Dog Killing Big Business in Romania

Read so that you can UNDERSTAND better what's happening in Romania!
 
Between 2001 and 2011 the Romanian animal control people have killed hundreds of thousands dogs by spending tens of millions of EUROs in public funds, while the number of stray dogs only grew larger.
For example, in Brasov, although there were only 4,000 stray dogs in 2001, the dog catchers managed to “kill” about 20,000 in 8 years. The only noticeable result of the “final solution” was the emergence of a classic mechanism of siphoning off public money, put in place by the local authorities and animal protection services in Bucharest and many other cites and towns (Brasov, Arad, Constanta, Timisoara, Ramnicu Valcea, Braila, etc.), authorities that came to realize that the mere existence of the that strays is a very profitable business for the following reasons:
- Budgets. 
Under the pretext of the “stray’s terror” generous budgets were allocated. The Bucharest do catchers spent about 13 million EURO in 7 years. The dog catchers in Brasov spent about 2 million EURO in 8 years. Overall it is estimated that Romania spent between 25 and 40 million EURO on strays from 2001 until 2008.
- The flexibility of the budgets. 
Contrary to the popular belief that fuels the anti-stray protests, the money spent on food for the strays was just a infinitesimal part of the budget, as the dog were being fed “subliminal” quantities, to quote the so called specialists from DSVA Brasov. Out of a total budget of 1,500,000 lei for 2008, the dog catchers in Brasov allocated only 5,000 lei for the dog food, less than 3%. Instead enormous gas quotas were approved. In Brasov, 4 rundown old cars with easy to tamper with mileage tracking systems were each allocated about 350-400 l of gas per month, which means each car did about 100 km/day. Land was rented for the municipality shelters, despite that fact that local authorities had land they could build on. In Brasov, the municipality paid in 8 years more than 1,500EURO/month (170,000 EURO in total) to the owners of a former swine farm that was in really bad condition and it also invested in modernizing the farm. All of this while it could have built a brand new shelter with 15,000 EURO on a land it owned.
About 100,000 lei were annually spent on tranquilizers and lethal substances, but nobody ever checked that against the number of dogs reported caught and/or euthanized. These substances were bought illegally (without prescriptions), used illegally (because the dog catchers got lazy and started to catch all dogs with tranquilizers, committing two felonies and one ?) and may have even been used or sold as drugs (Vetased, the most used tranquilizer contains ketamine, which is used as a drug and is legally considered drug since 2010).
In Brasov, the chief dog-catcher even got to buy his own jeep, a Mitubischi L200, for about 30,000 EURO, under the pretext of helping large animals, such as cows, pigs. Bears, rhinoceros or giraffes that might have wondered into the public roundabouts build by mayor Scripcaru. Rumor has it that the jeep is used in certain weekends by two local authorities in their hunting trips.
- The business of gathering dogs. 
Several mayors with business “abilities” transformed the local animal control departments into businesses that made money by catching and killing dogs from small towns that didn’t have their own shelters or by catching the dogs in a town without shelter and “hosting” the dogs in a different city, tens of km away. The corrupt mayors became so addicted to these profits that they imposed quotas on their dog catchers: the Brasov dog catchers hunted in 4-5 counties, bringing over 120,000 lei to Brasov’s budget. Most of the dogs were exterminated in the Stupini shelter and a small number were handed over to other cities that had shelters.
The whole operation was made profitable at the price of torturing the animals and breaking the Romanian animal protection laws. After loading up the dogs and before heading for Brasov, the Brasov dog catchers would be paid per number of dogs for capture, transportation, sheltering and euthanasia.
Since they were already paid and everyone saw them leaving with the dogs, nothing (certainly not their conscience) stopped the dog catchers from releasing most of the dogs on their way back to Brasov, to make sure that the problem continues and they are called back to “help”. Any animal lover would be happy to hear that, if they didn’t know that the dogs would be caught again and again, sometimes injured in the process, and would most likely continue to multiply.
- The counting of the dogs. 
The audit of the activity of the do catchers was a chimera. Nobody was really counting the dogs. Nobody knew how many dogs actually went through their hands, from capturing through incineration, especially since the documents for Protan (the incineration company) were filled out by the dog catchers themselves who approximated the weight of the bodies, filling in numbers with a lot of digits and even decimal points, and tried to make it match the number of dogs they claimed to have caught. It was very easy for them to claim for example they caught 5,000 dogs while in reality they caught half of that number. The dogs that (fictionally) entered the center were also supposed to (fictionally) leave the shelter. On June 25, 2009, according to the official documents, between 131 and 54 dogs were killed in Brasov. A witness and several documents point to the fact that only 90 animals were killed and that those dogs were from Victoria, Fagaras and a few other towns. In November 4, 2009, the Brasov dog catchers captured 46 dogs in Covasna. People from Covasna were told that the dogs were in the Brasov shelter and people from Brasov were told they were in the Covasna shelter, but the dogs were not found in either shelter. On June 1st 2010 the Brasov dog catchers caught 48 dogs in Sangeorgiu de Mures and transported them to the Reghin shelter. The Reghin shelter received and registered only 25 dogs.
