Talk:Feral cat/Archive 1

Why define the feral cat?

 * I started this page to define feral cats and discuss how we humans have, once again, impacted a species and forced it into an unnatural state. Feral cats, quite different from wild cats, are our creation, as is their plight.  This page isn't a forum for opinions...just information.  Be sure your facts are correct and your sources are worth quoting!

CTCatVet 15 Oct 2005
 * newer response: Why do you have this false assumption that feral cats are different from their wild cats brothers?

You should research more before adding any asumption. Cats, unlike most other domestic animals, were never domesticated through any formal process. There was no formal traits selection or enhanced interbreeding been introduced throughout house cat history. most common domestic cats have very little genetic variation from their wild cat ancestors... actually, even to today, the genetic drift is sooo small that an african wild cat shares almost 100% genes as most "domesticated" cats. Due to this unique nature, cats are biologically never domesticated. This is why cats if bred without human contact in the wild, can revert into wild cat status within only one generation. Thus, their behaviors and habits are no different than African wild cat. If you ever observed a cat born in the wild without human interaction, the 1st instinct they have had is hissing and growling, and read for attack... you can observe this in African wild cats too. Most cats lovers assumed this hissing behaviour is due to human's abuse, or out of fear. which isn't true, it's simply a mark of the cat reverted into its african wild cat status.. well, sadly, most cats freaks can't see this and won't see this and still treat them as pet which they are already not so. If a feral cat were born in the wild and reverted to wild status, why should we kept assuming its status being pet? It's the most ridiculous remark I have ever heard from most cats lovers.


 * RESPONSE: You obviously have a bias against feral cats and are a supporter of the species you are saying is "forced . . . into an unnatural state."  You need to follow your own advice and not make the central point of the article the fact that feral cats are dangerous to whatever species you are seeking to preserve.    —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.80.141.11 (talk) 23:14, 7 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Akin to my complaints on the Cat page, this page is very Americentric, or at the very elast urban-centric. --ZayZayEM 14:36, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)


 * I already had this page in my watchlist to get round to, for the purposes of expanding the generalised statements about the damage ferla cats do around the world to wildlife. Cat's are a real conservation issue in smaller islands and places like Australia, even in the US they do real damage to bird popultaions. The subject of introduced species removal, be it rat or cat or rabbit, is highly political, unfortunately, and needs careful wording.sunbird 16:11, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)


 * Oh my, please run a spell check and check your punctuation before you post here, Sunbird...


 * "many celebrities campaign to encourage people to spay and neuter their pets, including Bob Barker." This would imply that Bob Barker is a pet and should be neutered. Perhaps the author meant "many celebrities, including Bob Barker, campaign to encourage people to spay and neuter their pets" User:jhbadger Jan 23 2005
 * Maybe he should be neutered - then he would know how it feels .... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 150.192.42.117 (talk) 20:20, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Pathetic and unadoptable
Blackcats, I had added those words and you deleted them, saying they were not true and emotive rather than a NPOV.

Actually, they are true. Pathetic means evoking tenderness, sympathy, pity or sorrow. Unadoptable is self-explanatory. The condition of feral cats is pathethic. And no feral cat over the age of about twelve weeks is adoptable because they cannot be socialized (or tamed or civilizied or some other similiar word). I know because I cleaned out two feral cat colonies, rescuing and finding home for 21 kittens. Two of the little buggers live here with me and my family. They were both less than nine weeks old but they are noticably different in attitude and temperament than cats raised in captivity.

That's when I did all the research and talked to concerned humans and vets, etc. about the issue.

As for NPOV, I'll admit the word "pathetic" is emotive and subjective but unadoptable isn't. I think it, at least, needs to go back in. I'll await to hear from you before editing again. Johnwhunt 23:32, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Hey Johnwhunt, sorry if I got a little over-zealous with the editing there. I went ahead and added back in the unadoptable part - slightly qualified - since there's always exceptions and because in rural and low-density urban areas the line between feral and non-feral domestic cats is sometimes a little blurry...

I also added back in about how they evoke strong emotions in animal lovers.

Hopefully this will work for everyone - if not then feel free to edit some more :)

--Blackcats 23:32, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Looks good to me. Have a good day. Johnwhunt 00:57, 16 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Actually, you are both right - or wrong - depending on your definitions. I am sitting here right now surrounded by about 30 ex-feral cats. None even remotely resemble domestic cats. One lives on my sholders - I have to wear a leather jacket around the house to prevent blood transfusions. Three or four run from me, but when caught, happily relax to get petted, then either stick around or run and hide as they feel is appropriate. One usually runs from me, but then on occasions, comes up tyo be petted and gets extremely affectionate. When she has kittens, she always comes to me and asks for help with the delivery. The kittens are always so beautiful that I don't have the heart to have her spayed and there is a waiting list for them. Almost all these ex-feral cats would be adoptable and will be adopted by the right person. None have any similarity to a domestic cat.

P.S. It ain't easy. Tbonge (talk) 05:29, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Have to agree with Tbonge. Feral cats can get used to people. It's just that most people can't get used to feral cats. They don't understand what stresses them and what relaxes them. If you hang out with a colony like I do, you learn. It's something of a matter of learning to think like cats do, while they learn to think like humans (at least humans who like cats) do. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 133.7.7.20 (talk) 09:23, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

They aren't unadoptable. I have one "feral" cat who lived outdoors all her life and had never been touched by a human when I got her. She was over a year old. At first she wouldn't let anyone touch her, but after I worked with her she became a sweet affectionate cat. She'll even let my nine-year-old sister carry her around the house!

I have to agree that most feral cats are not adoptable, since I've been trying to tame feral kittens back in the 80's back in China. The feral cats in China were very wild that they were too aggressive to be adopted, even feeding is not possible after 1 year length of taming process and the process started when they were simply 2 month old. Maybe you Americans have different *feral* cats than I used to have back in China? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zhengjdc (talk • contribs) 20:57, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

I'm going to have to agree with the "Most humans just don't know how to treat feral cats"... because they CAN be socialised and adopted, it's just that most people can't be bothered. They think if it doesn't act like a normal cat than it cannot. Most feral cats can easily be socialised by someone with great patience and kindness. To say they're unadoptable is a bare-faced lie, considering how many stories there are of adopted feral cats. Some cats would take a lot more effort than others, sure, but every wrong that has ever been done to the cat to make it behave that way can, in time, be righted by a human that puts in the time and effort. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bulbpowder (talk • contribs) 06:27, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

Legal status of feral cats
Is it worth mentioning somewhere in the article the recent public debate in Wisconsin on listing un-collared cats as unprotected, thus making hunting/killing them legal? A search on Google News shows a lot of articles on the topic. It looks like it is not a done deal so to speak so I am not sure if it merits inclusion here, but i think it is also an issue in several other states or the law may be vague. Either way we might think about including a paragraph or small section on the legal status of feral cats in different jurisdictions.

