"cats will always wrap themselves around your feet when you're descending a steep flight of stairs bearing a large amount of crockery on a tray".

Good old narrative imperative.

"...nine lives won't save your pet from if it falls from your sixth-floor balcony."

I read somewhere that the amount of damage an average domestic cat takes from a fall rises in severity (but is not in and of itself lethal) until you (or the cat) get to the fifth storey, where it plateaus at multiple broken bones and other attendant injuries, IIRC this is due to the low terminal velocity, self-righting abilities and inherent athleticism and (presumably) shock absorbing properties of the general make-up of said felines.

*rereads*

Sorry - it is a little verbose isn't it?

</erudition>

"nine lives won't save your pet from if it falls from your sixth-floor balcony"

No, but anything higher than the seventh floor and they'll probably be fine. I learnt everything I know from QI, don't-cha-know.

This is long overdue. Should contain items such as

1) keep out of other people's gardens

2) leave the birds alone

3) sandpits aren't toilets and neither are bark mulched borders

4) if guides to encouraging wildlife in gardens continue to have the "presence of cats will discourage <add-small-animal-name-here> from frequenting your garden" statements in them then you'll get an ASBO

A cat responds

1) Other people's things is an unknown concept - all your gardens are belong to us

2) The birds welcome their feline overlords and are happy to provide for our amusement

3) Well why do you put sand and bark-mulch in them?

4) Totally unnecessary I assure you - we are quite happy to be anti-social on a purely voluntary basis.

.... not Government, they live in London.

Do they have nowt better to do with my money.

Although my cat will be very pleased at this basic outline of her Feline Rights, and next time I place her into the garden for some quiet time after she has made an attempt at ethnically cleansing the goldfish bowl, she will no doubt appeal to the High Court.... I could see myself up infront of the man in the curly wig for a breach of Feline Rights.

"essential to provide it with a nutritionally balanced diet from early in its life".

Deep fried Mars bars then.

Since a cat will always land on its feet and toast will always land butter side down, what happend if you tie a piece of toast buttered side up to the back of a cat?

Paris cause this would make her brain explode.

There is already plenty of information on the web about "providing for your hamster's physical needs". But will the Scottish Parliament be providing free Gaffer tape?

is worth it to get rid of the wretched h5n1 birds, and small bubonic vermin. Good for the Scottish government.

"Since a cat will always land on its feet and toast will always land butter side down, what happend if you tie a piece of toast buttered side up to the back of a cat?"

perpetual motion!

the cat/toast will spin forever

black helicopters as if the government finds out its 'the island' for me

Cats are nature's perfect little predators. They appear cute and cuddly, but employ stealth and cunning to efficiently torture and kill without remorse.

They have been an inspiration to me and many other I.T. professionals.

So I guess that's the I.T. angle, for lack of a better one.

Agree 200% - I'm thinking of keeping a European eagle owl purely to remove the cats here since the SuperSoaker™ seems to be losing it's effectiveness.

If someone can explain to me adequately the cat owners' paradox (ie. how you can "love my cat to bits" and in the next breath open the front door and boot it out into the driving rain for 8+ hours without a thought) I may reconsider.

Paris because we've probably all seen her "cat" :)

There is someone sitting in an office somewhere in edinurgh pumping this bullsh$t out. We are paying for it.

This was probably consulted on of course so any fee was 4 times as much for creating this bullsh$t.

I think we need a wellfare code on office IT Admins.

Terrible thing, jealousy. Another example of the clear blue water opening up between the Westminster Government and the Holyrood one...

I presume the article is intended as a 'what a waste of taxpayers' money' type of thing; think on - is this kind of attention to everyday life more or less of a waste of money than, say, Trident?

The reason for the guidance, you miserable, penny-pinching sassunachs, is to give ordinary people guidance and set the foundations for stopping cruelty to animals, either by accident or design. By publishing this type of guidance (which is draft, for consultation, please note) the Scottish Government (not Executive Chris, try to keep up) can protect animal rights and ensure that any examples of cruelty can be dealt with.

All we're trying to achieve in Scotland is a society that's fair to all. And why not?

