The recent story of the dog found with a chain embedded in its neck has once again highlighted the need for change when it comes to the perception of animals at grass-roots level. Thankfully, AAA and Happy Paws have stepped in and, in spite of all the suffering this poor dog has been through, he at last has a future.
A similar case happened some 18 years ago, when one of our volunteers somehow managed to catch a terrified dog that was roaming in the Delimara area. Chokey – as we called him – also had the same injuries, his wound was inflamed, oozing pus and maggots.
He was in such a bad state that our vet gave up her day off, being August 15, to operate and remove the embedded chain.
Chokey spent the last years of his life at the Island Sanctuary, where he was much loved by the volunteers.
There are obvious similarities between these two cases, by no means the only ones, but there are differences too. For a start, 18 years should have seen a change in some people’s mentality. Thanks mainly to animal welfare NGOs, awareness has grown over these years.
Unfortunately, animal welfare is no longer considered important enough to be included in the curriculum, but many caring heads of school, teachers and LSAs still invite us to speak to their pupils about this.
Another big change has been the establishment of the Directorate for Animal Welfare – complete with a hardworking Commissioner for Animal Rights.
Laws have been passed – but sadly, not enforced.
Animal welfare is no longer considered important enough to be included in the curriculum
Had this dog been microchipped (and registered), his owner would have been quickly identified and hopefully charged with cruelty, though he’d probably just have been given a suspended sentence.
Unlike Chokey, a crossbreed, this second case was a pure-bred dog – some breeder or more likely, some ‘greeder’ – made money from his sale, or he was bought from a pet shop. Our laws cover these points; but are they enforced? No way.
Fines were established for anyone who refused to microchip their dog, but I have yet to hear of anyone being prosecuted for not complying.
Why is it that when someone loses a dog that does not have a microchip, and is lucky enough to find it, he is just given the dog back? At least he should be made to pay a fine.
Why is it that sanctuaries are expected to follow the law (we love our dogs so much we don’t need these laws anyway) while everyone else can do as they please?
There are laws covering breeders and pet shops, but, again, the ones who abide by these laws are the ones who care about dogs. The aptly named greeders are only after the money, and could not give a toss for the law or dogs’ welfare.
What is the point of making such laws unless they are enforced?
If lack of money is the excuse, then it’s just that – an excuse. There’s always money for everything and everyone, except for animals.
Ironically enough, in this case the only law that was not broken was leaving him chained. Hopefully, this case will help to bring about changes in the law, and make chaining dogs an offence.
Sylvia Zammit is PRO, Island Sanctuary Association.