"The Russian Blue" book, anyone?

On Tue, 20 Jan 2004 17:48:55 +0000 (UTC), "*SooZy*"
wrote:


"Tracy" wrote in message
. com...
Jellico is totally correct. The ideal life for a cat, if it can be
managed, is an indoor-outdoor life. Given the cat overpopulation
problem. I would not go so far as to suggest that anyone who is in an
urban environment shouldn't have a cat - a safe and loving home is
always better than no home at all, but I, at least, would express
regret if I were forced to keep my cats indoors 24/7.

I have seen cats wary about going through doors to the outside when
they are concerned whether or not the door will remain open for them
to return. I have never seen a cat in my life that would not joyfully
bound into a yard when it is no longer worried about that. Never,
ever, ever.

my 3 cats are indoor only cats, they have plenty of attention, raw meat
treats, toys, cat towers, play room etc they were bred indoors and have
never been out apart from in a carrier visiting/vet. Ragdoll haven't got
very good self defence, but I bet they would love the outside world really
though if given the chance to go out.

My reasons for keeping them in, is because I have no garden, live on a busy
road, they would get stolen. I chose Ragdolls because they seem happy to
live indoors.

If you live in an area where, for whatever reason, you feel unable to
allow a healthy cat its freedom to roam for at least some time each
day (and only you can judge your area) then don't have a cat.

It really is as simple as that.

--
Bob.

Cats know what we feel. They don't always care, but they know.

Bob,

What a spectacle! You remind me of a 6 year old boy, "Is to!", "Is not!"...
blah, blah, blah. I have 12 cats. All have been rescued from the outdoors.
And all are extremely thankful for it. Their isn't 1 of them that wants to
experience that again. They were miserable, sick, starving, and beaten up
when I found them. And believe me they wouldn't have lived long. Any of
them. (Should I have left them out there?) They all stay in 24/7. The
youngest one who died of an illness was 18 and the oldest was 21. They are
happy, fed, warm, exercised - I play with them every day - cuddled, and
sleep with us. I'm allergic to fleas, and we don't have any now. But we have
had, from the cats when they were first brought into the house. One we
brought in had FeV and had to be euthanized, who knows how many other strays
in the neighborhood he'd infected before then. When you're running your
mouth about not having a cat unless you can let it outside, and how it's so
safe for them - that it's "A FACT", please show me the facts. Don't just
keep saying it's a fact. Show where you got that information. Because I
don't believe a word you say. Nor does any other reasonably intelligent
person reading your postings. So please just put up or shut up, for all our
sakes. Thanks, Bob.

Bec

"Bob Brenchley." wrote in message
...
On Tue, 20 Jan 2004 17:48:55 +0000 (UTC), "*SooZy*"
wrote:


"Tracy" wrote in message
. com...
Jellico is totally correct. The ideal life for a cat, if it can be
managed, is an indoor-outdoor life. Given the cat overpopulation
problem. I would not go so far as to suggest that anyone who is in an
urban environment shouldn't have a cat - a safe and loving home is
always better than no home at all, but I, at least, would express
regret if I were forced to keep my cats indoors 24/7.

I have seen cats wary about going through doors to the outside when
they are concerned whether or not the door will remain open for them
to return. I have never seen a cat in my life that would not joyfully
bound into a yard when it is no longer worried about that. Never,
ever, ever.

my 3 cats are indoor only cats, they have plenty of attention, raw meat
treats, toys, cat towers, play room etc they were bred indoors and have
never been out apart from in a carrier visiting/vet. Ragdoll haven't got
very good self defence, but I bet they would love the outside world
really
though if given the chance to go out.

My reasons for keeping them in, is because I have no garden, live on a
busy
road, they would get stolen. I chose Ragdolls because they seem happy to
live indoors.

If you live in an area where, for whatever reason, you feel unable to
allow a healthy cat its freedom to roam for at least some time each
day (and only you can judge your area) then don't have a cat.

It really is as simple as that.

--
Bob.

Cats know what we feel. They don't always care, but they know.

