Would our animal friends vote for the PAP?

http://www.micropoll.com/a/mpview/1072805-414116

Are pigeon shoots on the way out? Vote cheered as first step on path to banning events in Pennsylvania.

http://articles.lancasteronline.com/local/4/376854

After years of disappointment, animal-rights advocates are celebrating the state Senate Judiciary Committee's 11-3 vote last week to outlaw target shoots with live animals, including pigeons.

Read more: http://articles.lancasteronline.com/local/4/376854#ixzz1JlszWiTZ

TODAY
Rethink shooting of crows (http://www.todayonline.com/Voices/EDC090727-0000026/Rethink-shooting-of-crows)
05:55 AM Jul 27, 2009
Letter from Bhaskaran Kunju

I WRITE with regard to the culling of crows as carried out by the National Environment Agency (NEA). I live in an HDB estate in the northern part of Singapore where the culling of crows is carried out about once a month. The amount of noise the gunshots generate is enough to startle anyone, especially since no warning or notice is given beforehand.

There are a number of schools in the vicinity. Culling has even been carried out directly in front of a primary school, while school children were on their way home.

While the shooter may be a marksman, I find it discomforting that the NEA has allowed firearms to be used in such locations.

The culling process was started in the 1980s to reduce the crow population. I strongly believe that the numbers have dropped significantly given the culling process and our rapid urbanisation.

It is time the NEA reconsider the status of crows as pests. Apart from the population numbers, which the NEA should make public to justify its actions, the other contributing factors for the culling have been the supposed noise from the birds and their being scavengers. Crows, however, are not the only scavengers. Any bird that becomes accustomed to living in densely-populated areas with few natural preys resorts to scavenging.

It is common to see sparrows and mynahs eating the leftovers in eateries and leaving behind their droppings. Is this not also a nuisance and unhygienic?

In addition, crows do not breed as much as has been mistakenly repeated. They brood once a year and only an average of three eggs are hatched successfully. In comparison, pigeons brood as many as eight times a year.

We should also not be paranoid about the possible spread of bird flu, which is more likely to be spread by migratory birds. Pigeons are known to spread diseases as well.

I am not asking the NEA to switch its culling focus to other intrusive birds but pointing out the flawed rationality in its programme. If the issue is about aggressiveness or incessant noise, then the NEA should only act on such instances of disturbances.

I do not wish to launch into a plea of humanity against the killing of animals but it is indeed inhumane to be shooting birds when alternative methods are available to deal with them. One method is for people to be more responsible in the disposal of trash and in the clearing of leftover food in eateries.

The real cause for the population explosion of birds, if any, are these food sources. Another alternative method is to install plastic owls to scare the crows away.

If the NEA is pressing on with its culling programme and the culling has not reduced the bird population, then obviously there is a fundamental flaw in its methodology.

I am also appalled that an annual crow- hunting competition is held by the Singapore Gun Club and endorsed by the NEA. This seriously goes against the very values of the NEA as an environmental-protection agency.

Untrained animal catchers a cause for concern

http://www.todayonline.com/Singapore/EDC110416-0000344/Untrained-animal-catchers-a-cause-for-concern

Untrained animal catchers a cause for concern

04:46 AM Apr 16, 2011

by Tanya Fong

SINGAPORE - To round up stray dogs, for which the authorities pay S$250 for each captured, one dog catcher uses unconventional tools like fishing lines and hooks, which indirectly led to the death of a stray dog.

Such methods employed by some independent dog catchers have become a cause for concern for animal welfare groups, who are calling for animal capture to be done more humanely.

MediaCorp understands that the Agri-Food and Veterinary Authority (AVA) pays external dog catchers - both independents and pest control companies - to capture strays. However, according to the AVA, "there are no structured training programmes for dog catchers".

External dog catchers have to comply with AVA's guidelines for capture, handling and transport of animals and the use of animal traps, said an AVA spokesperson.

In the case of the dog catcher, Mr Francis Lee, he has been fined by the AVA for his role in the death of the dog, which died from strangulation after being caught in a noose trap, after it fell into a drain next to the trap.

Mr Lee had been engaged "with the knowledge that he was an experienced animal handler based on his many years of work in animal transportation", said the AVA.