Feral cats in Australia are not just stray pussy cats that have been dumped or left home. The feral cat in Australia is a product of many generations in the wild, and have never had any human contact. They are many hundreds of kilometres fom the nearest farm house or town, and thru population pressure they might move into areas of human population only. They live very well off the native wildlife, and are too well adapted to an environment that has never had predatators since the demise of marsupial predatators 30,000 years ago. The dingo and the fox are also feral introduced predatators that are also having a major impact on the environment. Only homo sapiens have caused more damage whereever they have been introduced. 203.59.157.42 13:39, 24 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Perhaps the extinction of the marsupial predators 30,000 years ago was the bad thing, and the reintroduction of predators was a good thing? AllGloryToTheHypnotoad (talk) 21:50, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

A question: feral cats and evolution
This may be a unique question due to my fascination with evolution... but have there ever been any studies or research done on the evolution of feral cats or other feral animals? While I understand that evolution can take millions of years, small changes or adaptations can be brought about in only a few generations of the genes already exist... (for example, that thing about the moths changing color in England during the industrial revolution). Are there any feral cat colonies that have been around long enough to show a preference for cats with certain traits to survive and reproduce (before they started becoming neutered)? Looking at all of the different breeds of domesticated dogs, it doesn't seem like a stretch to imagine that survival of the fittest, and not just breeding of the prettiest, can bring about noticeable changes in perhaps a few hundred years. Any thoughts?
 * Probably somewhat. Some breeds of cats and dogs would likely not last long in the wild, so they would disappear immediately.  I'm guessing at least that has happened.  --Kalmia 04:32, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Definitely, see Dingo for a classic example of the evolution of the feral dog into a new species. Thew feral cat in Australia appears to be diversifying and many are not recognizable as to their original 'breed'. I happen to guess it won't be long before we see some specialize. petedavo 06:44, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Actually yes there has, New Scientist magazine (I think) published some studies about domesticated and wild "cousins" e.g. domesticated pigs vs. wild pigs and the verdict is that after 7-10 generations in the wild the animal is completely undomesticated and has taken on the "wild" appearance. I don't know about feral cat colonies in America, but in Australia the cats are of a considerately larger size and definately have more learned and genetic "feral" behaviour. Fox breeders in Russia have also noted that they can breed either friendly or violent foxes after 7-10 generations. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bulbpowder (talk • contribs) 06:32, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

Neutral point of view (NPOV)?
I removed this:

It has been suggested by individuals without environmental science backgrounds that feral cats should simply be hunted to immediately reduce the feral cat problem. Radical specicide, especially when more animals are abandoned each day, is never a prudent long-term answer to any animal-human problem; the solution is more responsible husbandry of the domestic cat by the species that initially started the problem.

That's as neutral as it gets...we're talking killing here...(CTCatVet)

from the main article, because of NPOV concerns. There may be a kernel of truth to this statement, but it needs to be fleshed out in a more neutral manner. Ideally, this would also include the POV of the opposing side, which seems to have some valid points as well. Unfortunately, I know little about the issue, so I can only exhort others who do to hammer out some compromise before putting this back.

(forgot to include my stamp: --greenmoss 9 July 2005 02:47 (UTC))

I always thought it was odd that some people's idea of compassion for animals is death. I'm no card-carrying member of PETA, but I think hunting wild cats seems cruel. I might change my mind if they actually eat them... (Mokru) 3 Oct. 2006

I have a cat.It is domesticated but that has not changed the fact that in the time that Salem has been part of my family that he has Hunted and killed a budgie (a native bird), two bearded dragons (a native lizard), numerous skinks, & insects, and fished a Koi out of my pond. He has also trapped a native Bandicoot which I managed to rescue. He is probably the only cat in my area that is kept within the property boundaries as I see and hear cats outside and in the nearby bush all the time. Every cat I've owned has done similar things and all seem to be proud to drag their kill inside to offer up to their human companions. My Grand Uncle was the Park ranger for Nambung National Park and he always carried a gun to shoot feral cats as he said "he saw nests and animals that he knew well being hunted and killed by the local feral cats". This is my first hand evidence. I love my cat, but I keep watch for native wildlife coming into my backyard because I know that the cat will hunt them and kill them. To pretend that a cat is not a hunter is nonsense POV. petedavo 15:57, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
 * A lovely story, but what is it supposed to convey towards the article or the writing of the article? Neither first-hand research or POV statements are allowed in articles.  Of the five pillars of Wikipedia, those are the top two. -- KirinX 16:29, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
 * That is exactly the point that I'm making by the story. The cat fanciers have let themselves get POV from the talk page into the article! They are stuck in a paradigm that believes the article itself should not exist because it's not within their ability to see any other paradigm. That paradigm I bring to the point here is "the nature of the cat as a predatory animal. So therefore NPOV to cat fanciers on the subject is POV to them already.petedavo 00:05, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Ah... perhaps my confusion has helped some of them see your point too. I agree that it is hard to seem NPOV when the subject is naturally POV to an audience.  But your root point, that cats are generally violent creatures when given the chance to hunt, is most valid. -- KirinX 00:19, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

In Australia
''Although trap neuter and return programs such as those in the United States are not prevalent in Australia, they are now being introduced in some urban and suburban areas. In Adelaide, the "C.A.T.S." program has had great success to date. More recently, such programs have been introduced in Sydney by the "World League for Protection of Animals".'' With great success? How does one define success in such circumstances? (And are neutered animals somehow magically incapable of predating on native birds and marsupials?) Sabine's Sunbird 02:05, 4 August 2005 (UTC)

I think this page forgets to talk about the very much negative impacts of feral cats in our natural environment. In Australia they are a problem which must be dealt with as native species such as bilby, numbat and mala are being hunted to near extinction. This page is very much biased and must at least say so at the top of this page. Moran


 * Ailurophobes write a lot of stuff along these lines but I've yet to see any of them explain coherently why numbats and malas are better than cats and therefore cats should be shot to stop them killing numbats. :-)
 * Saying that cats aren't part of the ecosystem and bilbawhatsits are is a red herring. They may not have been part of the ecosystem, but they are now. Which ecosystem was better is a subjective and occasionally highly silly value judgement. Either way we're not going to be able to correct one ecological intervention (introducing cats) by committing another (having them massacred).
 * Man, the above two comments are really pathetic. It's OK for cats to hunt Australian wildlife to extinction?  Sorry, but it is not.  Every bit of biodiversity lost is a tragedy; to hear excuses made for the feral species doing much of it is offensive.
 * The only real complaint I can see is that cats kill songbirds, which at least make pretty noises. But then, if you can fly, and you get killed by something that can't, I say it's Darwin 1, you nil. --Last Malthusian 12:00, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

Cats are no better than numbats and malas or any other species, at least not from a biologist's or environmentalist's point of view. Indeed, no species is better or worse than any other, in that sense. The difference is that some species are endangered, while others aren't. In the case of species like cats, foxes, rabbits and others, who are introduced into a new habitat and prove to be too much a competition for some of the local species and so eventually drive them to near extinction, the point is that there are too many of the introduced threat and too few of the threatened animals; in which case, guess who it makes sense to be worried about, you smart ass.

"I say it's Darwin 1, you nil." Oh, wow, Darwinism with a cowboy hat and spurs. I can see this was a mature debate from the outset. Stassa 21:33, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I know this isn't the place for debate, so please reply to my talk page. But seriously, if we protect a species, aren't we disrupting evolution? Applejuicefool 20:43, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

"Euthanasia"
"The wholesale removal of feral colonies by euthanasia is rarely effective, since new individuals move into the areas left by the removed animals almost immediately, and the blanket euthanasia of stray and feral cats has proven ineffective in controlling stray and feral overpopulation."

