My cat's gonna be a mommy!
Kathy Oerman
Thanks
KOerman
Hege Gausdal
A cats pregnancy is between 56 and 65 days. My cat is having her
first kittens the coming weekend, I'm so excited :)
Good luck!
Hege
Victor M. Martinez
>Anyone know how long gestation is for a cat? This will be her first litter.
And hopefully her last! Why didn't you spay her before she got pregnant?
--
Victor M. Martinez, Jr. | The University of Texas at Austin
mar...@che.utexas.edu | Department of Chemical Engineering
http://www.che.utexas.edu/~martiv | Austin, TX 78712
If we knew what we were doing it would not be called research, would it?
dinkmeister
On Wed, 22 May 2002 16:59:48 +0000 (UTC), Victor M. Martinez wrote:
Victor M. Martinez
>get a life.
Yeah... unlike the thousands of perfectly healthy cats and kittens that
are killed each year because of irresponsible people letting their pets
breed.
Nice.
Kathy Oerman
IS a cats newsgroup, one would think that if you're responding, then one
would actually LIKE cats!?!?!?
"Victor M. Martinez" <mar...@che.utexas.edu> wrote in message
news:acgiq4$rp8$1...@geraldo.cc.utexas.edu...
Kathy Oerman
"dinkmeister" <di...@yadda.com> wrote in message
news:qvaxlnqqnpbz.g...@news.mi.comcast.giganews.com...
Kathy Oerman
(Irresponsible people...) Not that it's any of your business, I have enough
money, time and oh yeah...LOVE to take GOOD care of my cats!! SO YOU and
drunkmister, oops, dinkmeister, GET A LIFE and stay outta mine!
"Victor M. Martinez" <mar...@che.utexas.edu> wrote in message
news:acgkm4$spe$1...@geraldo.cc.utexas.edu...
Kelly
their cats get pregnant who should "get a life". They are the reason
millions and millions of kittens/cats are put to their deaths in shelters
every year. It's called responsibility. Get your animal neutered. Sure
some people may claim "responsibility" because they find good homes for
their kittens, but who cares??? Those people that took in their kittens
could have saved lives by getting their kitten at a shelter instead. If
backyard breeders don't let their animals have babies, millions of more
lives could be saved in shelters.
Kelly
"dinkmeister" <di...@yadda.com> wrote in message
news:qvaxlnqqnpbz.g...@news.mi.comcast.giganews.com...
Kelly
There is no reason to let a regular mutt (moggie) cat have kittens. If you
really wanted to experience the birth and growing up of kittens, you should
have had YOUR cat SPAYED, and then volunteered at an animal shelter as a
foster parent for a pregnant mother cat. The bottom line is, responsible
pet owners should be aware of the overwhelming problem of pet
overpopulation, and should act in a responsible manner by having their
animal neutered. If you want to experience kittens there are lots of
shelters in need of help. But instead you opt to be extremely selfish,
allow your cat to become pregnant, and are ultimately responsible for the
death of 3-8 (however many your cat has) kittens in an animal shelter. You
will probably keep one or two, and give the rest away to a few people. But
if you didn't have those kittens to give away in the first place, those
people could have gone to a shelter and saved an animal life instead. Feel
proud, you are indirectly responsible for the death of innocent cat lives.
Kelly
"Kathy Oerman" <koe...@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:GLRG8.29033$mG.11...@e3500-atl1.usenetserver.com...
dinkmeister
On Wed, 22 May 2002 15:02:27 -0400, Kelly wrote:
:Your telling this guy to get a life?????? It's the idiotic people who let
:>
:>
:>
:
:
Victor M. Martinez
>Duh!, Maybe because I WANTED Kittens! How RUDE are YOU, Victor!!! BTW, this
>IS a cats newsgroup, one would think that if you're responding, then one
>would actually LIKE cats!?!?!?
If you liked cats, you would not contribute to the pet overpopulation problem.
Are you aware that hundreds of cats get killed every month all over the US
because there aren't enough homes for them? Here, read this, hopefully it
will make you think:
"THE MIRACLE OF LIFE"
"Come quick, come quick," their mother said,
"The time is getting near."
She feels that when the kittens come,
The children should be here.
She told them that a big orange Tom
Took "Kitty" as his wife.
"It's wonderful, a gift from God,
The miracle of life."
At half a year young "Kitty"
Feels too painful and too scared
To appreciate six miracles,
Blind-eyed and yellow haired.
But she knows these lives depend on her
And nature tells her how.
And as she cleans them, children ask,
"Mom, can we go now?"
But now and then for six more weeks
The children visit her to play
With six new magic toys
Made of life and fur.
The six weeks pass, the newness gone,
And new homes yet unfound,
Mom bundles up six miracles
And takes them to the pound.
Where lovingly, with gentle hands,
And no tears left to cry,
The shelter workers kiss them once,
and take them off to die.
And "Momma Kitty" now she's called
Mourns her loss and then,
She's put outside, and of course,
She's pregnant once again.
Dad tells "Kitty," "STOP THIS NOW,
Or you wont live here long!
But deep inside of Momma Cat,
This time something's wrong.
Too young, too small, too often bred,
Now nature's gone awry,
Momma Kitty feels it too,
And she crawls off to die.
She too is freed from this cruel world,
And from her time of strife.
How harsh the truth, how high the price,
This "Miracle of Life?"
--By Barry Taylor, DVM
Kathy Oerman
they rant and rave over things they don't even KNOW what they're talking
about! You'll be in my prayers tonight, Kelly. Hopefully your pityful life
will improve!
"Kelly" <tige...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:jmSG8.16815$op.32...@read2.cgocable.net...
Kathy Oerman
them, there is NO "throw aways, strays," etc. I was thinking this was a site
I could find other cat lovers who only wished to discuss they're pets
activities, behaviors, NOT people bashing over zealous maniacs! Get OFF ME!
Thank GOD I am not the rage filled NO LIFE idoits you all seem to be~
God Bless each of you so hopefully, you will be filled with a little
kindness and LET GO of the HATE!
"Victor M. Martinez" <mar...@che.utexas.edu> wrote in message
news:acgvhf$97v$1...@geraldo.cc.utexas.edu...
.
Kathy,
I must say I find the group more into bashing than helping. I posted a
question about the herpes virus in cats because I have 2 ill cats. Not
one person took time to respond other than a personal email from one
who is trying to help. Seems this group is more bent on judging, than
assisting. I came here for help. I can't believe this group of
intelligent people did not have any answers for me. So my next
question is why do they only have time to bash? Is this group here to
help or judge?
Karryl
Kathy Oerman
given some advice to someone whose cat had just given birth and there was no
condescending remarks! Image that Maybe they just have it out for people
with names that start with K, who knows. I wish I could help you with your
question, but unfortunately, I've never even heard of that in cats, sorry!
Thanks for reassuring me that there ARE still good people out there!
KO
"." <soft...@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:hm7oeuc067dd7aq58...@4ax.com...
Jane goodall
<koe...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
Congratulations....Your gonna have GrandKittens!
Marie Lawrence
Gestation for cats is around 9 weeks. Foreign breeds eg. siamese, take an
extra few days. Marie>
Kelly
facts, and my message had no tone of "rage" in it.
Also, have you even considered the *health* of your cat? Pregnancies are
stressful on a female cat, both physically and psychologically. Unspayed
female cats are at risk for uterine infections and many types of cancers.
You could eliminate this risk by spaying.
And okay, let's say you do keep all the kittens for yourself. Are you going
to have them all spayed and neutered??? Because if you don't, you will have
a household of inbred cats in no time. Please think about what you are
doing before you make silly statements and decisions.
If you view this message as "full of rage" then it is you that has the
problem, not myself. If you cannot accept the facts as they are, and choose
to live in denial, then you are making a very big mistake.
Kelly
"Kathy Oerman" <koe...@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:51UG8.13029$z05.1...@e3500-atl2.usenetserver.com...
Kelly
If you repost it I would be happy to try and help. I don't consider myself
a judgemental person, but I have no sympathy for people who purposefully
allow their cats to procreate when overpopulation is such a huge problem.
Not to mention that a neutered cat, is a much healthier animal.
If you take a look in all the cat newsgroups you will see I try and help
many people.
Kelly
"." <soft...@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:hm7oeuc067dd7aq58...@4ax.com...
>
Five Cats
<ranl...@ihug.com.au> writes
I think it's a bit of an urban myth that some breeds gestate for more or
less time than moggies.
--
Five Cats
Adreeanna
convince. Quite some time ago i used to post here, then one day I said the
dreaded word, and the lashing i got was insane. A few offered advice and
good wishes through private email, (i guess they too had their share of
bashing). But as with anything you will find fanatics. I had made the
mistake of mentioning, in passing no less, that all though I do not condone
declawing as a front line treatment for scratching, there are rare instances
when it really should be considered.
Not to this bunch!! Same thing with a cat having kittens. Yes there are
millions of unwanted homeless cats. Since man domesticated these feline
equivelents to bunnies, that is a fact of life. If procreation were sooo
hard on these poor creatures why were they given the equipment? My Siamese
queen put out her fair share of litters. She left me for Rainbow bridge at
18 years of age. Healthy and happy till the end! Her litters certainly
didn't seem to hurt her. A healthy cat can reproduce and still live a good
life. Face it...she has it better than us human moms, she only has to deal
with them for 6-8 weeks....we have ours till we die of old age! hehehe
Seriously though, we allll love cats. This is a cat group...not a cat
fanatic group.
Kelly whether you blatantly showed rage or not, you do not have the right to
chastise someone elses view. Argue your side for sure, but who died and
made you the cat god? On a basice biblical level, animals, and yes that
includes cats, were put here for the use of man. Whether as companion, or
in some cultures food! We may not agree with it, but if we can't argue our
points with logic, we have no chance of educating. People do not listen to
fanatics.
I love animals too, all animals....but I do eat meat, wear fur coats in
winter, have leather soled shoes, and am thankful everyday for the animals
that gave their lives in the name of science..(not cosmetics!!!)
And yup...I bred cats too.
Adreeanna
"Kathy Oerman" <koe...@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:Y7UG8.13060$z05.1...@e3500-atl2.usenetserver.com...
R Grass
people whatever the reason their cat is going to have kittens. This makes
me crazy. She asked about gestation and gets attacked. If she has the
money and is willing to keep the kittens then leave her alone. And before
you flame me all of mine are fixed. The bottom line here is that promoting
the pregnant cats kill cats in shelters and that aborting unborn kittens is
somehow more acceptable than killing already born ones is just not logical.
Yes it would be better if more people prevented pregnancies but, If we are
going to go that route then lets stop the genetic selection we do with so
called purebreds and only let people with enough money breed. Lee
R Grass
your cat. I am in theory opposed to the indiscriminate breeding of cats but
it seems that if you are asking such a basic question then this would be in
the "OOPS" category.
I do not believe in abortion for my cats but it is an option that in some
cases must be made so do not think I am opposed to you making that choice
either. You need to make a vet appointment and have a thorough talk with
the vet about gestation, feeding and other things. You need to start now
deciding if you will keep the kittens and if not where their homes will be.
If you make the decision to let her have them then you are responsible for
the kittens for life. I read in another post that you indicated you have
enough money and love for them so I will wish you good luck and hope others
who have just been through this will send you good links for more reference
material.
Lee
Kathy Oerman <koe...@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:51UG8.13029$z05.1...@e3500-atl2.usenetserver.com...
R Grass
then you flip out and start talking about inbred kittens. you do not know
how or why the cat is pregnant, you do not know if she is keeping then and
fixing. The message you give is not wrong but the way you do it. We all
know that letting cats inbreed would be wrong, but if you read the post
Kathy is starting from scratch and looking for information. With all you
have to offer why not give her what she asked for then talk about the other
things. And I have a question for you. If, and I know you are right, it is
better for the health of both sexes to be desexed, why not all the purebreds
also. It is my contention that if we could desex every animal we could get
a hold of there would still be far too many cats for the available. Why are
the purebreds more valuable? Lee, Who does not want a flame war, but sane
discussionnews:C1ZG8.16852$op.32...@read2.cgocable.net...
R Grass
are throw aways. I don't understand it but it is the cruelty of life. I
think we don't have enough information to just judge Kathy, maybe it was an
accident or maybe the were bred because she couldn't get her present cat to
accept a new one? Leenews:acgvhf$97v$1...@geraldo.cc.utexas.edu...
R Grass
nothing but sympathy. Which I do now. I hope you find help for your cats
and let us know how they are doing. Lee
Kelly
"R Grass" <Rgr...@mcleodusa.net> wrote in message
news:3cec...@nntp01.splitrock.net...
> and responsible people who believe in spaying and neutering don't attack
> people whatever the reason their cat is going to have kittens. This makes
> me crazy. She asked about gestation and gets attacked. If she has the
> money and is willing to keep the kittens then leave her alone. And before
> you flame me all of mine are fixed. The bottom line here is that
promoting
> the pregnant cats kill cats in shelters and that aborting unborn kittens
is
> somehow more acceptable than killing already born ones is just not
logical.
> Yes it would be better if more people prevented pregnancies but, If we are
> going to go that route then lets stop the genetic selection we do with so
> called purebreds and only let people with enough money breed. Lee
I never said she should abort the kittens. Now you are putting words in my
mouth. At this point, since her cat is already pregnant, it's too late. So
she might as well go through with it, and have her cat spayed afterwards.
This is what *I* would recommend. And yes, *promoting spaying and
neutering DOES save animal lives*. If you are denying this fact then maybe
you need to visit a couple shelters and ask them why this overpopulation
problem occurs.
FWIW I'm not a fan of purebred breeders either.
Kelly
Kelly
> then you flip out and start talking about inbred kittens. you do not know
> how or why the cat is pregnant, you do not know if she is keeping then
and
> fixing. The message you give is not wrong but the way you do it. We all
> know that letting cats inbreed would be wrong, but if you read the post
> Kathy is starting from scratch and looking for information. With all you
> have to offer why not give her what she asked for then talk about the
other
> things. And I have a question for you. If, and I know you are right, it
is
> better for the health of both sexes to be desexed, why not all the
purebreds
> also. It is my contention that if we could desex every animal we could
get
> a hold of there would still be far too many cats for the available. Why
are
> the purebreds more valuable? Lee, Who does not want a flame war, but sane
> discussion
The only reason I did not answer the actual question ("how long is
gestation") is because I saw that it had already been answered correctly by
someone. So there is no point repeating information.
Quite frankly there is no "right way" to tell someone that allowing their
cat to have kittens is not a good choice. How can you put that lightly??
Sure maybe I was a little harsh, but there are too many people that are
allowing this to happen without doing research and actually realizing that
overpopulation is a BIG PROBLEM!!!
As for your question, there is nothing I can do to stop the procreation of
specialty cat breeds out there. Like dogs, the breeds are not going to
disappear. Breeders want to fine tune their breed and their goal is to make
a breed that fits the perfect conformation yet is free from underlying
health problems. This is something no one can control and all cat lovers
must accept it. Even if millions of cats are being put to sleep each year
in shelters. However, the more people I can convince to have their moggie
cats neutered (in which breeding is not necessary at all, because it has no
real purpose besides personal pleasure for the owner) the better. And in
most cases, breeders don't allow their animals to breed past a certain age
and will have them neutered. Most breeders are aware that pregnancy is
stressful on a queen, and will only allow her a certain number of litters
before she "retires" and is spayed. People who just breed moggie cats "for
fun" are less aware of this fact due to the spontaneity of the pregnancy and
last minute research.
Kelly
Victor M. Martinez
>are throw aways. I don't understand it but it is the cruelty of life. I
>think we don't have enough information to just judge Kathy, maybe it was an
>accident or maybe the were bred because she couldn't get her present cat to
>accept a new one? Lee
From the tone of her replies to our "rage-full" messages, I believe she did
it on purpose and deep down, she knows was not the right thing to do.
Kathy Oerman
didn't mention what breed she is. In fact I didn't imply or mention half of
what Kelly "went off on me for" She is very passionate about her beliefs
and she is entitled to her beliefs...and she can keep them ~
KOnews:xD6H8.49016$Yt.22...@read1.cgocable.net...
Orchid
<koe...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>Thanks Lee, for helping me in my defense. I never said I had a moggie cat,
>didn't mention what breed she is. In fact I didn't imply or mention half of
>what Kelly "went off on me for" She is very passionate about her beliefs
>and she is entitled to her beliefs...and she can keep them ~
No offense, but it doesn't really matter if your cat is
purebred or not. If you were breeding purebreds responsibly, you
would have an experienced breeder as a mentor and wouldn't have to
come to the Internet for basic information that can be found in any
feline medical book. You are an irresponsible breeder, and thus you
deserve and get no sympathy from me.
Kelly and Victor 'went off' on you because they are tired, as
am I, of seeing people breeding yet still more irresponsibly-bred
cats.
Orchid
Kathy Oerman
Thanks ~ KO
"Adreeanna" <adree...@shaw.ca> wrote in message
news:c62H8.34797$Ka.27...@news2.calgary.shaw.ca...
Diana
> R Grass <Rgr...@mcleodusa.net> wrote:
>> are throw aways. I don't understand it but it is the cruelty of life. I
>> think we don't have enough information to just judge Kathy, maybe it was an
>> accident or maybe the were bred because she couldn't get her present cat to
>> accept a new one? Lee
>
> From the tone of her replies to our "rage-full" messages, I believe she did
> it on purpose and deep down, she knows was not the right thing to do.
<butt in> Y'know, you guys -- and you DO know this, I am confident -- there
are ways of expressing you POV that help others to see and agree with it;
than there are ways that cause others to go on the defensive and close their
minds to you. If your agenda is -- and again, I'm confident that it is --
to convince people to stop breeding as long as there are so many cats and
kittens available to be rescued from death, please use a non-hostile
approach, as you are not doing the cause any good by coming across like
badass, population police hammers. (/butt in>
--
Diana
http://personal.bellsouth.net/~drdrive
Kathy Oerman
simply asked how long gestation was. Noone in this group knows me, what I
do, how responsible I am or not, and the list goes on. I see by the
response that there is gonna be those who understand the simplicity of the
initial question and those who have nothing better to do than try to condemn
others for not believing or reacting to the way they are in their beliefs.
Personally, I can take whatever any of you have to say, I'm mature enough to
take everything with a grain of salt.
KO
"Orchid" <ne...@ascendancy.net> wrote in message
news:3ced0145...@news.va.comcast.giganews.com...
Kathy Oerman
don't understand why the University of Texas has him in their empolyment,
wonder if he's posting while at work, doesn't he have better things to
do???????
KOnews:acit0s$qlv$1...@geraldo.cc.utexas.edu...
Kathy Oerman
KO
"Diana" <donts...@bellsouth.net.please> wrote in message
news:B9127DB1.8E33%donts...@bellsouth.net.please...
Kathy Oerman
Don't you think this simple question has stirred up enough mess????????
KO
"Marie Lawrence" <ranl...@ihug.com.au> wrote in message
news:ache9p$3jb$1...@lust.ihug.co.nz...
Kathy Oerman
certainly NOT one meant to start world war three in this, a CAT NEWSGROUP!
It's really beginning to be funny how so many are getting catch up in this.
There are those on the defense of their own opinions and those who
understand and give the simple answer reqired. Gee, I wonder what else I
can ask here to keep the "fun" going!! ROFLOL
KO
"Five Cats" <cats...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:iiWdyjAd...@nevis-view.demon.co.uk...
Orchid
<koe...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>NOR did I ask for your sympathy, Orchid, or the sympathy of anyone else. I
>simply asked how long gestation was. Noone in this group knows me, what I
>do, how responsible I am or not, and the list goes on.
*smile* Okay, here's your chance to prove to me, Victor,
Kelly, and everyone else that you are a responsible breeder. If you
*are* a responsible breeder, I will publically apologise for jumping
to incorrect conclusions, and I'm sure Victor and Kelly will too.
Just answer the following questions clearly and truthfully, and we'll
see if you are a responsible breeder or not. If you need
clarification, feel free to ask, and if I feel that any of your
answers need clarification, I will feel free to ask. Please note that
the questions I am asking are not arbitrary, but are formulated
according to my experience in the shelter world, show world,
interaction with responsible breeders and breed club/cat fancy Codes
of Ethics.
1. What breed *is* your queen?
2. How old is she?
3. Do you show her?
4. What titles has she earned?
5. What positive features does she have that you wish to pass down?
6. What negative features does she have that you hope to improve on?
7. How did you pick the stud?
8. What titles has he earned?
9. What positive features does he have that you wish to pass down?
10. What negative features does he have that you hope to improve on?
11. How do their five generation pedigrees match?
12. How many instances of what genetic diseases occur in the queen's
pedigree?
