I, Mark, totally agree with the welfare groups working on the streets that the Indian Supreme Court, or SC, directive is utterly ‘pie in the sky’ as we say here in England – I campaigned a lot over a ten year period to oppose very negative and threatening / intimidating Government actions to both us human campaigners and the cruelty against the stray dogs in Serbia, https://serbiananimalsvoice.com/about-serbian-animals/ and this article above (about Indian strays) is TOTALLY CORRECT when it says that ‘Removing community dogs creates territorial vacuums, leading to the re-entry of unvaccinated dogs, increasing human – dog conflict’.
One of the worst actions that can be taken is to remove stray dogs from ‘their patch’. As said above, it then creates a vacuum for new animals to enter that same void. New animals can bring with them new disease and illnesses not previously carried by the now removed old patch dogs.
This is where the new human – dog conflict surfaces. Rabies free in the past, maybe not be now or in the future, now the void has been filled by the new entries !!. The sterilise-vaccivate-return model is the only sustainable and compassionate method of controlling a stray dog populations on their ‘home’ patch. The sterilisation part further prevents new litters being born to a life of hardship and suffering. Vaccinating every animal thus reduces disease spread amongst the animals or transmission to humans. The return back to the local patch of local dogs prevents the ingress of migrants into the newly formed territorial vacuum. This was our proposal method for Serbia also – the Government ignored us and opted for a ‘catch and kill’ routine.
The issue here is that by killing, you do initially see a reduction in dog numbers, (Governments think), but within a relatively short time you may be back to even higher numbers than before because the absolutely critical ‘sterilisation’ has not been undertaken ! Stray dogs enjoy a good ‘bonk’ to produce new litters – simple as that !!! Can anyone blame them ??
I thus close my case in defence of all stray animals. The sterilise, vaccinate and then return method is the only way to reduce stray populations gradually over time; killing does not reduce numbers and it never solves the stray issue.
Like all the other groups, I know I will also be ignored with my proposal. I experienced it big time with the threatening Serbian politicians and authorities in the past. Lets see what stray numbers are in a years time.
RSPCA rescue animal, Spotty, is one of hundreds of pets under the Darwin shelter’s care. (ABC News: Jayden O’Neill)
Bernadette Relos and husband, Nathan Calverley, are self-described animal lovers who live in a bustling house in Darwin’s outskirts suburb of Berrimah.
They have two cats and a one-year-old puppy, which they recently adopted from a shelter.
The South Australian couple who moved to the Top End for work said their “fur babies” brought chaos and destruction, but much-needed colour to their lives.
“They bring life to the household … you can be lonely, and one of the cats will jump on you, and then you’re not lonely anymore,” Mr Calverley said.
“You could walk in the front door, and everyone doesn’t say a word, but the dog will come running … and start licking you and saying hello.”
Ms Relos said they decided to adopt because they wanted pets that would grow up with their young family.
But as some are choosing to bring furry friends into their forever homes, animal shelters are seeing the opposite.
Shelters being pushed to breaking point
Charles Giliam, the Northern Territory’s RSPCA operations manager, said there had been an increasing number of surrendered pets due to people experiencing financial difficulties.
He said most pets being dropped on shelter doorsteps were mixed breeds, weighing around 20 to 30 kilograms, with backyard breeding worsening the situation.
“[People] bring pets to us that are often in need of veterinary treatment … and say, ‘We just don’t have the money’,” he said.
The RSPCA estimates most dog owners spend an average of $25,000 on their pet during its lifetime, while cat owners spend $21,000 on average.
The charity says that within the first year of cat ownership, people could face up to $3,500 of expenses on food, desexing, grooming, bedding, toys and treats.
Mr Giliam said the influx of surrendered pets was creating significant challenges for shelters.
“We probably got about 15 to 20 people on our waiting list who are wanting to surrender … but we are chock-a-block full,” he said.
RSPCA national data showed around 81,000 pets were surrendered in the 2023/2024 financial year, with only 27,000 finding new homes.
David Neilson, a volunteer at the Darwin RSPCA shelter, said the increasing demand was leaving some volunteers “overwhelmed”.
“There are so many volunteers that are here through the week to walk the dogs and sit with the cats and we are not getting through everything … it makes it difficult,” he said.
Industry voices want to see change
While many in the rescue sector are worried about the growing crisis, there are also concerns the NT’s animal rights laws are ineffective.
Unlike most other Australian jurisdictions, the NT does not have a formal dog breeder licensing scheme, however breeders are still expected to meet standards of care under the Animal Protection Act.
Melissa Purick, a licensed dachshund breeder, said it was “frustrating” to see people buy pets from unlicensed backyard breeders without considering the animal’s welfare.
“I would like to see that stopped to start with, where you can’t sell puppies at the markets or the side of the road,” she said.
Hannah Bohlin, an animal advocate, believes growing use of social media is glamorising pet ownership without highlighting its challenges.
She said if people adopted pets that were incompatible with their lifestyle, cost of living could become a “scapegoat” to surrender animals that were no longer valued.
She wants the NT to look at what other states and countries are doing to manage pet breeding and ownership.
“I would like to see a discussion around the possibility of introducing some kind of licence system [to own a pet],” she said.
“Some European countries do operate this kind of system to get a dog in the first place.”
