Cat and animal welfare needs a prosperous democracy

I say that cat and animal welfare needs a prosperous democracy, but why? Because it is only through the pressure that can be exerted on a government by the enlightened, caring and educated people of a democratic country that a government will create and implement, animal welfare laws. And an enlightened people only comes from prosperity over time.


"Hey Charlie, it's great here isn't it? But I'm worried about our brothers and sisters all over the world. It ain't that good for some is it? Na, you're right there mate........" Cats talking - photo by fofurasfelinas probably the most famous Flickr cat photographer.

{note: I use the word "cat" in the title and text as this is my area of main concern}

On a simplistic level look at the undemocratic countries and see the kind of animal welfare law that they have, if they have any at all. China is the classic example. There are no animal welfare laws and fairly widespread abuse towards cats and animals both domestic and wild including endangered animals. Perhaps the other end of the spectrum is England, which possibly has some of the best animal welfare legislation. Although there are still too many cases of unpunished animal cruelty particularly against cats in England and the United Kingdom.

There is no gain for the dictator in creating and implementing cat and animal welfare laws. Dictatorships are all about personal gain by the people running the country. They are more likely to exploit wild animals and be in breach of CITES if they are contracting parties. The classic example here is Myanmar better known as Burma (see Burma and animal welfare). This is an uncaring dictatorship. Yes, cat and animal welfare needs a prosperous democracy.

Prosperity is important for cat and animal welfare to flourish. A poor democratic country is probably in fact semi-democratic due to corruption at government level. Corruption at the political level will thrive in a poor country because politics becomes a way out of poverty or simply to become rich. It may look like a democracy but internally it isn't. Corruption ruins democracy. And a corrupt but ostensibly democratic government will not be concerned about low priority issues such as animal welfare.

Cat and animal welfare needs a prosperous democracy as wealth is needed to implement legislation. There are cases of a country having good cat and animal welfare legislation but poor animal welfare because of a lack of funding to implement it. A case in point is India. The British Raj started them on the road to animal welfare law which they updated but the funding is not there backed up by a failure of the people to put pressure on the government to implement the law, which, incidentally, is excellent (see cat and animal welfare in India). The people don't put pressure on the government because the heart of India is poor notwithstanding that India has a number of billionaires and has a strongly developing economy. India is ranked 137th (out of 192 countries) in terms of gross national income (GNI) per capita (src: World Bank Group). Poor people are liable to harbor outdated beliefs about animals due to a lack of education. Educating Indians is a vital ingredient in improving animal welfare in India and importantly the protection of endangered wildlife. I would expect India to be one of the best in terms of animal welfare in the future but will time run out for the endangered wildcats, my area of personal concern? The tiger is the classic and humbling case in point. We have failed. See Bengal tiger facts.

Pakistan is an interesting case. The enacting of animal welfare laws took place during the British Raj (rule over India). This ended in 1947. Nothing it seems has happened since. We know that Pakistan has been and is neither a democracy nor prosperous. This supports my argument that cat and animal welfare needs a prosperous democracy. See Pakistan and animal welfare law.

When people become more enlightened about animals as feeling creatures this leads to animal welfare taking place on the ground without state intervention. Governments should do more to educate the people to change their views about animals. This will provide governments with a ready made workforce to implement animal welfare initiatives. In the UK there are a large number of charitable organizations that contribute hugely to animal welfare in the country.

Mexico is one of those countries that best demonstrates that cat and animal welfare needs a prosperous democracy. It is a democracy but only just it seems. There is voting but political corruption. The government don't serve the people completely. Mexico is a middle income country as judged by the World Bank with a gross national income (GNI) per capita of 12,580 USD. This puts the country at 61st place out if 192. It is a country that demonstrates that Animal welfare needs a prosperous democracy.

Since the late 1980s Mexico has developed a full range of animal welfare laws both in relation to domestic animals (companion and farm) and wild species. Mexico also has regulations known as Official Mexican Norms. These set standards of good practice. This spate of animal welfare legislation was in part encouraged by other countries as Mexico entered into a number of international treaties.

The difficulties in implementing the legislation is due to a number of factors. Emma R. Norman and Norma Contreras Hernández in their article on Animal Protection policy cite these influences:

--poverty
--low school attendance rates
--organized crime in wild species trafficing
--political deficiencies
--civil society support
--the scale of the problem

One stark problem was the fact that the Mexican government didn't have the resources to implement the first class legislation. The legislation is comprehensive so requires a well trained staff to implement it. The will, commitment and resources were not forthcoming, for example, to fight organized crime.

In Mexico, the legislation was overambitious and the scale of the animal welfare problems too large. It is relatively easy to enact laws in comparison to implementing them. Ineffectively implemented cat and animal welfare legislation is commonplace throughout the world in the less well developed countries (and the better developed countries).

