Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
If you loved your cats you wouldn't let them ROAM around the neighborhood.
We have had a cat "roaming" bylaw in this city for over 20 years, cat people fought it for years until they realized it was better for their cats.
We had a male neutered cat who was 7 years old when the bylaw was installed..no problem he became a house and yard cat...he lived till he was 20 years old!!!! Blind with arthritis but purred like a kitten until the day he died.
Up here its legal to get a trap from the SPCA, catch cats in your yard and turn them over to the SPCA. If the cat has a collar/ ID the owner will be contacted and fined 200 bucks.
Cats and all pets are considered personal property. My cat is my property; to trap and remove it when ownership can be established is theft, and has legal consequences.
Cats that are not owned usually are considered the property of the landowner upon whose land they exist.
If my cat is on your property, you can ask me to keep the cat indoors. You can trap it and bring it home. You can call me every name in the book and fail to invite me to your Christmas party. But you cannot willfully trap my cat and surrender it to a shelter as long as you are aware that the cat is owned (established by collar, description, chip, etc.). My cat is not yours to surrender.
If a feral cat is on your property, and ownership cannot be established, you can trap it and take it to a shelter if that makes your day.
Of course, the humane thing to do is to trap, neuter and release.
I like this solution. Unfortunately, people are not always agreeable to keeping their cats inside. I wish they would. Foremost for the health and safety of the animal, but also out of respect for their neighbors.
Can you please clarify the statement about cats who are not owned? It reads as if a cat that chooses to nap on my patio has somehow become my property.
If my cat is on your property, you can ask me to keep the cat indoors. You can trap it and bring it home. You can call me every name in the book and fail to invite me to your Christmas party. But you cannot willfully trap my cat and surrender it to a shelter as long as you are aware that the cat is owned (established by collar, description, chip, etc.). My cat is not yours to surrender.
Not according to Ohio law. There are two acceptable means of disposing of someone elses property found on your land.
1, Find and return to owner.
2. Turn over to the proper authority.
Both are options and if the person chooses option 2, they are not only doing the right thing, but following what the law says. The law does require that you excecise all diligence to return to the owner if you pick that option, but turning it over to a shelter is equally accepted if thats the option they pick. Its not one if "A" and two if "B", The law is 1 OR 2, property owners option. Or to put it bluntly, It is the finders option to surrender it to the proper authorities, not your's!
We have had a cat "roaming" bylaw in this city for over 20 years, cat people fought it for years until they realized it was better for their cats.
Up here its legal to get a trap from the SPCA, catch cats in your yard and turn them over to the SPCA. If the cat has a collar/ ID the owner will be contacted and fined 200 bucks.
I think we'll see more municipalities passing similar laws. I would suspect the fines are good incentive for people to keep their cats safely indoors.
Ohio law is clear on this point. If you trap someone else's domestic cat, depriving them of ownership, it is a theft, plain and simple. If the value of the cat is $500 it is a felony.
Ohio law is clear on this point. If you trap someone else's domestic cat, depriving them of ownership, it is a theft, plain and simple. If the value of the cat is $500 it is a felony.
Thank you for clarifying the law in Ohio, but again you have not answered my question.
Ohiogirl81 suggested a simple solution to the issue of cats being on property not belonging to their owners. She said the owner of the property should just ask the cat owner to keep their cat inside. I agree that this is the best solution in that the cat is kept safely inside and off property where it does not belong thus respecting the rights of the property owner. IRL this solution works IF the cat owner is a responsible and respectful individual. Sadly, that is not always the case and requests are sometimes met with hostility and the cat is left free to roam. What recourse does the property owner have then?
You've quoted Ohio law and used the rodent population as a "reason" for letting cats roam. Do you have a solution for property owners who prefer not to have cats on their property? Or do you think the rights of a cat owner supercede those of a property owner? I'm trying to understand the mind-set of cat owners that allow their cats to roam free even when they violate the rights of property owners and am hoping you can provide some insight.
The ideal solution, of course, is for all cat owners to keep their cats indoors. It's healthier for the cat, and to me that's the most important reason. But the reality is that unless there is a statute stating otherwise, in most areas cats are free to roam as long as they are properly vaccinated. If someone willingly traps and removes an owned cat, that person is stealing.
