The reason why we have a "D" average is that too many of us take pride in our ignorance as if it is some sort of badge of honour. If mommy, daddy, our role models and our politicians think ignorance, or what I call conscious incompetence, is cute then why would our children think any different.

It is obvious mistakes were made, maybe on both sides, but suffering earned or unearned should be redemptive. Let's now encourage both sides to fight the real problem and not each other. Instead of criticising them we should respect them for being big enough to go back to the table because showing humility, especially from our politicians and intelligentsia, has almost become an extinct trait in the Bahamas.

My only interest here is trying to quench that unsettled feeling in my heart that says we have missed an opportunity for a more optimal solution. I am not interested in defending the local vets, criticising Animal Balance or vice versa. This is not nor should it be about me or you or about the local vets or Animal Balance. This is and should remain about trying to optimally address a national epidemic with respect to our stray dog/cat issue.

We don't know what the vets next move is but I suspect you do because even your explanation to explain your inconsistencies are inconsistent. I think the Bahamian people would have just appreciated a no-spins explanation from the local vets for their decision (based on their letter to OP) as it does not serve any worthwhile societal interest to demonise either the local vets or the OP operation.

So, based on your estimate above, have the local vets committed to performing 5,000 spay/neuters per year for 5 years?

And just what does this have to do with foreign vets volunteering their services to assist in addressing the stray dog/cat epidemic. The inference of greed has been drawn not because the local vets want to charge $50, but because when two identical goods or services are being offered and one of them cost 50 times the price of the other, all things being equal, the more expensive item would have less demand, a point which has been stipulated by the local vets. What is puzzling most persons is that if the objective is to address the stray dog/cat epidemic by performing as many surgeries as possible then why make a decision that conflicts with that objective. I guess based on the above the answer is that it is really for our national development.

And while we are at it let's ban all foreign owned hotels because local hoteliers gat it and for that matter let's ban all tourists because locals gat it. We can rise to the challenge. Maybe a bit extreme, however, using your comparison, which is really not applicable, an economy based exclusively on FDI is as equally short-sighted as an economy that is exclusively closed and it is that concept that makes the local vets position so unpopular and untenable.

By your reasoning we should then ban all foreign direct investments because locals or the government can do it, ban all foreign teachers because the local teachers can handle it, ban all foreign/imported medicine because local pharmacist can handle it, ban all imported food because local farmers and manufacturers can handle it and the government should put in place the infrastructure for all of the above to do so. Trust me that is not the position Germany took. One of the difficulties I have with your argument, and that of the local vets, is the position that these charitable services and the services of the local vets must be mutually exclusive.

You are addressing an entirely different issue and, quite frankly without trying to be disrespectful or presumptious, I would sincerely encourage you and your organization to take a look at your PR approach because some of the responses to the issues raised here have been less than helpful or flattering to your esteemed profession.

Below, and correct me if I am wrong, is what I understand to be a purported excerpt from your letter to Operation Potcake, "going into the next few weeks, knowing that a considerable amount of planning has already gone into OP 2014, we would respectfully like to present to your planning committee an alternative to the current construction of this exercise. Firstly, we politely decline the offer to have the additional veterinarians come in to assist in surgeries, inclusive of the cat clinic at the BHS. We apologize for any inconvenience that it may cause any person, as advanced notice is preferred under such circumstances. We do feel as though we are capable of carrying out a considerable number of surgeries, and would like to make a concerted effort to accomplish a realistic goal all on our own". An objective reader can judge whether you are simply voicing a concern or telling them their help is no longer needed. What I gather people don't understand and maybe you can help us is that assuming we all can agree that we have a stray dog/cat epidemic in our country, why are the local vets taking the position that their services and the services of Operation Potcake must be mutually exclusive when both are striving to accomplish the same objectives