If the politicians choose to ignore the electorate (because they are essential in politics for themselves) the electorate will loose faith in the government and stop voting and stop voicing its concerns. In terms of animal welfare this is the opposite of what is required. As mentioned an educated and motivated society can be utilized to raise standards of animal welfare.

Cat and animal welfare needs a prosperous democracy but even when this criteria is in place problems occur. The problem of implementing animal welfare law can also be present in so called rich western countries. In the England the ban on fox hunting with dogs has largely failed. Firstly it was watered down through pressure by the hunting lobby. Secondly, it is almost impossible to enforce it as hunting foxes takes place in relatively remote places and the police quite frankly are no longer any good in England. They are running out of finance because of a profligate attitude towards very generous police pensions and other financial waste. The police are almost fire proof in England but are failing society. This is an indication as to how prosperity and careful fiscal management is required to implement animal welfare law.

The argument that cat and animal welfare needs a prosperous democracy is supported by the fact that the best legislation is to be found in the founding members of the EU and in North America. These are countries in the top rank of prosperity and all are democratic.

Cat and animal welfare needs a prosperous democracy to cats and the law

Indian National Board for Wild Life (NBWL)

I am not sure but is the Indian National Board for Wildlife (NBWL) in breach of statutory duty? I believe that this body or organization was set up under the Wild Life Protection Act 1972 and the Wild Life Protection (Amendment) Act 2002.

Under these Acts the central government of India was obliged to constitute the National Board for Wild Life within 6 months of the Wild Life Protection (Amendment) Act 2002 coming into force (pursuant to section 6 of the Wild Life Protection Act 1972). Under section 7 of the Wild Life Protection Act 1972, the Board shall meet twice per year.

The first meeting of the National Board for Wildlife (NBWL) was in January 2002. The second meeting as on 18th March 2004. That appears to a breach of statutory duty. If I am correct there was another. In 2007 there was only one meeting on the 10th September 2008.

Does this indicate a lack of will and commitment to protect wild life in India and is it why endangered wild species are gradually becoming extinct in the wild in India?

See Cat and Animal Law in India
See Bengal tiger facts

Am I completely wrong? - tell me - leave a comment please.

________________________________

Update: the first meeting may have been 24th Dec. 2003. That would mean only one breach during the year of 2007. There have been years when there has been three meeting as well. Perhaps I am being too harsh?

________________________________

Is the Indian National Board for Wild Life (NBWL) in breach of statutory duty? - Source:

• http://envfor.nic.in/divisions/wild.html (for dates of meetings)
• Animal Laws of India by By India, Maneka Gandhi, Ozair Husain, Raj Panjwani
• Me
  

Killing a tiger in self-defense in India

Killing a tiger in self-defense in India is a legal defense to a crime under The Wildlife Protection Act 1972, which is designed to protect Indian wildlife (see section 9 of The Wildlife Protection Act 1972 and the defense at section 11(2)).

Sumatran tiger - photo by Captain Chickenpants

This sounds perfectly reasonable but actually, is it? Most tigers avoid people. If they do attack, it is probably due to a number of factors beyond the control of the tiger.

---the most obvious is habitat loss. This forces human and tiger together. This happens most frequently in the Sundarbans Tiger Reserve in India and Bangladesh. Here, apparently, about 5% of the tigers are thought to be man-eaters. This is mainly because this area is shrinking forcing people and tiger together. Global warming is thought to be partially responsible in flooding the delta. Then there is the human population growth in Asia. This is also in the hands of people to correct but out of the control of the tiger.

---reduction in prey. This is due to habitat loss and human intervention.

---the tiger may be desperate for food as it is old or injured. If there was more prey and/or less people in close proximity the tiger wouldn't attack a person.

---if the tiger is protecting young. It could be argued that people should keep clear and if not getting attacked is the person's fault. Also this is a consequence of habitat loss.


There are methods to minimize tiger attacks:

---wearing a mask with a face on the back of the head as tigers don't like to attack from behind.

--- making clay dummies of people that when attacked discharge an electric shock.

--- carrying a club over the right shoulder as tigers usually attack the right nape.

Are these steps being taken? I would doubt it.

What I am saying is this. If people are largely responsible for tiger attacks on themselves, which could be argued is the case, killing a tiger in self-defense in India should not be a legal defense to a crime (of killing specified vulnerable wildlife).

If tigers were wantonly on the rampage killing willy nilly without reason then, yes, killing a tiger in self-defense in India would be perfectly acceptable but this is not the case, no where near the case. Another problem is that it is very easy to claim self-defense. This promotes killing a tiger without due cause.

What then is the answer if we are to be fair on the tiger? There is only one long term proper answer that will work; give the tiger back the habitat and prey needed to survive. That won't happen. In lieu of that set up educational programs to instruct on how to avoid a tiger attack. Make it mandatory to put in place tiger attack prevention schemes. Introduce suitable prey into the remaining tiger habitat. These are some of the things that could be done.

