Niall Harbison and Soi Dog Foundation join forces to help stray dogs

[kwilco]

5 minutes ago, KannikaP said:

Me again. I Googled the meaning of CULLING = reduction of wild animal population by selective slaughter.

It would certainly work on Soi dogs. How would it  'start an endless battle'

CNVR does not stop them defecating on the pavements, attacking people or barking all night. 

So now i have a stalker....how sad you are!

You ignorance appears to be boundless.

[Doctor Tom]

1 hour ago, proton said:

The only good soi dog is a dead one, alive and neutered they are still pests,

The only good expat that thinks the way you do, is one that gets thrown out of Thailand, never to return.   Good luck finding any comparable Country in the World that doesnt have a supposed 'dog problem'.

[kwilco]

3 minutes ago, Doctor Tom said:

It helps them mate 

Another fatuous comment

[KannikaP]

1 minute ago, kwilco said:

So now i have a stalker....how sad you are!

You ignorance appears to be boundless.

No way am I stalking you. It is simply that for our first encounter I was trying to help you by giving you a genuine answer.

Now on this subject of Soi dogs, as far as I any many others are concerned, your ignorance shows.

[fredwiggy]

1 hour ago, proton said:

 

He's a misguided fool, you can bet he thinks he's a meat eating 'animal lover' like so many other hypocrite's. The only good soi dog is a dead one, alive and neutered they are still pests, if dead they are not and no need to neuter anyway.

Eating meat doesn't make you a hypocrite, especially if you're an animal lover. Meat is here for a reason. Vegans have their say, and if you know what you're doing as far as amino acids and how you get complete proteins, you can live on plants. Being a vegan doesn't give anyone the right to tell others what they can do with their diets, as if they'll listen anyway. If you can't understand that people like me can hunt, eat beef, deer, elk, fish, chicken, eggs and the like, and still love and respect life, as in animal life, that's your deal. Hunters do more than anyone else as far as contributing to the welfare of animals, with license money put towards habitat restoration, land purchases and game wardens to protect the resource. As far as wanting soi dogs dead, that's seeing animals as not a life but a pest to be destroyed. Animal lovers see them as pets, and running loose like they do here is the locals fault. People like dogs and cats as puppies and kittens, but when they get older, they aren't taken care of and let to run wild, which makes problems with over population, disease spreading, accidents and rabies. This isn't the animals fault but peoples. These people doing the spaying and neutering are doing what's best for the population. The more spayed and neutered, the less progeny. Simple. Stepping up these programs is the governments responsibility, which is to protect human life here. It has to be done all over the country, and more people need to get involved in the program, with more money coming in to help them. I have taken n a few "wild" dogs and cats in my life, only to have some of them poisoned by disturbed farmers who don't like them around for whatever reasons they can come up with. This is surely a problem, but these people are the only ones doing something about it, so they should be commended and not trashed. A hypocrite is someone who says they love animals, and then says they should all be put down because they inconvenience him somehow.

Edited February 12 by fredwiggy

[spidermike007]

Though it is certainly a step in the right direction and it's worthy work, but I still think that the answer is in major culling programs. There are just way too many soi dogs out there, there are a lot of confused people that think there's some sort of buddhaistic merit involved in feeding them, and the reality is the most of them are living rather desperate lives.

 

The compassionate thing to do is to put those guys down. 

[kwilco]

58 minutes ago, KannikaP said:

No way am I stalking you. It is simply that for our first encounter I was trying to help you by giving you a genuine answer.

Now on this subject of Soi dogs, as far as I any many others are concerned, your ignorance shows.

"Encounter" - thay sums up your attitude perfectly Your really take the biscuit - annoying stalker that you are - if you disagree with anything I've posted on Soi Dogs why don't you actually express it rather than just issue vague ad homs?

I suspect you don't have an argument at all but as a stalker just want to gainsay anything I post

[KannikaP]

6 minutes ago, kwilco said:

"Encounter" - thay sums up your attitude perfectly Your really take the biscuit - annoying stalker that you are - if you disagree with anything I've posted on Soi Dogs why don't you actually express it rather than just issue vague ad homs?