13. How many instances of what genetic diseases occur in the stud's
pedigree?
14. What health tests have you done on your queen?
15. What health tests have been done on the stud?
16. When do you plan to let the kittens go to new homes? (If you are
keeping them, when *would* you let them go to new homes if you planned
to re-home them?)
17. When do you plan to switch your queen's food?
18. What are your socialisation plans for the kittens?
19. What shots do you plan to give to the kittens, and what shots
will not be given to them?
20. What registry are you with?
>I see by the
>response that there is gonna be those who understand the simplicity of the
>initial question and those who have nothing better to do than try to condemn
>others for not believing or reacting to the way they are in their beliefs.
>Personally, I can take whatever any of you have to say, I'm mature enough to
>take everything with a grain of salt.
Great -- thanks for being mature and answering the above
questions. I eagerly await your response.
Orchid
Kathy Oerman
responsible or not! Sorry Orchid, you just DON'T intimidate me~news:3ced1dc9...@news.va.comcast.giganews.com...
Orchid
<koe...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>I never said I WAS a BREEDER! So I don't feel the NEED to justify rather I'm
>responsible or not! Sorry Orchid, you just DON'T intimidate me~
I'm not trying to intimidate you, I'm simply asking some basic
animal husbandry questions. 'Breeder' does not mean 'someone who
constantly has kittens', and you'll note that I didn't ask you any of
the questions about litter frequency that I would ask a more
experienced breeder.
However, your cat is pregnant, hence you *are* a breeder. One
litter, even if there's only one kitten in it, makes someone a
breeder. You may never be a repeat breeder, but you are a breeder.
Please note that a foster home working with a shelter or rescue group
that takes in a cat that is pregnant already is not a breeder -- the
pregnancy did not take place under their care.
I am just trying to give you the opportunity to prove that you
do not deserve the negative reactions you have gotten. I am one of
the few champions of responsible breeders on these groups, and I will
happily go to bat for you if you have bred your cat responsibly.
Orchid
Kathy Oerman
me....should I choose to subject myself to your ridiculous game. So sorry,
honey, I just don't feel like playing your games today nor will I EVER feel
the NEED to Prove myself to you or anyone else. ~ ALL THIS OVER ONE VERY
UNIMPORTANT, INSIGNIFICANT SIMPLE LITTLE QUESTION. Boy, do you take
responsibity for your own actions like you do trying to prove the sanity of
everyone elses? Maybe you should think about running for office, of course
in Your state and NOT mine! And THIS WILL END THIS DISCUSSION FOR ME!
KOnews:3ced24cc...@news.va.comcast.giganews.com...
Kelly
If you were a breeder of a purebred kind, and your cat was purposefully bred
and not accidentally bred, you would know the gestation period. What kind
of purebred breeder does not know the gestation period of a cat?? Real
breeders do their research before they get into the business. My take is
that you are not in this for the business or to improve a line of cats. You
are doing it for fun, and it was out of irresponsibility that your cat got
pregnant, not careful planning.
Kelly
"Kathy Oerman" <koe...@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:JR6H8.10$Wo2....@e3500-atl2.usenetserver.com...
Kelly
> Again ~ I NEVER said this was a moggie or not. It was just a question and
> certainly NOT one meant to start world war three in this, a CAT NEWSGROUP!
> It's really beginning to be funny how so many are getting catch up in
this.
> There are those on the defense of their own opinions and those who
> understand and give the simple answer reqired. Gee, I wonder what else I
> can ask here to keep the "fun" going!! ROFLOL
> KO
hahaha! Give me a break! *We* are going on the defensive???? That would
be you my dear. But only because you can't accept the facts: that there is
an overpopulation problem and you are only contributing to it. As well as
putting your cat through unnecessary stress and subjecting her to
disease/infection risk. I hope you had a good stud cover her who had been
tested for feline diseases. If you just let her wander outdoors and she
concieved by some wandering male, there's a good chance she could have any
number of feline diseases.
And like I said before, if you were a responsible breeder of a purebred
line, you wouldn't need to ask a newsgroup what the gestation period is.
Quit trying to fool people, you're only fooling yourself.
Kelly
Kelly
beating around the fucking bush already. I noticed in all your replies you
have cleverly not replied to the point of the message. Not once have you
discussed the details of your queen and just how she got pregnant. Let me
guess. You let her wander around outside and she concieved somehow and now
you end up with a pregnant cat. Irresponsible. If it were any other way
Kathy, you would be jumping up and down telling us "THIS IS HOW IT IS" which
would force those who have jumped on you to apologize for being wrongfully
judgemental. But I think we all know by now that your cat was bred in an
irresponsible manner, with no planning or purpose, and that is why you can't
even say anything in your defense except tell us how "rageful" we are. The
only things you have said relating to your cat directly is "I didn't say she
was a moggie" "I didn't say I was a breeder" ... Gee that says a lot.
It is what you don't say that makes you look bad.
Kelly
"Kathy Oerman" <koe...@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:VP9H8.2193$Wo2....@e3500-atl2.usenetserver.com...
Orchid
<koe...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>I am so relieved to hear you're a champion and willing to go to bat for
>me....should I choose to subject myself to your ridiculous game. So sorry,
>honey, I just don't feel like playing your games today nor will I EVER feel
>the NEED to Prove myself to you or anyone else. ~ ALL THIS OVER ONE VERY
>UNIMPORTANT, INSIGNIFICANT SIMPLE LITTLE QUESTION. Boy, do you take
>responsibity for your own actions like you do trying to prove the sanity of
>everyone elses? Maybe you should think about running for office, of course
>in Your state and NOT mine! And THIS WILL END THIS DISCUSSION FOR ME!
In other words, you irresponsibly bred your moggie cat, and
just don't want to admit it. I'm not playing a game, I'm attempting
to educate you on the realities of the responsibility of allowing an
animal you care for to be bred. There is nothing ridiculous about the
questions I asked you -- they are one of the tools I make available to
people to help them find responsible breeders for their purebred
kittens. By reacting with such hostility to a list of simple
questions, you have shown your true colours to everyone here. I
politely offered you that chance to redeem yourself, and you spit in
my face. So be it.
As for responsibility, I take total responsibility for
everything I do -- I would find it difficult to live with myself if I
didn't. It is a pity that more people in this world do not do the
same.
Since it is extremely unlikely that you will take your queen
in to be spayed and abort the kittens, you will want to pick up these
books and check out these sites for information on pregnancy,
complications, and things to watch out for. Get your queen on
pregnant/nursing queen food *right now*, or high-quality canned kitten
food if you can't find the better stuff. This will help her keep her
body mass during the pregnancy and nursing of the kittens, it is
extremely important for her health and the health of her kittens.
Please allow your queen to wean her kittens herself, it is not unheard
of for her to allow them to suckle on and off for 10-12 weeks.
Books:
The Cornell Book of Cats (by Mordecai Siegal) -- detailed
information on everything you'll need to know during the pregnancy,
birth, and post-natal care.
Cat Owner's Home Veterinary Handbook (by Delbert G. Carlson)
-- not as good as the Cornell, as well as older, but still useful.
Hand-Raising the Orphaned Kitten (by M. L. Papurt) -- it is a
sad fact that many accidentally or irresponsibly bred queens don't
make it through labour. It is to be hoped that you are lucky and she
is fine, but you should know what to do and be prepared for the worst.
The Complete Book of Cat Breeding (by Dan Rice) --
self-explanatory.
Sites: The majority of these sites are geared towards the purebred
breeder, because it is strongly felt that if cats are going to be
bred, they should only be purebreds as part of a breeding program. It
is a sad fact that ferals and irresponsible people will take care of
making sure that the moggie population will never go away.
http://www.geocities.com/breedingcats/breedingstories.html
http://www.geocities.com/breedingcats/links.html
http://www.sniksnak.com/cathealth/breeding2.html
http://www.peteducation.com/category_summary.cfm?cls=1&cat=1362
http://vetmedicine.about.com/cs/pregcat/
Orchid
.
wrote:
Kellly
Your post seem quite understanding. I think my cats are on the mend,
thank God. Thanks for the help, but now if you could recommend some
other cat newsgroups for me? As I said I came to learn, not fight, not
judge or be judged.
You can't teach anyone with anger or violence. You also can't teach
anyone with disrespect. Those tools simply push other away from you
and your ideas. God's business is to judge not ours. And that goes for
all types of judging. I don't wish to step on God's toes.
I am new to cats. I use to breed shepherds and show. I have 7
herniated discs, degernative discs disease. I can't handle the dogs
any more but I love all animals.
I was going to buy purebreed cats but then I decided that there are
too many homeless animals everywhere, (also children but then we don't
advise people not to breed,, but that is another story) so I adopted 2
kittens first. They were both under 12 weeks, Cat 5, my male fit in my
hand and slept in my neck at night. I guess he was 4 to 6 weeks old.
He didn't even know to clean himself. The other Lucifer was about 8 to
10 weeks, she helped me teach him to clean himself.
Just last month we took in another 9 mounth old femal, she had the
herpes virus. She was found near a breeders home who had left hundreds
of Siameese cats with no food or water, They were matted and eyes
closed from the mess. Talk about responsible breaders. The shelter was
begging for people to give homes to these babies as they came to
health. Miss Thang is not siameese but she was picked up there, the
shelter did not know if the breeder was the owner.
Anyway because of the out cry for homes I decided we would take in
another cat. We were going to buy a siameese from a breeder, when the
out cry came. Our shelter is a no kill shelter btw.
I also am proud to say I use to fund raise for Pets Alone Sanctuary in
Troy MO which is also a no kill shelter.
Well, I rattled on enough. Just thought I would try to let you know a
bit about me. If someone wants to judge me then so be it. Let them
Step on God's toes, better them than me.
Karryl
>Karryl your message Re: Herpes did not appear on my server for some reason.
>If you repost it I would be happy to try and help. I don't consider myself
>a judgemental person, but I have no sympathy for people who purposefully
>allow their cats to procreate when overpopulation is such a huge problem.
>Not to mention that a neutered cat, is a much healthier animal.
>
> If you take a look in all the cat newsgroups you will see I try and help
>many people.
>
>Kelly
Victor M. Martinez
>other cat newsgroups for me? As I said I came to learn, not fight, not
>judge or be judged.
You will be judged in every newsgroup there is, with one notable exception.
However, if what you want is to discuss feline health, the place to go is
rec.pets.cats.health+behav
.
(Victor M. Martinez) wrote:
>>thank God. Thanks for the help, but now if you could recommend some
>>other cat newsgroups for me? As I said I came to learn, not fight, not
>>judge or be judged.
>
>You will be judged in every newsgroup there is, with one notable exception.
>
>However, if what you want is to discuss feline health, the place to go is
>rec.pets.cats.health+behav
Thank you Victor, that is helpfull information. Yes I know people will
Judge, I have gotten good at ignoring those post. I look for the
information needed and get on with life. I will help others where I
can and if I have nothing nice to say then I won't say it.
Thanks for the help.
Karryl
Kelly
there is "rec.pets.cats.health+behav". Another one is "rec.pets.cats".
Finally there is "alt.cats" but I will warn you there is a lot of arguing
going on in there lately. alt.cats has been filled with trolls lately and
unfortunatly most of the regulars get into it with them. But if you filter
out the trolls then you will find some good information there as well. Also
don't forget "alt.med.veterinary". Great newsgroups with great information
and a few regular vets.
Kelly
"." <soft...@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:2beqeugqefci8q0ia...@4ax.com...
dinkmeister
:FWIW I'm not a fan of purebred breeders either.
Don't have kids, either. There should be laws against breeding
in general.
.
wrote:
>Yes I can recommend several other cat newsgroups. Probably the best one out
>there is "rec.pets.cats.health+behav". Another one is "rec.pets.cats".
>Finally there is "alt.cats" but I will warn you there is a lot of arguing
>going on in there lately. alt.cats has been filled with trolls lately and
>unfortunatly most of the regulars get into it with them. But if you filter
>out the trolls then you will find some good information there as well. Also
>don't forget "alt.med.veterinary". Great newsgroups with great information
>and a few regular vets.
>
>Kelly
>
Thanks Kelly, yeah I know newsgoups and trolls, and fighting go
togeather. There is always good with bad, guess that is what makes the
world go aroundThis board seems to have more bad than good though. I
read other ng for other reasons. I try to ignore the bad, get what I
need, but there doesn't seem to be much help here. I just started
adding the other groups suggested and hopefully they will have more
usefull information for me.
Karryl
Dianna Smith
for a purebred cat. Does that mean that they don't deserve a cat. I have
adopted plenty of cats from the pound, for the pure fact that I could care
less if it's purebred. If you want the animal for a pet, and for love, it
shouldn't matter if it is purebred or not. In my area I have actually had a
hard time finding a cat to adopt before. And are you saying that just
because "MY" female is not purebred I shouldn't let her have kittens, even
when I already have homes found for them?
"Kathy Oerman" <koe...@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:4%7H8.340$Wo2....@e3500-atl2.usenetserver.com...
Kelly
"dinkmeister" <di...@yadda.com> wrote in message
news:qvaxlnqqnpbz.g...@news.mi.comcast.giganews.com...
Actually kids irritate me and I have no plans to have them... <wink>
Kelly
Victor M. Martinez
>hard time finding a cat to adopt before. And are you saying that just
>because "MY" female is not purebred I shouldn't let her have kittens, even
>when I already have homes found for them?
Exactly. Why? Because those loving homes you've already secured for your
future kittens, would have possibly homed already homeless kittens. Since
they won't do that, those kittens will likely be killed.
That's why.
Dianna Smith
friends who want one of her kittens. If there are not alot of kittens
available in my area, what is the problem. One time I adopted a cat from
the pound. It took me weeks that time to find one to adopt.
"Victor M. Martinez" <mar...@che.utexas.edu> wrote in message
news:ack93b$krv$1...@geraldo.cc.utexas.edu...
Victor M. Martinez
>I am telling you, in my area it is hard to find a kitten to adopt. I have
Unless you're in Europe, I find that hard to believe. I'm not calling you
a liar, I'm sure you wouldn't do that. However, we're in the middle of
kitten season right now, and every shelter in the country is full to the
seams with unwanted kittens.
>friends who want one of her kittens. If there are not alot of kittens
>available in my area, what is the problem. One time I adopted a cat from
>the pound. It took me weeks that time to find one to adopt.
I wish that was always the case. The shelter I volunteer at has to turn down
cats and dogs all the time for lack of space (it's a no-kill shelter), but
the city-owned pound kills dozens of cats and dogs (including kittens and
puppies) every week. It breaks my heart just to think about it.
Dianna Smith
too. I even called pet stores when I was hunting a cat. I finally found
one. I know people now hunting a cat. I didn't purposely breed my cat.
And when her babies are 8 weeks old I am having her spayed. I just know
that my kittens will have a good home. And I also know that in my county
there aren't alot of kittens to be found.
"Victor M. Martinez" <mar...@che.utexas.edu> wrote in message
news:ackbhm$m4u$1...@geraldo.cc.utexas.edu...
Judith Trummer
> I have one input in the situation. Not everyone can afford 200.00 and up
> for a purebred cat. Does that mean that they don't deserve a cat. I have
> adopted plenty of cats from the pound, for the pure fact that I could care
> less if it's purebred. If you want the animal for a pet, and for love, it
> shouldn't matter if it is purebred or not. In my area I have actually had a
> hard time finding a cat to adopt before. And are you saying that just
> because "MY" female is not purebred I shouldn't let her have kittens, even
> when I already have homes found for them?
I think the problem is that so many other people's cats are having
unplanned or unwanted litters that if one of your friends gets a kitten
from you, s/he is then not adopting a kitten from a shelter; if you
didn't have any kittens, and your friends adopted, that many kittens
would be saved from potential euthanasia. If you know five people who
want kittens, you'd save lives by directing them toward helping clean up
after someone else's mistake by adopting unwanted ones. I think it's a
bit inflammatory to say, "If your cat has five kittens, you're now
personally responsible for the deaths of five more shelter kittens, even
if you keep yours" -- but I can see where the conclusion comes from.
I certainly prefer mixed-breed cats to purebreds myself, and couldn't
care less about the continuation of professional cat breeding. But
since amateur/accidental breeding is nigh unto unstoppable, there will
always be a surplus of kittens.
I'm glad to hear of anywhere that it's difficult to find spare kittens.
Pity we can't distribute them from places that have far too many :/
Dianna Smith
"Judith Trummer" <ki...@shell.core.com> wrote in message
news:3cedb5c9$0$3340$1dc6...@news.corecomm.net...
I agree that sometimes it is taken to extreme. I try to help. I have
adopted numerous animals from my local shelter. I found a man with full
blooded chocolate labs. He was going to send them to the pound if he
couldn't give them away. I took three of them(the last three) and found
them good homes. I love animals and understand that in some places they are
overpopulated. They just aren't here. Here some people sell mixed breed
kittens. I was at the pet store the other day and they had them for 20.00.
Now people will pay that to have a kitten. So, that should tell you, we
don't have an abundance of kittens here.
Adreeanna
it remains her property is really none of your business?? If you need to
ask how her queen got pregnant, maybe it is you who is in need of education.
She has stated that she is keeping the kittens. In all reality it is you
Kelly that failed to answer her question. Chances are her cat bred itself
with little or no help from her. Whether on purpose or by accident, the
only thing Kathy asked of the group was gestation...something you should
have been able to answer. Cats do not need fanatics in their corner, they
need responsible patient people to teach the wannabe cat people. Then maybe
you will make some headway in to the overpopulation of our furry
compatriots.
BTW....bushes hon, don't fuck...but evidently her queen did...that darlin is
how she got preggers.
Suck that up and deal with it.
Adreeannanews:_KaH8.49037$Yt.22...@read1.cgocable.net...
Cheryl Blake
message. Boy, there are come hot-under-the collar people out there.
Hey, I am a registered cat breeder and guess what? One of my cats once had
a moggie litter. She accidentally escaped and BINGO, got herself preggie. 3
days later I mated her to my stud, not knowing she'd even been with another
man. And after sitting up till midnight Xmas Eve, what a surprise when
little grey kittens popped out, instead of the little white ones I'd
expected. These things happen! In answer to your questions : 63-65 days
is the normal gestation period for a cat, but a couple of days either side
is okay. .... Good luck & make sure you find good homes for them .....
CHERYL
Victor M. Martinez
>I live in a small town in Alabama. My local shelter is a no-kill shelter
>too. I even called pet stores when I was hunting a cat. I finally found
Please, never, ever buy a cat or dog from a pet store. Chances are, they
came from a puppy mill.
>one. I know people now hunting a cat. I didn't purposely breed my cat.
>And when her babies are 8 weeks old I am having her spayed. I just know
Would you wait until they're 10 weeks old? That'll give them a chance to
be better socialized by their mom.
>that my kittens will have a good home. And I also know that in my county
>there aren't alot of kittens to be found.
I wish there was a way we could ship "excess" kittens to those parts of
the world that have a deficit.
Gee
"Adreeanna" <adree...@shaw.ca> wrote in message
news:egjH8.39291$Ka.30...@news2.calgary.shaw.ca...
> Has it ever dawned on you that what she does with her property as long as
> it remains her property is really none of your business??
PROPERTY?????????
And there I thought we were discussing the cats here, live, breathing,
lovable creatures, not some couch.
To make it short and to the point Adreanna, anything you do to your PROPERTY
such as couch or a car or a iron, IS in fact YOUR BUSINESS. CATS are however
NOT a " PROPERTY" therefore it is EVERYBODY's business, and any mistreatment
would be called ANIMAL CRUELTY while mistreating your couch would be called:
YOUR BUSINESS. Would you really be able to stand and watch your -say-
neighbour hit his cat and do nothing about it, just because you believe it's
his " property"? I didn't think so.
So please if you love animals and have any respect for them, stop calling
them PROPERTY. No matter what law might call them officially, there is also
a law against people who abuse animals, and no law against people who abuse
their couch.
(With this comment I am NOT saying that Kathy is in any way abusing her
cats, I am simply trying to explain Addreanna the concept of the word she
used to describe a cat: "PROPERTY".)
> If you need to
> ask how her queen got pregnant, maybe it is you who is in need of
education.
You clearly misunderstood what she has asked and why.
> She has stated that she is keeping the kittens.
And that is great for both mum and the kittens. The question still stands
however: will she have mum and the kittens done after the birth or not.
Kathy didn't answer that. Or perhaps I missed it.
Also the fact remains that Kathy could've helped kittens from the shelter by
adopting them, instead of allowing the birth of new ones. This is really the
issue we all have here, that any new kitten brought to life this way will
take up a home for a kitten from a shelter, which may result in that kitten
dying if no home has been found. So before both Kathy and you attack again,
please try and understand this point. Yes it's beautiful having kittens
around, but if you really want it so much, then it's ever so easy to
volunteer in a shelter where you can watch plenty of it , and also you can
adopt kittens and get most of the fun anyways.
