Mongrels are not 'substandard' (1)

I wish to heartily thank Sandra Cassar (August 30) for proving me right about the necessity of adopting strays rather than buying bred animals, as she advocates in her letter in reply to mine.

In my original letter, I didn't, in fact, imply that breeders are directly causing the problems of strays - only that they are indirectly contributing towards having more stray animals not being adopted.

If there had to be a moratorium on breeding and the importation of animals for some time, then, yes, in my view, people would be more encouraged to adopt a mongrel.

She asks what right do I have to keep people from buying pedigrees if they so wish, and go for mongrels. Well, my answer would be that that right comes from my love for animals in general. I love animals, for they are living creatures that have the same right as us, human beings, to a decent and dignified life.

She asks how many pure breed animals are found roaming outside. I answer her with another question: How many such animals have I, personally, found thrown away next to skips, awaiting their death, and had to re-home? A kind veterinarian in Birkirkara, as well as students at my school, bear witness to this.

That is as far as explaining what I meant by my first letter.

Now, a particular phrase she uses forces me to remove my silk gloves: How dare she speak about "substandard animals"? To which animals is she referring? If she is referring to feral cats and mongrels that we usually see in our streets, then she should know that these "substandard" animals are in no way substandard because, in fact, they are more resistant to disease and illness - and this proves how wrong she is.

Anyway, the so-called pedigree and bred animals are the result of human intervention - or rather, interference.

She has really put her foot in it and showed herself for what she is when she speaks about such animals and calls them "substandard" - it gives away what she really thinks about animals in general. She gives me the impression that she is one of these very breeders that I am criticising.

Is this the love Ms Cassar has for animals? Shame on her, for giving the idea to people that non-pedigrees are somehow "substandard" animals! Do not give me that hogwash about breeders making sacrifices and doing the breeding for the sheer love of animals! They do it for money, full-stop. For most of them, if not all, it is a lucrative business. Otherwise, why would they do it? VAT-free, no register, no licence, no nothing. Free-for-all.

Other statements she mentions show that she has no idea what she is talking about: that all sanctuaries are now neutering their dogs and cats - and there's a very expensive neutering programme going for cats living within colonies; that in said sanctuaries, there are few, too few volunteers who look after the animals there - but they do their best to ensure that the animals there are free of disease; and that no client would ever buy a pedigree dog or cat that is neutered.

So much so, that such animals are sold when they are very young and when, therefore, it is impossible to have them neutered.

I know of cases where quarrels arose between breeder-sellers and clients who returned animals because they either died soon after or because they found the animals they bought to be somehow not in a perfect condition. (Actually, a few such cases turned pretty sour and hit the headlines!) I conclude by repeating my general message in my first letter - we have to teach and influence the people around us to realise that in adopting an animal, they do not do so on the grounds that they consider it as a way to making financial gain or as a status symbol; but because they have recognised the need for the presence in a four-legged animal within their family.

And contrary to what Ms Cassar would have us believe, mongrels and feral cats do make our homes much happier and beautiful to live in - and I speak from experience, as two pairs of feline eyes watch every move that the cursor is making on my screen.