuming consistent rates around the country have the same rate as that area, but the effect on that area is clear. They are a disaster there and it's obvious. If you think cats are not a disaster it's because you are deluded to the same extent anti-vaxers, anti-GMOs, and climate change deniers are.

Look up subsidized predation. Cats are a disaster, they don't need to drive anything to extinction for that to be true. They damage the entire system.

>>2027505
>That doesn't make sense.
it's possible, for example cats have caused extinctions on islands where the animals aren't used to terrestrial predators.

but yeah, in a continent where lots of terrestrial predators already exist, including several species of cat, adding more cats isn't going to harm prey species.

if they threaten anything it would be the weasels and foxes and wildcats they compete with. There's only so many birds available to be killed.

>>2027508
Plus feral cats are food for feral dogs and foxes and wildcats.

>>2027505
>>2027499
>And everything has to eat.
We FEED THEM you fuck wit. There's no balance, their population is unnaturally high because we think they are cute and fluffy.

>>2027502
A third of birds are in decline, that's a fact. And that "stable" population should be much higher.

>>2027507
>They are assuming consistent rates around the country have the same rate as that area, but the effect on that area is clear.

I'm telling you the rates don't add up with actual bird populations or mortality, so they fucked up.

I love how you think I'm anti-science but you react with anger when someone challenges the METHODOLOGY of a study that supports your favorite notions.

I think cats are an ecological disaster AND I know your study is a heap of bullshit. And the reason that heap of shit doesn't shape policy in the US is BECAUSE WE CAN'T POINT TO A SINGLE SPECIES WHERE IT HOLDS TRUE.

>>2027511
>We FEED THEM you fuck wit. There's no balance, their population is unnaturally high because we think they are cute and fluffy.

We feed feral cats? Then how are they feral?

>>2027511
>A third of birds are in decline, that's a fact
no, it's not a fact.

you should really check your facts before you pronounce them facts.

>>2027515


My ass produces gold surrounded by a brown shell. That's a fact. Now, I'll let you mine my poops for profit as long as you use your hands. Tools will only make the gold disappear. Fact.

>>2027515
>>2027516
>Claims the guy that provides a source which directly references scientific studies is the one pronouncing facts
Why is the cat lobby so stupid? You people can't even understand basic ecology or statistics.

>>2027513
>people don't feed feral cats
Are you really this out of touch with reality? People do this all the time. Animal control sites beg people to stop.

>>2027521
>You people can't even understand basic ecology or statistics.
it's a bit too basic is all I'm saying.

instead of going out and counting how many birds are actually killed by cats in the wild they just track one cat and count how many birds it kills in a day and then multiply that a billion times for the estimated number of cats and days.

if you can't see why that's weak nonsense you're either a woman or a retard. Or emotionally attached to the outcome.

or all of the above.

the simple fact is the study anon cited doesn't match reality.

>>2027524
The bird decline is based on bird population studies, not "extrapolation".

Using a sample of a cat population to understand how effective they are at hunting is also basic statistics. You are retard trying to deny facts for the sake of miniature top predator because its cute.

>>2027508

>adding more predators isn't going to harm prey species.

>>2025996
Any farmer worth his salt knows barn cats are next to worthless for the complete eradication of all pests.

>>2027526
>The bird decline is based on bird population studies, not "extrapolation".
yes, that's a separate line of inquiry. If you actually look at bird populations in the US you'll find they decline and rebound every year.

the trend over a period of several years isn't a decline. Individual species may indeed be declining, but not a third of species or a third of all birds. And not one of those declining species is actually blamed on cats.

>You are retard trying to deny facts for the sake of miniature top predator because its cute.

they aren't facts. I don't give a fuck about cats, I'm offended by your failure at math.

10 billion birds minus 5 billion from natural causes minus 4 billion from cats equals 1 billion left. Birds would be extinct in a year at that rate.

two of those numbers come from actual census counts, the other comes from extrapolation. Which ones should we trust? Which ones do you think state ecologists trust?

It's you taking the peta line, not me.

>>2027527
>third grade science

>>2027531


>cats are likely killing more than 4 billion animals per year, including at least 500 million birds.

>at least 500 million birds.
>at least 500 million birds.
>at least 500 million birds.
>at least 500 million birds.
>500 million
>500 million
>500 million
>500 million

>>2027531
>I'm taking numbers out of context to make the study look bunk
If you actually looked at the study you'd realize you are either a. completely off base and stupid or b. defending cats intentionally. There is no science or math in your favor.

