Dog control

Press, 14 May 1982, Page 12

Dog control

Sir,—The Dog Control Bill recently introduced in Parliament is obviously the result of a determined effort by those who devised it, to move further towards eradicating the “effects” (dogs) rather than the cause. Over many years appeals for this type of approach have been made, supported by logical alternatives but it is apparent these have been dismissed. To make a defenceless creature the scapegoat for its owner’s negligence is a return to the dark ages, when nothing is being done to discourage indiscriminate breeding. If this bill passes. it will only increase the misery, abandonment and slaughter of thousands of dogs already in existence as well as those yet unborn. The bill is so designed that few dogs will ever leave a pound alive. — Yours, etc., (Mrs) ESTELLE WIN. May 12, 1982. Sir,—New legislation at present under study for tighter dog control might be a way of curbing stray dog problems and sorting out irresponsible owners but does nothing to help the continual influx of young animals that connot possibly all find decent homes. The supply exceeds the demand and leads to people having a disposable attitude towards animals. Something must be done, not can, or might, but must. Call for compulsory sterilisation of all animals unless owned and bred by registered breeders with definite orders for pups a prerequisite. How many dogs are destroyed each year or used in animal vivisection? If pups were harder to come by, older dogs . would become sought after, thus preventing continual waste of these loving, trusting best friends of man.—Yours, etc. GERARDINE RYAN. May 12, 1982. Sir,—l endorse J. Sharp’s letter (May 10). the bill before Parliament on tighter dog control, again penalises the dog not the irresponsible owner. The human race is over-popu-lated, because of large families, as is the canine family. Killing those poor defenceless creatures is not the answer. Only controlled breeding can solve and save senseless murder, or a clinic for spaying and neutering with lower veterinary fees, a subsidy or tax rebate for the purpose. Why do politicians and local bodies not get together on this issue, show compassion, and not continue to punish man’s best friend for being born. Dog pounds swell each day with many often wellbred helpless dogs suffering the knowledge of their fate, every one begging to be taken to a homie, but often doomed to a horrible death. Voluntary workers have a heart-breaking job, saving the few knowing they cannot save them all. When is man going to stop this destruction and abuse of God’s creatures?—Yours, etc., IVY V. KENCH. 1982.