Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Alina Lilova's avatar

Well said! To punish compassion is to turn everything upside down. It's such a shame, especially because Turkey used to inspire people across the globe, with its images of food dispensers in the streets and by generally being a model of urban interspecies coexistence. I hope that the bans and the law get overturned.

Of course the feeders would not give up. Would one not feed their hungry child, their brother or their human friend? One gets just as attached to the animals, and friendship would count for nothing if you let your friend starve because the authorities said so. However, I guess that casual passersby could be discouraged from sharing their leftovers with random animals, which may cause dogs to congregate in larger packs in remote areas secretly frequented by the bravest humans, thus becoming less socialised because they no longer see people as a source of treats.

It's incredibly short-sighted and cruel. Unfortunately, I feel that over the years, animal welfare activists have contributed to this idea of using starvation to "control the dog/cat problem" because they sometimes endorse "waste management" without much thought. While it may be true that free-living animals proliferate if there's more food available, including from spilled waste or open bins, the whole idea of switching to humane methods (sterilisation) is that we don't want to kill the animals or cause them to suffer, directly or indirectly. Since I'm not aware of any evidence that either dogs or cats can decide to have fewer kids in times of food scarcity, we must always emphasise that the animals who already exist must be given food, water and the basics to live a decent life... It's the only responsible and just way to treat domesticated beings. (I may have been guilty of what I describe here myself, a long time ago.)

Expand full comment

No posts

Ready for more?