> In all reality it is you
> Kelly that failed to answer her question.
She already explained the reason for it, and that is: it was already
answered so why bother repeating it. Perfectly logical.
>Chances are her cat bred itself
> with little or no help from her. Whether on purpose or by accident, the
> only thing Kathy asked of the group was gestation...something you should
> have been able to answer.
She was , but what would be the point of repetition?
> Cats do not need fanatics in their corner, they
> need responsible patient people to teach the wannabe cat people.
I agree. But do you honestly believe that anyone calling cats PROPERTY would
fill that category?
> Then maybe
> you will make some headway in to the overpopulation of our furry
> compatriots.
> BTW....bushes hon, don't fuck...but evidently her queen did...that darlin
is
> how she got preggers.
> Suck that up and deal with it.
She has , plus she offered a logical and loving advice: get your cats done!
Kathy really should've listened as to why Kelly and others said what they
said, before flying off the hook, and I must say so should you. If you love
cats and animals in general, you can understand Kelly with ease.
Gee
> Adreeanna
Gee
> Boy I really feel sorry for people like you who are so full of rage that
> they rant and rave over things they don't even KNOW what they're talking
> about! You'll be in my prayers tonight, Kelly. Hopefully your pityful
life
> will improve!
Kathy, this was completely uncalled for, and I must point out, didn't you
just do the same thing you accused Kelly of doing? Raved about her
"pitiful"life you don't know anything about? Comon! Take your defensive
glasses off and try to understand other people's points:
Both Kelly and Victor love cats and are helping them on daily bases and I
have learned a lot from them and others on this group. Also they have tried
explaining to you the reasons for spaying your cat, which are perfectly
reasonable, logical and, as hurtful as they seem to you, a reality. Victor
works in the shelter, watching the cats and kittens being brought in daily,
and ultimately dying if no homes are found. Doesn't that fact hurt you as an
animal lover? I am certain that you could've opted for adopting those cats
from the shelter, but instead you have allowed your cat to get pregnant, and
will now keep the kittens. The fact is , you could've saved a few lives from
the shelter.
Pregnency. I always believe in researching the subject before you let
yourself into something. Anything. Perhaps you haven;t had your cat neutered
on time and let her out to wonder, so she got pregnant. Perhaps you believed
the old saying that every cat should have one litter before spaying. Perhaps
you purposely wanted kittens. I don;t know and you didn;t care to explain,
not once, for some odd reason, but the fact remains that you have in fact
ALLOWED your cat to get pregnant one way or the other. You can see now why
they call it irresponsible. Because you could'vre stopped it, and help
sheltered animals. Perhaps you didn't realize that shelters are so full and
that lots of cats die if they can;t find home. If you did, then I do wonder
why couldn't you opt for giving some of those poor souls a good home which
you say you have.
I do know kittens are pleasure to have around. You can however always go to
your local shelter and volunteer, which will give you plenty of
birth-watching and small kittens raising. But you can still get most of the
joy once you adopt an 8-12 week old kitten from a shelter.
We here are not fanatics, nor any other name you may have thought. We simply
have lots of experience of behind the scenes, most of us work in shelters,
or have been caring about cats for years. We are not hero's nor we want to
be. We simply LOVE cats(and all animals for that matter), and want the best
for ALL of them not just a particular few. We also want to learn more and
help better to our and other cats. This is why not only us here, but any cat
website, and cat shelter, any vet, and any animal loving person will advise
you the same: Have your cat done! So please do not be angry nor jump into
wrong conclusions, we are just trying to help you understand how bad the
life is for other cats then yours and hope that in your heart you will find
the place for them as well.
Now that your cat is pregnant, enjoy the kittens. They are wonderful. You
said you'll keep them all. That is wonderful as well. At least those few
will have a home. But please please please, do have them all done, and do
contribute your love the correct way for ALL the animals, not for us here in
the group. And please feel free to check other postings in this and other
cat groups. Despite some bickering, and even harsh words, I have personally
learned ever so much , and got excellent advice on number of occasions. I
have also changed a few of my old opinions, simply because have realized
that I was wrong, and that by doing what I was, I am in some way hurting my
own or some other animals. This is why I do not wear fur, or eat meat, and
had all my cats done. Not because I am some fanatic, but because I actually
LOVE my cats, and animal in general, and I do not believe in animal
suffering. Animals have nobody else to help them but us. I am sure you are a
good person too who loves all the animals, and can see the point here.
Good luck with the kittens, and do please reconsider the posts here, as they
are written not to attack you, but to protect animals.
Best wishes
Gee
> "Kelly" <tige...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:jmSG8.16815$op.32...@read2.cgocable.net...
> > Kathy,
> >
> > There is no reason to let a regular mutt (moggie) cat have kittens. If
> you
> > really wanted to experience the birth and growing up of kittens, you
> should
> > have had YOUR cat SPAYED, and then volunteered at an animal shelter as a
> > foster parent for a pregnant mother cat. The bottom line is,
responsible
> > pet owners should be aware of the overwhelming problem of pet
> > overpopulation, and should act in a responsible manner by having their
> > animal neutered. If you want to experience kittens there are lots of
> > shelters in need of help. But instead you opt to be extremely selfish,
> > allow your cat to become pregnant, and are ultimately responsible for
the
> > death of 3-8 (however many your cat has) kittens in an animal shelter.
> You
> > will probably keep one or two, and give the rest away to a few people.
> But
> > if you didn't have those kittens to give away in the first place, those
> > people could have gone to a shelter and saved an animal life instead.
> Feel
> > proud, you are indirectly responsible for the death of innocent cat
lives.
> >
> > Kelly
> >
> > "Kathy Oerman" <koe...@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
> > news:GLRG8.29033$mG.11...@e3500-atl1.usenetserver.com...
> > > You shouldn't generalize, or maybe you're speaking for yourself!
> > > (Irresponsible people...) Not that it's any of your business, I have
> > enough
> > > money, time and oh yeah...LOVE to take GOOD care of my cats!! SO YOU
> and
> > > drunkmister, oops, dinkmeister, GET A LIFE and stay outta mine!
> > >
> > > "Victor M. Martinez" <mar...@che.utexas.edu> wrote in message
> > > news:acgkm4$spe$1...@geraldo.cc.utexas.edu...
> > > > dinkmeister <di...@yadda.com> wrote:
> > > > >get a life.
> > > >
> > > > Yeah... unlike the thousands of perfectly healthy cats and kittens
> that
> > > > are killed each year because of irresponsible people letting their
> pets
> > > > breed.
> > > >
> > > > Nice.
Gee
> There are some, Kathy, that don't get it no matter how hard you try to
> convince.
Isn;t that the same thing we could say about your opinions? You are also not
changing your opinions no matter how many reasonable arguments were
presented to you together with links and facts.
> Quite some time ago i used to post here, then one day I said the
> dreaded word, and the lashing i got was insane. A few offered advice and
> good wishes through private email, (i guess they too had their share of
> bashing). But as with anything you will find fanatics. I had made the
> mistake of mentioning, in passing no less, that all though I do not
condone
> declawing as a front line treatment for scratching, there are rare
instances
> when it really should be considered.
I was not a part of that post , so I am curious to know which are the
instances you consider reasonable?
> Not to this bunch!!
This "BUNCH" contains people who put animals first, and whose love for them
inspires them to help them, and make their lives better, as well as reduce
their suffering as much as possible. This " bunch" are the people who'd
never think of calling their cats a PROPERTY as you have.
>Same thing with a cat having kittens. Yes there are
> millions of unwanted homeless cats.
And don't you feel any pity at all for them? Can you not find it in your
heart to help them as well?
>Since man domesticated these feline
> equivelents to bunnies, that is a fact of life.
> If procreation were sooo
> hard on these poor creatures why were they given the equipment?
For the same reason you don;t give birth to 20 children, but only 1-3.
>My Siamese
> queen put out her fair share of litters. She left me for Rainbow bridge
at
> 18 years of age. Healthy and happy till the end! Her litters certainly
> didn't seem to hurt her. A healthy cat can reproduce and still live a
good
> life. Face it...she has it better than us human moms, she only has to
deal
> with them for 6-8 weeks.
But surely that is not the only issue to consider Adrianna. What about
rebuilding mothers body, physical pain of giving birth, possible deseases
tyopical for unspayed cats, millions of homeless kittens already in the
shelters whose homes have been taken by your cat's kittens etc. I do believe
your cat was happy. But many other in shelters and elsewhere weren't.You
have to look at the bigger picture.
...we have ours till we die of old age! hehehe
I strongly believe humans have deserved that.
> Seriously though, we allll love cats. This is a cat group...not a cat
> fanatic group.
And what is it that you consider fanatic? The fact that people here like not
only their own cats but all the other cats? That people here consider
emotions, health and behaviour off ALL the cats and animals? That people
here are actively DOING something to help cats: in shelters, or educating
others, or looking after strays and hurt animals? That people here are
trying to prevent animal cruelty? That people here have HEART for animals?
Just which of these makes them fanatic Addrianna?
> Kelly whether you blatantly showed rage or not, you do not have the right
to
> chastise someone else's view.
Yes she does if it is in the benefit of the cats in a long run.Like you said
this is the cats group.
>Argue your side for sure, but who died and
> made you the cat god?
Honestly Addrianna. Just because she gave advice you don;t agree with, you
are being childish.
> On a basice biblical level, animals, and yes that
> includes cats, were put here for the use of man. Whether as companion, or
> in some cultures food! We may not agree with it, but if we can't argue
our
> points with logic, we have no chance of educating.
There is plenty of chance of educating anybody who is willing and have
motivation to learn. You CAN in fact teach an old dog the new tricks. When
it comes to animals I still learn new things everyday, and if people show
evidence, there is no point stubbornly sticking to the opinion that is
clearly wrong, for the sake of YOU being right, and animal suffering in the
process.
> People do not listen to
> fanatics.
Again we are back to that. People here which you call fanatics will give you
the same advice that your vet will give you, or any other vet as well as any
cat website, any shelter, and any person who genuinely love and care for
animals. If you choose not to hear any of it, and continue to call all of
them fanatics, then I believe you just might be wrong and it's time you
change some things for the sake of animals.
> I love animals too, all animals....but I do eat meat, wear fur coats in
> winter, have leather soled shoes, and am thankful everyday for the animals
> that gave their lives in the name of science..(not cosmetics!!!)
> And yup...I bred cats too.
You call this love? Causing animals death (food), skinning alive animals
(wearing fur) and approving of animals farms and torturing of animals(in the
name of science) is NOT called love. It's called heartless, thoughtless and
selfish. What's love got to do with it?
And that all before you get me started on the breeding issue, where there is
already millions of overpopulated shelters and animals dying thanks to every
Tom Dick and Harry thinking it's OK to breed.
Adrianna, if you loved animals you'd show your love to them, not to your own
needs. Think about it and become a better man(woman). Can you do that? Can
you put them first or will you continue calling them PROPERTY?
Gee
> Adreeanna
>
>
> "Kathy Oerman" <koe...@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
> news:Y7UG8.13060$z05.1...@e3500-atl2.usenetserver.com...
> > You people STILL don't GET IT!! These ARE MY CATS, I KEEP THEM - ALL OF
> > them, there is NO "throw aways, strays," etc. I was thinking this was a
> site
> > I could find other cat lovers who only wished to discuss they're pets
> > activities, behaviors, NOT people bashing over zealous maniacs! Get OFF
> ME!
> > Thank GOD I am not the rage filled NO LIFE idoits you all seem to be~
> > God Bless each of you so hopefully, you will be filled with a little
> > kindness and LET GO of the HATE!
> >
> > "Victor M. Martinez" <mar...@che.utexas.edu> wrote in message
> > news:acgvhf$97v$1...@geraldo.cc.utexas.edu...
> > > Kathy Oerman <koe...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> > > >Duh!, Maybe because I WANTED Kittens! How RUDE are YOU, Victor!!!
BTW,
> > this
> > > >IS a cats newsgroup, one would think that if you're responding, then
> one
> > > >would actually LIKE cats!?!?!?
> > >
> > > If you liked cats, you would not contribute to the pet overpopulation
> > problem.
> > > Are you aware that hundreds of cats get killed every month all over
the
> US
> > > because there aren't enough homes for them? Here, read this, hopefully
> it
> > > will make you think:
> > >
> > >
> > > "THE MIRACLE OF LIFE"
> > >
> > > "Come quick, come quick," their mother said,
> > > "The time is getting near."
> > > She feels that when the kittens come,
> > > The children should be here.
> > >
> > > She told them that a big orange Tom
> > > Took "Kitty" as his wife.
> > > "It's wonderful, a gift from God,
> > > The miracle of life."
> > >
> > > At half a year young "Kitty"
> > > Feels too painful and too scared
> > > To appreciate six miracles,
> > > Blind-eyed and yellow haired.
> > >
> > > But she knows these lives depend on her
> > > And nature tells her how.
> > > And as she cleans them, children ask,
> > > "Mom, can we go now?"
> > >
> > > But now and then for six more weeks
> > > The children visit her to play
> > > With six new magic toys
> > > Made of life and fur.
> > >
> > > The six weeks pass, the newness gone,
> > > And new homes yet unfound,
> > > Mom bundles up six miracles
> > > And takes them to the pound.
> > >
> > > Where lovingly, with gentle hands,
> > > And no tears left to cry,
> > > The shelter workers kiss them once,
> > > and take them off to die.
> > >
> > > And "Momma Kitty" now she's called
> > > Mourns her loss and then,
> > > She's put outside, and of course,
> > > She's pregnant once again.
> > >
> > > Dad tells "Kitty," "STOP THIS NOW,
> > > Or you wont live here long!
> > > But deep inside of Momma Cat,
> > > This time something's wrong.
> > >
> > > Too young, too small, too often bred,
> > > Now nature's gone awry,
> > > Momma Kitty feels it too,
> > > And she crawls off to die.
> > >
> > > She too is freed from this cruel world,
> > > And from her time of strife.
> > > How harsh the truth, how high the price,
> > > This "Miracle of Life?"
> > >
> > > --By Barry Taylor, DVM
dinkmeister
go hug your trees but don't try to impose your b/s beliefs on me.
Adreeanna
"Gee" <g...@NOSPAM.com> wrote in message
news:3dAH8.3286$pf3.6...@news11-gui.server.ntli.net...
>
> "Adreeanna" <adree...@shaw.ca> wrote in message
> news:egjH8.39291$Ka.30...@news2.calgary.shaw.ca...
>
> > Has it ever dawned on you that what she does with her property as long
as
> > it remains her property is really none of your business??
>
> PROPERTY?????????
i wish some people would care for their cats as much as they do their couch
or their tv, or their computers....can you not see the point? Or just
attack because you think I am referring to a cat as less than a sofa? Like
you I have spent countless hours over the years in shelters and pounds.
>
> And there I thought we were discussing the cats here, live, breathing,
> lovable creatures, not some couch.
>
> To make it short and to the point Adreanna, anything you do to your
PROPERTY
> such as couch or a car or a iron, IS in fact YOUR BUSINESS. CATS are
however
> NOT a " PROPERTY" therefore it is EVERYBODY's business, and any
mistreatment
> would be called ANIMAL CRUELTY while mistreating your couch would be
called:
> YOUR BUSINESS. Would you really be able to stand and watch your -say-
> neighbour hit his cat and do nothing about it, just because you believe
it's
> his " property"? I didn't think so.
I could whup his ass...but when a 10 year old child douces a kitten in lamp
oil and sets it on fire...
>
> So please if you love animals and have any respect for them, stop calling
> them PROPERTY. No matter what law might call them officially, there is
also
> a law against people who abuse animals, and no law against people who
abuse
> their couch.
>
> (With this comment I am NOT saying that Kathy is in any way abusing her
> cats, I am simply trying to explain Addreanna the concept of the word she
> used to describe a cat: "PROPERTY".)
>
> > If you need to
> > ask how her queen got pregnant, maybe it is you who is in need of
> education.
>
> You clearly misunderstood what she has asked and why.
nothing to help the cause of cats.
>
> > She has stated that she is keeping the kittens.
>
> And that is great for both mum and the kittens. The question still stands
> however: will she have mum and the kittens done after the birth or not.
> Kathy didn't answer that. Or perhaps I missed it.
responsibility it's her choice. The shelter cats and kittens are not hers.
Cruel though that may sound to you. It is her choice where she gets her
cats. Should I adopt a starving third world child instead of having my own?
I am sorry those children are suffering, but that will not stop me from
preferring to have my own child.
I will never again adopt a shelter cat from my area. Our Humane society is
corrupt as far as i am concerned, and when the cats get poor cheap care,
while the director pampers her purebreed persians with donated food from the
shelter.....you do the math. If I wanted to have more than one cat knowing
what they do there? I would get a little moggie, breed her with another
cute moggie, and keep the litter. I am not even going to go into all the
details because it still makes me sick.
>
> Also the fact remains that Kathy could've helped kittens from the shelter
by
> adopting them, instead of allowing the birth of new ones. This is really
the
> issue we all have here, that any new kitten brought to life this way will
> take up a home for a kitten from a shelter, which may result in that
kitten
> dying if no home has been found.
die. The shelters can help by simply not allowing an unaltered cat to leave
the shelter. Yea for the first little while it would increase the costs of
sheltering that animal. But face it...it would be a huge step. You are
winning only small battles and never the war. The old saying "Morals of an
ally cat" did not appear out of thin air. Cats put out are going to
breed...that is nature...it's also nature that some will die.
So before both Kathy and you attack again,
> please try and understand this point. Yes it's beautiful having kittens
> around, but if you really want it so much, then it's ever so easy to
> volunteer in a shelter where you can watch plenty of it , and also you can
> adopt kittens and get most of the fun anyways.
>
> > In all reality it is you
> > Kelly that failed to answer her question.
>
> She already explained the reason for it, and that is: it was already
> answered so why bother repeating it. Perfectly logical.
>
> >Chances are her cat bred itself
> > with little or no help from her. Whether on purpose or by accident, the
> > only thing Kathy asked of the group was gestation...something you should
> > have been able to answer.
>
> She was , but what would be the point of repetition?
attacking someone you don't know, nor understand the circumstances with. A
gentle reminder, a bit of education...
had it been a polite question of how she got preggers, you may have
impressed upon her the importance of what we all want for cats...but
instead...she came away thinking the group, idiots.
I understand how passionate we can get about our fuzzy freinds....but it
does nothing toward teaching the ones about to become passionate
>
> > Cats do not need fanatics in their corner, they
> > need responsible patient people to teach the wannabe cat people.
>
> I agree. But do you honestly believe that anyone calling cats PROPERTY
would
> fill that category?
cars, puters, and furnishings....
Think about it.....you've been in the shelters.....have you yet to get a cat
that was abandoned because the owner didnt want the financial burden of vet
care? Have you had a poor sick cat show up with advanced liver disease
because the owner put it out instead of getting treatment or evening paying
the small fee for euthanasia?
Bet if the family computer got a virus they would find the money to get it
healthy again.
>
> > Then maybe
> > you will make some headway in to the overpopulation of our furry
> > compatriots.
> > BTW....bushes hon, don't fuck...but evidently her queen did...that
darlin
> is
> > how she got preggers.
> > Suck that up and deal with it.
>
> She has , plus she offered a logical and loving advice: get your cats
done!
In a combative, accusatory, insulting way. That is not logical, nor loving.
> Kathy really should've listened as to why Kelly and others said what they
> said, before flying off the hook,
ummmm she did not fly off the hook....not until she was blasted.
and I have not flown off the hook either.
and I must say so should you. If you love
> cats and animals in general, you can understand Kelly with ease.
I like animals....love cats...absolute adoration for Siamese.
Adreeanna
>
> Gee
>
> > Adreeanna
>
>
>
Adreeanna
through...you are horribly misinformed if you think that you are not being
cruel to animals....
"Gee" <g...@NOSPAM.com> wrote in message
>
> "Kathy Oerman" <koe...@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
> news:51UG8.13029$z05.1...@e3500-atl2.usenetserver.com...
> > Boy I really feel sorry for people like you who are so full of rage that
> > they rant and rave over things they don't even KNOW what they're talking
> > about! You'll be in my prayers tonight, Kelly. Hopefully your pityful
> life
> > will improve!
Gee....Kathy's rant was called for. She was attacked first.
