The Stray Dog In Romania - by Michael Bird

For the past two years I have been working as a journalist making a film about Romania’s problem with stray dogs. The east European nation has millions of the animals prowling the streets, hotels, car parks, blocks of flats and even the backyard of Parliament and along the corridors of a children’s hospital.

A UK national, for nearly a decade I have been a resident of the capital Bucharest, where the dogs are part of the fabric of the city. So together with a local production team, we felt it was necessary to record on film the phenomenon of a capital in the European Union still plagued by wild animals.

We talked to animal and social experts about this environmental disaster, chased dogs through the streets, talked to victims and were attacked by a pack of strays in an abandoned playground. Often I would hear extraordinary stories about animals and their relationship with Romanians, but few of these could be demonstrated for the camera. Some included the low-cost methods county councils used to kill them, such as injecting the dogs with vinegar or burying them alive in limestone. But there were incredible stories about the dogs, including how they could use the buses, trams and underground trains – one dog (now deceased) could slip under the barriers at the Metro station, negotiate the stairs and enter the train, moving between two different stations every day to a place where she could find food.

However these dogs were close to extinction at the beginning of the last decade. In Bucharest, the mayor decided to organize a mass-slaughter of the dogs. This move would have been simple in a time of Totalitarianism, where the people rarely took a public stance against the police. But in a time of a fresh democracy, where the public were exercised at attacking the forces of order, this would prove difficult to manage. Added to this was a huge problem that continues to undermine Romania’s development—the fact that a scary number of people in public service and business are on the take.

There was this one block in Bucharest where a dog lived. He was a fat and shabby mongrel who sat at the front entrance, eating leftovers thrown out of the windows by the residents. Fed many times a day by different families, he lived a content life, sunning himself outside in the summer and finding a home in the basement of the block during the freezing winter.

But, with the mayor’s decision, a city dog catcher visited the block with a mandate to catch and kill the animal. The fat creature put up little resistance as he was trapped inside a metal loop and taken to the city pound to receive a lethal injection. When one of the residents of the block—an elderly woman—realized he was gone, she visited the pound to plead with the dog catchers to let him go. They were intransigent until she reached in her pocket, pulled out her purse and produced a few notes—worth about ten dollars—to take him home. Within half an hour the dog was back in his usual position, waiting for his next meal.

Now the dog catcher figured he was on to a good deal. Once a month he would visit the block, threaten to take the animal away and the pensioner would have to muster a ten dollar bribe to keep the dog alive.

But one afternoon, the dog catcher found the woman was not at home. Instead another elderly pensioner who fed the dogs was sitting outside in her dressing gown, cuddling the filthy animal. He asked her for money and there was an argument, but soon she agreed to provide him ten bucks to leave empty-handed.

The dog catcher began to increase the regularity of his visits. He would come back every week at a different time and encounter a different person caring for the dog and solicit a payment. If they refused he would seize the animal, chuck him in the back of his van and lock him up in the pound. Someone from the block would have to come up with the cash to save the creature from the needle.

The dog catcher ended up pocketing around 100 dollars per month—close to the then average salary in Romania—for the job of threatening to kill one animal. If dog catchers were replicating this pattern across a city of two million people, with around a thousand blocks, each with their own resident dogs, there was scope for a 1.2 million-dollar-a-year black market. It’s possible that corruption saved thousands of vagabond canines.

This is a story I heard in many places across many cities in the country. Unfortunately on camera I could never catch someone taking or giving a bribe, but I thought this was a great example of how a society was failing in a surreal fashion—by doing nothing but sitting outside a block of flats, getting fat, wagging his tail and being friendly to anyone with a bag of bones, the stray dog in Romania had become a currency.

Source: http://www.loopletters.com/the-stray-dog-in-romania/

Please WATCH the DOCUMENTARY "Man's best friend", produced by Michael Bird, at:

http://vimeo.com/74578670

and please read also Michael's article "Ten reasons why Romania’s proposed mass-kill of millions of stray dogs won’t work and two reasons why it might" on our website, at:

http://www.romaniatourism.biz/#!mans-best-friends/c1edx

 

The translation of the 48 minute video interview that Razvan Bancescu gave to Lucian Mindruta on 24.03.2014

Original video in Romanian:

http://www.gandul.info/magazin/cine-toaca-banii-pentru-cainii-maidanezi-explicatiile-lui-razvan-bancescu-seful-aspa-in-exclusivitate-la-schimba-vorba-12323954

0:00 Good evening ladies and gentlemen. Glad to have you today on "Schimba Vorba".

