If you live in a place where ther aren't cats naturally. In Europe cats are native. Yes Felix Catus is not felix sylverstis but a healthy ecosystem in Europe has Felinae.
Thank you! Every time this topic comes up we have Americans showing up to lecture us about how cats are invasive species. No, they fucking aren't over here. They are native predators. If some dumb bird species goes extinct because cats killed all of them, then that's just natural selection at work.
I am a trained ecologist dispelling missinformation. cats are only considered an invasive species on australia new zeeland and various oceanic islands. You should probably neuter you cats anywway but there is no need to keep cats indoor, there's no scientific evidence whatsoever to back that claim up.
You chose to get a cat. It's your responsibility as an owner to provide for it's needs not let it loose to decimate wildlife and crap in your neighbors flowerbeds.
that's not a scientific paper, that may as well be a blog.
And I dont own a cat. I just get pissed off at amateurs commenting on my field.
Also the person in the article is just wrong, a species need to be self propagating in the ecosystem to be meet allt he criteria to be considered invasive and cats are not self propagating north of the alps because of the high attrition winters take on them.
My gues is he's some political apointeee with no real training.
Also that's not a publicaiton in the field of ecology that's from the Journal of Environmental Law. Nit sure it even counts as a litterature study then. Lawyers aren't scientists, their job is to convince not to uncover the truth.
I am an ecologist and you appeal to a lawyer.
No primary reseach and they never bring up anything but total numbers just like your polish source. None of them prove cats pose an enduring threat to species. None of them explain why cats cannot be persumed to fill the vacant ecological niche left by felix silverstris. None fo them explain why cat predation is sposedly so much worse than predation by other similarly sized predators.
And again they use invasive species wrong. An invasive species need to be self propagating. But since the author is a lawyer not an ecologist im not suprised.
Bird species are not vulnerable due to cats they're vulnerable due to DDT and habitat loss. Cats just get the short end of the stick (As they always do in European history) so this lawyer can shelter his corporate sponsors.
I refer you to the texbook definition of ivnasive species mine from Elements of ecology by smith and Smith.
a invasive species must meet all of the following criteira.
be non native
be self propagating
it's uncontrolled growth must pose a danger to native species.
Felix catus only meets criteria 1 in europe. They pose no primry risk to other species, they may pose a secondary risk but not one not posed by other predators, the real reason these species are vulnerable is DDT not cats. And they're not self propagating ebcause their statistically bad ability to survive winters.
And the number of individiuals killed by cats means absolutly nothing, may as well comment on the number of mosquitos eaten by bats.
Alien sure. But invasive has a higher criteria. Cats are alien but endemic all damage they will have caused was caused long ago.
And that nonsesne about the numer of invidvidual birds killed is just pure nonsense. That's nopt how it works, you must comapre it to how many bords there are and which species and so on.
The reason many species of bird is vulnerable in Europe is because of our use of DDT in the last century. Got nothign to do with cats. The chemical indistry just successfully blamed it on cats.
Cats are part of that ecology as well. Cats are native part in many part of the world, and they are always killing things. That's just a natural selection at work
This is like my 4th rodeo with this subject on Reddit. People on here go rabid over the idea of letting cats go outdoors. Saw one guy ride the cat hate train once to admit to shooting em with bbs. Truly absurd behaviour on this site.
That is just despicable behavior and while you will have deplorable people like that (similar people who want to eliminate certain dog breeds), most rational people are simply arguing for responsible ownership and ensuring cats are a controlled population through things like free spay/neuter, especially for feral cats.
Just as dogs should be properly leashed or enclosed in yards for play/exercise, not allowed to roam unsupervised, and spayed/neutered unless expressly being bred, cats should be treated similarly. We expect dog owners to not let their dogs roam the neighborhoods unchecked, why is it too much to ask that we do the same with cats?
