Lamma.com.hk

LAMMA-ZINE - CLASSIFIEDS - EVENTS - GALLERIES - LINKS - Subscribe - Donate - Advertise - Contact Us - Facebook

  WHAT'S NEW? Bike Clearance ~ Lamma Island bolt-hole ~ Beautiful island ~ Lamma Guide
  WHAT'S ON?    Quiz Night ~ Art Breakfast ~ Game Night ~ Summer Camp ~ MTB Enduro Race
  LAMMA-ZINE:  Free Dining Coupons ~ Andy's Seafood ~ Wildlife Contest ~ Lamma Life 

It is currently Fri Jul 31, 2026 2:01 am

All times are UTC + 8 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 34 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Wed Jan 02, 2013 3:12 pm 
Offline
Site Admin, Webmaster, Lamma-zine Editor
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 02, 2002 1:22 pm
Posts: 10011
Location: Pak Kok Village
SCMP Wednesday, 02 January, 2013; Amy Nip amy.nip@scmp.com {L_WROTE}:
Districts reject scheme to release neutered stray dogs

Not in our backyards, say Sai Kung, Lamma Island and Yuen Long councillors to a plan to release neutered feral dogs in those areas

After years of campaigning and several public consultation forums, a pilot scheme to capture, neuter and release stray dogs has been rejected in all three district councils involved in the plan.

Councillors in Sai Kung, Lamma Island and Yuen Long voted down the three-year trial, citing concerns that releasing the dogs back into the wild would endanger residents living in the area.

For the past decade, animal welfare groups have been promoting the programme as the best way to reduce the population of stray dogs: trapping, neutering and releasing the animals would prevent the unwanted births of more dogs, they said.

The three-year trial - sought by the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (SPCA) and the Society for Abandoned Animals - was planned for Lo So Shing on Lamma Island, Ha Pak Nai in Lau Fau Shan, Yuen Long, and in Sai Kung. The proposal was presented at public consultations before being submitted to district councils last year.

But when the time came to decide on the measure, the district councillors either objected to or had reservations about all three proposed locations. Many asked why stray dogs, once captured, should be released, since the animals could endanger the public. They also said irresponsible dog owners might dump their pets in the trial zones.

The defeat means the two animal welfare groups will have to identify new trial sites before consulting the public again, an Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department spokeswoman said.

Sai Kung's opposition came even though its council supported the proposal in 2007. But Ling Man-hoi, the district's housing and environmental hygiene committee chairman, said it was only support in principle and not for the locations suggested. It is not clear how the other two district councils voted in 2007.

At the Sai Kung meeting, councillor Philip Li Ka-leung pointed out that some villagers disliked dogs or were scared of them. "If residents are bitten by the dogs … it is unclear who would be held responsible."

Hygiene and safety problems could also arise if people fed the dogs, Li added. For instance, food left out for the dogs could attract wild boars living around Ho Chung village.

Fellow councillor Lok Shui-sang, who chairs the Sai Kung Rural Committee, proposed that the captured dogs be sent to an uninhabited island instead.

The other two districts shared similar concerns. Islands district councillor Chan Lin-wai said Lamma had seen about 72 cases of dog bites in the last 26 months.

Vivian Or Wai-yin, SPCA's community dog programme co-ordinator, said relocating the dogs to an uninhabited island was not feasible, as transporting and hiring caretakers for them would be too expensive. "It would turn the place into a large-scale dog shelter," she said.

Defending the proposal for the trial, Or noted that neutering the dogs would not make the current situation any worse.

"We would not put extra dogs into the area, but just desex those already there," she said. "A village dog can have 20 babies a year. If it is desexed, the area would have 20 fewer dogs."

Or also cited India's success in controlling the births of stray dogs in its trap, neuter and release programmes. In Jaipur city, the stray population was cut by 28 per cent from 1994 to 2002. In Chennai, the human death toll from rabies dropped from 120 in 1996 to none at all in 2007.

Local residents should offer the animal welfare groups a chance to prove a similar programme would work in Hong Kong, Or said. "It's hard to avoid complaints no matter what we do. Should we then eliminate all the animals?"

In 2011, the agriculture department put down 6,561 dogs, followed by 5,289 more from January to November last year, government statistics show.

