Tag Archives: Dogs

Foster Mum’s Homeseeker: Kanly, lovely doggy needs a home

Kanly-Dog_Foster_20090404_013_DSC_0152x

Kanly is a 8 month old black female puppy, medium-large size. She is sterilised and seeking a permanent home.

Kanly-Dog_20090404_001_DSC_0145x

Temperament: Friendly, trusting, affectionate, and calm. Does not bark. Shy with men.

Kanly-Dog_Bonnie_20090404_001_DSC_0150x
Kanly seems ok with cats. The orange blob in the lower right is Yo-yo aka Bonnie, a female ginger kitty in the cattery.

Her Story

Kanly was picked up of the streets as a young pup  5-6 months ago by a young brother and sister pair. She lived in a HDB flat happily, and without problems as she does not bark.

However, as she grew and grew, her family’s neighbours decided they would not tolerate her presence and made a complaint to HDB. Of course, the ultimatum was issued to her young owners. The kids were distraught but luckily, they were able to seek help. Kanly was rescued by Noah’s Ark and is now being fostered by Foster Mum.

Kanly is a victim of the same draconian HDB pet rules that threaten cats. As such, she cannot be rehomed to someone living in HDB.

ENQUIRIES: ADOPTION AND PROCEDURE
Please email sephycat@gmail.com with the following:

  • your name
  • contact
  • a summary of your background and experience with dogs

Serious adopters only, please. All info will be treated in confidence and forwarded to Kanly’s guardian.

TODAY Online 20090323: Pet issues can’t be legislated away

A follow-up to TODAY 20090316: Rise in lost dogs, despite laws. (Links and emphasis mine)

Today Online Voices Logo
Online Only – Pet issues can’t be legislated away
04:16 PM March 23, 2009
Letter from Goh Boon Choo

I refer to “Rise in lost dogs, despite laws” (Mar 16).The dog abandonment statistics released by the SPCA is alarming but not unexpected. When the tighter dog licence rules came into effect on 1 Sep 07, there was an immediate increase in large dogs being abandoned. I wrote a commentary on Singapore’s pet issues for TODAY, “Pet project: Let’s work together”, which was published on 7 Nov 07.

The SPCA statistics show the situation for dogs, and to a large extent cats, has not changed since then. 85 per cent of Singaporeans and Singapore residents stay in HDB flats, where only certain breeds of dogs are allowed, determined by size when temperament should be the determining factor.

HDB also categorically bans cats as pets even though animal experts and the AVA have said sterilised cats make perfect flat pets. Though HDB’s ban applies only to flat interiors, the Town Councils took it upon themselves to extend it to the streets.

Most cats surrendered to the SPCA are homeless, or community cats. That the number of cats it receives has dropped to 300 from 500 monthly is concrete testament to the success of efforts by residents who sterilise, stabilise and manage their neighbourhood’s community cat population. This is TNRM: trap-neuter-return-management. It is humane and effective, compared to the AVA and Town Councils’ penchant for cat killing.

In Singapore, TNRM is commonly self-funded. I am one such Singaporean and I have been running TNRM for 3 areas in my estate for 10 years.

However, TNRM programmes are still not recognised by Town Councils, nor even some of our Members of Parliament as active citizenry, organic community building at its best. In fact, successful TNRM programmes are sometimes undermined by Town Councils’ enthusiasm to respond to all manner of cat-related complaints by rounding up every cat in sight to be killed at the AVA, without even investigating the root cause. It is a vicious cycle as the removals create a vacuum effect, leaving the neighbourhood open for new, often unsterilised, cats to take over. Resident volunteers like myself have to sterilise the new cats if we don’t want to see our TNRM programmes down the drain.

Despite more than 2 decades of cat culling, new cats keep appearing. Town Councils and the AVA need to address the pertinent question: where are our community cats coming from?

Out of Singapore homes, just like the abandoned pet dogs.

With changing demographics, Singaporeans’ needs and wants for a cuddly pet will continue to evolve and grow, ban or no ban.

