Hong Kong No Kill City Forum (香港不殺之都聯盟) - Now renamed STOP
"STOP - Save Hong Kong's Cats and Dogs".
Please go to
STOP's website
:
http://www.hkstop.org/
or
Facebook Page :
http://www.facebook.com/home.php#!/group.php?gid=57500617500&v=wall
"No Kill" is the
term used for a concept of companion animal control in which methods are used to
PREVENT an unwanted surplus of animals forming, rather than killing the unwanted
animals which has been the traditional policy in most parts of the world. It is
also called "Zero Surplus" and "No More Homeless Pets".
Most of us who have spent any length of time trying to deal humanely with the
current huge surplus have come to the realisation that however hard we try, and
however valuable our work is to individual lives, we
shall never by ourselves make more than a small dent in the problem. We
need Government help to reduce the numbers entering the market.
Humane societies were originally often formed to introduce "humane" methods of
killing animals. Certainly death by injection is lot better than by drowning,
electrocution, starving, gassing, decompressing, etc. But thanks to the
pioneering work of San Francisco SPCA more than 20 years ago, we now know that
we can prevent the necessity for killing by controlling the production of the
animals.
Pet overpopulation
can be compared to a burst water pipe in your
home. Before you can effectively clean up the mess, you have to turn off the
water!
"Pet" overpopulation is a tragic problem which leads to the destruction of many
thousands of innocent
dogs, cats and other species
each year. Although
the methods of euthanasia used in Hong Kong are better than in some countries,
the whole process is barbaric besides being ineffective. Despite the continual
killing, the streets and parks of Hong Kong still have strays who pose major
hazards to themselves and the public from bitings, diseases and collisions with
vehicles. The animals themselves endure miserable lives of hunger, disease and
suffering. This situation is not acceptable either to animal lovers or animal
haters. The only people who are content with the current situation are those
who are making money from importing, breeding and selling the excessive numbers
of animals.
Hong Kong's main
method of dog and cat population control is simply
killing
the surplus. This cruel and inhumane policy has been used for decades and is
plainly ineffective. If the present policy worked there would be no
surplus and therefore no problem. An animal control policy that does work but
has not yet been tried in Hong Kong is the control of the supply by restricting
importing, breeding and selling.
The short name that is used for this new concept is "No Kill". The term "No
Kill" is in some ways misleading - euthanasia will still be provided for animals
for whom there is no other solution to their distress. "No Kill" in this context
simply means using preventive methods to stop the surplus from occurring,
instead of waiting for the surplus to be produced and then killing it. San Francisco's
pioneering policies have
now been successfully introduced into
many other cities both in the United States and in other countries around the
world. It will be particularly exciting to demonstrate that this humane concept
is effective in Hong Kong because other Asian cities can then be inspired to
follow Hong Kong's lead.
The advantages of a "No
Kill" policy are clear: the endless round of killings
will be stopped; tax payers' money will not be spent on rounding up and
killing thousands of animals every month; there will be no homeless suffering
animals in the streets causing annoyance
and upset
to humans
and to themselves;
the risk of a Rabies epidemic will be much reduced.
The Hong Kong SPCA was founded eighty
five
years ago largely to institute humane
methods of destruction, replacing the barbaric methods employed at the time.
But times have changed, the Agriculture and Fisheries Department (AFCD) uses the
same humane methods as SPCA and is well equipped to carry out the Government
policy of killing the surplus - if that is what the Government wishes to
continue to do. Today SPCA feels that its role in this killing is no
longer required and that continuing to help kill the surplus is to be part of
the problem.
Until August 2002 nearly
two thousand dogs
were
destroyed in Hong Kong each month by the SPCA and the AFCD.
SPCA believes that as a humane society dedicated to preventing cruelty it should
not be taking part in the killing of animals whose only fault is that they have
no home. It decided therefore to change from being an "Open Intake" shelter
to being a "Limited Intake" one. An "Open Intake" shelter takes every animal
presented to it, finds homes for those it can find homes for, keeps in kennels
those it has kennel space for - and kills the rest
(in HK SPCA's case it was nearly 90% killed). As a "Limited Intake" shelter it
now only takes
in surrendered
dogs that it believes it can find homes for. Of
course the ideal is for a shelter to be both "Open Intake" and "No Kill" - a few
communities around the world have now achieved this and we can all aspire to it. So what happens to the
dogs that SPCA would have taken in before but now
turns
away? Every person who brings in a
dog
who does not fill the criteria
for acceptance is
counselled as to the choices. Sometimes appropriate
medical or behavioural treatment will solve the problem. Sometimes a little
more effort by the owner will find a new home. In cases where the owner, despite
counselling, still wishes to have the
dog killed, this can be carried out
either at a private veterinary clinic or at AFCD. There remains of course a
danger that these owners will opt to throw the
dog into the harbour or
abandon her in a park.