Bob,

What a spectacle! You remind me of a 6 year old boy, "Is to!", "Is not!"...
blah, blah, blah. I have 12 cats. All have been rescued from the outdoors.
And all are extremely thankful for it. Their isn't 1 of them that wants to
experience that again. They were miserable, sick, starving, and beaten up
when I found them. And believe me they wouldn't have lived long. Any of
them. (Should I have left them out there?) They all stay in 24/7. The
youngest one who died of an illness was 18 and the oldest was 21. They are
happy, fed, warm, exercised - I play with them every day - cuddled, and
sleep with us. I'm allergic to fleas, and we don't have any now. But we have
had, from the cats when they were first brought into the house. One we
brought in had FeV and had to be euthanized, who knows how many other strays
in the neighborhood he'd infected before then. When you're running your
mouth about not having a cat unless you can let it outside, and how it's so
safe for them - that it's "A FACT", please show me the facts. Don't just
keep saying it's a fact. Show where you got that information. Because I
don't believe a word you say. Nor does any other reasonably intelligent
person reading your postings. So please just put up or shut up, for all our
sakes. Thanks, Bob.

Bec

"Bob Brenchley." wrote in message
...
On Tue, 20 Jan 2004 17:48:55 +0000 (UTC), "*SooZy*"
wrote:


"Tracy" wrote in message
. com...
Jellico is totally correct. The ideal life for a cat, if it can be
managed, is an indoor-outdoor life. Given the cat overpopulation
problem. I would not go so far as to suggest that anyone who is in an
urban environment shouldn't have a cat - a safe and loving home is
always better than no home at all, but I, at least, would express
regret if I were forced to keep my cats indoors 24/7.

I have seen cats wary about going through doors to the outside when
they are concerned whether or not the door will remain open for them
to return. I have never seen a cat in my life that would not joyfully
bound into a yard when it is no longer worried about that. Never,
ever, ever.

my 3 cats are indoor only cats, they have plenty of attention, raw meat
treats, toys, cat towers, play room etc they were bred indoors and have
never been out apart from in a carrier visiting/vet. Ragdoll haven't got
very good self defence, but I bet they would love the outside world
really
though if given the chance to go out.

My reasons for keeping them in, is because I have no garden, live on a
busy
road, they would get stolen. I chose Ragdolls because they seem happy to
live indoors.

If you live in an area where, for whatever reason, you feel unable to
allow a healthy cat its freedom to roam for at least some time each
day (and only you can judge your area) then don't have a cat.

It really is as simple as that.

--
Bob.

Cats know what we feel. They don't always care, but they know.

On Tue, 3 Feb 2004 03:35:42 -0500, "Rebecca & Terry Jernigan"
wrote:

"Bob Brenchley." wrote in message
.. .
On Tue, 20 Jan 2004 17:48:55 +0000 (UTC), "*SooZy*"
wrote:


"Tracy" wrote in message
. com...
Jellico is totally correct. The ideal life for a cat, if it can be
managed, is an indoor-outdoor life. Given the cat overpopulation
problem. I would not go so far as to suggest that anyone who is in an
urban environment shouldn't have a cat - a safe and loving home is
always better than no home at all, but I, at least, would express
regret if I were forced to keep my cats indoors 24/7.

I have seen cats wary about going through doors to the outside when
they are concerned whether or not the door will remain open for them
to return. I have never seen a cat in my life that would not joyfully
bound into a yard when it is no longer worried about that. Never,
ever, ever.

my 3 cats are indoor only cats, they have plenty of attention, raw meat
treats, toys, cat towers, play room etc they were bred indoors and have
never been out apart from in a carrier visiting/vet. Ragdoll haven't got
very good self defence, but I bet they would love the outside world
really
though if given the chance to go out.

My reasons for keeping them in, is because I have no garden, live on a
busy
road, they would get stolen. I chose Ragdolls because they seem happy to
live indoors.

If you live in an area where, for whatever reason, you feel unable to
allow a healthy cat its freedom to roam for at least some time each
day (and only you can judge your area) then don't have a cat.

It really is as simple as that.

Moronic posting style corrected. You have not been charged for this
service but I reserve the right to charge in the future if you make
the same mistake again.

Bob,

What a spectacle! You remind me of a 6 year old boy, "Is to!", "Is not!"...
blah, blah, blah. I have 12 cats. All have been rescued from the outdoors.
And all are extremely thankful for it. Their isn't 1 of them that wants to
experience that again. They were miserable, sick, starving, and beaten up
when I found them. And believe me they wouldn't have lived long. Any of
them. (Should I have left them out there?)

If the choice was that - or the rest of their lives in prison, then
yes, you should have left them. However, must as you may dislike
facing facts, that was NOT the only choice. You have the choice to
rescue them and then find them proper indoor/outdoor homes - why
didn't you?

