Pets and fees (2)

I doubt whether the various animal welfare associations need Anthony Muscat Doublesin's cynical opinions as to what they should be doing. Rather than organising themselves as the writer would want, the members of these associations are doing sterling service for the whole community, caring for the animals which otherwise would suffer at the hands of those who couldn't care less about their welfare. Animal owners do not need to pay a hefty fine, nor should they be asked to do so, to anybody, a federation included. If this had to take place, you would find that animals themselves would suffer.

Mr Muscat Dublesin claims that I, for one, misunderstood him. I think I understood him all too well. On the contrary, it is my message which has not yet arrived home. Animal lovers are not those who keep dogs and cats in places which bring hardship to the animals - and by this, I mean balconies, rooftops, overcrowded garages, etc ... If you have a pet, you keep "him" or "her" within the family, and not away from it; otherwise, don't have a pet at all. Having a pet is a commitment - and a lifelong commitment.

The writer yearns for his siestas and relaxing at home - it is his right and privilege, it's true. But doesn't he think that dogs and cats have a right to a decent existence as well? Has he never stopped for a minute to look closely at a stray dog on an early afternoon, walking along a street which is either half-baked by a summer sun or under torrential rain; walking aimlessly by, without a family to call his own, without a shelter over his head? It brings tears to my eyes to see such a scene - but then, I am an animal lover.