Often when neighbors object to an owned cat who roams, they confront the cat's owner with hostility (as illustrated in this thread). That's not going to get you very far. Also, there are plenty of simple, non-violent ways to keep a cat from a precious rose garden. It's not rocket science.
But Wilson's right that there are some benefits to roaming cats. When I was growing up, we had an indoor/outdoor cat who was an accomplished hunter. When she died, the neighbors were quite upset -- not because they loved the cat so much, but because she alone kept the population of mice, chipmunks and moles down throughout the entire neighborhood. The summer we had two feral kittens living in our vegetable garden -- they now live in our home and are spoiled lap cats -- we had a bumper crop of tomatoes.
The ideal solution, of course, is for all cat owners to keep their cats indoors. It's healthier for the cat, and to me that's the most important reason. But the reality is that unless there is a statute stating otherwise, in most areas cats are free to roam as long as they are properly vaccinated. If someone willingly traps and removes an owned cat, that person is stealing.
Often when neighbors object to an owned cat who roams, they confront the cat's owner with hostility (as illustrated in this thread). That's not going to get you very far. Also, there are plenty of simple, non-violent ways to keep a cat from a precious rose garden. It's not rocket science.
But Wilson's right that there are some benefits to roaming cats. When I was growing up, we had an indoor/outdoor cat who was an accomplished hunter. When she died, the neighbors were quite upset -- not because they loved the cat so much, but because she alone kept the population of mice, chipmunks and moles down throughout the entire neighborhood. The summer we had two feral kittens living in our vegetable garden -- they now live in our home and are spoiled lap cats -- we had a bumper crop of tomatoes.
Thank you for taking the time to state your views on the subject. I agree that hostility is not an appropriate way to respond to the issue on either side of the equation. I also agree that keeping a cat inside is better for the health and longevity the cat. I can appreciate your point that there can be benefits to free roaming cats. However, there are also downsides, so I guess your stance on the subject depends on how you evaluate the benefits vs. downsides.
I guess the bottomline is there exists an impasse between those who feel cats should be allowed to roam and those who prefer to enjoy their property cat free. I think the solution to this issue is going to be more and more cities passing "no roaming laws" and having leash/containment laws for cats that mirror those for dogs.
If one of my cats were to get outside, I would be eternally grateful to someone who captured my baby and either contacted me or contact animal control. My cats are collared and chipped and I would get them back.
I would not want my cat wandering and eating food that they shouldn't or have contact with feral cats or neighbors dogs. Nor would I want them playing in traffic.
If I lived in a rural area, I might feel differently. But this is a different world now and I think cats should be kept inside. Especially if I have neighbor that doesn't like strange cats in his yard. And he has every right to not have cats using his garden as a litter box or getting his dog riled up. If the cat were human, this would be called trespassing and vandalism.
I think the solution to this issue is going to be more and more cities passing "no roaming laws" and having leash/containment laws for cats that mirror those for dogs.
I wouldn't be opposed to those types of laws; however, they're more likely to punish the responsible pet owners than they are to deter irresponsible pet owners, and they do little to responsibly limit the growth of feral cat colonies.
Those two kittens I was telling you about -- the now-spoiled lap cats -- were dumped in our alley one summer day. They ran away when we approached them, so we couldn't pick them up to take them to a shelter or rescue. When we called and e-mailed shelters and rescues, we received no response, not even a "Sorry, we're full." Nothing. We already had an ailing, elderly cat, and couldn't bring the kittens into our home even if we could catch them. So we did the best we could with them -- fed them, gave them water, and let them take up residence under our shed. As much as we tried, they resisted letting us within arm's length, even when they were hungry.
Our next-door neighbor threatened to catch them and drown them in the river, because they made his dog bark (so does the mailman; was he going to drown the mailman, too?).
Then the weather turned cold. We were able to lure the male cat into our basement, but the female -- who by this point had been injured in a fight with another cat -- wouldn't budge. We bought a trap -- because again, the rescues who usually lend or rent traps to people did not return our calls -- and after three days of trying, were able to bring the female in. In the end, our elderly cat died, and two kittens found a loving, safe home. This was a four-month process.
Would it have been better for our neighbor and his dog if we'd let the cats starve?
Who would have been punished by a leash law for cats? Not the person who dumped the kittens in the alley (although that person's day will come ...). The person fined would have been me, someone who was desperately trying to save two little innocent lives.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
