Posted by:
woof
(
)
Date: October 22, 2017 10:39AM
https://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/06/070628-cat-ancestor.htmlIt's in their blood to be wild, and humans are lucky that some cats were or became less afraid of humans.
It amazes me that some humans believe that creatures would be lost without us. They would be much, much better off without us. Of those with which we interfere, they become too populous and dependent on a species (humans) that has become overwhelmed by the dependent species' fast reproduction. We "love" them to death.
I would offer that if we spay and release, we risk spaying the strongest survivors, further weakening the species, as if we "know" what we're doing, and can predict the outcome. If you really care about cats, think very long term, not just easing your own pain of seeing weaker cats suffer. If you can take a weak or sbandoned cat in and give it a decent life, meddle away. If you intend on "controlling" (helping???) the species by further weakening the wild population, re-think that.
Cats are a part of the ecosystem. Humans don't "own" them. Not "every" cat is or should be "domesticated." We've damn near killed off the big cats. We might want to leave some of the smaller ones alone. Did smaller cats come to N. America when humans did?
I've loved cats, and love my spayed, rescued dogs, whose origins are much more complicated, due to human interference.
https://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/01/19/science/the-big-search-to-find-out-where-dogs-come-from.html