They’re Coming for Your Cats and Dogs

Net Zero not only means no petrol, but also no pets. The authorities haven’t quite told us this yet, but the writing is on the wall. As more councils join the UK100 scheme to accelerate the quest for decarbonisation, expect to hear more about the environmental damage caused by Fido and Tiddles.

.

Take a proposal by my local council in Sussex to banish dogs from public open spaces where sport is played. Constituents didn’t call for this; there was no spate of dog bites or mess strewn on paths. My town has a large elderly populace, and many have pets as companions in their quiet lives. Walking the dog keeps older people active and out in the fresh air. This is the thin end of the wedge.

The Colorado state legislature recently introduced a bill to impose a tax on every animal other than farming livestock. All owners would be required to register their dogs, rabbits and goldfish. The fee for cats and dogs would be double if they are not neutered. The politicians said that the Bill would identify pet owners in an emergency, but citizens perceived another extortion racket. The real reason, however, was not conveyed to the media and public. It’s the climate, stupid!

After an outcry the Colorado Bill was shelved, but the mission continues. Mark Howell, councillor on Bournemouth, Christchurch & Poole Council, claimed at a town hall meeting on reaching Net Zero by 2050 that dogs of medium to large size have carbon emissions similar to that of a SUV. He said that pets consume 20 per cent of the world’s meat and fish and this adds to pollution as it has to be transported. While not calling for an outright ban of larger dogs, he said owners should consider ‘scaling down’ and getting smaller dogs in the future, and suggested friends and relatives could share pets.

Pet eugenics is an emerging theme of the climate crisis agenda. According to Donnachadh McCarthy in a 2021 article, cats and dogs are ‘having a devastating impact on the planet’. He asserted that ‘for obvious reasons, truth-telling about pets to friends can be a painful process, but it is not something we should shy away from’ (obvious to him perhaps; not to people who see through the climate hoax). So next time you pass your neighbour walking his spaniel, you should urge disposal of said canine. That’s a lot of enemies to make.

McCarthy bombarded the reader with statistics: ’20.8million dogs and cats consuming just one tin or unrecyclable plastic package of cat food per day results in 7.6billion containers being manufactured each year just in the UK. Add to this another 3.6billion plastic bags for picking up the estimated 1.2million tons of dog-poop, and then there is the issue of disposing of 200 thousand tons of cat waste.’

He went on to decry the carnivorous content of pet food. Pets at Home, the largest pet products retailer in the UK, with 453 shops, has committed to Net Zero and is promoting vegetarian food. The retailer’s grandiose ‘science-based target’ initiative aims for Net Zero by 2040. Creating a Better World for Pets and the People who Love Them is the title of the Pets at Home annual report for 2023. Prepare for the price of meaty pet food to rise and product ranges to be restricted, making it harder to keep a larger dog.

Gradually, the media campaign is ramping up. According to Euronews last June, 90 million households in the EU, and this is as polluting as flying on private jets! Feeding a 10kg dog wet food produces 6541kg of carbon emissions annually, while dry food reduces the total to 828kg. But depending on the latter, as vets know, is bad for animals’ kidneys, and a suspected cause of cancer.

The Euronews report expressed concern about a steady increase in pet ownership, particularly since the Covid-19 lockdowns, but it didn’t explain why. In my view, this is because people seek companionship in an atomised society of reducing social capital (mostly due to government policy, including the Net Zero scam).

The cost of having pets is sure to become prohibitive. Pet owners should resist by refusing to participate in costly, bureaucratic schemes such as mandated registration and insurance. The powers-that-be can’t tie us all to their leash.

Epilogue

When this was first published on Country Squire and Conservative Woman websites, it was one of my most widely read articles ever. Most people commenting below the line were aghast, although a few seemed to think it reasonable for my local council to ban dogs from sports fields or children’s play areas (in fact, the council proposal would stop dog-walking in the two largest parks in the town, where there is plenty of space for everyone).

Recently the cash-strapped council in Bristol passed a Gren Party policy to charge people £450 annually for conducting commercial activities in public parks. Specifically targeted were professional dog-walkers. This is a valuable service to the frail or infirm, and the new tax will obviously be at their expense. And as we should know by now, councils soon increase whatever charges they have introduced. Again, a thin end of the wedge.

Finally, I wonder whether large dogs will be made too costly for owners because the authorities want to deprive people of any protection.