The NT’s Agriculture and Fisheries Department, which oversees animal welfare, said a review of the Animal Protection Act was currently underway.
“The NT government takes animal welfare seriously and is committed to strengthening animal welfare laws,” a department spokesperson said.
One of 500 abandoned dogs at AID – SHIN in Mijas, ready for adoption. Credit: EWN
being of pets across the country but has ended up, in the eyes of many, worsening an already bad situation. Since its introduction, animal abandonment has only increased, and animal rights are worse than ever.
Local management challenges, lack of consultation with professionals, and a perceived ideological bent: with more than 30 million pets in Spain, it was inevitable that a one-size-fits-all approach wasn’t going to work for everyone. One in three households owns at least one companion animal, and not everyone can afford the changes. In Spain, an estimated 6 million pets remain unregistered, posing potential public health risks. In 2023, 285,000 dogs and cats were abandoned, highlighting the need for stricter regulations. But at what financial cost?
The new law sets standards for pet ownership and treatment, including a ban on leaving pets alone for more than 72 hours (24 hours for dogs) and prohibiting their habitual confinement in spaces like terraces, balconies, storage rooms, or vehicles. Sales of dogs, cats, and ferrets are now restricted to authorised, licensed breeders, excluding some intermediaries and private individuals.
Breeds classified as potentially dangerous, such as Rottweilers, remain subject to strict handling rules, including licences, short leashes, and muzzles. Notably, exemptions exist for working animals, like the Spanish Legion’s goat, which can still parade on October 12, or mules and oxen in living nativity scenes, unless their owners register them as pets in the new mandatory pet registry.
Despite its intentions, the law faces hurdles that hurt. Councils are tasked with collecting stray and abandoned animals and providing 24-hour veterinary services, but many lack the funds and resources to comply. As well, local governments must manage feral cat colonies, requiring trained volunteers or staff to capture, vaccinate, deworm, sterilise, and return the cats – a costly mandate that many areas struggle to meet.
If a pet owner now wants help, they have to go to a vet. For many who already owned a pet from before the introduction of the law, vet prices are not an option. According to Fabienne Paques of AID – SHIN, an animal rescue in the Malaga Region with 500 abandoned dogs and 150 cats, ‘A dog needs a chip, and it needs a rabies shot. Before you could go to a hardware shop for that. Now, it costs a lot to go to a vet. Before it was €20, and now it’s €80. To get some dogs castrated or sterilised (as per the new law), it can cost up to €500. The new law considered pets things, items, not animals.’ The shelter has recently had an inordinate amount of pets abandoned at their gates. ‘People don’t know what to do with them. The new law brought a lot of negativity. They say it’s not true, but it’s an absolute disaster.’
Dilemma under new animal rights law of what to do with existing pets?
A few kilometres away in the Miralmonte urbanisation, neighbours are up in arms about one of their neighbours who has several macaws and dogs which appear to be breeding amongst themselves. According to the neighbours, the animals make a terrible noise, and their droppings are attracting rats. The owner at the centre of the situation used to have a pet shop in nearby Coín but has been stopped from selling animals from the store she inherited from her parents. So, now, unable to afford to put them down, she keeps the animals at home. She cannot sell the animals by law, and the local police are reluctant to do anything as they can see both sides of the argument.
Critics of the law, including Professor Christian Gortázar, argue the law lacks scientific grounding and was driven by ideological motives, potentially threatening livestock industries by overly humanising pets. They also claim that there in no provision for pet owners with less resources to cope with the new rules.
José Luis López-Schümmer, president of the Artemisan Foundation, notes the law’s inconsistency with European legislation, which excludes wildlife from welfare regulations. The law also exempts animals raised for food, scientific experiments, bullfighting, or hunting, countering claims that it severely impacts the economy.
A year and a half after its enactment, the law’s limited consensus, even among its proposing parties, and incomplete framework have hindered its full application. Its true long-term impact – positive or negative – remains to be seen, as further data and regulatory clarity are needed to assess this polarising legislation. What is certain, in 2025, is that the situation with the welfare of animals is nowhere near being improved.
Now, unable to buy a dog from a pet shop, ACE – SHIN have a broad selection just looking for a home. Check out their website as they can arrange adoptions in may countries around Europe.
EL AARJATE, Morocco (AP) — A mutt with a blue tag clipped to her ear whimpers as she’s lifted from a cage and carried to a surgery table for a spay and a rabies vaccine, two critical steps before she’s released back onto the streets of Morocco’s capital.
The “Beldi,” as Moroccan street dogs are called, is among the hundreds taken from Rabat to a dog pound in a nearby forest. As part of an expanded “Trap, Neuter, Vaccinate and Return” program, dogs like her are examined, treated and ultimately released with tags that make clear they pose no danger.
“We have a problem: That’s stray dogs. So we have to solve it, but in a way that respects animals,” said Mohamed Roudani, the director of the Public Health and Green Spaces Department in Morocco’s Interior Ministry.
Trying to balance safety and animal well-being
Morocco adopted “Trap, Neuter, Vaccinate and Return,” or TVNR, in 2019. One facility has opened in Rabat and more are set to be launched in at least 14 other cities, aligning Morocco with recommendations from the World Organization for Animal Health. The government has spent roughly $23 million over the past five years on animal control centers and programs.
