Showing posts with label AVA. Show all posts
Showing posts with label AVA. Show all posts
Saturday, November 3, 2012
Sunday, September 30, 2012
Friday, June 15, 2012
Volunteers and AVA should work together
http://www.todayonline.com/Voices/EDC120615-0000012/Volunteers-and-AVA-should-work-together
Irresponsible, wannabe owners are aware of the fates of abandoned pets: Being run over, starving to death or attacked. But the numbers have gone up because owners are also aware that no one can trace their nasty deed.
The Agri-Food and Veterinary Authority (AVA) conducts licensing checks to "safeguard the welfare of animals in dog farms and pet shops", but how successful would these be in reducing pet abandonment if the crux of the problem is not addressed?
AVA's efforts and animal welfare groups' dialogues with important people have not resulted in much support in this area. Education must be backed by pre-emptive and preventive measures.
Singapore is a model of efficiency; we initiate and implement policies at every level to improve lives and create a society we can be proud of. So, I support the call to microchip and license at the point of sale.
Tireless volunteers spend time and effort to educate, but they need to work in partnership with the AVA. Only the latter can support the implementation of business practices and enforce them, or else it would be an exercise in futility.
04:45 AM Jun 15, 2012
I read the report "Speed up efforts to regulate pet trade, SPCA urges" (June 9) with equal parts anger and frustration.Irresponsible, wannabe owners are aware of the fates of abandoned pets: Being run over, starving to death or attacked. But the numbers have gone up because owners are also aware that no one can trace their nasty deed.
The Agri-Food and Veterinary Authority (AVA) conducts licensing checks to "safeguard the welfare of animals in dog farms and pet shops", but how successful would these be in reducing pet abandonment if the crux of the problem is not addressed?
AVA's efforts and animal welfare groups' dialogues with important people have not resulted in much support in this area. Education must be backed by pre-emptive and preventive measures.
Singapore is a model of efficiency; we initiate and implement policies at every level to improve lives and create a society we can be proud of. So, I support the call to microchip and license at the point of sale.
Tireless volunteers spend time and effort to educate, but they need to work in partnership with the AVA. Only the latter can support the implementation of business practices and enforce them, or else it would be an exercise in futility.
Monday, February 20, 2012
This poor community cat was caught on a glue-board trap placed by a pest control company overnight at a HDB bin centre.
4 hours ago
This poor community cat was caught on a glue-board trap placed by a pest control company overnight at a HDB bin centre. The cat in this photo was dying by the time it was brought to the SPCA. She was in deep distress and panting heavily. Our duty veterinarian made the decision to humanely euthanase the cat to prevent further suffering.
The board trap was about 4 feet by 5 feet in size and the amount of glue on the board was excessive. The cat never stood a chance.
SPCA has previously appealed to AVA to institute a ban of glue-board traps because of the suffering caused to animals that are trapped on them, not only rats, but other species. The case, which was reported to SPCA on Friday 17 February, only reinforces the extreme suffering that an animal goes through when glue-board traps are used. We have contacted the Town Council and the pest control company involved, to inform them that we will take this matter further We have also written to AVA to request that they ban the use of such traps
Please help us by writing to AVA at ava_cawc@ava.gov.sg to urge them to ban the use of such traps and to your town council to make sure they do not use such traps.
The board trap was about 4 feet by 5 feet in size and the amount of glue on the board was excessive. The cat never stood a chance.
SPCA has previously appealed to AVA to institute a ban of glue-board traps because of the suffering caused to animals that are trapped on them, not only rats, but other species. The case, which was reported to SPCA on Friday 17 February, only reinforces the extreme suffering that an animal goes through when glue-board traps are used. We have contacted the Town Council and the pest control company involved, to inform them that we will take this matter further We have also written to AVA to request that they ban the use of such traps
Please help us by writing to AVA at ava_cawc@ava.gov.sg to urge them to ban the use of such traps and to your town council to make sure they do not use such traps.
Wednesday, January 4, 2012
Place more restrictions on pet ownership
http://theonlinecitizen.com/2012/01/place-more-restrictions-on-pet-ownership/
Be part of the community! Join our Facebook Page!
~by: Russel Low~
I refer to the Follow-up Survey on Pet Shops and Pet Farms which was published a few days ago. It appears to me that the crux of the problem is still not being addressed.
Currently, everyone is fixated with the culling of dogs in Punggol. Many of the dogs are strays or dogs which have been abandoned and allowed to multiply. There is no sterilisation program in place and AVA’s zero tolerant policy towards strays usually translates to the end of the road for many of them. Over the last few weeks, people have been campaigning and lobbying AVA to review its stance, to work with animal lovers (and not just AWGs) and to be more transparent. All of these are lives issues which needs to be addressed and resolved.