But the fear mongers have been proved wrong - since SPCA in August 2002 stopped euthanasing dogs at owners' request (unless death was in the direct interest of
the dog to prevent serious suffering), the total number of dogs "euthanased" in
Hong Kong has nearly halved - and there is no increase in the number of dogs in
the streets. This is in large part thanks to the new organisations that have sprung up to
help adopt out unwanted animals. Previously, SPCA was sweeping the problem
under the carpet by killing silently and efficiently. Now the community
has embraced the problem and cooperates to solve it. It has been estimated that, if
the Government takes this problem seriously and enacts effective preventive
measures, the over-supply can be reduced by 15% per year.
It should be clearly understood that at the moment the SPCA "No Kill" policy has
only been applied to owner surrendered dogs and not to cats nor to stray dogs
which by law have to be sent to AFCD. It is our opinion that it is
high time that the SPCA applied its dog policy also to cats and other species.
It must be emphasised that SPCA going "No Kill"
cannot solve the problem on its own. The aim is to make Hong Kong "No Kill" - not just the SPCA. The AFCD
must reduce the importing, breeding and selling of dogs and cats.
The measures that the No Kill City Forum has proposed are listed below.
Dogs and cats are being produced in Hong Kong by importation and breeding in numbers far in excess of the number of homes available. The surplus animals are either killed by the authorities (about 2000 a month) or roam wild in the streets and countryside. These uncared for animals cause road accidents, bite children, kill wild life (barking deer, civet cats, etc.) and spread diseases to humans and other animals (rabies, toxocara, distemper, etc.). In addition, their own lives are brief and wretched from disease and starvation. This situation is common in many parts of the world and will only be fully controlled when the whole population has been educated to understand the problems. However, there are several useful measures which could be instituted in Hong Kong now. New regulations are needed urgently - the situation is deteriorating rapidly in Hong Kong and China. The popularity of dog buying is increasing exponentially. Unfortunately many people abandon their animals when the novelty wears off.
Dog and cat control should be relatively easy to achieve as it is one issue on which animal lovers and animal haters should be able to agree. The solution lies in a multi-faceted programme involving increased education, adoptions, appropriate legislation, etc, etc - but the most important element is a massive low cost Spay and Neuter campaign. This will only be effective if all parties cooperate. But the prize is great: 15,000 dog lives, and even more cats and other animals, saved every year. And if it can be shown to work in Hong Kong, it will be copied in other Chinese cities!
The following are the Legislative Actions we would like to see taken:
1. Licence to keep a dog or
cat.
Current legislation requires all dogs to be licensed and receive rabies shots every three
years with proof by the insertion of a microchip in the neck. Microchipping is a painless
and highly effective method of identifying animals. Its full implementation should prevent
anyone from abandoning an animal and then denying responsibility. But the
regulations must be changed to insist on the microchip being inserted before
first transfer of ownership - ie at the place of breeding, whether in Hong Kong
or abroad.
If the animal has not been desexed, there should be a significant licence fee - e.g.
HK$5000 every three years (i.e. significantly higher than the cost of desexing). This fee
should make the whole scheme self funding. Desexed animals could be licensed without
charge or for a small fee. Initial proof of desexing would be by veterinarian's
certificate.
After a initial period of, say, three years, if a dog or cat is found without a microchip
(or, to allow for technical failure, a certificate and record that one was inserted), it
will be either desexed at the owner's expense or rehomed.
There also needs to be a special exemption category for registered stray dogs. This is
so that someone who Traps, Neuters and Replaces an animal will not be subject to
prosecution for abandonment of that animal. [TNR has been shown to be a much more
effective method of control of feral populations than random killing].
