 |
| spcaLA.com |
UPDATE: City attorney directed to draft a regulation allowing the maximum number of cats one can have to go from 3 to 5 BUT- it must include "any required analysis required by
the California Environmental Quality Act as part of said ordinance".
This would be easier if the amendment required that all cats must be indoor only, sterilized and wearing visible identification. At lease they listened to us and abandoned the idea of clowders of 20 or more cats!
The PAWS committee of Los Angeles city council has once again come up with an
ill-conceived scheme and will ask the entire council to support it.
They want to raise the cat limit per household to 5. We have no issue with 5. As you know, there are those who should
not be allowed to have even one cat and those who can keep many more than that
in a safe humane environment. There is no magic number! The devil is in the details, and the details here are nuts.
As always, demagoguery to special interest groups and ignorance of this complex issue, appear to inform the internal logic of this proposed regulation and ultimately defeats
its stated purpose to reduce euthanasia and provide homes for cats. What on earth does it mean that households
with 3 cats can allow the cats outdoors while those with 4 or 5 must remain in?
How can an enforcement officer know the difference between a cat who is legally
out and one who is not? Perhaps a
scarlet 4 or 5 emblazoned on the cats would help identify law breakers.
The solution is simple. All cats must be sterilized, must
wear a visible identification tag and
must be kept indoors or in protected outdoor areas. Doing so would accomplish
several things. It would extend the lifespan of the pet as indoor cats live
longer free from outdoor perils. It would help shelters find homes for cats who
need them rather than recycling lost cats who already have homes. It would
protect cats from predators and save animals who are prey to cats. The visible tag
would both assist in the return of the cat home to allowing animal control
personnel to differentiate stray, community and feral cats from a lost owned
cat. (Invisible microchips are useful but not for these purposes.)
All of the
above would in fact help reduce euthanasia and improve animal control
efficiency as more cats would have homes, stay in their homes and animal control
would have clear tools and a means of enforcement. Finally, the visible tag
will help neighbors, who do not have scanning devices, return a lost cat who
accidentally escaped thereby also freeing animal control personnel from that
task.
Honestly, it is just tiring and trying to see our ill informed elected officials just put anything on paper that appears to do something but either doesn't or makes things worse. There is no evidence of critical thinking or an attempt to study the issues. They are just creating feel good captions to vote on. There is a lot of evidence that this city is sinking while the band plays campaign tunes. Elected officials seem to think their job is running for office and it seems that deals and regulations are achieved for those who contribute, endorse or otherwise help the officials stay in office. Beyond the animal welfare issues look at the increase in crime, traffic and weird construction projects.
As far as cats go - this can be fixed easily. The question is will the full council do so. I guess it depends on who asks them to.....
