I have just been informed that there is a hot debate over in some public forum about spca’s online petition and why some NGOs have withdrawn their support.
Perhaps it is necessary to clarify here why I withdrew AnimalCare’s support early yesterday morning.
16th May: I was sent a draft by an officer from the SPCA asking for the consent of several NGOs to place their logos in support of the petition. I read the petition and felt it was worth supporting so I gave my consent. The petition was a protest on cruelty inflicted on animals.
19th May: I clicked on the online petition and noticed the published version of the petition was different from the original draft. This new version contained 6 resolutions to the prime minister which was never in the original draft.
I immediately wrote to the SPCA officer concerned and requested to see the original draft but this was not made available. I also enquired why the published version was different from the draft and no explanation was given.
That was reason enough to withdraw our support.
I do not think it is right to send a draft to seek for support and then publish another version which is different from the original.
Furthermore, we do not support two of the new resolutions, ie. Nos 2 and 3 which advocate the capture and euthanasia of stray animals.
AnimalCare has been working so hard to promote CNRM which advocates neuter and return to colony, not capture and euthanise.
Killing is never a wise solution to any problem. What goes around, comes around….in due time.
We cannot possibly support the petition now.
I hope this clarifies our stand. Our logo has been removed as of 8am, 20th May.
I did not see any need to explain why we pulled out and more importantly, I did not want to jeopardise the public’s support of the petition, but since there is a big debate going on in some public forum (I avoid public online forums at all costs), perhaps this clarification is now warranted.
We all have our own reasons for doing what we do.
Thank you.
Comments
5 responses to “Clarification: Why we withdrew our support”
This is very shocking and disheartening to know SPCA supports the capture and euthanasia of stray animals. Thanks for the update.
i would also prefer the idea of neuter and release. how can i withdraw my signature?
I don't know if you can. Write to SPCA and ask if that's possible. For us, it's removing our logo, so that's simpler to do.
There are kill shelters and there are non-kill shelters. Overseas, there are several advanced thinking SPCAs like Hong Kong and California SPCAs (just to mention a few) that no longer advocate killing. They are firm believers that neutering is the only workable and proven solution to succeed in controlling strays population.
These modern and forward thinking SPCAs explain on their website that they had studied the effectiveness of their past killing methods and discovered that despite of all the numerous killings done by them – they had killed (er … i mean "worked")very, very hard to reduce the numbers! – through the years, but it really did not solve or help reduce the strays population at all. In contrast, the stark reality that stared at them in the face was that the problem remained. In addition to that, their eyes were opened to the simple fact that the killings were not only cruel, they were non-humane. Killing of healthy animals simply because they did not have a human address is wrong, they say on their website. And they also say that the cost of neutering is actually the same as that of killing. Except that neutering works, killing does not.
But our local SPCA is a kill-shelter and must not assume that everyone else is. Also, it must not assume that everyone else does not think.
I absolutely support your stand in this matter. I do not approve of euthanasia either.