2. Import Licence.
All imported animals should be fully vaccinated and at least 12 weeks old, preferably 16.
The import licence fee for a desexed animal should be nominal but for an intact
animal it should be significant, e.g. HK$1000. The animal must be microchipped
before entry.
3. Breeding Licence.
A licence should be required for commercial breeding. Illegally bred puppies and kittens
offered for sale should be confiscated and the owner fined. Indeed, in our opinion,
breeding should not be allowed.
However, a draconian implementation of this ideal would result in further illegal
breeding.
4. Pet Shop Licence (Animal Traders' Licence).
The regulations should be made more stringent and the fees significantly
increased. Ideally the selling of animals in pet shops should be phased out and
animals should be obtained directly from rescue centres. There are currently
far too many pet shops in Hong Kong, not to mention illegal hawking and pet
shops in Shenzhen which will, for a small fee,
deliver the animal to you in Hong Kong (apart from being illegal, this poses a
serious rabies threat). And, of
course, the Internet.
Pet shops licensed in Hong Kong under Cap 139 as at 3/DEC/2002:
Licensed to sell dogs and/or cats: 149 shops.
Other traders licensed to sell various pet
animals/birds (birds, non-venomous reptiles, hamsters, gerbils, rats, mice,
chinchillas, rabbits): 116 shops.
5. Education.
Educational efforts by the different Government Departments and NGOs should be
co-ordinated. Funding should be partly from Government sources and partly contributed by
the NGOs. An adequate education programme is essential.
The current efforts to promote "Responsible Pet Ownership" are uncoordinated and
underfunded.
6. Animal Wardens.
The AFCD Animal Management Division should close down its killing yards and put
its resources into:
Spay and Neuter
Education
Enforcement of the regulations on Importing, Breeding and Selling.
7. Dog prize-fighting
Everyone knows that this takes place regularly in various parts of the New Territories. It
is illegal under current law but the venues are always heavily guarded and the police feel
they have more important work. Only a long term change in public opinion can make a
difference. This is a cruel "sport", demeaning for
dogs and humans alike.
The following are the simplified proposals we presented in January 2005 to Dr York Chow, Secretary for Health, Welfare and Food (the Bureau which oversees the Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department which is the department charged with managing animal affairs).
PROPOSALS FOR CONTROLLING THE DOG POPULATION
1. Licensing
All animals to be registered and microchipped before first sale/adoption
Registration fees to be free for desexed animals but retained for intact animals
(ie all dogs, cats, rabbits and chinchillas) - regardless of sex
Strict enforcement of registration
2. Importation
Raise importation fees
Stop illegal entry
3. Breeding
Breeding regulations to be improved and effectively enforced
4. Pet Shops Regulations to be improved and effectively enforced for animal traders, animal businesses and animal keepers
Dr Chow promised to get back to us by the
end of 2005 but has not done so. We are pushing for a new meeting.
The proposals have also been debated many times at the AFCD's Animal Welfare
Advisory Group - draft proposals have been drawn up but have not been actioned
by the department.
Click here for some old correspondence of historical interest and here for a review of SPCA's "No Kill" policy by students at HKU in 2003.
Further information relevant to No Kill and its implementation can be found on these web sites:
What Happens When the Cages Are Full?
Hong Kong SPCA
Hong Kong AFCD
San Francisco SPCA
Richmond SPCA
Chennai (Madras)
Blue Cross
HSUS -
Programs - Companion Animals - The Shelter Library
Humor Us, Neuter Us Campaign
Put your fundraising thru the woof
Maddie's Fund
No Kill Animal Shelter Proposal for Oakland
Don't breed or buy while animals die!
Click on Wu Jui:
(Wu Jui befriended the Huizhou Bile Bears when they were waiting for IFAW
to build their Sanctuary - he now lives with the bears at Animal Asia Foundation's Sanctuary
in Sichuan)
Dog Control in China:
Dog owner threatening policeman with a meat cleaver:
To protest, click:
Sirius Global Animal
Organisation (Sirius GAO)
AAF - Friends....or Food?
Please help us to persuade the Government
to take this problem seriously. The Surplus should be prevented – not killed.
This will save money in the long term and be far more effective than the current
policy of giving free rein to the pet industry. Join Hong Kong's effort to
become No Kill:
http://www.hkstop.org/
Last revised: 17 February 2011