In a court case of 1979 Tilak Bahandur Rai -v- State of Arunachal Pradesh (1979 Cri LJ 1404) the judge heard an appeal of the conviction of Tilak Bahandur Rai for killing a tiger. It was decided that he acted in self defence. Interestingly, the judge said this:

--the nature and ferocity of the animal is relevant in deciding if the person acted in self defense. Comment: this is obviously correct. A tiger has a reputation making people fearful and more likely to attack the tiger. All the more reason to educate and train people as mentioned above.

--"it cannot be said that the accused was committing any offence prior to shooting the tiger that charged at him". What was he doing? It would seem that it is important to be seen to have done all one can to avoid a confrontation with a tiger and I am sure that judges in India will take into account peoples' actions before acting in self-defense to kill or injure a tiger. As I said there are a number of steps that could be taken to avoid an attack. Were they taken? And if not was the act of self defense bona fide? Killing a tiger in self-defense in India must take into account actions before the actual killing, I argue. I am sure that this is the case. But it must also include the long term actions of people generally in narrowing the tiger's habitat. Does not this undermine the defense of killing a tiger in self-defense in India?

• See Cat and Animal Protection in India
• See Cats and the Law (world)
  
• See Bangladesh and animal welfare and protection
• See Bengal tiger facts
  

Killing a tiger in self-defense in India - Source: http://www.seaworld.org (for information about tiger attacks on humans)

Photo: The Sumatran tiger (Panthera tigris sumatrae) is a subspecies of tiger found on the Indonesian island of Sumatra (src: Wikipedia® published under license, see below)

Wikipedia®
Click on this link to see the Wikipedia® License src: Wikipedia® published under GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or any later version, November 2002 Copyright (C) 2000,2001,2002 Free Software Foundation, Inc. 51 Franklin St, Fifth Floor, Boston, MA 02110-1301 USA - - no other conditions to the license are added.

Foldex cat

No, the Foldex cat is not a type of attaché case or filofax but a cat with folded ears and a flattish or rounded face. This cat is rare and is a hybrid cross from the mating of the well known Scottish Fold and the Exotic Shorthair cats.


Foldex cat (see base of post)

Both the Scottish Fold and Exotic Shorthair are rounded, cobby cats. The Exotic SH has a flat face like the contemporary or Ultra Persian cat. In fact the Exotic SH is an Ultra Persian without the long hair. The Scottish Fold's ears are caused by an incomplete dominant gene or a gene producing an autosomal dominant trait. The person responsible for the early development of the Scottish Fold, William Ross, a shepherd, called his cats "lop eared" after the rabbits with, yes, lop ears. The Scottish Fold's face is, dare I say it, more normal (less flat) than the face of the Exotic SH but rounded nonetheless. Breeders like to produce rounded faces for Scottish Fold as they look better with the flattened ear flaps creating an unusually round head shape.


Scottish Fold cat - photo by zono1

The mating of these two cats results in a cat with folded or flat ear flaps (pinnae) and a face that is less flat that Exotic SH. There are a lot of flat surfaces! The body should be, what breed standards call, "massive" meaning large. The neck should be short and the eyes, you guessed, round and open.

The Foldex cat is not recognized by the major cat associations. It is currently recognized by the Canadian Cat Association (CCA), as I understand it. This may change of course, please note. This would imply that this cat breed is only or mainly breed in Canada.


Exotic Shorthair cat - photo by Charlyn W

The Foldex cat made his/her first appearance at a cat show in 1993 being presented to the world by Betty-Ann Yaxley. The CCA describe the cat as a compromise between the Scottish Fold (with a snout) and the Exotic (with a very short nose). The Foldex is therefore an Exotic SH with a slightly longer nose and floppy ears or a Scottish Fold with a slightly shorter nose.

The genetics ensure that some cats are born with normal ear flaps. This cat is also known as the Exotic Fold.

As regards health the health issues that affect the Scottish Fold affect this cat too. I have covered this topic in some detail here: Scottish Fold Genetics - Health - Breeding. Most people think the health aspects of cat breeds are important.

The Foldex cat to Home page

Photo of Foldex cat: believed to be copyright free as copyright owner has waived copyright expressly or by implication. If I am wrong please leave a comment.

Other photos:

Cat pee on the bed

In my opinion cat pee on the bed is probably going to be due to stress if your cat is healthy and the litter is in good shape and well positioned.

A bed smells strongly of the human companion of the cat. A cat's urine is an odor marker of that cat. I think the cat is exchanging scent as if he/she is rubbing against you to greet you or when a cat head butts. These are all putting scent onto you so the cat feels more comfortable.