Tonight our guest is Razvan Bancescu, project coordinator at ASPA.

First of all, lets remind people where we are (regarding the stray dogs problem)

A couple of days ago a woman was found dead and bitten.

The doctors from I.M.L. didn't figure out yet if she died because she was too drunk or from the bites. She had a 4 promille alcohol concentration in her blood.

On the other hand the woman was found bitten by a pack of stray dogs.

00:51 Razvan Bancescu: I don't know it if was a pack. She was behind a bench in the park.

So the dogs were in a park.

00:58 Bancescu: Yes

So they lived there.

Yes

So after all of this ASPA got into this and started with banning people from adopting stray dogs. On Aspa's website there's a long list that i published on my facebook with the people who are not allowed to adopt anymore. Why aren't they allowed to adopt anymore?

1:25 Razvan Bancescu We would wish the list to be final, to not find anymore cases of abandoned stray dogs (from those taken from ASPA shelters). What we can prove regarding abandonment we posted online

How do you prove people took dogs and abandoned them?

Razvan Bancescu: We have declarations from people who adopt stray dogs, who contain identification and microchip of the dog and who said they will take the dog to a certain address but we either found the dog in the streets (we recaptured them) or we found them at a different address which was not mentioned initially.

2:06 How many dogs are involved in this?

Razvan Bancescu: there are over 160 dogs that we found on the streets.

The list contains people that adopted large numbers of  dogs (110, 120, 172 dogs), like Mrs. Pahomi, the woman who was the holder of some of the dogs involved in this case.

3:03 What is the legal right of ASPA for doing this?

Razvan Bancescu: It's more of a moral right regarding this situation. We can't finish our program if we have these kind of situations.

It's a neverending story like this.

4:57 What's the plan? How did you decide to resolve this issue (the stray dog problem) considering there are dogs on the streets that bite, attack,etc.

Razvan Bancescu 5:09 These measures were drawn up at the end of 2012 and approved in may 2013 by the General council. It's not the death of Ionut in september that determined to take action.

Razvan Bancescu :In 2012 and before there weren't much money at our disposal. But with the new council decisions and the law at the end of 2013 and the publication of the norms....

So you are the dogs catchers also, right?

Razvan Bancescu :Yes, there's no shame about that.

How many people call each day?

Razvan Bancescu: 40 - 45 people and also aprox. 20-25 written petitions. So almost 60 in total.

How many criminal complaints do you get daily from NGO's?

We don't have those daily yet, but we are not far away from it.

Do you have a legal right to do this? The NGO's accuse you that you don't have any right

Razvan Bancescu: For them, anything that comes against their mission is an abuse.

Do you have anything against the protection of animals?

7:06 No, of course not, i have 3 dogs, 1 is a stray dog.

We don't handle 200-300 dogs as shown on TV on RSPCA, handled with care, with gloves, taken in arms.  We catch over 200 dogs daily.

question from the public: What studies do the dog catchers have?

7:53: Sadly there is no school to train dog catchers, we train them. We strive, in all of this routine, to cause no harm.

 

8:14 There are images and videos (on which the NGO's base their accusations) that dogs are ill-treated.

Razvan Bancescu: No, all our equipment is homologated. The most traumatizing technique is the use of the catching pole. They are brought from the U.S. They can be tighten or loosen. It's their marketing.

9:08 There are sensitive people out there who don't agree with these methods. Your plan will never work if the NGO's don't agree with your catching techniques.

Razvan Bancescu: The projects has drawn out lines. The NGO's can adhere to them or not. They had enough time. If they want to help, they should do it regarding adoptions. But responsible adoptions, not just take dogs of because of fear of euthanasia and we find them in the streets again. This part is not negociable.

10:01 People talk about sterilization as a solution to this problem.

Razvan Bancescu:  Sterilization is nothing (dust) in regard to the situation we have now in Bucharest.

How many dogs are in Bucharest now?

Razvan Bancescu:  Over 40.000, We estimated using the extrapolation method. we count the dogs in an area during the day and during the night and we extrapolate that to the area of Bucharest.

40.000?

Well, we started from 65000 dogs. We caught about 12000 dogs until today.

Over half of them were adopted.

11:20  How can stray dogs suddenly appear on a street?