What does euthanasia mean in that sense? No matter how miserable most feral cats' lives are, killing every single one of them stretches the definition of 'merciful' beyond all normal credibility, and the phrase 'Removal by euthanasia' seems euphemistic in the extreme (must... not... Godwin...) Of course, I could just have got the wrong end of the stick, since the article doesn't really say whether these programmes involve killing all cats or just the sick ones. If not, maybe replacing 'wholesale removal' by 'wholesale killing' and removing 'by euthanasia' would be better? You can't really get more NPOV than the word 'kill'. --Last Malthusian 12:09, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
 * This is a very old question but thought I'd respond to the comment about the term euthanasia. The term means 'good death' but doesn't mean it's good because the animal's life was so terrible that death is preferred, but that the method of killing it is considered humane (it may be drugged and put to sleep rather than shot). I think 'killing' has very strong connotations of cruelty so is not neutral POV, but with this issue, there doesn't seem to BE a NPOV.--Paddling bear (talk) 14:12, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

Removed cite tag
An image with the following caption feral cat hunting for blackbirds along a freshwater river in Virginia Beach. was tagged with a citation required tag. Given that the entire caption was a description of what the animal was (a feral cat) and what it was doing (hunting blackbirds), information that can only be provided by the photographer, it is very unclear what kind of citation is required or indeed can even be provided. Unless there is a complelling reason to think that the editor in question is lying (and I can't see any) there is no reason for the tag. Sabine's Sunbird talk 16:58, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Hi Sabine. The picture is of a cat looking at the camera. There's nothing to show it doing anything. Is it domestic or wild? (The Common Blackbird is not endangered.) --WikiCats 12:17, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Like I said there is no citation that could be provided. All we have is the photographer's assertion of what it was doing (and what it is). The caption makes no claim as to the status of blackbirds (given that it was taken in America it'd be the Red-winged Blackbird most likely, also not rare) nor claims that the cat is responsible for the status of the blackbird. It simply states that this cat is hunting blackbirds and is feral. Sabine's Sunbird talk 16:56, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Citation required
This paragraph also has a tag ''Unfortunately recent studies published in the Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association indicate that trap-neuter-release programs are not effective in reducing feral cat populations. These programs cannot be effective unless they manage cats on a population--rather than colony--basis, neuter at least 75% of the cats in the population, and carrying capacity is reduced, usually by reducing the amount of food provided to the cats by humans. Because cats are naturally so fecund, a small number of individual cats that remain unsterilized can cause a TNR colony to grow exponentially.[citation needed] The paper I think it comes from is - Paul L. Barrows (2004) "Professional, ethical, and legal dilemmas of trap-neuter-release" Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association'' November 1, 2004, Vol. 225, No. 9, Pages 1365-1369 - but I can't check as I don't have a vet school library log in. Can someone who does (or with access to a library) please check and if it is cite teh article? Thanks muchly! Sabine's Sunbird talk 06:33, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

The feral cat has been an ecological disaster in Australia
The feral cat has been an ecological disaster in Australia sounds quite astute but there not one published paper to back it up. --WikiCats 12:24, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Changed, better? I was wondering if you could provide a cite for Environment Australia reports that “convincing evidence that cats exert a significant effect on native wildlife throughout the [Australian] mainland is lacking.”. Also I have a problem with Evidence for early predation by cats having caused major and widespread declines in native fauna is unsubstantiated and not credible. - unsubstanciated maybe but uncredible is POV. There is scientific debate about the role of cats (which is why I cited Abbott 2002 who certainly agrees with you) but to completely dimiss one point of view is disingineous. Sabine's Sunbird talk 16:52, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

"Evidence... is not credible" I thought you would have a problem with that. It comes from your own reference. --WikiCats 05:50, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
 * And there are others that say otherwise. To include this statement from one author with one opinion and dismiss any other opinion and statements is POV. The statement would be better if written Evidence for early predation by cats having caused major and widespread declines in native fauna is circumstancial and its credebilty debated. Wikicats, this is not a debating forum and this is not a competition. This is an article and neutrality is to be respected, regardless of our own personal views. Views are divided on this issue and the article should reflect this, and not come down on one side or another. Sabine's Sunbird talk 06:57, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

I put the same request to anyone who makes these anti-cat allegations: "Provide the proof." I am yet to get even one published paper that establishes that cats are a threat to the environment.

Yet I can quote every environmental department in Australia, including the CSIRO, who say that no proof has ever been forthcoming.

I make no claims as to what cats do or what cats don't do. I have simply searched for the truth. I was shocked to find so many eminent persons who said that the allegations were not proven. --WikiCats 06:10, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Risbey, Danielle A. ; Calver, Michael C. ; Short, Jeff ; Bradley J. Stuart and Ian W. Wright (2005) The impact of cats and foxes on the small vertebrate fauna of Heirisson Prong, Western Australia. II. A field experiment " Wildlife Research 27(3): 223-235 Sabine's Sunbird talk 06:57, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

What was the level of viable habitat in that area? --WikiCats 07:33, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
 * No idea. Actually, I don't even know what you mean by viable habitat. What has that got to do with the price of eggs, anyway? Sabine's Sunbird talk 07:51, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

In the absence of reasonable habitat such claims becomes less reliable. Also the study said that the cat zone was not fox free only that fox numbers were reduced. I've got that study somewhere, I'll have to dig it out.

That study also brings up an an important point. It says that cats can have a large impact on mice. We know that since the introduction of large scale cat control in Australia we have had an explosion of mouse plagues in the wheat fields that they can't bring under control. When I pointed this out to the CEO of Environment Australia he put a disclaimer on their website. In essence it said that the Federal Government was not responsible for actions of the Federal Government. --WikiCats 08:45, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
 * The point about knock on effects is dealt with in Robley also, although in the context of fox and cat control. Eliminating an important predator, native or not, will inevidably have knock on effects, hense in a way why people do it, and the effects can be varied, often unexpected and run the gamut from beneficial to detrimental. I say find a paper or reference linking the two (prefereably peer reviewed) and put it in the article. Sabine's Sunbird talk 17:17, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

If anyone wants to cite referances to CSRIO studies or University Research here are some starters: petedavo 15:37, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
 * [http://www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/invasive/publications/cat/index.html]
 * [http://www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/publications/tap/cats/index.html]
 * [http://www.nationalparks.nsw.gov.au/npws.nsf/Content/Feral+cats]
 * [http://www.dpiw.tas.gov.au/inter.nsf/WebPages/SJON-52H4ZQ?open]
 * [http://www.feral.org.au/content/species/cat.cfm]
 * [http://wwwcomm.murdoch.edu.au/synergy/0302/cats.html]
 * [http://www.abc.net.au/science/news/enviro/EnviroRepublish_1429383.htm]
 * [http://www.csiro.au/files/mediarelease/mr1998/WhenfoxIsAwayferalCatsPlay.htm]
 * [http://www.wildliferesearchmanagement.com.au/Fact%20sheet_feral%20cats.pdf]
 * [http://www.agric.wa.gov.au/pls/portal30/docs/FOLDER/IKMP/PW/VP/VERTEBRATE_PESTS_IN_WA_CAWS.HTM]
 * [http://www.naturebase.net/content/view/463/834/]
 * [http://www.nt.gov.au/nreta/wildlife/animals/pests/majorpests.html]
 * [http://www.petnet.com.au/uam/uamcat.html]

"Do any of those arguing actually live in Australia? To my knowledge there's not much scientific studies done or papers released mainly because it's an accepted fact that cats hunt and in Australia a lot of what they're hunting is going to be endangered. If they're sucessful in their hunt, then there's a high chance they'll have impacted on the population of a rare and/or endangered species - for example the Australian antechinus (a mouse-like marsupial). Basically there are so many rare and endangered species in Australia it's going to be a hard task for the average feral cat, living far from people and cities (the majority of feral cats in Australia haven't been domesticated for generations), to snack on something that's not part of the disappearing natural ecosystem." —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bulbpowder (talk • contribs) 06:51, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
 * All scientifically collected data shows that the main diet, around 89%, of feral cats in Australia is rabbits and mice - neither of which are native nor endangered. See C. Dickman or Australian Geographic --User John S  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 123.211.218.216 (talk) 08:23, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Feral?
These cats that are called "feral cats" are (according to the Feral cat colony article) dependant on humans for there food. They either steal the food or have it given to them. These cats have never really left home. "Feral" means an animal that has left domestication and gone wild. The offspring of these animals will never have human contact. The worst you could say about these so called city "feral" cats is that they are stray cats. --WikiCats 05:12, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Are they any less feral than feral pigeons in the park fed by humans? Having human contact doesn't make an animal not a wild animal, surely? But drawing a distinction between the two might be a good idea. Sabine's Sunbird talk 03:18, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Hi Sabine. Do you think that they are stray cats or not? --WikiCats 06:53, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
 * For general purposes, feral cat = stray cat, that's just semantics. Although the cats I feed on the street definately have human contact and somewhat depend on my kibble, they are surely feral, as they live on the streets, have no owner, have no vaccinations, do not like being touched, or anything that is definitive and normal of a pet house cat.Sabar 11:00, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Stray Cats, and such cats in populated areas should in another article. They can not be considered as Feral as they are not in the wild.petedavo 06:55, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
 * If your looking at a cat for the first time with no knowledge of it's history, you won't always be able to tell whether the cat is stray (it goes home every once in a while or is feral (it's wild but willing to eat free food if someone leaves it out). Since people who try to manage cats or wildlife have trouble, they often use "feral/free ranging" when they talk about cats in general. Free ranging would include those cats that went stray (they ran away) from those that are just out for the night (and go home each morning).  Unlike most dogs, many many people just open the door and let their cats out at night.--Paddling bear (talk) 14:16, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

Major places with feral cats
This should be "Major Places with Feral Cats, known by the author.

