 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion GroupsGeneral TopicsCat AnecdotesHealth and BehaviorRescue CatKB.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Cat Forum / Cat Anecdotes / January 2008Feral cats in Los Angeles go to work
Great article! :) http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-feralcats29dec29,0,2242260,full.story?co ll=la-home Joyce  SignatureTo send email to this address, remove the triple-X from my user name. > Great article! :) > > http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-feralcats29dec29,0,2242260,full.story?co ll=la-home > > Joyce What a great idea! Finally, a reason to be proud of my home 'town'! Joy >> http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-feralcats29dec29,0,2242260,full.story?co ll=la-home > What a great idea! Finally, a reason to be proud of my home 'town'! I know. Every time I hear about some organization or institution putting down rat poison to take care of their rodent problem, I ask myself, "Have these people heard of these animals called 'cats'?" They've done a great job of controlling rodents for millenia, which is how we ended up keeping them as pets. Joyce SignatureTo send email to this address, remove the triple-X from my user name. > >> http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-feralcats29dec29,0,2242260,full.story?co ll=la-home > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > Joyce Indeed. There are some historians that believe the 'black death' (Bubonic plague) was helped along because of people's superstition about cats. They didn't want the cats around as they were associated as being a witch's familiar. No cats around = more rats around. Rats carried fleas... fleas carried plague... and leas don't care who they bite. I'm sure the rats carried the plague as well, and bit a few people on their own. Signature-- The ONE and ONLY lefthanded-pathetic-paranoid-psychotic-sarcastic-wiseass-ditzy former-blonde in Bloomington! (And proud of it, too)© email me at nalee1964 (at) insightbb (dot) com http://community.webshots.com/user/mgcmdjeep >> >> http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-feralcats29dec29,0,2242260,full.story?co ll=la-home >> [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > plague... and leas don't care who they bite. I'm sure the rats carried > the plague as well, and bit a few people on their own. There are also cultures that valued cats for their ratting skills. Many Italian towns recognized that cats killed rats, and gave cats the freedom of the town for protecting them from the plague. So if you go to Italy, you see "gatti" everywhere. And there is really something about Italy that goes well with cats-- the "bella figura," the love of beautiful things, the sunniness, the food, the determination to work to live, not live to work. Cats look great in Roman ruins. ;) However, Italy still has a lot of catching up to do on spaying and neutering. > There are also cultures that valued cats for their ratting skills. In England prior to the Middle Ages, a person could be fined for killing a cat but only once a kittens eyes opened since before then the kitten was not useful as a rat catcher. Thereafter there was a scale of fines depending on whether the cat was a kitten, an adult or a mouser One king had a novel way of dealing with someone who killed another person's cat. The dead cat would be suspended by the tail so only the nose touched the ground and the killer would then shovel grain over the body until it was completely covered. The amount of grain was the compensation to the cats owner (they didn't think of themselves as slaves thern) and was considered to represent the grain the owner would lose to mice and rats because the cat wasn't around to kill them. Lesley Slave of the Fabulous Furballs > In England prior to the Middle Ages, a person could be fined for > killing a cat but only once a kittens eyes opened since before then > the kitten was not useful as a rat catcher. Not very good at looking forward, were they? :) Joyce SignatureTo send email to this address, remove the triple-X from my user name. > There are also cultures that valued cats for their ratting skills. Many > Italian towns recognized that cats killed rats, and gave cats the freedom > of the town for protecting them from the plague. So if you go to Italy, > you see "gatti" everywhere. And there is really something about Italy that > goes well with cats-- the "bella figura," the love of beautiful things, the > sunniness, the food, the determination to work to live, not live to work. I remember several years ago there was a tour, put on by some travel group, called "Cats and Culture", which was a trip through Italy to check out various museums and historical sites, as well as to visit areas that had large cat colonies, such as in Rome. I thought that was a great travel idea, and toyed with going, but alas, I didn't have enough money for it. Joyce SignatureTo send email to this address, remove the triple-X from my user name. >> >> http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-feralcats29dec29,0,2242260,full.story?co ll=la-home >> [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >> >> Joyce Don't forget about dogs they will eat anything > Indeed. > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > plague... and leas don't care who they bite. I'm sure the rats carried > the plague as well, and bit a few people on their own. Not to jump off subject but think where humanity