> Kathy, this was completely uncalled for, and I must point out, didn't you
> just do the same thing you accused Kelly of doing? Raved about her
> "pitiful"life you don't know anything about? Comon! Take your defensive
> glasses off and try to understand other people's points:
>
> Both Kelly and Victor love cats and are helping them on daily bases and I
> have learned a lot from them and others on this group. Also they have
tried
> explaining to you the reasons for spaying your cat, which are perfectly
> reasonable, logical and, as hurtful as they seem to you, a reality. Victor
> works in the shelter, watching the cats and kittens being brought in
daily,
> and ultimately dying if no homes are found. Doesn't that fact hurt you as
an
> animal lover?
What an aweful thing to ask someone! Guilt them into taking a
kitten...Yeeesh...if the foster homes start that we are in REAL trouble.
Sure it hurts...So does seeing an animal dead on the road side hit by a
car....guess we should alll stop driving and go back to horse and buggy?
Oops...can't do that either....mistreating horses.
I am certain that you could've opted for adopting those cats
> from the shelter, but instead you have allowed your cat to get pregnant,
and
> will now keep the kittens. The fact is , you could've saved a few lives
from
> the shelter.
Let's see...where I live adoption from the humane society is 75.00 per cat
or kitten altered or not! However if a kitten altering is only an
additional 25.00.
Fact if she has 4 kittens....thats 300.00 in the price of the kitten
alone....add an extra 100.00 for altering them all....
altering 4 cats on your own at our neighborhood animal hospital which offers
to alter moggies for 35.00, just to help make it affordable....that's
140.00, add mom in there, and it is still only 175.00! Sorry, but money is
tight all over. I would have my own before paying out that kind of money.
Not to mention the vet costs after, to treat the parasites and URI's common
in shelter animals.
>
> Pregnency. I always believe in researching the subject before you let
> yourself into something. Anything. Perhaps you haven;t had your cat
neutered
> on time and let her out to wonder, so she got pregnant. Perhaps you
believed
> the old saying that every cat should have one litter before spaying.
Perhaps
> you purposely wanted kittens.
Perhaps, perhaps, perhaps. Perhaps you just assumed she is irresponsible,
and treated her like shit, and then hoped that she would be alllllll
underatanding and want to answer the accusatory questions. You would'nt
answer her question on gestation, because it had already been
addressed....but it's ok for you all to jump on her with the same bitch and
moan....how does that work?
She might have had she not been attacked.
>I don;t know and you didn;t care to explain,
> not once, for some odd reason, but the fact remains that you have in fact
> ALLOWED
How do you know she allowed? Again...assumption. Not nice.
There is a correct way to love????????? Fanatic pure and bloody simple.
There are many ways to show love. I trap the poor unhealthy strays and take
them to be put down with some dignity, and more pain free than starving or
dying of festering wounds.
Hunting and wildlife management has to be done to protect our wild friends
as well. Would you rather they were just shot and left to rot? Or I
know....lets just leave them to over populate and die of hunger and disease.
Have you ever seen a deer staggering with hunger? It's ribs sticking out,
shaking like a leaf, and sumbling with each step. stricken with fear as a
coyote stalks it, and plays it to death? It would reduce you to tears lady.
We need more hunters that at least give the death of that animal purpose.
Your cats sure as hell aren't vegetarians....but it's ok to kill animals to
feed them?
Get off it....that is sooooo hypocritical!
> I have also changed a few of my old opinions, simply because have
realized
> that I was wrong, and that by doing what I was, I am in some way hurting
my
> own or some other animals. This is why I do not wear fur, or eat meat, and
> had all my cats done.
Whoever told you that crap should be shot for cruelty to animals. Instead
of reading your fluff bunnie rag magazines, maybe you should start reading
Hunting and wildlife articles.
>Not because I am some fanatic, but because I actually
> LOVE my cats, and animal in general, and I do not believe in animal
> suffering. Animals have nobody else to help them but us.
Which is why it is not at all cruel to hunt or eat meat.
Adreeanna
Hunting and the harvest of animals for fur or food is not cruel, nor is it
inhumane. You guys and gals are guilty of selective reading. You have
closed your minds to facts around you, and that is bad for animals in
general.
Cats, dogs, their wild cousins are not vegetarians. But it is ok to kill
animals for their food, but not for humans? How utterly ridiculous!!!
Adreeanna
"dinkmeister" <di...@yadda.com> wrote in message
news:qvaxlnqqnpbz.g...@news.mi.comcast.giganews.com...
Gee
> Gee....Kathy's rant was called for. She was attacked first.
I don't call it attack. I call it a constructive criticism.
> Read through...you are horribly misinformed if you think that you are not
being
> cruel to animals....
And just how is that, how did you get to the conclusion that I am cruel to
animals? Is it me feeding them cruel? Adopting strays and cats form a rescue
centre? Putting them first? Which bit is exactly cruel in your mind
Addrianna? You, a person who calls animals PROPERTY. Interesting.
>>Victor
> > works in the shelter, watching the cats and kittens being brought in
> daily,
> > and ultimately dying if no homes are found. Doesn't that fact hurt you
as
> an animal lover?
> What an awful thing to ask someone! Guilt them into taking a
> kitten...Yeeesh...if the foster homes start that we are in REAL trouble.
So you feel guilt then. Good. I don't. I do my bit for animals and I am
proud of it. I just wish I could do even more.
> Sure it hurts...So does seeing an animal dead on the road side hit by a
> car....guess we should alll stop driving and go back to horse and buggy?
> Oops...can't do that either....mistreating horses.
Your point being what - everything is OK and we should continue as it is???
And what about the animals who do not have anyone to protect them apart from
us humans?
Perhaps you ought to cut your smarty pants type of talk because it's just
childish and involve into a decent conversation if you want me to take your
opinions seriously.
> I am certain that you could've opted for adopting those cats
> > from the shelter, but instead you have allowed your cat to get pregnant,
> and will now keep the kittens. The fact is , you could've saved a few
lives
> from the shelter.
>
> Let's see...where I live adoption from the humane society is 75.00 per cat
> or kitten altered or not! However if a kitten altering is only an
> additional 25.00.
> Fact if she has 4 kittens....thats 300.00 in the price of the kitten
> alone....add an extra 100.00 for altering them all....
> altering 4 cats on your own at our neighborhood animal hospital which
offers
> to alter moggies for 35.00, just to help make it affordable....that's
> 140.00, add mom in there, and it is still only 175.00! Sorry, but money
is
> tight all over. I would have my own before paying out that kind of money.
> Not to mention the vet costs after, to treat the parasites and URI's
common
> in shelter animals.
If the money is more important to you then the general animal welfare, then
you really ought to reconsider your options of keeping a cat. Seriously
Adrianna, you are not thinking of cats , you are thinking only of yourself,
and that is just plain selfish and dangerous. What happens when your cat
gets ill, or break a leg, or God knows what. Do you have it put down because
you can't afford a vet? Do you pay for vaccinations at all? Are you telling
me you are not having your cats neutered because of the cost? Whatever
happens in the life I will make damn sure my cats have the food on the table
and cat insurance is paid, rather then eat myself. Cats are like children,
they are a responsibility you choose to take on FOR LIFE, and I believe you
ought to put your priorities right.
> > Pregnency. I always believe in researching the subject before you let
> > yourself into something. Anything. Perhaps you haven;t had your cat
> neutered
> > on time and let her out to wonder, so she got pregnant. Perhaps you
> believed
> > the old saying that every cat should have one litter before spaying.
> Perhaps
> > you purposely wanted kittens.
> Perhaps, perhaps, perhaps. Perhaps you just assumed she is irresponsible,
> and treated her like shit, and then hoped that she would be alllllll
> underatanding and want to answer the accusatory questions. You would'nt
> answer her question on gestation, because it had already been
> addressed....but it's ok for you all to jump on her with the same bitch
and
> moan....how does that work?
First:nobody treated her like shit. Second: If you have cared to read on,
you would've noticed my statement that regardless of the reason why she let
her cat get pregnant, SHE DID ALLOW IT therefore act in itself IS in a fact
irresponsible. She could've stopped it and she didn;t, so yes, it is
irresponsible, weather you agree or not, and I can only hope Kathy will
realize that, so the mistake doesn;t happen in the future, because I am sure
she loves cats and can understand why are we saying what we are saying. The
reason I have said all the perhapses is because I was giving her the benefit
of the doubt that she has allowed it to happen accidentally because she
didn;t know all the facts, and not purposely.
As for bitching and moaning, well isn;t that what you are doing right now?
You don;t agree with us, so you are using a harsh language and being all
childish. Why? We are all here to learn, and there is absolutely no need for
this behaviour Addrianna, especially because Victor, nor Kelly nor me nor
others were behaving like that.
> She might have had she not been attacked.
Attack no. Constructive criticism yes.
> >I don;t know and you didn;t care to explain,
> > not once, for some odd reason, but the fact remains that you have in
fact
> > ALLOWED
> How do you know she allowed? Again...assumption. Not nice.
Not an assumption. A fact. She ALLOWED it one way or the other.
First: if you are going to own a cat, you need to learn about the
possibility of pregnancy and when can it happen. Female cats could get
pregnant as early as 4 months old, therefore one will use the precautions so
it doesn't happen. Either keep the cat in, or have her done, depending on
what country you are as vets operate at different ages. Here in UK is 6
months old, so you simply make sure cat doesn;t go out. Easy.
Second: If she knew all about it and purposely let/wanted the cat to get
pregnant, she ALLOWED it again.
Thirdly: If the cat was over 6 months old, she should've been done, so
anything after that is ALLOWING it to happen.
So you see, it is in fact allowing it one way or the other. You watch your
kids. You watch your pets. They are the family too.
> But please please please, do have them all done, and do
> > contribute your love the correct way for ALL the animals,
> There is a correct way to love?????????
Absolutely. This is what I, others here, vets, cats websites, shelters and
other animal loving people are saying. So yes. It is.
> Fanatic pure and bloody simple.
Well if you want to continue your stubbornness, then do so, I'd rather
belong to the group of what you categorize as " fanatics" and continue to
love and cherish animals, then be in a group of selfish, breeding, people
who call their cats PROPERTY.
> There are many ways to show love. I trap the poor unhealthy strays and
take
> them to be put down with some dignity, and more pain free than starving or
> dying of festering wounds.
It would've been much more humane for you to feed them like I do, then take
them to get killed. Alternatively, you could pay for them to be done so they
don;t breed, like I do again. Lots of shelters and organization will have
them neutered for a small amount of money, or even for free, and some will
even keep them and find homes for them. Killing is only option if animal is
ill.
> Hunting and wildlife management has to be done to protect our wild friends
> as well.
Hunting is never an option. Hunting is pure and brutal murdering of animals.
>Would you rather they were just shot and left to rot?
I'd rather ban the guns altogether full stop.
>Or I
> know....lets just leave them to over populate and die of hunger and
disease.
Read few passages above.
> Have you ever seen a deer staggering with hunger? It's ribs sticking out,
> shaking like a leaf, and sumbling with each step. stricken with fear as a
> coyote stalks it, and plays it to death? It would reduce you to tears
lady.
> We need more hunters that at least give the death of that animal purpose.
Yes I have seen similar. And yes it did make me cry. But a) you can put the
food out for them, and b) unfortunately animals do kill and eat for food
only. We cannot prevent that.
Humans on the other hand kill for a trophy, fame or God knows what else, but
all wrong reasons. That we can prevent. Humans do not NEED nor DEPEND on
meat to live. In fact being a vegetarian is ever so much healthier.
> Your cats sure as hell aren't vegetarians....but it's ok to kill animals
to
> feed them?
> Get off it....that is sooooo hypocritical!
Are you aware that cat/dog food is made of the leftovers of the animals
killed for human consumption?
Also if my cats are biologically able to survive on vegetarian food, I would
put them on it. Unfortunately cats are slightly different in that respect,
therefore I am not being hypocritical, it is the nature that I cannot
change.
> > I have also changed a few of my old opinions, simply because have
> realized that I was wrong, and that by doing what I was, I am in some way
hurting
> my own or some other animals. This is why I do not wear fur, or eat meat,
and
> > had all my cats done.
>
> Whoever told you that crap should be shot for cruelty to animals.
What crap? Skinning live animals? Killing them? Which part is crap?
> Instead
> of reading your fluff bunnie rag magazines, maybe you should start reading
> Hunting and wildlife articles.
Hunting: NO, NO and NO again. Hunting should be banned full stop. It is
simply a different name for murdering the animals.
Wildlife articles: I read quite a lot about bears in China being kept in a
small cage and tortured all their life because of Chinese medicine. I read
about foxes being hunted down with a pack of dogs and a bunch of stupid rich
bustards and torn alive to peaces for fun. Should I continue? Now these are
things you should be reading about, and not about how to murder more and
better!
Adreeanna
"Gee" <g...@NOSPAM.com> wrote in message
>
> "Adreeanna" <adree...@shaw.ca> wrote in message
> news:HiFH8.135511$xS2.10...@news1.calgary.shaw.ca...
> > Gee....Kathy's rant was called for. She was attacked first.
>
> I don't call it attack. I call it a constructive criticism.
>
> > Read through...you are horribly misinformed if you think that you are
not
> being
> > cruel to animals....
>
> And just how is that, how did you get to the conclusion that I am cruel to
> animals? Is it me feeding them cruel? Adopting strays and cats form a
rescue
> centre? Putting them first? Which bit is exactly cruel in your mind
> Addrianna? You, a person who calls animals PROPERTY. Interesting.
Feeding them is cruel according to some reports....see the link in the post
fact not fight. You know, if you have unlimited resourses to alter every
single stray, thats great. Not everyone does.
>
> >>Victor
> > > works in the shelter, watching the cats and kittens being brought in
> > daily,
> > > and ultimately dying if no homes are found. Doesn't that fact hurt you
> as
> > an animal lover?
>
> > What an awful thing to ask someone! Guilt them into taking a
> > kitten...Yeeesh...if the foster homes start that we are in REAL trouble.
>
> So you feel guilt then. Good. I don't. I do my bit for animals and I am
> proud of it. I just wish I could do even more.
Ohhhh hell no, I don't feel guilty for my part.
>
> > Sure it hurts...So does seeing an animal dead on the road side hit by a
> > car....guess we should alll stop driving and go back to horse and buggy?
> > Oops...can't do that either....mistreating horses.
>
> Your point being what - everything is OK and we should continue as it
is???
> And what about the animals who do not have anyone to protect them apart
from
> us humans?
What animal has NO one in the world but humans? All animals have their own
form of protection, in one way or another.
>
> Perhaps you ought to cut your smarty pants type of talk because it's just
> childish and involve into a decent conversation if you want me to take
your
> opinions seriously.
You view my opinion as smarty pants, but I am expected to take yours
seriously? It doesn't work that way.
There are 2 sides for everything. I was once on your side of the fence till
I saw the damage it was causing to the envirnment, and cultures that depend
on hunting for food. Yes Gee, those cultures still exsist. Just as
pedigree breeders contribute to the welfare of all cats, through clubs,
sponcerships, etc, hunters contribute to the welfare of wildlife management.
What happens when mine get ill? That is what you are asking? Well because
I did not shell out 500.00 to a shelter for a bunch of kittens that may or
may not be healthy, I can afford to look after my own.
So you would feed your cats while you starve? Uhhh huh, and when you get
ill from malnutrtion, who then looks after your cats? Your responsibilitys?
That is fanatisism...plain and simple. Its fine to look after them, raise
them, love them. But you can;t do that if you yourself are not healthy. To
me that is simple common sense.
Sorry yes she was....follow the order of the thread
Second: If you have cared to read on,
> you would've noticed my statement that regardless of the reason why she
let
> her cat get pregnant, SHE DID ALLOW IT therefore act in itself IS in a
fact
> irresponsible.
Maybe she did allow it so she could have the kittens. Remember she is
accepting responsibilty for them. She is not assuming responsibility for
those that are not hers....no different than human mothers in that regard.
I ca't take in every pitiful creature that comes within my sight. Charity
begins at home. My own must be looked after as I assumed the responsibility
for their care, and I will make sure that they get the best there is, not
second rate because I am also looking after every other stray that comes
around.
She could've stopped it and she didn;t, so yes, it is
> irresponsible, weather you agree or not, and I can only hope Kathy will
> realize that, so the mistake doesn;t happen in the future, because I am
sure
> she loves cats and can understand why are we saying what we are saying.
The
> reason I have said all the perhapses is because I was giving her the
benefit
> of the doubt that she has allowed it to happen accidentally because she
> didn;t know all the facts, and not purposely.
Accidents aren't allowed, accidents happen even with the best of care.
Thinking otherwise is foolish Gee, and I am sure you realize that.
>
> As for bitching and moaning, well isn;t that what you are doing right now?
> You don;t agree with us, so you are using a harsh language and being all
I am using language no different that what Kelly used? Should she be
berated as well? Or is it just that she assumes Kathy is irresponsible as
well, so harsh language is ok?
I am just keeping with the playing field set out by example.
> childish. Why? We are all here to learn, and there is absolutely no need
for
> this behaviour Addrianna, especially because Victor, nor Kelly nor me nor
> others were behaving like that.
>
> > She might have had she not been attacked.
>
> Attack no. Constructive criticism yes.
>
> > >I don;t know and you didn;t care to explain,
> > > not once, for some odd reason, but the fact remains that you have in
> fact
> > > ALLOWED
>
> > How do you know she allowed? Again...assumption. Not nice.
>
> Not an assumption. A fact. She ALLOWED it one way or the other.
> First: if you are going to own a cat, you need to learn about the
> possibility of pregnancy and when can it happen. Female cats could get
> pregnant as early as 4 months old, therefore one will use the precautions
so
> it doesn't happen. Either keep the cat in, or have her done, depending on
> what country you are as vets operate at different ages. Here in UK is 6
> months old, so you simply make sure cat doesn;t go out. Easy.
Maybe you better get some articles and educate the vets and shelters in the
UK. Why on earth are you waiting till age 6 months? It is totally
un-necessary!! And very irresponsible, as anyone that owns a cat, knows
that they are Houdinis in disguise. Accidents can and do happen.
>
> Second: If she knew all about it and purposely let/wanted the cat to get
> pregnant, she ALLOWED it again.
>
> Thirdly: If the cat was over 6 months old, she should've been done, so
> anything after that is ALLOWING it to happen.
>
> So you see, it is in fact allowing it one way or the other. You watch your
> kids. You watch your pets. They are the family too.
Yes I watch my kids, and my pets. I allow them certain freedoms...that goes
for the cats too. I allowed my daughter to walk to school alone at age 7,
and she got bumped by a car....she was responsible....the driver was not. I
allow my cats into an outdoor run to play climb, relax and enjoy the fresh
air and sunshine. One day a neighbors teenager thought it would be funny to
toss a little stray kitten into the run. My 4 siamese "boys" killed it.
But the kitten I guess had the last laugh...it had an URI, that killed my 2
older toms. Bad things happen. The teen was not punished. I was told that
if my cats were not outdoors, it would not have happened. The yard was
secure, he had to climb a frost fence, and then jimmie that opening to force
the kitten inside. Accidents can and do happen no matter how responsible
you are
>
> > But please please please, do have them all done, and do
> > > contribute your love the correct way for ALL the animals,
>
> > There is a correct way to love?????????
Love is unconditional, and does not come with a regulation book. Because I
love my cats does not mean I am going to endanger them by dragging each and
every stray into my home. And as I have said before, I do not have
unlimited financial resourses to insure that every one of them on the planet
has the same benefits mine do.
>
> Absolutely. This is what I, others here, vets, cats websites, shelters and
> other animal loving people are saying. So yes. It is.
>
> > Fanatic pure and bloody simple.
>
> Well if you want to continue your stubbornness, then do so, I'd rather
> belong to the group of what you categorize as " fanatics" and continue to
> love and cherish animals, then be in a group of selfish, breeding, people
> who call their cats PROPERTY.
Still didn't understand why i used the term property eh? Oh well I tried.
>
> > There are many ways to show love. I trap the poor unhealthy strays and
> take
> > them to be put down with some dignity, and more pain free than starving
or
> > dying of festering wounds.
Hehehe...sorry Gee, but why feed them, and then take them to get killed?
Careful of your grammar girl.
Did you not read ALL the words? I specifically said the unhealthy strays.
I do not feed and encourage strays to group together, that just promotes
rampant breeding, and increase the stray population. Again in the post fact
not fight I have listed very informative links on this very issue.
You give out only a portion of the necessary info newbies need to properly
care for strays and feral populations. Educate...not berate. Understand
the difference
>
> It would've been much more humane for you to feed them like I do, then
take
> them to get killed. Alternatively, you could pay for them to be done so
they
> don;t breed, like I do again. Lots of shelters and organization will have
> them neutered for a small amount of money, or even for free, and some will
> even keep them and find homes for them. Killing is only option if animal
is
> ill.