I suspect you don't have an argument at all but as a stalker just want to gainsay anything I post

OK, I totally disagree with your idea that Soi dogs should be neutered/spayed. They should be eliminated for reasons I have said previously.

I am NOT a stalker, never have been, never will, but if two subjects come up on the same day on different subjects on which I give my genuine opinions, be they from the same person or not, I shall reply.

I guess your paranoia says that I am stalking and annoying you, but I can assure you that I am not.

 

[kwilco]

2 minutes ago, KannikaP said:

15 minutes ago, kwilco said:

 

OK, I totally disagree with your idea that Soi dogs should be neutered/spayed. They should be eliminated for reasons I have said previously.

OK stalker, That's not an argument - that is gansay - so now explain how your hypothesis will work

Edited February 12 by kwilco

[KannikaP]

1 minute ago, kwilco said:

THat's not an argument - that is gansay - so now explain how your hypothesis will work

It is not an hypothesis, it is a valid, solution to the Soi dog problem, be it injection, shooting

Or running over with a 4x4. 555

[kwilco]

Why dog culls don’t work. – To start off with, you will find no examples of a successful cull anywhere in the world. (and Thailand’s stray dog problem isn’t unique)

 

CNVR however, has been shown to work – Phuket had over 700,000 strays, by 2022, that number had dropped down to 7,000—mostly thanks to Soi Dog and its CNVR campaigns. For many the problem is they simply don’t notice the difference occurring. Officially now Phuket is rabies free – where is the threat of it re-appearing? Not from a vaccinated stray population but from the dogs imported from the mainland to be sold as pets on the markets.

 

Where dog culls have seen temporary reductions in stray populations, there is no evidence of any successful long-term elimination through culling.

 

Here's why: -

 

The “vacuum effect” is triggered when stray dogs are culled, it creates a "vacuum" in the environment where they lived. This attracts new dogs often younger, unsterilized ones, from surrounding areas. This quickly replenishes the population, negating the initial reduction.

 

Many of the “new” dogs bring in diseases with them and this increases the likelihood of the spread of rabies. Tights become more common as dogs fight over territory and this in turn accelerates the spread of diseases.

 

Increased breeding - It seems some people are unaware of the breeding characteristics of Soi Dogs. Culling disrupts social structures and triggers hormonal changes in the remaining dogs. This leads to increased breeding rates as they attempt to compensate for the loss. This can result in a population rebound that’s even higher than before.. Female dogs can reproduce as early as six months old, and removing some dogs can actually trigger increased reproduction in others.

One single bitch can produce 6 to 12 pups in a litter 3 times a year. After six months those pups will be producing litters of their own. A bitch will live from 3 to 5 years. After 5 years at a rate of 7 bitches per annum it could have up to 17,000 descendants all happily reproducing on top of that… if they are neutered that can’t happen. Neutering obviously reduces the breeding rates as does restrictions of food supply – females will not come “on heat” at times of hunger.

 

I’d also be interested to hear what culling methods are being advocated - Those who unthinkingly propose culls  clearly haven’t thought out the practicalities of a cull especially in Thailand – Firstly there is the obvious impossibility of complete eradication: Eliminating all dogs across a large area is in all practical impossible. Even seemingly thorough culls miss hidden dogs, pregnant females, and pups born shortly after. These survivors quickly reproduce, leading to population resurgence.

 

The next thing to consider is HOW you will kill them – poisoning is far to unrestricted and potentially damaging to both humans and wildlife – you also have to consider what to do with a sudden mountain of bodies, both dogs and other animals.

 

Shooting – way too slow and ineffective do you really want marksmen roaming the streets of your town taking pot-shots at anything they think is a valid target? Then trying to recover the bodies or chasing after wounded animals?

 

You also have the problem of difficulties in identification and targeting: In densely populated areas, distinguishing stray dogs from owned but unlicensed or unleashed dogs is challenging. Culling could mistakenly target pets, leading to public outrage and legal repercussions.

 

Logistical complexities:  dealing with live or dead animals is not easy - Capturing large numbers of animals in urban environments is difficult and expensive. It requires specialized equipment, personnel, and infrastructure, creating a significant strain on resources.