I 'm Greek. There are at least a million of what you call "feral" cats in Athens, most probably two. So is that "minor" or is it just that you had no idea? I guess the latter.

That section has information about what goes on in Australia and the USA, parts of the English-speaking western world, which I imagine must have been more accessible to you. But to completely disregard the rest of the world discredits your article (and the miniscule and misinformed reference to Rome is risible as an attempt to hide the fact that you don't know about the rest of the world, btw).

My suggestion is that you remove the section altogether, or just rename it into something more accurate. Perhaps, break it down into two distinct sections, "Feral Cats in the USA" and "Feral Cats in Australia". Stassa 21:24, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

Be Bold. --WikiCats 07:59, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

I think the "expand please" tag added is fine. Stassa 13:58, 26 October 2006 (UTC)


 * I don't consider that stray cats going wild is the same as feral cats that live in the wild. Stray cats in urban areas do not belong in this article. I define feral as living off it's own hunting totally dependent for it's own shelter, and not in anyway living off rubbish or handouts nor habitat[User:Petedavo|petedavo]] 06:57, 7 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Not to sound rude but Your definition of feral doesn't matter. It is the dictionary definition we are to follow. The dictionary states feral as:
 * 1. 	existing in a natural state, as animals or plants; not domesticated or cultivated; wild.
 * 2. 	having reverted to the wild state, as from domestication: a pack of feral dogs roaming the woods.
 * 3. 	of or characteristic of wild animals; ferocious; brutal.
 * Stray cats also could be listed as feral, particularly under the second or third definition.

156.34.181.176 (talk) 20:55, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

The following definitions are widely used by organizations such as the Humane Society:

- Feral cats are cats born and/or living in the wild, with no human contact. - Alley cats are cats born and/or living in the streets without owner. They don't classify as feral as they don't live in the wild. - Stray cats are cats that were raised by humans, but later were abandoned or got lost. After a while, they get used to it an become either feral (if they live in the wild) or alley cats (if they live in a urban environment.) The difference with born feral or alley cats is that stray cats may become pets again, as they are already used to live with humans. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 148.87.1.172 (talk) 21:57, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Your pictures of cats
I also changed the caption of ericcatlake.jpg. If the name is any indication, that's probably eric's cat near the lake, or eric the cat near the lake. In short, cut the crap, that's just a picture of your cat.

And I don't see how the picture of the cat with kittens in the beginning of the article is what the caption says it is. It's not even clear that the big cat is not the mother of the others (please respect my inteligence and don't try to point out that they 're different colours).

I 'm very happy you have cats, but this is supposed to be an informative article about feral cats. There are several forums on the net where you can post pictures of your cats. Do that there, not here. 86.144.205.210 22:04, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

I tend to agree about eric the cat. There is no way you can tell if this cat is wild, tame, feral or whatever. Under those circumstances I doubt if the picture should be in this article. --WikiCats 13:48, 8 October 2006 (UTC)


 * For that matter, is there a way to tell if a cat is wild, feral, or tame by looking at it? I would suspect not. Applejuicefool 14:20, 24 January 2007 (UTC)


 * [[Image:Feral_cat_san_antonio_01.jpg|thumb|120px|right|Feral cat outside my home.]]

No good way of checking, but I'd say this one I photographed is a good case. Battle scars and bitten ears are the stereotypical sign, plus unkempt fur. Of course it could just be an abusive owner photographing their pet cat. This cat here is pretty much 100% feral. It has no owner, it is friendly towards other street cats (while domesticated indoor cats are much more hostile as a generality), it fights, it is young (feral cats rarely get old), he is shy, he sleeps on the street (literally), he isn't vaccinated, ect. Now, this isn't definiative and that's the problem. You have to weigh the circumstances and make a judgement call. Outside of witnessing the animal being born on the wild, there is no way to tell. Sabar 10:46, 15 May 2007 (UTC)


 * A tipped ear is a pretty universal sign of a feral cat. I was disappointed to see the photos of cats with tipped ears removed. One of them was taken by me -- and while I didn't witness the birth itself, I did witness the cat as a kitten living under my shed with its mother and littermates. I'm going to put it back -- though I admit it's not the greatest photo (I could never get close enough for a crisp, clear picture), and I wouldn't be offended if someone replaced it with a better one. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.255.34.200 (talk) 21:27, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

I did not know that ALL feral cats were born with a tipped ear. Is that a genetic trait? I thought it was just a sign that it had been neutered/spayed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 148.87.1.172 (talk) 22:03, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

More references
Most of the article is POV and location specific. The statements about the living conditions of feral cats and their survivability in the urban "wild" is relevant to dense urban areas in the English-speaking western world, but not to the rest of the world, as I pointed above, or even rural areas anywhere. The very term "feral cats" is Anglo-centric; in the rest of the world, they 're called "stray cats" (well, the equivalent in the languages of the rest of the world, of course). Hence all the calls for references.

If you don't add your references until next month, I 'll add the template about the article being location specific. 'Cause right now, it so is. 86.144.205.210 22:04, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

Agreed. --WikiCats 07:57, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

There is no evidence that the cat toward the bottom of the page is stray, not is there evidence that that cat is scratching the car. Original authorship of this page does not protect it from sharp-eyed editing; the page belongs to (and is authored by) all that wish to view it and participate. Please provide evidence for your caption. Otherwise, there is no value to any caption for any picture on all of wikipedia, and wikipedia cannot be considered even somewhat reliable. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.233.207.120 (talk) 18:36, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Title
In most parts of the these cats are just called stray cats or alley cats. --WikiCats 12:18, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Hardly the first animal in the world to have multiple names. ;) Sabine's Sunbird talk 02:15, 11 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Someone is confusing stray cats living in urban areas with the millions of feral cats that have never had any human interaction living in the wilds of Austraolia, jungles of Indonesia, and areas not habitated by humans. Stray cats do not belong in this article as they are not a wild animal unlike feral cats.petedavo 13:28, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Split proposed
I think the Effects on wildlife section of this article is disproportionately long and detailed compared to the rest of the article. I think it makes sense to split this to Impact of feral cats on wildlife, and include a brief summary of it on this article, potentially as a subsection of a "Controversy" section or similar. GorillaWarfare (talk) 01:13, 28 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Support: we can split the article; however, the suggested article title is wrong. Both domestic cats and feral cats have an impact on wildlife.  We should make the title more generic, ex. "Cat predation on wildlife".  As humans urbanize we are pushing out natural predators of vermin, such as foxes, coyotes, etc, and cats are providing a service to humans, i.e. cat predation on wildlife is not always bad! The new article should not be hateful and mean spirited toward cats; and in particular toward feral cats, it is often not their fault they have had to go wild! IQ125 (talk) 11:01, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

✅ I've split it off to Cat predation on wildlife. It, and the remaining section in this article, could use some attention, but it's a start. GorillaWarfare (talk) 01:42, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I moved hybridisation back. It's not the same things as predation. Sabine's Sunbird  talk  06:51, 7 March 2017 (UTC)

