Following on from part 1 of this issue which was in a recent post;

http://serbiananimalsvoice.wordpress.com/2010/07/18/serbia-subotica-city-public-competition-to-control-stray-animals-update-corrupt-and-authority-organised-as-always-so-whats-new/

The Constitutional Court of Serbia decided that the killings of once a week back in Subotica in 2003 were unlawful.  The Subotica authorities decided in 2008 that they could  still kill animals more than once a month.  Again the Constitutional Court of Serbia decided that these killings were unlawful.

Now, in a futile attempt to continue with their animal killings, the Subotica authorities have established this un-elected, un-democratic and very un-professional ‘Commission’ of four people who will decide the fate of animals (strays) in the city.

We argue that despite what the city Commission says, the activities and decisions which they are undertaking are illegal and unlawful under Serbian legislation.

If an animal has to be euthanised, then this decision should be taken by a vet, and in the welfare of the animal, it should be done as soon as possible; not within the next month as is the arrangement by this commission.  There are very many concerns that healthy animals will be euthanised by this fake, un-elected commission simply because one vet is involved and probably making lots of money from the process, and no doubt still is; simply because he is a vet, then his word is gospel; when in fact it means nothing.  He is just a cover for the authorities to continue killing stray animals because he, as a vet, says that they should be euthanised.  This approach will be supported by the other members of the ‘commission’; none of whom are either veterinarians or elected by the people.  This approach will ensure one thing only, that all decisions will be documented as ‘collective’ and that the responsibility of decision making will not be given to just one person.  A united ‘kill the animals’ collaboration for which nobody in the consortium can individually be held responsible.

At this present time, the Subotica authorities appear to have have the situation completely stitched up, with everything looking very ‘formal’ with regard stray animal control, when in fact the whole system is organised and run by an un-elected commission consisting of four people who simply wish to continue killing as many animals as they can, whilst making it look correct and proper to the Subotica public as the decisions have been made by a ‘commission’.

As far as we are concerned this is fraud aimed at the citizens of Subotica city.  We hope that we can make necessary changes to this system.

We understand that the vet who is part of this corrupt commission, one Grgo Tikvicki, has a wife who is a lawyer.  Everything seems to have been very well arranged to deceive the Subotica public as we say.  Tikvicki and his lawyer wife have made a very good job in the past in relation to getting animal killings to happen.  They wish to be protected from Serbian legislation, and so now they have established this un-elected, un-democratic commission of four people which is very closely associated with the chiefs of the Communal Department of Subotica city, which includes Matilda Seker and Suzana Dulic.

Everyone in the commission and the Subotica Communal Department appear to have very close ties and are all working together to undertake the continued killing of strays which goes against Serbian legislation.

We consider that Tikvicki will always be able to hide his unlawful killings under the blanket of a decision by the four members of the un-elected commission.

Animal welfare campaigners have made representations and charges on 12/07/10 to the Special Attorney Against Organised Crime who is located in Belgrade. 

Regarding Subotica, Slavica has also now requested financial support for the 1,000 dogs which she cares for at EPAR shelter.  This is because Slavica has always had to fund the care of the animals out of her own pocket, despite legislation which declares that strays care is to be financed from the city budget – an obligation of the city budget.

The Subotica city authorities are attempting to say that despite having around 1,000 dogs at EPAR shelter, which she has taken in from the streets and is providing care for out of her own money, which has included having the dogs microchipped; EPAR shelter is NOT relevant to the community legislation relating to stray animal care, and so the city should not finance the dogs care from the city budget !

Slavica from EPAR shelter has provided the authorities with all the answers to all the questions they have asked in their attempts to get out of financing the care for any of the 1,000 ex stray dogs which now live at EPAR shelter.  The Subotica city community budget cannot work its way out of paying towards the care of strays now living at EPAR shelter; be they dogs which are 3, 5, 7 years old, male or female, or microchipped when they arrived or not. 

It currently appears that Subotica city has established this un-elected, tight knit commission of four people; all who have self interests in continuing with the city policy as it always has been of killing as many strays animals from the city streets as they possibly can.

The illegal Commission killings currently go on, but we now have to wait for the review and decision of the charges and appeal made on 12/07/10 to the Special Attorney Against Organised Crime, located in Belgrade. 

