• mcv@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 days ago

    That feral cats are not necessarily escaped domestic cats like you claim. Many are the distant descendants of domestic cats, born from a long line of feral cats. Like the person you responded to claims, and like you seem to want to deny. Those cats are not immediately wild cats like you suggest; they’re feral. You and the person you reply to focus on only part of the feral population.

    • MentalEdge@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      7 days ago

      I made no such claim.

      The person I’m responding to was trying to equate the word “feral” with the word “wild” in order to argue that feral animal populations aren’t a problem, and one caused by humans.

      They are, and it is.

      You make this mistake as well when you write “Those cats are not immediately wild cats”.

      They are not wild. They will never be wild. A feral animal cannot become “wild” except by the words casual definition. Feral animals are invasive species introduced by humans. Something which the word “feral” inherently includes by definition.

      Whether they are first or later generation is a distinction without a difference.

      • mcv@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 days ago

        No, you were the first person to start about “wild” animals. The person you responded to never mentioned wild animals and was talking about feral cats. You’re the one who equated that with wild cats. They also never said feral cats weren’t a problem; quite the opposite: that those were the cats that ate birds, and not the domestic cats that came outside. I don’t know whether that’s true, but that’s the argument they were making, and not the strawman you’re making out of it.