>
> > Hunting and wildlife management has to be done to protect our wild
friends
> > as well.
>
> Hunting is never an option. Hunting is pure and brutal murdering of
animals.
>
> >Would you rather they were just shot and left to rot?
>
> I'd rather ban the guns altogether full stop.
>
> >Or I
> > know....lets just leave them to over populate and die of hunger and
> disease.
>
> Read few passages above.
Read what above? If you ban allll guns, how do you contend with the severe
overpopulation of wildlife? Don't you dare preach that nature takes care of
her own either, because you just got through telling me we have to take care
of them.
>
> > Have you ever seen a deer staggering with hunger? It's ribs sticking
out,
> > shaking like a leaf, and sumbling with each step. stricken with fear as
a
> > coyote stalks it, and plays it to death? It would reduce you to tears
> lady.
> > We need more hunters that at least give the death of that animal
purpose.
>
> Yes I have seen similar. And yes it did make me cry. But a) you can put
the
> food out for them, and b) unfortunately animals do kill and eat for food
> only. We cannot prevent that.
Animals do not just kill for food. Weasels will kill for the sheer fun of
it. They will also killl to protect their young. Sorry, but if a bear,
coyote, or other predator comes near my family, human or pet, I will shoot
it to protect mine.
I am human. Unless of course you are insulting me....I do not kill for
trophy, or sport, or fame. I kill for the food. I cannot tolerate the
chemicals and food additives to commercially prepared meats, fish and
poultry.
I eat what I shoot. Trophys are not typically very good tasting meat.
>
> Humans on the other hand kill for a trophy, fame or God knows what else,
but
> all wrong reasons. That we can prevent. Humans do not NEED nor DEPEND on
> meat to live. In fact being a vegetarian is ever so much healthier.
You are very wrong with that statement dear. There are millions of humans
that do indeed depend on meat to survive. Waht about the famers that depend
on the sale of their produce? The small northeren communitys that depend on
seal hunts, and fishing? Or do fish not count as animals?
You want to sacrifice one for another and nature does not work that way.
Responsibilty whether you agree with the method or not is necessary, but
there are different ways to show love, and accept responsibilty.
>
> > Your cats sure as hell aren't vegetarians....but it's ok to kill animals
> to
> > feed them?
> > Get off it....that is sooooo hypocritical!
>
> Are you aware that cat/dog food is made of the leftovers of the animals
> killed for human consumption?
So what? If we didn't eat me ourselves we would still have to kill meat for
them. Killing according to you is killing, plain and simple. It's great
that the leftovers can be used instead of just tossed away. If your child,
or your pets and neighborhood was being victimized by a wild animal would
you not have it put down? And please don't give me the drivel about
relocating the animal...here we have a strike three...we relocate 3
times...after that they are shot on sight to protect our domestics pets, and
people too.
>
> Also if my cats are biologically able to survive on vegetarian food, I
would
> put them on it. Unfortunately cats are slightly different in that respect,
> therefore I am not being hypocritical, it is the nature that I cannot
> change.
>
> > > I have also changed a few of my old opinions, simply because have
> > realized that I was wrong, and that by doing what I was, I am in some
way
> hurting
> > my own or some other animals. This is why I do not wear fur, or eat
meat,
> and
> > > had all my cats done.
> >
> > Whoever told you that crap should be shot for cruelty to animals.
>
> What crap? Skinning live animals? Killing them? Which part is crap?
>
> > Instead
> > of reading your fluff bunnie rag magazines, maybe you should start
reading
> > Hunting and wildlife articles.
>
> Hunting: NO, NO and NO again. Hunting should be banned full stop. It is
> simply a different name for murdering the animals.
>
Yup there are some cultures that beive in that. Hard isn't it? But just as
your beliefs are right for you, so too are theirs. If you start believing
that we have to change all of their opinions, you are no different that the
christians that want to abolish alllll forms of worship but their own. And
since the bible talks of animal sacrifice, and the consumption of meat, I am
guessing you are not christian. So if success is gained banishing all but
one belief, your opinions may one day be shot to hell, no pun intended
> Wildlife articles: I read quite a lot about bears in China being kept in a
> small cage and tortured all their life because of Chinese medicine. I read
> about foxes being hunted down with a pack of dogs and a bunch of stupid
rich
> bustards and torn alive to peaces for fun. Should I continue? Now these
are
> things you should be reading about, and not about how to murder more and
> better!
I read everyday advances in hunting, and practice several times a week, to
insure I never Ever cause undue suffereing to an animal.
Do you eat Honey by the way? Do you know how many bear are shot each year
to protect honey farms?
How about jams and jellies...fruit and veggies? Animals do have to be
controlled, and one way to do so...like it or not....will cause them to die.
At least if they are hunted they are not wasted.
Check out the Oklahoma Department of Wildlife conservation. They are funded
strictly by hunters to rpeserve and maintain animal habitats, breeding
grounds, preserves...you name it.
The point I am trying hard to make here is that WE do all love our planet.
Not just animals...ALL living things.
Animal, mineral, vegetable. The home you live in, the clothes you wear, the
products you use, if you buy it commercially, guaranteed animals died so you
could have it. It is the circle of life.
Cruelty occurs in all breeds of life. Lions kill Cheetah cubs...they don't
do it for food!
Only through thorough education from all perspective can we best look after
our planet.
And face it....that HAS to come before all else..Protects the cats to
extreme if you must...but if you don't keep a balance to nature, you will
not have to worry about the cats anymore, because none of it will be here.
I am suggesting you read reputable publications. Unless of course you
believe that the Enquirer is reputable, in which case this is a lost cause.
Victor, Kelly, you, Kathy, myself, and I am sure most others are alllll on
the same side of the fence. We just have different ways of showing it.
We are hunter/protectors...that is our nature....why mess with it?
Adreeanna
Gee
> > And just how is that, how did you get to the conclusion that I am cruel
to
> > animals? Is it me feeding them cruel? Adopting strays and cats form a
> rescue
> > centre? Putting them first? Which bit is exactly cruel in your mind
> > Addrianna? You, a person who calls animals PROPERTY. Interesting.
>
> Feeding them is cruel according to some reports....see the link in the
post
> fact not fight. You know, if you have unlimited resourses to alter every
> single stray, thats great. Not everyone does.
I agree not everyone does. I don't either, hence my wish to be able to do
more. But I always make sure that every bit of food left or unwanted is
recycled in some way and given to stray cats , birds and foxes outside( I
live in a city). Every peace of bread that's not eaten, every leftover cat
meal or anything they eat, all goes out for them. Also I always buy cheaper
dry cat food which I can place outside regularely so the poor things can get
something to eat. I am also lucky that I have 2 other neighbours who do the
same. We have also managed to get lots of them done in a local rescue for
nothing or a small amount, after we explained the situation.
> What animal has NO one in the world but humans? All animals have their
own
> form of protection, in one way or another.
Untill they get ill. Then what? Unless we help them, they will generaly end
up duying from another animal, or because they are unable to get the food.
> > Perhaps you ought to cut your smarty pants type of talk because it's
just
> > childish and involve into a decent conversation if you want me to take
> your opinions seriously.
>
> You view my opinion as smarty pants, but I am expected to take yours
> seriously? It doesn't work that way.
No. I didn't call your opinion smarty pants, but your behaviour.
> Just as
> pedigree breeders contribute to the welfare of all cats, through clubs,
> sponcerships, etc, hunters contribute to the welfare of wildlife
management.
I really do find it hard to believe hunting contributes to animal welfare.
> What happens when mine get ill? That is what you are asking? Well
because
> I did not shell out 500.00 to a shelter for a bunch of kittens that may or
> may not be healthy, I can afford to look after my own.
Many treatments cost much more then 500. What happens then?
> So you would feed your cats while you starve? Uhhh huh, and when you get
> ill from malnutrtion, who then looks after your cats?
As a responsible person I wouldn;t allow it to happen. Rice, bread and salad
is cheap. I will always be able to afford that, even if I had to clean for
living, but my cats will always come first, because I have taken that
responsibility and I will honor it to the end. I will hopefully be able to
find a better paid job before malnutrition of any kind kicks in.
> Your responsibilitys?
> That is fanatisism...plain and simple.
No it isn't. You don't put yourself before your kids, nor your pets. It's a
very simple mature concept, for any responsible person.
> Its fine to look after them, raise
> them, love them. But you can;t do that if you yourself are not healthy.
To
> me that is simple common sense.
Yes, I agree, therefore I will always take the precautions so I do not get
ill, but not on their account.
> > First:nobody treated her like shit.
> Sorry yes she was....follow the order of the thread
I do not agree. Yes, it could've been said differently, but still it wasn't
a shitty treatment.
>>SHE DID ALLOW IT therefore act in itself IS in a fact irresponsible.
>
> Maybe she did allow it so she could have the kittens. Remember she is
> accepting responsibilty for them.
Yes, and that is good. However the point we are all trying to make is,
having enough knowledge about the full picture and then concience to do it
or not, knowing full well that doing so some other cats have/will die. The
idea is to make a choice that will help reduce overpopulation, not enlarge
it. You were telling me about overpopulation, so I am surprised you are not
agreeing with this point.
She is not assuming responsibility for
> those that are not hers....no different than human mothers in that regard.
Yes, but you can't exactly compare it on this occasion. She didn't give
birth to them.
> I ca't take in every pitiful creature that comes within my sight. Charity
> begins at home. My own must be looked after as I assumed the
responsibility
> for their care, and I will make sure that they get the best there is, not
> second rate because I am also looking after every other stray that comes
> around.
The trick is the fine balance. You do what you can. Of course you care after
yours, that is only natural, but surely you can extend your love and charity
from home further.
> The
> > reason I have said all the perhapses is because I was giving her the
> benefit
> > of the doubt that she has allowed it to happen accidentally because she
> > didn;t know all the facts, and not purposely.
>
> Accidents aren't allowed, accidents happen even with the best of care.
> Thinking otherwise is foolish Gee, and I am sure you realize that.
One thing is accidently stepping on your cats tail, allowing your cat to
breed is not an accident. I have refered to a possibility of her not having
enough info therefore "acidently" breeding due to that. I had to make EVER
so sure mine didn;t get to go out, before vet had them done at 6 months. Yes
accidents do happen, the cat may run out, but I would run after it, or
desperately try and tempt it with the food to come in, and then if there is
any cahnce of her being pregnant, take her to the vet for the op asap.
Depending of her age, the vet would be able to then decide if he could do
the op, or sugegst alternatives. But I would NOT just let it go.
> > As for bitching and moaning, well isn;t that what you are doing right
now?
> > You don;t agree with us, so you are using a harsh language and being all
>
> I am using language no different that what Kelly used? Should she be
> berated as well? Or is it just that she assumes Kathy is irresponsible as
> well, so harsh language is ok?
> I am just keeping with the playing field set out by example.
Yes but if we continue like that, everybody will just get angry and no
worthwihile discussion will be produced. You don;t have to follow the crowd
if you feel crowd is doing negative stuff. You can just be yourself.
>>. Either keep the cat in, or have her done, depending on
> > what country you are as vets operate at different ages. Here in UK is 6
> > months old, so you simply make sure cat doesn;t go out. Easy.
>
> Maybe you better get some articles and educate the vets and shelters in
the
> UK. Why on earth are you waiting till age 6 months? It is totally
> un-necessary!! And very irresponsible, as anyone that owns a cat, knows
> that they are Houdinis in disguise. Accidents can and do happen.
I am certain vets have their reasons for not doing the op earlier. Perhaps
is something to do with their development, health and risks. I do not know
for definite.I am not a vet therefore can not go into explaining something I
do not know enough about. Perhaps someone else in the group has more
knowledge and will care to answer?
> > So you see, it is in fact allowing it one way or the other. You watch
your
> > kids. You watch your pets. They are the family too.
>
> Yes I watch my kids, and my pets. I allow them certain freedoms...that
goes
> for the cats too. I allowed my daughter to walk to school alone at age 7,
> and she got bumped by a car....she was responsible....the driver was not.
I
> allow my cats into an outdoor run to play climb, relax and enjoy the fresh
> air and sunshine. One day a neighbors teenager thought it would be funny
to
> toss a little stray kitten into the run. My 4 siamese "boys" killed it.
> But the kitten I guess had the last laugh...it had an URI, that killed my
2
> older toms. Bad things happen. The teen was not punished. I was told
that
> if my cats were not outdoors, it would not have happened. The yard was
> secure, he had to climb a frost fence, and then jimmie that opening to
force
> the kitten inside. Accidents can and do happen no matter how responsible
> you are
Agreed, and I am sorry about what happen to your daughter and your boys. But
I know that you do try your best to watch them and protect them as much as
possible, in order to reduce accidents to a minimum, and if they do happen,
we take further actions.
> > > But please please please, do have them all done, and do
> > > > contribute your love the correct way for ALL the animals,
> >
> > > There is a correct way to love?????????
> Love is unconditional, and does not come with a regulation book.
I am not quite certain about that. See if you marry a guy who later end up
beatin gthe crap out of you, should you stay because of unconditional love?
No because it's not a correct way to love: him you, nor you yourself. So
there are really fine lines at unconditional, and there is plenty of wrons
and wrights you need to work on in "love".
>Because I
> love my cats does not mean I am going to endanger them by dragging each
and
> every stray into my home.
Nobody suggested that. I did suggest however you feeding the strays. Put the
plate outside somewhere. That's all.
>>And as I have said before, I do not have
> unlimited financial resourses to insure that every one of them on the
planet
> has the same benefits mine do.
Fair enough, if you can't you can't, nobody will force you to. But having a
big heart and wanting to do it means a lot, and one day when you can do,
perhaps you will try. Not all the animals. One life saved is worth more then
millions of dollars in cash.
> Did you not read ALL the words? I specifically said the unhealthy strays.
Yes yes you did, so I appologize for not picking it up, and biting your head
off.
I am however surprised that your local shelters are unwilling to take them
on, get their deseases treated (if treatable) then rehome.That's what they
do here.
> I do not feed and encourage strays to group together, that just promotes
> rampant breeding, and increase the stray population.
Well I don;t know about that. Cats and foxes are territorial and will rarely
cross the " paths" so a plate of food will not really invite any more
animals then usual. Not that I am saying it's inpossible of course.
> > It would've been much more humane for you to feed them like I do, then
> take them to get killed.
> Hehehe...sorry Gee, but why feed them, and then take them to get killed?
> Careful of your grammar girl.
Yes I can see what I've said, spelling mistake, but you know as well as I do
what I really meant, which is that you could feed them INSTEAD of having
them killed. Not to kill them after feeding :)
> If you ban allll guns, how do you contend with the severe
> overpopulation of wildlife? Don't you dare preach that nature takes care
of
> her own either, because you just got through telling me we have to take
care
> of them.
Yes the nature does take care of many of the animals, but fine there is
overpopulations present. However there must be many more humane ways to
reduce it than guns.
> Animals do not just kill for food. Weasels will kill for the sheer fun of
> it. They will also killl to protect their young.
Protecting young yes, I can agree with that. For fun, I doubt. Perhaps we
humans just don;t understand why.
> Sorry, but if a bear,
> coyote, or other predator comes near my family, human or pet, I will shoot
> it to protect mine.
Why not just avoid going in the bears habitat?
> I am human. Unless of course you are insulting me....I do not kill for
> trophy, or sport, or fame. I kill for the food. I cannot tolerate the
> chemicals and food additives to commercially prepared meats, fish and
> poultry.
> I eat what I shoot. Trophys are not typically very good tasting meat.
When you say you cannot tolerate chemicals, do you mean you are alergic to
them? And if you are why not just buy the fresh meat instead of killing your
own? How do you have a heart to look an animal you say love in the eye and
murder it?
> > Humans on the other hand kill for a trophy, fame or God knows what else,
> but
> > all wrong reasons. That we can prevent. Humans do not NEED nor DEPEND on
> > meat to live. In fact being a vegetarian is ever so much healthier.
> You are very wrong with that statement dear. There are millions of humans
> that do indeed depend on meat to survive. Waht about the famers that
depend
> on the sale of their produce? The small northeren communitys that depend
on
> seal hunts, and fishing? Or do fish not count as animals?
They can all become vegeterian. As for farmers, they could start selling
vegetables rather than meat.
> You want to sacrifice one for another and nature does not work that way.
Actually it does. Nature already sacrifies a death of one animal to feed the
other. We can at least say NO.
> Responsibilty whether you agree with the method or not is necessary, but
> there are different ways to show love, and accept responsibilty.
Not by shooting them. Or eating them. Or wearing them. No.
> > Are you aware that cat/dog food is made of the leftovers of the animals
> > killed for human consumption?
> So what? If we didn't eat me ourselves we would still have to kill meat
for
> them.
Yes because they depend on it. There is no other way.
>>according to you is killing, plain and simple.
yes when is not nececery.
>If your child,
> or your pets and neighborhood was being victimized by a wild animal would
> you not have it put down? And please don't give me the drivel about
> relocating the animal...here we have a strike three...we relocate 3
> times...after that they are shot on sight to protect our domestics pets,
and
> people too.
What kind of animals are we talking about here? 3 strikes? If I understood
corerctly, they come back 3 times(and do whatever you consider unsuitable)
and you shoot them. Well perhaps you are not relocating it far enough? Or
how about zoos? Wild rescue centers, or at least if it has to be killed, to
be put down humanely?
> > Hunting: NO, NO and NO again. Hunting should be banned full stop. It is
> > simply a different name for murdering the animals.
> >
> Yup there are some cultures that beive in that. Hard isn't it? But just
as
> your beliefs are right for you, so too are theirs.
How can you possibly excuse shooting? It's not a belief. It's love for
animals I am talking about.
> If you start believing
> that we have to change all of their opinions, you are no different that
the
> christians that want to abolish alllll forms of worship but their own.
Where did you hear this? I never heard anything such.
> And since the bible talks of animal sacrifice, and the consumption of
meat, I am
> guessing you are not christian.
I am. But neither Bible nor religion forces me to eat or not eat meat. It is
my choice which came out from love of animals and animal protection. But
even if I wan;t Christian, no religion could tell me to do something that is
simply wrong such as torturing kids, women or animals.
But probably the best is not to discuss religion here.
> So if success is gained banishing all but
> one belief, your opinions may one day be shot to hell, no pun intended
How can it? Who can possibly proove to me or others that skinning a live
animal is OK? That eating meat is OK? That shooting or hunting an animal is
OK? Even if the law changed and ordered me to hurt an animal, I wouldn't.
They have rights and I respect them.
> > Wildlife articles: I read quite a lot about bears in China being kept in
a
> > small cage and tortured all their life because of Chinese medicine. I
read
> > about foxes being hunted down with a pack of dogs and a bunch of stupid
> rich
> > bustards and torn alive to peaces for fun. Should I continue? Now these
> are
> > things you should be reading about, and not about how to murder more and
> > better!
> I read everyday advances in hunting, and practice several times a week, to
> insure I never Ever cause undue suffereing to an animal.
Wouldn;t you be better off using that time to help animals, not to improve
your shooting skills?
> Do you eat Honey by the way? Do you know how many bear are shot each year
> to protect honey farms?
> How about jams and jellies...fruit and veggies? Animals do have to be
> controlled, and one way to do so...like it or not....will cause them to
die.
> At least if they are hunted they are not wasted.
Yes animals need sometimes to be controlled, but ALL of the above can be
controlled the HUMANE way. A strong fence for example would prevent much of
the trouble.
> Check out the Oklahoma Department of Wildlife conservation. They are
funded
> strictly by hunters to rpeserve and maintain animal habitats, breeding
> grounds, preserves...you name it.
Which is the department you keep mantioning in all your examples? Hmmmm...
Care to give a different example then? This one suddenly doesn;t seem as
credible, if it's funded by hunters and shooters.
> The point I am trying hard to make here is that WE do all love our planet.
> Not just animals...ALL living things.
> Animal, mineral, vegetable.
No. If you love something, you wouldn't feel comfortable murdering it.
> The home you live in, the clothes you wear, the
> products you use, if you buy it commercially, guaranteed animals died so
you
> could have it. It is the circle of life.
> Cruelty occurs in all breeds of life.
Which is why I tend to buy animal cruelty free products, no leather, no
furr, no meat, I recycle, etc. Basically I do my bit. If everyone did, life
would be so much better for all, and less animals would be used in trades
they shouldn;t be used in.
>Lions kill Cheetah cubs...they don't do it for food!
They must have a reason why are they doing it. However that doesn;t give you
the right to go and do the same.
>
> Only through thorough education from all perspective can we best look
after
> our planet.
Well after 20 centuries of ONE perspective, it's time people learn that
animals have feelings and right too.
