Wednesday, November 08, 2006

Microchipping and Minutes

Going through the Minutes of the meeting we had with the AVA again and making changes. As much as we love the whole programme, the glitch is the microchipping of the cats that they are considering as a form of identity and which we really do not think will work.

In addition, as Michelle pointed out the other day, it's antithetical to the whole concept of getting people to sterilise. For example if they reach the number of cats agreed upon, say someone dumps another two cats - then what happens? The caregivers aren't going to call the TC and turn over the cats. At the same time, in the past they probably would have gotten those cats sterilised. Now assuming that the cats, sterilised or not are going to be caught if they are not microchipped, then the caregivers probably won't bother. Which means MORE cats will be born.

I do agree that it is of utmost importance to manage the population - that's a key concept of TNRM - but microchipping is not the way to go.

One important thing to consider is of course abandonment and how to go about tackling it. One thing that I have seen more and more is how the HDB policy against cats in flats encourages semi-pet cats, which cause problems to other residents AND caregivers. Our last letter to the HDB in July did not get a response. I followed up with an email last week. Still awaiting a reply.

7 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Does anyone really know the rationale behind HDB's decision on not allowing pet cats? Cats are the perfect apartment pets, so it seems unusual for such a policy.

I know it has been around for a very long time, but I never did understand the rationale behind it.

Marilyn

8/11/06 10:56 AM  
Blogger Dawn said...

I don't really know if THEY know it really. First they said it was because cats by nature wander - but we have more then 30 vets who said cats are great apartment animals. They mentioned complaints - but it's something like 400 complaints a YEAR across the whole of Singapore. How many of these are repeat complaints? Plus how many complaints are occuring now because the owners are choosing to let the cats OUT instead of keeping them in because they don't want to run afoul of the HDB rules? I reckon a lot more than 400.

Finally they said it was a 'historical reason'.

8/11/06 11:02 AM  
Blogger E_Cat said...

Interestingly, Hong Kong apartments can keep cats but not dogs.

8/11/06 11:26 AM  
Blogger Dawn said...

Yes Marilyn.

8/11/06 11:32 AM  
Blogger Mary said...

Historial reason? Means what? i doubt they can emphasis.

8/11/06 12:34 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I'm just speculating. But I think that the fact that cats caterwaul when in heat may have something to do with it. Unfortunately, not everyone will spay or neuter their cats and the HDB may not want other people to be disturbed. I also think that even if the HDB does allow cats to be kept in flats, that doesn't necessarily mean that people will do so 24 sevvy. Some will surely let them roam. So we're back to square one. Might as well take the easy way out and issue a blanket rule that cats are not allowed... make sense??

8/11/06 1:01 PM  
Blogger Dawn said...

Anonymous the problem is that NOW there is nothing wrong with letting the cats wander. That way people don't get caught, because they can say it's their cat.

In our proposal, we suggested that every cat must be microchipped, sterilised and kept indoors. If the cat wanders out, we'll know whom the cat belongs to. I think if people know there is a simple way NOT to break the law, that they will comply. Right now there is no incentive (and every reason) to be a non-responsible cat owner if you don't want to get caught.

8/11/06 3:17 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home