But if your cat shits in my garden then I'm still going to shoot it.

"If someone can explain to me adequately the cat owners' paradox (ie. how you can "love my cat to bits" and in the next breath open the front door and boot it out into the driving rain for 8+ hours without a thought) I may reconsider."

There is no paradox. My cats come and go as they please through the cat flaps I thoughtfully provide for them. They choose to go out in the rain. They are particularly adept at anticipating the end of a rain storm as this is the best time to be in position to nab the small rodents who come out from shelter early, before the cats presence can be heard or smelled.

I've never "booted" a cat anywhere. It's more fun to watch what they are up to when they think you can't see 'em. It's like a little safari in your garden.

Apropos the original story though - I don't think it's the job of any government (Scottish or otherwise) to be telling people how to look after their pets. It's part of the responsibility of pet ownership. They'll be publishing leaflets on how to wipe our own arses next.

If I wanted to take my cat, who's never been outdoors, anywhere in the British Isles, she'd have to spend six months in quarantine to prevent rabies from entering the Isles. If Scotland were really concerned about the welfare of cats, shouldn't there be at least a mention of that? Such quarantine would likely kill her.

Nice to see in the PDF version of the Doggie document that Nestle have kindly contributed some diagrams from their Purina range.

Yes, Nestle, that kind hearted corporation who feeds African mothers breast milk substitute they can't afford...

And who now makes stinky factories in England http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/cambridgeshire/3374235.stm

Woot!

The Scottish government must know its own citizens and have therefore decided the Scottish people require this kind of detailed guidance. A fair judgement if my Scottish father-in-law is anything to go by.

Anonymous because I don't want to be harrassed by a bunch of short-arsed gnomes in kilts.

... that eminates from the self-styled Scottish 'Government'. All decent Scots have legged it south of the border anyway.

With regards the poster who believes our Government to be a (quote) "tax-grabbing Scottish mafia":

In 2005 (the most recent figures I can find; feel free to respond with more up-to-date, although given oil prices now compared to then, I fear you will only be shootin yerself in the other foot), the Scottish Government (nee Executive before the more enlightened reign of the SNP), received (and spent) around £45 Billion. However, Scottish taxpayers only payed around £34 Billion into the Westminster kitty.

At this point I expect the mouth-frothing screaming BNP supporters that have to come to represent the english nationalists to be a frothin' an' a screamin' to have all Scottish male children put to death, the girls raped (then put to death too, natch), all married women to be raped (and then guess what) and all male Scots to made to watch the above then sold as slaves/killed. Incidentally, so did the english royal family back in the 'day'. This of course, as the Flower of Scotland suggests, is past, now, and should stay past. I mention it merely in passing :). However, said frothing-screaming-BNP supporters, in their vehemence to get on with the child-rape, (or perhaps they had too much curry the night before whilst they were planning how to throw out all them damned asians and are unable to concentrate. I digress) seem to forget one minor, trifling fact. That would be the £101 Billion of Scottish oil money.

More in fact, since the UK/US invasion of Iraq has destabilised the oil markets. Now, fair enough, said oil doesn't bring in £101 Billion to the UK taxpayer; it only brings in a paltry £7 Billion. However, the oil itself brings in profits of £101 Billion, it's just the english choose to allow Shell et al to keep that, rather than (like some other oil-rich nations) choosing to nationalise production and keep all the cash to themselves. Were Scotland (soon, I hope, very very soon) to become independent, the decision to do this would rest at the hands of the Scottish electorate, not a foreign nation 500 miles to the south.

As would the decision to send our troops to die for english companies to make more money from our oil. As would the decision to hand over what little sovereignty we have to an unellected gravy-train of former english politicians and assorted other hangers-on from the rest of the EU. In fact, independence would mean the english tax-payer would no longer have to fund the aforementioned "tax-grabbing Scottish mafia". Yet, strangely, all 3 of the major UK parties are so anti scottish independence, that they are actively campaigning not only against independence itself, but against asking the people of Scotland what their opinion is. Which is a little suspect if you ask me.