Of course a rescued cat has to spend some time cut off from its
natural style of life, but rescue centers do what they can to keep
that to a minimum. Running such a rescue operation is hard work, and
it is often sad to see the cats go, but for them it is the best
choice.

Part of what I do now is to take in rescues that have been deprived of
their right to roam, it can take a lot of time working with then to
build their confidence back up - but the reward of seeing them running
and climbing outside makes the hard work worth it.

They all stay in 24/7. The
youngest one who died of an illness was 18 and the oldest was 21. They are
happy, fed, warm, exercised - I play with them every day - cuddled, and
sleep with us. I'm allergic to fleas, and we don't have any now.

What you mean is you don't have many. Fleas exist just about
everywhere man and animals exist - except maybe the International
Space Station.

But we have
had, from the cats when they were first brought into the house. One we
brought in had FeV and had to be euthanized, who knows how many other strays
in the neighborhood he'd infected before then. When you're running your
mouth about not having a cat unless you can let it outside, and how it's so
safe for them - that it's "A FACT", please show me the facts. Don't just
keep saying it's a fact. Show where you got that information. Because I
don't believe a word you say. Nor does any other reasonably intelligent
person reading your postings. So please just put up or shut up, for all our
sakes. Thanks, Bob.

The FACT is that none of the UK's major shelters, nor most of the
smaller ones that for various reasons affiliate with the big boys,
will normally rehome a healthy cat to an indoor only environment. This
has been confirmed on numerous occasions by people who work at the
grass roots level - actually finding homes for cats.

The facts are that cats show signs of stress when deprived of time
outside.

If you live in an area where, for whatever reason, you feel unable to
allow a healthy cat its freedom to roam for at least some time each
day (and only you can judge your area) then don't have a cat. To have
a healthy cat, knowing you will keep it in 24/7 marks you are being
cruel, selfish, or both.

Bec


--
Bob.

In the beginning, there was nothing. And God said, "Let there be
Light." And there was still nothing, but you could see a bit better.

On Tue, 3 Feb 2004 03:35:42 -0500, "Rebecca & Terry Jernigan"
wrote:

"Bob Brenchley." wrote in message
.. .
On Tue, 20 Jan 2004 17:48:55 +0000 (UTC), "*SooZy*"
wrote:


"Tracy" wrote in message
. com...
Jellico is totally correct. The ideal life for a cat, if it can be
managed, is an indoor-outdoor life. Given the cat overpopulation
problem. I would not go so far as to suggest that anyone who is in an
urban environment shouldn't have a cat - a safe and loving home is
always better than no home at all, but I, at least, would express
regret if I were forced to keep my cats indoors 24/7.

I have seen cats wary about going through doors to the outside when
they are concerned whether or not the door will remain open for them
to return. I have never seen a cat in my life that would not joyfully
bound into a yard when it is no longer worried about that. Never,
ever, ever.

my 3 cats are indoor only cats, they have plenty of attention, raw meat
treats, toys, cat towers, play room etc they were bred indoors and have
never been out apart from in a carrier visiting/vet. Ragdoll haven't got
very good self defence, but I bet they would love the outside world
really
though if given the chance to go out.

My reasons for keeping them in, is because I have no garden, live on a
busy
road, they would get stolen. I chose Ragdolls because they seem happy to
live indoors.

If you live in an area where, for whatever reason, you feel unable to
allow a healthy cat its freedom to roam for at least some time each
day (and only you can judge your area) then don't have a cat.

It really is as simple as that.

Moronic posting style corrected. You have not been charged for this
service but I reserve the right to charge in the future if you make
the same mistake again.

Bob,

What a spectacle! You remind me of a 6 year old boy, "Is to!", "Is not!"...
blah, blah, blah. I have 12 cats. All have been rescued from the outdoors.
And all are extremely thankful for it. Their isn't 1 of them that wants to
experience that again. They were miserable, sick, starving, and beaten up
when I found them. And believe me they wouldn't have lived long. Any of
them. (Should I have left them out there?)

If the choice was that - or the rest of their lives in prison, then
yes, you should have left them. However, must as you may dislike
facing facts, that was NOT the only choice. You have the choice to
rescue them and then find them proper indoor/outdoor homes - why
didn't you?

