Dreschel: Council is pussyfooting around cat licensing once again//

The proposed initiative might need some work, but doing nothing is not a solution

We want to change the attitude about cats and we believe that licensing was that first step. KEN LEENDERTSE CITY LICENSING DIRECTOR

When it comes to licensing pets, Hamilton councillors are cleaving to poet T.S. Eliot’s immortal line that “a cat is not a dog.”

For what’s believed to be the third time since amalgamation, they’re once again pussyfooting around requiring non-rural cat owners to buy an annual licence like dog owners do.

Faced with a staff recommendation to implement a $20 licensing fee for spayed or neutered felines and $45 for “unaltered” cats, the planning committee voted 5-3 to merely receive the report rather than act on it.

That decision may be challenged when it’s on deck for ratification by the full council on Nov. 23.

But after some three hours of staff presentations, community delegations and committee discussions, it’s clear the subject is not unlike a tabby — more of a mottled than a black-and-white affair.

For every reasonable argument for licensing kitty, there’s an equally reasonable one against it, or at least for fine-tuning the idea.

One point that everyone should be able to agree on, however, is the proposal is not a tax grab as some claim.

Staff estimates licensing cats could generate about $200,000 annually, of which $85,000 would be spent on a new employee to administer the program while the $115,000 balance would be invested in community cat programs such as providing affordable spaying/neutering and vaccinations.

The projected revenue is predicated on annually licensing 10,000 of Hamilton’s estimated 130,000 owned cats.

(By way of comparison, there are an estimated 70,000 dogs in Hamilton, of which about 38,000 are now licensed. Dog licences are $32 for spayed or neutered canines and $68 for unfixed.)

Staff also estimates there are 110,000 free-roaming, abandoned or feral cats in the city. That’s the real problem licensing could help tackle.

With euthanasia now frowned upon as a means of controlling the overpopulation of unwanted cats, staff argue that getting responsible pet owners to license their cats will help pay for progressive programs such as ones which trap, snip, microchip, and release rambling felines back onto city streets.

Everyone seems to agree the cause is good; it’s the execution that doesn’t sit well with some.

Hamilton-Burlington SPCA and acclaimed local veterinarian Liz O’Brien, among others, flagged shortcomings.

O’Brien’s written submission noted she believes in licensing to promote identification, registration, vaccination and returning lost cats safely home, but, nonetheless, she has several concerns.

O’Brien, a feline specialist, argued that licensing unaltered cats is unacceptable because unaltered cats are at the root of the unwanted “cat problem.”

She also believes, among other things, the staff report puts too much emphasis on collar and tag licenses instead of microchipping as a means of identification. She pointed out cats regularly lose collars and tags.

For its part, the SPCA argued licensing should be considered in the context of a community-wide plan involving all animal welfare stakeholders.

Those are valid points. But they don’t negate licensing director Ken Leendertse’s straightforward principle that licensing helps change a prevailing mindset that cats are “disposable.”

In many cases, if people lose cats they simply get another one. Licensing not only assists in locating lost cats, it attaches a personal and societal value to all of them.

“We want to change the attitude about cats and we believe that licensing was that first step,” Leendertse said in an interview.

Surely when the issue is resurrected later this month, rather than kicking it to the sidelines, council will direct staff to address the legitimate concerns raised by O’Brien and others with the goal of returning in the new year with a revamped plan.

As Coun. Doug Conley said in support of the initiative, there’s always going to be a “better way” to do something. Doing nothing, however, is not the answer.