A Nation of Pet Lovers

Date: 2015-10-07; view: 775.

A recent survey in the United States showed that the average family there spent more money on its pets than on its children. Although this is a rather shocking statistic, it should not surprise anyone who has seen the doggy beauty parlours or the quiet shady groves where loved pets of all varieties are laid to rest forever. It is possible that the Americans are unique in treating their little friends in this way, but what information we do have would suggest that the English, too, are slavish in their attentions to the whims of their pets.

This can clearly be seen when we look at pet foods, which often contain more vitamins than human food or, at least, are seldom less nutritious. They certainly cost as much. Last year the British public spent two hundred million pounds on pet food alone, to say nothing of veterinary bills and animal furniture. It is difficult not to feel resentful about this when one considers what the same amount could do for victims of starvation and poverty, and so it is not unusual for me to get hot under the collar when I read about another old person who has left all his/her money to a dog or cat home.

There are a variety of reasons why I, personally, find the popularity of British pets alarming. Among other things they cause physical problems. An example of this is New York where they have great difficulty getting rid of the mess that dogs leave on the streets. Many people find this funny, but in a number of large cities it is a major problem. Animals can cause disease, too. It is the threat of rabies – a disease with no known cure "that has made the English government impose strict restrictions on animals coming into the United Kingdom. When the Spanish government recently destroyed a number of stray dogs as protection against the same threat, English tourists immediately wrote letters to the newspapers complaining about "mass murder".

Another problem is the carelessness of some pet owners. Most little children want a dog or a cat, and they continually pester their mothers and fathers until they get one. It is only when the "sweet little thing" has been brought home that the parents realize how much time and money must be spent on "Rover" or "Bonzo". At this point many of them abandon it. This brings me to my last point. Pets which are allowed to run free are often not sweet at all. English farmers lose hundreds of sheep a year, killed by someone's pet poodle or dachshund, and you must have read of children being mauled by pet Alsatians or even tigers.

You may think that I dislike all pets, but this is not true at all. I would only suggest that we have got our priorities wrong and that something should be done about it. For example, the authorities clearly have a responsibility to introduce stricter penalties for pet-owners whose animals savage livestock or harm little children. This might deter them from being so careless. Surely it would be a good idea, too, if we made dog licences more expensive. The increased revenue from them could be used for many needy causes.

As far as I'm concerned, it's time we stopped being sentimental about pets. I can see no reason, for example, why we should get upset when animals are cut up for medical experiments. If this will lead us to discovering cures for serious human diseases, then I say, "keep cutting!"

We are a nation of pet-lovers. Wouldn't it be better to be lovers of human-beings?

By Julia Elliot

How does Julia Elliott think money spent on pets could be better used? Do you support her point of view?

Why does the author think that people should not be surprised at the way American people spend money on pets.

Are there any regulations on keeping pets in your country?

Do you feel unhappy about medical experiments on animals?

What punishment should be given to pet-owners if their animals cause damage?

B Discuss the following quotations with the group:

If the Earth were a few feet in diameter, floating a few feet above a field somewhere, people would come walk around it marveling at its big pools of water, its little pools and the water flowing between. People would marvel at the bumps on it and the holes in it. They would marvel at the very thin layer of gas surrounding it and the water suspended in the gas. The people would marvel at all the creatures walking around the surface of the ball and at the creatures in the water. The people would declare it as sacred because it was the only one, and they would protect it so that it would not be hurt. The ball would be the greatest wonder known, and people would come to pray to it, to be healed, to gain knowledge, to know beauty and to wonder how it could be. People would love it and defend it with their lives because they would somehow know that their lives could be nothing without it. If the Earth were a few feet in diameter. Joe Miller

“This is what you should do: love the Earth and sun and the animals, despite riches, give alms to everyone that asks, stand up for the stupid and crazy, devote your income and labour to others, hate tyrants, argue not concerning God, have patience and indulgence towards the people, take off your hat to nothing known or unknown or to any man or number of men… re-examine all you have been told at school or church or in any book, dismiss what insults your own soul, and your very flesh shall be a great poem.” Walt Whitman