Razvan Bancescu: Dogs migrate in certain conditions from one territory to another. For example, after a couple of rains and depending on the wind direction these territories can change or intersect, but if 2 dogs suddenly appear and they seem confused it means someone brought them. We have this situations on a number of streets. With the help of the new budget we hope to acquire some video cameras and mount them in these areas where citizens report these kind of things.

There is a movie on the internet (shows the video from the ASPA raid in the vier pfoten shelter)

In this movie you enter on a private terrain.

Razvan Bancescu: No, the terrain belongs to ADP district 6

Why did you enter there?

Because the gates were opened for us by the legal owners of the land, District 6 town hall. They were notified of this. It's their problem if they decided to stay or not..i don't know. They had a protocol which also stipulated leaving that base (terrain).

But why did you go there? 

16:28 Yes, all sorts of things happen there, we had info regarding dog trafficking. We didn't know who those dogs belong to. There's an obligation that all dogs be registered.

What does dog trafficking mean? Sounds very weird...

Part of this involves adoptions and international adoptions made just so the dogs can be moved around.

In southern Italy for example they banned international adoptions because they couldn't control this. The Napoli, Sicilia areas.

Ok, so you went there, got the dogs...

Razvan Bancescu: We went there, got the dogs, put them in our vans...

Why?

Razvan Bancescu: Because they don't have any papers for them. If those dogs there get moved anywhere, or on the street i am at risk of being bitten or maybe worse and then we will search for who is guilty..

So they weren't microchipped?

18:15 Razvan Bancescu: just a part. From what i managed to scan on friday, from 40 dogs, only 12 were microchipped.

And these 12 that were microchipped belonged to...?

Razvan Bancescu: We can consider that those people that came to get them out today are their owners and we encourage adoptions, but we want to know (according to the law) who those dogs belong to.

Can NGO's  make partnerships with town halls to take care of the dogs?

18:38 Razvan Bancescu :There is the possibility to adopt. Anything more than this can hurt more, hurt the community. i can give you an example with the same NGO  that had a sterilization program with ASPA. A program dragged from 2010 up until 2012 that we finally started because it was good for us.

Why was it postponed?

Razvan Bancescu: They were gone in Sudan, Ukraine, The Danube delta,etc. Stray dogs counted only when elections came. We had a target, they came and made 20 sterilizations then went off to Sudan, came back and made another 20. We can't make things this way. We notified them to leave the room, they sued us, we won the lawsuit and we will evacuate them

Do you have something against these NGO's? People on facebook say that you are a criminal organization that steals the public money

Razvan Bancescu: there are good and bad town halls and there are good and bad NGO's

ASPA cooperates with other NGO's. We didn't find any problems with them so we will continue with them.

In the list we published there are only a part of the NGO's.

How many NGO's are in Bucharest that handle dogs?

20:46 Razvan Bancescu: Here there's a problem, many appear as NGO's but they don't have a fiscal code and they receive money from donations.

How do you know they receive money from donations?

Razvan Bancescu: Because we watched/followed the transactions on the internet. There are different types of donations. For the well being of the animals (i guess he means for food) and for the adoption preparations in other countries.

These donations should be made with an IBAN code and a SWIFT code. For 2 years since i monitor these, they are made through paypal addresses. I wanted to know why there is such a resistance to not resolve this problem in Bucharest.

I had problems with these NGO's even regarding sterilization.

These donations ended up in the paypal address of the owner of the NGO, for them to take care of the animals or getting them ready for transport.

You say you have evidence, shouldn't we have names also?

Shouldn't you take these evidences to the police?

20:25 Razvan Bancescu: No, there are institutions that received this information. They received this data in October last year.

If these were illegal, don't you think those institutions should have initiated some lawsuits?

23:19: There's a lot of data, we're talking about data gather in over 1 and a half years.

They are investigated by ANAF

I gave a report to the ministry of finances (in september last year) that included the number of NGO's that handled dogs in bucharest in 2001, and there were 7 then. Now there are 58 + 12 or so that don't have a fiscal code.

They don't pay taxes, deceiving, and working without papers.

Show host: But i think most of the NGO's are serious, real and take care of the dogs.

24:33 From our analysis 2001 - 2012, it all started with funds around  136000 euros for these NGO's in 2001 and in 2012, more than 2 million euros in Bucharest.

These money come from donations and international transfers and also the 230 form through which anyone can donate 2% of their taxes.