So I do agree with education, but not the education that will take those
rights away.
> And face it....that HAS to come before all else..Protects the cats to
> extreme if you must...but if you don't keep a balance to nature, you will
> not have to worry about the cats anymore, because none of it will be here.
Nature takes the balance of itself. Unfortunately humans have taken over of
much of animal natural habitats, so since it's our fault if there are any
animal problems, then we ought to sort it out, not kill them all.
> I am suggesting you read reputable publications. Unless of course you
> believe that the Enquirer is reputable, in which case this is a lost
cause.
What do you consider reputable publications. from what you stated earlier
you spend lots of your time I reading about "everyday advances in
hunting"!!! Or giving a link of a comany funded by hunters and shooters. If
that's what you consider reputable, no I do not wish to read it. If they are
however anything to do with IMPROVING animal welfare, then sure I'll read
it.
> Victor, Kelly, you, Kathy, myself, and I am sure most others are alllll on
> the same side of the fence.
No no we are not. We wouldn't shoot an animal.
>We just have different ways of showing it.
> We are hunter/protectors...that is our nature....why mess with it?
YOU may be a hunter. I am not. I am a PROTECTOR.I like to HELP. I do NOT
MURDER! I love instead.
Gee
> Adreeanna
>
>
>
>
Orchid
<snip>
>> Just as
>> pedigree breeders contribute to the welfare of all cats, through clubs,
>> sponcerships, etc, hunters contribute to the welfare of wildlife
>management.
>
>I really do find it hard to believe hunting contributes to animal welfare.
Think about it for a moment, and you'l lsee how it happens.
Hunters enjoy hunting -- some do it for trophies, true, but most do it
for the meat. In order to be able to hunt, there must be large
stretches of wilderness in order to support the deer population.
There must be unpolluted streams and rivers for the fish population.
This means that it is in the best interest of hunters to lobby for
wilderness conservation year-round so they can enjoy hunting in the
fall season. See how it works?
<snip>
>> Maybe you better get some articles and educate the vets and shelters in
>the
>> UK. Why on earth are you waiting till age 6 months? It is totally
>> un-necessary!! And very irresponsible, as anyone that owns a cat, knows
>> that they are Houdinis in disguise. Accidents can and do happen.
>
>I am certain vets have their reasons for not doing the op earlier. Perhaps
>is something to do with their development, health and risks. I do not know
>for definite.I am not a vet therefore can not go into explaining something I
>do not know enough about. Perhaps someone else in the group has more
>knowledge and will care to answer?
In all honesty, Gee, there is no reason to not perform early
spay/neuter. The operation is so safe and effective that many
responsible breeders of purebreds are early spay/neutering their
kittens before they leave home. If you do a Google search for 'early
spay/neuter' or 'early altering' you'll be able to find the studiees
doen by the Winn Foundation and other groups that address its safety.
I have no idea why British vets don't do it.
<snip>
>> I do not feed and encourage strays to group together, that just promotes
>> rampant breeding, and increase the stray population.
>
>Well I don;t know about that. Cats and foxes are territorial and will rarely
>cross the " paths" so a plate of food will not really invite any more
>animals then usual. Not that I am saying it's inpossible of course.
British foxes and American foxes are very different in many
ways. American foxes are considerably larger than British foxes, and
they can and do go after food left out. They also can and do kill
cats.
<snip>
>> If you ban allll guns, how do you contend with the severe
>> overpopulation of wildlife? Don't you dare preach that nature takes care
>of
>> her own either, because you just got through telling me we have to take
>care
>> of them.
>
>Yes the nature does take care of many of the animals, but fine there is
>overpopulations present. However there must be many more humane ways to
>reduce it than guns.
There is no more humane way to kill an animal intended for
consumption than with a high powered hunting rifle. I know many
hunters, and they pride themselves on getting a 'killing shot'. As
well, if the deer does not die immediately, the hunter will track it,
and finish it off as quickly and humanely as possible, either by a
shot to the head or by cutting its throat if it can't run. Think of
the difference between that death and a death by wolves -- the wolves
surround the deer in a pack, and dart in and out, biting it to cause
blood loss. They run it until it drops from sheer exhaustion/blood
loss, or if they manage to hamstring it, until it is incapable of
running any more. Then, when it is on the ground and helpless, they
begin eating it......usually when it is *still alive*. Which sounds
more painful to you?
>
>> Animals do not just kill for food. Weasels will kill for the sheer fun of
>> it. They will also killl to protect their young.
>
>Protecting young yes, I can agree with that. For fun, I doubt. Perhaps we
>humans just don;t understand why.
There are several animals that will kill for 'fun'. Weasels
and stoats will do it -- they come across another animal who is
minding its own business and attack it unprovoked. After it is dead,
they will wander off, and not eat the corpse. Wolverines will also
kill for 'fun' -- they have a similar behaviour. Feral dogs kill for
fun -- they will cross a street and find a way into a fenced yard to
kill an animal (again, not eating it). They will also chase down and
kill any smaller animal that crosses their path, simply for the sheer
pleasure of killing.
>
>> Sorry, but if a bear,
>> coyote, or other predator comes near my family, human or pet, I will shoot
>> it to protect mine.
>
>Why not just avoid going in the bears habitat?
Because, unlike Britain, we still have large predators. You
see, y'all live on a small island, and you already forced all the
large predators there into extinction. Britain used to have a species
of lion, a species of bear, and a species of wolf -- all of which were
hunted into extinction. And now, British farmers are vehemently
protesting the re-introduction of wolves onto the island -- you'll
note that Americans have successfully re-introduced wolves into some
Northern states where we wiped them out. We've also done grizzly and
cougar re-introductions. This means that we have to live with the
large predators, and have to have protocols to deal with them. They
don't stay in their preserves, they wander. Sometimes that wandering
brings them into contact with humans. If people leave food out, it
encourages those contacts. Predators are caught and relocated three
times before they ae considered 'problem' animals, and are put down
for the safety of the people of the area. Isn't this much better than
killing them all off and then asking smug questions of those who still
have them?
>> I am human. Unless of course you are insulting me....I do not kill for
>> trophy, or sport, or fame. I kill for the food. I cannot tolerate the
>> chemicals and food additives to commercially prepared meats, fish and
>> poultry.
>> I eat what I shoot. Trophys are not typically very good tasting meat.
>
>When you say you cannot tolerate chemicals, do you mean you are alergic to
>them? And if you are why not just buy the fresh meat instead of killing your
>own? How do you have a heart to look an animal you say love in the eye and
>murder it?
Because it's better to die a quick death from a bullet in the
heart than a slow, agonising death of starvation. Deer will breed
themselves to the point where habitat cannot support them. Because
there are fewer predators now than there were, they are not being
population controlled in that method. It is our responsibility to
perform the population control that we have disrupted, and if a life
is going to be taken, isn't it better that it is appreciated and used?
I think it is better and more respectful to the animal to use as much
of its body as we can instead of just letting it rot in the woods.
Many hunters will hunt for homeless shelters, donating the meat to
them to help feed homeless people. How is this bad? The hunters I
know use the meat, have the hides turned into leather, use the bone
and antler in carvings and tool parts (handles for knives, etc).
Please explain to me how this is less respectful to the life that was
taken than just killing it and letting it rot.
>> > Humans on the other hand kill for a trophy, fame or God knows what else,
>> but
>> > all wrong reasons. That we can prevent. Humans do not NEED nor DEPEND on
>> > meat to live. In fact being a vegetarian is ever so much healthier.
>
>> You are very wrong with that statement dear. There are millions of humans
>> that do indeed depend on meat to survive. Waht about the famers that
>depend
>> on the sale of their produce? The small northeren communitys that depend
>on
>> seal hunts, and fishing? Or do fish not count as animals?
>
>They can all become vegeterian. As for farmers, they could start selling
>vegetables rather than meat.
Being vegetarian is *not* healthier. As well, a properly
formulated vegetarian diet is not less healthy than a properly
formulated omnivorous diet either. Both are equally healthy. It is,
however, more difficult for the average person to properly formlate a
vegetarian diet. Humans are physically designed to eat meat. It is
why we have the teeth that we do, and why we have the digestive tracts
we do. Because we are omnivores, it is *possible* for us to eat
vegetarian, but it is no more superior healthfully than trying to eat
a carnivorous diet. It is currently thought that one of the key
factors in our ability to make the leap into sentience was the eating
of meat -- meat is a much more concentrated form of calories and amino
acids than vegetable matter, and it is more bio-available.
I am not a vegetarian. I am secure in my position as one of
the top members of the food chain, and thus I do not resent
vegetarians either. Eat whatever you want, but don't try to control
what I eat.
>> You want to sacrifice one for another and nature does not work that way.
>
>Actually it does. Nature already sacrifies a death of one animal to feed the
>other. We can at least say NO.
>
>> Responsibilty whether you agree with the method or not is necessary, but
>> there are different ways to show love, and accept responsibilty.
>
>Not by shooting them. Or eating them. Or wearing them. No.
I would rather be killed by a human with a gun than by any
other animal in the world -- it's faster and cleaner.
>> > Hunting: NO, NO and NO again. Hunting should be banned full stop. It is
>> > simply a different name for murdering the animals.
>> >
>> Yup there are some cultures that beive in that. Hard isn't it? But just
>as
>> your beliefs are right for you, so too are theirs.
>
>How can you possibly excuse shooting? It's not a belief. It's love for
>animals I am talking about.
Exactly. A love for animals that means that we want to see
them not starve to death when they overbreed their environment. A
humane culling that is faster and less painful than any death the
'natural world' has to offer.
> > So if success is gained banishing all but
>> one belief, your opinions may one day be shot to hell, no pun intended
>
>How can it? Who can possibly proove to me or others that skinning a live
>animal is OK? That eating meat is OK? That shooting or hunting an animal is
>OK? Even if the law changed and ordered me to hurt an animal, I wouldn't.
>They have rights and I respect them.
Okay -- um, I'm anti-predator fur (as I have no issue with
using as many parts of the animals that we kill for food as possible),
and where on earth are you getting the 'skinning a live animal' bit?
AFAIK, fur animals are not skinned alive. As for eating meat, yes,
it's okay. It's what we as a species have been designed to do, and
there is nothing ethically wrong with it. Now, there is something
ethically wrong with factory farming, but I and people like me are
working against that sort of thing by buying free-range and organic
meats. Shooting/hunting animals is more humane that allowing them to
starve to death, die of horrific disease....hell, more humane than
letting a natural predator kill them.
People should know and care where their food comes from. I
have hunted, shot, killed, skinned and dressed my own food before, in
large part so I could decide if I was comfortable with the direct
evidence of 'meat was once a living animal'. I know where it comes
from, and I appreciate the life that was given so that I might eat and
live. Humans are part of the food chain -- we are as much animals as
a lion or a wolf.
>> Do you eat Honey by the way? Do you know how many bear are shot each year
>> to protect honey farms?
>> How about jams and jellies...fruit and veggies? Animals do have to be
>> controlled, and one way to do so...like it or not....will cause them to
>die.
>> At least if they are hunted they are not wasted.
>
>Yes animals need sometimes to be controlled, but ALL of the above can be
>controlled the HUMANE way. A strong fence for example would prevent much of
>the trouble.
*giggle* Gee, hon, you live on a small island with no bears,
so I'm going to explain this to you. A strong fence is not going to
keep out bears. Every year, thousands of idiots who leave food in
their CARS at Yellowstone (an American wildlife refuge) come back to
find their car TORN OPEN by black bears (the smallest of the three
North American bear species). Bears are immensely strong, fast,
intelligent animals. They are the top of the North American food
chain, and they cannot be contained by a 'strong fence'. Do a Google
search on 'Yellowstone bears' and see for yourself.
>> The point I am trying hard to make here is that WE do all love our planet.
>> Not just animals...ALL living things.
>> Animal, mineral, vegetable.
>
>No. If you love something, you wouldn't feel comfortable murdering it.
So let me guess, you hate plants then? Not to be overly
facetious, but death permeates the whole of the food chain. One can
love and care about animals and still eat meat, and I personally think
that a quick, humane death via gun is preferable to any of the other
alternatives.
>>Lions kill Cheetah cubs...they don't do it for food!
>
>They must have a reason why are they doing it. However that doesn;t give you
>the right to go and do the same.
Lions kill cheetah cubs because they don't want the competiton
from another predator that uses the same ecological niche. Male lions
come into a pride and slaughter all existing cubs so that the females
will come into heat so they can sire new cubs. Animals are neither
nice, nor noble -- they are the consumate example of the ends
justifying the means.
>> And face it....that HAS to come before all else..Protects the cats to
>> extreme if you must...but if you don't keep a balance to nature, you will
>> not have to worry about the cats anymore, because none of it will be here.
>
>Nature takes the balance of itself. Unfortunately humans have taken over of
>much of animal natural habitats, so since it's our fault if there are any
>animal problems, then we ought to sort it out, not kill them all.
Great. So when are y'all in Britain going to be
re-introducing the predators you've wiped out? Let us know how your
re-introduction progam is going, and we'll keep you updated on the
Mexican wolf re-introduction, the grey wolf re-introduction, and the
grizzly bear re-introduction.
Orchid
Kelly
over North America.
2) Spaying and neutering animals will help solve this problem.
3) Neutering animals decreases the risk of many diseases and provides an
overall healthier and happier animal.
These are not BELIEFS, they are FACTS. It's people like you who look like
fools when they cannot accept the bare facts yet remain ignorant due to
their selfishness.
Kelly
"dinkmeister" <di...@yadda.com> wrote in message
news:qvaxlnqqnpbz.g...@news.mi.comcast.giganews.com...
Kelly
reason) in shelters. That is a lot different than slaughtering animals for
human consumption.
Kelly
"Adreeanna" <adree...@shaw.ca> wrote in message
news:tlFH8.135526$xS2.10...@news1.calgary.shaw.ca...
dinkmeister
breed them. It really makes no sense that you do this, especially since it
causes a HUGE rant/rave thread every single time.
On Sun, 26 May 2002 19:14:00 -0400, Kelly wrote:
:1) Millions of animals are put to their deaths each year in shelters all
:>
:>
:>
:
:
Adreeanna
Gee, there are articles that state that feeding strays is not a good idea.
I give you this link since you obviously cannot be bothered to read the post
i made to show at least where I get my info.
> I agree not everyone does. I don't either, hence my wish to be able to do
> more. But I always make sure that every bit of food left or unwanted is
> recycled in some way and given to stray cats , birds and foxes outside( I
> live in a city). Every peace of bread that's not eaten, every leftover cat
> meal or anything they eat, all goes out for them. Also I always buy
cheaper
> dry cat food which I can place outside regularely so the poor things can
get
> something to eat. I am also lucky that I have 2 other neighbours who do
the
> same. We have also managed to get lots of them done in a local rescue for
> nothing or a small amount, after we explained the situation.
>
If they get ill and we allow nature to take it's course, then the animal
dies right?
You did say that it was ok to let nature do what nature does...but I suppose
that is all other animals but cats?
> > Just as
> > pedigree breeders contribute to the welfare of all cats, through clubs,
> > sponcerships, etc, hunters contribute to the welfare of wildlife
> management.
>
> I really do find it hard to believe hunting contributes to animal welfare.
Did you read what the Oklahoma Conservation does for the contribution of
animal welfare, or are you just imagining that because it is supported by
hunters it cannot be good? Most North American Wildlife Conservation is
funded by hunters and anglers. READ IT!! unless you cannot be bothered to
listen to another persons opinion.
>
> > What happens when mine get ill? That is what you are asking? Well
> because
> > I did not shell out 500.00 to a shelter for a bunch of kittens that may
or
> > may not be healthy, I can afford to look after my own.
No treatment I have ever had to have with my cats has cost me over $267.00,
and that was a thyroid-ectomy with full follow up.
>
> Many treatments cost much more then 500. What happens then?
>
> Yes, and that is good. However the point we are all trying to make is,
> having enough knowledge about the full picture and then concience to do it
> or not, knowing full well that doing so some other cats have/will die. The
> idea is to make a choice that will help reduce overpopulation, not enlarge
> it. You were telling me about overpopulation, so I am surprised you are
not
> agreeing with this point.
I mentioned that I agree that there is an overpopulation of cats. My point
is simply that if someone opts to have their own kittens...with the intent
of keeping them and raising them...that is fine too. I love my cats, but if
i wanted more, I would breed them myself, simply because I want Siamese, not
moggys. So the view that I or someone else who wants to do this, is killing
the equivilent kittens in the shelters is incorrect, because If I could not
breed my own, I still would not get a cat/kitten from a shelter.
> Yes, but you can't exactly compare it on this occasion. She didn't give
> birth to them.
Her cat had them and that as far as i am concerned is the same thing.
>
> The trick is the fine balance. You do what you can. Of course you care
after
> yours, that is only natural, but surely you can extend your love and
charity
> from home further.
You are right. Through education and research. There is an old
saying...Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day....teach him to fish
and he eats for the rest of his life! I will not just hand over money to
Charitys, whether for animal or human. Charitys are one of the biggest
businesses going, and quite a few are as crooked as hell. I donate food,
and when I have extra...time.
>
Through the best of intentions a cat can get out, and get pregnant. In an
ideal world it would never happen, and just because it has never happened to
you, does not mean that it won't
Gee, I am not now, nor have I ever been angry. I have a view point that
deserves to be heard and understood, just as you want your understood. I at
least attempted to look up info on what you say. Did you do me the same
courtesy? I gave a number of links for your info. Did you look them up in
my other post?
The post was called Fact not fight.
> Yes but if we continue like that, everybody will just get angry and no
> worthwihile discussion will be produced. You don;t have to follow the
crowd
> if you feel crowd is doing negative stuff. You can just be yourself.
>
> >>. Either keep the cat in, or have her done, depending on
> > > what country you are as vets operate at different ages. Here in UK is
6
> > > months old, so you simply make sure cat doesn;t go out. Easy.
> >
> > Maybe you better get some articles and educate the vets and shelters in
> the
> > UK. Why on earth are you waiting till age 6 months? It is totally
> > un-necessary!! And very irresponsible, as anyone that owns a cat, knows
> > that they are Houdinis in disguise. Accidents can and do happen.
>
> I am certain vets have their reasons for not doing the op earlier. Perhaps
> is something to do with their development, health and risks. I do not know
> for definite.I am not a vet therefore can not go into explaining something
I
> do not know enough about. Perhaps someone else in the group has more
> knowledge and will care to answer?
Check out the link i gave you regarding the early spay and neuter.
>
But Gee, we are not talking about humans...we are talking about animals. If
I had a cat that attacked, I would still love it enough to find it a new
home....not the same with an abusive hubby...you gonna love him enough to
find him a new home? I dont think so. So the comparison is pointless.
Love is unconditional between a parent and a child....same with our fuzzy
buddies, a lot of us call them our furry kids. Love is love...no
rules...there cannot be rules with unconditional love.
> I am not quite certain about that. See if you marry a guy who later end up
> beatin gthe crap out of you, should you stay because of unconditional
love?
> No because it's not a correct way to love: him you, nor you yourself. So
> there are really fine lines at unconditional, and there is plenty of wrons
> and wrights you need to work on in "love".
>
I simply refuse as i do not believe that is the correct way to love a stray.
Whether I have the resourses or not. I love them too much to do that to
them.
Again you would have to read my other post and look at the article i
suggested to understand why i say this.
> Fair enough, if you can't you can't, nobody will force you to. But having
a
> big heart and wanting to do it means a lot, and one day when you can do,
> perhaps you will try. Not all the animals. One life saved is worth more
then
> millions of dollars in cash.
>
>
> Yes the nature does take care of many of the animals, but fine there is
> overpopulations present. However there must be many more humane ways to
> reduce it than guns.
You know, you say that "there must be some other way" alot....that is an
excuse Gee.
A top notch marksman can dispatch an animal with it never being aware that
it is coming.
>
> > Animals do not just kill for food. Weasels will kill for the sheer fun
of
> > it. They will also killl to protect their young.
>
> Protecting young yes, I can agree with that. For fun, I doubt.
There you go with perhaps again. How about look it up! Don't be so lazy.
If I can take the time, why can't you. They kill just for pure pleasure
according to research. And if you can accept that humans can kill for fun,
why not animals?
Perhaps we
> humans just don;t understand why.
>
> > Sorry, but if a bear,
> > coyote, or other predator comes near my family, human or pet, I will
shoot
> > it to protect mine.
Since when is my back yard a bears habitat? They come looking for garbage,
and pets.
>
> Why not just avoid going in the bears habitat?
>
> When you say you cannot tolerate chemicals, do you mean you are alergic to
> them? And if you are why not just buy the fresh meat instead of killing
your
> own? How do you have a heart to look an animal you say love in the eye and
> murder it?
