The Editor,
My doorbell rang yesterday afternoon and who should I find on my doorstep but a dog licensing person sent by the city of Port Coquitlam to track down errant dog owners. I politely informed her that I was not pleased to see her and that I viewed this licence as no more than a tax, one which I had paid dutifully for the last 10 years of my old dog's life without receiving much value from the city.
I was informed that there is now a dog park available to me (nowhere near where I live and, as I am not going to waste precious gas to get to it, I will never use it). I was also informed that PoCo operates its own shelter and uses the funds from this tax (I mean licence) to operate it and to help fund spaying and neutering costs.
I appreciate the fact that lost and unwanted animals are looked after in Port Coquitlam and I, as part of this community, am happy to contribute to this essential service. My question is: Why are cat owners exempt from this licensing fee while I and other dog owners are singled out?
As a responsible dog owner, I do not leave my dog unattended when I am outside of my home. Unlike many cat owners, I do not open my front door to allow Rover to wander the neighbourhood to do his business in other people's yards (responsible dog owners always pick up) nor does he have the freedom to kill birds and wildlife at will nor reproduce willy nilly or get lost or killed roaming his territory.
Isn't it a double standard that dog owners have to pay a tax (I mean a licence fee) while cat owners do not, despite the fact that city shelters are full of cats needing homes, including many unwanted kittens from feral cats?
How many feral dogs are roaming the Lower Mainland? Why should I, as a dog owner, have to subsidize all the cat owners who don't have to pay any licence fees for their animals? A tax should be shared by all or by none - fair is fair.
Elizabeth Harvey, Port Coquitlam