Lead image
I notice you changed the image in the lead from File:Feral cat 1.JPG to File:Gatos_de_Galicia.gif. Do we know that all the cats in that GIF are feral? I don't see any indication in the image description(s). GorillaWarfare (talk) 20:18, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

For your interest: Article IQ125 (talk) 19:58, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the article. Do you have any comments on the lead image? GorillaWarfare (talk) 00:31, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
 * The image was posted under the category feral cats. 10:32, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I'm not seeing it in that category. I think the image should be changed back to the previous image, which we know is a feral cat, and also shows the tipped ear. GorillaWarfare (talk) 22:20, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Feral cat. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080517155753/http://pritch.bsd.uchicago.edu/publications/wildcats.pdf to http://pritch.bsd.uchicago.edu/publications/wildcats.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 13:17, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

Taxobox
The taxobox is as per Wikispecies and I think it is good to have for less knowledgeable readers! In addition, there are plenty of citations at Google Scholar.IQ125 (talk) 19:16, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Folks who wish to learn about cats as a species (as opposed to feral cats as a phenomenon) can head over to the cat article, which I've added as a wikilink to the lead. This aligns with what is being done in other articles, such as Free-ranging dog, Feral horse, etc. and other articles about feral animals which are the same species as the domesticated kind. GorillaWarfare (talk) 22:14, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Introduction
Rephrased "... able to survive in the wild" to "... self-sufficient."

Every cat, even those who never come outside, is never truly domesticated and can survive with ease in the wild. It would apply to dogs but not to cats. Unless they're purposely misshapen, like the Sphinx cat or the Persian breeds. 2001:1C06:504:3300:C95A:C7F9:C257:6EF (talk) 16:38, 2 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Do you have a source to support "Every cat, even those who never come outside, is never truly domesticated and can survive with ease in the wild"? GorillaWarfare (talk) 07:55, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Sorry for not backing it up right away. Most of what I know about animals comes from encyclopedia I've read in the past. Here's a link I just looked up. I hope it's sufficient. http://www.smithsonianmag.com/smithsonian-institution/ask-smithsonian-are-cats-domesticated-180955111/ On a separate note, I was being too black and white trying to make a point. I should've written, "Most cats, even those that never come outside, are never truly domesticated and are able to survive in the wild." 217.121.65.15 (talk) 18:18, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Not a problem, thanks for looking up a source. The article you link does seem to support the comment about cats never truly being domesticated. However, I'm only seeing “Cats have retained their hunting skills and they’re less dependent on humans for their source of food,” he said, adding that “with most of the modern breeds of dog, if you were to release them into the wild, most would not survive." While this does seem to imply that the person being quoted believes that many cats (or many breeds of cat? not quite sure) would survive if released, this source does not support the claim that "Most cats, even those that never come outside... are able to survive in the wild." That said, this discussion may be beside the point—I think your change from "able to survive in the wild" to "self-sufficient" is fine, though I'm not sure I see a huge difference in meaning between the two. GorillaWarfare (talk) 03:05, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
 * That's all right then. You most likely have more experience with wikipedia. I may try to find the book that says it. I will get back to it then. Thanks anyway. 217.121.65.15 (talk) 21:53, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Sounds good! Thanks for following up and taking the time to find the reference. GorillaWarfare (talk) 00:37, 6 July 2016 (UTC)

Latin name
Can you find a specific cite to support that a feral cat is Felis silvestris catus, whereas a domesticated cat is Felis catus? Because I'm finding plenty that use both Latin names for both types of cat. We should not include it in the lead. GorillaWarfare (talk) 22:09, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
 * "Domestic Cats (Felis silvestris catus) Do Not Show Signs of Secure Attachment to Their Owners", PLoS ONE
 * "The Domestic Cat is classified as either Felis catus or Felis silvestris catus, depending on the author." – "Wildcat Felis silvestris", International Society for Endangered Cats (ISEC) Canada
 * "Feeding habits of feral domestic cats (Felis catus), wild cats (Felis silvestris) and their hybrids: trophic niche overlap among cat groups in Hungary", Journal of Zoology
 * "Spatial colonization by feral domestic cats Felis catus of former wildcat Felis silvestris silvestris home ranges", Acta Theriologica
 * GorillaWarfare (talk) 22:10, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Please stop adding this back to the article without discussing it here. See WP:BRD. GorillaWarfare (talk) 19:18, 13 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Please stop removing this from the article without discussing it here. See WP:BRD. IQ125 (talk) 19:31, 13 March 2016 (UTC)
 * ... are you just trolling here? You made the edit, I disagreed, now it's time to discuss. Per WP:BRD, "Discuss the edit, and the reasons for the edit, on the article's talk page. Leave the article in the condition it was in before the Bold edit was made (often called the status quo ante), but don't engage in back-and-forth reverts because that will probably be viewed as edit-warring." GorillaWarfare (talk) 20:17, 13 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I see that you linked to the Wikispecies entry. Ignoring that wikis are not reliable sources, that page says nothing about feral cats. GorillaWarfare (talk) 20:22, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

This page may be relevant: http://www.sms.si.edu/irlspec/Felis_catus.htm. --Proud User (talk) 23:41, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I've undone your edit about feral cats being a variant of the Felis catus species. The difference between feral and domesticated cats is in their environment and behavior; there is no biological difference, as your edit had implied. GorillaWarfare (talk) 21:12, 18 March 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Feral cat. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20151222210755/http://www.neighborhoodcats.org:80/HOW_TO_MANAGING_A_FERAL_CAT_COLONY to http://www.neighborhoodcats.org/HOW_TO_MANAGING_A_FERAL_CAT_COLONY

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 22:25, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Feral cat. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160304040904/http://secure.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/invasive/publications/pubs/impacts-feral-cats.pdf to http://secure.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/invasive/publications/pubs/impacts-feral-cats.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160304040904/http://secure.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/invasive/publications/pubs/impacts-feral-cats.pdf to http://secure.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/invasive/publications/pubs/impacts-feral-cats.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141017023522/http://www.alleycat.org/document.doc?id=461 to http://www.alleycat.org/document.doc?id=461
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://fr.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull&cid=1185379025278

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 20:45, 29 September 2017 (UTC)

I'm not interested in edit warring but I object to reverting opposing views.
I am concerned by |this edit by GorillaWarfare. I added a lot of content to a section that was entirely pro-TNR, and backed my edits up with multiple citations from peer reviewed journals. I did not remove any existing pro-TNR arguments, although I did rephrase one section to reflect that the POV was POV and not an undisputed fact. What was Various long-term studies have shown that TNR is effective in stopping reproduction and reducing the population over time.[33][27][53] became  Proponents of TNR argue that it is effective in stopping reproduction and reducing the population over time, with an explanation of why people found the studies inconclusive or wrong further down. The revert included an edit summary statement that beginning the para framing feral cats as "vectors for disease" is not restoring neutrality. There is an already existing section of the article, not written by me, that discusses the zoonotic risks of feral cats. The article I linked to stated that feral cats are controlled for reasons of public health - we can quibble to the cows come home about whether the reason is valid but it is incontestable that cats are controlled for this reason. So I ask that my edits be restored. Sabine's Sunbird  talk  04:56, 27 May 2018 (UTC)
 * I've already responded to your post on this matter on my talk page, but see now you've posted here as well. You're right that it would have been better to reword the content I thought was poorly worded, which I've since done. It's not my intention to remove cited content and studies disputing the effectiveness of TNR—they just need to be represented accurately. GorillaWarfare (talk) 18:27, 27 May 2018 (UTC)

History section
Thanks for reverting the deletion of content that I added today. Highly appreciated!!!!-- BhagyaMani (talk) 16:55, 21 December 2018 (UTC)
 * No problem . Have a good day!

