Talk:Cat

Unsourced claim, unsupported by evidencem

Article claims that stray cats are leading to the extinction of birds and small animals.

This is not supported by any linked source, and all evidence (including RSPB studies) show that cats have a negligible impact on local animal populations. 86.161.76.245 (talk) 23:07, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

@86.161.76.245 one word, australia. Emalin1005 (talk) 01:41, 10 May 2025 (UTC)

That is indeed one word. —Tamfang (talk) 20:36, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

@86.161.76.245 https://www.nature.com/articles/ncomms2380 Emalin1005 (talk) 01:57, 10 May 2025 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 6 May 2025

During the COVID-19 pandemic, cat ownership was reported to provide emotional support, with many owners perceiving their cats as sources of comfort and companionship that helped alleviate stress and loneliness. Dr Joanna Marchewka (talk) 10:56, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

Comment. While PLOS ONE appears to be a scholarly journal with a solid editorial process, the editor proposing the edit, based on username, is an author of the study, and the request is that user's sole edit to date. —C.Fred (talk) 11:08, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

I think that this reference is more relevant to the article on the pandemic than for this on the domestic cat. – BhagyaMani (talk) 11:40, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{Edit semi-protected}} template. It is not clear where the information would go or whether it is WP:DUE in this article. Perception312 (talk) 20:59, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

References

Grammar change in taste section

Under the 'taste' section of the article, I just found a small grammar hiccup, in the quote "...leaving them with no ability to taste sweetness. But they do have taste bud receptors...". I suggest that the second sentence just be changed to start with "However, they do have taste bud receptors..." to make it flow more smoothly. HalcyonSky18 (talk) 13:31, 9 May 2025 (UTC)

Courchamp et al. (2001)

Courchamp et al. (2001) says cats are a major factor, "In particular, introduced feral cats are known to be a major threat to many island bird species", but also passages like "Rats have a lower predation rate on birds than cats, but they are much more numerous and can have a higher impact on the prey"; "over the last 400 years, rats and cats are said to be responsible for 54% and 26% of island extinctions caused by predators, respectively". The present prose is fine and doesn't misconstrue the source. The entire point of invoking the mesopredator release concept is that cats cannot be characterized simply as the "dominant" factor. Good grief. Remsense ‥ 论 16:04, 10 May 2025 (UTC)

Acknowledging my support/consensus for the long-standing wording as it accurately represents the source. Traumnovelle (talk) 20:25, 10 May 2025 (UTC)

I deleted mention of the mesopredator release effect [1] because it was wildly undue for a single paragraph on the relevant topic, cat predation of wildlife. Note that this secondary literature review, Review and synthesis of the global literature on domestic cat impacts on wildlife [2] only devotes a single sentence to it. I also suspect that the article text, In nearly all cases, the cat cannot be identified as the sole cause for reducing the numbers of island birds is likely false and that this literature review, which says, A vast global literature documents that free-roaming domestic cats (Felis catus) have substantial negative effects on wildlife, including through predation, fear, disease and competition-related impacts that have contributed to numerous wildlife extinctions and population declines worldwide. is a much more authoritative source. Geogene (talk) 23:32, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

The review contains: 'Although no studies showed only positive effects, eight studies showing negative effects also found significant positive associations between cats and one or more response variable. One of these studies found a positive association with species richness of non-native birds, and six found positive associations on some oceanic islands where cats are top or middle-level predators that, in some cases, suppress negative impacts on wildlife by depredating invasive predators such as rats.' Traumnovelle (talk) 00:46, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

Yes, six studies out of sixty three found evidence of a mesopredator release effect. But this article was devoting 35 out of 203 words in total, or 17% of the relevant content about the global effects cats have on wildlife, to talk about this obscure phenomenon that's only relevant to certain oceanic islands. This is WP:UNDUE. Geogene (talk) 00:58, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

Did all 57 of those studies evaluate parameters that relate to the mesopredator release effect? Traumnovelle (talk) 01:01, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

While I've got Word Counter open, let me also point out that this literature review is about 6,250 words long, and devotes 32 of them to the mesopredator release effect.

Add by edit: I found another sentence in the review discussing the mesopredator release effect: A few studies on islands found cats have apparent positive effects by depredating other invasive predators (Courchamp et al., 1999), but even in these cases, removing both cats and their invasive prey provides the greatest benefit to wildlife (Rayner et al., 2007). This reinforces my opinion that Courchamp (1999) is a minority POV, or a very minor aspect of a global problem, that shouldn't be included in such a brief treatment of this subject. The review makes it clear enough that cats do not benefit wildlife. Geogene (talk) 01:53, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

Is the domestic cat still considered a "big cat"?

When I last lookoed at this, must have been about 30 years ago, there were 3-4 criteria for whether a cat was a "big" cat or a "little" cat. At that time, despite its size, the domestic cat was considered a "big cat". Is this still the case? I understand that criteria have changed? 2001:8003:E46B:3E01:293E:E86:AAE6:E787 (talk) 10:51, 4 July 2025 (UTC)

It was never considered a big cat. - UtherSRG (talk) 13:26, 4 July 2025 (UTC)

Big cat says: The term "big cat" is typically used to refer to any of the five living members of the genus Panthera, namely the tiger, lion, jaguar, leopard, and snow leopard. Our little friend is in genus Felis. —Tamfang (talk) 03:32, 5 July 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply, but I find it confusing. I can recall quite clearly discussing with a cat lover, about 30 years ago, the reasons (which I dont recall) that the domestic cat was indeed considered a big cat. Are you sure of this? 2001:8003:E46B:3E01:699E:B9EF:682D:66D1 (talk) 09:10, 6 July 2025 (UTC)

Absolutely !! And what did your "cat lover friend" at the time consider to be a small cat ? BhagyaMani (talk) 11:38, 6 July 2025 (UTC)

Since you cannot recall any of the criteria for such inclusion, I am inclined to dismiss this as a product of faulty memory. I, of course, never misremember anything. —Tamfang (talk) 21:32, 6 July 2025 (UTC)

"On islands with seabirds up to 60% of cats consume birds"

@FredTheDeadHead: Again, if the source says With seabirds present on islands, birds are found on average in 60% of the guts or scats of cats on islands [3] that does not necessarily support your revision, that says On islands with seabirds up to 60% of cats consume birds. I'll note that @Traumnovelle: is also reverting you [4], so you should not be reverting this back into the article without seeking consensus here first.

Since we're discussing it, I don't know what this factoid is meant to convey, other than as a vague cats on islands are particularly destructive observation, that could probably be expressed in more encyclopedic manner, or perhaps be removed as redundant if the article is already hitting that point. I don't find the source, a text on cat behavior, whose authors endorse letting cats roam at will outdoors in most cases (on page 70), because they believe this is necessary for the cats' welfare, to be particularly reliable for cats vs. wildlife issues, and I think there are better sources available for this aspect in conservation biology journals. Geogene (talk) 16:56, 29 July 2025 (UTC)

The original sentence is not supported by the source. You are welcome to make an improvement, but restoring a factually incorrect sentence does not make sense.

> so you should not be reverting this back into the article without seeking consensus here first.

This judgement is hypocritical. Why do you yourself not seek consensus? FredTheDeadHead (talk) 19:37, 29 July 2025 (UTC)

After reading the source the original claim 'On islands, birds can contribute as much as 60% of a cat's diet.' is not supported by it and should be either removed or rewritten. It states 60% of cats gut/scat content (on average) contains evidence of bird consumption. Traumnovelle (talk) 19:39, 29 July 2025 (UTC)