Wow, our Rural Committee Chairman Chan talks about 72 dog bites on Lamma in the last 26 months?? Almost all of these must be from domestic, owned dogs?

This sounds like very bad news for our animal welfare groups who've been fighting for this project for years. The feral dog problem seems to be slowly getting worse, especially in South Lamma, for example around Lo So Shing beach.

I wonder if they get into fights with the slowly growing number of wild boars? A sturdy bamboo stick is what I carry occasionally these days when hiking off-road. No encounters so far....

Any comments from LAP and LAWC, please?

_________________
Click here for Lamma-zine stories and recent Lamma Spotlights of the Week:
Photo, Video, Person, Wildlife, Bird, Artwork.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jan 02, 2013 4:40 pm 
Offline
over 800 messages posted
over 800 messages posted
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2006 2:24 pm
Posts: 849
Location: Shifting Sands
Our councillors are obviously idiots. They're presumably afraid of introducing a scheme which some residents can't get their heads around, but that's a poor excuse. Sceptical locals would soon be won over when the TNR policy started to work. Unfortunately it appears it won't get the chance. Too bad the TNR couldn't have been tied in with something involving concrete - then they would have given it the go-ahead.

_________________
Friends, Romans, countrymen, lend me your ears.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 02, 2013 5:33 pm 
Offline
Discussions Forum Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 05, 2002 7:06 pm
Posts: 5046
Location: Tai Peng
SCMP Wednesday, 02 January, 2013; Amy Nip amy.nip@scmp.com {L_WROTE}:
Many asked why stray dogs, once captured, should be released, since the animals could endanger the public.

That has been explained over and over, they aren't interested in hearing an answer. They just insist on an impossible solution rather than deal with reality. The problem is the dogs that aren't caught, and which from AFD's efforts over the decades, never will be. Releasing neutered dogs will reduce the wild population.

{L_QUOTE}:
Fellow councillor Lok Shui-sang, who chairs the Sai Kung Rural Committee, proposed that the captured dogs be sent to an uninhabited island instead.

What an idiot. More humane just to kill them as they do now than let them all starve to death on some island and be a risk to anyone who happened to stop there.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jan 03, 2013 5:58 pm 
Offline
over 100 messages posted
over 100 messages posted
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 10, 2009 12:12 pm
Posts: 174
Location: Po Wah Yuen
The plan does not involve concrete! So why act surprised?

_________________
Sabe 1


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jan 03, 2013 6:19 pm 
Offline
Site Admin, Webmaster, Lamma-zine Editor
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 02, 2002 1:22 pm
Posts: 10011
Location: Pak Kok Village
Maybe they should have proposed a new "Trap Neuter Release" center in Lo So Shing, one big concrete building to house the program! :roll:

_________________
Click here for Lamma-zine stories and recent Lamma Spotlights of the Week:
Photo, Video, Person, Wildlife, Bird, Artwork.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jan 04, 2013 8:13 pm 
Offline
over 100 messages posted
over 100 messages posted

Joined: Sun Mar 20, 2011 2:40 pm
Posts: 168
Please understand the politicians' feelings too, they're scared that if the dog scheme proves successful, you will Trap, Neuter and Release the politicians themselves.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jan 04, 2013 9:30 pm 
Offline
Discussions Forum Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 05, 2002 7:06 pm
Posts: 5046
Location: Tai Peng
Anton {L_WROTE}:
Please understand the politicians' feelings too, they're scared that if the dog scheme proves successful, you will Trap, Neuter and Release the politicians themselves.


I'd prefer Lok Shui-sang's solution in that case.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 23, 2014 6:53 am 
Offline
Site Admin, Webmaster, Lamma-zine Editor
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 02, 2002 1:22 pm
Posts: 10011
Location: Pak Kok Village
SCMP, Jan 20, 2013, "Letter to the Editor":


Attachments:
Adam-SCMP-140120.jpg
Adam-SCMP-140120.jpg [ 233.75 KiB | Viewed 5890 times ]

_________________
Click here for Lamma-zine stories and recent Lamma Spotlights of the Week:
Photo, Video, Person, Wildlife, Bird, Artwork.
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 23, 2014 6:59 am 
Offline
Site Admin, Webmaster, Lamma-zine Editor
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 02, 2002 1:22 pm
Posts: 10011
Location: Pak Kok Village
Dr John Wedderburn's reply on Jan 22, also on the "Letters to the Editor" page:

Inaction by officials added to dog problem

Adam Bornstein makes several errors in his letter ("Desexing scheme for stray dogs has failed in Lamma village", January 16).