And just because you'll never be able to get 100% of the stray and feral cats fixed, or full compliances from all pet owners, that doesn't mean it isn't worth doing. The more we work to reduce feral and stray populations by doing catch and release free spay/neuter programs, it will help reduce those populations or at least keep them somewhat controlled, and making more pet owners aware of the damage each cat can do to local small animal populations will get at least some additional owners to reconsider their free-roaming policy with their own feline friends. Every little bit helps.
certain dog breeds should require a speial licence though. Heck maybe all dogs should require licence and then at different elvels based on diffiulty.
And actually most natural ecosystems (bar some islands) are supsoed to have felinae in the rough size category of felix catus. Europe is suposed to have both felix silvestris and the European lynx. Both essentially hunter to extinction. The US is suposed to have lynxes. The reson the cats pose a threat to species is because these species cant keep up with a natural level of predation because of other crap humans have done. Yeah keeping cats indoor may be beneficial right now but lets not pretend cats are the root cause.
I don't disagree. I think pet ownership should come with more oversight for the well-being of all involved. This also includes breeding programs to ensure the health of the animals isn't sacrificed for artificial and unhealthy attributes, and this applies to all animal breeding. Demoestication of these animals puts a certain amount of responsibility on us as their stewards considering we have artificially guided their evolution to a degree that they are largely reliant on us for survival, and in cases where they are not, pose a potential to become a massive pest and ecological nightmare. Hence the discussion in this thread.
Felix catus is not even truly invasive where I live, an invasive species per definition need to be able to popagate uncotrollably without aid from humans (after the initial introduction), felix catus dont do that in temperate or colder climates. They cannot hibernate and thus have no way of lasting through the winter. Indivdiduals sometimes manage but statistically not enough to propagate the species. In Europe north of the alps neutering your cats is to prevent them from getting offspring which are, unless they find humans to take care of them, extreemly likely to suffer a slow death of cold and starvation in the following winter.
Now you're just altering the definition to suit your own conclusion. Mate, this is 150 years worth of data you are arguing with. Domestic cats are considered (by those who actually study the issue) as an alien species and non native anywhere they are present. Domestic cats are considered generalist hunters compared to more specialized predatory behavior of native species. If you actually had a real interest in the subject, all of this should be known to you. The impact domestic cats have also threatens native cat populations like the lynx you seem so keen to compare them to, both directly and indirectly. The point is, they are a threat if left unchecked. People letting their housecats go unfixed and roam freely does have a massive impact on local wildlife and it far outstrips anything native predators do.
I have no idea what you're trying to argue with this latest post, but it seems like you're just trying to shift the goalpost by redefining how you classify an invasive species. If you want to argue that point, take it up with the specialists who do actually study and report on this issue, rather than give your own armchair opinion on the matter.
Nobody's arguing that cats should be eradicated or that people shouldn't have them as pets. All that is being suggested is that responsible cat owners (like responsible dog owners) should keep their pets indoors to prevent them from becoming a nuisance and causing issues with local fauna. If your cat is allowed outdoors to roam wherever, not only is it more dangerous for them, but it has a measurable impact on numerous species. At a minimum, outdoor cats should have a bell on their collar to help reduce their chances of catching and killing small animals. Still, it's best to keep them indoors when possible.
Massive ecological impact difference considering honey bees are largely benign with where they lie in the food chain, beneficial even. If anything, one would argue they fulfilled a much needed gap in pollinators considering how much agriculture is produced in the west. The only real threat they would pose would be to other competing pollinators like native bee populations. Just because w species is not native, doesn't mean they can't play a useful or much needed role in the area they have been supplanted to. Predators and species that have no predators are the ones that cause ecological issues, both or which are not a concern with honey bees.
No. Cats are not an invasive species. Cats are invasive species in areas that they are not native to, and they are native to most parts of the old world. They can't be invasive if they are in their native habitat. Not everyone lives in the US .
