Cat shooting facts incomplete – SPCA

IN response to ‘No end to cat shootings in residential area’ on the ZO of 2 June.

The true facts are not made clear in the letter to the ZO in this case.

According to law, an instantaneous killing shot to the head resulting in instant death is technically not cruelty; it is indeed an abhorrent act and completely illegal.

If the animal had been wounded or maimed and then left to die, that would have constituted cruelty in terms of the Animals Protection Act.

This particular cat was killed instantly and thrown over the fence as reported by the writer.

The discharging of a firearm, including air rifles, is in contravention of the Firearms Act and the Municipal Bylaws and not enforced by the SPCA. We enforce the Animals Protection Act.

The writer’s sister’s cats were shot months previously and were never reported to the relevant authorities.

It is legal for a farmer to shoot marauding animals destroying stock.

When researching a question on Google, it is not seen as consulting with an SPCA Official.

The shooting of any animal must be reported to the relevant authorities in that area. Shooting animals with air rifles is illegal.

I am a bit disappointed that once again Letters to the Editor has a complaint about the SPCA without comment from the SPCA in defence of allegations. We are reliant on public support and this type of sensationalism causes us more harm than good.

R FIVAZ Senior Inspector

Empangeni SPCA

Editor: The writer of the letter clearly stated they had contacted an official of the SPCA and received the response mentioned in the letter. Perhaps the official should have been more specific. Also, the letter complains about the law, not the SPCA.