Another way to make money was to manipulate the adoption numbers, especially the adoptions towards private shelters: adopted dogs were also counted as euthanatized. In 2008 at least 400 dogs were adopted from the Brasov dog catchers by the “Millions of friends” rescue association. In the official documents that number is 0!
Finally, another way was to modify the number of deceased dogs, by recording a smaller number than the real one and accordingly increase the number of euthanized dogs. For 2008, the shelter mortality as it resulted from official records was of 79 dogs, meaning a dog died every 4 days. In the first months of 2009, the mortality was of only 23 dogs, meaning a dog did every 8 days. In reality, the number of dogs that died in the shelter is much higher: at least 300-400 in 2008 and at least 150 in 2009. And there were also the dead dogs that were found in the city and which had to be, of course, euthanized.
Through all of these manipulations the animal control folks were gaining about 25-30 lei per dog, by either selling the substances for euthanasia or by writing fictional invoices, in complicity with folks from the veterinary supply deposits.
- PROTAN and how to incinerate public money. 
The incineration of a 20 kg dog costs 10 EURO (0.5 EURO/kg). Since most shelters don’t have weight scales and Protan reception documents specify that the quantity column should be filled out by the customer, the weight was eyeballed by the animal control folks. If you fictionally kill between 40 and 60 animals, you also need to approximate their weight and fictionally incinerate about 1,000kg, which brings Protan about $500 EURO.
If you extrapolate this schema to a whole year between 10,000 and 15,000 EURO were embezzled in Brasov only.
It was obvious that this whole embezzlement mechanism was accompanied by a long term strategy to keep the animals on the streets. When they were out hunting in other cities the dog catchers were catching everything they could get their hands on, especially dogs with owners or protectors and dogs that were sterilized and returned to their territory according to HG 955/2004. There were cases where dogs were taken while walking next to their owners or where the dog catchers went into people’s yards and took their dogs. A lot of the owners tried to negotiate a return fee smaller than the official one and eventually, especially in Bucharest, a “protection fee” paid to the dog catchers became the norm.
Although the problem of the aggressive dogs was supposedly the number one priority, the animal control folks rarely caught aggressive dogs. Instead they almost always took puppies and little, friendly dogs that were easy and safe to catch. This approach had the double benefit of keeping the dangerous dogs on the streets in order to perpetuate the “terror of the strays” while making the dog catchers appear as heroes and saviors in the eyes of the people.
Quarrels... in the "dogcatchers ' paradise"
--------------------------------------------------
At the end of December 2007 the Deputies Chamber voted a modification of the Animal Protection Law(205/2004) also known as "Marinescu's Law".Among other things, this law classifies animal cruelty as a crime punishable by law and prohibits the euthanasia of healthy cats or dogs.It seemed as if common sense and logic had won over the hundreds of mayors and dogcatchers (who during 8 years managed to "bury" aprox. 35 million euros in a mountain of stray corps).Also, during the same time, in December 2007, the Senate modified the law concerning the strays and replaced euthanasia with spay/neuter and returning to territory, according to the WHO's guidelines. AND NOW COMES THE "PROBLEM"....These two new legislative measures would have solved the strays problem, leaving all of those who made big money from the "stray business" without their huge profits!!!
The conspiracy
-------------------
All the dogcatchers and their "official sponsors" quickly realized that if the new legislative proposals (PL912) will be presented to the ADP in spring 2008, the new law will become definitive, as approved by the Senate.Their only chance was to postpone and prolong this indefinitely. This would have given the dogcatchers plenty of time to still operate as before , the solution wouldn't have been applied and it would present later on as the perfect excuse to suggest euthanasia of all strays as the number of strays would have grown even more.Their evil plan worked, as the new legislative proposal (PL912) still has yet to be presented to ADP since 2008!
ANSVA , DSVSA and other public institutions
-----------------------------------------------------
Although euthanasia had been abolished, majority of public administrations across country continued the mass killing of strays , using the most absurd justifications: suddenly, all strays became terminally ill (backed up by false documents produced by corrupt state employees)or using "personal interpretation " of the law. All this was going on with the silent approval of the official services for animal protection, just as corrupt as the public administrations: ANSVSA and DSVSA.
Thousands of strays were captured, the "lucky"ones being detained sometimes for a couple of weeks before their death in the official "shelters": filthy ,cold , very small cages, lying in their own feces, deprived of food and water, beaten and abused daily and then finally killed by untrained or uneducated dogcatchers, in the most cruel ways possible, suffering the most unimaginable pain till the last breath...
Anybody that get the chance to see some of their official evidence of these atrocities would be appalled by the gruesome mistakes used to justify what they did .
As many of these dogcatchers are paid by the local authorities , their only "enemy" are the NGO's. Therefore, they are doing their best to keep the NGO's as far away as possible, refusing any collaboration or cooperation with them.
The Almighty dogcatcher and his dark amendments....
------------------------------------------------------------------

