Saturday, August 21, 2010
Friday, August 20, 2010
Why sharks matter to everyone
Today
Letter from Louis Ng Executive Director Animal Concerns Research and Education Society
03:10 PM Aug 20, 2010
I REFER to the letter "Sharks' real nemesis: Longlines" (Aug 16) by Mr Tan Keng Tat.
I was surprised by the remark that "sharks are not an endangered species", as sharks are undoubtedly disappearing from the oceans.
Last year, the International Union for Conservation of Nature's Shark Specialist Group announced that a study to determine the global conservation status of 64 species of open ocean sharks and rays had revealed that 32 per cent were threatened with extinction, primarily due to overfishing. Furthermore, 24 per cent of the species examined were categorised as Near Threatened, while information was insufficient to assess another 25 per cent.
The report documented serious overfishing of several shark species, in national and international waters, and demonstrated a clear need for immediate action to conserve sharks on a global scale.
Furthermore, several species of shark are listed on the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species Appendices, including the white shark, whale shark, great white shark and the basking shark. This is clear acknowledgment, by governments, that these species are threatened.
Shark fishing continues virtually unchecked in most of the world's oceans and territorial seas, even though many species are threatened with extinction. Many more species are data deficient, meaning that we have no real idea how many are left.
Shark populations are extremely vulnerable to hunting pressures. Their slow growth, late maturity and small number of offspring make them especially susceptible to overexploitation, and shark populations are slow to recover once depleted.
Furthermore, because most sharks are top ocean predators, over-fishing of sharks is likely to cause disruption to prey populations and an overall imbalance in marine ecosystems. The disappearance of sharks from the oceans is therefore a very real, and very pressing, concern - for all of us.
While, as Mr Tan mentions, the shark fin trade is not the only threat to wild shark populations, it is undoubtedly a significant one. The trade in shark fin has been identified as a primary contributing factor in the global decline of many shark species. According to a paper published in a 2006 edition of the journal Ecology Letters, as many as many as 73 million sharks are estimated to be killed each year worldwide for the shark fin trade.
There have been numerous studies providing strong evidence that fish, including sharks, do feel pain. Therefore, the live finning of sharks is a very serious welfare concern. Although live finning has been banned by many countries, there is undoubtedly a real danger that it still occurs, as the fins remain the most valuable parts of the shark.
It is therefore conceivable that fishermen will be tempted to keep as much room on the fishing boats as possible for storing the fins (rather than the carcasses) and to "process'' the caught sharks as quickly as possible to get the fins, possibly removing the fins when the sharks are still alive and throwing the finless sharks back into the sea to drown. Video evidence has indeed revealed this barbaric practise taking place.
The only way to guarantee that sharks are not finned alive is to ensure that all shark carcasses arrive at the port with fins attached. However, very few countries have laws to ensure that this happens.
There are numerous reasons more and more people are saying no to shark fin. The only way to guarantee that you are not eating the fin from a shark which has been cruelly finned alive, or indeed is the last surviving shark of that particular species in the wild, is to shun that bowl of shark fin soup
Letter from Louis Ng Executive Director Animal Concerns Research and Education Society
03:10 PM Aug 20, 2010
I REFER to the letter "Sharks' real nemesis: Longlines" (Aug 16) by Mr Tan Keng Tat.
I was surprised by the remark that "sharks are not an endangered species", as sharks are undoubtedly disappearing from the oceans.
Last year, the International Union for Conservation of Nature's Shark Specialist Group announced that a study to determine the global conservation status of 64 species of open ocean sharks and rays had revealed that 32 per cent were threatened with extinction, primarily due to overfishing. Furthermore, 24 per cent of the species examined were categorised as Near Threatened, while information was insufficient to assess another 25 per cent.
The report documented serious overfishing of several shark species, in national and international waters, and demonstrated a clear need for immediate action to conserve sharks on a global scale.
Furthermore, several species of shark are listed on the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species Appendices, including the white shark, whale shark, great white shark and the basking shark. This is clear acknowledgment, by governments, that these species are threatened.
Shark fishing continues virtually unchecked in most of the world's oceans and territorial seas, even though many species are threatened with extinction. Many more species are data deficient, meaning that we have no real idea how many are left.
Shark populations are extremely vulnerable to hunting pressures. Their slow growth, late maturity and small number of offspring make them especially susceptible to overexploitation, and shark populations are slow to recover once depleted.
Furthermore, because most sharks are top ocean predators, over-fishing of sharks is likely to cause disruption to prey populations and an overall imbalance in marine ecosystems. The disappearance of sharks from the oceans is therefore a very real, and very pressing, concern - for all of us.
While, as Mr Tan mentions, the shark fin trade is not the only threat to wild shark populations, it is undoubtedly a significant one. The trade in shark fin has been identified as a primary contributing factor in the global decline of many shark species. According to a paper published in a 2006 edition of the journal Ecology Letters, as many as many as 73 million sharks are estimated to be killed each year worldwide for the shark fin trade.
