Cat poop or wild animal droppings? Warning; pile picture!

It's not about who would be right in the last instance. If a duty-bound confession from cat owners gives you better sleep, no one can help you. It is worthless for outdoor cats due to impracticality. At best, someone comes by every time and cleans your lawn.

My argument was proportionality: If you have to take action yourself anyway, why use a live trap for €50 instead of valerian-lavender-mint infusion for €0.50?

It only makes sense if you need to work towards your peace of mind by reprimanding the owner.

By the way, the idea that you can leave a cat in a trap for even a few hours during weather like now is nonsense. In addition to the price, you are also tying unnecessary work to your leg.

Question: Why?

Whether you like it or not, nobody here cares.

After I absolve myself of any guilt, if you were my neighbor, I would of course pick up the poop on your property every day and disinfect the spot with Sagrotan.

The Darmstadt Regional Court, for example, has a different view than you.

And on the topic of animal cruelty, everyone agrees. You loudly and clearly call for that.

[QUOTE="haydee, post: 271660, member: 9254And on the topic of animal cruelty, everyone agrees. You call out loudly and clearly about that.[/QUOTE] Hello haydee NO!!! Animal cruelty is very far from me. I would and will never accept it. I have no problem killing animals. But I have a problem torturing animals. I would never do that. I have killed animals, for example, to eat them. Not in Germany. I am not a hunter. And as a child we were sent out to find young cats and, if no one wanted them, to kill them. That was normal. But I have never tortured an animal. That is far from me. I also do not see it as cruelty if the cat owner refuses to cooperate in bringing the cat to reason themselves. What is wrong with that? Steven

The Darmstadt Regional Court, for example, has a different opinion than you.

Hello haydee

that is incorrect. This ruling exactly expresses my opinion. A lawsuit was filed claiming that up to 5 cats were roaming in the garden. The garden owner also complained about the contamination caused by feces. However, this was not substantiated with any evidence and therefore was not taken into account in the judgment. The judge ruled that up to 2 cats can be in the garden as "visitors." The court does consider this a "disturbance," but it must be tolerated. The corollary: as soon as the cats defecate in the garden, this is no longer acceptable. Don’t just see the supposedly positive aspect in the judgment.

Steven

You are not my neighbor, so we don't need to discuss this further. As I said, no one here cares. I interpret the ruling differently. However, the neighbor is not allowed to keep an unlimited number of cats. Which I also welcome, but from different perspectives.

Where did you grow up? I do not condemn the collecting and, if necessary, killing of young cats! The uncontrolled breeding of cats is a problem.

Steven, I understand your argument regarding involving the cat owner. Honestly, I don’t know anyone who wouldn’t be immediately willing to solve the problem with you if it was proven to be their pet. There are always a few ignorants everywhere. However, where I have to vehemently disagree with you is your last conclusion to kill the cat if necessary. YOU MAY NOT do that and you do not have the right to do so. If the cat owner finds out, harsh penalties will be imposed. That you feel it is your personal right is a completely different matter. But that does not make it legal. So you are forced to resolve it differently.
By the way, you have to be very careful in choosing your methods. Live traps are not for free use. Even in our animal welfare organization, there were cases where we accidentally caught a cat with an owner (a classic outdoor cat). The cat was cared for, registered with Tasso, and kept in the animal shelter. However, the owner caused a huge fuss to find her pet. Apparently, that was not quite cheap. The association had to reimburse the woman for the costs. We should not have caught the cat. It did not matter that we did not do it intentionally.
Even spreading pepper in the garden is very borderline. If the cat gets irritated, you may have to pay for veterinary costs.
Regarding the feces, courts decide very differently. Ultimately, they seem to agree that you have to tolerate up to 2 cats on your property as visitors. Whether the deposited feces are to be accepted as a reasonable restriction of your ownership is seen very differently.
If the cat deposits the sausage in the flowerbeds, neatly buried, probably every court will laugh at you. In the case of andimann, it might look a bit different, since the kitty deposits it so conspicuously. But how it will be decided we will only see when it comes to a case.
Contrary to some indications, there is NO uniform jurisdiction to which one can refer.