Roudani said Morocco’s updated approach balanced public safety, health and animal well-being. Local officials, he added, were eager to expand TVNR centers throughout the country.
Though population estimates are challenging, based on samples of marked and tagged stray dogs, Moroccan officials believe they number between 1.2 to 1.5 million. Some neighborhoods welcome and care for them collectively. However, others decry their presence as a scourge and note that more than 100,000 Moroccans have needed rabies vaccinations after attacks.
A draft law is in the works that would require owners to vaccinate pets and impose penalties for animal abuse.
Inside the center
On a visit organized for journalists to a TNVR center in El Aarjate, enclosures for dogs appear spacious and orderly, with clean floors and the scent of disinfectant. Food and water bowls are refreshed regularly by staff who move between spaces, offering gentle words and careful handling. Some staff members say they grow so attached to the dogs that they miss them when they’re released to make space to treat incoming strays.
Veterinarians and doctors working for the Association for the Protection of Animals and Nature care for between 400 and 500 stray dogs from Rabat and surrounding cities. Dogs that veterinarians deem unhealthy or aggressive are euthanized using sodium pentobarbital, while the rest are released, unable to spread disease or reproduce.
Youssef Lhor, a doctor and veterinarian, said that aggressive methods to cull dogs didn’t effectively make communities safer from rabies or aggression. He said it made more sense to to try to have people coexist with dogs safely, noting that more than 200 had been released after treatment from the Rabat-area center.
“Slaughtering dogs leads to nothing. This TNVR strategy is not a miracle solution, but it is an element that will add to everything else we’re doing,” he said, referring to “Treat, Neuter, Vaccinate, Return.”
It’s designed to gradually reduce the stray dog population while minimizing the need for euthanasia.
It’s a program that Morocco is eager to showcase after animal rights groups accused it of ramping up efforts to cull street dogs after being named co-host of the 2030 FIFA World Cup last year.
Animal rights groups protest
Animal rights groups routinely use large sporting events to draw attention to their cause and similarly targeted Russia in the lead-up to the 2018 FIFA World Cup there.
Citing unnamed sources and videos it said were shot in Morocco, the International Animal Welfare and Protection Coalition claimed in January that Morocco was exterminating 3 million dogs, particularly around cities where stadiums are being built. The allegations, reported widely by international media lacking a presence in Morocco, triggered anti-FIFA protests as far away as Ahmedabad, India.
“These dogs are being shot in the street, often in front of children, or dragged away with wire nooses to die slow, agonizing deaths,” Ian Ward, the coalition’s chairman, said in a statement.
Moroccan officials vehemently deny the claims, say they’re implementing the very programs that activists propose, including TNVR. They rebuff the idea that any policy is related to the World Cup. Still, critics see their efforts as publicity stunts and are skeptical such programs are as widespread as officials claim.
Instances of mistreatment and euthanasia by gunshot have been reported in local media but Moroccan officials say, despite international attention, they’re isolated incidents and don’t reflect on-the-ground reality nationwide.
**************
Morocco’s Successful Stray Dog Program is Saving Lives. Turkey Must Do the Same!
In Morocco, a groundbreaking approach to managing stray dogs has proven successful and humane. The government implemented the “Trap, Neuter, Vaccinate, and Return” (TNVR) program in 2019, investing $23 million in animal control centers and offering a better, more compassionate alternative to culling. Through TNVR, stray dogs are neutered, vaccinated, and returned to their territories, reducing the population while ensuring the health and safety of both the animals and the people in the community.
This news comes at a time when Turkey is still using its brutal approach to managing its stray dog population. The country has legalized the culling of stray dogs, raising serious concerns about animal cruelty. Research shows culling creates more problems and suffering, whereas programs like Morocco’s TNVR provide a safer, more sustainable solution.
Sign the petition to urge Turkey to follow Morocco and implement a TNVR program to solve its stray dog problem!
Morocco’s program has shown amazing results, with the stray dog population decreasing in a way that promotes animal welfare, public safety, and disease control. Now, local dog populations are monitored and kept healthy, without the need for cruel and deadly methods.
The evidence is clear – culling does not solve the problem of stray animals. It only perpetuates suffering and creates new issues, as the void left by killed animals is quickly filled by others.
By adopting Morocco’s model, Turkey can provide a humane solution for stray animals while improving the safety and health of its citizens. Let’s urge the Turkish government to follow Morocco’s lead and implement a comprehensive program that prioritizes the well-being of both people and animals.
Sign the petition to demand Turkey end the culling of stray dogs and adopt a humane solution for animal control!
Born on the street, abandoned, thrown out and forgotten, in recent years dogs, apart from state shelters, find refuge in private shelters, which are established by associations for the care and assistance of animals.
“We have a registered shelter, but our animals are mostly with volunteers who take care of them.”
“We believe that it is too demanding, but also dysfunctional, that few people take care of a large number of dogs,” explains Marija Cvijetićanin, founder of the Ventura Association for Help and Care of Animals, for the BBC in Serbian.
There are currently 126 registered dog shelters in Serbia, while the exact number of illegal ones is unknown.
Control of space, equipment, record keeping and preservation of animal welfare in a registered shelter is controlled by a veterinary inspector, according to the written response of the Ministry of Agriculture, Veterinary and Water Management to the BBC in Serbian.
