Cat apparently shot with pellet gun

[jr70895]

I have a cat that for at least a year had a lump on the side of his neck and leg. Last year during his annual exam the vet said it wasn’t anything to worry about.
He was a stray that I took in.
Well tonight I was rubbing the side of his neck and a pellet fell out. He must’ve been shot before moving inside.
So apparently the lump I was felling was in fact the pellet. He also has a similar lump on his leg.
He’s been acting normal all this time.
Taking him to the vet tomorrow to have him checked out….not the same vet, very disappointed that the original vet said it was nothing to worry about.

 

[Antonio65]

I'd have an X-Ray done to see how many pellets are still there and where they are.

 

[IndyJones]

Was this recently? I would be concerned for the safety of children and familys in such an area.

Firearms should not be discharged in populated areas.

 

[fionasmom]

This happened to me several years ago with the dog that I rescued from a very bad situation. I noticed a funny little bounce in her step when she walked and it ended up that there was a pellet in her leg. It is very upsetting, but I do agree that you should have the cat checked for signs of any other pellets or abuse, and try to remember how much you have already helped this poor cat.

 

[Caspers Human]

I'm more pissed at the a$$#hole who shot a cat with a pellet gun than I am at the vet!

Shooting at cats with pellet guns should have gone out with the 1970's! Anybody who would do that must be a damn redneck!

My beef with the vet is more about the lack of explanation.

If the embedded pellet is in a stable position, the body will encapsulate it with scar tissue. Once it is fully encapsulated, it becomes mostly inert. Sometimes an embedded object can migrate through body tissue. IF it begins to migrate it should be taken out.

If an encapsulated pellet isn't migrating, causing discomfort or isn't in danger of causing other problems it is okay to leave it in place. In fact, most doctors would recommend leaving an encapsulated pellet in place because the surgery to remove it might cause more harm than good.

I've been shot with a pellet gun. Right in the cheek of my ass! A bunch of us kids were running around the woods, having a pellet gun fight. The pellet went right through my pants and just broke the skin. I ran home and my father looked at it for a moment then squeezed it like a zit and popped it out. It hurt worse coming out than it did going in!

My stepfather also got shot with a pellet gun and the pellet is still there. It's in the back of his arm, just above the elbow. He got it the same way I did! He's been to the doctor and they always tell him the same thing. As long as it's not getting infected or starting to migrate, it would be more trouble than it's worth to remove it. He's over eighty years old and it hardly bothers him at all. If you ask him about it, he'll even show it to you!

When I was a kid, we had a hunting dog that got peppered by a shotgun. It was from a distance so the dog didn't get killed but he was "bloodied up" so to speak. Pretty much the dog's whole left side. The dog went to the vet and they cleaned the dog up as well as they could. They picked out the majority of the shotgun pellets but they didn't get them all. Whenever you petted the dog, you could feel them under his skin. Sometimes, we would squeeze them like zits and pop them out when we could. That dog had BBs in him for the rest of his life and it never seemed to bother him.

So... With your cat... First off, you should be commended for taking him in!

Second, I'm disappointed that the vet didn't explain it to you. As long as the pellet stays put, doesn't migrate, doesn't bother the cat and has become fully encapsulated with scar tissue, it's okay to leave it be. It is often more harmful to try and remove an embedded object than to just let it be.

If the pellet is migrating, if it causes discomfort, if it gets infected, if it's in danger of causing other harm then, yes, it should be removed.

If the pellet stays in-situ and isn't hurting anything, trying to remove it could cause more harm than good.

If it is your vet's opinion to leave the pellet(s) in your cat's body alone for fear of causing more harm than good, I'm okay with that.

The vet didn't have to explain all the gory details but he could have simply said, "Sometimes it can cause more harm than good to try removing them and it's often better to just let them be."

BTW: IndyJones Pellet guns are not firearms and should not be confused. Pellet guns operate by springs or compressed gas like air or CO2. Firearms operate by burning gunpowder. The difference sounds subtle but, just because it's "gun shaped" doesn't make it a firearm. Around here, pellet guns are used for dispatching rats and vermin around barns and feed storage areas. You would never even think of using firearms for that purpose! Especially not around barns where livestock are kept!

 

[fionasmom]

If an encapsulated pellet isn't migrating, causing discomfort or isn't in danger of causing other problems it is okay to leave it in place. In fact, most doctors would recommend leaving an encapsulated pellet in place because the surgery to remove it might cause more harm than good.