On what are these kind of money spent on?

Razvan Bancescu: Mainly marketing, meaning how to say that ASPA is not making it's duty, that we are corrupt, because they can't accept that situation of stray dogs in bucharest begins to be resolved. That's their business.

What was ASPA's budget last year?

Razvan Bancescu: 1.6 million euros.

What did you make with this money?

We continued to invest in the Mihailesti shelter, salaries, sanitary materials,veterinarians.

So you helped getting rid of how many dogs with these money?

6000 dogs last year.

Why do we build shelters for them when there is a law that says they must be killed if they aren't adopted?

27:50 Razvan Bancescu: We need them to administrate this problem. We need to catch over 180 dogs/day. We need space for them.

Adoptions help, they usually happen in the first 1,2,3 or 4 days after a dog has been caught.

(then they discuss a few seconds how adoptions rise and fall each month)

Then both he and the show host says that the demonstrations on the 8th of march were chosen badly because it was woman/mother's day and also about a banner that said "Who the fuck is Ionut?"

29:35 This is not how you find ways to communicate with us. There is nothing worse than what they did on the 8th of march.

From what i saw on facebook, there is a certain kind of people who love dogs that don't accept any other rational arguments. For them we are all criminals, they can't understand anything other than sterilizations...Can it be done without killing?

Razvan Bancescu: a wise man from history said "to try to make everyone happy you will fail". We need to satisfy 98.17% of people who live in Bucharest.

Nobody will say on the street that they agree with the killing. it's a taboo thing.

It's logical, there are thousands of dogs, what do we do with them? any lowering of the catching rate means more and more generations and we "feed" this marketing that caused us a lot of harm internationally

What does that mean?

Well, i got messages from the ambassadors from all over Europe about the demonstrations happening there. Their propaganda is full of lies.

What do they say about us?

31:40: Razvan Bancescu: That we started killing before the norms were out, that we kill everything no matter what, that we don't handle them with care. Pictures show up from the 90's, from other countries,etc

Show host: But they have a hero (he refers to Grivita) that dog that got mutilated,

32:12 Razvan Bancescu: I Don't know how it happens but the hero always shows up when they need to. From what i know about dogs, that dog was mutilated long before the killing law appeared. Dogs are naturally curious and keep getting their nose everywhere.

it looks like a petard did that, not a sword.

How many people take the law into their own hands? Do you find dogs that have been killed?

Razvan Bancescu: Yes, sadly we find dogs that are poisoned. We don't encourage that.

That's not how you resolve this issue.

i agree. i think the one who adopts and then abandons is guilty in the same way as that who takes the law into his own hands and kills.

Razvan Bancescu: The problem is the abandonment rate, and i am reffering here to dog breeds not only stray dogs. i saw aprox. 160 abandoned german shepards, rottweilers,cockers,etc in the last 3 months. A dog is not a gadget.

There are various reasons for abandonment: the changing of the status of the family (someone dies, someone gets sick, a child is born,etc), moving. Another special problem is with the dog breeders. There is no control over them. They breed in consanguinity even. These leads to diseases. I also had people phoned me to get them an exactly same dog as the one they had. Also the pet shops, it's not normal for dogs to be sold there.

Show host: Lets get back to stray dogs. I have the following problem. I ride my bike with my kid. I convince him very hard to do this because he is scared of dogs since when he was biten. We pass by a factory. From that yard, each day 6-7 dogs attack me, well..sort of, they bark at me. They don't catch me. i have speed and experience, but it's stressful and it is even more stressful with a child.

I got the phone number of the manager and called him and said to him to do something about this. These dogs are usually kept there by guards to help them during the night. What can i do as a citizen, attacked, against that company?

37:23 Razvan Bancescu: Yes, we have more than 20 of these cases a day. We go there, the dogs retreat on a private property and then the complaints start rolling.

By who? the companies?

No, by the guards helped by NGO's.

Show host: I used to work as a night guard at a factory and i had 2 dogs but i kept them in the shed/bay, they weren't getting out to bark at people in the tram station.

Razvan Bancescu: There are companies that let loose their dogs at night but during the day they keep them locked in kennels. This is what being responsible means. I never saw there a free dog during the day.

Show host: But what should i do if i get attacked at during the night?

Razvan Bancescu: The best way to do it is this: complaint to the police, the police writes to the administrator and the administrator contacts us and so we have the right to get in there.