However, several stray dog feeders reported seeing Mr Lee in the Punggol and Serangoon North Industrial Park areas catching stray dogs using mattress spring coils.

Since November, they have been disseminating alerts on their personal Facebook page with photographs of his van.

The AVA impounds about 1,800 dogs annually, of which about 95 per cent are put down via lethal injection.

It culls strays to control the stray dog population and prevent diseases such as rabies.

The issue of how strays are handled also surfaced last month when a town council alerted the Cat Welfare Society (CWS) that a sterilised cat had been caught by mistake. When CWS found the cat, it found it had been kept in a cage wrapped in a garbage bag, without food.

Said CWS vice-president Veron Lau: "It puts into question the whole process of trapping, transporting and holding strays for which the pest control industry plays a big part.

"The animal welfare organisations are happy to conduct training in animal trapping but no pest control companies have come forward."

Both the CWS and the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals have also published guidelines on animal capture.

The general manager of Star Pest Control, Mr Bernard Chan, said that formal training is difficult because the job involves dealing with the unpredictable but combative nature of the animals during capture.

"We must be trained because the animals have been out in the wild and we have to protect ourselves as much as we try to be humane to the animals, said Mr Chan, whose firm has been contracted by the AVA to capture dogs.

While it may be difficult to conduct training, "we can, however, have guidelines and use conventional methods", he said. Tanya Fong

How did AVA staff restrain the dog?

Straits Times Forum
HOME > ST FORUM > ONLINE STORY

Apr 14, 2011
How did AVA staff restrain the dog?
IT IS alarming that such an incident ('Pet dog's death at AVA centre raises worrying questions'; last Saturday) could happen on the premises of the very authority which is purported to be the body enforcing and promoting responsible care for pets.
By what means was Mrs Isabel Motyka's dog 'forcefully restrained by the neck'? Bearing in mind that the site of the injection of the microchip is at the neck, was this the appropriate manner of restraint?
When the dog was in physical distress, why did the Agri-Food and Veterinary Authority (AVA) staff not wait until the dog had calmed down before attempting the procedure again? Why did AVA staff not allow the owner to assist in calming the dog? This is a common practice in all vet clinics.
Adeline Ang (Ms)




- Posted using BlogPress from my iPhone

Dog should have been reunited with owner first

Straits Times Forum
HOME > ST FORUM > ONLINE STORY

Apr 14, 2011
Dog should have been reunited with owner first
I AM concerned about how the Agri-Food and Veterinary Authority's staff handled Mrs Isabel Motyka's dog ('Pet dog's death at AVA centre raises worrying questions'; last Saturday).
Anyone who has experience handling pets must realise that the most important thing to do first is to reunite the pet with its owner. Other steps such as micro-chipping are secondary.
Alpana Ahuja (Ms)



- Posted using BlogPress from my iPhone

Distressed by dog's death at AVA centre

Straits Times Forum
HOME > ST FORUM > ONLINE STORY

Apr 14, 2011
Distressed by dog's death at AVA centre
I AM extremely shocked and disturbed by the way Agri-Food and Veterinary Authority (AVA) officers handled the micro-chipping process of Mrs Isabel Motyka's dog ('Pet dog's death at AVA centre raises worrying questions'; last Saturday).
The act of forcefully restraining a dog that is scared is a classic case of animal cruelty.
Simon Lee




- Posted using BlogPress from my iPhone

Stricter rules needed for animal welfare

Straits Times Forum
HOME > ST FORUM > ONLINE STORY

Apr 14, 2011
Stricter rules needed for animal welfare
AS MRS Isabel Motyka's dog died while being handled by the Agri-Food and Veterinary Authority's staff ('Pet dog's death at AVA raises worrying questions'; last Saturday), she should seek another party to do the post-mortem.
She had offered to calm her dog while AVA staff carried out the micro-chipping process. However, the staff opted to do it themselves. The dog eventually died after the procedure. This is a serious matter.
The AVA's Centre for Animal Welfare and Control should implement stricter rules to improve the situation.
The AVA should also seek to improve animal welfare issues as well as take citizens' feedback seriously.
Clara Fu (Ms)


- Posted using BlogPress from my iPhone