But the more pertinent issue remains, how we do reduce the incidences of abandonment, neglect and abuse. Whilst there may not be a direct link between this and the culling of strays, AWGs and animal lovers alike would have more resources to help manage the stray population if they didn’t also have to deal and cope with the number of dogs, cats and rabbits (both mongrels and purebreds) which are being neglected and abandoned.
And the only reason why we have so many cases of neglect and abandonment isn’t just because the public is not educated sufficiently on responsible pet ownership, or the laws are not strictly enforced by AVA or the sentences meted out are not harsh enough. It is mainly because of the pet trade in Singapore.
AVA has the power to impose restrictions on the pet trade, such as banning puppy/kitten mills and farms and prohibiting the sale of live animals in commercial pet shops. But it doesn’t do so. It comes up with guidelines which pet shops ignore. All pet shops are concerned with is commercial gain, not ethics and definitely not responsible pet ownership. The results of the Follow-up Survey (see HERE) speak for themselves.
If people truly want a dog or a cat, they either adopt or they acquire one through licensed breeders either in Singapore or abroad. Such pets will be licensed at the point of sale and registered not just with the breeder but also the new owner. They will also need to undergo an eligibility test to determine suitability. If people really want a dog or a cat, they must be prepared to go through the trouble and expense of doing so.
This is an effective way of differentiating the committed and responsible ones from those who buy out of impulse. This is just a rough framework and details will need to be worked out, and whilst it may not be 100 per cent effective due to things like the “underground pet trade”, it would still make a noticeable difference in the numbers of animals which are being abandoned and neglected.
If Singapore can cope with things like the COE, they can certainly live with the restrictions and difficulties involved in pet ownership. Time and time again, people have called for these restrictions to be put in place, but nothing appears to be put in place.
At the end of the day, AWGs, shelters, animal lovers and AVA themselves bear the burden and brunt of cleaning up the very mess which AVA themselves could have largely prevented.
–
See also: SPCA continues push for pet ownership law
–
This article first appeared on Russel Low’s Facebook. We thank him for allowing us to reproduce it in full here.
–
picture credit: Stop the cruelty in puppy mills
Be part of the community! Join our Facebook Page!
Monday, December 19, 2011
Thursday, December 15, 2011
Saturday, October 29, 2011
Email to AVA's CEO Tan Poh Hong has gone unanswered.
Dear Ms Tan,
I am a member of the public and also an avid animal lover. As you are no doubt aware, there is currently a lot of buzz and negativity directed at AVA in the various social media groups about the current policy and stance towards stray dogs and cats. I am sure you are sick to the bone about hearing about how culling isn't the solution to the problem and whilst I agree with that, I believe there is no point in me rehashing the reasons why.
What I do take issue with is the manner in which animals are caught. Everyone is aware that AVA still engages Francis Lim despite having fined him for his cruel methods of animal entrapment Whilst you may think that Francis is effective in what he does, has AVA bothered to consider if the manner of doing so is acceptable. Various volunteers have on recent occasion intercepted Francis and AVA officers in their attempts to trap stray dogs. Some of these have been caught on video and are making its rounds across the web. Some of these also show AVA officers threatening members of the public.
Telling members of the public that feeding strays is illegal is misconceived. Telling members of the public they are not allowed to film AVA officers in action is also misconceived, for there is no law against filming someone in a public space. To have your AVA officers threaten members of the public on these grounds serves to reinforce the public's perception of AVA, that it is uncaring, non-transparent and very condescending towards the public.
Another point of contention is the inaction on the part of AVA in clear-cut animal abuse cases. We have not seen AVA lift a finger concerning the 2 puppies which were brutally killed at Bukit Batok. We have not seen AVA do anything about the pomeranian which was savagely bashed to death in a HDB estate, an act which was witnessed by the public. Where is AVA when you need them? Are the lives of stray dogs so meaningless, that they do not warrant protection? Should the same be said of vagrants living amongst us? Should the government find ways to get rid of them, so that the world at large would view us as a squeaky clean first world nation with no poverty and beggars?