Once captured and killed the bodies pile up – this is thousands of extra carcasses that suddenly have to be disposed of – how? – There are estimated to be up to 8.5 million soi dogs in Thailand.

 

This brings me to the public reaction – I know expats can be insensitive to the culture of the country they live in but I would have thought even the most insensitive have some appreciation of the Buddhist attitude to living things.

There are ethical concerns and public opposition to be taken into consideration. : Culling often faces ethical critiques for its cruelty and animal welfare concerns. This opposition can hinder implementation and create community tension, reducing its effectiveness. In Bangkok a few years back, an ill-advised attempt at a cull triggered by a rabies scare brought about a massive outcry from both the public and scientists.

One also needs to bear in mind that many people regard there Soi Dogs as an asset. Adopting a friendly pack in your street is seen as a good crime prevention tool and company of some of the people.

 

Time and again it has been sown that the ethical and practical drawbacks of culling outweigh any potential temporary benefits.

 

So advocates of culls - how do you think it would work? Can you find any evidence that it does? Address the practicalities -  how would you kill and dispose entirely of between 3 and 9 million dogs – many of which  have owners?

 

[kwilco]

1 hour ago, KannikaP said:

It is not an hypothesis, it is a valid, solution to the Soi dog problem, be it injection, shooting

Or running over with a 4x4. 555

your reply is incorrect - you don't even know what a hypothesis is - I've never read such ill-informed posts as yours - You are not putting forward an argument at all ? You have no basis to suggest how that would work yet it has been clearly demonstrated time and again why it won't.

[KannikaP]

8 minutes ago, kwilco said:

your reply is incorrect - you don't even know what a hypothesis is - I've never read such ill-informed posts as yours - You are not putting forward an argument at all ? You have no basis to suggest how that would work yet it has been clearly demonstrated time and again why it won't.

OK. PLEASE put me on ignore so you do not have to read any more of my hypothses.

 

Edited February 12 by KannikaP

[kwilco]

For those of you who "prefer not" to read here is a graphic to demonstrate it...

 

 

Dogs in Thailand-2.pdf

[gomangosteen]

1 hour ago, kwilco said:

Phuket had over 700,000 strays, by 2022, that number had dropped down to 7,000

Question that figure of 700,000. 

 

Typo, or for dramatic effect?

 

Only lived there a year 2009-10, but as a cyclist/runner think I'd have noticed.

 

Soi Dg Foundation quoted 70,000, more realistic.

[proton]

4 hours ago, Doctor Tom said:

It helps them mate 

Like feeding rats or pigeons, helps them as well, soi dog feeding should be illegal, all it does is prolongs suffering and ends up creating more vermin dogs to haunt the sois, roads, shop doorways, pavements and vacant lots. Makes the deluded feeders feel all compassionate though. 

Edited February 12 by proton

[kwilco]

50 minutes ago, gomangosteen said:

Question that figure of 700,000. 

 

Typo, or for dramatic effect?

 

Only lived there a year 2009-10, but as a cyclist/runner think I'd have noticed.

 

Soi Dg Foundation quoted 70,000, more realistic.

typo - 70,000. in Phuket

In BKK the figure was about that.

 

You highlight a problem though and that is one of perception - with CNVR the reduction is slow and people tend not to notice this reduction - in fact a combination of cognitive dissonance and confirmation bias prevents them from properly assessing the situation. As a cyclist you know that in certain hotspots you will attract attention from dogs but in other areas they may have reduced in numbers 

[kwilco]

Stray Dogs in Thailand.ppsx

[proton]

2 hours ago, kwilco said:

Why dog culls don’t work. – To start off with, you will find no examples of a successful cull anywhere in the world. (and Thailand’s stray dog problem isn’t unique)

 

CNVR however, has been shown to work – Phuket had over 700,000 strays, by 2022, that number had dropped down to 7,000—mostly thanks to Soi Dog and its CNVR campaigns. For many the problem is they simply don’t notice the difference occurring. Officially now Phuket is rabies free – where is the threat of it re-appearing? Not from a vaccinated stray population but from the dogs imported from the mainland to be sold as pets on the markets.

