"Spay in May": Do they just want your address?

In local newspapers throughout the state the Animal Welfare League is promoting its Spay in May programme. Cats and dogs can be spayed at a vet nominated by the A.W.L. for only $65 for holders of Centrelink cards. 

I read the story about someone from the Animal Welfare League harassing a person who advertised kittens in the newspaper. I have a similar story and I wonder if it is the same person who did this to me.

While Spay in May sounds like a great idea to reduce dog and cat populations, I suspect it is all part of a plan by some people to get the phone numbers and addresses of 'unsuitable' pet owners.

These 'unsuitable' owners are the poor or on Centreflunk benefits.

I really object to this idea. Poor kids are entitled to dogs and cats just as rich kids are. Studies have shown that kids who grow up with animals have less allergies and asthma and better immune systems. Poor people love their animals as much as rich people and are prepared to make huge sacrifices to keep them well fed and vaccinated.

I am on Centrelink benefits as a fairly temporary measure since an accident a couple of years back, but I am on leave from work and I will be returning to work. I adopted a stray cat and I saw the Spay in May feature in the newspaper. I decided to ring up and get a voucher to get my new cat spayed. A male cat does not make a good pet unless spayed. I could probably find the full price of spaying, about $120, but I fell for the 'trap'.

The woman at the Animal Welfare League that I spoke to was bloody awful. She was rude, she spoke down to me, she obviously thought I was some kind of inferior being not worthy of being on this earth. In fact her whole attitude said "You unemployed people are scum - you should not be entitled to own an animal."  

I expected a friendly person to take down my details and post out the voucher without any judgments being made about my situation.

Instead I was subjected to interrogation by a person obsessed with her own 'importance' and with removing animals from people she judges to be 'unsuitable'. When I said I adopted a stray cat she tried to tell me I had no legal right to have that cat, as it could be microchipped and belong to someone else. She said she would come and collect the cat and place it in the care of the Animal Welfare League. I could then buy it back if I wanted for some exhorbitant amount, providing Animal Welfare inspected my premises and deemed them suitable. (I own my house. It's worth $300,000 - nothing owing. Would that be good enough?) I had already paid to get this cat vaccinated (two vaccinations a month apart, cost $120). It didn't have a microchip but she didn't want to know about that - the only people entitled to judge if a cat has a microchip is the A.W.L. according to her. 

After interrogating me about Finnegan, she then started to ask if I had any OTHER cats in a very rude way. When I said no, she asked if I had DOGS. (How dare I have dogs on Centreflunk benefits). I decided the answer to that was also going to be no. I was trying to be polite - after all she was giving me something for nothing, wasn't she? - but my patience was wearing thin.

I gave her my address and phone number. I hoped that was the end of it. But she rang again some time later to 'discuss' my surrendering Finnegan to the A.W.L. She actually had the nerve to say "You really can't afford to have pets, you know. We can find him a suitable home."  She also mentioned something about violations of council regulations and a whole lot of other empty threats. (Is this whole Spay in May campaign a plot to flush out low-income pet owners and seize all their animals and/or report them to the Council for violating various bullshit regulations?)

Finnegan: not on Animal Welfare's Death Row, never will be.