About a year later, once a few people started complaining about their dirty business, the almighty dogcatchers across the country started to be concerned and thus considered it's the perfect time to start changing the law according to their interest.

The "chosen" one to formulate the new proposal of law was no other than Barbulescu Flavius ( famous for killing 30000 dogs in 8 years and having at least 6 legal complaints against him) , supported by Simona Panaitescu. Both of then had the "blessing" of Brasov's mayer, George Cripcaru, also known as "Dracula of dogs",prominent member of PDL (Democratic-Liberal Party) and a man used to manipulate the laws according to his best interests.
Barbulescu's new law proposal included mass euthanasia of strays , banning the NGO's any involvement in the dogcatchers or municipal shelters activity, obstructing adoptions by implementing severe fines for people feeding or taking care of strays on the streets
The evil plan
-------------------
Once Barbulescu's "masterpiece" was finished, they needed someone to make it public. And who better than Bucharest's prefect , Mihai Atanasoaiei , well known for his embarrassing public speeches and appearances. After that, the game moved on to Elena Udrea and Sulfina Barbu.
Zanfir Iorgus (PDL) :"The best solution is spay/neuter...or Euthanasia...or better yet let the mayors decide!"
Sulfina Barbu:" I suggest that it should be mandatory by law that local administrations and NGO'S became partners.." .....that was all she had to say after all NGO's representatives explained and documented 453,17 arguments against the reintroduction of mass euthanasia of strays. They have showed her in ever way possible why mass killing of dogs is inefficient,inhumane, absurd, very expensive and not cost-effective compared to the alternative,against WHO's guidelines: They also showed her how during the last 7 years the officials did nothing to solve this problem the right way, how they delayed everything , didn't pass the law , abused the power they had, continued the killings and misused the taxpayers money.....
Manipulation
------------------
Their biggest weapon is the manipulation of the population through mass-media. Their "servant" PRO TV always "deliver" twisting the facts and lying out in the open without remorse, just as long as they can blame something on the strays (e.g. The case of a woman attacked by dogs in a private yard, because she entered the premises at night, without any authorization, presented to the public as a woman killed by strays. The same type of story happened again, a drunk woman was attacked by dogs who had owners, and they also blamed the strays for her death. Even after the official reports from the investigations were released, PRO TV never rectified their stories , apologized, on the contrary, everyday they try to find more things that they can blame the strays for...
And PRO TV is not the only one. There are other tv stations and newspapers in the same boat.
Elena Udrea
----------------------
She is one of the biggest supporters of euthanasia of all strays, as a future candidate for the Mayor of Bucharest. She encourages the passing of the anti strays law, claiming that this is the "American"model, but failing to realize the HUGE differences between the two countries when it comes to animal welfare.
SUMMARY/RECAP
---------------------------
2007: The Senate votes PL 912/2007 that replaces the mass killing of strays with spay/neuter/release
2008: Animal Protection Law prohibits mass euthanasia.
ADP from Deputies Chamber blocks the discussion of this law for 3 YEARS!!!
Meanwhile, local authorities continue the killing and totally ignore the solution:spay/neuter/release.They are officially breaking the law and try to cover for all who do that also. 
In Brasov, a German organization offered to spa/ neuter all the city's strays but were completely ignored by local authorities.
The only town were the mayor actually used spay/ neuter/release programs was Oradea, and the results are showing: in 6 years the population of strays decreased 8 times.
So after 3 long years of blocking PL912 from being approved, the politicians want now to "solve"the stray problem by mass killing!!!
Knowing very well that euthanasia is not a solution, they all want that as it is a guarantee for more dirty money to be made in the future from "the stray business". Spay/neuter/ return programs would only jeopardize their source of dirty profits!
On the 1st of March 2011, Sulfina Barbu sneaked in Atanasoaiei's new proposals of law(modifying PL912) which granted the mayors the liberty to decide on euthanasia or not. Animal lovers were protesting outside the Parliament's Building unnoticed...
On the 7th of March 2011 , when ADP tried to vote the "new and improved "PL912 with Atanasoaiei's proposals, a miracle happened:the deputies decided to return the law to the Commission to allow the NGO' s and Animal Welfare groups to be consultants and the law to be re-discussed after 3 weeks. 
This delay "caught by surprised" a lot of mayors too, who already counted on the mass euthanasia to be approved and were "ready" to take action, having everything ready do to "the job". And strangely enough , during these 3 weeks more and more cases of strays shot , poisoned, beaten to death, burned , abused and tortured appear every day , all over the country.