Despite the commission vet being married to a lawyer, it would appear that the commission is not up to date with existing Serbian legislation relating to the care and protection of stray animals.  The commission has been established to decide simply which strays will be killed and which will be saved from death. No doubt the Subotica public will be bribed into thinking that some of the ‘spared’ strays kept alive will be cared for at this so called shelter which is run by the Commission ‘animal welfare representative’ (see Part 1), who has this small shelter of 70 to 100 animals and who always appears to have collaborated with the city authorities; by whom they have always been funded.

Meanwhile, the EPAR shelter is provided with no funding from the city authorities for the 1,000 dogs in its care – around ten times (x10) the animals at the ‘shelter’ which is run by a member of the close knit city commission.

All that can be done now is to wait for information and news from the Special Attorney Against Organised Crime which is located in Belgrade.

After all, we would consider that this un-elected commission made up of four people with a self interest in continuing to undertake the cities wishes of killing as many strays as possible is an ‘Organised Crime’.

Based on the information, what do you think ? – we would love to hear your opinions.

Please leave comments through the normal system on the site thank you.

We are certain that the Serbian government and authorities do visit this SAV site regularly – maybe it is their only way of getting to know Serbian legislation.

If the happenings in Subotica city are anything to go by, they certainly don’t know about existing legislation for stray animals !

http://serbiananimalsvoice.wordpress.com/2010/06/09/serbia-subotica-city-public-tender-update-090610/

http://serbiananimalsvoice.wordpress.com/2010/06/03/serbia-now-that-stray-animal-control-programmes-go-to-public-tender-authorites-cut-budget-by-two-thirds-to-ensure-animal-welfare-proposals-fail/

http://serbiananimalsvoice.wordpress.com/2010/06/02/serbia-subotica-city-now-stray-animal-control-is-opened-up-to-public-competition-including-welfare-organisations-suddenly-the-budget-for-same-is-drastically-reduced-the-closed-shop-big-money-w/

http://serbiananimalsvoice.wordpress.com/2010/05/29/serbia-public-competition-by-law-may-now-enable-animal-welfare-groups-to-present-proposals-to-authorities-for-their-no-kill-stray-animal-numbers-control-programmes/

At the end of May we started a series of posts – see above, in which the Constitutional Court of Serbia declared that there must be a Public Competition – Tendering for the catching of stray dogs and cats in Subotica city.

We declared in our posts that Subotica city is finally starting to / having to act in agreement with the court, by allowing public competition for the process of catching and thereafter caring strays in the city.

From the beginning of June animal welfare campaigners eagerly awaited the formal publication of the tendering process to be published in the press, as they would have a chance to tender for this.

The immediate reaction of the Subotica authorities, knowing that animal welfare organisations and the public were now going to be allowed to tender for the task, was to cut the financial budget allocated by around two thirds !

This shows the closed loop ‘look after ourselves’ attitude which the authorities have had in the past.  Money in the budget is not spent on animal welfare, but it is spent on other things not directly associated with animals.

*** Update 18/07/10   Update 18/07/10   Update 18/07/10   Update 18/07/10 ***

Some two months after being informed that the Subotica strays programme was to put out to public competition, there is still no further news or publication of the programme in the press on which the public are able to base their tender.

Originally, welfare organisations were informed that they had 30 days from 12/06/10 in which to submit their full stray control programme to the Commission of Public Competition.  On the 12/07/10 the public competition would be closed and after a review of the tenders and a further 20 days later, the Commission would decide on the winner and all participants would be informed.

And so, by the 02/08/10 all the participants in the public competition would be informed of the results.

Well, that was the schedule and plan that anyone involved and wishing to participate in was informed by the Subotica authorities.  We understand that from 30/06/10 the Subotica authorities have paid the media ready for the competition to be published, but it has not happened for almost 3 weeks since.

It appears now that prior to this whole pack of lies from the authorities, on the 18/03/10 the Subotica authorities made a new decision independently, declaring that the (stray) animal killings would only be undertaken once a month.  It appears that the listing of animals will be compiled by 4 members of a ‘Commission’; a group which has been formed to authorise the killings.

The declarations can be seen in the following documents.

 

This system and the killings are ILLEGAL and a VIOLATION OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL COURT VERDICT.

We understand that the members of the ‘Commission’ which decides the fate of the animals is made up of;

One veterinarian;

one person directly involved with the city authorities;

one person from a ‘dogcatching’ firm; and

one person from an ‘animal protection’ organisation.

