Animal lovers protest removal of fleas from UGH

Vegeta

gozunda wrote: »

Such animals of domestic origin are correctly referred to as straying or abandoned nimals - there is no legal definition of cats as "feral"

The law of animal trespass under legislation covers civil liability for animals that stray onto other property where damage is caused.

The humane killing of sick or injured animals is normally confined to those who may deal with such animals on a fairly regular basis. Examples would include veterinary surgeons, ISPCA inspectors, etc

It is incorrect to say cats as a species are not 'protected'. Dogs, cats cows, budgies and hamsters and all other animals of domestic origin cannot be defined as 'protected' species. There are certain species of Native wildlife are legally "protected". This link provides details on native wildlife that is protected

Authority may be required to kill animals which fall outside the scope of usual types of game or vermin, for example, feral goat or wild boar

The term "game" covers certain birds and animals that may be shot for food and sport. Apart from deer which have defined controls, these may include rabbit, hare, pheasant, partridge, grouse, woodcock and other game birds. Species that are destructive to some farming and hunting activities may include animals such as fox, rabbit, mink, brown rat, and grey squirrel, as well as some birds.

The slaughtering of amimals for human consumption is controled under specific regulations

Straying and abandoned animals of domestic origin may be subject to local authoitiy bye laws under national legislation.
[FONT=Arial,Arial][FONT=Arial,Arial]
[/FONT][/FONT]

Can you quote the relevant pieces of legislation to back this up please?

I have pointed out to you in the past that the "fauna" definition in the Wildlife Act includes all "wild mammals".

Now the Wildlife Act does make make any distinctions here. So if there is somewhere in the Wildlife Act which states that wild mammal does not include those of domestic origin, I for one would like to see it.

?Cee?view

Vegeta wrote: »

Can you quote the relevant pieces of legislation to back this up please?

Read back a few posts. He doesn't need to. The barrister told him.

Mrs OBumble

dreamers75 wrote: »

No its ok to kill rats but not cats seemingly.

Have you never heard of someone having a pet rat?

Or seen a flea-circus?

OldNotWIse

I had two pet rats before. They made great pets. I really loved them. I wouldn't have pet rats again for two reasons.
1. I have a rescue terrier who would probably turn them into starters
2. They have short life spans so you just get attached to them and then they get sick and die.

On a related note, I remember bringing one to the vet for flea treatment and it was around the time flea treatment (the decent ones at least) became prescription only. Cost me sixty euro. I joked with the vet that I could have bought three flea-free new rats for that.

Anyway, skimming through this thread there seems to be an awful lot of bickering going on, its pathetic. One week to Christmas and you're all bickering about rats and fleas and cats and barristers

gozunda

Vegeta wrote: »

Can you quote the relevant pieces of legislation to back this up please?

I have pointed out to you in the past that the "fauna" definition in the Wildlife Act includes all "wild mammals".

Now the Wildlife Act does make make any distinctions here. So if there is somewhere in the Wildlife Act which states that wild mammal does not include those of domestic origin, I for one would like to see it.

Vegeta

I would politely suggest you go look it up yourself. It's all there in black and white.

I note you did not ask the previous poster who gave detail on relevant legislation for same. Why not?

The wildlife Act which includes flora a and fauna and clearly designates for native "Wildlife" - mammals, birds etc

Animals of domestic origin such as dogs, cats and budgies do not fall into these categories no matter how you wish to shoot fido who has strayed from next door. They are neither 'fauna' nor 'wild'

Just because they are stray or abandoned does not make them a 'wild' animal' under the meaning of the act.

This is where many get mixed up with dictionary and legal definitions. The Act itself is The Wildlife Act

Bonzo the dog is an animal of domestic origin and not 'wildlife' even if goes walkabout

Under the act a 'wild animal' is one who is considered native to this country and is legislated for accordingly - I have previously provided a link listing such native wild animals.