Changes needed to conform to current data, global info, and to remove poor citations w/unsupportable statements.
Needs updating - various information and citations lack validity Section 1 – definition: The definition is outdated. There is a newer edition to the book that is cited as the basis for the definition. https://books.google.com/books/about/The_Domestic_Cat.html?id=4avCAQAAQBAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=kp_read_button#v=snippet&q=feral%20cats&f=false This reference clearly admits the terminology of “feral” is confusing, mentioning that references to free-roaming cats include: feral, semi-feral, lost and abandoned, or owned. (pg 142).

In settling on a definition that is going to be routinely accessed in web searches, it is necessary to establish the controversy about it and to offer one that fits in the framework of the cited materials, some of which use “feral” to encompass any free-roaming cat, others to mean a certain behavior or type of cat, and still others that are simply referring to the members of a colony. (Reference 2 provides a definition right in the citation that is different than what is offered.)

Propose: The definition of "feral cat," as it relates to the domestic cat (felis catus), varies in countries worldwide and even between professions. A 2013 study on some of these variations suggests the following definition to enhance communication regarding the welfare and management of them, as well as providing consistent frames of reference in research and education of the public: "A feral cat is ... a cat that is unapproachable in its free-roaming environment and is capable of surviving with or without direct human intervention, and may additionally show fearful or defensive behaviour on human contact."

A feral cat typically avoids human contact: it does not allow itself to be handled or touched, and usually remains hidden from humans. Some feral cats may become more comfortable with people who regularly feed them, but even with long-term attempts at socialization they usually remain fearful.

References, data, or public information may not make clear distinctions between feral cats, street or community cats, or stray or abandoned cats, although some guidelines are available. Stray and feral cats are generally considered to be different by rescuers, veterinarians, and researchers. Stray cats are cats who were, at one time, socialized to humans but no longer live in homes. They could potentially be successfully reintroduced to a home environment. “

"Attempts to control feral cats are widespread” – no citation or basis for this in the context of the definition. Attempts to control free-roaming cats are widespread - numerous citations avail, refer to TNR article.

Section 2: Definitions: Unnecessary section. The definitions in countries vary according to the agency providing it. Government agencies, NFP organizations, researchers, medical specialists, shelters, NFP cat rescues all may have different ones. Too many countries to list. Too many variations. The 1st section should simple mention the disparities.

Farm Cats – there is already a wiki entry for this. Unneeded repetition. Claim that these cats are “feral or semi-feral” is not substantiated. Followed the citations on the wiki article for Farm Cats after the statement that these cats are “feral” or “semi-feral” -these are not reliable citations (Huff Post. Colorodean, etc) and certainly cannot be used to establish a broad-based definition for all farm cats.

Ships Cat - there is already a wiki entry for this. Inaccurate statement There is no credible citation that establishes these cats were or are “feral” or “semi-feral.” The cited blog even mentions that some of the cats went home with sailors.

More to come ....

Samantha Michaels (talk) 00:52, 8 April 2019 (UTC) — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  01:14, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Some of this is probably worth looking into, but it doesn't make much sense to argue that there are conflicting definitions, an alleged "controversy" about them, a real-world recommendation for a consistent definition, and so on, then simultaneously argue that we can't have a section about definitions. That's the opposite of the encyclopedic conclusion we would come to. Second, the fact that something has a separate article doesn't mean it shouldn't be mentioned or even have a section in another article; see WP:SUMMARY and Template:Main.  The way it's being done exactly in this article may need work, though.  Third, "some ships' cats went home with sailors" is not incompatible with the idea that some ships cats were essentially feral, though the Ship's cat article is the place to get into that. And if frequent ferality of ship's cats can't be established in sources, then it shouldn't have a section in this article. Farm cats obviously should since they are in fact often feral. The trick is to ensure all details in the section are also in the main article Farm cat, then write a summary of that article in this one (probably a single paragraph). PS: Some talk page hints: Your sig goes at the end of your post, not the top.  It's not clear what in the above material is you talking to us as editors, and what is intended to be replacement article content.  You can bracket the latter with something like.

"Farm cats are in fact often feral" = a conclusion based on what facts? and in what country? The citations that are used in this section do not support generalities.

Samantha Michaels (talk) 01:57, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

I fully agree with SMcCandlish: if several differing country-specific definitions exist, they need to be referred to and referenced, but definitely NOT deleted in favour of just one. I also find the int links to and summaries of farm and ship cats very useful; would probably not have read these pages yet without the links provided here! I also think that some sections can be improved, both in content and references: there are at least 60 peer-reviewed articles to choose from instead of referencing websites. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 02:54, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

Think entire rewrite or major changes are needed.
Samantha Michaels (talk) 01:53, 20 April 2019 (UTC) Many of these citations are incorrect - the references are clearly about "free-roaming cats" or "community cats" which encompasses feral, strays (owned but either escaped, lost, or allowed to roam) and/or abandoned or dumped cats. The last categories may or may not be feral. Some are citations of web-based pages that give no references. For some that do, back-tracking to the actual citation shows that the quoted section is arbitrarily edited and misleading. Some citations are simply not verifiable (not available).

The photo captioned "a colony of feral cats" is misleading. The source simply notes these as "stray" cats - they may or may not be feral.

I did do an entire rewrite, posted it, and clearly mis-stepped doing so because it was deleted. I followed all the old citations/references. Even went within them and backtracked internally referenced citations. I deleted unsupported info and added more current citations. I'm fine with none or any or all of it being used, but very much want to see this article more reflective of Wiki standards of reliable references/sources with clarification on how "feral" is referred to as opposed to "free-roaming" or "stray."

A prime example is the highlighted teaching point on the header of this page stating a feral cat's lifespan of being 2 years. I could find NO study that supports or claims that. Some studies give the lifespans of the cats they followed, but this included all "free-roaming" or "community cats" in the study (not necessarily "feral") and is only based on the ones that didn't disappear. The citation in the main article on lifespan leads to the ASPCA's website, which is about "community cats." They define these as: "Cats born and raised in the wild." and "Cats who have been abandoned or lost and turned to wild ways in order to survive." The 1st potion - "born in the wild" - is likely feral, the second may or may not be. This ASPCA page does not use the word "feral." They do not provide any references/citations for info in the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Samantha Michaels (talk • contribs) 01:57, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Stray cat, "community cat" (a euphemism), and feral cat are all the same thing, which is a cat living outdoors with no owner. Of the three, the term "feral cat" is less POV and more encyclopedic, it's the one you find in the best sources, such as this one . I'm not particularly interested in what jargon the ASPCA uses, as they're an advocacy organization. Geogene (talk) 19:13, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

Suggestion - Articles on ferals appear a wee bit biased.
This is an opinion on these articles and you can do with it what you will. I came here looking to cite this article on my website and I was hugely disappointed that the debate between eradicating feral cats and TNR feral cats is continuing even on this article. It is not impartial at all. Even the TNR article, which is supposed to be about what the TNR proponents support is biased as if it's 'unproven' or weird alternative health suggestion like Reiki or Yoga or anti-vaxxer stuff.

I'm actually shocked by this. Wikipedia isn't supposed to be showing bias, which is why it's an open edited project. But this article is seriously lacking. Anyone who's wanting to destroy millions of animals would be happy by this article.

I'm not up to doing the research and siting independent sources for the article as I have other projects I'm doing. So I am giving the current editors my opinion on this pages bias and hope that your integrity in creating accurate articles is prodded to do research on the other side of the argument, or even look into the experts in those fields.

These are the reasons I feel this article is biased, though there does seem to be an attempt to remove the bias in some places, for example:

1. It's very obvious when there are sited tons of anti-feral studies as fact but anything that proponents of TNR site is 'claimed' even backed by proof. There are even quotation marks around anything that supports TNR.

2. When you go through the edits for this page, I even saw one comment by an editor using PETA's tagline about "re-abandonment" which clearly SHOWS the editor's bias on that.

