Warning readers; this made my bile rise so you might want to go grab a cup of tea before you get reading.
For the past 19 years, Whyalla Council has killed animals via carbon monoxide from an old Holden motor. Prior to the gassing, Council killed dogs by shooting them in the head and cats, by poisoning them in a chloroform box.
Cats deemed ‘feral’ have been killed immediately, while the local RSPCA who is located just next door, picks some of the best dogs for rehoming (“the small ones”). Last financial year, Council killed 273 animals (240 dogs and 33 cats).
According to their 08/09 Annual Report They impounded: 646 dogs, returning 351 to their owners. Leaving 295. If they’re presently killing 240 dogs a year – they’re supporting a kill rate of around 80%.
This was confirmed in their January media feature, where they lamented that 44 dogs were impounded during December, 24 were claimed and the remaining were 20 were destroyed (a 100% kill rate).
But ‘good’ news today; after a kick by their community they’re going to stop gassing pets!
Registrar of dogs Ronald Versteegh. In the background is the gas chamber, which will no longer be used to euthanise animals.Animal gas chambers have finally been put to rest.
Whyalla City Council made recommendations on Monday night to adopt a policy of euthanising animals by injection.
The recommendations called tenders for the provision of an animal euthanasia service for a three-year period.
Council chief executive officer Ian Burfitt said it was a good move by the council.
“It would be safe to say that there was a fair degree of concerned expression across the community,” Mr Burfitt said.
He said due to the high concern the council came to the decision to stop using gas chambers.
He said Whyalla vet doctors would perform the euthanasia by lethal injection.
“We put the report up recommending we go out to tender for vets to undertake that service,” he said.
Mr Burfitt said originally the gassed animals were taken to landfill but now they would be of disposed by the vets.
This council, who used to shoot pets and then gas them, but will now switch to the more humane method of barbiturate overdose, seems to be forgetting to ask one vital question.
Do these pets really need to die at all?
Certainly it’s easier to jam pets in a box and kill them than it is to train them, advertise them and find new homes for them, but what about the obligation to actually offer these animals some kind of ‘shelter’ when they’re in care? Sure it’s easier to blame your community for being ‘irresponsible’, but what about animal management’s ‘responsibility’ to be using killing as a last resort and to have tried every possible avenue to find these pets new families?
The new system of ‘humane’ killing is set to cost Council $22,000 to $25,000 to euthanase the 273 animals by lethal injection, or $80 per animal. The Council propose to cover this cost by raising dog registration fees an additional 10% (on top of a 25% increase in June), effectively making dog owners pay for the Council to run a systematic pet killing facility.
On the other hand, those 273 animals could be groomed for adoption. An adopted pet returned to the community brings a small adoption fee to cover vet work and cost $0 in euthanasia charges.
273 animals is less than one animal a day to find a home for. Less than one a day.
PetRescue is free. Facebook is free. Posting available pets on their own Council website is free. A small advert in the local paper could be sourced for free. And yet they’re proposing that the best future for these pets is to be quickly dispatched and cremated.
And that you, as a dog owner, should pay them to do this.
Welcome to your local council. The one who blames you for the killing.