According to the letter of the law, local self-government is obliged to build shelters for dogs, but individuals can also open shelters independently, Marijana Vučinić from the Faculty of Veterinary Medicine in Belgrade told the BBC in Serbian.
But even that does not solve society’s negligence towards animals, she warns.
“Supposedly, there are a large number of societies that love dogs, as well as people who want to help animals, but this creates a new problem, because it seems that now anyone can have a shelter without meeting the basic requirements,” says Vučinić.
Several dozen dogs died recently in Veliki Gradište, near Požarevac, in one of the private shelters.
Criminal proceedings were initiated against the owner, while one of the workers was arrested.
How easy is it to open a dog shelter?
Shelters should be used only for the physical removal of dogs from the streets that sometimes attack people and other animals, injure them, but also obstruct traffic, explains Vučinić.
“Some dogs are better off going to shelters because they have a better chance of being adopted,” she says.
This, however, will not reduce the reproduction of dogs, nor solve the problem of irresponsible ownership, he warns.
A shelter can be established by a natural or legal person, and the shelter will be entered in the Register of the Veterinary Administration if it meets the required conditions for the protection of animal welfare, according to the written response of the competent ministry.
The space must be functional, the entrance under constant surveillance, and the shelter separated and surrounded by a fence, are just some of the prescribed conditions.
This process is too simple, believes Vanja Bajović, professor of criminal law at the Faculty of Law in Belgrade.
“Submitting a request to the Veterinary Administration and paying a fee of 1,840 dinars is often enough to start a dog shelter.
“Entry in the register is often done without prior control of the veterinary inspection – before making a decision, the veterinary inspector does not even check whether the facility meets the requirements for a shelter, so anyone can register it very easily, cheaply and quickly,” warns Bajović.
Reuters
Illegal shelters ‘dented on the map’
Violation of legal provisions is “an offense for which physical persons can be fined from five to 50 thousand dinars, and legal ones from 100,000 to one million dinars”, says Vanja Bajović.
And the work of unregistered shelters is sanctioned by a fine and a decision to ban work.
“Determining the cause of the animal’s death determines the further action of the veterinary organization and the veterinary inspection and determines the procedure of the prosecution and other state authorities,” the Veterinary Administration says.
The Veterinary Inspection controls registered shelters, both on the basis of application and random inspection, explains Bajović.
“However, they are illegal ‘under the radar.’
“No one checks whether the shelter meets the prescribed conditions, so it is not surprising that a total of 126 state and private shelters are officially registered in Serbia, while in fact there are many more,” she warns.
The conditions regulation is “rather paradoxical” and “does not contain any punitive provisions at all.”
“This means that just running an unregistered shelter is not punishable and no one actually controls them, bearing in mind that they are mostly located on private properties,” Bajović points out.
Watch the video about the abandoned dogs of Kragujevac:
“Who looks after the abandoned dogs of Kragujevac”
Video on Page
What should dog shelters look like?
Marija Cvijetićanin from Ventura also thinks that it is not enough to have good will and love for animals.
“Boxes of a certain size are needed in which the dogs can move normally, but also be arranged so that they do not disturb each other.
“There should also be a veterinary clinic in the area of the shelter so that the animal can be helped more easily if it gets sick or injured,” he believes.
She warns that “it is not enough to bring dogs from the street into one room without a clear structure to work on”.
“They often spread infectious diseases, because there is no separate contaminated and clean space”.
Animals should be separated according to age, sex, temperature and species, as well as health, according to the work of the group of veterinarians who care for dogs in shelters in America, Standards in shelters for abandoned animals, published in 2010.
“The point is to give the adopters the certainty that the animal they are adopting is healthy, vaccinated and free of parasites, and therefore ready for a normal life in the family,” concludes Cvijetićanin.
Palić Zoo: A place where confiscated and injured wild animals find a new home
How do shelters affect dogs?
According to professor Vučinić, life in a shelter for dogs that used to roam freely until then can be a challenge.
“They come to a completely new space and there they are in contact with other dogs and people, and because of the change in environment, their immune status further declines,” she says.
TOMS KALNINS/EPA-EFE/REX/Shutterstock
Dogs from shelters and shelters often come to Zoran Lončar’s veterinary clinic infected with infectious diseases.
“They are generally not vaccinated, and as they often all stay together, diseases spread easily and are difficult to control,” Lončar explains to the BBC in Serbian.
Because of life on the street and the traffic accidents they experienced, they often have back, head or limb injuries.
“There are also old fractures, so bone modeling operations are performed.”
“However, as these types of interventions are quite expensive, and shelters and shelters operate with limited funds, many animals are not helped,” he says.
Shelters make sense “only if it is a short-term stay” because “a dog is a social animal and should live with people”, Vučinić believes.
“If you stay in shelters all your life, they become like prisons.”
“This is how their role is rendered meaningless and they quickly grow into centers where dogs accumulate, live in packs and their basic needs, such as having enough food and water, cease to be recognized,” warns Vučinić.
They don’t yell or protest. They don’t hold signs or march. But in Singapore, a chorus of concern is rising on their behalf. From living rooms to parliament, the country is facing hard questions about the way animals are seen, protected and valued.
