Thailand Based Soi Dog Launches Bt550m Project to Sterilise Bangkok Street Dogs

[webfact]

Thailand Based Soi Dog Launches Bt550m Project to Sterilise Bangkok Street Dogs

BANGKOK – Thailand based Soi Dog Foundation, with the support of UK based Dogs Trust Worldwide, have announced the start of a new large scale dog sterilisation and vaccination programme in the Greater Bangkok area.

John Dalley of the Soi Dog foundation told The Nation that the seven-year Bt550-million project will see an increasing number of mobile surgical teams recruited to target the estimated 640,000 stray dogs that roam the streets in Bangkok.

It said the Department of Livestock Development has pledged to support the programme that has started in the Latkrabang district of the capital.

Full story: http://www.chiangraitimes.com/thailand-based-soi-dog-launches-bt550m-project-to-sterilise-bangkok-street-dogs.html

-- CHIANGRAI TIMES 2016-08-01

[Artisi]

Money would be much better spent on homeless kids, their education and housing. Round up the dogs and exterminate them - a far more useful endeavour. 

[MiKT]

1 hour ago, Artisi said:

Money would be much better spent on homeless kids, their education and housing. Round up the dogs and exterminate them - a far more useful endeavour. 

 

 

Usual heartless crap from another who does not bother to read why it is better to sterilize these poor dogs.

All TV readers should attempt to make a small donation which will eventually drastically reduce the soi dog population of Bangkok.

But then you miserable xxxx's would have nothing to winge about except everything else in Thailand as usual! 

[ClutchClark]

It was a Soi Dog Project that first brought me to Thailand.

It was foreign run so had no chance of this type of funding.

Having some experience with this subject and the grant provided, I would be curious to see how the money is divided.

i hope the program is sincere.

[cumgranosalum]

If this is carried out conscientiously, it would be one of the most positive things done to solve the dog problem

The other thing is to remove their food supply - garbage and those misguided people who feed them.

 

however - I wouldn't hold my breath - I expect it won't be long before we see dog handlers driving round in brand new pickups etc......

[ClutchClark]

5 minutes ago, cumgranosalum said:

If this is carried out conscientiously, it would be one of the most positive things done to solve the dog problem

The other thing is to remove their food supply - garbage and those misguided people who feed them.

 

however - I wouldn't hold my breath - I expect it won't be long before we see dog handlers driving round in brand new pickups etc......

+1 on the fleet of new pickups ;-)

But there have been similar sterilization efforts in the past as well as Rabies Vaccination programs most often financed by foreign money but the actual "hands on" is typically Thai.

Almost all Soi dogs are loosely owned by local residents or pushcart vendors and they actually think nicking a dogs cajones is a bad thing. 

As for starving the dogs, I hope you are joking. One thing Thailand does not need are 10's of 1,000's of starving and angry dogs running around loose. I am guessing you have never seen what starvation is like.

[cumgranosalum]

1 hour ago, Artisi said:

Money would be much better spent on homeless kids, their education and housing. Round up the dogs and exterminate them - a far more useful endeavour. 

One has to assume that you are over-awed by the return of Thaivisa, hence your remarkably silly comment.

Even the most hardened dog-hater knows that not only are culs expensive they are in fact almost completely ineffective.

"“All the world’s leading authorities on rabies control, including the World Health Organisation and the Food and Agricultural division of the United Nations are united in their view that the best approach to eliminating human rabies is to vaccinate a minimum of 70 per cent of dogs, thereby establishing a herd immunity amongst the canine population. Random removal or culling of vaccinated dogs actually has a negative impact on controlling rabies,” CRT

Edited August 1, 2016 by cumgranosalum

[cumgranosalum]

13 minutes ago, ClutchClark said:

+1 on the fleet of new pickups ;-)

But there have been similar sterilization efforts in the past as well as Rabies Vaccination programs most often financed by foreign money but the actual "hands on" is typically Thai.

Almost all Soi dogs are loosely owned by local residents or pushcart vendors and they actually think nicking a dogs cajones is a bad thing. 

As for starving the dogs, I hope you are joking. One thing Thailand does not need are 10's of 1,000's of starving and angry dogs running around loose. I am guessing you have never seen what starvation is like.

I am aware of the reluctance to sterilise dogs on the ground as it were - this is largely a matter for education - one wonders is they have the same attitude towards spaying?

As for the food supply, I couldn't be moire serious - you don't seem to understand that restricting the food supply is not as you say "starving" the dogs. Your fear of 10's of 1000's of starving angry dogs is utterly baseless and shows a lack of knowledge of how the dog populations thrive in Thailand

When a food supply is reduced an animal population - in this case dogs - reduces itself quite naturally, many animals in a restricted food situation cease to breed and the population simply reduces through natural wastage - BTW - how do you think Soi dogs usually die? D'you think they drift off peacefully into doggy heaven?

 

Edited August 1, 2016 by cumgranosalum

[Artisi]

37 minutes ago, MiKT said:

 

 

Usual heartless crap from another who does not bother to read why it is better to sterilize these poor dogs.