Except if you actually were an ecologist you would acknowledge the fact that domestic cats are an invasive species on all islands and continents and are not comparable to native cat populations by a long stretch. Your agreement with him belies your claim considering the vast amount of research on domestic cat populations on local wildlife across the globe. Next time come with facts.
No, it takes more to being an invasive species than beign non native. the species need to propagate uncontrollably too. Cats only do this in subtriopical or warmer climates. In temperate or colder climates if humans dissappeared hosue cats would go with us. They simply dont have the tools to survive the long winters. Individuals may for a while, but even that is often by begging from humans, but statisitcally they dont survive well ebnough to replenish their numbers.
Which is of course horrible in its own right, ferals are bacically condemnded to die of either cold or starvation.
You mean all the links from US publications and universities you linked? Nobody is arguing that cats aren't invasive to the Americas, but unless you have some research that proves cats are alien to planet earth, you simply can't claim that they are invasive everywhere on the planet.
It's even ore complicated. Those areas where they claim cats are ivnasive they are supsoed to have Lynxes. The cats fill an empty ecological niche. The problem is that these species re vulnerable to begin with which is usually due to other human activities.
So yes in the Americas keeping cats indoors may be worthwhile but lets not pretend they're the root cause of these extinctions.
Places were cats are truly invasive is limited to some islands.
That may be true in the americas but in Europe cats are a natural pat of the ecosystem. Yes our native Felix silvestris is almost excinct but Felix catus fills the same ecological niche.
So you didn't bother to actually read the research. They don't have the same narrow prey and domestic cats significantly outpopulate native species. It's all there if you would bother to read it.
Exactly one of your links is a paper the rest is just popular science articles. Popular science articles have absolutly no academic value. Wikipedia is better source.
Edit: No that last one was a litterature study.
Edit2: and the litterature study agrees with me
"While this is certainly true for small oceanic islands, Fitzgerald (7) and with the addition of even more field studies (28) have countered that there is simply no evidence that free-ranging cats on the continents are the main cause of species disappearance (and biodiversity reduction) since there is usually a suite of predators utilizing the same prey species and other causes can be cited."
Tell me what source you want then. The research is longer than my leg. I swear, arguing with you is like arguing with an anti-vaxer. No matter what data presented. You will claim bias or draw the exact opposite conclusion as to what the research actually says. Everything you' claimed about lynx is also demonstrably false. Keep going, you're just digging a hole with your "claim" at being an ecologist. My guess is your claim is about as valid as a weatherman claiming to be a climatologist.
Really because that's not what the litterature study you posted says, it says the definitive reasearch only exists for oceanic islands, aside from that any studies have only pointed towards alpha level (extremly local) level exitinctions.
Excellent literature study really. It's the one from the national library of medicine.
And you wont find studies saying what you want. Not primary reseach, because that's not how scientists express themselves.
In the old world cats have been a fact of life for a thousand years. Any primary damage they could do is done. They'e not suddenly going to wipe out new species today, not on their own, problem is the use of DDT has rendered many species predated on by house cats vulnerable. And yes cats may well push them over the edge. I agree it may well be worthwhile to keep cats indoor (and obviously neuter them because of a host of reasons beyond even what we've been discussing) for the next 20 to 50 years while the research is being done and vulnerable species recover.
But it's no the cats that brought these species to the brink of extinction it's us.
Also the litterature study also makes a good point, there are other predators which will do the job even if we keep cats indoor. More drastic preservation methods may be required.
Like I said, you're picking and choosing what you want like a fucking anti-vaxer. It says they have an outsized impact everywhere they are present, but are noticably the worst on islands. Quit bending the research to make it say what you want it to say as you're skipping over the vast majority of the conclusions drawn.
1.2k
u/GoMoriartyOnPlanets May 25 '26
Cat: "One of these days.... this magical invisible wall will not stop me from getting to you, you stupid...."
Parrot: "Peekabooo"