Lynx owner fights for his pets life

Lynx Article #1

Lynx article #2

The first article has a pic of the cage he built. It looks very solid, to me, but I admit I have no experience in such things. What irritates me is that the county originally said it would be fine so long as the cat was neutered and declawed, and now that the deeds have been done they have changed their mind and no zoos or refuges want the animal because of the modifications that have been done to him!! That is ridiculous that the county went back on their word like that!

I hate the way our state operates with regards to animal laws. :twoguns:

Argh! I hate the declawing of any cat, hearing it got done to a wild big cat kind of makes me sick.

I've had people at the shows seriously ask if we defanged our snakes. Even after I tell them they have no poision. I think if you have to seriously mutlate an animal to keep it, you shouldn't keep it! It sucks the county told him too, the whole situation is unimpressive.

I think Puddy should stay with the guy on the ranch..I mean..the cat obviously can't harm anyone since he lives in such a solid enclosure, plus he was declawed..As long as the owner keeps the animal fed it shouldn't feel the need to want to hunt anything, and as long as all the other animals have had their rabies vaccinations then there shouldn't be any risk of the wild cat getting rabies..So I really fail to see a serious issue here...dumb ass county..

You have to know a little about Kingsville to "get the issue." Kingsville is where all the "pretend rich people live." It used to be a rural farming area- now it is crammed full of $500,000+ dollar McMansions. I guarantee one of the psuedo-richies was "afraid for her children's life," and that's where this is coming from. Plus, they all think that they should be able to dictate what, where and how everyone else does. Irritating beyond words....

Isn't there something in our constitution called ex post facto? Apparently when he got the cat he wasn't breaking any laws(or he never would have been told it was ok to have him if he ...), so how are they going to make one now that says he has to get rid of it?! I can see if the cat had gotten out already or something.

IF there was no specific law when he got the animal, he could go to court and fight to be "grandfathered" in when they pass new laws. I think he should make the county keep its original promise, but I'll bet there was nothing in writing.

dionythicus said:

IF there was no specific law when he got the animal, he could go to court and fight to be "grandfathered" in when they pass new laws. I think he should make the county keep its original promise, but I'll bet there was nothing in writing.

Click to expand...

I am sure, otherwise the case would be cut and dry. At least you'd think so. What cracks me up is that the county is pitching a fit about a cat in a good cage in very rural Kingsville when Baltimore City just signed in an ordinance change barring snakes over 5 foot, Iguanas between 0 and 4 foot, and pigeons, while allowing potbelly pigs and chickens!!! WTH?!

So we're going to piss and moan about a cat out in the sticks, and then allow people in BALTIMORE CITY (cement capital of the world) to own potbelly pigs?! This is what I hate about pet bans- they are so inconsistent, and never, ever based on true facts or even on logical conclusions. They are always based on emotions, he said / she said, or ridiculous pissing contests between disgruntled neighbors.