What do people’s attitudes have to do with facts? Your own link says:
In NZ, free-roaming cats primarily prey on small mammals and birds, creating ecological concerns, although cats may also control introduced pest species. The impact of cats on the environment, along with community nuisance and potential zoonotic risks, have prompted calls for national cat management policies. Public support exists for such policies, though translating this into behavioural change remains challenging.
Cats themselves are an introduced species in many parts of the world. Many island animals in particular haven’t evolved for a hunter like them. People’s attitudes toward what to do with cats doesn’t change the fact that they threaten wildlife, which even your own links acknowledge.
Not sure what my country of origin or status of cat ownership has to do with any of that. I don’t need to be anywhere special or have a cat to understand the ecological damage they can cause.
Are you from New Zealand or are you also American?
EDIT: Here, this is New Zealand - https://www.companionanimals.nz/articles/new-research-sheds-light-on-kiwi-attitudes-to-outdoor-access-for-cats
Are you one of the few cat owners in New Zealand who don’t want their cats outdoors? Is that who I’m talking to? Else I’m not gonna bother.
What do people’s attitudes have to do with facts? Your own link says:
Cats themselves are an introduced species in many parts of the world. Many island animals in particular haven’t evolved for a hunter like them. People’s attitudes toward what to do with cats doesn’t change the fact that they threaten wildlife, which even your own links acknowledge.
Not sure what my country of origin or status of cat ownership has to do with any of that. I don’t need to be anywhere special or have a cat to understand the ecological damage they can cause.