In February, a 32-year-old Singaporean man was sentenced to 14 months in jail for abusing five community cats – a spree of violence that culminated in the horrific act of throwing two of them from high-rise public housing blocks in Ang Mo Kio.
Just three months later, in May, a 20-year-old man pleaded guilty to sexually abusing a neighbour’s cat in Bukit Panjang, an act captured on surveillance cameras.
These disturbing events, along with other recent high-profile cases, have triggered widespread public outrage and prompted a national reckoning over animal welfare. Campaigners warn that not only are abuse cases becoming more extreme, but they are also exposing gaps in Singapore’s animal protection laws – and underlining the need for a cultural shift in how animals are treated.
Animal cruelty reports reached a 12-year high last year, according to figures released in January by the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (SPCA). The surge has galvanised Singaporeans, with some signing petitions and others submitting proposals to parliamentary representatives, demanding reforms and tougher enforcement.
Authorities have acknowledged the public concern. A legislative review is under way, examining the penalties for animal cruelty and the extent of current animal welfare laws.
Under current legislation, those convicted of animal cruelty in Singapore can face up to 18 months in jail, a fine of up to S$15,000 (US$11,700), or both. Repeat offenders risk three years’ imprisonment or a fine of up to S$30,000.
The Animals and Birds Act – the main legal framework governing animal protection – has been under review since at least 2022, according to a statement from the Animal and Veterinary Service on Friday. The act was last amended in 2014, and authorities say future revisions will incorporate feedback from stakeholder consultations held this year.
From 2017 to 2020, around 1,200 cases of alleged animal cruelty were investigated annually, according to Singapore broadcaster CNA. Between 2017 and 2021, 40 people were fined and 23 jailed for related offences.
In Jalan Besar, newly elected Member of Parliament Shawn Loh said many constituents had approached him with suggestions to strengthen animal protections in the wake of recent incidents.
Suggestions included stricter penalties for abusers, a registry barring convicted lawbreakers from pet ownership and improved community vigilance, Loh told This Week in Asia.
Shawn Loh, the newly elected member of parliament for Jalan Besar multi-seat constituency. Photo: Shawn Loh
“We therefore decided to hold an engagement session to hear all these views, so that I may appropriately engage the relevant agencies and effectively advocate for change,” he said, adding that the coming session had already reached full registration.
“Following our own discussions [with residents] at Jalan Besar GRC, I hope to put together a balanced list of practical recommendations for the government’s consideration and effectively advocate for change on behalf of our residents,” Loh added.
Fellow MP Lee Hui Ying, representing the Nee Soon Group Representation Constituency, made a similar call for stronger laws and enforcement – and better protection for animals – following a visit to the Springleaf Gardens estate on Tuesday following the death of a disembowelled cat.
Momentum is growing elsewhere as well. On May 31, Young PAP, the youth wing of the ruling People’s Action Party, hosted a focus group to discuss stronger animal cruelty laws.
“Cruelty is rising. Protection must keep pace,” the group wrote in a social media post about the event. “We must act now – let’s make animal cruelty a serious crime.”
Several online petitions have echoed that call. One petition, seeking harsher penalties, has garnered more than 12,000 signatures.
“Convicted animal abusers often receive punishment which can only be described as no more than a slap on the wrist,” said Dr Ryan Leong, co-founder of Pets Avenue Veterinary Clinic and Referrals.
“Such punishment will never deter the next person who is about to commit a similar crime.”
Shelby Doshi, 40, a former cat rescuer, said Singapore’s sophisticated surveillance infrastructure should make it easy to identify perpetrators – but that same urgency is lacking when the victims are animals.
Stray cats that were rounded up amid a government-run euthanasia programme in Singapore in 2003. Photo: AP
A person abusing someone in public in Singapore would likely be identified within a day with the help of video surveillance, she said. “Yet, when a similar or more drastic act happens to a community cat, the effort to apprehend [someone] is sorely lacking, simply because they are not viewed as important.”
“As a first-world country, we certainly can and should do better.”
Shef*, an adoption counsellor at Action for Singapore Dogs – a non-profit organisation focused on stray and abandoned dogs – said law enforcement agencies needed to be given “more teeth” to intervene when animals were in danger.
“Even if we see something, all we can do is tell the family we really need the dog back. But if the family says no, there’s only so much we can do as a non-profit,” said the 38-year-old, referring to cases of neglect involving adopted pets.
Public outrage tends to spike whenever a high-profile case of animal cruelty emerges, said Aarthi Sankar, executive director of the SPCA.
“They may urge the SPCA to intensify pressure on the authorities to implement stricter penalties and tighter enforcement of animal welfare laws, both of which the SPCA has been actively lobbying the government on,” she told This Week in Asia.
Sankar added that any legal reform must acknowledge not only the financial burden of animal abuse, but also the lasting trauma inflicted on sentient beings.
“They [animals] may physically recover from the abuse, but any traumatic experience will likely shape how they go on to perceive the world and their interactions with humans,” she said.
Kalai Vanan Balakrishnan, chief executive of Singapore’s Animal Concerns Research and Education Society (Acres), cautioned that legislative change alone would not be enough to stop abuse.
“I’ve been working here 15 years and I’ve seen multiple incidents where there is a high-profile case and uproar on social media. Then that dies down. Then it happens again,” Balakrishnan told This Week in Asia.