All TV readers should attempt to make a small donation which will eventually drastically reduce the soi dog population of Bangkok.

But then you miserable xxxx's would have nothing to winge about except everything else in Thailand as usual! 

 

37 minutes ago, MiKT said:

 

 

Usual heartless crap from another who does not bother to read why it is better to sterilize these poor dogs.

All TV readers should attempt to make a small donation which will eventually drastically reduce the soi dog population of Bangkok.

But then you miserable xxxx's would have nothing to winge about except everything else in Thailand as usual! 

Sure,  reduce the soi dog population to zero as quickly as possible as there is absolutely no need for any dogs on the streets. 

My donations go to supporting kids in need not useless soi dogs, so if that makes me miserable (in your strange thinking) then so be it. 

[samtam]

Whilst they're at it, could they sterilise cats too? We have many in our soi, and the female keeps on reproducing.

[cumgranosalum]

2 minutes ago, Artisi said:

 

Sure,  reduce the soi dog population to zero as quickly as possible as there is absolutely no need for any dogs on the streets. 

My donations go to supporting kids in need not useless soi dogs, so if that makes me miserable (in your strange thinking) then so be it. 

You are just completely misinformed - and if you think society deals with a single issue at a time you are just way too simplistic to grasp the basics.

[ClutchClark]

7 minutes ago, cumgranosalum said:

I am aware of the reluctance to sterilise dogs on the ground as it were - this is largely a matter for education - one wonders is they have the same attitude towards spaying?

As for the food supply, I couldn't be moire serious - you don't seem to understand that restricting the food supply is not as you say "starving" the dogs. Your fear of 10's of 1000's of starving angry dogs is utterly baseless and shows a lack of knowledge of how the dog populations thrive in Thailand

When a food supply is reduced an animal population - in this case dogs - reduces itself quite naturally, many animals in a restricted food situation cease to breed and the population simply reduces through natural wastage - BTW - how do you think Soi dogs usually die? D'you think they drift off peacefully into doggy heaven?

 

Like I said, I directed an organization that has worked on Dog Sterilization efforts in a few underdevleloped countries throught the world.

Your above post strongly suggests you have no actual experience on the subject at all. 

The way animal populations "reduce themselves quite naturally" when their food supply is cut off? 

Ah...its called starvation.

It ain't pretty, it ain't painless, it ain't fast, and a starving animal is an unpredictable animal and often an aggressive animal.

the last word is yours...you actually do a better job of losing your argument with every post you submit.

 

 

 

[theguyfromanotherforum]

2 hours ago, Artisi said:

Money would be much better spent on homeless kids, their education and housing. Round up the dogs and exterminate them - a far more useful endeavour. 

 

Nah, annihilating human population would be a lot more useful. 

[Artisi]

2 hours ago, theguyfromanotherforum said:

 

Nah, annihilating human population would be a lot more useful. 

That would be one option, then you wouldn't have useless people buying dogs as pups and then abandoning them on the streets and other bleeding hearts feeding them while others try to justify why soi they should allowed to run wild on the streets -- but but we are going to sterilise them so that will makes it ok.

Question for all the bleeding hearts and do-gooder's, do you have or see packs of mangy half-starved dogs roaming the streets in the west  -- nah! didn't think so, ever wondered why? 

Edited August 1, 2016 by Artisi

[MiKT]

10 minutes ago, Artisi said:

That would be one option, then you wouldn't have useless people buying dogs as pups and then abandoning them on the streets and other bleeding hearts feeding them while others try to justify why soi they should allowed to run wild on the streets -- but but we are going to sterilise them so that will makes it ok.

Question for all the bleeding hearts and do-gooder's, do you have or see packs of mangy half-starved dogs roaming the streets in the west  -- nah! didn't think so, ever wondered why? 

 

More than enough fully starved and abandoned pets in the west, but thankfully there are lots more bleeding heart do-gooders to try to find them better homes.

But do try harder to understand why sterilisation will reduce the population of stray dogs quicker than culling; as so clearly set out in previous posts, it might put your little heart at rest.

But with your attitude I  imagine that you would like to have all your stray children put down to save you money as well.

 

[MiKT]

Just out of interest what is our total reputation score based on?

Can it go negative for reprobates, jai dam ugly people and dog killers?

Can we drum up support by bribing other posters?

Would Donald Trump be able to boost his ratings by offering free scholarships to the Trumped-up university?

Its such a mystery.

[Artisi]

deleted

Edited August 1, 2016 by Artisi
removed post as it loaded into a later response MiKT

[Artisi]

22 minutes ago, MiKT said:

 

More than enough fully starved and abandoned pets in the west, but thankfully there are lots more bleeding heart do-gooders to try to find them better homes.

But do try harder to understand why sterilisation will reduce the population of stray dogs quicker than culling; as so clearly set out in previous posts, it might put your little heart at rest.

But with your attitude I  imagine that you would like to have all your stray children put down to save you money as well.