There have been numerous studies providing strong evidence that fish, including sharks, do feel pain. Therefore, the live finning of sharks is a very serious welfare concern. Although live finning has been banned by many countries, there is undoubtedly a real danger that it still occurs, as the fins remain the most valuable parts of the shark.
It is therefore conceivable that fishermen will be tempted to keep as much room on the fishing boats as possible for storing the fins (rather than the carcasses) and to "process'' the caught sharks as quickly as possible to get the fins, possibly removing the fins when the sharks are still alive and throwing the finless sharks back into the sea to drown. Video evidence has indeed revealed this barbaric practise taking place.
The only way to guarantee that sharks are not finned alive is to ensure that all shark carcasses arrive at the port with fins attached. However, very few countries have laws to ensure that this happens.
There are numerous reasons more and more people are saying no to shark fin. The only way to guarantee that you are not eating the fin from a shark which has been cruelly finned alive, or indeed is the last surviving shark of that particular species in the wild, is to shun that bowl of shark fin soup
Sengkang man slammed his dog to death.
Read: Dog brutally beaten to death at void deck
Petition: Maximum Sentence To Be Imposed On Dog Killer
Read: "Puzzling that AVA can't trace microchip supplier of lost husky"
http://forums.hardwarezone.com.sg/showthread.php?t=2785794
TODAY
Dog has ID, but can't be traced
05:55 AM Apr 07, 2010... See more
Letter from Jaclyn Liew
A FEW weeks ago, I found a female Siberian husky estimated to be six to seven years old. She was also suffering from tick fever.
This husky has a microchip number 7020 5555 000 4685, but her owner had not licensed her with the Agri-Food and Veterinary Authority of Singapore (AVA) or Petcall (the Central Animal Recovery System for lost and found pets).
I wrote to the AVA hoping that the supplier of the microchip can be traced, as all suppliers of microchips for animals are authorised by the AVA.
If we could trace the supplier, we would then be able to trace the clinic the microchip was supplied to. Then, hopefully, we could trace the owner of the husky.
A week later, the AVA called to say that it could not find any information about the dog.
I was very surprised and disappointed to be told by the authority that authorises suppliers of microchips, that it could not trace the company who supplied this particular microchip. It is akin to a country not being able to trace the identity card numbers of its citizens.
I hope the AVA would care to explain.
TODAY
Tracing is easier for dogs licensed after Sept 2007
Letter from Goh Shih Yong Deputy Director, Media Division For CEO, Agri-food & Veterinary Authority (AVA)
05:55 AM Apr 10, 2010... See more
WE REFER to the letter "Dog has ID but can't be traced" (April 7) by Ms Jaclyn Liew.
Microchipping of all newly-licensed dogs was made mandatory after Sept 1, 2007 with the revision to the Animal and Birds (Dog Licensing and Control) Rules. Microchipping helps to trace dogs in the event of a rabies outbreak. It also helps the AVA to trace and return licensed dogs to their owners if the dogs get lost.
The husky found by Ms Liew was probably licensed prior to Sept 1, 2007. Hence, the microchip number of the husky was not captured in our records.
The AVA does not regulate suppliers of microchips. However, we specify that only ISO-compliant microchips be used to enable wide compatibility between the microchips and the scanners used by the AVA and suppliers.
We thank Ms Liew for her feedback. As Ms Liew mentioned that the husky is suffering from tick fever, we advise her to take the dog immediately to a veterinary centre to seek medical attention for the dog. Ms Liew can contact AVA at 1800 476 1600 if she requires further clarification.
Jaclyn
Updated 10:21 AM April 10, 2010
The husky has already been hospitalised for a few days. Her tick fever is chronic, she was found bleeding profusely from her nose.
I am surprised that microchipping has been made mandatory, but suppliers of microchips are not regulated.
Microchipping aims to "help to trace dogs in the event of a rabies outbreak...and help the AVA to trace and return licensed dogs to their owners if the dogs get lost."
It is clear that, without further measures, this mandatory microchipping is not fulfilling its aim. When there are dogs like this Husky who are microchipped, not licensed and thus untraceable.
The fact is there is a finite number of microchip suppliers in Singapore. With this microchip number, the supplier can be traced.
But it apparently cannot be done. Cos the suppliers are not regulated by any authority. Isn't it time to review for a change?
Thursday, August 19, 2010
A tabby gal
Abandoned with her tail chopped and now in an adopted home
- Posted using BlogPress from my iPhone
- Posted using BlogPress from my iPhone
Billy still maintains his charm
Billy as usual will wait at the gate for the neighbours to come home from work between 6.30 till 8pm,he is like an alarm clock who knows who and who will be walking by the gate.When I am home I keep the door open till about 9pm for him to sit and watch and look out.Afterall he was all alone from 8am till I get home at 6.45pm most days except for the days when I am not working.
This evening when I saw him comfortably waiting I took my camera out to snap a picture of him and who knows at the same aunty came back from work and said hello to him.His first reaction to greet her was to stand up in respect to the elders and meow at her and aunty spoke to him in response to his acts.It was such a beautiful scene that I just had to snap a picture of the two of them.