So, the next time you feel the need to go on about the "tax-grabbing Scottish mafia", please remember that

a) We have no say at all on UK policy (including the Barnett formula), since even if every person in Scotland were to vote for the same party we still couldn't effect a UK government.

b) Believe me, after 300 years of occupation, a lot of people here would quite like their country back, and finally

c) They'd also like their oil/gas money back, ta very much. You can keep "Dave" Cameron, Gordon Brown, Tony Blair, Ming Campbell and all the other little english-toadying traitors though.

/ Willing to accept Emily Watson in return for them though. She's tasty.

"They'd also like their oil/gas money back, ta very much."

We don't get Shell's money either, so the amount is £7 Billion. If you want some of Shell's cash, buy some shares.

Also, you point out that the Scots gained by £11 billion from the treasury in 2005.

So using your figures, let's say we have a refund based on that since the oil came ashore =

(2007-1975)*(£11 Billion - £7 Billion) = £128 Billion

which you owe to the English, Welsh, and Northern Irish.

Now get out your sporran and cough up.

Having conducted extensive studies of the cat/toast perpetual motion phenomenon in our very expensive taxpayer-funded laboratory, my team of boffins and I have determined that this method of generating motive power is impractical, for the following reason:

While it is true that a cat with a piece of buttered toast strapped to its back will theoretically spin in midair forever, there are laws of physics that prevent this effect from being put into practice; namely, that for the perpetual motion effect to occur, the mass of the toast must be EXACTLY equal to that of the cat. If the cat's mass is greater than that of the attached toast, the cat's greater mass will override the ground-attractor force of the toast, and the cat will hit the floor feet-first. Similarly, if the mass of toast is greater than that of the cat, the mass of the toast will override the righting force of the cat, and the toast will land buttered side down. This holds true even if the mass differential is one microgram.

Therefore, given that over time, the cat's mass will change (due to respiration, transpiration etc), and the toast's mass will change (due to crumbs falling off under friction from the air as it rotates, or interaction with the struggling cat), the system will bias one way or the other after less than a second even in optimal cases. Repeated tests have demonstrated that no more than one rotation can practicably be achieved before the cat respires or a crumb falls off the toast, thus negating the balance of mass.

Conclusion: While the theory of the cat/toast effect is sound, practical tests have proven that a cat/toast combination will rotate a maximum of only once before the system becomes unbalanced and the cat or toast falls to the ground. We therefore conclude that it is not possible, using present technology, to utilise this effect for any practical purpose.

We just want to make sure we are looking after the pussy correctly up here :)

If you have a 4 legged, furry carnivore as a pet....

...and it's called a dog, you have to pick up its crap, stop it biting people, walk it on a leash and generally treat it as some sort of mobile disease fcatory liable to run rampant at any moment.

...if it's called a cat, you just lob it out the back door and let it do whatever the damn thing feels like.

Guns...we need lots of guns

but a convenient tool to open tins for cats?

Terry Pratchett's insights are brilliant as ever

Apologies to the origional author - but I thought this wothy of reposting here

When a cat is dropped, it always lands on its feet, and when toast is dropped, it always lands buttered side down. Therefore, if a slice of toast is strapped to a cat's back, buttered side up, and the animal is then dropped, the two opposing forces will cause it to hover, spinning inches above the ground. If enough toast-laden felines were used, they could form the basis of a high-speed monorail system.

I've been thinking about this cat/toast business for a while. In the buttered toast case, it's the butter that causes it to land buttered side down - it doesn't have to be toast, the theory works equally well with Jacob's crackers. So to save money you just miss out the toast - and butter the cats. Also, should there be an imbalance between the effects of cat and butter, there are other substances that have a stronger affinity for carpet. Probability of carpet impact is determined by the following simple formula:

p = s * t(t)/tc

where

p is the probability of carpet impact,

s is the "stain" value of the toast-covering substance - an indicator of the effectiveness of the toast topping in permanently staining the carpet. Chicken Tikka Masala, for example, has a very high s value, while the s value of water is zero.

tc and t(t) indicate the tone of the carpet and topping - the value of p being strongly related to the relationship between the colour of the carpet and topping, as even chicken tikka masala won't cause a permanent and obvious stain if the carpet is the same colour.