3. One study that is sited that compares TNR and euthanasia together with different immigration rates was stated that "culling is more effective' when immigration was not controlled, which is not what it said, I looked: It said the numbers are comparable for both when the immigration rates are 0%, but in simple English, it says, "Euthanasia required higher treatment effort than TNR" when immigration is NOT 0%.  That's a direct quote, btw.  I haven't checked them all, but one study quoted wrong leads me to suspect the whole article.

The UK's Royal Society for the Protection of Birds even admits there is no scientific basis for cats being the cause of declining bird populations and the humans and climate change are the biggest causes and that cats are more of a danger to GARDEN birds: https://www.rspb.org.uk/birds-and-wildlife/advice/gardening-for-wildlife/animal-deterrents/cats-and-garden-birds/are-cats-causing-bird-declines/

There was a study done on the effectiveness of culling (which is an attempt to not horrify people by calling it killing) in Tasmania where they were concerned because it wasn't working: http://www.publish.csiro.au/wr/WR14030

Every time this article mentions any study about the effectiveness of TNR or the non-effectiveness of culling, it seems they quickly throw out that TNR encourages people to abandon more pets so it's ineffective, or that they can't prove more cats weren't moving out, or they use "this" to emphasize it's just an opinion.

And while I did give up halfway through this article, I didn't see one section on why TNR actually is effective in a lot of cases, "the vacuum effect." TNR'd cats actually keep out other cats from moving in. Nature abhors a vacuum and even when a species becomes extinct, other species quickly come in to fill that niche. It's common in anything in wildlife. If a niche needs filled, nature ensures other species do it. Established colonies reduce the number of free-roaming cats moving in. I've seen this with my own eyes. It doesn't help when people are DUMPING kittens in areas, but it helps keep out the free-roaming unfixed cats.

I'm a logical person and I believe scientific facts and what I've observed with my own eyes. I've seen the effectiveness of TNR and I've seen what happens when a cat colony is destroyed. I read studies and then I also go with the studies that support my own experiences. I have my own opinions. I also understand in some instances feral cats are a very real menace, like in Australia and New Zealand, because of their ecology. The issue is NOT black or white, and I want impartial evidence, not this... whatever this article and the TNR article is.

I understand *I* am a little biased, so I always go to BOTH sides of a debate to see the fact before I make a decision. I'm hugely disappointed this article is very much tilted towards the destructiveness of feral cats and not impartial at all, even using a study inaccurately. You can do with my opinion what you wish, but please, actually research the other side too to create articles here that are well-rounded, especially when it's regarding the actual term people who support the method used.

Thanks for your time.

Selenityjade (talk) 04:16, 7 August 2019 (UTC)


 * Well said. It's time to unlock the page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 36.11.228.95 (talk) 13:47, 26 September 2020 (UTC)


 * I totally agree with you. I felt the same way when I recently tried to add information on the new trend to support TNR, as well as the philosophical changes on how feral cats are viewed, which also supports TNR. It was great seeing this postJmm26 (talk) 22:13, 18 March 2021 (UTC)! Jmm26 (talk) 20:58, 18 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Since this complaint is, unfortunately, still attracting commentary, I would just like to point out that the Selenityjade account only ever made a single edit to a Wikipedia article, this edit, in which the user was tacitly encouraging people to potentially expose themselves to rabies. This fails MEDRS and, in my mind, it's both harmful and incompetent enough that it discredits all of this user's opinions about the article. It's possible that that edit is linked to this news item from about seven months before , in which 13 people (!) had to receive rabies prophylaxis after being bitten or scratched by four rabid stray cats in Florida. TNR was implicated as a possible factor in the re-emergence of rabies there. Geogene (talk) 03:28, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Short description
,, , obviously this article needs a short description. Everyone can talk about what it should be in this section instead of doing that over and over. Invasive Spices (talk) 18:34, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
 * The edit summary I gave here is perfectly clear on my position. I'm not a grammarian, and am flexible on whatever the specific wording comes out to be, as long as it's factually accurate. I was thanked by two other editors for that edit, so I know that Qwertyxp2000 needs to develop a consensus. Geogene (talk) 18:58, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Not very sure if "un-owned domestic cat" is sufficient, because feral cats are basically domestic cats who returned to wild instincts. Not sure what else to say about this short description stuff. Qwertyxp2000 (talk &#124; contribs) 23:00, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
 * The earlier "domestic cat that has returned to the wild" strikes me as an adequate definition. The bit about "unowned" is both unencyclopedic and, a bit, ridiculous, in light of the feline worldview. "One that lives in the wild but is descended from domesticated specimens" is the Wikipedia definition of a feral life form. Perhaps "domestic cat that lives in the wild"?--Quisqualis (talk) 23:39, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
 * What is a feline worldview? Only human beings have worldviews. Cats aren't people, and aren't wildlife. Most feral cats aren't living in "the wild," they live around human disturbance, and are either intentionally fed by people, or are eating rubbish. Geogene (talk) 23:47, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
 * If a short description is needed, then let's keep it short : just *feral cat*. All else like adding 'returning to the wild' is too long and superfluous. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 23:43, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Ownership has nothing to do with whether a cat is feral. Meters (talk) 23:49, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Then there's a problem with the first sentence in the Lead. Geogene (talk) 00:00, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Fixed. I don't know when 'un-owned' was added, but it's not needed. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 03:00, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
 * It's probably been there since 2014, because it passes verification. The source given for it (The Domestic Cat: The Biology of Its Behaviour, 2nd edition) does clearly use the term feral to distinguish un-owned cats from owned ones. The total cat population includes both owned (pet) and unowned (stray or feral) cats, but it is difficult to establish their proportions..... . A quick look at Google Scholar shows that sources there are using 'feral' to mean 'un-owned' there as well. Geogene (talk) 03:15, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
 * The ref does not equate "unowned" with "feral". I read it as meaning that unowned cats are either strays or feral. Meters (talk) 05:25, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
 * It is a direct statement that feral cats are unowned, and it's a perfectly viable interpretation that it's equating "stray" and "feral" as well. Geogene (talk) 06:23, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
 * I disagree. It's not about whether the cat is owned. It's simply about how the cat lives. Most feral cats are unowned, but they don't have to be unowned, and some (or even many) unowned cats are feral, but that does not mean that any unowned cat is feral. If someone releases their owned cats into their large property (with cat-proof fences) and lets them fend for themselves, eventually the result will be a colony of feral cats which that person owns (assuming they can find food, shelter, etc.). And, on the other hand, a stray cat that lives under someone's porch and is fed and watered by that person is neither owned by that person nor feral. Even if you argue that the person taking care of the cat has de facto ownership, what if the person dies? It does not suddenly become a feral cat overnight because the person feeding it has died. Once again you have a stray cat that is neither owned nor feral. I can quote proper definitions of "feral" (such as the Oxford English Dictionary's "animals or plants that have lapsed into a wild from a domesticated condition") that make no mention of ownership, and do not rely on assumptions about what is meant. Meters (talk) 06:58, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
 * I'm aware that you disagree. Nevertheless, you are reading it as unowned (stray or and feral) cats which is a misreading of the source. Geogene (talk) 07:18, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
 * I'm not misreading anything. It says "unowned (stray or feral)". I'm interpreting that as meaning an unowned cat can be one that is stray, or one that is feral. Why don't you show us real definition of "feral" that is dependent on the ownership status of the cat? Meters (talk) 07:35, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Your change of the description to simply "Un-owned domestic cat" is not valid. An unowned stay cat in the pound is not a feral cat. Period. Meters (talk) 07:38, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
 * What? A cat in the pound is owned by the pound, obviously. Look up the surrender paperwork of any shelter of your choice, it will say that when you bring them an animal you are permanently conveying ownership. Geogene (talk) 07:43, 5 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Attempting to get this back on track, I've checked a new source, Cat Wars (Marra and Santella, 2016, Princeton University Press). It says, The term "feral" is often used as a catchall for outside cats, though it technically should apply only to animals that have completely returned to the wild, have no reliance upon humans for any sustenance or shelter, and reject any interaction with humans. Other descriptors for outside cats encountered in an urban or suburban environment include "semi-owned," "street," "stray," "colony," and "neighborhood," all of which imply a level of human dependence and thus are more accurate. The waters are further muddied by the fact that many "house" or "pet" or "owned" cats are allowed to wander outside, some for as long as they wish. (p.43). The fact that these terms are being muddled in the real world is why I'm not interested in strict OED definitions, and why I am interested in distinguishing between outdoor cats that are owned and those that aren't. Geogene (talk) 07:54, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
 * I don't think a source saying a term is sometimes used inaccurately in a particular way should be used as a reason for following that inaccurate use. The quoted text says what a feral cat is and gives alternatives for other cat life-styles. —  Jts1882 &#124; talk 08:20, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Well, Here's another source following the same convention. (Levy et.al. "Humane strategies for controlling the feral cat population. Journal of the American Verterinary Medical Association, 2004) The lines between loosely owned outdoor cats, tame strays, and feral cats are often blurred. Owned cats that wander or become lost may become stray cats. Stray cats that have lived in the wild for an extended time may become feral. Homeless cats may be adopted. Thus, individual cats may occupy different categories at various stages of their lives. For the purposes of this discussion, “feral cat” will be used to denote any unconfined, unowned cat, regardless of its socialization status. As a Wikipedia editor, it isn't your place to decide if a term is used "incorrectly" in the sources. You must use the English language as the rest of the world does. Geogene (talk) 08:27, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
 * I am following the source, which says the catchall use is technically wrong and inaccurate.  You are the one distorting the meaning of the sources (here and above about the stray or owned). The last source puts feral cat in quotes to describe how they will use it so makes it clear that this is not a widely accepted definition. —  Jts1882 &#124; talk 09:41, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Sources, and the real world, don't define the term the way you think they should. You're wrong, not them, and what you're doing here is disruptive (WP:IDHT). Here's another example. (Population characteristics of feral cats admitted to seven trap-neuter-return programs in the United States. Journal of Feline Medicine and Surgery (2006) Wallace and Levy.) Because both owned and unowned cats are frequently free-roaming without identification, the line is often blurred regarding classification of loosely owned outdoor cats, tame strays, and unsocialized feral cats (Levy and Crawford 2004). For the purpose of this study, feral cats were defined as any unowned free-roaming cat, regardless of a wild or tame socialization status. Geogene (talk) 15:06, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Your sources don't make the points you say they do. Pointing this out is not disruptive, it is an attempt to stop misleading information being added to the article. Poorly thought out Wikilawyering doesn't strengthen your arguments. Both those studies (with same author) say for the purposes of their study they use the loose definition, not that it is the most accurate or only definition. —  Jts1882 &#124; talk 15:50, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
 * And, here's yet another source (Feral Cats and their Management, University of Nebraska Lincoln Extension) that uses un-owned in its definition. This one actually uses a table to distinquish between feral, free ranging, limited range, and indoor cats, based on whether the cats are owned or not, indoors or not, and tame or not. Quote: Feral cats are domestic cats that have gone wild (figure 1)....Today, domestic cats can be classified into four categories (indoor, limited range, free range, or feral), based on whether they are owned, tame or acclimated to human contact, and allowed to roam extensively outside (table 1)....Feral cats are not owned and therefore have reverted to a wild state. They frequently exhibit aggressive or avoidance behavior around people. . Geogene (talk) 16:05, 5 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Proposal the first sentence and short description of the article should say that a feral cat is an unowned or unsocialized domestic cat living outdoors. Or perhaps a free ranging unowned or unsocialized domestic cat? Geogene (talk) 15:19, 5 February 2021 (UTC)