He is correct in the sense that the scheme has not yet been fully successful but it can certainly not be deemed a failure.

First, the reason for the numbers of feral dogs increasing over the years was that the Agriculture, Fisheries and conservation Department and Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (SPCA) requested that no trap, neuter, release scheme should be carried out there because they were planning to do a scientific trial whose validity they claimed would be compromised if an unofficial scheme was started before theirs.

Year after year went by and time was wasted by consultation after consultation - the result was the steady increase in the numbers of dogs, as observed by Mr Bornstein.

If the government had allowed the trap, neuter, release scheme to be started there when first requested in 2008, there would already be no dogs left.

When finally, last year, the department and SPCA decided not to go ahead on Lamma, a group started it unofficially last March.

The reason progress has not been more rapid is because, so far, it has not been possible to control the villagers who wish to continue "shovelling large quantities of dog food", as Mr Bornstein correctly puts it. Dogs with full stomachs do not enter traps.

Interestingly, it is not villagers in favour of the department's catch and kill policy that have been the problem but those who can't bear to think of dogs being trapped and neutered.

If the department ordered villagers to stop putting down food, this minimum of official support would ensure success.

The heated discussion is continuing in the [url]Lamma Dog Owners[/url] Facebook group.


Attachments:
YES-to-TNR-poster.jpg
YES-to-TNR-poster.jpg [ 101.66 KiB | Viewed 5890 times ]

_________________
Click here for Lamma-zine stories and recent Lamma Spotlights of the Week:
Photo, Video, Person, Wildlife, Bird, Artwork.
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 23, 2014 7:03 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Dec 03, 2013 2:13 pm
Posts: 10
Location: South Lamma
Mislead Animal Activists

Disinformation sprinkled with a few selected truths always make for a better story.

Significant sums of money have been extracted from sympathetic but tragically misinformed individuals.

Eager to come to the rescue of their furry friends, common sense, consideration for neighbors and observance of HK and local laws are often swept aside. All fueled by, according to the victims, a jargon wielding "scientist and expert".

It has been acknowledged that a "group" unofficially ( read illegally) started their own experiment; "Years and Years" before individuals renting property in South Lamma or working as domestic servants were influenced by disinformation that a TNR was actually in place on Lamma. This individual clearly had self serving and frustrated motives by soliciting individuals , knowing full well, and as sited, the HK Gov. program " would be compromised".

The source of that information will never likely or easily be identified, nor will they be prosecuted for their deception.
Makes you wonder why ?.. Why Us?..

As a long time resident who enjoyed the tranquility of S. Lamma, I must now endure the nightly feeding frenzy, howling, screams of terror by visitors and the TNR illegal dogs fighting for their life. Furthermore, the confused activists now also assume the right to let any dog go unleashed, fight and die while they compete for food and territory with the much stronger better adapted bred of the wild un-cut animals.

I ask, where is the humanity in 3 years of suffering for the TNR animal.
I only see profit and self promotion as motive.
The TNR scheme is a Euphemism.
Actually CCCC: Captured, Castrated, Condemned, and Capitalized is more accurate than TNR.

Stop the feeding, stop the releasing, don't be fooled by mislead activists,
and smooth talking emotional blackmailers with their hand out.

For the sake of all, animal and human alike, don't let your furry friends go "dogging" at night.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 23, 2014 7:55 pm 
Offline
Discussions Forum Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 05, 2002 7:06 pm
Posts: 5046
Location: Tai Peng
LoSoBay {L_WROTE}:
Stop the feeding, stop the releasing, don't be fooled by mislead activists,
and smooth talking emotional blackmailers with their hand out.


You're lumping together several quite different groups, labelling them all as "activists" as if they were all working together.