This is true and something the vet should know. Hopefully the new vet will be more on top of these kinds of injuries.

In Los Angeles county it is legal to own a pellet gun, but not fire it, including the front lawn area of your property. Like that stops anyone.

 

[Caspers Human]

When I was married, we had critters getting into the house. I set traps and put rat poison in the basement but that only caught the bulk of them. There were still a few that needed to be dispatched the "old fashioned" way. You could plug up all the holes where small animals might get in but, over time, they'd always find a way inside.

Today, with cats in the house, I'd never even think of using rat poison! Not even in the basement where cat's aren't allowed. It's too easy for a rat to eat poison then run to another place in the house where the cats can find them. If a cat eats a poisoned rat, it could be poisoned, too! Trapping them and shooting them are really the only options.

Luckily, the place where I live, now, we don't have rats, squirrels or other vermin getting into the house. I still have a pellet gun and would use it if I had to but, for now, it stays locked in a closet unless actually needed.

I don't find the task enjoyable in the least but, sometimes, you gotta' do what you gotta' do in order to keep a safe, clean house.

 

[IndyJones]

I'm more pissed at the a$$#hole who shot a cat with a pellet gun than I am at the vet!

Shooting at cats with pellet guns should have gone out with the 1970's! Anybody who would do that must be a damn redneck!

My beef with the vet is more about the lack of explanation.

If the embedded pellet is in a stable position, the body will encapsulate it with scar tissue. Once it is fully encapsulated, it becomes mostly inert. Sometimes an embedded object can migrate through body tissue. IF it begins to migrate it should be taken out.

If an encapsulated pellet isn't migrating, causing discomfort or isn't in danger of causing other problems it is okay to leave it in place. In fact, most doctors would recommend leaving an encapsulated pellet in place because the surgery to remove it might cause more harm than good.

I've been shot with a pellet gun. Right in the cheek of my ass! A bunch of us kids were running around the woods, having a pellet gun fight. The pellet went right through my pants and just broke the skin. I ran home and my father looked at it for a moment then squeezed it like a zit and popped it out. It hurt worse coming out than it did going in!

My stepfather also got shot with a pellet gun and the pellet is still there. It's in the back of his arm, just above the elbow. He got it the same way I did! He's been to the doctor and they always tell him the same thing. As long as it's not getting infected or starting to migrate, it would be more trouble than it's worth to remove it. He's over eighty years old and it hardly bothers him at all. If you ask him about it, he'll even show it to you!

When I was a kid, we had a hunting dog that got peppered by a shotgun. It was from a distance so the dog didn't get killed but he was "bloodied up" so to speak. Pretty much the dog's whole left side. The dog went to the vet and they cleaned the dog up as well as they could. They picked out the majority of the shotgun pellets but they didn't get them all. Whenever you petted the dog, you could feel them under his skin. Sometimes, we would squeeze them like zits and pop them out when we could. That dog had BBs in him for the rest of his life and it never seemed to bother him.

So... With your cat... First off, you should be commended for taking him in!

Second, I'm disappointed that the vet didn't explain it to you. As long as the pellet stays put, doesn't migrate, doesn't bother the cat and has become fully encapsulated with scar tissue, it's okay to leave it be. It is often more harmful to try and remove an embedded object than to just let it be.

If the pellet is migrating, if it causes discomfort, if it gets infected, if it's in danger of causing other harm then, yes, it should be removed.

If the pellet stays in-situ and isn't hurting anything, trying to remove it could cause more harm than good.

If it is your vet's opinion to leave the pellet(s) in your cat's body alone for fear of causing more harm than good, I'm okay with that.

The vet didn't have to explain all the gory details but he could have simply said, "Sometimes it can cause more harm than good to try removing them and it's often better to just let them be."

BTW: IndyJones Pellet guns are not firearms and should not be confused. Pellet guns operate by springs or compressed gas like air or CO2. Firearms operate by burning gunpowder. The difference sounds subtle but, just because it's "gun shaped" doesn't make it a firearm. Around here, pellet guns are used for dispatching rats and vermin around barns and feed storage areas. You would never even think of using firearms for that purpose! Especially not around barns where livestock are kept!

Guns are guns as far as Im concerned and I belive any gun used as a weapon to commit a crime is classified as a "firearm" under canadian law.

Anyways we aren't here to debate the laws surrounding guns. My point was people that hurt animals also hurt other human beings. There is a direct link. My concern is that this person is still running around free and could be a danger to the public.