Show host: But i don't have time to go to the police, to make a complaint...

Razvan Bancescu: That is why we are preparing a resolution of the general council through that will permit us to enter on terrains that permit the stray dogs to retreat there, or dogs from those terrains who come into the public space.

Show host:The NGO's will attack you that you are against the constitution.

Razvan: If they will give us 6 months we will resolve this. After we finish cleaning up the center of the town, we will go to the residential area.

This will be the next target, the dogs that live on the premises, who don't have papers. They retreat on private lands but do damages in public. Everything that concerns the public safety is not negociable.

Show host: i know a place with another pack of dogs, next to which a lady steps down from a very expensive car (more than 50000 euros) with a large bag of food. Suddenly from the open field 10+ dogs came. She was very happy, for her it was the greatest thing.

But what about us that come after her and don't have food?

Razvan Bancescu: Feeding the stray dogs is the biggest mistake one can make. last year we proposed to fine all those that feed dogs. All the NGO's yelled at us, they said it's illegal, mr. Vadim came, mr. Marinescu came...

Show host:  Mr. Marinescu should go knock on a door and ask if the child there has a piece of meat like that

42:22 Razvan Bancescu: He is not interested in that, it doesn't bring him notoriety.

I discussed this thing with some psychologists and i asked them why are people doing this: They said it's a substitute for endorphin and adrenaline.

It's sort of a maternal instinct transferred to the dog.

Show host:You can't fight with this. It's like with the drugs.

Bancescu: The feeding of stray dogs can only be resolved with the "stake", a metaphor for fines and strict regulations, this is how civilization begins.

By feeding them they socialize and form packs.

 

Over 90% of the attacks are made by sterilized dogs and people fed them\

Show host: I wonder if the person feeding the dogs feels he has a guilty conscience?

No, if he had a conscience he would have understood this.

Bancescu: When there are injured people we can only think with the mind (rationaly)

Show host: When i discuss with people on facebook all these rational arguments can't be understood by them.

Bancescu: As i said, you need a "stick", there is no other way.

Show host: I can't believe that...

Razvan Bancescu: In Berlin, in London, you get fined if you feed the pigeons. All that food is a source for other animals, rats for example, is about the safety of the town, it's a disease risk.

Show host: This year you have 3 times more money than last year, how much time until you resolve this problem? how long before i can  be sure that from my house to a park, i can go with my child, riding a bike, that i won't be attacked.

47:22 Razvan Bancescu: on the 31st of march 2015 this project will be finished, meaning 80% of the dogs will be caught and there will be less than 10% of the current bites reports. We now have 67% less bites than last year.

Show host: there is another thing that nobody cares about, all of these animals pee and poo on the street where we walk

Razvan Bancescu: We will have statistics regarding this from Victor Babes institute.

Show host: Thank you everyone for watching. Tonight we discussed about stray dogs with ASPA representative Razvan Bancescu. Tomorrow night....get ready for this...especially I...we will have as a guest a lady from CUTU CUTU association.

 

Independent Finnish filmmaker releases beautiful documentary on the Romanian stray animals situation filmed in Romania in November 2013

"Stray Dog Rescuers" is the title of a very interesting and beautiful documentary film that has just been released and comes with subtitles in English, Finnish, German and Romanian.

You will see many familiar faces in the video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HbFH-vrQShc

The movie contains NO violent or graphic images.

The world against romanian dogs slaughter!

FPAM has filled a lawsuit against the Romanian government and the ANVSA at the Romanian Court of Appeal on 13th of March, 2014

FPAM calls on Romanian activists, rescuers and citizens who have witnessed cruelty and neglect in public "shelters", to join them in their lawsuit and to testify against the Romanian Government and the ANVSA.

INTRODUCTION:

On 21st of December, 2011 USL leaders Victor Ponta and Daniel Constantin, signed a cooperation protocol with the Federation for the Protection of Animals and the Environment headed by their Honorary President, Marius Marinescu, prohibiting the euthanasia of stray dogs through a legislative initiative, during a conference held at the Capital Hotel Rin. The agreement is valid until 21 December 2020.

PURPOSE:

Protecting the environment and animal rights in Romania.

