01:11 PM February 3, 2009
Letter from Christina Kwan
This article is in response to the numerous writers who have written in to address the issues on the AVA's stand, stated in "No easy solution for strays" (Jan 30).Being an animal caregiver, I applaud the efforts that the AVA has put in actively over the years, on playing a vital role of adopting a balanced approach in the management of strays.
However, it is sad that to date, the AVA still chooses to use the "inevitable" method of culling to tackle the root cause of stray’s problems in Singapore. The question is, if culling has indeed been the most effective way to keep their population in check, shouldn't their number have been reduced by now? Otherwise, why are we not promoting sterilisation as a more humane and holistic approach to address our stray’s population in long term? Or have we already come to a standpoint where we no longer view a stray's life of great importance and that the blanket solution is simply to cull them?
While I fully agree with AVA that public education on responsible pet ownership is the key to reducing the problem of strays, it would also be good to adopt a positive "win-win" mindset where sterilisation is also given a fair chance.
While sterilisation is a cumbersome process that involves financial outlay and might take years to prove its effectiveness, at least our local strays are given a second chance in life. Most importantly, the desired outcome - a reduction in their population - could be achieved.
The AVA should be fully aware of the constraints caregivers faced in their during the caring of strays. Yet, time and again, the AVA reiterates their stand that "sterilised strays should be properly homed and not be returned to the environment”. Could the AVA then suggest to caregivers like myself the best solution to help rehome these strays, when our current animal policy prohibits us to do so since the majority of Singaporeans live in HDB flats?