“There needs to be a push to get to the root of the problem. And it should involve a multi-agency effort.”
Such collaboration would allow organisations like Acres to share legal expertise and advocate for tougher penalties, he said.
Two feral cats sit in front of a house in Singapore. Experts say cultivating compassion about animals’ pain can help reduce animal cruelty cases. Photo: Shutterstock
He also pointed to deeply ingrained misconceptions about animal sentience – some still believe that certain species, like snakes, do not feel pain. A 2023 case in which men were filmed killing a python with a cleaver highlighted this ignorance.
“If from a young age, we cultivate compassion in children so that they know animals do feel pain and they’re sentient beings, as they grow up, I think we will see less of such cases,” he said.
That view is shared by Dr Genevieve Zhang, a veterinarian at Pets Avenue Veterinary Clinic, who said long-term change would require a cultural shift rooted in empathy.
When more people openly share stories about the emotional bonds they form with pets, non-owners may better understand animals’ capacity to feel and connect, she said.
“They need to understand animals have feelings as well and are lives we need to protect, given that humans can easily overpower them,” Zhang said.
Yvonne Packer and her husband Chris are overwhelmed with rescues at their animal charity in South Auckland. LAWRENCE SMITH / Sunday Star-Times
nday Star-Times
The pair behind a small South Auckland animal charity are frustrated with abuse from the public, and say the SPCA needs to be doing more to help with a surge in roaming animals. Stewart Sowman-Lund reports.
unday Star-Times
The pair behind a small South Auckland animal charity are frustrated with abuse from the public, and say the SPCA needs to be doing more to help with a surge in roaming animals. Stewart Sowman-Lund reports.
The calls can come at any time of the day or night.
Whether it be a dog on the loose, a litter of unhoused kittens, or (on one occasion) some goats – Yvonne Packer will answer the phone.
But after two decades running the South Auckland Animal Rescue, at least half of that time as a registered charity, Yvonne and her husband Chris are growing increasingly frustrated by the level of abuse directed at them by disgruntled members of the public, and want the SPCA to start “doing their job”.
“It’s shocking,” says Yvonne of Auckland’s problem with roaming dogs.
“The amount of phone calls we get daily, and messages daily, asking us to take dogs because people can’t take them to their rentals, or they’re moving, or they’re going overseas, or somebody’s died, or it’s had puppies because they haven’t de-sexed.”
Yvonne Packer says Auckland’s roaming dog problem is out of control. LAWRENCE SMITH / Sunday Star-Times
South Auckland Animal Rescue is just one of a number of smaller outfits dealing with a growing problem. As Yvonne explains, anyone can start a rescue centre and you don’t have to be a registered charity.
The Sunday Star-Times has previously looked at Auckland’s out-of-control problem with roaming dogs and spent time with the team dealing with it on the frontline, the council’s animal management squad. They described how things got worse during Covid-19, as people stuck indoors decided they wanted a pet only to realise after lockdown lifted it was too much.
Yvonne agrees, and says there has been a boom in roaming animals, welfare issues and attacks since the pandemic. This week, a pair of dogs were seized in Glen Innes after eight cats were killed. Roaming dogs killed two of Yvonne’s cats during a spate of attacks last year.
As The Post reported, there were close to 600 dog attacks on people and animals in Auckland in 2024. A clampdown on unregistered dogs saw 5500 infringement notices issued earlier this year.
The surge in welfare issues and roaming animals has also resulted in more abuse directed at Yvonne and her small team of volunteers. People have dumped animals on her doorstep, or yelled at her down the phone. On another occasion, a dog was left tied up to her front gate. The police have even delivered animals to her house.
People think that since Yvonne and Chris run an animal rescue service, they can take in an unlimited number. What they might not realise is that their charity is run from a South Auckland home and relies on fosters willing to take in animals and get them ready for a new life.
“We can only do what we can do, and each rescue is doing their best,” says Yvonne.
Last month, a post was made on South Auckland Animal Rescue’s Facebook page that put it bluntly.
“The abuse being thrown at us is unbelievable,” the post read. “We are not the SPCA and receive no government funding like they do.”
It continued: “To get abuse hurled … threats made because people can’t or won’t take accountability for their own pets is getting beyond a joke.”
Yvonne says it was a volunteer that made the post, but with her consent. It was a bad day, she confesses, but the message needed to be heard.
While some rescues “take and take and take”, adds Chris, that’s not always possible for them – or the right thing to do for the animals.
Yvonne and Chris Packer want the SPCA to step up and help. LAWRENCE SMITH / Sunday Star-Times
“They’re just too full that they end up being an animal hoarder rather than a rescue. And the animals aren’t being helped,” he says.
“And we get abused because we don’t take animals – because if we can’t look after them, the dogs are no better off.”
Yvonne says she’s “disgruntled” with the SPCA and that the charity – which she describes as “the big name” in animal rescue – needs to “up their game”.
“You know, the amount of calls we get, ‘Oh, we rung the SPCA, they won’t help us.’ [Or] ‘We’ve rung the SPCA, they’re closed’,” says Yvonne.
“They’re just a corporate business now, gaining the revenue. But what are they doing with it? Because we’re doing their job.”