Farm animals are fed chemicals in their food. I cannot tolerate those. I
prefer venison as it is healthy for the human body.
I feed deer, and contribute to feeding programs during the occasional harsh
winter that buries their food under mountains of snow. But those programs
are to maintain healthy numbers of animals for the area they occupy. Your
rice, and salad foods are at a great risk when deer become seriously over
populated. Now really Gee, if the animal can feed starving people is that
not helping ALL of nature's children? Over 10 million meals were given to
homeless and poor people...meals of venison, and yet deer populations are
better now than they were 30 years ago. Proof is on the web sites I
offered. Hunters take very very good care of wildlife. They have to...no
one else has the numbers to do it. Government can't, and private people
don't have the amounts of money needed to maintain huge deer herds.
>
> > > Humans on the other hand kill for a trophy, fame or God knows what
else,
> > but
> > > all wrong reasons. That we can prevent. Humans do not NEED nor DEPEND
on
> > > meat to live. In fact being a vegetarian is ever so much healthier.
>
> > You are very wrong with that statement dear. There are millions of
humans
> > that do indeed depend on meat to survive. Waht about the famers that
> depend
> > on the sale of their produce? The small northeren communitys that
depend
> on
> > seal hunts, and fishing? Or do fish not count as animals?
Iniut people would have a heard time growing food in their climate, and it
costs a fortune to import veggys and fruits....they need to be able to
afford to do that...they get money by selling their seal, beaver, and bear
pelts. Unless you want to start buying ice burgs.......
Gee, I live in Canada....research the great white north....these people need
animals for their survival, plain and simple. I am not going to research it
for you. I did it once for myself to make sure I knew what I was talking
about, and so I could make the right choice for helping nature.
I am Wiccan. It is my sworn vow to look after nature. There was a time I
thought just like you. I got an education. Approx. 25 years ago an animal
rights fanatic group managed to halt the fall deer hunt in our province.
The winter was very mild and the deer bred like rabbits!!! Doe were having
triplets which is very abnormal. By the following year the populations were
soooooo heavy that farmers, who had never had trouble with deer before were
now actually entering insurance claims for ruined crops. Then disease set
in....became a risk to domestic animal...horses mainly....thats when the
public demanded that something be done. 15000 deer had to be shot. Their
carcasses left to rot in the bush, because with the possiblity of disease
their meat was inedible. That was a horrible waste!!! Nothing else could
be done. But they sent natural resourse people in to shoot these animals.
None were experienced hunters or marsmen. The deer were chased, wounded,
poorly hit. THEY DID SUFFER. UK, Australia, and a few other of our
overseas neighbours envy our wildlife populations here. The reason.,.....we
have hunters that are commited to preserving wildlife habitats, protected
areas, and specific hunting seasons
Do I agree with hunting a little fox just to kill it? No! I told you, I am
not a sport or trophy hunter. I cannot kill an animal for no reason. There
has to be a damn good reason for me to kill it.
> They can all become vegeterian. As for farmers, they could start selling
> vegetables rather than meat.
Not all land is condusive to growing vegetables or grains. But is good
pasture land.
>
>
> > Responsibilty whether you agree with the method or not is necessary, but
> > there are different ways to show love, and accept responsibilty.
>
> Not by shooting them. Or eating them. Or wearing them. No.
I will never hunt an animal for fur, or just clothing. But the entire deer
is used when I hunt. Including making cat food from the left overs. I will
not feed my cats commercially raised meat. I prepare all my cat's foods
from fresh fish, grouse that I have shot, and deer, moose, or elk meat.
> > > Are you aware that cat/dog food is made of the leftovers of the
animals
> > > killed for human consumption?
>
> > So what? If we didn't eat me ourselves we would still have to kill meat
> for
> > them.
>
> Yes because they depend on it. There is no other way.
So it's ok to kill a cow, pig or chicken to feed our pets but not to eat
ourselves?? Get real Gee.
>
> >If your child,
> > or your pets and neighborhood was being victimized by a wild animal
would
> > you not have it put down? And please don't give me the drivel about
> > relocating the animal...here we have a strike three...we relocate 3
> > times...after that they are shot on sight to protect our domestics pets,
> and
> > people too.
>
> What kind of animals are we talking about here? 3 strikes? If I understood
> corerctly, they come back 3 times(and do whatever you consider unsuitable)
> and you shoot them. Well perhaps you are not relocating it far enough? Or
> how about zoos? Wild rescue centers, or at least if it has to be killed,
to
> be put down humanely?
Of course it is put down humanely. We have SPCA's to insure that when a
wild animal has to be put down, it is humane.
Unsuitable is risking human life Gee. That is acceptable worldwide. They
are taken my Humane Society, or SPCA, or wildlife specialists. They very
groups you condone are the ones that declared....three times and it is
killed. Zoos here do not need anymore animals....our breeding programs
provide for zoos world wide. Wild rescue centers here focus on returning a
hurt or ill animal back into the wild not convert it to a housepet. A
nuisense animal is put down because of the danger to human life.
>
> > > Hunting: NO, NO and NO again. Hunting should be banned full stop. It
is
> > > simply a different name for murdering the animals.
> > >
> > Yup there are some cultures that beive in that. Hard isn't it? But
just
> as
> > your beliefs are right for you, so too are theirs.
>
> How can you possibly excuse shooting? It's not a belief. It's love for
> animals I am talking about.
Gee, I did not say that shooting is a belief. READ what I am saying. You
have done this a few times now, and I sincerly enjoy debating with you on
this, but give me the courtesy of READING what I write. I said the there
are cultures that believe in skinning live animals, and other things that we
feel is hidious. BUT that is THEIR culture and belief. I say again, yea it
hurts. Bugs the hell out of me that oriental culture allows cats and dogs
to be eaten as food. But eh only reason it bothers me is because I was
raised to think of them as pets, not dinner!
>
> > If you start believing
> > that we have to change all of their opinions, you are no different that
> the
> > christians that want to abolish alllll forms of worship but their own.
>
> Where did you hear this? I never heard anything such.
Gee...christians think anyone not christian is wrong and should change their
ways, but you are right....this is not a religious forum
> But probably the best is not to discuss religion here.
>
> > So if success is gained banishing all but
> > one belief, your opinions may one day be shot to hell, no pun intended
>
> How can it? Who can possibly proove to me or others that skinning a live
> animal is OK? That eating meat is OK? That shooting or hunting an animal
is
> OK? Even if the law changed and ordered me to hurt an animal, I wouldn't.
> They have rights and I respect them.
We as Canadians do not condone the skinning of a live animal. Whatever
poacher, or culture does that, that is no where near the normal for this
country.
>
> > Do you eat Honey by the way? Do you know how many bear are shot each
year
> > to protect honey farms?
> > How about jams and jellies...fruit and veggies? Animals do have to be
> > controlled, and one way to do so...like it or not....will cause them to
> die.
> > At least if they are hunted they are not wasted.
>
> Yes animals need sometimes to be controlled, but ALL of the above can be
> controlled the HUMANE way. A strong fence for example would prevent much
of
> the trouble.
Good lord woman. Do you realize what you are saying? It is not at all cost
effective to even attempt it.
My whole point was that you dont eat meat because you dont want to kill an
animal. EVERYTHING you eat can and does require that wildlife be shot and
killed. I asked you a specific question....DOES IT NOT MAKE SENSE TO
MAINTAIN PROPER POPULATIONS THROUGH REGULATED HUNTING, THAN JUST SHOOTING
AND WASTING THE ANIMAL?
>
> > Check out the Oklahoma Department of Wildlife conservation. They are
> funded
> > strictly by hunters to rpeserve and maintain animal habitats, breeding
> > grounds, preserves...you name it.
>
> Which is the department you keep mantioning in all your examples? Hmmmm...
> Care to give a different example then? This one suddenly doesn;t seem as
> credible, if it's funded by hunters and shooters.
Read their web site and then tell me yourself. Oklahoma is a state in the
US. Most of the Conservation departments have the exact same charters.
READ IT
>
> > The point I am trying hard to make here is that WE do all love our
planet.
> > Not just animals...ALL living things.
> > Animal, mineral, vegetable.
>
> No. If you love something, you wouldn't feel comfortable murdering it.
>
> > The home you live in, the clothes you wear, the
> > products you use, if you buy it commercially, guaranteed animals died so
> you
> > could have it. It is the circle of life.
> > Cruelty occurs in all breeds of life.
>
> Which is why I tend to buy animal cruelty free products, no leather, no
> furr, no meat, I recycle, etc. Basically I do my bit. If everyone did,
life
> would be so much better for all, and less animals would be used in trades
> they shouldn;t be used in.
That was not my point Gee. EVERYTHING you use has killed an animal.
Recycling plants put harmful chemicals into the air. Birds die by the
thousands that fly through it. Pesticides used to preserve your veggie
products are harmful to fish and birds, and a host of small animals. You
are being hypocritical by suggesting that as a vegetarian you are saving
animals.
>
> Well after 20 centuries of ONE perspective, it's time people learn that
> animals have feelings and right too.
> So I do agree with education, but not the education that will take those
> rights away.
I am sorry Gee, but I disagree with you. We are part of nature, in a way,
we are animals on this planet too. There are some that are bad, but for the
most part people care about the living things on our earth. Most do what
they can to preserve and care for them. But I, and others like me, can love
animals, and still have no problem with harvesting <killing in your words>
animals for food.
If I took it to your level, plants are living creatures too. They breathe,
eat, and reproduce. You are killing it to eat it. Why is that ok? Just
beacuse it is cute, and has fur, feathers, or makes some kind of sound does
not mean it cannot feel pain. If we cannot yet figure out why weasels kill
for fun, or lions kill cheetah cubs, maybe we have not figured out that
carrots do indeed cry when ruthlessly pulled from the earth, or apple trees
weep when we take away their babies to eat them. Now even to me that sounds
utterly ridiculous right? But really, how do we know? the truth is we
don't. Humans and animals eat other living things to survive, that is
nature. MOST human hunters dispatch their chosen prey a lot more humanely
than our animal cousins do. We try to be humane, as humane as is possible.
In the United States and Canada huge sums of tax money is going each year to
erect fencing along major highways to protect wildlife from being struck by
cars. Acres of land is being protected to preserve natural habitats. We
are a humane species Gee. But we are biologically omnivors. If you do your
research true vegans are not healthy according to medical research. They
must take commercially prepared supplements in their diets. If you eat meat
substitutes, then all you are doing is creating chemically a fake meat. I
refuse to ingest chemically prepared foods. Nor will I give anything like
that to my cats. Dry cat food is not something they would find in nature.
Canned food is pumped with water and chemicals. This is the crap you feed
your pets? Make their food. Cancers in domestic animals is at an all time
high. Ever wonder why? Look at what you feed them. Ask yourself if you
would eat it? If you answer no, then why on earth are you feeding it to
your pet?
> Nature takes the balance of itself. Unfortunately humans have taken over
of
> much of animal natural habitats, so since it's our fault if there are any
> animal problems, then we ought to sort it out, not kill them all.
Humans are part of nature Gee, not a problem of nature. The breeding cycles
of hunted animals, and I refer to animals hunted by other animals as well as
humans, are such that with a balance of predator, and hunted, the numbers
remain equal. Again I state, deer populations, now that we control and
regulate the amounts hunted, are at a 30 year high. If that is the case,
how can you say we harm nature's balance? We are protecting it, and
insuring that it stays healthy. When populations get too high, they get
sick, malnourished. Taht can wipe out an entire heard and upset the
balance. No herds....predators die of starrvation. Balance!!!
Don't let the few idiots that poach, or don't care about extinction, ruin
the good that hunters can and do provide.
>
> > I am suggesting you read reputable publications. Unless of course you
> > believe that the Enquirer is reputable, in which case this is a lost
> cause.
>
> What do you consider reputable publications. from what you stated earlier
> you spend lots of your time I reading about "everyday advances in
> hunting"!!! Or giving a link of a comany funded by hunters and shooters.
If
> that's what you consider reputable, no I do not wish to read it. If they
are
> however anything to do with IMPROVING animal welfare, then sure I'll read
> it.
Good Lord Gee. READ the Site!!!! The lik i sent you is NOT A COMPANY. Go
see for yourself. PLEASE!!!
>
> > Victor, Kelly, you, Kathy, myself, and I am sure most others are alllll
on
> > the same side of the fence.
>
> No no we are not. We wouldn't shoot an animal.
I bet if you had to...you would.
>
> >We just have different ways of showing it.
> > We are hunter/protectors...that is our nature....why mess with it?
>
> YOU may be a hunter. I am not. I am a PROTECTOR.I like to HELP. I do NOT
> MURDER! I love instead.
I have never ever commited an act of murder Gee, and that kind of accusation
must stop at once!
>
> Gee
>
>
> > Adreeanna
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
Kelly
this type of thing time after time, and have experience with shelters (both
kill and no-kill) you would understand the frustration. I'll keep my tone
in mind next time another message similar to this one appears (and we both
know it won't take long for another to appear).
Adreeanna
Where in the states are you located? Canadian's have started following our
southern neighbors in the Hunters donating game to feed the homeless, and it
is a whopping success here.
You and I think a lot alike. It is through education that we have learned
this. In I think it is Oklahoma, where the deer are at an all time high in
population for the first time in 30 years, and it is thanks to Conservation
organizations. We have Grizzly, Black bears, brown bears, and a bit further
north Polar Bears. I can't really say though that I am against fur farming.
The ones we have here, are under strict regulations, and the flesh is sold
for byproducts so, as well the animal is not being wasted.
I think the only things I am truly utterly against, aside from fanatism, is
sport hunting, and the use of animals in cosmetic research.
I am thankful for you filling in the info, that I simply could not recall at
the moment.
I used to think almost the same as Gee does, until I took a week
camping/nature trip with the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resourses. Once I
saw the good that responsible hunters do for the environment, I did a total
about face, and became a hunter myself. The meat is far superiour to any
commercially grown animal, unless of course it is free range. A local farm
near our city, went organic, and sells to private citizens, and that as well
as my own garden is the only place I get my veggies. Now if I had the land
to grow grains...WOW!
Thanks for your input
Adreeanna
"Orchid" <ne...@ascendancy.net> wrote in message
news:3cf0e7cf....@news.va.comcast.giganews.com...
Adreeanna
No one is arguing that spaying and neutering should be done to help control
the overopopulation of unwanted pets. Animal rights activists/fanatics, are
not doing anything to help the cause of overpopulation though. It creates
anger and distrust. How can someone grant credibilty to a person who starts
ranting at the drop of a hat, or runs out and spashes ketchup on someone
wearing a fur? There are intelligent ways to educate people. That is
childish, and solves nothing.
Her cat got pregnant. Whether it was because she wanted the kittens,
or just a fluke accident...she did not deserve to be jumped on for a simple
question. If she did indeed want them, that is her choice.
The cats and dogs in shelters are not being put to death needlessly by
the way. They are being put to death because there are no homes for them.
And as I said before, I would breed my own litter before purchasing an
animal from a pet store or shelter. Both are businesses.
Breeders have been ragged on for attempting to make money off kittens, yet
shelters are no different. If they wanted to adopt out their kittens, then
don't charge people stupidly high prices for them. 100.00 for a moggy??
Why, when I can pick up a "pet quality" purebreed for the same damn price!
At least then I get a health guarantee! Our vets are not charity
organizations either. They need to earn a living. They are spending
thousands of hours and dollars spaying and neutering all these strays, and
then having to increase the costs of their other services to attempt to
offset the freebies! Sorry but if vet care gets any higher, I will wind up
in the terrible situation of having to put down my baby because I can no
longer afford his doctor! That is certainly not fair to the responsible
cat/dog owner, is it? Shelters keep hounding city officials for more and
more money to run their facilitys...why? Because of the activists who want
and are agitating for no-kill shelters. What the hell for? If the kittens
were not wanted last month they certainly wont be this month either, put
them down and make room for hopefully less strays as each month goes by and
people are better educated. So what we are creating is a welfare system for
animals now. Sorry, but I am taxed to death as it is. We still have
homeless humans we need to deal with. Money goes there first IMHO. And it
is the very attitude of the activists and fanatics that are causing these
feelings in the overall population. We are getting sick and tired of all
the push push push for animals. Ohh my you can't have zoos, they are cruel.
Ban the circus animals from performing, don't eat meat....dogs should not be
muzzled when out in public, do something about alll the wildlife killed on
highways......good god!!! With all that slapped in our faces at every give
and turn, why are you surprised at the attitude you get now?
Ohh yes and lets not forget the brutal treatment if any wanna be cat owner
says sure I will take your shelter cat, but at least let me get the thing
de-clawed so I can have furniture too. Fine a cat raised from day one can
be trained not to destroy furnishings, not so with most shelter cats.
Now....do you want to kill it, or allow it to be declawed and adopted out?
Most apartment building owners will not allow cats because of the damage
they do. However if a ver certificate shows that the cat is declawed they
will allow them in.
I was an avid poster here, and treated with respect, till i posted that
after trying everything, I had to get one of my cats declawed. I was
depressed enough at having to have that done, but you all here made it
worse...maybe I should have just had her destroyed? She was clawing herself
to ribbons. The infections were getting worse, and there was no
physiological reason. She was nervous. We declawed her to protect herself.
The fanatics here could not see that at all.
Adreeanna
"Kelly" <tige...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:0WdI8.26351$op.35...@read2.cgocable.net...
Adreeanna
It's fine to be passionate about something you really believe in. But we
have to promote positive feelings to get more and more people to become
involved, and aware. Good debates also help to teach because it gives
people a richer perspective, and more points of view. Even if some people
still believe that an animal should be bred once before being altered, don't
you think they would benefit more from gentle education, than being told
they are stupid and irresponsible? Hell they thought they were doing the
right thing for their pet. Once taught, they will know better for next
time. Each generation will get better and better. But not if treated like
they are. And I'm sorry, but posters like Gee, are simply not helping the
cause. Gee comes across that if we are all not devout vegans, we are animal
haters...welll....I hate to say it...but that will breed hatred and
mistrust. The time for that is over!
Adreeannanews:rthI8.26390$op.35...@read2.cgocable.net...
Kelly
> The cats and dogs in shelters are not being put to death needlessly
by
> the way. They are being put to death because there are no homes for them.
And why are there no homes for them? This is something that is highly under
human control. Many of the cats dumped into shelters are those that used to
be owned by someone, but then they either moved away or decided they didn't
want their cat anymore and dumped it on the street. Or were irresponsible
and let their cat have kittens and then dumped the kittens out on the
street. It happens time and time again.
> And as I said before, I would breed my own litter before purchasing an
> animal from a pet store or shelter. Both are businesses.
Most shelters are non-profit organizations, in which case you wouldn't
really consider them a business. They are there out of the goodness of
their hearts to try and help animals get adopted out. I agree, I would
never buy a kitten from a petstore and do not endorse the selling of kittens
from these places. Most are from kitten mills (along with the puppies) and
these are cruel operations. Pet stores are there to make a profit, and they
go to unimaginable means to do so. You cannot even compare shelters to pet
stores as they are two totally different things.
> Breeders have been ragged on for attempting to make money off kittens, yet
> shelters are no different. If they wanted to adopt out their kittens,
then
> don't charge people stupidly high prices for them. 100.00 for a moggy??
> Why, when I can pick up a "pet quality" purebreed for the same damn price!
> At least then I get a health guarantee!
Are you insane?? The reason most no-kill shelters charge about 80 dollars
for a cat, is because the cat COMES COMPLETELY HEALTHY!!!!!!!!! No-kill
shelters test all their cats for feline diseases, treat for problems that
are already there, and spay/neuter their animals if they are old enough.
Not to mention the majority of no-kill shelters also microchip all the
animals they adopt out. Now let's add this up here (all prices in CAN$).
Disease testing - $50 Treatment if necessary - variable, anywhere from
$50 - $200. Vaccinations - $60. Spaying/Neutering - $100 Microchip - $50.
Deworming/Defleaing - $50. That comes to anywhere from $360 - $510 dollars
PER CAT that these no-kill shelters spend. This does not even include all
the cat food and cat litter they must have. Do you seriously think asking
80-100 dollars for a cat is excessive??? I think not. And if you had
actually done your research, most no-kill shelters do give health guarentees
with their animals. And if the animal is still needing treatment after you
adopt it due to a condition it already had (ie an upper respiratory
infection), then the shelter will cover that treatment. Of course this does
not include a condition which the cat will have it's whole life.
Similarily, kill shelters ask much less for their cats ($20-40 dollars)
because they don't spend the amount of money a no-kill shelter does to care
for their animals.