The Singapore Government needs to recognise pet issues, like every other problem, cannot be legislated out of existence. The key is in acknowledging that people want to keep pets, that cats and dogs are very popular pet choices regardless of what type of residence they live in, and to manage the situation accordingly.

NYT 20081017: In Hard Times for Humans, Hardships for Pets, Too

The ongoing crisis is causing hardships for all but really, when abandonment is rampant in good times, leading to an annual cat and dog kill rate of 21,000 in Singapore, what more can we expect when poo hits the fan and people have difficulties with money? As a reminder that pets are not ornaments or possessions but members of the family, I quote the closing section of this New York Times article:

But some people may find that as their savings evaporate, their need for companionship may grow stronger. This weekend at Madison Square Garden, the Mayor’s Alliance for NYC’s Animals will be holding its annual Adopt-a-Cat day, with hundreds of cats and kittens looking for new homes. Prospective owners can fill out a survey that will color-code their personalities to match with available animals.

On average, a cat costs $1,000 a year to maintain, compared with about $1,500 a year for a dog, Ms. Levine said. Having a pet can bring healthy returns, especially during bear markets.

“They comfort us; they don’t care if your 401(k) lost money today,” Ms. Saul of Petfinder.com said. “They’re one of the few people in the family who are not going to be stressed out about what you did with your money.”

(Click here to read full article)

Friends or food? Cats and dogs tortured for Cantonese palette

What will it take to stop East Asians, especially the citizens in the Chinese province of Guangdong eating dog/cat meat? Especially when even the Olympics warrants a clean-up, Chinese style where Beijing 2008 propagate death camp for cats and dogs.

But it seems there is hope. From animalsasia:

If you want to help, write a polite letter to your local Chinese embassy (www.travelchinaguide.com/embassy/) explaining your concerns, and the urgent need for legislation to protect dogs, cats and other animals from this kind of horrific treatment. The Chinese authorities must be made to realise that these kinds of practices reflect badly on China and her people on the international stage. Also, please consider helping by donating to Animals Asia’s Friends….or Food? campaign.

For more info – Cats:

Cats in China are on the menu, and in the media

Recent increase in media reports and public outrage at horrific trade

Cats bound for the Guangdong catmeat market
Stacked on top of each other in horrific conditions, cats await sale in a Guangzhou market.

The struggle to end dog and cat eating in China, and the horrific cruelty associated with the trade, was a major reason for the formation of Animals Asia 10 years ago. Through our Friends….or Food? campaign, this issue remains very much at the core of our work.

Recent reports in the Chinese media have once again focused attention on this barbaric practice. The Southern Metropolis Daily newspaper, based in the southern city of Guangzhou in Guangdong province (the centre of dog and cat eating in China), reported on 17 December that a group of traffickers had shipped around 1,500 live cats from Jiangsu province into Guangdong, for sale to restaurants in cities there, and that thousands more were being transported every day.

Con’t reading…

Dogs:

New year brings hope for Chinese dogs
Animals Asia helps save 149 dogs from illegal meat trader

Animals Asia Foundation is funding the rescue of 149 dogs from an illegal trader in Sichuan province. The dogs, crammed together in tiny cages, had been bound for a meat market in the southern city of Guangzhou, China’s dog-eating capital.

The dogs were confiscated from the trading station in Pengzhou, 30 kilometres north of Chengdu, by the local Animal Husbandry Bureau after it discovered the trader was operating without a licence. The officials were notified of the situation by Mr Qiao Wei, the operator of Qiming Rescue Centre in Chengdu, who had received a tip-off about the dogs.All 149 dogs were taken to the rescue centre yesterday (31 December) and released into the quarantine area.
A truck containing cages crammed with petrified dogs arrives at Qi Ming rescue centre.

Animals Asia’s Founder and CEO, Jill Robinson, along with a team from the foundation’s Moon Bear Rescue centre in Chengdu, including Education Manager Rainbow Zhu, vet Leanne Clark and vet nurse Emily Gorman, were at the shelter when the dogs arrived.

“The dogs were in an appalling condition, many of them very thin and clearly in shock,” Ms Robinson said. “I hate to think how long they had been in those cages, many of them packed in so tightly that they were piled on top of each other. We heard terrible screams coming from some of the cages, where terrified dogs were biting each other.”