Please note that A.F.R.A did not compile this article, it was brilliantly written by another. Please Click Here to go to the authors blog and see the article on their blog

ROMNAZIA - Formerly known as Romania

The Nazi flag is deemed by the majority of us in modern western society as a symbol of the purest evil. A race of humans that systematically massacred thousands upon thousands of people, whether by simple war tactics or by manipulating German society into believing that specific groups within their country, needed to be killed, to be eradicated. So begun the Ethnic Cleansing and what we all know to be the Genocide of the Jews and other cultures that the Nazis deemed to be unclean!

One of the many horrific manipulation techniques the Nazis used to not only control German society but to allow the ethnic cleansing to be fully successful was encouraging fellow Germans to inform on their neighbours. At that time there were many good German people in the country,but they were terrified. If they did not inform on their neighbours they risked persecution and death themselves. If they did not do their duty to the Nazis, they risked social exclusion and to be labeld as a traitor. We all know what happened to traitors of the Nazi party!

You may wonder how the author of this article is linking the Nazi Party with Romania. It is very simple,right underneath our noses, there is a government that is introducing Ethnic Species Cleansing, right now, if you are of what the Romanian Government deem to be an unclean species, in this case a Dog or a Horse, you will be killed. You will be hunted down,beaten, taken to an area, stored, and then killed. Sounds familiar?

To ensure that all dogs for instance are slaughtered, for instance a family pet, with the new law that is being proposed , even those who look after their pets,they will not be allowed to keep them unless their neighbour either side of them agrees to this. If someone knows that another owns a dog and they have not got the neighbours permission, they are encouraged to inform on that animal lover, and the animal will then forcibly be removed,beaten,taken to a camp/shelter and by the hundreds at one sitting, will be tortured and killed. Again sounds familiar?

The Romanian Government infrastructure, if you were to look at the government in its whole context,, you would not necessarily see any similarities between the Romanian Government and the Nazis. You have to remember that like most governments, it is divided into sub sections, into regions. Now this is where the similarity comes into play. It is common to find the mayor of a region, related to the minister of trade within that same region, within that same city hall. Within that region, various jobs are allocated to people,for example the big business of dog capture/killing. The head dog killer as it were will normally be a private company subcontracted by the mayor to capture/kill the stray dogs in that region. In the example of the province of Brasov, the head of the private company subcontracted to capture/kill the dogs is related to the Mayor of Brasov.