 

Where dog culls have seen temporary reductions in stray populations, there is no evidence of any successful long-term elimination through culling.

 

Here's why: -

 

The “vacuum effect” is triggered when stray dogs are culled, it creates a "vacuum" in the environment where they lived. This attracts new dogs often younger, unsterilized ones, from surrounding areas. This quickly replenishes the population, negating the initial reduction.

 

Many of the “new” dogs bring in diseases with them and this increases the likelihood of the spread of rabies. Tights become more common as dogs fight over territory and this in turn accelerates the spread of diseases.

 

Increased breeding - It seems some people are unaware of the breeding characteristics of Soi Dogs. Culling disrupts social structures and triggers hormonal changes in the remaining dogs. This leads to increased breeding rates as they attempt to compensate for the loss. This can result in a population rebound that’s even higher than before.. Female dogs can reproduce as early as six months old, and removing some dogs can actually trigger increased reproduction in others.

One single bitch can produce 6 to 12 pups in a litter 3 times a year. After six months those pups will be producing litters of their own. A bitch will live from 3 to 5 years. After 5 years at a rate of 7 bitches per annum it could have up to 17,000 descendants all happily reproducing on top of that… if they are neutered that can’t happen. Neutering obviously reduces the breeding rates as does restrictions of food supply – females will not come “on heat” at times of hunger.

 

I’d also be interested to hear what culling methods are being advocated - Those who unthinkingly propose culls  clearly haven’t thought out the practicalities of a cull especially in Thailand – Firstly there is the obvious impossibility of complete eradication: Eliminating all dogs across a large area is in all practical impossible. Even seemingly thorough culls miss hidden dogs, pregnant females, and pups born shortly after. These survivors quickly reproduce, leading to population resurgence.

 

The next thing to consider is HOW you will kill them – poisoning is far to unrestricted and potentially damaging to both humans and wildlife – you also have to consider what to do with a sudden mountain of bodies, both dogs and other animals.

 

Shooting – way too slow and ineffective do you really want marksmen roaming the streets of your town taking pot-shots at anything they think is a valid target? Then trying to recover the bodies or chasing after wounded animals?

 

You also have the problem of difficulties in identification and targeting: In densely populated areas, distinguishing stray dogs from owned but unlicensed or unleashed dogs is challenging. Culling could mistakenly target pets, leading to public outrage and legal repercussions.

 

Logistical complexities:  dealing with live or dead animals is not easy - Capturing large numbers of animals in urban environments is difficult and expensive. It requires specialized equipment, personnel, and infrastructure, creating a significant strain on resources.

Once captured and killed the bodies pile up – this is thousands of extra carcasses that suddenly have to be disposed of – how? – There are estimated to be up to 8.5 million soi dogs in Thailand.

 

This brings me to the public reaction – I know expats can be insensitive to the culture of the country they live in but I would have thought even the most insensitive have some appreciation of the Buddhist attitude to living things.

There are ethical concerns and public opposition to be taken into consideration. : Culling often faces ethical critiques for its cruelty and animal welfare concerns. This opposition can hinder implementation and create community tension, reducing its effectiveness. In Bangkok a few years back, an ill-advised attempt at a cull triggered by a rabies scare brought about a massive outcry from both the public and scientists.

One also needs to bear in mind that many people regard there Soi Dogs as an asset. Adopting a friendly pack in your street is seen as a good crime prevention tool and company of some of the people.

 

Time and again it has been sown that the ethical and practical drawbacks of culling outweigh any potential temporary benefits.

 

So advocates of culls - how do you think it would work? Can you find any evidence that it does? Address the practicalities -  how would you kill and dispose entirely of between 3 and 9 million dogs – many of which  have owners?

 

 

Dogs culls do work, a dead dog cannot breed, bark, be a traffic hazard, health hazard, or wee all over your car tires. 😄 Millions of dogs could be killed, all thats needed is an incentive. Offer a bounty for every dead dog brought in, Thais would soon lose their reluctance to top them with a few baht going. Get the army killing them as well. If the Chinese could wipe out millions of birds in the 60's the same can be done with soi dogs.

