I turned off reblogs on that other post because I didn’t expect people to reblog it that much and I think the wording was a bit poor— people seem to be misinterpreting my point the more it spreads.
Regarding the “Ecology of Fear” theory that person was talking about (explanation on that theory here), I do think there is some merit to it. That’s why there are “no dogs” hiking trails, and some wildlife areas are restricted to have no humans contact.
That all being said, many of the opinions I’ve been seeing lately (not just the one I used as an example in the previous post) have taken that to the extreme and have begun saying you shouldn’t let your cat experience the outdoors at all or it should be in a very limited fashion due to this theory.
That is the part I don’t agree with— I think there are ways for both humans and their pets to respectfully and safely experience the outdoors while coexisting with wildlife. This does not include letting your cat free roam, or letting your dog off leash in non-designated areas. I think if we keep our pets under control and remain in “human” areas (ie. porches, sidewalks, backyards, and hiking trails) then we can all enjoy being outside while maintaining both urban and rural wildlife friendly areas.
The OP of the post I linked earlier said it well:
In urban areas there always will be stress of domestic predators like dogs, cats, and humans, I think it’s just up to us to ensure we can minimize that stress by maintaining a respectful distance from wildlife rather than letting our dogs, cats, and human friends invade their space. If we have boundaries between “wildlife” and “people” areas, then wildlife will have more of a chance to relax. Being respectful still means we can still go on walks every day or chill in the backyard. Us and our pets are a part of the environment too and we shouldn’t feel pressured to remove ourselves from it entirely.