If you read John's letter above, you'd see he (an advocate of TNR) is equally opposed to random and excessive feeding of wild dogs, since that just attracts more dogs and makes it impossible to control their population.

The "dog feeders" are soft hearted about dogs and would feed them regardless of TNR.
They see feral dogs as pets, not wild animals. They're unable to see how irresponsible their actions are.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 23, 2014 10:18 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Dec 03, 2013 2:13 pm
Posts: 10
Location: South Lamma
That is the point Alan.
The soft hearted in S. Lamma were encouraged by someone posing as an officially sanctioned TNR " administrator" when they were not.
When that provocateur, realized their Unofficial TNR experiment was unraveling because they failed to understand Anthropomorphic tendencies of the people they targeted for the support of the illegal scheme, blame was shifted.

John seems uniquely aware of this, I congratulate him for his observations while not even being a Lamma resident.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 23, 2014 10:39 pm 
Offline
Discussions Forum Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 05, 2002 7:06 pm
Posts: 5046
Location: Tai Peng
John Wedderburn is a Lamma resident and has been for a very long time.
He used to live in Tai Peng, he's moved down to the lowlands of YSW now.

Anyway, whoever this "provocateur" is, and whatever they did, does not disprove TNR as a viable strategy.

The alternative is for AFCD to just to try to catch and kill them, which has failed to work anywhere. They have neither the manpower nor the willpower to make a real difference. Enough dogs survive after the sporadic hunts, and not being sterilised, can breed to keep their numbers up to as high as the available food will allow.

Unless Yu Lai Fan would like to spray the hills with Agent Orange to remove the pesky trees and shrubs and pave the island in concrete so they have nowhere to hide.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 23, 2014 11:05 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Dec 03, 2013 2:13 pm
Posts: 10
Location: South Lamma
That didn't work in Vietnam .
And actually what your saying.. catch and kill them doesn't work is exactly the TNR strategy.. (Catch them, wait till they die )

. TNR only will work in a place where the the released population is isolated from the abandoned, and animals who have evolved to survive in the wild. Stop the Feeding, Stop attracting un-cut animals .. the population disburses... Back to the dumpsters of the Restaurants and Bars in YSW.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jan 25, 2014 7:01 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 21, 2002 6:47 pm
Posts: 95
Location: Ko Long
The Government has had 50 years to show that Catch and Kill works. It obviously does not. TNR is the only method that will work - but of course it will only work if done correctly.
No one, except a few misguided individuals, wishes those dogs to be there. They are a nuisance to residents and visitors and they themselves live miserable lives. As pointed out so often, if only a few dogs are removed (whether by killing or homing), the population will rapidly recover. LoSoBay is right that one of the key components of correct TNR is control of the food sources - this is what has been so difficult in Lo So Shing. Controlling the food to the point of starving the dogs to extinction is impossible, apart from being inhumane - some dogs will find adequate food from somewhere and continue the breeding cycles. We all want a permanent solution to this problem. The psychopathic amongst us don't care if the solution is inhumane (starving, shooting, poisoning, agent orange, etc) but, fortunately, none of those will work. The only long term permanent solution is TNR. It is entirely humane. The dogs have to endure the indignity of sitting in a trap and being taken to a vet. But they will quickly be back with their families. Apart from the desexing (under anaesthetic of course) the dogs are treated for a variety of infections and infestations and are immunised against others. After their return, they will be monitored by volunteers - not left to die as LSB says.
Food is made available to the dogs in a place where gatherings of dogs are not a nuisance. All other food sources must be controlled as much as possible - that means FEHD must do a much better job of enforcing food waste regulations and villagers must stop putting food down in open public places.
Lamma Island should be an ideal place for doing TNR. Only the occasional dog arrives from outside and can usually be quickly identified. In theory it should be quite easy to TNR the required 70% of the dog population - at 70% the numbers start to decline; higher percentages bring steeper declines. We could achieve success much faster if it wasn't opposed by this vocal minority who don't have the mental capacity to understand TNR.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jan 25, 2014 7:09 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 21, 2002 6:47 pm
Posts: 95
Location: Ko Long
By the way - we need more volunteers to help with TNR. Both in the North and the South of Lamma. This is a do-able project which will result in much benefit to humans and dogs alike.
Please private message me on Facebook.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jan 26, 2014 11:56 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Dec 03, 2013 2:13 pm
Posts: 10
Location: South Lamma
Hmm If only this was a laboratory.. this is fantasy ...