To add insult to injury, well-meaning dog lovers and animal welfare groups have been scrambling to collect funds with one objective in mind, to free the strays caught by AVA, the same strays which these people are trying their very best to rehome. For the last few years, i've heard about the sort of charges involved in freeing just one animal. The costs are astronomical, especially when you consider and trace the background how how these funds came to be. AVA knows full well that these people aren't the owners, that the dogs and cats are strays. So why does AVA still insist on slapping fines for "straying" and for "having an unlicensed dog". If AVA wants to charge for licensing and boarding, I have no issue with this, but to impose fines for straying and having an unlicensed dog couple with GST is ludicrous especially when AVA knows full well these guys aren't the owners. This sort of behaviour on AVA's part probably disgusts me the most. It would appear to me that when AVA is not killing, it is "making a killing". I have attached a copy of a receipt issued by AVA last year for your information.
I lost faith in AVA many years ago and it appears that i'm not alone. This explains why there is an increasingly campaign against AVA amongst members of the public and the several animal welfare groups. If AVA is unable to show a committment towards doing the right thing and is unwilling to work with these groups and people, then you will see an increasing movement working against AVA. Perhaps we will never have the sort of resources AVA has, but we have the will, the tenacity and most importantly, the heart to do the right thing.
Yours truly,
Russel Low
Saturday, October 15, 2011
AVA officer culling strays in Punggol
Resident spotted a big dog trap cage on the big field located near Blk637A Punggol Drive on 13 October 2011. It had chicken drumstick in the cage to attract the poor hungry stray. The cage is big enough for any young kids to enter.Resident then witnessed how the door of the cage suddenly shut down by itself with a loud thud.The door is very heavy and is very dangerous if any kids go near it. Resident then saw AVA officer and cleaner went to pull up the door of the cage. Concerned resident went up to find out more from the AVA officer but was threatened instead. AVA officer was very hostile and threatened to call police and LTA.AVA officer refused to answer any of the questions by the resident. This is totally inhumane to cull the strays...why they are so hostile if there's nothing to hide?
http://wildsingaporenews.blogspot.com/2011/06/culling-stray-cats-not-way-khaw.html
"An animal lover, Mr Khaw said in his post that he has pets and - 'to walk the talk' - is a vegetarian to boot."
Sunday, May 15, 2011
ACRES Forum Letter: Public should be consulted on tender to cull dogs
by ACRES: Animal Concerns Research and Education Society (Singapore) on Saturday, 14 May 2011 at 21:28
I refer to the article “Some upset over call for tenders to cull strays” (ST 14 May).
ACRES (Animal Concerns Research and Education Society) hopes that NParks can provide further clarifications regarding its decision to call for a tender to cull the dogs in the parks.
We share NParks concerns with regard to public safety, but is culling the dogs a long-term solution?
We understand that NParks decision was “in response to the more than 100 complaints it has received in the past year from members of the public”. Can NParks clarify how many people actually complained, as each person might have complained more than once?
We should also bear in mind that thousands of people have used the parks and have not complained and are concerned about the culling of the dogs. Any decision made should also consider the sentiments of this group of park users.
Lastly, can NParks clarify if it has consulted animal welfare groups like Action for Singapore Dogs or SPCA to find alternative solutions before it called for the tender?
As stated in the article, a more humane solution is possible and should be looked into as well.
Sunday, April 17, 2011
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
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
Friday, April 15, 2011
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
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
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
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
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
Saturday, April 9, 2011
Pet dog's death at AVA centre raises worrying questions
MY DOG escaped from our yard on Wednesday after he found a small hole in the fence of our new premises. Luckily (so I thought) he was found by the Agri-Food and Veterinary Authority (AVA) on the same day, and the staff informed me the next morning.
When I visited AVA's Centre for Animal Welfare and Control immediately, I was advised to wait as my dog needed to be micro-chipped. I was also told that my dog would not allow anyone to touch him as he was very scared.
I offered to calm him down and hold him while they did the procedure, but the staff opted to do it themselves.
Five minutes later, I was escorted into a room where they told me that my dog had to be forcefully restrained by the neck and when they finished, he had collapsed and died.
I never got to see him, only his lifeless body. While my family is grief-stricken and my children inconsolable, the attitude of the AVA staff was business as usual.
Who polices the activities at the AVA centre? Is there care and compassion, and proper facilities, and are staff trained to handle terrified dogs?
Perhaps this is one reason for a public perception that calls for changes to conditions at puppy mills and for the humane treatment of strays have fallen on deaf ears.
The AVA offered to do a post-mortem on the dog and we are waiting to see what the results are.
Isabel Motyka (Mrs)
Monday, January 31, 2011
Teaching the wrong lessons in rabbit care
ST Forum
Home > ST Forum > Online Story
Jan 31, 2011
Teaching the wrong lessons in rabbit care
MY FAMILY has been taking in abandoned rabbits for the past 10 years, so I was troubled by the Rabbits In The City event organised by Pets Village at Suntec City Mall from Jan 20 to Jan 30.