I have also explained that I checked this previously with a person qualified to do do. - I did this to ensure that I know what is legal and what is not. There is a lot of misinformation regarding the wildlife act etc. I agree this should be cleared up by the government

Of you don't believe me - well you have every right to do so but I don't recommend you get the shotgun out just yet to shot that pesky pet next door ok?

gozunda

churchview wrote: »

Read back a few posts. He doesn't need to. The barrister told him. D

Smart! Don't see you going and checking your 'facts'....

Iwannahurl

OldNotWIse wrote: »

One week to Christmas and you're all bickering about rats and fleas and cats and barristers

I believe the appropriate Boards-style response to that is "Baby Jesus is crying and so am I".

OldNotWIse

Iwannahurl wrote: »

I believe the appropriate Boards-style response to that is "Baby Jesus is crying and so am I".

Boards style alright

http://www.galwaynews.ie/29453-under-pressure-hospital-reverses-its-cat-cull-policy

pleasant Co.

Seems like some journalist has been reading this thread :P

connemara man

Bring in feral dogs i say to take care of the cats :pac:




but when they run rampant.............. what can we bring in then???????

Discodog

The GSPCA have a duty to prevent cruelty & the HSE could hardly ignore them. The likely real culprit is the pest control company that seems to of advised the HSE & carried out the cat removal.

Maybe the lesson is to be open minded concerning proposals from companies that have a vested interest. Once it was suggested that the cats were the cause then the HSE should of consulted cat experts & assessed all the options.

juan.kerr

Misleading thread title.

biko

connemara man wrote: »

Bring in feral dogs i say to take care of the cats :pac:




but when they run rampant.............. what can we bring in then???????

Feral baby-snatching eagles.


I'm not sure what comes after that.

Mrs OBumble

Discodog wrote: »

the HSE should of consulted cat experts & assessed all the options.

When did animal health and welfare become part of the HSE's remit?

antoobrien

biko wrote: »

Feral baby-snatching eagles.


I'm not sure what comes after that.

Cats to raid the eggs from the eagles nests.

Wait aren't we back where we started?

juan.kerr

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

When did animal health and welfare become part of the HSE's remit?

I assumed the issue was that the fleas are now affecting humans...

connemara man

antoobrien wrote: »

Cats to raid the eggs from the eagles nests.

Wait aren't we back where we started?

Or do we bring back the snakes??

juan.kerr

connemara man wrote: »

Or do we bring back the snakes??

Is this all a conspiracy that leads to the second coming of St Patrick and our re-conversion to catholicism?

gozunda

connemara man wrote: »

Or do we bring back the snakes??

Now now we will have none of that kind of thing - this a good catholic country....

connemara man

gozunda wrote: »

Now now we will have none of that kind of thing - this a good catholic country....

Arthurs day isn't a good enough version of St Patricks day so a second official one might be needed

Discodog

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

When did animal health and welfare become part of the HSE's remit?

If they are told that problem relates to cats then it's common sense to consult an expert in that field.

Surely common sense should be part of the HSE's remit.

gozunda

Discodog wrote: »

If they are told that problem relates to cats then it's common sense to consult an expert in that field.

Surely common sense should be part of the HSE's remit.

Hmmm - yes but the main problem with common sense

is that it is not that common...

Mrs OBumble

Discodog wrote: »

If they are told that problem relates to cats then it's common sense to consult an expert in that field.

Surely common sense should be part of the HSE's remit.

Would that be the field of pest-eradication or cat-welfare? Somehow I suspect that experts in these the two area might give different answers.


BTW, I've asked several times if anyone actually saw any cats removed or had a pet cat in the area go missing. Deafening silence in the response. So I'm not convinced that any were actually removed ....

How many cats are we talking here? Obviously it must be enough to cause such a large problem and had to be solved. Now, if there's that many, I would assume it would cost a lot of money to give cats medication, proper treatment and then a new home. Who exactly is going to pay for that? And how many of these cats would actually get homes?

I love cats, but given the option between keeping a hospital free of disease and fleas, then they have to go. Simple as.