I am glad I adopted him last year and have enjoyed his company since he is my everything now.He now sleeps with me and he knows which corner of the queen size bed belongs to him.He will wake me up like an automated alarm clock and first word he greets will always be 'ma..a' and he knows my answer will always be yes darling good morning.There are times when he will sleep in his own circle of arms and times he will expose indecently and also times when I will be waken by his tail sweeping my face.
Billy is full of love and he knows how to butter me too coming snuggling at my leg when he wants his dinner and kiss my hand and fingers when I am seated at the dining table with my note book and thats when he will just flop on my hand wanting to be sayang and be pat.
He's young and full of energy still and his favourite before we said good night is to hide somewhere waiting for me walk by and jumpa at me initially I was shocked but then I realised all he wants is to play.
Billy will always be my first love and I hope we will have a long way more to be with each other.
(promotes neighbourliness)
Cat In A Flat? It's A Purr-fect Idea
http://www.moggies.co.uk/articles/aug2010/purrfect.html
http://www.smh.com.au/lifestyle/homestyle/cat-in-a-flat-its-a-purrrfect-idea-20100817-1289c.html
Cat In A Flat? It's A Purr-fect Idea
By: Miles Godfrey - Sydney Morning Heald, Australia
If you've ever wanted to keep a cat in a flat, but thought the unit a whisker too small, think again.
A new study says keeping pets in city apartments is a purrrfect idea. It also advises how to get your paws on a building which is pet friendly.
And in a move which will set posh pooch's tails wagging and get yuppie moggies purring with delight, developers of upmarket new buildings are said to be increasingly willing to accommodate animals.
One in four Australian households are now based in apartment blocks, says the Petcare Information and Advisory Service (PIAS), which is attempting to bust the myth that pets can't live in small units.
"There is absolutely a perception out there that cats and dogs can't live in units because they are too small... but it's really not true," says PIAS spokeswoman Susie Willis.
"Traditionally, people think you need a quarter-acre backyard for a dog to run about in, but most are just as happy in an apartment as long as you take the right steps."
And developers and real estate agents that were traditionally "anti-pet" are now changing their ways, Ms Willis added.
"We know city dwellers want to keep pets and some developers are now cottoning on to that fact," she said.
"They've realised there is money to be made from allowing pets."
She said Sydney's upmarket Jacksons Landing development and parts of Melbourne's Docklands residential development, among others, are now pet-friendly.
PIAS's research is based on a 2008 study involving 800 respondents and has been turned into a new guide, called Pets In The City.
It aims to advise people which pets are most suitable for apartments, such as those which shed less hair.
And it offers advice on how to find pet friendly buildings, negotiate with anti-pet real estate agents other potential obstacles to pet ownership.
It has won the backing of Sydney mayor Clover Moore.
"In a society in which people often live on their own, pets give pleasure, they teach responsibility, they provide security, and they love and are loved in return," Ms Moore said in a statement.
For more information visit: petsinthecity.net.au.
HDB bans cats for these silly reasons:
http://www.hdb.gov.sg/fi10/fi10326p.nsf/w/PetTypesOfPetsAllowed?OpenDocument
"Flat owners are not allowed to keep cats in HDB flats, as it is generally difficult to confine cats within the flat premises. Nuisance caused by cats such as shedding of their fur, defecating/urinating in public areas or even the caterwauling sounds that they make can cause a lot of disturbance, which affects the environment and disrupts neighbourliness in our housing estates. "
There are MANY HDB residents who live with cats and they treasure their feline companions enough to keep them safe indoors by cat-proofing their apartments and to neuter them. Yet they have to live in fear of nasty neighbours who may report them to the HDB for "illegal activity" or if they are "sway" (Hokkien for "bad luck") enough for HBD officers to walk by their apartments and notice the cats inside. Read this "Small, furry, outlawed: Singapore torn over cat rights"
Speak out for your rights as "owners" of HBD flats and also as "good citizens" by responding to the Government's repeated calls to be involved in the management of YOUR estates, by forwarding this article to
MAH BOW TAN
Job Title : MINISTER - MINISTER
DID : 31067111
Email: MAH_BOW_TAN@MND.GOV.SG
Unit: MINISTRY OF NATIONAL DEVELOPMENT (MND)
and cc
LEE HSIEN LOONG
Job Title : PRIME MINISTER
DID : 62358577
Email: LEE_HSIEN_LOONG@PMO.GOV.SG
Unit: PRIME MINISTER'S OFFICE (PMO)
cc to
The Cat Welfare Society
email: info@catwelfare.org
The SPCA
email: eo@spca.org.sg (Executive Officer)
Write to the press
1) The Straits Times
"Please include your full name (as in IC), your address and a phone number. For women, please indicate Miss, Mrs or Ms. Send your letters via e-mail: stforum@sph.com.sg"
2) TODAY
email: voices@mediacorp.com.sg
3) MY PAPER
email: myp@sph.com.sg
4) NEW PAPER
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)