First, rabbits are very timid and fragile animals, and subjecting them to such stress at a crowded public event is cruel as it can result in them falling ill and even dying.
Worse still, at the event, some rabbits were kept in tiny cages not even fit to house a hamster. The larger rabbits barely had enough space to turn around. Furthermore, the cages had wire floors, which could result in the animals developing sore hocks.
The Pets Village staff standing at the table with the rabbits in cages also did not stop people from poking their fingers at the rabbits.
Moreover, people were allowed to pat the rabbits which would definitely have caused them severe stress. Some of my more timid rabbits at home won't even let me pat them, but will run away if I try. However, the rabbits at the Suntec event were put on a table surrounded by people, with nowhere to run.
A staff member there claimed the event was to educate the public. However, with all the things they were doing wrong, how could they be educating the public? Although they said they were not selling rabbits at the event, Pets Village does sell rabbits, and its staff were giving out the company business cards.
I was really shocked to learn that the event was approved by the Agri-Food and Veterinary Authority (AVA), and hope that AVA will never again allow such events to take place, and will put more effort into educating the public about rabbits.
Joel Chia
Thursday, October 28, 2010
One senses that government-related agencies and the civil service sometimes think that they are listening to the ground...........................
"One senses that government-related agencies and the civil service sometimes think that they are listening to the ground, when they may not really be doing so."
AVA has NOT responded to this letter:
How about third party checks? This will help AVA to reassure the public
Original letter
To: voices@mediacorp.com.sg
Sent: Wednesday, October 06, 2010 6:04 AM
Subject: TODAY - Possible Contravention of Animals and Birds Act by the AVA
I refer to the article "AVA Denies allegations that stray animals suffered in pound" on 30 Sep & 'Strays welfare matters" on 02 October
With the publication of these articles, various accounts of healthy animals similarly deteriorating in AVA's pound has been posted on TODAY's Voice and other internet forums. Are the preventive measures taken by AVA sufficient?
The Animals and Birds Act, under Prevention of Cruelty to animals, 42(d) states that it is an offence
“by wantonly or unreasonably doing or omitting to do any act, causes any unnecessary pain or suffering or, being the owner, permits any unnecessary pain or suffering to any animal; “
For example, refer to the contention on healthy animals being infected while at the pound. AVA has stated they are housed singly but it may not necessarily be out of the infection zone of another sick animal nearby.
Are there any regular third party checks or inspections to assess the condition of animals held at AVA? The records of corporate organisations are audited and errors can be detected even after an extended period of time. This helps in accurate assessments and making improvements.
However, since AVA will not keep animals around for more than a few working days, there is no way to back-check on their treatment during that period. With the current stress on operational transparency, especially that of government agencies, this is a grevious loophole. AVA should engage in open practises to quell possible rumors and clarify their professionalism to the public.
Mr Roger Chow
Sunday, October 17, 2010
Another disappointing "template" and passive reply from the AVA
Anyone who still has energy to "whip" the AVA into more animal welfare action instead of just KILING/CULLING strays in its premises with taxpayers' money, give your feedback on this reply by clicking here.
Thursday, October 7, 2010
How about third party checks? This will help AVA to reassure the public
Original letter
To: voices@mediacorp.com.sg
Sent: Wednesday, October 06, 2010 6:04 AM
Subject: TODAY - Possible Contravention of Animals and Birds Act by the AVA
I refer to the article "AVA Denies allegations that stray animals suffered in pound" on 30 Sep & 'Strays welfare matters" on 02 October
With the publication of these articles, various accounts of healthy animals similarly deteriorating in AVA's pound has been posted on TODAY's Voice and other internet forums. Are the preventive measures taken by AVA sufficient?
The Animals and Birds Act, under Prevention of Cruelty to animals, 42(d) states that it is an offence
“by wantonly or unreasonably doing or omitting to do any act, causes any unnecessary pain or suffering or, being the owner, permits any unnecessary pain or suffering to any animal; “
For example, refer to the contention on healthy animals being infected while at the pound. AVA has stated they are housed singly but it may not necessarily be out of the infection zone of another sick animal nearby.
Are there any regular third party checks or inspections to assess the condition of animals held at AVA? The records of corporate organisations are audited and errors can be detected even after an extended period of time. This helps in accurate assessments and making improvements.