Discodog

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

Would that be the field of pest-eradication or cat-welfare? Somehow I suspect that experts in these the two area might give different answers.


BTW, I've asked several times if anyone actually saw any cats removed or had a pet cat in the area go missing. Deafening silence in the response. So I'm not convinced that any were actually removed ....

That's the whole point. The HSE only bothered with the pest removal aspect. It would of been simple & logical to contact the GSPCA.

The last press article suggests that 15 cats were killed. If none or very few were killed then the HSE would state this to offset the PR damage.

Discodog

boneyarsebogman wrote: »

How many cats are we talking here? Obviously it must be enough to cause such a large problem and had to be solved. Now, if there's that many, I would assume it would cost a lot of money to give cats medication, proper treatment and then a new home. Who exactly is going to pay for that? And how many of these cats would actually get homes?

I love cats, but given the option between keeping a hospital free of disease and fleas, then they have to go. Simple as.

Galway Cat Rescue & the GSPCA would not of charged. The pest control company must of charged a fair bit as each cat had to be transported to a vet & then killed.

The HSE could of made a donation to the local rescues instead of paying a contractor. By the way these cats were either picking up poorly disposed of waste food or eating rats and mice.

thesandeman

Report in City Tribute and Galwaynews.ie today (can't link from phone).
12 cats were destroyed during the cull. 6 fleas were found.
7 cats had been killed before the first flea was discovered.

dilallio

thesandeman wrote: »

Report in City Tribute and Galwaynews.ie today (can't link from phone).
12 cats were destroyed during the cull. 6 fleas were found.
7 cats had been killed before the first flea was discovered.

And it cost the HSE €4,500 according to Galway Cat Rescue, who had to submit a Freedem of Information request before any information was released.

Quoted here for boardsies not on Facebook:

The way the UCHG management dealt with the feral cat situation shows a total lack of rationale. The HSE never consulted the two local animal welfare organizations before taking actions. They then payed a microbiologist for a survey, but didn't wait for the results and the recommendations of the same before hiring Rentokill to take care of the 'problem". They never made sure that no owned cats were harmed. No warnings to the neighbors were ever issued. We approached them several times via phone to discuss the matter, but only met a brick wall. Nobody was willing to speak to us. We then decided to pay Anne Cosgrove, the HSE manager that dealt with the matter, a visit on the 21st of December. Again there was no intention of her to talk to Galway Cat Rescue. Since we didn't get any answers, we submitted through Brian Walsh, TD a list of question to the HSE Regional Health Forum meeting. Cllr Padraig Conneely posed the questions on our behalf, but unfortunately all we got was a pre-fabricated statement. P. Conneely asked Tony Canavan, Chief Operations Officer, UCHG,
to elaborate the matter further. All he replied was: "I feel that we have given as much information as we are in a position to give."
The HSE has never given any proof that the cats were actually euthanized by a vet.

and

Patricia made a Freedom of Information Request re hospital feral cats and received some of the requested documents. We haven't had a chance to fully go through all the papers, but two things are already clear. The microbiologist that was consulted regarding the fleas clearly stated that most likely either a patient or an employee brought them into the hospital and secondly that the by the GSPCA proposed TNR project was never carried out. Rentokill charged in excess of 4500 euros to "eliminate" between 15-20 feral cats. Paid by the HSE ( tax payers money). We get € 2000 from the Dept. of Agriculture for one full year for our work. We also asked for proof of the "humane" euthanisa which the HSE couldn't provide???!!!

Aerohead

dilallio wrote: »

And it cost the HSE €4,500 according to Galway Cat Rescue, who had to submit a Freedem of Information request before any information was released.

Quoted here for boardsies not on Facebook:



and

I hope you dont let this lie down its a disgrace they way the whole thing was handled, I walked around the hospital grounds last week and there are rat bait traps all over the grounds, I think the cats would have been taking care of the rats who would have carried a lot more than fleas with them, anyone who has a cat knows how clean they keep themselves so I think the whole flea thing was a cynical exercise to get rid of cats who as you said may have been outdoor owned cats.