Frank Warner wrote in news:301020091424294630% snipped-for-privacy@verizonDOTnet.net:
I wish there was a similar product for repelling dogs. Many of my neighbors let their dog crap around the building(without picking it up as required) instead of walking 20 extra feet to the perimeter of the property,where people don't walk. At least cats bury their poop.
OK, and why do I have to listen to the neighbour's (2 doors down, with a street in between) yappy Jack Russel Terriers barking incessently at all hours? Two of the little "all mouth and heart" buggers, for over an hour at a time at least 3 times a day from 6:30 in the morning till
10:00 at night.
My cats never bothered anybody - one was too scared of it's own shadow to even leave the back deck - and everyone picks on the cats.
Call the police department aand animal control. If they fail to do their job, show up at a city council meeting and explain the problem using the name and address of the offending animals and owners. that should get results, especially if the local newspaper covers ciity council meetings. Give the reporters a copy of your written out comments so they have all the particulars. Works well where I live.
Explain to me why I should have to pay $14.95 plus shipping to keep the neighbor's cat out of my yard -- instead of the neighbor keeping his damn cat in his *own* yard.
STATE OF ILLINOIS EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT SPRINGFIELD, April 23, 1949.
To the Honorable, the Members of the Senate of the Sixth-sixth General Assembly:
I herewith return, without my approval, Senate Bill No. 93, entitled, "An Act to Provide Protection to Insectivorous Birds by Restraining Cats." This is the so-called "Cat Bill." I veto and withhold my approval from this Bill for the following reasons:
It would impose fines on owners or keepers who permitted their cats to run at large off their premises. It would permit any person to capture or call upon the police to pick up and imprison cats at large. It would permit the use of traps. The bill would have statewide application -- on farms, in villages, and in metropolitan centers.
This legislation has been introduced in the past several sessions of the Legislature, and it has, over the years, been the source of much comment -- not all of which has been in a serious vein. It may be that the General Assembly has now seen fit to refer it to one who can view it with a fresh outlook. Whatever the reasons for passage at this session, I cannot believe there is a widespread public demand for this law or that it could, as a practical matter, be enforced.
Furthermore, I cannot agree that it should be the declared public policy of Illinois that a cat visiting a neighbor's yard or crossing the highway is a public nuisance. It is in the nature of cats to do a certain amount of unescorted roaming. Many live with their owners in apartments or other restricted premises, and I doubt if we want to make their every brief foray an opportunity for a small game hunt by zealous citizens -- with traps or otherwise. I am afraid this Bill could only create discord, recrimination and enmity. Also consider the owner's dilemma: To escort a cat abroad on a leash is against the nature of the cat, and to permit it to venture forth for exercise unattended into a night of new dangers is against the nature of the owner. Moreover, cats perform useful service, particularly in rural areas, in combating rodents -- work they necessarily perform alone and without regard for property lines.
We are all interested in protecting certain varieties of birds. That cats destroy some birds, I well know, but I believe this legislation would further but little the worthy cause to with its proponents give such unselfish effort. The problem of cat versus bird is as old as time. If we attempt to resolve it by legislation why knows but what we may be called upon to take sides as well in the age old problems of dog versus cat, bird versus bird, or even bird versus worm. In my opinion, the State of Illinois and its local governing bodies already have enough to do without trying to control feline delinquency.
For these reasons, and not because I love birds the less or cats the more, I veto and withhold my approval from Senate Bill No. 93.
Dogs and cats, like humans, can do things that forfeit their right to live. Such things as attacking people, biting children, being aggressive as a common behavior, and others. Yes, relocation or adoption is an option, but sometimes the problem just follows them, and the new owners have a hospital bill. Sometimes the animal can be rehabilitated and trained out of the unacceptable behavior, and that falls under either category, relocation or termination.
To me, any dog that bites me or a child goes either out the door, or in the ground. Saves on drama and second guessing later. Too many good dogs that love people and who are sociable and loveable to tolerate a chain saw who may go off at any time.
Just MHO, YMM(and probably does)V
And don't give me any shit about poor pet owner. I currently own a Corgi who the adoption agency would not accept because he's a biter, and a Lab who's dying of cancer. I like dogs. Just not ones that I have to stay awake over.
It is both, sort of. First, to attract the male by showing the female is of reproductive age and healthy and vigorous, and thus likely to produce strong healthy babies, and then to feed the kid once it arrives.
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.