Toronto’s program to license the city’s pets has been going on for some time now. But on the weekend, which must have meant a couple of slow news days, the city’s media were full of stories about the current drive that has students going all over the city, knocking on doors and attempting to ascertain if the household contains illegal non licensed dogs or cats.
It seems that some Torontonians are outraged over the fact that these students do a little snooping. They have been known to knock loudly on the door or ring the doorbell several times hoping that a previously unknown, unlicensed pooch will bark. These students also look for other signs of hidden doggies and kitties such as paw prints on windows.
It should come as no surprise to anyone that a city that has smoke police and idling police also has puppy police or kitty kops, or whatever else you want to call those who will enforce the licensing bylaw. Those who are caught with unlicensed Fidos or Fluffies first get warnings that can be followed by fines that range from $240 to $5,000.
What is most shocking about the citywide hunt for unlicensed dogs and cats is that some Torontonians are actually shocked by what is happening. Snooping around peoples’ homes in order to part them from more of their money is par for the course for Mayor David Miller and his socialist minions at City Hall. There’s nothing shocking about it.
In the Toronto Star’s reportage of this yesterday, the Star ran a picture of one Jeff Moulden, sitting with his two cats. Moulden is quoted as saying that he can’t understand why he has to pay for his two spayed indoor cats that will never require services from Toronto Animal Services. He doesn’t like the idea that if he does get his cats licensed they are supposed to wear their licenses around their necks, even though they never leave his house.
The license fees are at least reasonable. They range from $15 a year for a cat that has been spayed or neutered to $60 for a dog that hasn’t been. Even so, there are probably some people, most notably those on fixed incomes such as pensioners that will have difficulty coming up with the licensing fee. But Mr. Moulden appears to be able to pay a yearly fee of $30 for his two cats, but that’s not what he is complaining about. Besides the snoop tactics that were used to out his two indoor kitties, he can’t understand why he has to pay money that is supposed to go to Animal Control when he keeps his cats inside. Mr. Moulden is obviously not alone in this puzzlement. Yet the answer is so simple.
IT’S A CASH GRAB!
That’s all it is. Many of our laws and bylaws are nothing more than excuses for governments to take more of our money. Any possibility that there is some logical connection between the licensing law and the need to look after animals disappears when it comes to the necessity of pets who never leave their owners’ homes are required to be licensed. This bylaw has nothing to do with animals and everything to do with money. No one should really be surprised.
It’s amazing how reasonable intelligent people still give governments such as that run by David Miller the benefit of the doubt by looking for a rational reason why they are being charged more and more money. There isn’t one – these people have money and City Hall wants it. It’s as simple as that.