An impounded puppy rescued from a property in Wiri during a Sunday Star-Times outing in March. Stewart Sowman-Lund / Sunday Star-Times
In a statement, the SPCA’s general manager of animal services, Dr Corey Regnerus-Kell, rejects that criticism, telling the Star-Times that SPCA centres around the country are “fully funded” by donations, including through adoption fees, pet insurance and the network of op-shops.
An additional funding agreement covers approximately 80% of the operational costs for the SPCA Inspectorate Service.
Yvonne says if it’s a matter of resources, then the SPCA needs to get more staff on the ground and in the community.
“They have to pick up … they need to go back to the way they used to be, and actually do their job.”
But Regnerus-Kell says the SPCA does not have any powers under the Dog Control Act.
“As such, while roaming and stray dogs in communities are overtly managed by councils, SPCA support the proactive measures of providing community desexing opportunities as a reduced or free service for dogs to address the population issues,” he says.
Yvonne would like to see the SPCA share funding with smaller players. Providers like her charity are desperate for extra help.
At the moment, she has between 40 and 60 animals fostered out, and she’s always on the lookout for more people willing to take on an animal, short-term, so it can be rehomed.
“They might do a few [ads] on the TV with that grey kitten,” says Yvonne of the SPCA. “That cat must be just about dead by now. I mean, seriously, it’s been on there for years. ‘Sylvie, the cat. We feed it on Purina’ – yeah, have they not had any more cats since?”
Yvonne Packer says people need to take responsibility for their pets, and can’t rely on rescue centres for help. LAWRENCE SMITH / Sunday Star-Times
Regnerus-Kell says the SPCA does not provide any financial support to other animal welfare groups for operational needs, but offers access to funding to support desexing initiatives.
“We have now pulled this process back in-house, and charitable status will no longer be a requirement. We will restart the SPCA Desexing Grant process later this year.”
A new partnership with Auckland Council will help provide free desexing services in communities across the supercity. “We hope to develop more relationships like this with councils going forward,” says Regnerus-Kell.
Yvonne’s charity entirely relies on public donations, but even that’s not enough. She admits she regularly has to dip into her own pockets to keep the service afloat.
day Star-Times
Regnerus-Kell says the SPCA does not provide any financial support to other animal welfare groups for operational needs, but offers access to funding to support desexing initiatives.
“We have now pulled this process back in-house, and charitable status will no longer be a requirement. We will restart the SPCA Desexing Grant process later this year.”
A new partnership with Auckland Council will help provide free desexing services in communities across the supercity. “We hope to develop more relationships like this with councils going forward,” says Regnerus-Kell.
Yvonne’s charity entirely relies on public donations, but even that’s not enough. She admits she regularly has to dip into her own pockets to keep the service afloat.
“Our average vet bill a month is between $9,000 and 12,000,” she says.
No dog will leave the South Auckland Animal Rescue without being desexed, registered, microchipped and vaccinated – something she believes not all rescues are consistent with. It all adds up.
“We cover all their costs, vet bills, worming, flea treatment, anything they need,” she says.
“We’ve just had 11 pups desexed on Sunday, we had one go in yesterday. Last week, there were four that went in. So we’ve done a heap in this last sort of week. And that’s not cheap.”
And they go the extra mile. At the moment, she’s spending most nights on the North Shore helping to track down a dog that’s been on the run for six weeks.
Her message is simple, and it’s not just a call for more money. It’s to pet owners.
“Take responsibility for the animals that you have in your care,” she says.
“If you cannot afford to feed them, give them medical care, get them desexed: don’t get them. Get a stuffed toy.”
Hobby hunter has cat torn to pieces by hunting dog
In Triebes in the Free State of Thuringia, a hobby hunter was filmed committing a serious offense.
Disgusting scenes in a video from the everyday life of hobby hunters were leaked to IG Wild beim Wild by a whistleblower.
This hobby hunter, too, is completely numb and internally crippled. Typical symptoms of years of hunting. A hunting license always gives you two things: a license to kill and a license to become stupid. The faces, eyes, and activities of these older hobby hunters speak volumes.
Video on Page
As is so often the case, the hobby hunter has absolutely no control over his dog. Time and again, we receive videos of hobby hunters setting their dogs on defenseless animals. It’s hard to imagine what happens in the forests, where wild animals are defenselessly at the mercy of these sadists. These are not isolated cases, so hobby hunting must finally be banned, and the children of hobby hunters must be protected.
The person who recorded the video is an old man who can only move with pain using a walker and therefore could not intervene.
Little Luna was unfortunately the victim of this cruel act. She was a very special and trusting kitten. However, because of this act, she never even lived to be two years old.
The cat’s owner is shocked. The community is wondering how sick the alleged former managing director of the German Hunting Terrier Club (name withheld from the editors) is to give his hunting dog such commands, or even to watch.
The cat presumably suffered for a few more minutes before succumbing to her injuries. Her body has not yet been returned to her owner. This suggests that the hobby hunter later disposed of little Luna after her death.
Legal action has been initiated and the local animal welfare association is providing support.
The hobby hunter—the police have no doubt about this—is a 64-year-old local man. Officials are now investigating him on suspicion of violating the Animal Welfare Act.
Dogs are abused for hunting
The abuse of dogs for recreational hunting is systematic. For their “training,” they are forced into obedience with electric shock devices, spiked collars, kicks on the paws, pinches in the ears, and sometimes even beatings.
