Editorial | Hong Kong should see animal protection as a shared civic duty
A pond-cleaning operation that resulted in the death of over a hundred fish highlights gaps in public awareness of and education on animal welfare
The sorry episode came to light after images of dozens of colourful koi and other species lying dead on a wet brick pavement at King Lam Estate went viral last week. The fish apparently died after a cleaning contractor temporarily transferred them to several containers with inadequate aeration. Some animal groups rushed to the scene and managed to stabilise the surviving fish and relocate them to nearby ponds.
The police later launched an investigation and arrested a female work supervisor for alleged animal cruelty. Under the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Ordinance, those found responsible for causing unnecessary suffering to animals face a maximum penalty of three years in prison and a fine of HK$200,000 (US$25,600).
Whether the incident amounts to a violation under the law is ultimately a matter for the courts to decide. But the mishap reflects a general lack of awareness and commitment to animal protection among some sectors and the authorities supervising them. It does not take an animal expert to tell that fish taken out of water cannot survive long. Public and subsidised housing estates with gardens and fish ponds are home to many species that form part of the urban ecosystem. The fish that died in the cleaning exercise were like residents plucked out of their long-time habitat when the contractor drained the pond but failed to take adequate measures to ensure they could breathe.
From pets abandoned after festivals to stray animals mistreated on the streets, acts of casual neglect remain disturbingly common. These are not merely isolated lapses, but evidence of inadequacies in public awareness of and education on animal welfare.
A developed and caring society like Hong Kong should make animal protection a shared civic duty rather than an afterthought.