Dog Killing is one of the most profitable businesses in Romania today. For each dog that is caught and killed, the private company invoices the local city hall,the Mayor. The city hall will then pay that private company, the normally the mayors relation approx 100 Euros for each dog captured and killed from Government funds. It has been scientifically proven that capture and killing of stray dogs actually encourages more strays to the area , when a dog is killed, another will take its place within the pack,that area. This will be either a sexually active bitch or a sexually active male.  A sexually active bitch then year on year produces more litters of stray dogs. For each bitch for instance,she can produce a litter of 6 puppies per litter. If she gives birth to say 3 litters in any given year, the dog killers/private contractors, have got themselves a nice source of flesh....from 1 bitch that has taken the place of another dog that was killed, they have got themselves a nice tidy 1800 Euros. Compliment of their relative, the Mayor,paid for by the Romanian Government.

What we know with certainty that does work is the Capture,Neuter and Release programme. This has been proven in other parts of the world that have similar issues with the numbers of stray dogs as Romania. How the programme works is a dog is captured,taken to a neutering shelter and released back to the area it was caught. Because there is no void to fill, no other sexually active dogs will enter that region. The dogs acting as a pack will protect its food source, in this case, the city/town/area that they live. But, because the dog that has been returned has been neutered, the pack number does not increase. In-fact this programme being introduced has been proven to reduce the numbers of dogs in one region by 90%. Now why on earth would the Romanian regional mayors etc. not want this? It is very simple, because it does not pay their relatives wages. It would only cost the local government just 15 Euros to neuter a dog, if we compare this with the 100 Euros their relatives would receive to kill a dog, you then can get a very clear understanding of why Dog Killing is Big business in Romania. This is out and out corruption,and more importantly, out and out cruelty! Again, sounds familiar?

Each local authority region ( made up of close knit relatives and friends) has now pressurised the higher government to bring a law in to allow all strays to be killed,for pets who have not been given permission by their families neighbours to be killed. This is not about controlling the dog population, this is all about the Money. What is terrifying, is that the higher government within Romanian, looks like it is going to allow it.

The horses in Romania now are going through the same process, for each horse killed, the horse capturers/killers get paid for each animal they have captured and destroyed. A horse the same as a dog can be neutered, but yet again...this would not be profitable.

On an ending note, I would like to remind the people of the world, the citizens of Europe that there was once a small party called the Nazis. At first, they were no threat, just a small political party with an infrastructure just as the Romanian Government above. We ignored it, just let it grow, wasn’t our problem, wasn’t our country...Because of our ignorance and allowing the Nazis regime to be implemented (the hallmark of what is happening in Romania) our decision to ignore them led to the most horrific time line in world history.

Are we really that stupid to do that again? Unfortunately, I believe we are!

Animal Welfare & Animal Rescue - The three tier system

Animal Welfare the three tier system

By understanding these three tiers/levels of the above you can be more proactive and supportive when you yourself are trying to make a difference to animals lives, whether its through donations or being part of it, getting to grips with who is who within the animal welfare world your contribution can be more affective.



When it comes to animal welfare and animal rescue, it may surprise you to learn that though the larger organisations may appear to be the ones out there doing all the rescuing and campaigning, if we were to compare the numbers like for like, it is actually the smaller, unknown groups on the ground that in terms of numbers is really having an impact on animal welfare and rescues on a day to day basis. Also lets not forget the individuals out there who on their own are helping animals in every day.
Don't get us wrong, both the larger organisations and the smaller groups have their place within making a difference to animals across the globe, all three tiers focus is the same, but the way they go about it is totally different.
The first tier - The larger more well known organisations tend to focus on the bigger picture, rather than focusing on one subject, one animal, one case. These larger organisations work towards changing laws, saving an entire species and so on. These are the organisations who quite rightly, bring about changes by raising public awareness through heavy duty TV campaigns etc.
The second tier - The smaller groups on the ground, they do not have such public backing, these tend to focus on specific areas of need, like rescuing street dogs in Romania, one dog at a time.
The third tier - Individuals, these are every day people who have stumbled across an animal in need and either tend to the animal themselves or will turn to one of the other two tiers for help.

How you can make a difference

There are numerous ways as an individual you can make a difference, it is not all about the money you can give.

