Is it okay for neighbors to trap and dispose of cats?

I think they shouldn't do that at all, and I think this guy is a mean cat killing machine, considering cats that don't get adopted at the pound often get pts... They do legally have the right, though, and that is one more reason why cats should be indoors...
It kills me the my neighbor have her cats inside and out - everybody pretty much in my building have cats, but she is the only one who has them in/out... She always has her door half open, so they can come and go, and she claims that they don't go far. They don't even have collars!!!! I keep telling her it is dangerous, and she absolutely LOVES those kitties; I even bought them collars with tags and everything, but nothing - she doesn't put them on...
My point being this guy is awful and definitely wrong, but the owners have responsibilities too, and should be aware that situations like this may come with the territory of having an outside cat.
I didn't notice a collar on the kitty either; neither the owner claimed it had a collar...

I think it's disgusting what he's done He certainly wouldn't be popular in my street

Thank god he isn't my neighbor... We would be at war!

I think the guy is pretty disgusting. My neighbor across the street lets their cats roam, which is against the law but whatever. The cat uses a patch of my back yard that is desert landscape as its' litter box. I have two dogs, well one ESPECIALLY that is a cat poop eater. The last time he ate some he got very sick, vomited badly a few times and had terrible diarrhea for 24 hours. Complaining to the owners of the house (they have renters) does no good. But I would never call AC on that cat, I just couldn't do it. It isn't the cats fault it is the owners fault.

I have a few problems with this.

First off. I hate cat trappers with a passion. I think most of them have way too much time on their hands, or too much hate in their heart.

With that said. I know the law. That person has every right to trap a cat on his property. However, just like here he can not keep that cat confined for more than a 24hour period.

Of course who is going to prove he trapped a cat and left it in the cage for two days? There is no proof.

This "400" dollar cat wasn't even microchipped. They assumed their cat was dead instead of assuming it went to the pound which is where they should have started looking in the first place.

Next: If it is a county facility and run by the goverment then those people should have a right to or what we call "Public information request". That's the law here. Not sure why it isn't there.

Also, the cat sneezing and drooling. That cat probably has URI. It was at the shelter for two days, they can get it that fast.

This is why I tell people you run a calculated risk when you let your cat outdoors. People could trap them, they could get run over, someone else might take a liking to them, and yes...they can be eaten by coyotes. These are all factors I have thought about with my Forest who is an indoor outdoor cat. However, if he ever came up missing my first thought wouldn't be "he's dead" it would be "I need to go to the shelter and file a lost report." Then again..My Forest is microchipped, and I get him scanned every year on his yearly exams.

I have to add one more thing in. These people should be happy that they got their cat back. Most people who trapped cats don't take them to the shelter. They take them to where they will never be found again.

It is legal. is it moral or ethical, that is another issue. Just another reason why my pets are indoor protected by people who love them.

They know there is the danger of coyotes in their area. They know there is the danger of cars. They know he could be picked up and turned into a shelter.

And they still let him out?????

Without a chip or collar!!!

I wish people who let their cats roam freely would try to understand that just because they love their cats doesn't mean everyone does. Some people don't like cats and don't appreciate them digging and pooping in their flower beds, stalking birds at their bird feeders and otherwise being a nuisance.

I don't condone knowing trapping a neighbors pet and turning it into a shelter. I would certainly never do it but I think the primary blame here is with the cat owner.

And this sentence right here is what I have to try to explain to people on a daily basis. They are just shocked that a person can trap an animal coming onto their property.

Many people still believe that letting the cat outdoors is the best thing for their cat; I've even heard people say it's cruel to keep them in. Perhaps they are misguided or uninformed, but I believe most people try to do the right thing for the kitties they love.

On a moral level, I feel that the cat and the owners are the ones who were wronged. There was no malice in their actions, and that can't be said of the neighbor. I am always very cautious about blaming the victims...

I agree that on a strictly moral level the one who took the cat to the shelter was in the wrong assuming they knew the cat was a neighbors pet. But, everybody knows there are immoral people in the world. It is our responsibility to take reasonable measures to protect ourselves and those dependent on us from the foreseeable, immoral acts of others. Naturally there are unforeseeable acts that we can't protect against. I don't think what happened as related in the article was unforeseeable.

This is why it annoys me when people outside the UK think it's the norm that Brits for let their cats outside.

It isn't the norm because i don't let mine out, so i know it's not just the UK.

We can't possibly foresee the immoral acts of others. More accurately, we weigh the known risks against the benefits, and act accordingly. The more safety-conscious we are, the more risks we have to consider.

If someone takes a risk I feel is a bad choice and one that I personally would not take, and there is a problem, does that mean the person brought it on himself? On some level, that he deserved it?

BTW, I think kitties should be indoors.

Can't a decent neighbor make an effort to go to the cat owner & have a talk? I know this sounds like too simple of a solution these days but it's always worth a try for a first resort.

There are two sides to every story and this one is from someone who lets their supposedly $400 cat out to roam as it pleases, fully aware that it can get killed by coyotes, and then based on hearsay claims her cats must have been "baited with tuna" and trapped in order to land at the pound.