A terrified dog waits to be released.

She said many of the dogs were wearing collars and were possibly stolen pets; some were pure-breeds, including two dalmatians and a chocolate labrador; others had been collected as strays from the streets. She appealed to families in Pengzhou that had lost their dogs to contact the rescue centre.

Con’t reading…

Once again:

If you want to help, write a polite letter to your local Chinese embassy (www.travelchinaguide.com/embassy/) explaining your concerns, and the urgent need for legislation to protect dogs, cats and other animals from this kind of horrific treatment. The Chinese authorities must be made to realise that these kinds of practices reflect badly on China and her people on the international stage. Also, please consider helping by donating to Animals Asia’s Friends….or Food? campaign.

Mr Safety goes cat trapping

Remember the purveyor of meankitty pop? Yes, Mr Safety himself is spreading the necessary message: STERILISE, DAMMIT!

Ok so not in the same tone… just watch the vid please:

Remember, it is up to us, people, to change Singapore’s Love-Hate Relationship with TNRM, to remove the tormenting paradox. Don’t hope for a national pet project, because neither authorities nor Singapore’s straitlaced leaders will lead the charge. Bureaucratic red tape is perfect foil. Reduce the number of animals on the streets, reduce the number who die every year under the guise of humane termination.

Fined for righting a wrong

Homeless dogs in Singapore have it worse than cats in a lot of ways – for one, they are bigger and more visible, and it doesn’t help that they run in packs.

I just came across this article and the reply from AVA about the conditions of the dogs. Once again, loopholes you can dance the sub-prime crisis through abound. Kudos to the TWO GOOD SAMARITANS. There are too few people with heart in Singapore.

ELECTRIC NEWSBukit Batok strangers become STRAYS’ BEST FRIENDS
By Hedy Khoo

September 22, 2008

WOULD you spend thousands of dollars to give a stray dog a proper home?

Click to see larger image 
KIND: Madam Tan with her dog Angel May. PICTURE COURTESY OF MADAM MAY TAN <COPYRIGHT></COPYRIGHT>

Two Good Samaritans did just that.

When they found out the stray dogs in their neighbourhoods had been impounded by the Agri-Food and Veterinary Authority (AVA), they decided to claim ownership.

But they each had to pay between $400 and $500 in fines first because they were regarded as owners who had allowed their dogs to wander around without a license.

The two of them do not know each other.

After claiming the dogs, they paid a monthly fee of $130 for them to live at an animal boarding house, Pet’s Villa, in Pasir Ris.

Madam May Tan, 43, a trader, first came across her dog, which she named Angel May, at a park in Bukit Batok West last year.

She would see the dog regularly until last September, when it went missing.

‘She was usually with a pack of dogs, and I found her special because she was the only one which would come up to me and allow me to pet her on the head,’ said Madam Tan.

She then heard that officers from the AVA had caught some dogs in the area.

‘I panicked and went to the Centre for Animal Welfare and Control. I was so relieved that she was alive,’ she said.

Madam Tan paid the fine and applied for a licence for it. But that wasn’t all.

She later paid more than $2,000 in veterinary fees as Angel May was badly infected and in a poor condition.

‘I couldn’t keep her at home as I already have three dogs. I managed to get a place for her at Pet Villa, but she had to be sterilised and vaccinated,’ she said.

Every Sunday, Madam Tan, her husband and her daughter go to Pet Villa to see Angel May. They also help to clean the area and feed the other dogs there.

Said Madam Tan: ‘It’s not just about giving money. There is a lack of volunteers to maintain the area, and I want Angel May and the other dogs to have a clean home.’

The other dog lover, who wanted to be known only as Mr Lin, had first seen the dog, which he calls Ah Boy, at a park in the east in 2005.

‘Other park-goers who went there regularly would feed him. He would usually eat and then wander off,’ the 28-year-old, who is self-employed, recalled. ‘But even when I didn’t feed him, he would sit near me whenever I was there. Maybe he could sense that I like animals.’