• The animals that are rescued need secure and loving foster and full time families.
• The larger and smaller organisations need group members to help with sending emails, writing letters, signing and sharing petitions
• Protests and Demonstrations, if you care about a cause, then get physically involved. Attend a groups protest and demonstration, stand with them when they are protesting against a government or large corporation.
• Donations, as we have said it is not all about the money, but it cannot be argued in this day age everything from paper to tins of dog food cost money. So if you are able to donate no matter how small, please do.

The Problem and the Solution

 

THE PROBLEM

During the communist era, the main policy all over Romania was the transformation of rural areas into big industrial cities.

Private houses were demolished and people were forced to move from their own homes with gardens into small blocks of flats/apartments. They were not allowed to take any pets with them and so they had to abandon them on to the streets or worse still to the dog catchers who exterminated thousands upon thousands in frequent 'street cleansing' programmes.

Over the years that passed, the dogs that survived were able to breed and it eventually became impossible to control the extensive canine over-population. This problem was compounded further by the lack of peoples education in animal welfare, poverty issues throughout the country and the Romanian authorities' general ignorance.

(Street dogs in Galati)

THE SOLUTION

The only long-term solution to controlling the over-population of street dogs is extensive and organised spay/neuter and release or adoption programmes. Not only will this reduce the numbers to a manageable and perhaps non-existence level, it is the only humane solution for the animals who, through no fault of there own, are born to live on the street.

Hand in hand with spay/neuter programmes, educational awareness through schools and billboard campaigns must highlight to communities the importance of neutering pets and promoting good animal care principles.

Examples proving it works

SOS Dogs Oradea http://www.sosdogs.ro is one of the charities doing great work in/around the city of Oradea in NW Romania close to the Hungarian border.

Now managed and run by the FPCC, the main city shelter has a successful adoption centre and the long-running spay/neuter program rolled out across Bihor province has reduced the number of street/stray animals to around 10% of the original number in just a few years. The pioneering work being done by this charity and the evident success they are having will hopefully be a model that other NGO's and municipalities will soon adopt.

Written by Romania Animal Aid

Catch,Neuter & Release Vs Euthanasia

TOGETHER FOR ANIMALS

THE COOPERATION BETWEEN PAFI & PRO ANIMALS ROMANIA

PRO ANIMALS FINLAND (PAFi)

PAFi is a registered Finnish animal protection association founded in 2005 by Kiia Vasko. PAFi operates on a grass root-level, focusing its support on one small cooperation partner at a time. PAFi helps to improve the situation of animals locally by e.g. reducing the stray animal population through spaying & neutering programs and by educating the local people to take responsibility for animals. PAFi doesn’t provide animals for adoption to Finland from any other countries.

PRO ANIMALS ROMANIA

Pro Animals Romania is an animal protection association founded by Carmena Serbanoiu and her daughter Patricia Paraschiv. Since 1999 Pro Animals Romania has been running an old dog shelter of Tg-Jiu without any support from the city. In addition to maintaining the shelter of 400+ dogs, Pro Animals Romania takes care of all animal protection-related issues of Gorj County. Since the current shelter isn’t suitable for taking care of animals and the city also wants the lot for more profitable use, Pro Animals Romania is searching for a new site and hopes to raise enough funds for a new, modern animal welfare centre. PAFi and Pro Animals Romania have cooperated closely since 2005. The first cooperation project was a neutering campaign

in August 2006. The long-term key-projects include a sponsor dog programme to ensure the everyday welfare of the shelter dogs, therapy dog programme aimed at the elderly people, education

programme in local schools and at the University of Tg-Jiu and spaying & neutering programmes to reduce the number of stray dogs. Both associations do their best to develop the cooperation with the local authorities on animal welfare-related matters and improve the situation of animals in Romania.

THE IMPORTANCE OF SPAYING & NEUTERING OF

STRAY DOGS IN REDUCING PROBLEMS

TERMS

Stray dogs are either ”owned” by someone and allowed to roam the streets or they have been abandoned to the streets. Street dogs are so-called ”wild dogs” that are most likely to born, live and die on the streets. There are also so-called community dogs that the members of communities feed and give some kind of a shelter to. Usually these dogs wouldn’t survive the winter without care from these people. Generally we are speaking of stray dogs.