{L_QUOTE}:
the dogs are treated for a variety of infections and infestations and are immunised against others. After their return, they will be monitored by volunteers - not left to die as LSB says.
Food is made available to the dogs in a place where gatherings of dogs are not a nuisance. All other food sources must be controlled as much as possible - that means FEHD must do a much better job of enforcing food waste regulations and villagers must stop putting food down in open public places.


Sorry John..
We have people who openly deface government posted "no Feed and mandatory fine" posters. and dump food/waste nightly.
We have people who erect cages and coordinate the evasion of capture from the MR. Yip and his animal welfare team.
The police will not even walk/patrol the official Family Trail side walk for fear of encountering the packs of dogs.
The only volunteers, can't even catch a 1 month old puppy
The Feeding is Done Right in the middle of the sidewalk by the LO SO School !!!!!!! not some remote area

Nice story, but is is NOT reality .. Some psychopathic individual .. spun a similar story to soft hearted good people and now we have a plague of uncontrollable and rapidly adapting survival capabilities and numbers. Fellow Islanders beware of a scheme such as TNR. Every Pet food suppliers is lobbying for this.. wonder why ??

The government needs to chemically sterilize uncontrolled dogs( yes that means any dog let out to run all night) and remove those that use the TNR dogs as lures for humans incapable of understanding their feeding is actually enabling the uncut to be more prolific, and attracting rats, snakes and uncontrolled and abandoned "pets"

Any Dog off leash is considered uncontrolled if it ventures off owners property. For Renters in a flat.. that means outside their front door !!! .. and guess where they go? to fight and kill the weak/castrated TNR dogs, eat their food, and mate with the other uncontrolled and wild dogs or uncut "Pets".

Good luck.. TNR would only work on Georges Island..


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jan 27, 2014 12:26 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Dec 03, 2013 2:13 pm
Posts: 10
Location: South Lamma
Oh and for those un aware of the location of the abandoned LO SO school and the adjacent pavilion .. It is at the primary intersection for visitors walking with their children and elderly family members going to and coming from YSW/SKW ..

The Uncontrolled animals have dug out the sand under the sidewalk .. for shelter (as the TNR scheme does not consider shelter or fresh water important )to the point it has fractured and is no longer safe for traffic.. Yes more than a month ago it was attempted repair..but.. the dogs just dug it out again... watch your step.. and not just for the half digested regurgitated fish carcasas and droppings.. the area is so infested with uncontrolled dogs the health and safety department and sidewalk cleaners will not even attempt to clean it any longer.

This is what TNR has in your future.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jan 27, 2014 12:48 am 
Offline
Discussions Forum Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 05, 2002 7:06 pm
Posts: 5046
Location: Tai Peng
LoSoBay {L_WROTE}:
Fellow Islanders beware of a scheme such as TNR. Every Pet food suppliers is lobbying for this.. wonder why .


TNR is not dog feeding.

Don't keep attacking TNR when it isn't the problem.
Your problem is the dog feeders.
Giving unlimited amounts of food to wild animals simply creates a population explosion.

Neutering a small number of animals can't counter that.

But if you did completely stop TNR, you'd have even more dogs.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jan 27, 2014 1:14 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Dec 03, 2013 2:13 pm
Posts: 10
Location: South Lamma
My last comments on this subject.
1 The Government will not put itself out of a job by completing it.
2. It is Not the dogs fault. They are wonderful companions who were bred from wild wolf ancestry to be a best friend to the humans; ones that would care for and about them. Only when abandon, physically or through neglect of their needs and for discipline do they revert to their ancestral instincts.
3.TNR in its most honest description is: Solicit money from the naive to Handicap the unwanted and collect revenue and notoriety on the repercussions.
4. You will NEVER be able to stop the soft hearted feeders

Good Night Folks.. Tip of the hat to little Red Riding hood


Last edited by LoSoBay on Mon Jan 27, 2014 1:26 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 34 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC + 8 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group