Monday, June 30, 2008
She has spoken with the feeder several times and she says that she doesn't want to get the feeder into trouble because the feeder's husband doesn't like her to feed. The irony in this case is that she says the TC has been quite sympathetic but that the area is a mess and she can see why there are complaints.
After the TC called the last time, she said that she spoke with the feeder again. The feeder threatened to stop feeding - but then left food again that same night. The caregiver explained that the cats might get rounded up and killed, but the feeder was unmoved and said that if that was what happened, then so be it.
I told the caregiver she may have no choice but to let the TC know whom the feeder is. Perhaps if the feeder's husband finds out and is disapproving, that may be a factor that will cause her to stop - and stop putting the cats in danger.
Friday, June 27, 2008
Thursday, June 26, 2008
Wednesday, June 25, 2008
I realise the irony about all the talk about obsessive pet owners who spoil their pets and then posting this photo, but I swear this wasn't an expensive toy! I actually bought it in a supermarket which goes to show it can't have cost too much :)
Scout loved it when we opened it for her.
Tuesday, June 24, 2008
Say you had a person who liked children so much that they decided to go out and say kidnap a few. Would that person described as someone who loves children? Chances are that person would be locked up. When it comes to animals however, any behaviour is explained because the person is an 'animal lover'. It seems that there is a bias that if you like animals then you're probably not too sane to begin with. Tell that to the 71.1 million households that have animals living with them in the US alone - I don't know of an equivalent study in Singapore.
Monday, June 23, 2008
Friday, June 20, 2008
Thursday, June 19, 2008
Thanks to Chinky for sending in this poster. I believe that the section that the poster may be referring to is Section 17 of the Environmental Public Health Act. You can look it up at Singapore Statutes Online. However that section refers to 'throw or leave behind' food or food containers. Caregivers aren't doing that - they are feeding the cats but are going back to clean up afterward.
Wednesday, June 18, 2008
Monday, June 16, 2008
Again thank you Chinky for this.
Here on the other hand, is an example of a bad poster. This came from a bigger poster on feeding pigeons as well. This poster also makes no sense - if the cats are fed, they are LESS likely to go into garbage bins. Hungry cats do that - but well fed cats are far LESS likely to do that.
Saturday, June 14, 2008
Friday, June 13, 2008
First, the cats on this island were killed because supposedly they were killing the iguanas. Here's an article on the various things that are killing the iguanas - if you look at it, it seems that the iguanas went extinct after an army base went up during World War II and several of the iguanas have been killed by cars (20 out of a population of 220 or so at the time). So my question is - why cats? It seems odd again to me that cats are singled out. Why not ban cars on the island, or aircraft since they seem to be a significant factor in why the iguanas are dying? I also wonder what percentage of the iguanas dying can be linked to the cats? Also is it not possible that it's just greater human activity (with all its attendant issues) that has led to the population of iguanas dropping?
Secondly, there was an increase apparently in the iguana population, but at the same time this may well have been due to the fact that iguanas were introduced or other factors. If you introduce say X number of iguanas and they are old enough to reproduce, then it's not a surprise really that the population would increase. So why were cats killed as a first result before taking all these other issues into consideration?
Fortunately a group called Animal Balance was started to deal with this and to do TNR on the islands. They are working with the local authorities to get all the cats and dogs sterilised. I saw a presentation that the founder did at a conference a few years ago and now have a renewed appreciation of the work she is doing.
It seems that one of the problems is importation of animals - which is supposedly not allowed. While it seems that Sea Shepherd has a problem with the cats and dogs being there as well, they do not want the cats to be killed and are working with Animal Balance though they want the law on dogs and cats to be strictly enforced. What I did find interesting in the editorial as well was that it seems that many birds were seen killed by traffic - and the presence of cats was noted. I am not sure however that this correlates with the cats killing the birds or lizards - just because the cat was there doesn't mean the cat necessarily killed the lizard or bird.
At the same time, having a group like Animal Balance working there means that the animals are in better health and less likely to have disease. It would be almost impossible to stop people owning cats and dogs as well, so it's best to ensure that they know how to do it responsibly.