>>2027533
>Third grade science you can't understand
Says more about you.

>>2027536
ok, I apologize then. I didn't read the thing.

half a billion is a reasonable estimate for the number cats kill, but probably has no effect on bird populations.

again, I'm not aware of a single bird species in the continental US that's threatened by cats.

>>2027537
there is a study out there estimating bird deaths in the billions, I assumed that's the one she cited.

my mistake.
>>2027539
prey population controls predator populations, not the other way around.

>>2027542
>prey population controls predator populations
Which is why I say you don't understand subsidized predation. They are subsidized, by people, feeding them. Cats are also willing to eat any small mammal. If mice do better around people, it doesn't matter if the birds die, they can eat mice. Cats will still eat birds when they can, but they don't need to and their populations won't drop if they don't.

>>2027550
in which case we'd have to posit that either cats prefer to eat birds or the birds they're eating have no other natural predators.

either way we're trying to explain a problem that doesn't exist.

if bird populations in general aren't declining, and we don't know of a single bird species that's being decimated by cats, why are we trying to figure out how the cats are killing birds and causing extinctions?

I dunno, we've got exactly the same problem with bees and neonicotinoids. People have been trying to explain how neonicotinoids cause bee extinction for the last 55 years.

the problem is bees aren't actually going extinct.

>>2027555
>if bird populations in general aren't declining
>wild bees (as in not honey bees) are not declining
Ok, seriously stop. You are proclaiming facts here and haven't even bothered to produce any evidence.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/domestic-crops-threatened-by-dramatic-decline-in-wild-bee-population_567957a0e4b06fa6887e915c
http://news.stanford.edu/news/2005/january12/birds-011205.html

As far as whether or not an insecticide could be bad for bees, really? It at least needs a major independent study even if it doesn't out right kill them. Besides that though I agree, wild bees are in decline because of habitat degradation, mostly due to agriculture and invasive plants. Not the insecticides. More likely herbicides have a more significant effect.

>>2027564
>(as in not honey bees)
notice how you had to add words to make my statement false.

wild bees are declining, honey bees are not. When environmentalists scream about bees they're almost always talking CCD in honey bees, which indeed are the most important crop pollinators in the US.

you can kill off all the honey bees you want, we'll breed more.

>>2027564
>haven't even bothered to produce any evidence.
I figure you can google bird populations in the US as easily as I can.

perhaps I'm wrong. I have faith in you though. And if nothing else maybe I've planted the question.

keep in mind the people that are complaining about cats eating birds and insecticides killing bees are THE EXACT SAME PEOPLE protesting gmo's and fluoride and vaccines.

>>2027570
Honey bees aren't even native. Environmentalists care about wild bees, not honey bees. CCD is caused by an invasive mite, Verroa destructor. It's not going to kill them all but it does cause a lot of economic damage.

>>2027575
>Does it again
Good job, you've failed. I searched it in the post you responded to and it supported me, yet you seem incapable of finding anything that supports your claims.

>>2027581
>Environmentalists care about wild bees, not honey bees
you clearly haven't read Silent Spring or much of any modern environmentalism.

>I searched it in the post you responded to and it supported me
those are predictions, not actual numbers.
the actual numbers are essentially flat since the 1940's.

also the cited article is talking about the world, not the US, and doesn't say how large a role cats are expected by the scientists to play.

>>2027581
The US actually conducts two bird censuses each year.
the data aren't difficult to find.

>>2027540
>but probably has no effect on bird populations.
you'd be wrong.

>>2027606
>you'd be wrong.
fair enough.

as I asked at the beginning, can you name a continental US bird species that's threatened by cats?

we're seeing lots of shorebird decline from loss of habitat, but I don't know of any birds that are flat out being killed off by cats here.

>>2027508
Holy shit you are dumb. Lol just add some more cats, other animals are used to them!

Feral cats are a huge problem in Australia. Second invasive species to fuck up our continent next to Chuzwuzzas. I believe the government is coming up with a plan soon to bring down their numbers. A type of feed that will either poison them or make them infertile. Dunno how they will do it, but it was a big thing on abc not long ago. I believe the Bilby has become endangered due to kitties.

>>2027607
>can you name a continental US bird species that's threatened by cats?
pretty much every common bird species is declining steadily.

it doesn't look that bad in newer statistics because of that, but many lost about 80% to half of their population.

that's in north america atleast, I don't even know what birds you have there.