Of course a rescued cat has to spend some time cut off from its
natural style of life, but rescue centers do what they can to keep
that to a minimum. Running such a rescue operation is hard work, and
it is often sad to see the cats go, but for them it is the best
choice.

Part of what I do now is to take in rescues that have been deprived of
their right to roam, it can take a lot of time working with then to
build their confidence back up - but the reward of seeing them running
and climbing outside makes the hard work worth it.

They all stay in 24/7. The
youngest one who died of an illness was 18 and the oldest was 21. They are
happy, fed, warm, exercised - I play with them every day - cuddled, and
sleep with us. I'm allergic to fleas, and we don't have any now.

What you mean is you don't have many. Fleas exist just about
everywhere man and animals exist - except maybe the International
Space Station.

But we have
had, from the cats when they were first brought into the house. One we
brought in had FeV and had to be euthanized, who knows how many other strays
in the neighborhood he'd infected before then. When you're running your
mouth about not having a cat unless you can let it outside, and how it's so
safe for them - that it's "A FACT", please show me the facts. Don't just
keep saying it's a fact. Show where you got that information. Because I
don't believe a word you say. Nor does any other reasonably intelligent
person reading your postings. So please just put up or shut up, for all our
sakes. Thanks, Bob.

The FACT is that none of the UK's major shelters, nor most of the
smaller ones that for various reasons affiliate with the big boys,
will normally rehome a healthy cat to an indoor only environment. This
has been confirmed on numerous occasions by people who work at the
grass roots level - actually finding homes for cats.

The facts are that cats show signs of stress when deprived of time
outside.

If you live in an area where, for whatever reason, you feel unable to
allow a healthy cat its freedom to roam for at least some time each
day (and only you can judge your area) then don't have a cat. To have
a healthy cat, knowing you will keep it in 24/7 marks you are being
cruel, selfish, or both.

Bec


--
Bob.

In the beginning, there was nothing. And God said, "Let there be
Light." And there was still nothing, but you could see a bit better.

People, mellow out! If a cat is loved, has a lap to crawl into, if it
purrs, it's happy! Who cares about the rest?

kilikini

People, mellow out! If a cat is loved, has a lap to crawl into, if it
purrs, it's happy! Who cares about the rest?

kilikini

"Rebecca & Terry Jernigan" wrote in message
...
Bob,

What a spectacle! You remind me of a 6 year old boy, "Is to!", "Is
not!"...
blah, blah, blah. I have 12 cats. All have been rescued from the outdoors.
And all are extremely thankful for it. Their isn't 1 of them that wants to
experience that again. They were miserable, sick, starving, and beaten up
when I found them. And believe me they wouldn't have lived long. Any of
them. (Should I have left them out there?) They all stay in 24/7. The
youngest one who died of an illness was 18 and the oldest was 21. They are
happy, fed, warm, exercised - I play with them every day - cuddled, and
sleep with us. I'm allergic to fleas, and we don't have any now. But we
have
had, from the cats when they were first brought into the house. One we
brought in had FeV and had to be euthanized, who knows how many other
strays
in the neighborhood he'd infected before then. When you're running your
mouth about not having a cat unless you can let it outside, and how it's
so
safe for them - that it's "A FACT", please show me the facts. Don't just
keep saying it's a fact. Show where you got that information. Because I
don't believe a word you say. Nor does any other reasonably intelligent
person reading your postings. So please just put up or shut up, for all
our
sakes. Thanks, Bob.

Bec

SNIP

Bec,

I know I am stating the obvious but Bob never provides links or any
searchable references to any of his "facts." He will occasionally say "for
more information follow this link" but the link will be to one of his own
previous posts which doesn't have any back-up other than a vague mention to
"UK's major shelters, nor most of the smaller ones that for various reasons
affiliate with the big boys." This is what trolls do. They make statements
repeatedly which inflame and will never provide any facts. If they had
enough facts to prove they are right then the argument would die. Trolls
only post enough to keep arguments alive.

When over his head he will accuse his challengers of "moronic posting style"
or simply say, "abuse report filed." When bored, he will occasionally act
like a net nanny. He will respond to someone's post with; "abuse report
filed" without stating why or to whom it was filed. This is a flame to
cause people to react and start a flurry of postings. If he actually made
as many abuse reports as he suggests, the ISP's would have cut him off for
e-mail flooding. They probably have killfiled him. Which is what I should
have done a long time ago but I find him so darn laughable.