OBJECTIVES:

1.The refer to permanent and will take steps to harmonize the Romanian legislation with the European one, considering the EU regulations, the European and global treaties and conventions profile. This will monitor the compliance and enforcement provisions of the Universal Declaration of Animal Rights (Paris, 1978), the World Health Organization recommendations (1992), the Treaty of Lisbon (2009), the Declaration of the European Parliament of 13 October 2011, the Kioto Protocol (1997), Protocol on Environment in Copenhagen (2009), Convention in Durban (2011) and other relevant international documents to which Romania is a party.

2.Uniunea Socilal-free and Federation for Animal Welfare and Environment will work to implement environmental policies and animals.

3. Will implement and Animal and Environment Police. The entity will operate though a single telephone number that that will operate at national level.

4. USL and Federation for Animal Welfare and Environment will monitor the work of the Executive, so stop and prevent abusive measures taken by the authorities, and violation of Roman law, the European regulations and European and global treaties and conventions on environmental protection and animal.

5. After consultation with the Federation for Animal Welfare and Environment, Social-Liberal Union will submit the Romanian Parliament in the legislative session in early 2012, a legislative initiative to the European Union regarding management of stray dogs by banning euthanasia.

--------

During the conference from 21st of December, 2011, Victor Ponta said that people should not think this collaboration protocol had been signed to get the votes from the Romanian animals... No, no, they signed this agreement out of concern for the country that they live in, and which is far more important than any political interest, Ponta said.

Of course...

Fact is that they have got the votes from the Romanian animal lovers on 10th of June, 2013 during their latest local elections. Their deal with FPAM, however, seems to have been forgotten!

On 10th September the Lower House of the Romanian Parliament voted GEO 155/2001 to legitimise a 'catch and kill' policy for all homeless animals. The terminology used during the debate at the parliament was 'eradication'.

On 25th September, 2013 Constitutional Court judge Petre Lăzăroiu, suggested that "the mass killing of stray dogs in Romania could traumatize the population"... then the entire place ruled to cull all dogs... and that the eradication of Romania's homeless animals - although it had been ruled unconstitutional in January 2012 - was now "constitutional"!

On 25th of September, the Romanian Constitutional Court had an opportunity to define whether Romania is a country worthy of being called civilized or whether it should be consigned to popular perception of a country unworthy of being considered anything other than barbaric, mismanaged, corrupt and dangerous. They chose the latter.

FPAM FILLED LAWSUIT AGAINST THE ROMANIAN GOVERNMENT AND THE ANVSA

On 31st of January, 2014 FPAM introduced a formal complaint to the Romanian Government which remained without response after the legal period of 30 days was exhausted. On 13th of March, 2014 FPAM - represented by their Honorary President, Mr Marius Marinescu - filed a lawsuit against the Romanian Government and the ANVSA at the Romanian Court of Appeal.

The goal of FPAM's action - according to the text taken from their website - is to stop the mass euthanasia of dogs by the authorities, and the cruelty which takes place in most cities in Romania (poisonings, shooting, torturing, etc...) with the help from representatives of DSVSA, ANSVSA implicitly, which from 2001 until now, did not take any legal measures against the local administrations for not solving the situation with stray dogs, neither against the trauma to which these animals have been subjected to by the local administrations, but instead, they managed to punish animal lovers and owners.

On 13th of March, 2014, FPAM opened a legal action in the Romanian Court of Appeal, against the Romanian Government, the ANSVSA included, asking the Court to force the above mentioned to modify or to void some articles from the Methodological Norms for Government Emergency Ordinance OUG 155/2001 (which later became law 258/2013). FPAM have also asked the Court to verify the legality of all the actions and administrative procedure prior to the Norms and also to inform the population about the measures they took from 2001 until now by the representatives of the local administration and why they had no results in stopping the phenomenon of the stray dogs over-population.

Furthermore, FPAM states that 80% of Romanian towns (cities, town, communes) have not organized services for the management of the stray dogs population - although the law obliged them to do so - and that they do not have public shelters for stray dogs as required, not even NOW. In the meantime, dogs die in these miserable public shelters all over Romania all the while the ANSVSA representatives sleep in their chairs.

►►►► URGENT CALL FROM FPAM

FPAM calls on Romanian activists, rescuers and citizens who have witnessed cruelty and neglect in public "shelters", to join them in their lawsuit and to testify against the Romanian Government and the ANVSA

Those from Romania who would like to show the illegalities committed by the local authorities and want to become material witnesses in this trial, are invited to sign up by filling in the form at the right side of the following page on the FPAM website.