>>2025868
Trap them. Remove their balls and uteruses. Give them a small green tattoo. Chop of part of their left ear. Release them back into their habitat. Problem solved

Stray cats are just harder targets for my peepee

>>2025922
>>2025941
Who brought PETA onto the board?

>>2028106
Pretty sure these guys are more intellectually consistent than PETA.

>>2027898
>can you name a continental US bird species that's threatened by cats?
>pretty much every common bird species is declining steadily
not only is that not true, it doesn't answer my question.

or perhaps it does. Your answer is no, you cannot name a single bird species native to the contiguous US that's threatened by cats.

neither can we, and that's why the only people funding science about cats threatening birds in the US are PETA and similar organizations.

>>2028207
Fuck peta
ASPCA all the way

>>2028228
>Fuck peta
an interesting sentiment because most of the science /an/ agrees with is actually funded by PETA.

you claim to hate it but eat out of its hand.
>all mammals feel pain and suffer
>cats are destroying the birds
>fish can feel pain
>factory farming is cruel
these are all ideas that in science are floated and funded entirely by PETA

Feral cats are an awesome source for free pets!

>>2028207
>not only is that not true
go ahead and check, it's what happened in north america.
>that's threatened by cats.
every bird species near cats is threatened by cats.

>why the only people funding science about cats threatening birds
there's none, no one is funding it, hence why there isn't a whole lot of it.

>>2028373
https://www.allaboutbirds.org/state-of-the-birds-2014-common-birds-in-steep-decline-list/

here.

>b-b-but it's not just cats!
yeah it's pretty much never just one thing.

cats are an issue that's easy to solve.

>>2028378
>here.
yes, the 33 species listed are NOT MOST BIRDS. In fact they're 16% of US birds by species.

They're also not COMMON birds, they're less than 1% of US birds by population.

so it's not true that "pretty much every common bird species is declining steadily."

more to the point, cats aren't implicated in the decline of any of those 33 birb species.

>>2028378
>cats are an issue that's easy to solve
I agree entirely.

I'm just explaining to anon why nobody in the US is studying the problem-

because it's not actually a problem.

>>2028455
The cognitive dissonance and circularity with you is strong.

>Showed evidence that birds in general are declining, with sources.
Denies it without a source, proclaims google when challenged because clearly can't find anything. Changes focus to demanding specific examples

>Demands specific examples, gets them
Claims that uncommon birds being threatened don't matter and to represent a broad trend and changes focus to the outsourced "fact" common birds aren't threatened

You are wrong and have been proven wrong on both specific and brood counts with sources. Google is not your friend, everyone else but you seems capable of using it.

>>2028455
>the 33 species listed are NOT MOST BIRDS
they're the most common birds so they ARE most birds, they're just not most bird species.
>they're less than 1% of US birds by population.
that is common.
>cats aren't implicated in the decline
cats are a part of the decline everywhere they are.

>>2028460
>Changes focus to demanding specific examples
I started off asking for specific examples, if you like I can show you the post.
>Demands specific examples, gets them
nobody has named a single species threatened by cats yet.

I'm not trying to win arguments here, I'm honestly curious if you can NAME A SINGLE SPECIES OF BIRD IN THE CONTIGUOUS US THAT'S KNOWN TO BE THREATENED BY CATS?

You've given me nothing, which is what I've found as well.

the reasonable conclusion is you can't name a single one because none are known.

>>2028465
invasive sparrows are more common than everything on that list.

they aren't common at all. Nor is less than 1% equal to most (more than 50%)

cats are certainly part of the decline, but until they actually cause an extinction or endangerment nobody here is going to care aside from anti-science environmentalists and people like you that hate cats.

There is invasive squirrels that are everywhere and not native, yet people have no problem with them even though these furry tailed rats eat the native birds. You anti cat people always blaming cats

>>2028466
>nobody has named a single species threatened by cats yet.
no one needs to.

every bird species near cats is threatened by cats.
>>2028468
>invasive sparrows are more common than everything on that list.
irrelevant.
>they aren't common at all
they're the most common birds in north america.
>but until they actually cause an extinction or endangerment
there's 33 species extinct due to cats.
http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-21236690

>>2028472
>no one needs to.
in the grand scheme of things, no.
but in the argument as it began, yes.
>they're the most common birds in north america.
bullshit.

house sparrows, pigeons and crows are the most common birds in north america.

