>>Read the other papers as well. Some papers claim 500 and some say 1,000 plus and you know it.



Sooo......now you're going to claim that the article you yourself cited is lying about those 500 cats??



Cmon, Tom, don't try to weasel out now. You claimed loudly and confidently that there were many research papers "proving" that the feral cats were "soley" responsible for the decline of the woodrat. Yet you haven't produced a SINGLE paper to back up your claim. And you CAN'T produce those papers, because your claim ISN'T TRUE.



You claimed loudly and confidently that NOTHING was being done about the feral cat problem. Yet I have shown you, and the article you yourself cited shows, that hundreds of thousands of dollars are being spent to decrease the deleterious effects and the overall population of those cats. Again, your claim ISN'T TRUE.



I'm not going to quibble with you about how much money is enough, or about how much reduction in the population is enough. I am satisfied to disprove your false claims, and leave it at that.



As for your claim that "cats are never mentioned" -- hell, Tom, the article you just cited says a lot about cats. All of the articles I cited last night talk about cats. Of COURSE cats are mentioned in *many* discussions about these endangered species....
-----
----



0.1 Peruvian rainbow boa (Amaru)

2.0 Brazilian rainbow boas (TBA)

0.3 Honduran milksnakes (Chicchan, Chanir, Hari)

2.6 corns (Cetto, Tolosa, TBA)

1,000,000.1,000,000 other critters

[ Reply To This Message ] [ Subscribe to this Thread ] [ Hide Replies ]