POISONING OF CATS AND DOGS

Dominion, Volume 30, Issue 46, 18 November 1936, Page 5

POISONING OF CATS AND DOGS

‘‘Manner Diabolical and Vindictive” EFFORT TO SUPPRESS RIFE PRACTICE What was described as the “poisoning of harmless animals in a diabolical and vindictive manner” was a matter that gave rise to a good deal of censuring comment at the annual meeting of the Wellington Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals last night. The poisoning of animals, it was stated, had been rife in Wellington and suburbs lately, and the co-operation, of the public is to besought by the society in an effort to suppress the practice. Reference to the subject was made in the annual report, in which it was stated that considerable anxiety had been caused in Wellington and suburbs by the poisoning of dogs, and efforts had been made to put a stop to the cruel practice and also to locate the offenders. The society’s committee had made representations to the Government in an endeavour to have the regulations controlling the sale of poisons tightened up considerably, and it was hoped that with the co-operation of the Government it would be possible to bring in some amended regulations which would enable purchasers of poisons to be traced more effectively than at present.

The poisoning that had been going on in the city and suburbs recently had been systematic, and the poison used in most cases had been strychnine, declared Mrs. M. Christmas-Harvey. At present there was an outbreak at the Hutt. To support her contention that the offences were systematic, she said that they were all of the same type. “Menace to Community.” “Anyone who has such an unbalanced mind as to kill harmless animals is a menace to the community; if they kill animals they may go further and kill human beings,” she said, when urging the meeting to pass a vote of censure against “the abominable poisoning of harmless animals in a diabolical and vindictive manner,” and later in the meeting moved a resolution to that effect. Mrs. H. M. Christie said she thought letters to the Press had been partly responsible for the creation of a misconception in the minds of the public that animals were largely concerned in carrying disease. That was not the case. , “I am heartily in sympathy, but it seems strange to censure people we don’t know; who are we censuring?” asked Mr. P. F. Hazeldon. The chairman, Mr. J. R. Salt: If we knew who they were we would probably jail them. Mr. J. H. Howell question whether the owners of dogs were not to blame in the matter insofar as they failed to train their dogs properly. If dogs were taken young they could be taught not to pick up food. He thought more would be gained if the meeting was to draw attention to the fact that poisoning had been rife in several districts in Wellington and the co-operation of the public sought in the matter. Cats and Dogs by the Dozen. The Rev. W. Tye: I have been on Brooklyn hill for about six weeks now. I don’t own a dog or a cat, but other people’s cats and dogs are an absolute nuisance. There are eats and dogs there by the dozen. If it continues I shall feel like putting down some poison myself soon. I don’t want you people here to tackle me as if I was not an animal lover; lam a lover of animals, but I am only emphasising another aspect. Saying that she was aware that animals were at times apt to be a nuisance. Mrs. Christie said she was satisfied there must-be some way out. Painless deaths might be possible, but the trouble was that the only poisons that could be easily obtained by the public were poisons that caused painful death. After the Rev. Mr. Tye had been elected a vice-president of the society, Mr. W. Barke said he would like to ask him if he had considered the aims and objects of the society. He felt sure he was an animal lover, but expressed his belief that Mr. Tye would be unwise in accepting the office of vice-president unless he was prepared to conform .to the aims and objects of the body. He went on to say that one of the society’s aims was to educate ignorant owners in the proper care and treatment of their animals.

A-voice: If a dog is a nuisance, I think it is the owner who should suffer, and not the dog. (Hear, bear.) Mr. Hazeldon: Poison the owner.

Mr. Howell said that Mrs. ChristmasHarvey had intimated that: she wished to withdraw her motion in favour of the suggestion he had made that the attention of the public should be drawn to the position and their co-operation sought in giving information to the society which would be treated as confidential.

This suggestion was adopted by the meeting in the form of a resolution.