BACKGROUND AND ETHICAL VIEWS

The controlling of stray dog population can be observed from the point of view of both human and animal welfare. The human welfare point of view is usually connected to the threat of spreading diseases and fear of being attacked and bitten by stray dogs. This fear is generally speaking groundless since the studies show clearly that pet dogs cause more biting injuries and more severe injuries than stray dogs. The animal welfare point of view is based on the fact that the diseases and deaths among the stray dog populations cause far too great suffering for the animals and is the reason for maintaining programmes that help the dogs and reduce the stray dog population.

The local culture and different kinds of fundamental views of values based on e.g. freedom, the right to exist and suffering have an impact on opinions. The cultural views can greatly influence e.g. the implementation of spaying & neutering projects and sometimes very much long-term planning is needed so the countries of a certain culture would be ready to embrace the idea of neutering an animal. It’s dangerous to follow blindly the western perception of dogs being meant only as pets for humans, supposing that it’s the only acceptable form for a dog to exist.

Though it’s true that the lifespan of a stray dog is shorter than the life of a well-cared pet, the length of life is not the only indicator of welfare. The quality of life of a free stray dog can be comparable or even better in comparison with many pets that lack this same kind of freedom. E.g. the stress is very common and prominent welfare problem among over-controlled pet dogs. Also the unethical issues related to breeding of purebred dogs as well as trend phenomena related to dogs are everyday in our world and cause the dogs both health and behavioural problems.

Dogs are creatures capable of thinking and sensing. The disregard of their suffering only because they are different species than us humans can’t be accepted. The humane controlling of stray dog populations is very justifiable since the increase of stray dogs is a direct consequence of people’s actions - meaning we have actually caused these problems.

Below are some views supporting the controlling of stray

dog populations:

1) The stray dogs are often considered as peeves and general concerns. They make noise, are a health risk and are avoided for the fear of being attacked.

2) The stray dogs often wander among the busy traffic causing accidents and damage to vehicles. Usually in accidents the dogs are injured, leaving crippled for the rest of their lives or having to suffer by the road until they die.

3) The tourists aren’t keen on encountering stray dogs on their holidays and under no circumstance do they wish to witness suffering, injured, dying or dead dogs.

4) The stray dog population grows very rapidly if it’s not controlled. One female stray dog can deliver on average 8 puppies a year during its lifetime. If the female dog lives past the age of 5, it has delivered approximately 40 new stray dogs. If there are 500 un-spayed female dogs running around in the area, they have delivered 20 000 puppies in just five years. And these puppies naturally continue to grow the population, too. When the local community has decided to take measures, series of ethical dilemmas usually occur. The first fundamental question is should they try to have an effect on the population by killing or regulating the birth rate.

DIFFERENT WAYS OF SOLVING THE STRAY

DOG PROBLEM:

1) Killing the stray dogs

2) Capturing stray dogs and placing them into shelters

3) Controlling the increase in stray dog population and thus

reducing their number

1) Killing the stray dogs Every year millions of stray dogs all over the world are poisoned, shot or in other ways eliminated by different kinds of authorities in order to reach the desired result: getting rid of the threat of stray dogs. These dogs are considered as vermin that must be destroyed.

Killing may sound effective – but perhaps a little uncomfortable

– alternative to take care of the problem. However, closer observation reveals the harsh truth of the inefficiency of this“method”.

First of all, there is no cheap, inhumane way to kill dogs. The capturing of dogs and putting them down in inhumane ways is expensive and demands for such efficiency and carefulness that the areas having these problems simply cannot afford or even are willing or able to concentrate on. This usually leaves poisoning as the means, which causes danger to the community (pets, birds, cats, other animals and even children) and leads to an extremely painful and prolonged death.

Another killing method often used is shooting which can be done in areas with people nearby and performed by unprofessionals very often leaving the dogs to suffer in pain before dying. The method “one dog-one bullet” is generally used because it’s cheaper that way. Of course, this increases even more the possibility of the dog not dying instantly (or at

all). Even if stray dogs could be put down in a humane way, it still wouldn’t work. As long as the dogs have the possibility of finding food on the streets, from the garbage and landfills, they will always keep appearing to the “cleaned” areas over and over

again.

It should also be paid attention to that in addition to killing millions of stray dogs on a yearly basis, in the US alone c. 4 million dogs and cats abandoned to the shelters are put down. A countless number of unwanted purebred dogs and cats are

included in this number.