Instead of killfiling him, I have his posts highlighted. I am always
interested to study trolls in their natural environment.

For more information on trolls, net nannies, etc. follow this link. Not my
web site but darn funny.
http://www.winternet.com/~mikelr/flame1.html


P.S.
I remembered after writing this that Bob does provide one link to a
netiquette site.

--
Chester
http://chester_vaughn.tripod.com/

My psychiatrist said. . .
"Positive results within a year, or your mania back."

"Rebecca & Terry Jernigan" wrote in message
...
Bob,

What a spectacle! You remind me of a 6 year old boy, "Is to!", "Is
not!"...
blah, blah, blah. I have 12 cats. All have been rescued from the outdoors.
And all are extremely thankful for it. Their isn't 1 of them that wants to
experience that again. They were miserable, sick, starving, and beaten up
when I found them. And believe me they wouldn't have lived long. Any of
them. (Should I have left them out there?) They all stay in 24/7. The
youngest one who died of an illness was 18 and the oldest was 21. They are
happy, fed, warm, exercised - I play with them every day - cuddled, and
sleep with us. I'm allergic to fleas, and we don't have any now. But we
have
had, from the cats when they were first brought into the house. One we
brought in had FeV and had to be euthanized, who knows how many other
strays
in the neighborhood he'd infected before then. When you're running your
mouth about not having a cat unless you can let it outside, and how it's
so
safe for them - that it's "A FACT", please show me the facts. Don't just
keep saying it's a fact. Show where you got that information. Because I
don't believe a word you say. Nor does any other reasonably intelligent
person reading your postings. So please just put up or shut up, for all
our
sakes. Thanks, Bob.

Bec

SNIP

Bec,

I know I am stating the obvious but Bob never provides links or any
searchable references to any of his "facts." He will occasionally say "for
more information follow this link" but the link will be to one of his own
previous posts which doesn't have any back-up other than a vague mention to
"UK's major shelters, nor most of the smaller ones that for various reasons
affiliate with the big boys." This is what trolls do. They make statements
repeatedly which inflame and will never provide any facts. If they had
enough facts to prove they are right then the argument would die. Trolls
only post enough to keep arguments alive.

When over his head he will accuse his challengers of "moronic posting style"
or simply say, "abuse report filed." When bored, he will occasionally act
like a net nanny. He will respond to someone's post with; "abuse report
filed" without stating why or to whom it was filed. This is a flame to
cause people to react and start a flurry of postings. If he actually made
as many abuse reports as he suggests, the ISP's would have cut him off for
e-mail flooding. They probably have killfiled him. Which is what I should
have done a long time ago but I find him so darn laughable.

Instead of killfiling him, I have his posts highlighted. I am always
interested to study trolls in their natural environment.

For more information on trolls, net nannies, etc. follow this link. Not my
web site but darn funny.
http://www.winternet.com/~mikelr/flame1.html


P.S.
I remembered after writing this that Bob does provide one link to a
netiquette site.

--
Chester
http://chester_vaughn.tripod.com/

My psychiatrist said. . .
"Positive results within a year, or your mania back."

Oh Dear Bob - You still haven't given me anything to back up your facts
except your own words. Even if I were to believe you, it's very sad that you
consider your house a prison, I don't consider mine one. My cats are
perfectly happy. And I can tell the difference. The rules may be different
in the UK (although I find that hard to believe) but in the US all the SPCAs
and private rescue agencies have policies requesting you raise your cats
indoors ONLY. I didn't realize they were all animal abusers too. Imagine my
surprise when I found out. They site all the reasons that have so patiently
been explained to you by so many people. You know, those silly life
expectancy theories, illness, starvation, fighting, hit by cars, etc... Have
you ever wondered why so many people are for keeping them indoors and so few
for outdoors? Could it be there are more humane people out there than not?
Or ones who know better than you? I know you'll find that hard to believe,
but consider the possibility, please. I don't like to be so snotty with
people, but I don't usually get as angry as you make me. Most people will
listen to another's point of view in a reasonable manner, and then respond
appropriately. But you just simply tell everyone they are out and out wrong,
couldn't possibly be right, and in the nastiest of ways. You'll certainly
never persuade anyone with your technique even if your argument did have any
redeeming qualities. Just keep calling people names, I'm sure we'll all come
to love and respect your point of view that way. And that's the important
thing, isn't it Bob?