 * No. This is a basic logic error. "Feral cats are not owned" does not mean that all unowned cats are feral. Just take unowned out of the definition. The important thing is the way feral cats have returned to the wild, not whether or not they are owned. Meters (talk) 19:17, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Well, sources disagree with you on that, as I've already demonstrated. Further, what do you consider to be "the wild," anyway? Do you think that, as "wild animals," they have owners? I find that a logical contradiction. Geogene (talk) 19:19, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Why are you insisting that we must use "unowned"? The definition is fuzzy. Some people include that term and some don't. We don't need to use it, it is not the defining characteristic, and is not always true (a stray cat that is being cared for is not owned, and not feral). Again, "just take unowned out of the definition." Meters (talk) 19:30, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Because it appears to be an essential component of the definition? Why are you insisting that we can't? Where are your sources? Geogene (talk) 19:32, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Further, since you acknowledged that my sources do use the term unowned, what is your objection to the first option I gave above, an unowned OR unsocialized domestic cat living outdoors? Geogene (talk) 20:02, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

Commentary on edits by Jmm26
Regarding this revert, some problems are:
 * Who are the American Association of Feline Practitioners, and why do they deserve so much WP:WEIGHT? As far as I can tell, they're a chapter of the AVMA, and one with unusually strong views about euthanizing healthy feral cats. In 2016, it seems they tried to get the AVMA to drop its conditional non-opposition to euthanizing feral cats and failed. It appears that their proposal failed 94.2% to 5.8% . This implies that their position on euthanizing feral cats is a fringe view within the AVMA.
 * The statement The non-lethal Trap-Neuter-Return approach is now being supported by veterinarians and nonprofit organizations all over the nation, as well as over 550 local laws. is written like a press release or promotional ad.
 * The statement This growing support and trend towards managing and controlling the feral cat population in a more humane, non-lethal TNR approach is similarly promotional in tone, and also POV because not everyone agrees that TNR is humane.
 * The text goes on to make POV claims about "zoocentric ethics" in Wikipedia's voice, claims which are heavily disputed in the literature.
 * The POV being presented in WP's voice is sourced to an alleged (by his opponents) pro-TNR lobbyist working for Best Friends Animal Society  and is being published in a controversial Frontiers Media journal.
 * Why don't we use TNR to control the rat population, and do birds have the same rights that cats allegedly do under "zoocentric ethics"? Geogene (talk) 02:43, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
 * In addition to your comments : this section on TNR is anyway quite long, so not necessary to add more web-based statements, imo. And in view of the link to trap-neuter-return, some of this verbose part can perhaps even be moved to this other page. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 08:06, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Geogene, I agree with all your points here. Neutralitytalk 15:54, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

Commentary Regarding Possibly False, Definitely Biased Picture text

 * One of the statements under a picture of a cat is, "Feral cats are an invasive species and one of the greatest threats to native wildlife." This is objectively false, as it is widely accepted by science that without cats, the world would be overrun with rodents. They are not an "invasive" specie to 90+% of the world. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1702:2308:470:3def:7fcd:8469:1dcd (talk) 10:18, 1 July 2021 (UTC)
 * You could argue that feral cats and any domestic cats are an invasive species anywhere outside the Middle East, but I agree the statement is inaccurate as a generalisation and factual questionable, at best unsourced. It's editorialising rather than encyclopaedic so should be changed. —  Jts1882 &#124; talk 10:56, 1 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Feral cats belong to a distinct species (Felis catus) that is fully separate from F. sylvestris, the African and European wildcats that are the closest wild relatives . As a domestic species that evolved to live with people, they have no native range . Geogene (talk) 22:22, 1 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Regarding this revert :
 * The caption does seem relevant for the image.
 * WP:BAREURL says that There is nothing wrong with adding bare URL references to Wikipedia. If you only have time and inclination to copy the reference URL you found, we thank you for your contribution!
 * I used bare URLs in this case because I thought it so obvious that it's WP:SKYISBLUE territory, meaning you should not have demanded the sources in the first place. (I'm sure all the sources you need are *already* in the body of the article)
 * The comment by the IP above that precipitated this is pseudoscientific nonsense. Geogene (talk) 16:15, 2 July 2021 (UTC)