Europeans who have visited public shelters in Romania can also participate in the trial in Romania as witnesses. What counts the most, is the material proof a witness can bring and not necessarily their presence in the trial.

All probative evidence, legalized at a notary is welcomed. Ideally it would be to be sent by land mail, and those who want to help in this manner should please contact:

Mihnea Columbeanu by sending and email at:

mihneacolumbeanu@yahoo.com

who is the legal representative of FPAM and who will advise you.

Thank you, in advance.

All information in English is compiled on our website, at:
http://www.occupyforanimals.org/romania---fpam-takes-legal-actions-against-the-romanian-government-and-anvsa.html

OFA's observations regarding IREC's 'Right of Reply' from 7th of March, 2014 concerning the article called 'Neglect of Stray Dogs - MEPs Deliver Damning Indictment of Romania's Mismanagement' published by Dr Rita Pal on Huffington Post.

On 7th of March, 2014 IREC's expressed reservations in their paper 'Right of Reply' regarding the article called 'Neglect of Stray Dogs-MEPs Deliver Damning Indictment of Romania's Mismanagement' published by Dr Rita Pal on Huffington Post, and later "apologized" to Dr Pal on their Facebook-page:

"Dear Rita Pal please do not take our letter personally - we know you are probably just another victim of extremist groups' untruthful propaganda. Please see this interview with Mr. Dominic Taylor - perhaps it will help you get a better grasp on the truth about strays in Romania. He is a British expat businessman who talks about the magnitude of the stray dog problem he's experienced first-hand in Romania."

Dr Pal responded:

"The small minded often make assumptions about the broad minded. Secondly, your assumptions, of course, are inaccurate. Thirdly, no one is disputing overpopulation. The evidence demonstrates culling is not the way forward. To deny this is to deny evidence.

I have read all you have written in the past and find your position unconvincing, misdirected and non-evidence based. You are welcome to write whatever you wish. It does amuse me because I consider your narrow spectrum viewpoint to be non-evidence based. That is all I have to say on the matter.

I take nothing personally. I merely observe with a great deal of amusement. I give your letter a 2/10. Next time write your evidence in reference or link form and argue your points better. I have no objection to your right to free speech. I do have mine as well. It is for the audience to judge which of us is right. For us to judge ourselves would be like turkeys voting for Christmas.

I bid you Good Night and may I suggest you take up knitting as it would be a more constructive use of your time. All the best!"

-------------------------------------------------------------

It is with delight that we use the opportunity to respond to the IREC's 'Right to Reply' and to be able to correct a number of errors and misrepresentations contained therein for the benefit of the Romanian people.

As said before, the article by Dr Rita Pal, referred to is in fact NOT a personal perspective but a representation of the conclusion and perceptions of the European Union authorities. Recent visits by representatives of this authority found that they had been deceived by the Romanian authorities and that both stray animal control strategy and it's implementation were inconsistent with European policies and directives.

Taking each point in turn, recognizing the naive mis-interpretations and mis-representations included in this 'Right to Reply', we seek to inform not only IREC but also the Romanian people of the true realities.

- That there are too many stray animals on the streets of Romania is agreed by all.
- That some of these dogs are aggressive is agreed.
- That the situation is undesirable to all.
- The only question that remains is how to achieve a successful conclusion.

The reasons why there are so many on the streets is generally agreed. No major national program has ever been conducted, so numbers have continued to increase. Endeavors to control the animal population by catching and killing have failed abysmally whereas major programs where the animals were neutered, although not producing an immediate result, after 6-7 years reduced numbers on the streets significantly and most important... permanently.

Almost all countries in Western Europe and the USA have used a national neutering program and where stray animals are generally conspicuous by their absence. In Romania this was also achieved in Oradea and Lugoj where stray animal numbers were reduced from 4,000 to 270 and 2,500 to 235 respectively. Not only have national neutering programs proven to be successful but they are also recommended by the WHO as the only successful strategy.

In response to the unique strategy of managing stray population numbers by killing, currently being deployed in Romania, significant numbers of people from western societies are adopting dogs both remotely and transporting them physically outside of Romania to new western homes where the animals will become members of the family. In one culture... harmonious inclusion.... in another... divisive exclusion promoting significant societal disharmony, violence and death.

It is also important for the Romanian people to know that not only is the Law 258/2013 promoting an animal control strategy which historically has been proven to be unsuccessful compared with the strategy of a national neutering program which has proven successful in many countries but the selection of this strategy comes with a literal serious cost. From Romanian government figures, we see that by enacting Law 258/2013 instead a neutering program, the Romanian taxpayer will contribute almost twice as much to fund a program which has never been successful.