Bec

"Bob Brenchley." wrote in message
...
On Tue, 3 Feb 2004 03:35:42 -0500, "Rebecca & Terry Jernigan"
wrote:

"Bob Brenchley." wrote in message
.. .
On Tue, 20 Jan 2004 17:48:55 +0000 (UTC), "*SooZy*"
wrote:


"Tracy" wrote in message
. com...
Jellico is totally correct. The ideal life for a cat, if it can be
managed, is an indoor-outdoor life. Given the cat overpopulation
problem. I would not go so far as to suggest that anyone who is in
an
urban environment shouldn't have a cat - a safe and loving home is
always better than no home at all, but I, at least, would express
regret if I were forced to keep my cats indoors 24/7.

I have seen cats wary about going through doors to the outside when
they are concerned whether or not the door will remain open for them
to return. I have never seen a cat in my life that would not
joyfully
bound into a yard when it is no longer worried about that. Never,
ever, ever.

my 3 cats are indoor only cats, they have plenty of attention, raw
meat
treats, toys, cat towers, play room etc they were bred indoors and
have
never been out apart from in a carrier visiting/vet. Ragdoll haven't
got
very good self defence, but I bet they would love the outside world
really
though if given the chance to go out.

My reasons for keeping them in, is because I have no garden, live on a
busy
road, they would get stolen. I chose Ragdolls because they seem happy
to
live indoors.

If you live in an area where, for whatever reason, you feel unable to
allow a healthy cat its freedom to roam for at least some time each
day (and only you can judge your area) then don't have a cat.

It really is as simple as that.

Moronic posting style corrected. You have not been charged for this
service but I reserve the right to charge in the future if you make
the same mistake again.

Bob,

What a spectacle! You remind me of a 6 year old boy, "Is to!", "Is
not!"...
blah, blah, blah. I have 12 cats. All have been rescued from the
outdoors.
And all are extremely thankful for it. Their isn't 1 of them that wants
to
experience that again. They were miserable, sick, starving, and beaten up
when I found them. And believe me they wouldn't have lived long. Any of
them. (Should I have left them out there?)

If the choice was that - or the rest of their lives in prison, then
yes, you should have left them. However, must as you may dislike
facing facts, that was NOT the only choice. You have the choice to
rescue them and then find them proper indoor/outdoor homes - why
didn't you?

Of course a rescued cat has to spend some time cut off from its
natural style of life, but rescue centers do what they can to keep
that to a minimum. Running such a rescue operation is hard work, and
it is often sad to see the cats go, but for them it is the best
choice.

Part of what I do now is to take in rescues that have been deprived of
their right to roam, it can take a lot of time working with then to
build their confidence back up - but the reward of seeing them running
and climbing outside makes the hard work worth it.

They all stay in 24/7. The
youngest one who died of an illness was 18 and the oldest was 21. They
are
happy, fed, warm, exercised - I play with them every day - cuddled, and
sleep with us. I'm allergic to fleas, and we don't have any now.

What you mean is you don't have many. Fleas exist just about
everywhere man and animals exist - except maybe the International
Space Station.

But we have
had, from the cats when they were first brought into the house. One we
brought in had FeV and had to be euthanized, who knows how many other
strays
in the neighborhood he'd infected before then. When you're running your
mouth about not having a cat unless you can let it outside, and how it's
so
safe for them - that it's "A FACT", please show me the facts. Don't just
keep saying it's a fact. Show where you got that information. Because I
don't believe a word you say. Nor does any other reasonably intelligent
person reading your postings. So please just put up or shut up, for all
our
sakes. Thanks, Bob.

The FACT is that none of the UK's major shelters, nor most of the
smaller ones that for various reasons affiliate with the big boys,
will normally rehome a healthy cat to an indoor only environment. This
has been confirmed on numerous occasions by people who work at the
grass roots level - actually finding homes for cats.

The facts are that cats show signs of stress when deprived of time
outside.

If you live in an area where, for whatever reason, you feel unable to
allow a healthy cat its freedom to roam for at least some time each
day (and only you can judge your area) then don't have a cat. To have
a healthy cat, knowing you will keep it in 24/7 marks you are being
cruel, selfish, or both.

Bec


--
Bob.

In the beginning, there was nothing. And God said, "Let there be
Light." And there was still nothing, but you could see a bit better.