[Doctor Tom]

11 minutes ago, proton said:

Like feeding rats or pigeons, helps them as well, soi dog feeding should be illegal, all it does is prolongs suffering and ends up creating more vermin dogs to haunt the sois, roads, shop doorways, pavements and vacant lots. Makes the deluded feeders feel all compassionate though. 

Together with a few other Thai people, I feed two extended families of older dogs and puppies.  I've been doing that for the best part of 7 years and I've seen the packs grow from a couple of dogs to a community . They live exclusively in the jungle areas, away from houses and most people.  They thrive and seem happy and contented. They are friendly and welcoming to those of us who interact with them.  Yes, it makes me feel good to watch them living life and apparently enjoying it and as far as I can see, they only annoy local monkeys. I would support their sterilization, but never their eradication, at least only by natural sterilization means. 

Edited February 12 by Doctor Tom

[kwilco]

11 minutes ago, proton said:

Like feeding rats or pigeons, helps them as well, soi dog feeding should be illegal, all it does is prolongs suffering and ends up creating more vermin dogs to haunt the sois, roads, shop doorways, pavements and vacant lots. Makes the deluded feeders feel all compassionate though. 

 

food supply is directly related to the dog population. Whereas feeding by local inhabitants is a problem, the main part of the  problem and main source of food is garbage.

Most areas of Thailand have very poor garbage collection and terrible waste disposal systems which are. in effect. a never-ending buffet for Soi Dogs.

If their food supply is restricted dogs won't breed.

 

As I said earlier restricting the food supply is crucial to reducing the roaming dog problem.

Edited February 12 by kwilco

[kwilco]

3 minutes ago, Doctor Tom said:

Together with a few other Thai people, I feed two extended families of older dogs and puppies.  I've been doing that for the best part of 7 years and I've seen the packs grow from a couple of dogs to a community . They live exclusively in the jungle areas, away from houses and most people.  They thrive and seem happy and contented. They are friendly and welcoming to those of us who interact with them.  Yes, it makes me feel good to watch them living life and apparently enjoying it and as far as I can see, they only annoy local monkeys. I would support their sterilization, but never their irradiation, at least only by natural sterilization means. 

Even that has dire impact on the native eco-system. you also don't know hpow many stay their - the pack system requires dogs to leave and go elsewhere - it also does nothing to stop the spread of disease.

Edited February 12 by kwilco

[kwilco]

16 minutes ago, proton said:

 

Dogs culls do work, a dead dog cannot breed, bark, be a traffic hazard, health hazard, or wee all over your car tires. 😄 Millions of dogs could be killed, all thats needed is an incentive. Offer a bounty for every dead dog brought in, Thais would soon lose their reluctance to top them with a few baht going. Get the army killing them as well. If the Chinese could wipe out millions of birds in the 60's the same can be done with soi dogs.

You are completely wrong you will never find an instance of where they have - all authorities know this - you are alone in your idea - it isn't an opinion because it isn't based on reason or evidence.

You have seen the reasons why your naive proposals won't work yet your cognitive dissonance prevents you from admitting you are wrong.

[Doctor Tom]

12 hours ago, kwilco said:

Even that has dire impact on the native eco-system. you also don't know hpow many stay their - the pack system requires dogs to leave and go elsewhere - it also does nothing to stop the spread of disease.

I don't care about your view on it mate. You are twisted and biased about this subject, so best to ignore you. 

[Humpy]

'' 2,000 dogs sterilised and vaccinated every single month.''

Does not stop them crapping all over the place !!