Why doesn't she just keep her cats indoors instead of letting them roam all over the place if she is that worried out her "baby?" Something does not smell right about this story.

A guy I work with has a 13 year old cat that is an indoor-outdoor cat. I have tried to talk him into make her an inside only cat, but his stock reply is,
"but she LOVES to go outside, she WANTS to go outside"

Last week this poor kitty, had to go to the Vet because she was not eating and screamed when picked up. They took her to my Vet, she has a broken sternum, with a lot of bruising. Some despicable creep dropped kicked that poor cat, I would be willing to lay money on it. Their neighborhood is not the best.

Believe me, I did say, "I told you so"

Oh My, that is so disturbing to hear.

I used to work with a woman who lived in a not so desireable area on Chicago's south side. She started to tell me a story about how some neighborhood kids HUNG her dog by the neck and killed him. I was so upset by her story I had to stop her in the telling because I was ready to start bawling!

This thread made me think of something else that someone told me several years ago:

An old friend of mine told me how his younger brother used to go hunting cats in his neighborhood by duck taping a knife to a broom handle and he would scower the allyways of his neighborhood for any feral cats. He considered them fair game.

SICK

and most people don't think twice calling the council about a roaming dog yet cats can go into any yard they want to.

I don't necessarily agree with keeping cats indoors all the time, but they shouldn't be roaming free bothering others. That's what enclosures or harnesses are for, to let them be outside but still safe.

I have indoor cats & I have outdoor cats. Everyone's fixed, everyone's vetted. I live in the country - there are coyotes, but haven't lost a at to a coyote since they've been fixed (4 years now) - the cats don't really roam anywhere. There is no reason to - they have food (wet & dry food), water, shelter. They come in the house if it's too cold. Is it ideal? No. My farm kitties range from 18, 15, 11, 10, 9, 7, 6, & the twins are 3....so I must be doing something right - and I don't love them any less than the housecats.

That said - if I paid $400 for an 'exotic' Chausie - I wouldn't be dumb enough to let him roam outside without any form of ID, esp in a populated area. For a cat to get sick in a shelter is not uncommon, as stated above usually if we have a URI going around the new comers get it within 24-48 hours (due to, in part, stress). Their cat could well have been causing damage to the neighbor's property....and if so he had every right to trap the cat. Doesn't make him any less of a jerk in my mind, esp if he let the cat sit for 2 days!

I have neighbors with indoor/outdoor cats and there is no talking to them about it. I actually don't mind - in one case a now RB cat, Mittens, was helping us by killing the moles infesting the lawn. (Regular grub treatment takes care of the moles, now.)

The article says the neighbor trapped *trespassing* cats. I'm sure the trespassing came before the trapping. It wouldn't make any sense for him to lure them onto his property just for the purpose of trapping them. If they otherwise stayed off his property he wouldn't have any reason to bother with them.

*sigh* I really wish some people weren't so quick to judge others and assign blame.

It isn't a matter of judging or blaming. It is a matter of recognizing the realities of the world. Nobody is saying that the neighbor who did the trapping did the right thing.

As you all know I love cats. My husband was one of those hard-headed guys that felt Bijou should be allowed outside because he "loved going outside". I worried myself sick every time he was out but there was no swaying my husband. Finally Bijou got hurt and had a big abscess on his back. Hubby said it would heal by itself and I argued that it wouldn't and that he needed to be seen by our vet. Hubby then said he wasn't going to pay money to a vet needlessly. At that point I said that I would pay for the vet fees but because I was paying Bijou was not to be allowed out anymore as I couldn't afford vet fees for an outdoor cat. DH agreed. $500 later Bijou is now an indoor cat only.

I don't condone what the neighbour did in this instance but the owner is the one that assumes responsibility for an animal in their care. If they let their cat roam then they have to be willing to accept whatever happens to their cat - right or wrong.

It's time to stop blaming everyone else for the results of our own actions in all things, not just in this instance of a cat.

How do you know this is true?

If you are referring to the part about the tuna, the article says someone at the shelter told the cat owner about the person trapping cats. Presumably, they told him the person uses tuna to lure them into the traps. I've done that myself to catch strays. It doesn't imply that the person was luring cats on to their property with tuna which is what a couple of posts here seem to be suggesting.

That's not quite what the article says. The quote is this:
It does not say that this information came from anyone at the shelter. In fact there is no way to tell where they got it. The bit about luring with tuna came from the cat owner's husband (who is hardly an objective witness), he told it to a reporter, the reporter wrote it into the story, and now it has somehow become a fact.
No proof, no evidence, just words from people who feel they were wronged.

That isn't enough for me to believe it.

On second read, you're right.

Using food as bait to trap an animal is common practice tough. I'd be surprised if the person didn't do it. As far as I'm concerned it's irrelevant anyway except that it would put the person doing the trapping in a worst light if they had used food to lure the cat onto their property where otherwise the cat would have stayed off their property. But I very seriously doubt that is what happened.