Mr Lin would visit the park two or three times a week. Then, last November, he noticed that the dog was gone.

Like Madam Tan, he became worried and called the Society for Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, which checked and told him that the dog was with the AVA.

Forlorn

Mr Lin then went to the Centre for Animal Welfare and Control to claim the dog.

‘I was shocked when I saw him. He had been there for almost a week and had lost a lot of weight. He looked very forlorn,’ said MrLin. ‘Though he wasn’t my dog, I decided to pay the fine and get him a licence.’

Mr Lin also took the dog to the vet and had him checked and vaccinated. He had to pay another $400 in veterinary charges.

‘I would love to have Ah Boy live with me, but I live alone and it is not fair for me to leave him in an apartment on his own,’ said MrLin. ‘He was a stray dog and he needs a lot of space to roam around.’

He now pays $130 monthly for his dog to be boarded. He visits the place every weekend to bathe and play with the dog.

‘It’s amazing to see how Ah Boy has transformed. He is about 5 years old, but in the past year, I managed to get him to obey some simple commands like ‘Sit’ ‘.

Asked why he chose to adopt and care for an adult stray dog, Mr Lin replied with a smile: ‘He is my friend. If you know a friend is in trouble, you would do your best to help.

‘He needed me and I did what I could. It was fate. I didn’t pick him. He chose me to be his friend,’ he added, tears glistening in his eyes.

And here is the apparent torchlight into the dank and dark labyrinthe of the AVA’s lofty standards

AVA: Impounded dogs are kept in pound and given food, water and care
October 11, 2008

WE refer to the letter, ‘Touched by animal lovers, puzzled by AVA’ (The New Paper, 30 Sep).

As one of our measures to keep the stray dog population in check, the Agri-Food & Veterinary Authority (AVA) impounds any dog found straying in the streets.

Impounded dogs are kept in the pound at AVA’s Centre for Animal Welfare and Control and are provided with food, water and veterinary care until they are claimed by their owners or put to sleep (in the case of unwanted stray dogs).

Dogs which show signs of ownership (eg. if they wear a collar or appear well-groomed) will be kept for five days pending possible claim by the owner.

Unwanted stray dogs are put to sleep after two days.

Owners who claim their lost dogs have to bear the costs incurred for the impoundment, food, lodging and care of their dogs. Owners of unlicensed dogs will also be fined as it is a compulsory requirement under the Dog Licensing and Control rules for owners to license their dogs.

In the case of the dogs in Bukit Batok, both dogs were not licensed. The dogs were released, in good condition, to Madam Tan and Ms Lin within three days of impoundment.

Madam Tan and Ms Lin claimed to be the respective owners and the dogs were observed to respond to them.

Both Madam Tan and Ms Lin were fined for failing to license their dogs. They also had to pay for the expenses incurred for the duration of the dogs’ stay at the pound.

We would like to take this opportunity to remind dog owners that it is compulsory to license their dogs.

Dog owners are also encouraged to let their dogs wear identification tags so as to facilitate the return of the dogs in the event of loss.

Dog owners must also practise responsible dog ownership by having their dogs on leash in public places and not allowing them to stray.

GOH SHIH YONG, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR,
CORPORATE COMMUNICATIONS
for CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER,
AGRI-FOOD & VETERINARY AUTHORITY

In Singapore’s context, Canine Control definitely presents The Stray Dilemma For Animal Groups. Culling is not the answer, and it has never been the answer. So after decades of culling, why hasn’t the light turned on for someone in a seat of Singapore political power? Why still no concerted effort and drive from the vaulted Singapore government to EFFECTIVELY control homeless animal populations and SOLVE the root causes? Imagine if the Singapore government adopted this attitude towards nation-building… what a cold hard thought.

Hoarder Grand Finale

Remember the hoarder case I first mentioned here?

Seems like the last of a list of updates for a long time to come has been posted on 3 Oct. Read it here: Hoarder Grand Finale. There are 4 parts. Prior to this and after the second (and last) update I posted, there’s been more info. Go to babywail’s blog for full details.

I’m not involved in this case but still I would like to add my thanks to everybody who helped.