>>2028470
But squirrel is considered small game and can be hunted. Or you can kill them if they are being a pest around your house. And squirrels don't kill birds for the sake of killing. Cats on the other hand are protected by laws and fanatic cat people. Kill a cat, it's animal abuse. Kill a squirrel? No one gives a shit.

>>2028472
>there's 33 species extinct due to cats.
which has nothing to do with what we're talking about.

anon asked why there's so little science on the subject in the US.

the answer is none of the birds in the US are actually endangered by cats. Nothing you've brought contradicts that fact.

>>2028481
>but in the argument as it began
no.

every species that's near cats is threatened, any bird species you're able to find in america that isn't native to an extremely isolated area is being threatened by cats.

it's not just birds, they're also making every mammal in the sea go extinct right now with their brain parasites.
>house sparrows, pigeons and crows are the most common birds in north america.
I don't think you understand what common even means.

either way you wouldn't know if there's less birds because you don't go outside.

>>2028485
>I don't think you understand what common even means
I'll bite, tell me what you think it means.

>>2028487
i'll tell you what it doesn't mean.

being 1% of the bird population already makes it a common species.

>>2025868
That pic looks like littering to me. I'd collect all that unsightly plastic and recycle it.

>>2028489
it would be difficult to find less common species.

>>2028495
it wouldn't.

the species that are already extinct aren't common ;')

>>2028497
I've lived in the US all my life (6 different states so far) and I've never heard of any of the birds on that list.

>the species that are already extinct aren't common ;')
another good point!
can you name a single bird species in the contiguous US that's been made extinct by cats?

that's another category I think you'll come up empty on. I don't know of a single one.

>>2028501
>and I've never heard of any of the birds on that list.
you don't go outside, that isn't all too strange.

I know of a bunch in Mexico, not even going to bother looking for some in the US because you're not going to read it anyway.

http://www.endangeredspeciesinternational.org/birds5.html

it was already on my tabs.

>>2028504
>you don't go outside, that isn't all too strange.
funny you think that, I spend far more time outdoors and traveling than you do.

>not even going to bother looking for some in the US because you're not going to read it anyway.
oh, I'll read it if you find one.

I already know there aren't any or I wouldn't bring it up.

>>2028468
I'm a scientist and I agree feral and outdoor cats are an issue. Why must we wait until we lose yet another species to factors we know are bad?

Kill the feral and outdoor cats, kill the invasive birds, shoot the Euros who thought bringing them was a good idea.

>>2028509
>I spend far more time outdoors and traveling than you do.
hilarious, but this isn't a YLYL thread.
>I already know there aren't any
because you didn't do any research.

Tympanuchus cupido cupido is a good example.

>>2028512
>Tympanuchus cupido cupido
that's not a species, but I'll ignore it.

>hunting pressure and habitat loss.
hey look, no mention of cats.

>>2028520
there's more if you look for them, I just picked this one as an example.
>hey look, no mention of cats.
but by 1890 this number had declined to 120–200 birds, mainly due to predation by feral cats and poaching. By the late 19th century, there were about 70 left.

because you don't look for it.

>>2028523
that quote is regarding a tiny part of a subspecies, a population found on an island.

so it fails both in being a species and in being in the contiguous US.

I'll freely admit cats have caused extinctions and are causing extinctions on islands. We both know that's true.

One of us doesn't seem to realize it's not happening on the mainland in the US though. Not sure why you don't understand that, but whatever.

Free food for my alligators.

>>2028525
>cherry picking this hard

What, exactly, makes the mainland not a larger island?

>>2028560
>What, exactly, makes the mainland not a larger island?
pretty much everything.

>>2028561
And yet you couldn't think of a single one.

>>2028560
really it's just a matter of degree, but for the sake of this conversation the difference that matters is that cat's often cause bird extinctions on islands and have never caused one on our mainland.

thus the reason our scientists don't spend a lot of time or money researching bird extinctions caused by cats in the US.

it doesn't happen.

>>2028563
that's what the words mean. there is nothing to explain. you asked me to explain how blue is not red.

>>2028564
I'm fairly certain the reason it's not studied is because not enough people care and most populations are not isolated well enough for study to be easy.

Islands are just convenient, if sad, proof of concept.

>>2028569
Go ahead, explain it because you have yet to explain anything. Surely you can come up with a couple significant mechanisms at work in the mainland that protect every bird species from cats.