 

And you should try really really hard to understand  sterilising dogs that could possibly survive on the streets for many years will not reduce the population quicker than culling, now if you think about that for at least 1 minute it might put your little heart at rest, but then any one who makes stupid comments like "But with your attitude I  imagine that you would like to have all your stray children put down to save you money as well" would be hard pressed to really think about anything constructive.

Edited August 1, 2016 by Artisi

[MiKT]

4 minutes ago, Artisi said:

And you should try really really hard to understand that sterilising dogs who could possibly survive on the streets for many years will not reduce the population quicker than culling, now if you think about that for at least 1 minute it might put your little heart at rest, but then any one who makes stupid comments like "But with your attitude I  imagine that you would like to have all your stray children put down to save you money as well" would be hard pressed to really think about anything constructive.

 

May I kindly refer you to post number 7, who I think has quoted better authorities than you on how to reduce the stray dog population and reduce diseases such as rabies. Take as long as you like to think about it after you have finally assimilated what is being said.

The post was about stray dogs not stray children and I can readily see that you are hard pressed to think about anything constructive.

[Artisi]

There are no second prizes and I'm sure even you could understand the reference about homeless kids and its meaning within the context of the particular post. 

[daveAustin]

Good move. Let's hope they roll it out nationwide.

[MiKT]

28 minutes ago, Artisi said:

There are no second prizes and I'm sure even you could understand the reference about homeless kids and its meaning within the context of the particular post. 

 

Meaning, oh you mean meaning, yes and Somali pirates cause global warming!

Prizes! were you thinking of showing yourself at Crufts?

[Dagnabbit]

6 hours ago, cumgranosalum said:

One has to assume that you are over-awed by the return of Thaivisa, hence your remarkably silly comment.

Even the most hardened dog-hater knows that not only are culs expensive they are in fact almost completely ineffective.

"“All the world’s leading authorities on rabies control, including the World Health Organisation and the Food and Agricultural division of the United Nations are united in their view that the best approach to eliminating human rabies is to vaccinate a minimum of 70 per cent of dogs, thereby establishing a herd immunity amongst the canine population. Random removal or culling of vaccinated dogs actually has a negative impact on controlling rabies,” CRT

So let me get this right.

If they culled all stray dogs, there would still be a rabies problem with stray dogs?

We aren't talking about "removal or culling of vaccinated dogs" - we are talking about a cull of dogs that have not been vaccinated. All of them.

Rabies isn't the only issue. They spread disease, bite children and leave feces all over the place.

A total cull is a low cost, effective solution.

[Dagnabbit]

3 hours ago, MiKT said:

 

More than enough fully starved and abandoned pets in the west, but thankfully there are lots more bleeding heart do-gooders to try to find them better homes.

But do try harder to understand why sterilisation will reduce the population of stray dogs quicker than culling; as so clearly set out in previous posts, it might put your little heart at rest.

But with your attitude I  imagine that you would like to have all your stray children put down to save you money as well.

 

Sorry - but your assertion is ludicrous.

Let me spell it out.

Dead dogs cannot breed. Neither can sterilized dogs. 

The problem with sterilized dogs is they can still walk around, spread disease and bite people. 

If you kill all the dogs, you immediately reduce the population. Sterilizing then does not do this. So of course a complete cull will reduce the population much faster.

[kannot]

7 hours ago, ClutchClark said:

It was a Soi Dog Project that first brought me to Thailand.

It was foreign run so had no chance of this type of funding.

Having some experience with this subject and the grant provided, I would be curious to see how the money is divided.

i hope the program is sincere.

and how much goes a................stray!

[kannot]

None of this is going to make a jot of difference due to the stupidity of the Thai "love" (sic  joke) of dogs

[berybert]

Why do people who don't like dogs always come up with the line 'give the money to the kids and kill the dogs'

If you don't like dogs you give money to the kids, I don't like kids I will give my money to the dogs. Its called choice.

You choose yours and I'll choose mine.

 

Oh and I didn't even say 'kill the kids'

[Thechook]

This is a farang established and run operation and the only connection Thailand has is its dogs.  It was set up in Thailand in 2003 because Thailand didn't give a rats about the dogs, they didn't even have an animal cruelty act until 2014.  The foundation has been sterilising dogs and cats for years and years with the support of donations from around the world, not Thailand.   The foundation is registered in the U.K the U.S, Netherlands, Australia and Canada and it was their campaign that brought about the animal cruelty act.

[Thechook]

11 hours ago, Artisi said:

Money would be much better spent on homeless kids, their education and housing. Round up the dogs and exterminate them - a far more useful endeavour. 

People around the world donated their money specifically to help The dogs and now you want to get your hands on it and divert it to your cause.

[Artisi]

7 hours ago, Dagnabbit said:

So let me get this right.

If they culled all stray dogs, there would still be a rabies problem with stray dogs?

We aren't talking about "removal or culling of vaccinated dogs" - we are talking about a cull of dogs that have not been vaccinated. All of them.

Rabies isn't the only issue. They spread disease, bite children and leave feces all over the place.

A total cull is a low cost, effective solution.

Dead dogs wag no tails..