Citing the historical reasons for their existence doesn't really help the case that they aren't a problem now because the exact reason that it's now and not then. Cats may have had a purpose when they were introduced but in most cases they don't actually serve that purpose anymore. And we can ignore that point entirely because feral cats don't even fit the definition of animals with a job to begin with. They aren't owned by anyone, they are just another animal in the environment. One that happens to be an invasive species causing extraordinary damage to the environment.
http://e360.yale.edu/feature/courting_controversy_with_a_new...
It's too late to go and kill all the cats. It's been tried in Australia for decades and it's a dismal failure.
It's arguable that trying to kill cats or rabbits or whatever now is just species Xenophobia.
Barring that, if you want to minimize suffering of future stray cats/dogs (or limit environmental impact), it makes sense to do a one-time massive nationwide effort of scooping up all stray cats and dogs, and either spaying/neutering them, or culling them.
The statement you quoted said cats "should be no more allowed to roam than <other domesticated livestock>". Your father's livestock were allowed to roam. Ergo, maybe the author wasn't talking about the farm your father grew up on. Something something false equivalencies or something.
Did farmers originally lock up their barn cats in the barns?
Did Jesus have a pet cat? No. Cats are the devil. Or maybe the author was not prescribing a one-size-fits-all solution.
We have a litany of examples of "Europeans brings domestic cats to newly-explored island, ecological devastation ensues", I don't think we need to digress with stories unrelated to the environments to which the author refers (which I gather to be urban and suburban environments).
In the country, I could imagine letting cats outside -- though only after getting them neutered or spayed -- but in the city or suburbs, where I have lived, keeping them inside makes more sense.
The mice were getting to be a problem, btw, because they were burrowing between the walls of my house and making noise at night, and doing god knows what damage in there.
My wife was once on the porch with him. She was gardening (lots of potted plants, etc). He was laying there in the sun and snapped up to grab a hummingbird in flight. She grabbed him and he spit it into her hand. The hummingbird flew away a few seconds later. That was when I realized how efficient a predator he was.
EDIT: and he did get into a fight with a raccoon once, that required stitches. So, living inside will definitely increase the health and length of life.
Also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_Know_Why_the_Caged_Bird_Sing...
Seems unlikely. Citation needed.
'A pet that spends more time outdoors may live on average 2 to 3 years less than a cat that lives exclusively indoors.'
That indoor cats live longer seems reasonably well attested. However here's some anecdata: sum of my parents' 8 indoor/outdoor cats + my 3 indoor/outdoor cats: none have lived less than 13 years (two made it to 18). My parents two indoor-only cats both died before reaching 13. I have assumed the cats that go outside survived due to the low number of vehicles and predators they had to deal with.
There are other reasons to keep cats inside, as is the subject of the article. The problem is much worse in Australia where birds and small marsupials nest on the ground.
IIRC some cattle out West are allowed to graze on government/public land. Later in the season when it's time to get them back to the farm they check their brands so they know which Cattle belong to their farm.
It should not be too surprising what apex predators like cats (we make them tiny, but they are at the top of the food chain nonetheless) can do to ecosystems if crazy people (us) confuse them with cuddly toys and breed and feed them without control.
Just for nitpicking: How can they be "apex predators" "at the top of the food chain" when they're eaten by coyotes e.g.?
That IS the problem.
Actually, my Dad grew up on a mountain where, every day after school, he would come home and gather up the pig and cows that had been let free to eat for the day. So there's certainly use cases for letting a pig roam free and gather some forage. By the time I was growing up we had chickens, which had to be brought in at night to prevent predators from eating them, but otherwise could roam the yard to eat worms and the like.
Also a horse that kept the grass in the yard short without us having to mow it. There were goats, but they weren't allowed free mostly because they went and ate mountain laurel and poisoned themselves.
It's kind of strange to take a working animal like a cat, bred for pest control, and stick in a little indoor room and never let them out. Did farmers originally lock up their barn cats in the barns? I don't think so. It's actually a problem when they accidentally get locked up in a shed or a car or something, because they aren't out doing their jobs.
Seems nuts to me that the author belittles letting them outside.