>>2028570
>studying the mainland where almost everyone lives is somehow harder than studying on islands small enough for cats to make a difference.

>>2028570
I think it's more likely because the birds we have endangered in the US aren't found near human settlement and thus avoid predation by cats. In fact it's usually their avoidance of humans that causes them problems -
there aren't that many places you can go to avoid humans any more.

>Islands are just convenient, if sad, proof of concept
sure, if we assume that larger ecosystems are perfectly modeled by small ones.

I've never met an ecologist that thinks that.
much of /an/ seems to.

>>2028571
>a couple significant mechanisms at work in the mainland that protect every bird species from cats.
one has already been mentioned, there are more terrestrial predators already there on the mainland. I.e. birds have evolved defenses to things much like cats.

in the US there are actual cat species native to the mainland, birds have evolved around actual cats.

island birds tend to be ground-nesting birds, much more vulnerable to cats. A lot of island birds don't fly, making it even worse.

Both predator and prey are far more concentrated on an island. Spread them out more and suddenly they aren't much of a problem. Birds have more places to hide, cats have more territory to cover.

>>2028571
>>2028577
Forgot another important one-
cats have more competition and predators on the mainland.

In the US cats are coyote food most places.

>>2028104
This

>>2028104
Too expensive, just kill them with a minimum of fuss.

>>2028525
doesn't matter, stop cherry picking, stop pulling a no true scotsman.

you're getting so awfully specific about it that your entire argument isn't worth shit anymore.

>>2028724
also if you want an actual species try Porzana sandwichensis.

>inb4 hawaii isn't a state.

>>2028724
>>2028725
Hawaii isn't in the contiguous US.
if you'd like we can go back to my first post and you can see I said IN THE CONTIGUOUS US from the very beginning.

not my fault you can't read.
could've saved you some time.

>>2028728
yes it is.

I don't think you understand how islands work, it's not like there's a void underwater.

they're connected by land, if you think they're not it means every single pond and other body of water in the US isn't contiguous.

>trying to make a retardedly specific claim using non-specific words.

>>2028729
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contiguous_United_States

>>2028731
>they're connected by land, if you think they're not it means every single pond and other body of water in the US isn't contiguous.

>>2028732
the meaning of "contiguous US" isn't up for debate.

sorry.

>>2028735
the meaning of 'contiguous' is.

water isn't a border.
>trying to make a retardedly specific claim using non-specific words.

you can find atleast 5 more bird species that are extinct in north america due to cats.

>>2028737
>the meaning of 'contiguous' is.
I guess, but it doesn't matter.
the meaning of "contiguous US" is strictly defined and there's nothing you can say to change that.

>>2028738
>the meaning of "contiguous US" is strictly defined
it isn't.

you're referring to the lower 48 and never pointed that out, to anyone reading it it just looks like 'contiguous .......... U.S'

>>2028740
>you're referring to the lower 48 and never pointed that out
that's literally what "contiguous US" means.

>>2028741
no.

that's what lower 48 means.

'contiguous US' doesn't necessarily refer to that.

>being this autistic.

what is exactly is a "feral" cat? There are a bunch of strays around my apartment complex and any time one of them comes up to me they're very nice and like to be petted. Are they considered feral? Is there a difference between stray and feral?

Logically, I know we should just kill them. But from an emotional stance, I know I couldn't, so I don't blame people that can't either.

I wish we could just kill the people that keep letting unfixed cats outside. But again, I wouldn't be the one with the gun.

>>2030274
Feral is a reversion to wild behavior. Generally unfriendly and adverse to direct human contact. Can be difficult to retame.

I live in the country and have chickens and rabbits that are loose in chain link fenced yards and every once in a while I get feral cats that come and kill my animals.
When that happens I sit and wait knowing they will be back the next night and I blow their fucking head off.

>>2028728
Don't debate with bugfag that's what he wants just let him put in his 2 cents and don't reply.
He is just a idiot looking for attention because he has no life.

>>2027501
We shoot the cats at the ranch I work at to control their numbers

>>2027495
>hating your own species

Top cuck

In my hometown there's this place my father goes to with at least 40 strays living under a big gazebo. He lets the dogs chase them

>>2030356
I'll do what I want.

Ferals are useful. They eat nuisance animals like mice and pigeons. Yeah, they might take a dump in your flowerbeds, but assholes with dogs let them shit on the sidewalk all the time too.