This is General Questions. We appreciate intelligent answers to the questions asked.
What we DON’T tolerate in this forum are provocative answers and provocative statements.
SlyFrog. Don’t suggest shooting animals.
Atroxe. If you have a problem with a post that you find objectionalble, there is a red triangle with an exclamation point in the upper right corner of each post in a thread. This is what you do. You hit that red triangle and report the post to a mod. If we agree, we do something about it. You DO NOT come back with a statement like
You also have the option to open a thread in the Pit, flaming the poster who offended you.
I don’t see why not. It’s an accepted way of life in the country where I grew up, and to my knowledge perfectly legal in many places (which is why I prefaced it that way) to kill stray animals that wander onto your property, including cats. I screwed up and didn’t read the “without hurting them part” of the OP, which I later apologized for (so the answer was inapplicable in this case, which I admit, and again apologize for). Others may disagree with it, but it is a solution, and to say it is without question wrong and cannot be posted is (when it is legal and done all the time), I think, presumptious.
As for the response to the part about murdering children, I’m sorry that I posted a response. I should have left it alone.
To the subject at hand:
I was told to sprinkle the area with soil that smells of dog. If you know someone with a dog, ask for a little soil from were they pee or even poop (the dog that is). From what I hear, the cats can smell even the slightest trace of dog and stay away. Additonally, it is good for the garden in small doses.
Don’t forget to let us know what was tried and what has worked for you.
Actually, I just accidentally stumbled upon a solution to this problem. I bought a new litter box for my cats, and had placed the old one out by the garage, to be bagged for the trash. Sure enough, one of the local strays ambled by and used it. I think I’ll just leave it out there permanently.
Regarding the cat issue, I knew someone who eventually rented a live trap and caught the wandering cat that was crapping in his garden. Noting that it had a collar and a tag, he attached a note to the collar that said: “Your neighbor caught me pooping in his garden. Please help keep me from doing this again.” He says he never saw the cat again.
I, myself, have put in an order for some reservoir-type devices that hold cat-repellent pellets. Supposedly, they will repel cats in a ten-foot radius and remain effective longer than standard repellent sprinkled on the ground. I’ll be curious to see how well they work.
I’d be interested in knowing what jurisdictions it’s legal to shoot nonaggressive animals that wander onto your property. Could you shoot someone’s horse if it wandered onto your land? Could you shoot their dog if it chased a frisbee into your yard?
What if it were something else–what if, for example, their car hit a pothole, skidded out of control, and ended up in your yard? Would you be justified in taking a pickaxe to the car?
I just wonder how property rights work in these areas where theoretically it’s legal to shoot animals that wander onto your own property. I know that in North Carolina, such behavior is illegal, and could easily garner the shooter a misdemeanor conviction (or a felony conviction, if the behavior is found to be malicious).
Shooting dogs or cats damaging property doing is perfectly legal outside the city limits where shooting wouldn’t be illegal where I live. Your link says nothing about shooting something destroying one’s garden. In fact, it makes an exception for protecting property.
For the lawful destruction of something in order to protect property. Arguing that poop in a garden constituted destruction of property is a bit tenuous.
If it ain’t in an exception, then my link DOES say something about it: specifically, it says it’s illegal.
Have you actually read the article you linked to? Specifically, a listed exception is
I didn’t follow up any of the provided cross-references, but if you consider how the law is written, it’s a cruelty to animals law. It doesn’t mention moles or rats, so you could be tried for their death, too. It also doesn’t mention insects, in which case you can probably be tried as a mass murderer. It’s generally fairly well established that human beings have property rights that exceed those of wild or domestic fauna. For example ranchers can shoot coyotes or wolves, even if they’re protected species. Just because an animal is cute and fluffy doesn’t give it any special preference over another animal (again, consider rats, moles, etc.).
Well, as you know, the hot pepper treatment didn’t work Then I tried the orange peel method. No luck with that either. So I’m afraid I had to resort to drastic measures. No, I didn’t shoot anything (never owned a gun in my life. never will.), but I did set out some boards with prodtruding nails. Not in an attempt to injure the cat, but to make it difficult for it to maneuver its way around the area. And I think it did the trick! 2 days without cleaning up any cat shit! I’ll give it a few more days before I call it a success, but so far so good.
Yeah, sure – good luck getting a Judge to ever agree to that.
Remember that Judges are elected by the voters. Usually in elections with very little attention paid.
But a Judge who agreed with that, and ruled in favor of shooting cats, would get a whole lot of aattention (unfriendly attention) from local pet lovers. And they could turn out a lot of previously inattentive voters to throw such a Judge out of office. How many voters are cat owners, after all?
In the neighboring state of Wisconsin, a Wasau firefighter proposed a plan to allow shooting of ‘feral’ cats. The reaction to this made national news! He’s now facing a firestorm of protests, with several death threats and a serious attempt to get him fired from the city fire department. And it took only a few days of this before the Governor of the state announced that he would veto this proposal if it reached him.
Well, this is starting to get far afield from the OP, so I understand if this needs to be moved, but in direct response, disallowing that in rural areas would, in my experience, bring far more pissed off farmers and landowners than it would attention from “pet lovers.” Said pet lovers not really having the same attitudes and viewpoints in the rural areas where I have been as they do in more urban areas. In other words, I don’t think there really are that many “pet lovers” as I think you would define it in non-urban areas. I’ve had this discussion before and others have been free to disagree, but the in the rural areas where I have lived, while the people generally were not up for torture of animals for fun and giggles (well, some people were, but that’s another story), they also were not big believers in “animal rights,” and really wouldn’t bat an eye at someone shooting an animal that kept wandering into their property, particularly if it were lingering, defecating, etc.
As to your story re: Wisconsin, I think that was in the city proper (though I may be mistaken). As well, I also recall several stories mentioning other states that have the substantial equivalent of the law that Wisconsin turned down. Interestingly enough, at least one mainstream news article reported a poll, by the Wisconsin DNR, that suggests more people may have been in favor of the law than against it.