Instead of spending huge amounts of money on the promotion of violence and corruption, a socially credible government invests the money into the social infrastructure, of which the independent social movement is one of essential foundations.

So let us take each of the points made and offer a sensible and real response to each.

- 258/2013 is NOT compliant with EU legislation (see our page)

- Animal control strategy by euthanasia is NOT compliant with WHO directives (see our page)

- The number of dogs adopted by people and organisations IS taking place, but the quantification of numbers as 'very low' does not provide a numerical basis to challenge.

- However the statement that NO long distance adoptions have taken place is demonstrably incorrect with for example in Craiova: approximately 100 dogs. Braila: 44 dogs. Cernica and Batimanu: 750 dogs. In Bristrita, all dogs are sponsored through international sponsors, last year 400 dogs were adopted by groups in Europe, this year 30 have been adopted so far. The shelter hasn't yet adopted the distant adoption, but volunteers are caring for the dogs through sponsors.

- It is true that the problem of dog bites and the rabies alert may be serious but it is the inevitable consequence of the Romanian government's failed and abortive social policy.

- Regarding REC's claim that "the legal conditions to adopt a dog from a "shelter" are minimal", we would simply like to quote what MEP Wojciechowski said about the adoption procedure after his second visit: "Shelters are every often located in places which are difficult to find and they are closed for people who wish to adopt a dog. Although financed from public money, they are treated as private ownership. Furthermore, adoption procedure is very complicated and it makes adoption practically impossible." The limited access to shelters, as evidenced by the delegation, actually renders all else an irrelevancy.

- To say that the Romanian Slaughter Law was comparable to the law in the U.K. is like comparing a Luxembourgian egg to a book by Jean-Paul Sartre. Surreally different... In the U.K. in 2013, 48% of dogs who entered a shelter were reunited with their owners. 25% of dogs have been been re-homed. 8% have being euthanized because of behavioral problems, ill health or because they are dangerous. A stray in the UK is one who is owned but simply went on a touring holiday for a few days...

And last but not least, the fact that the Romanian people are being bitten by stray dogs and that there are even fatalities reported, which need to be carefully analysed, is a clear sign of the ineffectiveness or even a criminal neglect on the part of the Romanian authorities which shamefully failed in the implementation of the plausible and working social policy to win the support and the co-operation of the social movements and the general Romanian public to resolve the structural and social problem of animal homelessness through socially-friendly policy of non-violence and honest public dialogue.

In fact, the degenerate quality of the Romanian social relations compromises the set of values and standards of the European Community thus exposing the weakness and inefficiency of the EU policy makers.

Our detailed reflections, important links as well as picture and video evidence are compiled in the following link:

http://www.occupyforanimals.org/our-observations-to-irecs-right-to-reply-from-7th-of-march-2014-concerning-the-article-called-neglect-of-stray-dogs---meps-deliver-damning-indictment-of-romanias-mismanagement-published-by-dr-rita-pal-on-huffington-post.html

In conclusion - and arguably most important of all - we would agree with the statement that 'Romania is finally on the right track.' NOT however by implementing a law which patently is historically unsuccessful, ill-consistent with international directives and morals but because the light of truth and reality is now beginning to shine in the darkness after the second visit of the EU-delegation.

In the Convention for the Protection of Pet Animals, justification is given to reduce significant numbers of stray dogs, it shall take the appropriate legislative and/or administrative measures necessary to reduce their numbers in a way which does not cause avoidable pain, suffering or distress. The word that shouts from the page is 'avoidable'. As we have highlighted in the IREC response text, there is another way: by introducing a neutering program, pain, suffering and distress are 'avoided'.

This exchange is a watershed where we have identified all the errors presented by IREC. We have responded with evidenced truths and facts. Romania has lived too long in the darkness of deceit and corruption.

And therefore, having identified the multiple errors contained within the IREC Right to Reply, we freely invite IREC to contact us for assistance before publishing erroneous letter content. The people of Romania deserve no less than to have access to the truth and to make their decisions accordingly.

We would respectfully suggest that IREC retract all their statements which have been proven here to be erroneous and misleading and to allow Romania to really be 'on the right track'.

Only through truth is a democracy truly made.

- The Occupy for Animals Team