would be if those 800 years of superstitious nonsense never happened Also think about the Egyptians they knew the value of having cats around Now if New York will take a hint and leave the feral cat colonies by the airport alone or transplant them to a place needed > There are some historians that believe the 'black death' (Bubonic plague) > was helped along because of people's superstition about cats. They didn't > want the cats around as they were associated as being a witch's familiar. > No cats around = more rats around. Rats carried fleas... fleas carried > plague... and leas don't care who they bite. I've heard this a lot, and at first glance, it makes a lot of sense. But then it occurred to me that, as every cat slave knows, cats also carry fleas. So how does keeping cats around reduce the flea population? They didn't have Advantage back then. :) Joyce SignatureTo send email to this address, remove the triple-X from my user name. > > There are some historians that believe the 'black death' (Bubonic > > plague) [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > Joyce They also didn't let the cats into their living quarters or their beds like we are inclined to. Jo > They also didn't let the cats into their living quarters or their beds like > we are inclined to. > >Inclined to? Remind me when we had a choice! Lesley Slave of the Fabulous Furballs > <bastXXXette@sonic.net> wrote in message >> I've heard this a lot, and at first glance, it makes a lot of sense. But >> then it occurred to me that, as every cat slave knows, cats also carry >> fleas. So how does keeping cats around reduce the flea population? They >> didn't have Advantage back then. :) > They also didn't let the cats into their living quarters or their beds > like we are inclined to. I'm sure they didn't choose to let rats in, either. Rats would just come in, but if someone discovered rats in the house, wouldn't they kill them or shoo them out? I'm actually curious about this. Joyce SignatureTo send email to this address, remove the triple-X from my user name. > > <bastXXXette@sonic.net> wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > in, but if someone discovered rats in the house, wouldn't they kill them > or shoo them out? Rats don't just 'shoo' away. They may run from a human, but as soon as the human vacates the room, they are back. > I'm actually curious about this. > > Joyce Signature-- The ONE and ONLY lefthanded-pathetic-paranoid-psychotic-sarcastic-wiseass-ditzy former-blonde in Bloomington! (And proud of it, too)© email me at nalee1964 (at) insightbb (dot) com http://community.webshots.com/user/mgcmdjeep > <bastXXXette@sonic.net> wrote in message >> I'm sure they didn't choose to let rats in, either. Rats would just come >> in, but if someone discovered rats in the house, wouldn't they kill them >> or shoo them out? > Rats don't just 'shoo' away. They may run from a human, but as soon as the > human vacates the room, they are back. As you can tell, I've never had rats. There are apparently some rats in or around the building I live in, maybe in the basement, because Smudge has delivered a couple of dead ones to my front door. But thankfully I've never seen on *in* my apartment. So I've never had to shoo one, or attempt to shoo one, at least! I don't mean to be a smartass about this, I'm really just wondering. I've heard a lot that the mass killing of cats during the Middle Ages (and as part of the widespread witchhunt) helped to spread the plague, because with fewer cats around, there were more rats, and more fleas. I just don't understand why having more cats around wouldn't also mean more fleas. Wouldn't cats and rats hang out in pretty much the same places? Where the rats go, the cats would follow. Joyce SignatureTo send email to this address, remove the triple-X from my user name. > > <bastXXXette@sonic.net> wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > > Joyce Think in terms of how many rats and mice one cat can kill in a lifetime. Especially one that depends on them for food. Now think how many rats and mice that is over ten years if they aren't killed by that single cat but are allowed to reproduce at will for that period of time. Jo > Think in terms of how many rats and mice one cat can kill in a lifetime. > Especially one that depends on them for food. Now think how many rats and > mice that is over ten years if they aren't killed by that single cat but are > allowed to reproduce at will for that period of time. Good points! Joyce SignatureTo send email to this address, remove the triple-X from my user name. > > Think in terms of how many rats and mice one cat can kill in a lifetime. > > Especially one that depends on them for food. Now think how many rats and > > mice that is over ten years if they aren't killed by that single cat but are > > allowed to reproduce at will for that period of time. >Good points! Actually no. If a cat kills a thousand rats from a population of ten thousand rats, the population won't decline enough to matter. It isn't as if those thousand rats could have an offspring of a million rats in few generations and those million rats have an offspring of a trillion rats in a few more generations. Food supplies aren't infinite. If cat(s) take out a portion of the rats' population, the survivors will simply take up the slack and in fact be healthier as a whole due to the cat(s) pruning out the genetically inferior. > > <bastXXXette@sonic.net> wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > > Joyce