The wild animals that hobby hunters set their four-legged friends on also pose a great danger: When dogs are forced to chase foxes or badgers out of their dens, bloody life-and-death fights often ensue. It’s not uncommon for the four-legged friends to be bitten by the terrified wild animals. Because the animals are sent headfirst into the den, they often suffer injuries to their eyes, lips, jaws, and necks. However, most dogs are injured by wild boar. Training dogs on live foxes in dens or on ducks is common practice.
Firstly, we wish to welcome all our international visitors to the site https://clustrmaps.com/site/1a9kn – we hope that you find our posts interesting and informative; and trust you can use the data to act as a supplement to your personal campaigning. Regards, Diana and Mark.
As MEP’s, or Members of the European Parliament, prepare to vote on the landmark regulations for the welfare of both dogs and cats, animal protection organisations are sounding the alarm – proposed amendments and exemptions could undermine the regulation, thus leaving millions of cats and dogs unprotected.
In December 2023 the European Commission (EC) unveiled the first ever regulation on the welfare of dogs and cats – a move which was greatly applauded by welfare organisations and EU citizens alike.
It is now concerning however that a solid proposal from the commission; strengthened by the EU Council, is now at risk of being significantly weakener by some political groups with the European Parliament. MEPs now have a chance to step up their reputation and their game by upholding a regulation that delivers for all companion animals.
Welfare organisations are particularly concerned about:
The possibility for cats to be exempted from identification and registration (I and R) and breeding requirements. Without mandatory I and R authorities cannot trace ownership, fight illegal breeding or manage disease outbreaks. In addition to protecting cat welfare, mandatory I and R could reduce costs to public authorities by up to 25 billion Euros EU wide.
A proposed amendment to exempt small and household breeders from registration and other responsibilities. One unregulated household breeder can be responsible for up to 100 pups or kittens in an animals lifetime. Without controls, this could lead to breeding in areas which are both unsanitary and unethical (puppy mills), an exponential increase in the number of strays, which in turn leads to an increase in pressure on the numbers of excellent shelters which ARE ALREADY OPERATING AT MAXIMUM CAPACITY around the EU.
Leaving out Hunting and Military dogs, despite them having the same behavioral and health needs of any other dog. Allowing mutilations and other painful practices under the guise of ‘preserving health’ is known to cause significant suffering and trauma to these types of dogs.
Watering down of breeding practices, with a possibility of lowering the breeding age of female dogs to 12 months, and allowing for artificial insemination in most cases. Breeding from animals which are unable to mate naturally often perpetulates hereditary problema and poor welfare outcomes.
Other companion animals left unprotected. Animal welfare organisations call for the proposal to offer a legislative opening to the future for other companion animals to be protected, through the production of an EU wide positive list which would be a tool stipulating which animals would be allowed as pets. This will address the current inconsistent Member State rules, enforcement gaps and loopholes which are currently undermining international welfare.
Crazy ? – NO – ASK EU POLITICIANS FOR THEIR VIEWS.
Wehave several posts on the issue here on the site – the kill shelter at San Antonio has exceptionally high numbers – today, Tuesday, 48 dogs are listed for “euthanasia” …
Please stop the killing of loving healthy and loveable dogs! And they kill owner surrenders first. Mia in the photo here was 4–her owners said very sweet. She was wagging her tail happily in her pink harness as she entered the shelter. Then, terrified, despite the best efforts of volunteers, she was killed three days later. Her life was short—and precious. She deserved better.
In 2024 , six days a week, animal rescue nonprofit and kind individuals have less than two hours to rescue dogs that are released to be euthanized. They were on target to kill more than 4000 dogs and cats in 2023–and it’s as bad this year.
It would be worse without the army of volunteers and kind rescues who step up to save these sweet adoptable pets. In March 13 2023 they even killed a service dog despite efforts to save him including an adoption bid.
ACS euthanizes healthy adoptable dogs three days after intake—a Director stated in an interview he wished he could do this quicker. There are usually 20 plus dogs killed at a time, including sweet friendly and highly adoptable puppies. Over 20% of dogs are killed—the figure for cats is worse.
They euthanize puppies, nursing mothers, young dogs, dogs that are confiscated because of cruelty and seniors. They euthanize gentle loving dogs.
Let’s stop this killing together. Let the mayor Ron Nirenberg, city manager Eric Walsh and governor Greg Abbott and the director of Animal Services in San Antonio feel your outrage at these unnecessary deaths by signing. Let them know they need to pay attention to the dogs and you—and stop this! Networking and more funding—with a change of policy and perhaps personnel at administration level—would be a good start. Other cities manage this.
The policy of high kill isn’t helping San Antonio’s problem with strays and the dumping of dogs. They need an aggressive spay and neuter campaign.
Up to 508 puppies can be born from one unspayed female dog and her offspring in seven years.
Up to 4,948 kittens can be born from one unspayed female cat and her offspring in seven years.
The more they kill the more are produced, and spaying and neutering—and limiting breeding in the city—would be a cheaper solution than slaughter.
And without your help thousands more dogs will be quietly killed. Please sign—and share and promote if you can. Their lives are sacred—it’s the only one they get.
World Animals Voice 