2) Capturing stray dogs and placing them into shelters- Again at first this method sounds like a good idea and much more humane than killing. By collecting the stray dogs from the streets to shelters, the dogs can be taken care of and they are safe. However, soon the shelters are full and since there is no more room for the dogs still living on the streets, these dogs keep growing the stray dog population outside the shelters. More and more shelters should be built to meet the demand of the ever-increasing population. As you can see, the circle is endless making this method extremely expensive to maintain.

Also the crammed shelters would create new problems since only in rare occasions they would meet the adequate quality standards. Often shelters become “concentration camps” where animals are starving for water, food or the possibility to necessary medical care. In some countries stray dog shelters have very unethical business-based functions, and eliminating these actions seem to be an impossible task for local authorities as well as all other instances.

3) Removing the stray dog problem by spaying & neutering - Though this might seem like a very slow method to control the stray dog problem and no visible results can be seen instantly, the spaying & neutering programs are the only way that actually works.

The implementation of a spaying & neutering program is simple. The dogs are captured and taken to ”a neutering centre” where they are operated and at the same time also given proper

vaccination e.g. against rabies and other contagious diseases. The dogs are marked so in future it would be easy to spot the dogs that have already been operated. When the dogs have recovered, they are released back to where they were found.

There are several reasons supporting the controlling of stray dog population by spaying & neutering. Here are some of them:

* The studies show that killing doesn’t reduce the number of stray dogs in a long run since the whole population is impossible to eliminate and there will always be new stray dogs. The remaining dogs and dogs coming to the area from other places will reproduce even faster than before since they have plenty of space and more food to share. The stray dogs that come from other areas can also bring diseases and may be more menacing before getting familiar with their new living environment than the dogs that were eliminated from the area.

* Capturing, keeping and killing of stray dogs are often done in very cruel and completely inhumane ways. These cause the dogs a great deal of pain and suffer.

* Both Emanuel Kant and Mahatma Gandhi have wisely concluded that the cruel treatment of animals will inevitably lead to cruelty against people and this view is also supported by criminological studies (e.g. Kellert and Felthous).

* The killing of stray dogs ignores the fact that stray dogs may have a meaning e.g. to some poorer people. These people don’t have the luxury of keeping dogs as pets but the dogs still receive some level of basic care from these people.

* It’s been studied that spayed & neutered stray dogs behave much more peaceful towards each other as well as people. Solely the fact that male dogs don’t have to fight for the female dogs in heat will make the dogs calmer.

* The risk of contagious diseases decreases remarkably along with spaying & neutering and vaccinations.

* The risk of a female stray dog getting mammary tumours decreases by spaying.

With spaying & neutering programs also the human welfare

is developed

Well-planned and implemented spaying & neutering programs provide a solution to improving both human and animal welfare. These programs require that local authorities and communities to accept and understand the fact that problems will be solved only by doing long-term cooperation. Education on animal protection and welfare is needed so the authorities and locals would understand the overall meaning of welfare that could inevitably be gained by spaying & neutering programs.

It’s good to remember that it’s not always easy to find the balance between the welfare of individuals and much larger success stories that lead to visible benefits. The financial resources and circumstances in spaying & neutering programs are nearly always very limited and they should always be carefully considered in order to meet the standards of animal welfare. The success demands for relentless cooperation between all participants.

Source materials:

Beck A.M.; The ecology of stray dogs: a study of free-ranging urban animals.

Borcheit P.L.; Aggressive behaviour of dogs kept as companion animals:

classification and influence of sex, reproductive status and breed.

Brown D.; Cultural Attitudes Towards Pets Symposium on the Human Companion

Animal Pond.

BSAVA; Manual of Canine Behavior

Dye C. Serengeti ; Wild dogs – what really happened?

Poulton J.; Is man really a dog’s best friend?

Serpell J.; Pets and the development of positive attitudes to animals.

Singer P.; Neither human nor natural; ethics and feral animals.

The State Animal Welfare Board West; Bengal and the Vets Club Calcutta

Guidelines on Animal Birth Control Programmes in stray dogs recommended

jointly.

WHO; Guidelines for dog rabies control and Guidelines for dog population

management.

Wright J. C;. Canine Aggressions Towards People.

WSPA; Pet Respect News, Stray Dog Control.