[proton]

On 2/12/2024 at 4:04 PM, fredwiggy said:

Eating meat doesn't make you a hypocrite, especially if you're an animal lover. Meat is here for a reason. Vegans have their say, and if you know what you're doing as far as amino acids and how you get complete proteins, you can live on plants. Being a vegan doesn't give anyone the right to tell others what they can do with their diets, as if they'll listen anyway. If you can't understand that people like me can hunt, eat beef, deer, elk, fish, chicken, eggs and the like, and still love and respect life, as in animal life, that's your deal. Hunters do more than anyone else as far as contributing to the welfare of animals, with license money put towards habitat restoration, land purchases and game wardens to protect the resource. As far as wanting soi dogs dead, that's seeing animals as not a life but a pest to be destroyed. Animal lovers see them as pets, and running loose like they do here is the locals fault. People like dogs and cats as puppies and kittens, but when they get older, they aren't taken care of and let to run wild, which makes problems with over population, disease spreading, accidents and rabies. This isn't the animals fault but peoples. These people doing the spaying and neutering are doing what's best for the population. The more spayed and neutered, the less progeny. Simple. Stepping up these programs is the governments responsibility, which is to protect human life here. It has to be done all over the country, and more people need to get involved in the program, with more money coming in to help them. I have taken n a few "wild" dogs and cats in my life, only to have some of them poisoned by disturbed farmers who don't like them around for whatever reasons they can come up with. This is surely a problem, but these people are the only ones doing something about it, so they should be commended and not trashed. A hypocrite is someone who says they love animals, and then says they should all be put down because they inconvenience him somehow.

 

By definition meat eaters cannot be animal lovers, getting all soppy over rancid soi dog vermin when you are scoffing down other dead mammals is the height of hypocrisy. I have nothing against meat eaters, it's just a pity they are not eating dogs as well, it would be a real help.

[kwilco]

On 2/11/2024 at 1:15 PM, stoner said:

 

ok you believe what you may. 

not "belief", it is hard evidence

[kwilco]

On 2/13/2024 at 2:15 AM, Doctor Tom said:

I don't care about your view on it mate. You are twisted and biased about this subject, so best to ignore you. 

" You are twisted and biased: - how so? What is my bias?

[jacko45k]

On 2/12/2024 at 9:25 AM, fredwiggy said:

Deer especially, left to breed and not harvested, over populate and cause many problems, one of which is vehicle accidents which kill about 200 people a year

Sort of applies to dogs in Thailand !

You just seek to justify your own habits and refute those of others.

[fredwiggy]

1 hour ago, jacko45k said:

Sort of applies to dogs in Thailand !

You just seek to justify your own habits and refute those of others.

I refute what is right and real. Some animals are here for us to eat and some are here for us to teach and domesticate. Anyone with any common sense knows the difference, but some think we can eat cats and dogs. These are people who don't understand the difference between pets and food. It seems this shows how the same people treat domestic animals and dogs, looking at them as something to eat, abuse and destroy. Any animals left to overpopulate will either hurt their own habitat, or cause harm to others, like dogs allowed to breed wild without any care for them or their offspring, as happens here. This is why people who are actually doing something about it should be supported and commended, and not commented on negatively, because if you're not part of the solution, you can be part of the problem. Complaining does nothing in this case. I\m one of the ones who eat meat and treat domestic animals well, meaning I have common sense. Wanting to destroy all the dogs because the locals allow them to run wild isn't helping matters. This is the government and locals problem. Deer are here for us to eat. The meat is low in fat and healthy. The problem is people overdeveloping their habitat for profit, allowing these same deer to breed the same, with less habitat to support them and their offspring. Hunting is the only way to keep their population in check with the available habitat. Left to overpopulate, stopping hunting in rural and city areas, allows the deer to eat whatever they find, which is gardens and vegetables grown by the people who have moved into areas which were originally the deer's home. Deer aren't pets, and will become pests, increasing the car accidents, and deaths from same, and deer allowed to grow accustomed to people will attack them during the rut, or mating season, causing up to 6 deaths a year in the US. There is no other recourse besides hunting, and a lot of the meat from these animals is donated to homeless shelters. I don't try to justify my own anything. I tell it exactly how it is. Some cannot understand the dynamics of animals and what happens if left to breed without control. This is again why these people who are spaying and neutering them are to be supported. If you don't eat meat, don't comment, because millions of others do, and it's our right. No one will ever change this, as meat tastes good, and is also good for you. And dogs and cats aren't meant to be eaten, but as pets and sometimes as rescue and support animals.