Replies to LegCo questions

LCQ18: Measures to control stray animals

Following is a question by the Hon Andrew Cheng and a written reply by the Secretary for Food and Health, Dr York Chow, in the Legislative Council today (June 23):

Question:

Recently, some animal rights advocates have published a joint declaration, urging the Government to immediately implement the "Trap-Neuter-Return" (TNR) programme, which is internationally recognised as humane and effective, to replace killing as the means currently adopted for controlling the number of abandoned animals. In reply to a question raised by a Member of this Council on January 20 this year, the Government indicated that the Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department (AFCD), "in collaboration with the animal welfare organisations which have been advocating this programme, consulted various District Councils (DCs) on the TNR trial programme in 2007. Nine of the 18 DCs supported in principle the implementation of the programme in their districts". However, it has been learnt that none of the DCs has so far implemented the programme. Besides, the Government also pointed out that a study in the United States showed that euthanasia was more effective than the TNR programme in controlling the number of stray cats. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:

(a) of the reasons for failing to implement the aforesaid trial programme so far and the technical difficulties involved;

(b) whether AFCD has any plan to collaborate with those advocating organisations again in persuading the opposing DCs to implement the trial programme; if so, of the timetable; if not, the reasons for that; and

(c) apart from the aforesaid study in the United States, whether the Government has made reference to other studies which have confirmed the effectiveness of TNR; if so, of the findings of such studies; if not, whether the Government has assessed if drawing on the conclusion of one study only may give rise to bias in the formulation of policies?

Reply:

President,

Dogs are domestic animals and are not accustomed to living in the wild. Neglected dogs are not only prone to health problems, they may also cause nuisances to the public and spread diseases such as rabies.

In formulating measures to control stray animals, apart from taking an integrated approach such as through legislative control, education and publicity promoting responsible pet ownership, we also need to consider the effectiveness of various measures to be implemented and their possible impact on public health and the community.

Local animal welfare organisations have earlier proposed to the Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department (AFCD) the introduction of a "Trap-Neuter-Return" (TNR) programme for dogs, allowing neutered stray dogs without an owner to be returned to public places. Successful implementation of the programme is contingent upon public support. In this connection, the AFCD, in collaboration with the animal welfare organisations which have been advocating this programme, consulted the District Councils (DCs) on the TNR trial programme in 2007. Nine of the 18 DCs supported in principle the implementation of the trial programme in their districts, while seven expressed objection and the remaining two made no indication. This shows that DCs have differing views on the trial programme.

The reply to the three parts of the question is as follows:

(a) As mentioned above, public recognition and support of the trial programme is crucial to its successful implementation. Hong Kong is a small place with a dense population and the returned stray animals will continue to cause nuisances, including environmental hygiene problems, noise pollution, dog biting and even traffic accidents, etc. In fact, over the past three years, the annual numbers of complaints lodged with the AFCD regarding stray cats and dogs exceeded 20,000. This shows that the nuisance problem is indeed serious. The Government has the responsibility to address the problem and cannot shirk its duty. The question of responsibility that will arise upon implementation of the programme when the returned dogs cause nuisances and accidents is of critical importance.

As such, the AFCD and the organisations concerned are actively examining the implementation details and the responsibility issue. The question of how the criteria for assessing the effectiveness of the programme are to be set is also being discussed.

(b) The AFCD and the organisations concerned are still examining the implementation details and the responsibility issue. Before the formal commencement of the trial programme, for those districts proposed by animal welfare organisations for implementing the trial programme, the AFCD will again consult the DCs concerned irrespective of their previous stance.

(c) Overseas experience and data show that the TNR programme for dogs is highly controversial. It has never been implemented in the major cities of the advanced European and North American countries which are relatively sparsely populated. Moreover, there is hitherto no formal research study indicating that such programme has produced concrete results.

In considering the details of the trial programme and the responsibility issue, the AFCD also makes reference to overseas programmes and study reports.


Ends/Wednesday, June 23, 2010
Issued at HKT 13:08

NNNN