As for breeders, about all they do is deworm and vaccinate their kittens.
What you are paying for is the "quality" line of breeding, not how much
money the breeder has actually spent on their animals.
>Shelters keep hounding city officials for more and
> more money to run their facilitys...why? Because of the activists who
want
> and are agitating for no-kill shelters.
Do you even know what you are talking about?? The only shelters that can
take money from the city (ie the government) are city operated shelters,
which are kill shelters. Privately run no-kill animal shelters do not take
money from the city, unless it is some sort of donation. But no-kill
shelters do not go begging for money. They run events to get together
animal lovers alike who would like to help the animals. They dont' force
people to give money. For instance my local no-kill shelters runs a huge
dogwalk to help raise money each year. This year was their largest ever
turn out, and the number of people increase every year. There are only 2
paid employees at this shelter, and the rest of the shelter is run by
volunteers. Do you call that begging for money and asking for a profit???
No.
What the hell for? If the kittens
> were not wanted last month they certainly wont be this month either, put
> them down and make room for hopefully less strays as each month goes by
and
> people are better educated. So what we are creating is a welfare system
for
> animals now. Sorry, but I am taxed to death as it is.
It is becoming more and more apparent that you have absolutely no idea what
you are even ranting about. Very little of your tax dollar goes towards
animal facilities. About 0.0001% of it, and that's stretching it.
We still have
> homeless humans we need to deal with. Money goes there first IMHO. And
it
> is the very attitude of the activists and fanatics that are causing these
> feelings in the overall population. We are getting sick and tired of all
> the push push push for animals.
You are responsible for your own feelings. Don't blame that on everyone
else. I'm sick and tired of people always having to find someone to blame
for their own emotions and problems. You are responsible for you. If
someone presents you with facts about how animals are treated, and you feel
guilty and anger because you know you don't try and change the problem and
may even add to it, then that is the result of YOU... not the person who
happens to be the messenger of the present problems in today's society.
> Ohh yes and lets not forget the brutal treatment if any wanna be cat owner
> says sure I will take your shelter cat, but at least let me get the thing
> de-clawed so I can have furniture too. Fine a cat raised from day one can
> be trained not to destroy furnishings, not so with most shelter cats.
You are absolutely wrong AGAIN. All cats and any cat can be trained to use
a scratching post. Everyone knows the saying "You can't teach an old dog
new tricks" is an old wives tale. And that applies to cats as well. Cats
are not stupid. And what makes you think that it's only shelter cats that
innappropriately scratch?? That is the most fabricated and false statement
I've ever read. Any cat has the potential to scratch things it's not
"supposed" to if it is not trained properly. And this training does NOT
have to be when a cat is a kitten. It can be done ANY TIME in the cats life
effectively. For petes sake read some books on cat behavior will you???
> I was an avid poster here, and treated with respect, till i posted that
> after trying everything, I had to get one of my cats declawed. I was
> depressed enough at having to have that done, but you all here made it
> worse...maybe I should have just had her destroyed? She was clawing
herself
> to ribbons. The infections were getting worse, and there was no
> physiological reason. She was nervous. We declawed her to protect
herself.
> The fanatics here could not see that at all.
If she was declawed for health reasons, then there shouldn't be a problem.
In fact, several of my cats had a mysterious fungal infection of the claw,
and had to be declawed. And the point is? My personal opinion is that
there's no point declawing a cat since every cat can be trained to use a
scratching post. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
Kelly
Adreeanna
>
> "Adreeanna" <adree...@shaw.ca> wrote in message
> news:8QiI8.57013$Ka.43...@news2.calgary.shaw.ca...
> > The cats and dogs in shelters are not being put to death needlessly
Well....I tried. I have come to the following conclusions:
1. You cannot debate issues or argue points in this group witout being
referred to as, insane, fucked up, etc.
2. Fanatisism is alive and healthy here.
3. Though I have for the most part held my tongue and patiently tried
through reference, links, facts and comparisons to make my points clear,
this group sees only what they want.
4. Delusions of granduer is a common ailment here.
5. You respond only to points you want to and ignore anything that may be
right.
So I say this:
1. Fantatics, will do more harm to the cat population that educated love
and compassion.
2. I shall continue to hunt, fish, and support wildlife management.
3. I shall believe wholheartedly that no kill shelters serve no good
purpose based on the facts I have gleaned over the net. Certainly no one
here has bothered to attempt to prove through fact, not rant, that no-kill
shelters serve a purpose.
4. I believe that if you are christian, you believe in the bible, which
means you fullyunderstand that God put the animals here for the use of
mankind...whether that be food, clothing, or companionship.
5. If you support the big bang theory, you then understand that we are ALL
animals and as such will hunt and kill animals for food, etc, just like
other species.
6. UK posters, read up on the latest info regarding spay and neutering.
You are behind the times. Read up on animal well-being as well.
7. To those of you who believe that animals have rights....remember
this...history's slaves had no rights. They were castrated to prevent
breeding except for a select few....they were chained, prevented from
roaming the earth free. Technically speaking you have enslaved cats. You
say you love them, but on you terms only. They are not given a choice
regarding breeding, food, shelter, recreation. You make all their
descisions for them. You are keeping the animal plain and simple. Where is
the animals rights? Sounds pretty dumb right? Well....I am afraid it's
true. If the animal has rights, then let it decide, pure and simple. If we
are to control its life, then it does not have rights, pure and simple.
Make up your minds.
If it is indeed my pet, I will spay or neuter it at my will. I will choose
whether or not I want it to have kittens. I will choose whether or not I am
prepared to lose my furniture if the cat I am trying to teach resists the
efforts. Should I choose to keep my furniture intact, I will declaw my cat.
Should my neighbour insist on allowing her pets to invade my gardens and
destroy my plants, something my own are not permitted to do, I will trap
them and take them to the pound to be put down.
Should there come a time when expensive treatments are not worth watching
the cat suffer, I will opt for euthanasia rather than paying thousands to
attempt to treat it.
I will never maliciously harm a living creature, nor cause it undue
suffering.
I will continually practice my hunting skills so that my first shot is a
kill shot.
I will not support the cruel caging of cats in shelters.
I will agressively lobby that strays be given one week to be placed in a
home, and if one is not available, the cat should be put down, as it is far
more cruel to house it in a 3x3x3 ft cage away from sunlight freshair, and
food appropriate to its species.
I can sleep knowing that my cats are well fed an in an invironment
stimulating for their species.
I am comfortable knowing that I, and others like me, will insure the
continuation of our wildlife and habitats.
Adreeanna
R Grass
>
> "R Grass" <Rgr...@mcleodusa.net> wrote in message
> news:3cec...@nntp01.splitrock.net...
> > and responsible people who believe in spaying and neutering don't attack
> > people whatever the reason their cat is going to have kittens. This
makes
> > me crazy. She asked about gestation and gets attacked. If she has the
> > money and is willing to keep the kittens then leave her alone. And
before
> > you flame me all of mine are fixed. The bottom line here is that
> promoting
> > the pregnant cats kill cats in shelters and that aborting unborn kittens
> is
> > somehow more acceptable than killing already born ones is just not
> logical.
> > Yes it would be better if more people prevented pregnancies but, If we
are
> > going to go that route then lets stop the genetic selection we do with
so
> > called purebreds and only let people with enough money breed. Lee
>
> I never said she should abort the kittens. Now you are putting words in
my
> mouth. At this point, since her cat is already pregnant, it's too late.
So
> she might as well go through with it, and have her cat spayed afterwards.
> This is what *I* would recommend. And yes, *promoting spaying and
> neutering DOES save animal lives*. If you are denying this fact then
maybe
> you need to visit a couple shelters and ask them why this overpopulation
> problem occurs.
>
> FWIW I'm not a fan of purebred breeders either.
>
> Kelly
>
>
>
I didn't mean you Kelly about the abortions. Sorry if you took it that way.
There are too many animals in shelters because the human race is largely a
bunch of pigs. The part of the argument I have a problem with is that many
will say she could have adopted instead of letting hers have kittens. Kelly
the fact that desexing is better for the cat and that overpopulation is a
problem is not where I differ with these arguments. It is when people make
value judgments that I go insane. I wish everybody would spay and neuter
and I wish there was a tattoo that could be put on the forehead by g*d of
those who throw away pets like fast food cartons. And again, if I reacted
strongly, I am sorry. I just know there are lots of reasons why someone
lets the cat get pregnant, ignorance in my case one time and the second
time, not moving fast enough. Some people can't have a second cat because
of the nature of the momcat. My point was really that she is after
information and if we provide it then we can move the discussion to desexing
but if we attack first then she goes away and never hears the real, logical,
practical reasons for desexing.
Lee, glad Kelly doesn't like "purebred" breeders either.
R Grass
variety of people let their cat become pregnant for many reasons. And if
you do have a purebred cat, then good for you being able to choose. I
always had Siamese growing up because it was the only cat my father could
breathe around. I also always had male cats and since they were "only" type
personalities just one at a time. If one had been female with a similar
personality I might have had a litter to get a second cat that would be
tolerated. Good luck with your litter and I hope everything goes well for
you. Leenews:JR6H8.10$Wo2....@e3500-atl2.usenetserver.com...
> Thanks Lee, for helping me in my defense. I never said I had a moggie cat,
> didn't mention what breed she is. In fact I didn't imply or mention half
of
> what Kelly "went off on me for" She is very passionate about her beliefs
> and she is entitled to her beliefs...and she can keep them ~
> KO
R Grass
I don't recall that she specified generic or purebred cat and I don't recall
her ever saying she was a "breeder" I recall she said her cat was pregnant
and asking a gestation question. How hard is that?
Lee
Orchid <ne...@ascendancy.net> wrote in message
news:3ced1dc9...@news.va.comcast.giganews.com...
> On Thu, 23 May 2002 11:34:14 -0400, "Kathy Oerman"
> <koe...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>
> >NOR did I ask for your sympathy, Orchid, or the sympathy of anyone else.
I
> >simply asked how long gestation was. Noone in this group knows me, what I
> >do, how responsible I am or not, and the list goes on.
>
> *smile* Okay, here's your chance to prove to me, Victor,
> Kelly, and everyone else that you are a responsible breeder. If you
> *are* a responsible breeder, I will publically apologise for jumping
> to incorrect conclusions, and I'm sure Victor and Kelly will too.
> Just answer the following questions clearly and truthfully, and we'll
> see if you are a responsible breeder or not. If you need
> clarification, feel free to ask, and if I feel that any of your
> answers need clarification, I will feel free to ask. Please note that
> the questions I am asking are not arbitrary, but are formulated
> according to my experience in the shelter world, show world,
> interaction with responsible breeders and breed club/cat fancy Codes
> of Ethics.
>
> 1. What breed *is* your queen?
> 2. How old is she?
> 3. Do you show her?
> 4. What titles has she earned?
> 5. What positive features does she have that you wish to pass down?
> 6. What negative features does she have that you hope to improve on?
> 7. How did you pick the stud?
> 8. What titles has he earned?
> 9. What positive features does he have that you wish to pass down?
> 10. What negative features does he have that you hope to improve on?
> 11. How do their five generation pedigrees match?
> 12. How many instances of what genetic diseases occur in the queen's
> pedigree?
> 13. How many instances of what genetic diseases occur in the stud's
> pedigree?
> 14. What health tests have you done on your queen?
> 15. What health tests have been done on the stud?
> 16. When do you plan to let the kittens go to new homes? (If you are
> keeping them, when *would* you let them go to new homes if you planned
> to re-home them?)
> 17. When do you plan to switch your queen's food?
> 18. What are your socialisation plans for the kittens?
> 19. What shots do you plan to give to the kittens, and what shots
> will not be given to them?
> 20. What registry are you with?
>
> >I see by the
> >response that there is gonna be those who understand the simplicity of
the
> >initial question and those who have nothing better to do than try to
condemn
> >others for not believing or reacting to the way they are in their
beliefs.
> >Personally, I can take whatever any of you have to say, I'm mature enough
to
> >take everything with a grain of salt.
>
> Great -- thanks for being mature and answering the above
> questions. I eagerly await your response.
>
>
> Orchid
R Grass
She does not deserve to be attacked in any case. She did not provide enough
information for that. I was thinking. If I ever did get another purebred
cat I would ask very similar questions to what you listed. It is a pretty
good list for selecting a breeder.
Lee
Orchid <ne...@ascendancy.net> wrote in message
news:3ced24cc...@news.va.comcast.giganews.com...
> On Thu, 23 May 2002 13:17:15 -0400, "Kathy Oerman"
> <koe...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>
> >I never said I WAS a BREEDER! So I don't feel the NEED to justify rather
I'm
> >responsible or not! Sorry Orchid, you just DON'T intimidate me~
>
> I'm not trying to intimidate you, I'm simply asking some basic
> animal husbandry questions. 'Breeder' does not mean 'someone who
> constantly has kittens', and you'll note that I didn't ask you any of
> the questions about litter frequency that I would ask a more
> experienced breeder.
> However, your cat is pregnant, hence you *are* a breeder. One
> litter, even if there's only one kitten in it, makes someone a
> breeder. You may never be a repeat breeder, but you are a breeder.
> Please note that a foster home working with a shelter or rescue group
> that takes in a cat that is pregnant already is not a breeder -- the
> pregnancy did not take place under their care.
> I am just trying to give you the opportunity to prove that you
> do not deserve the negative reactions you have gotten. I am one of
> the few champions of responsible breeders on these groups, and I will
> happily go to bat for you if you have bred your cat responsibly.
>
>
> Orchid
Kelly
within our message. You are just as much guilty as raving like a lunatic as
any other person here. Ranting about how you think no-kill shelters "hound"
the city for money, and charge "stupidly high prices" for their animals. If
you know ANYTHING about how a no-kill shelter was run, you would be able to
refute my comments. But you don't. Have you even stepped foot in a no-kill
shelter before??? Doubt it.
Not to mention raving about how it's the activists who CAUSE the overall
population to "feel" a certain way towards animals. Where did you get THAT
from?? A person creates their own feelings. In most cases, activists
merely reveal the truth about the reality of what is going on, as harsh as
it is. And then people contributing to the problem hate the activists
because they feel guilty and know what they are doing is not right.
Or what about you saying that a cat can only be trained from "day one" to
not "destroy furnishings". And that "most shelter cats" are not trainable.
That was a good one Adreeanna. Seriously, read "Clinical Behavioral
Medicine for Small ANimals" by Karen L. Overall. Maybe you will learn a
thing or two about cat behavior and it's modification.
Kelly
"Adreeanna" <adree...@shaw.ca> wrote in message
news:_0xI8.58617$Ka.45...@news2.calgary.shaw.ca...
dinkmeister
wish there were more people like you here.
best regards
On Mon, 27 May 2002 20:53:14 GMT, Adreeanna wrote:
:
:"Kelly" <tige...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
:
:
:
Orchid
wrote:
>Orchid,
>Where in the states are you located? Canadian's have started following our
>southern neighbors in the Hunters donating game to feed the homeless, and it
>is a whopping success here.
I'm in Virginia, which is on the East Coast of the US. About
40 minutes outside of Washington DC, actually. Virginia has been
doing the 'game to feed the homeless' program for years now, and it
has been very successful.
>You and I think a lot alike. It is through education that we have learned
>this. In I think it is Oklahoma, where the deer are at an all time high in
>population for the first time in 30 years, and it is thanks to Conservation
>organizations. We have Grizzly, Black bears, brown bears, and a bit further
>north Polar Bears.
Yep. Part of it is also taking a step back and observing
animals for what they are -- emotion-driven creatures that are neither
nice, nor noble, nor cuddly.
> I can't really say though that I am against fur farming.
>The ones we have here, are under strict regulations, and the flesh is sold
>for byproducts so, as well the animal is not being wasted.
Here's my take on it. No one and nothing (except scavenger
species) eats predator meat. This is because predator meat tastes bad
because of the predator's diet. There is a huge backlash in the
States dealing with 'meat' meal being used in pet foods. The bodies
of predators raised for fur are one of the things in 'meat meal', and
people do not want to feed their pets those animals. Many fur farms
are just tossing bodies into mass graves and burying them to let them
rot. This is a massive waste of life, IMO, especially since fur is no
longer necessary to sustain life (we have better insultaing synthetic
products). To me, predator fur is wrong. I think I'd be more
comfortable with it if the rich bitch who wants the full-length mink
coat had to go out and personally kill and skin every animal that went
into her coat, but that's not likely to happen. :)
>I think the only things I am truly utterly against, aside from fanatism, is
>sport hunting, and the use of animals in cosmetic research.
We'll have to disagree here -- I'm sticking on the predator
fur thing, and I'm also wholly and utterly against products like
Premarin in every way. With you on 'sport' hunting and cosmetic
testing though.
>I am thankful for you filling in the info, that I simply could not recall at
>the moment.
NP. :)
Orchid
Orchid
wrote:
>Dear Orchid,
>
>I don't recall that she specified generic or purebred cat and I don't recall
>her ever saying she was a "breeder" I recall she said her cat was pregnant
>and asking a gestation question. How hard is that?
>
>Lee
Oh, I am well aware that she didn't mention if her cat was
purebred or not. However, responsible breeding practises shouldn't be
limited only to purebred breeders. *Anyone* who decides to breed
their cat should follow responsible breeding practises, or they are
part of the problem. As for being a 'breeder' or not, if you allow a
cat who is under your care to get pregnant and carry those kittens to
term, you are a breeder. You may never be a repeat breeder, but you
are a breeder, and as such should follow responsible breeding
practises. It's all about ethics.
This is a *discussion group*, not an "Ask strangers a question
that one can answer themselves by a mere ten minutes of Internet
research" group. If someone posts here, they should EXPECT that their
question is going to be discussed.
Orchid
Adreeanna
like insane, and accusations of not knowing what they ae talking about. I
can debate with you from now till the cows come home, if its a debate, not a
mud slinging contest.
Regarding stepping into no-kill, and kill shelters...did more time than I
care to remember. And like each and everyone of you, I hated seeing what
came through the doors. But that was then and this is now.
As For Karen Overall...I have read a few of her pulications(mainly articles
in the vet mags), however, myself and the feline specialist that looks after
my cats do not agree with a few of her "opinions", and "beliefs". She is a
general small animal vet, preferring to psychoanalize behaviors. She is
contrary to some animal behaviorists. As you are well aware, there are
different schools of thought regarding any treatments of people and animals.
I guess it just depends on who you believe and listen to. Freud or Skinner?
Take your pick. She applies similar techniques used for rearing kids.
Don't give them attention for example when they do something bothersom,
because animals love attention, so they "could" continue the behaviour
simply to get more of their owners attention. Where did I get the attitude
about activists? You need only do a few second search on the net to find a
host of comedians that make animal rights groups, and activists the brunt of
their jokes. How on earth do you think that lends credibility? Peta
admitting to vandalising a public billboard...thta by the way is on the
net....go see it for yourself. I am not ranting, and can back up what I
say. I as well, am not uneducated, and I am well read, I had to when I
decided to raise and breed siamese cats.
I did say most regarding training, and that just came with past experience.
Granted there are many new techniques out today, but....the success rate,
and ease of training is definately greater in young kittens, than in older
cats. I can't tell you how many cats we put down that went to homes and
were brought back because of damaging behaviours....and then deemed
un-adoptable. Sad shit.
As for the specific publication Behaviour meds for small animals...my vet
has it. I asked her this evening about it and her opinion HERS not mine,
was "take it with a grain of salt." She has been my trusted vet for 15
years. I tend to follow her advice. It hasn't steered me wrong yet.
Considering that you are not inclined to discuss, but rather sling mud and
accusations, this conversation is pointless and probably not well received
by the group as a whole...so we I guess can agree to disagree.
Thanks for your opinions.
Adreeanna
"Kelly" <tige...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:34yI8.26883$op.35...@read2.cgocable.net...
mark
know how they get on
--
visit our web site at
http://www.jaxgals.btinternet.co.uk
"Cheryl Blake" <adora...@paradise.net.nz> wrote in message
news:FVjH8.3410$7N.5...@news02.tsnz.net...
> Hello from New Zealand! Made me smile when I read all the replies to your
> message. Boy, there are come hot-under-the collar people out there.
> Hey, I am a registered cat breeder and guess what? One of my cats once
had
> a moggie litter. She accidentally escaped and BINGO, got herself preggie.
3
> days later I mated her to my stud, not knowing she'd even been with
another
> man. And after sitting up till midnight Xmas Eve, what a surprise when
> little grey kittens popped out, instead of the little white ones I'd
> expected. These things happen! In answer to your questions : 63-65 days
> is the normal gestation period for a cat, but a couple of days either side
> is okay. .... Good luck & make sure you find good homes for them .....
> CHERYL
>
>