I think they're different types of fleas. Also, rats are very prolific. I imagine they were breeding and were located in lots of places. They probably outnumbered the cats by quite a bit, especially after so many cats were killed off, so the cats couldn't cover every place where there were rats. Joy >> I just don't >> understand why having more cats around wouldn't also mean more fleas. > I think they're different types of fleas. I was wondering about that - that would make a lot of sense. Joyce SignatureTo send email to this address, remove the triple-X from my user name. > >> I just don't > >> understand why having more cats around wouldn't also mean more fleas. > > > I think they're different types of fleas. > > I was wondering about that - that would make a lot of sense. And according to the history channel, it's true. The fleas were specifically rat fleas, which need rats to survive and reproduce, but will jump on and bite on almost anything warm blooded when their host dies. Cats (and terriers, which I don't think were in wide use either in places hard hit by plague) tended to serve as a buffer, keeping living and dead rats out and away from human living quarters, and cleaning up the rat corpses fleas and all promptly after killing the rats. Maeve >^..^< Signaturehttp://volatiledreams.deep-ice.com http://www.flickr.com/photos/minnow/ > > <bastXXXette@sonic.net> wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > in, but if someone discovered rats in the house, wouldn't they kill them > or shoo them out? Plain to see you've had no experience with rats! Fortunately there was no disease involved, but I had rats in my attic in Pasadena. Outside of an occasional scuffling sound at night, I was unaware of them, until critters called "oriental rat mites" moved downstairs into my clothes closets (and clothes). You think FLEA bites itch, try mites!!!!! > Plain to see you've had no experience with rats! Plain to see that you didn't catch my previous post, where I said just that! > Fortunately there was no disease involved, but I had rats in > my attic in Pasadena. Outside of an occasional scuffling > sound at night, I was unaware of them, until critters called > "oriental rat mites" moved downstairs into my clothes > closets (and clothes). You think FLEA bites itch, try > mites!!!!! Hmm... you know, I suffer from an inordinate amount of itching. Very, very intense itching, actually. It's only in particular places, pretty much confined to my extremities. My hands (backs of hands only, not palms), my forearms (back again, not the under part), and also my feet - both top and the soles. If it were just my feet, I'd assume athlete's foot. But since it also happens on my hands - also on my fingers - and on my forearms (but not the upper arms or shoulders, or anywhere on my torso), I figure it must be something else. Flea bites, maybe? The itching is so intense it's very hard not to scratch. Within a few minutes, I can remove the top layer of my skin, and then I have a big sore. Sometimes this happens before I become conscious of the fact that I'm scratching, and by the time I realize it, it's too late. Could this be from mites? Does it make sense that mites would attack only the extremities? Joyce SignatureTo send email to this address, remove the triple-X from my user name. > Hmm... you know, I suffer from an inordinate amount of itching. Very, > very intense itching, actually. It's only in particular places, pretty [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > > Joyce It is indeed possible. I assume you've seen a dermatologist? Has he done scrapings? Dan > It is indeed possible. I assume you've seen a dermatologist? Has he done > scrapings? I haven't seen a dermatologist, but I did ask my regular doctor. Didn't get any conclusive response. Guess I should see the specialist, eh? :) Joyce SignatureTo send email to this address, remove the triple-X from my user name. > I haven't seen a dermatologist, but I did ask my regular doctor. Didn't > get any conclusive response. Guess I should see the specialist, eh? :) > > Joyce Yeah, I think so. It would also probably be a good idea to specifically request that he do mite scrapings initially. He might not get around to doing so until he's exhausted several other possibilities. > > Plain to see you've had no experience with rats! > [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > Could this be from mites? Does it make sense that mites would attack > only the extremities? Fleas tend to bite you on the ankles and lower legs (but you can see the bites - tiny red spots, not as big as mosquito bites). The mites bit around the waist area - bites had the same appearance as flea bites, but different bodily area and different biter. > Joyce > There are some historians that believe the 'black death' (Bubonic plague) > was helped along because of people's superstition about cats. They didn't > want the cats around as they were associated as being a witch's familiar. > No cats around = more rats around. Rats carried fleas... fleas carried > plague That has to be an urban legend. The Black Death was c.1350, the witch panic didn't start until the 1580s. The Black Death was more often blamed on the Jews, who had no particular association with cats. Though people doing appallingly cruel things to cats didn't necessarily have anything to do with a belief in witches. Some kinds of ritual cat torture survived in Scotland until around 1800. (Maybe the people who