So it is obvious that the probability of carpet impact is maximised if you use chicken tikka masala and a white carpet - in fact this combination gives a p value of one, which is the same as the probability of a cat landing on its feet. Therefore a cat with chicken tikka masala on its back will be certain to hover in mid air, while there could be problems with buttered toast as the toast may fall off the cat, causing a terrible monorail crash resulting in nauseating images of members of the royal family visiting accident victims in hospital, and politicians saying it wouldn't have happened if their party was in power as there would have been more investment in cat-toast glue research. Therefore it is in the interests not only of public safety but also public sanity if the buttered toast on cats idea is scrapped, to be replaced by a monorail powered by cats smeared with chicken tikka masala floating above a rail made from white shag pile carpet.

Paris - because she just wouldn't understand it all..

"Nope: what used to be the Scottish Executive is now called the Scottish Government."

Yes, as a Scotsman I am aware of this. My point being, that they are not the Government. The election was a sham, they have a minority and quite frankly, the only Government is HM Government in London, they are merely an executive branch of said HM Gov, able to take decisions on its behalf.

This type of legislation along with their pitiful rebranding of everything that offends the hearts of the nationalist minority just show what a useless bunch of money wasters my fellow countrymen have elected.

I was wakened late one night (early one morning) by a strange scuffling outside of the bedroom. I rose and made my way to the hallway to investigate, to find one of the cats, huddled in a corner.

I knelt down to investigate, bringing my face up close to the feline that had become like one of my family, and enquired, "whatchagot-therethen-poooos?"

The cat stopped and turned his head a little, enough for me to see the large (not song) bird he had clamped between his jaws and for him to stare straight into my eyes... and then he broke it's spine in a sickening crunch of avian bone and feathers. I swear I saw him smiling at me.

What is the point of advising people what to feed their cat? Wouldn't it be better to teach them what to feed their children. The deep fried marsbar sounds like a good idea.

"My cats come and go as they please through the cat flaps I thoughtfully provide for them."

So you wilfully allow your uncontrolled animal to shit on my lawn - time to apply for a shotgun certificate to control the vermin.

That would be the Scottish oil bizz created and developed by the English then? As for it being "Scottish" oil, I think you'll find the bit of the North Sea it came out of belongs to the Crown (again, that's us English). Exactly which Scottish force do you think will come sailing out to claim the North Sea when the Royal Navy is again sworn to serve the same Crown? The Edinburgh Rowing Club? I suggest the Scots Exec stops wasting money on protecting cats (there's plenty of UK laws already covering animal protection, set by us English), and spend more time re-educating the bitter Scots into realising they are lucky the English saw fit to wander up North and introduce a bit of culture, technology and education, let them ride our coat-tails through history, and stopped them becoming just another third-world European country (which they surely will become within years of us English finally getting rid of them via independence). After all, the Romans committed plenty of massacres and general nastiness on the land, but we look back on the technical and educational benefits they brought to us, so why can't the Scots just admit that rule by England has been for their good?

/me laughs at the anticipated screaming and foaming.....

The sooner we get a decent border guard for Hadrians wall the sooner we can leave the idiots to deciding that they will nationalise an Oil field in terminal decline, promote feline welfare over national defence and bankrupt themselves within a decade.

Scots are just like scousers. They spend their entrie lives away from the place or trying to get away from the place, telling everyone how great the place is.

STFU you idiot. The SNP got in purely because the electorate got fed up with Labour and (stupidly) protest-voted SNP to get labour out.

The vast majority of Scots are NOT anti-English or separatist.

Just give Alec Salmond a few years to prove what a complete fool he is, and come next election we'll be back to good old corrupt, swindling, tax-happy labour before you know it.

The wall *is* going to have cat-flaps in it, isn't it?

<flame>

OK, just let us know when you're coming to collect your nuclear missiles and we'll be willing to let you have them.

Hell, give us co-ordinates and we can deliver!

And you can find somewhere to park the rotting nuclear submarines while you're about it!

Mind you, you'll probably site them somewhere in the North-East as you strike me as one of these Metropolitan types who doesn't care two farthings for anyone outside the M25!

</flame>