However, since AVA will not keep animals around for more than a few working days, there is no way to back-check on their treatment during that period. With the current stress on operational transparency, especially that of government agencies, this is a grevious loophole. AVA should engage in open practises to quell possible rumors and clarify their professionalism to the public.
Mr Roger Chow
TODAY
How about third party checks?
This will help AVA to reassure the public
Letter from Roger Chow
05:55 AM Oct 07, 2010
I REFER to the report "AVA denies allegations that stray animals suffered in pound" on Sept 30 and the letter "Strays welfare matters" on Oct 2-3.
Various accounts of healthy animals similarly deteriorating in the Agri-Food and Veterinary Authority (AVA) pound have surfaced in Today and on Internet forums.
Are the preventive measures taken by the AVA sufficient?
The Animals and Birds Act, under Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, 42(d) states that it is an offence if a person, "by wantonly or unreasonably doing or omitting to do any act, causes any unnecessary pain or suffering or, being the owner, permits any unnecessary pain or suffering to any animal".
Take, for example, the contention that healthy animals are getting infected while at the pound. While the AVA claims that animals are housed singly, they may not necessarily be out of the infection zone of another sick animal nearby.
Are there any regular third-party inspections to assess the condition of animals held at the AVA? The records of corporate organisations are audited, which helps in accurate assessments and making improvements.
However, since the AVA does not keep animals for more than a few days, there is no way to back-check on their treatment during that period.
URGENT: Seeking Donations for Medical Treatment of Cat in Bad Condition After Being Held by AVA
This is a photo of Boyfee in happier days:
and this is Boyfee now:
When we picked Boyfee up from AVA, he had injuries all over his body and the back of the body was drenched in cat pee and poo, most likely to be his own.
Boyfee is now admitted to the hospital as he is fully dehydrated with fever and flu. He is so badly treated that if any human had seen him, they - like me - would have been outraged by how he and the other cats were kept and treated.
Here're some photos of Boyfee's injuries:
UPDATE
Unfortunately to our great dismay, Boyfee has passed away early Sunday morning. Due to his condition, he had lost all his strength and didn't even have the energy to move his paws.
The total bill at the vet was $618.54, after $54.46 discount. Kashif had to borrow most of the amount so as to settle the bill, and we are still looking to raise enough funds to assist the cause.
To response to this article, write to voices@mediacorp.com.sg
with name, address and contact number.
You can write to the CEO of the AVA about this matter at:
MS TAN POH HONG, PPA(P), PBM, PBS
Job Title : CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
AGRI-FOOD & VETERINARY AUTHORITY
DID : 63257530
Email: TAN_POH_HONG@AVA.GOV.SG
Unit: AGRI-FOOD & VETERINARY AUTHORITY OF SINGAPORE (AVA)
Parent: AGRI-FOOD & VETERINARY AUTHORITY OF SINGAPORE (AVA)
Organisation: AGRI-FOOD & VETERINARY AUTHORITY OF SINGAPORE (AVA
Saturday, October 2, 2010
Strays' welfare matters
TODAY
Strays' welfare matters
05:55 AM Oct 02, 2010
Letter from Veron Lau Vice-President Cat Welfare Society
I REFER to the report "AVA denies allegations that stray animals suffered in pound" (Sept 30).
It often makes people responsible feel better that the animal be put down by humane euthanasia.
However, humane euthanasia only refers to the way that the animal is put down, by injection, but glosses over an entire sequence of events leading up to this procedure - the trapping and handling of the animals by often untrained personnel from the pest control companies or home owners and the physical and mental deterioration of the animals before the termination of their life.
We have not known of any pest control contractors having the practice of transferring animals to a proper animal carrier after trapping, which is a common practice for animal welfare groups and volunteers trapping for sterilisation.
This is often the cause of injuries sustained when the animal thrashes around in fear inside the metal trap. The trapped cats may urinate or defecate from the stress. Their waste matter also stays on and corrodes the metal cages. The affliction of the animals in such circumstances is akin to trauma.
There have also been reports of animals kept for too long without food or water or without shelter before being sent to the AVA. This violates guidelines governing the use of animal traps.
If the AVA's stance remains to advocate humane euthanasia as one of the means of animal control, the term should not start and end at how the animals are put down.
The condition of the animals brought into the centre should be examined and patterns of negligence or mistreatment investigated while animals are duly treated and cleaned.
Pest control contractors, as well as pet shop operators and breeders, should go through proper training provided by the AVA. While pest control licences are under the jurisdiction of the NEA, if these contractors are to be engaged to trap animals, they should be held to animal welfare standards.
To response to this article, write to voices@mediacorp.com.sg
with name, address and contact number.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)