I have first hand experience of this but not personally. My ex-wife worked very hard and she kept one of our two cats when we separated. He was a great black boy, gorgeous character and very attached.

She would go out in the evening after a hard and long days work. She was never at her flat. He peed once (perhaps more often) on her bed, when she was out. He was lonely and stressed. She had to keep in in too as this was central London.

I guess the cat (he was called Boo Boo by me and Freddie by my ex.) was anxious and stressed and to make himself feel more comfortable urinated on something that smelled of her.

OK, if we have a cat we are responsible for him or her and that means a life style that allows us to discharge that responsibility. It requires some sacrifice and the cat has a say in this process. it can't be all about what we want. Cat pee on the bed can be down to other things but in my view is likely to be stress but we need to check out health as well. Cats react to our behavior and cat pee on the bed is one such reaction.

Cat pee on the bed to home page

Psychological Benefits of Human-Animal Interactions

There are a number of benefits to humans (and of course cats or other animals) when considering the Psychological Benefits of Human-Animal Interactions.

I am going to focus on cats but this applies to all companion animals. There are people, sometimes legislators (i.e. government) who disseminate the negative aspects of the domestic cat. They are, though, usually talking about feral cats. But even then they forget that feral cats or their ancestors were once domestic cats and a companion. One negative apsect that I think is rather exaggerated is the spread of disease from cat to human. There are very few cases and very few diseases that do this. One is Toxoplasmosis. This disease is usually talked about in respect of pregnancy. See cat feces and pregnancy. The danger, I say, is exaggerated.

There are some great benefits to owning or living with a cat. Here is a list of some of the Psychological Benefits:

I am not talking about mental illness but promoting mental well being; feeling better. Caring for and interacting with a cat is a great stress reducer. It takes you away from a silly problem that is causing stress. It produces calm and relieves anxiety.

It could be argued that pet (including cat) owners are more independent, and have better self esteem.

Children can greatly benefit from pets. There is a dog sanctuary in China (a rare place) where both the dogs and children are healed by interacting together. Abused children can receive the healing nature of contact with another animal. This is a brilliant idea. Children react positively to animals. Why then do too many adult people behave aggressively towards them? Children feel that their pets love them. This is beneficial to the child. Dogs, cats and other animals have been used in hospitals to improve the morale of the patients.

Then there are guide dogs. Guide dogs are not available in many countries but they dramatically improve the life of a blind person by leading them down the pavement and across roads and more. They are companions and a source of interaction with passers by. This helps with socialization. In fact pets can be trained to do a wide range of tasks to assist the disabled. This normally applies to dogs and in some countries monkeys. Cats are more difficult to train and not as strong as dogs. Cats though can assist in providing comfort and can indicate when for example the door bell goes off (if the owner is deaf).

For the elderly the companionship of a pet cat or dog is invaluable and can provide a substitute for a lost partner. Pets can help to keep the elderly more alert and responsive. In retirement homes pets can help with patient interaction and help create a more pleasant environment.

There are reports that mentally disturbed prison inmates (and there are many) can benefit by the presence of animals in communal areas. The animal helps to reduce stress, fighting and suicidal thoughts.

I myself have found thousands of hours of pleasure interacting with my cat, stroking her, checking for fleas, brushing her, talking to her, letting her in and out, feeding her, listening to her demands and responding and getting to know her likes and dislikes. I see her as a person, a part of the family no less. She has enhanced my life.

Psychological Benefits of Human-Animal Interactions to cat health problems

Cat Cruelty in the UK

I have bumped into a good website (link at the base of this post) in which cases of animal cruelty are listed. It is also a very sad website.

Cat cruelty in the UK in still very much alive despite excellent legislation and enforcement. But is it that good? What I mean is, is detection of crime good enough?

The last 50 cases of animal cruelty in the UK listed on the website all concerned cats. The most frequent form of cat cruelty is shooting at a cat with an air rifle.

Of the last 50 cases only 22% resulted in convictions. These cases go back to April 2006. One of the last ones was a case of a cat being thrown out of a car, a silver Renault Clio on the A508, killing it. The crime was witessed. It falls within section 4 of the Animal Welfare Act 2006. The penalty on conviction would be a maximum of 51 weeks imprisonment and/or a fine of £20,000.

It is believed that the car was occupied by three young men. Young men are the usual suspects it would seem. I wonder how many incidences of cat and animal cruelty go unreported or unnoticed? Lets take a guess. I'd say about 90% of the total are unreported. If I am correct, that makes 2.2% of all cases of cat and animal cruelty lead to a conviction and punishment.

Cat Cruelty in the UK goes largely unpunished in my estimation.

• See Cats and the Law
• See Animal Welfare Act 2006

Source: Pet-Abuse.com
Photo: by drinksmachine and published under a Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs creative commons License

Cat Cruelty in the UK to Cats and the Law