took part in it all emigrated to Texas to do it to rattlesnakes instead). ============== j-c ====== @ ====== purr . demon . co . uk ============== Jack Campin: 11 Third St, Newtongrange EH22 4PU, Scotland | tel 0131 660 4760 <http://www.purr.demon.co.uk/jack/> for CD-ROMs and free | fax 0870 0554 975 stuff: Scottish music, food intolerance, & Mac logic fonts | mob 07800 739 557 >> There are some historians that believe the 'black death' (Bubonic plague) >> was helped along because of people's superstition about cats. They didn't >> want the cats around as they were associated as being a witch's familiar. >> No cats around = more rats around. Rats carried fleas... fleas carried >> plague >That has to be an urban legend. The Black Death was c.1350, the witch >panic didn't start until the 1580s. The Black Death was more often >blamed on the Jews, who had no particular association with cats. >Though people doing appallingly cruel things to cats didn't necessarily >have anything to do with a belief in witches. Some kinds of ritual cat >torture survived in Scotland until around 1800. (Maybe the people who >took part in it all emigrated to Texas to do it to rattlesnakes instead). Such torture is still common. I torture my kitty by stuffing his face with freshly grilled tuna until he can't walk. > > There are some historians that believe the 'black death' (Bubonic plague) > > was helped along because of people's superstition about cats. They didn't > > want the cats around as they were associated as being a witch's familiar. > > No cats around = more rats around. Rats carried fleas... fleas carried > > plague > That has to be an urban legend. The Black Death was c.1350, the witch > panic didn't start until the 1580s. The Black Death was more often > blamed on the Jews, who had no particular association with cats. There was more than one wave of plague epidemic, though, so witch hunts and cat superstition might have coincided with a later epidemic. As for Jews, yes - part of keeping kosher involved certain kinds of cleanliness in the home. So Jewish homes and villages tended to be less attractive to rats. Joyce SignatureTo send email to this address, remove the triple-X from my user name. > > > There are some historians that believe the 'black death' (Bubonic plague) > > > was helped along because of people's superstition about cats. They didn't > > > want the cats around as they were associated as being a witch's familiar. > > > No cats around = more rats around. Rats carried fleas... fleas carried > > > plague > > That has to be an urban legend. The Black Death was c.1350, the witch > > panic didn't start until the 1580s. The Black Death was more often > > blamed on the Jews, who had no particular association with cats. >There was more than one wave of plague epidemic, though, so witch >hunts and cat superstition might have coincided with a later epidemic. >As for Jews, yes - part of keeping kosher involved certain kinds of >cleanliness in the home. So Jewish homes and villages tended to be less >attractive to rats. What certain kinds of cleanliness? I'm only familiar with such superstitious prohibitions such as mixing meat/dairy, eating port or shelfish, etc. I don't recall anything in the bible about keeping your trash and excrement out of your water supply or anything else truly beneficial. They certainly didn't know about quarantine and the sick and healthy not assembling together to share their infections. The black plague swepth through europe without any care of the population's ethnic or religious background. On Jan 4, 7:50 pm, bastXXXe...@sonic.net wrote: > Great article! :) > > http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-feralcats29dec29,0,2242260,fu... It's a great idea and a good article. I think they exaggerate, more than a little, the difficulty of making pets out of ferals. It is hard but they seem to say it is impossible. I have furry friends who can tell them it isn't, although none of the ones who live in this house are not former ferals. Will in New Haven -- "Well, my work here is done. If you need me again, just admit to yourself that you're screwed and die." -- Pete Abrams "Sluggy Freelance" > Joyce > -- > To send email to this address, remove the triple-X from my user name. > On Jan 4, 7:50 pm, bastXXXe...@sonic.net wrote: >> Great article! :) [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Will in New Haven Since cats are all different, just like people, there are probably some feral cats that can't be turned into pets. However, as you have obviously proved, most of them can be tamed with love and persistence. Joy >>On Jan 4, 7:50 pm, bastXXXe...@sonic.net wrote: >> [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > Since cats are all different, just like people, there are probably some > feral cats that can't be turned into pets. I've encountered a few "pets" who were "domestic" in name only! (Willing to accept food and shelter, and play with the toys provided, but any petting and snuggling was purely on THEIR terms, and seemed to be regarded merely as necessary "payment" for benefits received.) > Great article! :) > > http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-feralcats29dec29,0,2242260,full.story?co ll=la-home > > Joyce Well, cats were first domesticated for their ability to control the rodent population - apparently things haven't changed all that much! (The Egyptians even went so far as to deify them.)
|
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.