We can confirm that neither Slavica nor any other representative of SAV or EPAR will be involved with this Commission.  It appears the animal protection representative is from an organisation called ‘APS Subotica’ who it seems have one small shelter of 70 to 100 animals and who always appear to have collaborated with the city authorities, by whom they have always been funded.  Is it any wonder that any other animal organisation is not involved ? – the Commission animal welfare rep is from an authority funded organisation.  A do as we say type approach ?

Their (APS Subotica) position is based on 1)  education and on 2)  the humane putting to sleep of animals.  We are simply of the view that the killing of strays is their overall position and is the only way they consider controlling dog and cat populations.  Same as the authorities – what a coincidence !

Their (APS Subotica) President, Mr. Nebojsa Mihajlovic, has for many years received money from the city budget for his ‘collaboration’.  We understand that this figure is around 30,000 to 100,000 dinar per month.  Money to simply continue to give the green light for the continued killing of dogs and cats.

Mr. Nebojsa Mihajlovic appears to have established a contract with dog killers in the past.  It is alleged that in 2004, 2005 and 2006, 7,000 dinars per month was given to (Subotica) dogcatchers.  Many hundreds of animals were caught and killed, whilst the Subotica general public were told / misinformed  that the animals were being cared for at the shelter.  In fact, the animals were being killed immediately after capture.

We call this hypocrisy.  It is alleged that Mr. Nebojsa Mihajlovic always spoke about education regarding strays; but here he actually did nothing; there was never any  public education in Subotica about stray animals.

We understand that in their first article associated with this new decision, the Subotica city authorities have written declaring that the killing of dogs and cats only (not more than) once a month is ‘communal intervention’.

We declare that the illegal (Veterinary law 2005) killing of dogs and cats is euthanasia, which is ‘medical’, and not a ‘communal intervention’ policy. 

Please refer to ‘Part 2’ in another post (to be issued soon) for a continuation.

The B92 news situation item given later in this post is a summary of recent events relating to Serbia and the OIE – the OIE being the World Organisation for Animal Health.

Whilst we welcome the move by the OIE to hold an international seminar in Belgrade relating to veterinary medicine which can do nothing but move Serbia a step forward in animal welfare terms from its current dark ages perspective / philosophy towards policies and goals of the 21st Century, we still have very many concerns that the OIE are not being given the full facts by Serbia when it comes to disease control policy.

In other words, we still feel that inaccurate or even non existent alleged Rabies outbreaks in the country are constantly, and misleadingly, being used as an excuse by the Serbian authorities to allow them to continue to undertake mass killings of stray animals, regardless of any disease detection or not.  As we show in the data below, the Veterinary Law of 2005 which is fully supported by the Serbian Constitutional Court, FORBIDS the killing of animals (strays); instead they must be given care. 

This is a policy which we feel the Serbian authorities to do not wish to undertake; in their misguided attitude, killing stray animals is esier than population management programmes.  There is no forward vision by the authorities that a sterilisation prgramme over time will dramatically reduce stray animal numbers; killing strays only continues a current policy of pouring water into a bottomless barrel; un-sterilsed strays produce more strays as offspring. 

Only when the authorities actually understand the reality and accept that stray sterilisation programmes are the way to reduce stray numbers in Serbia, will we ever see a reduction in populations and a long term saving in costs.

The only exception to this case of providing care to stray animals, is when it is applied to Rabies infected areas, which then allows animals, including strays, to be killed.  If there is no rabies in an area, then the demands of the legislation as directed by the Serbian Constitutional Court must be applied, and this declares that stray animals must be protected.

So we ask, is a national widespread rabies outbreak a simple invention of the government and authorities so that they can continue to kill and yet appear to be within the law ?, or is it a reality ?

It is time that the OIE were informed about the views of the animal welfare organisations once again. 

 Personnel who should be asked at the OIE include –

Dr Nikola T. Belev – Regional Representative

Dr Stanislav Ralchev – Technical Assistant

Dr Anatoliy Vlasov – Regional Expert

Dr Caroline Planté – Sub-Regioanl Representative

Dr Jean-Pierre Vermeersch – Project Manager.

We are perfectly within our rights as world citizens to ask the OIE – the world orgainsation for animal health, to consider our view that Serbia may be inventing rabies outbreaks to allow the continued killing of stray animals, rather than taking time and including financial investment to reduce stray numbers by sterilisation, vaccination, microchipping and a public education programme targeted at responsible owned (pet) animals.

At the end of this post you can find a sample letter which can be copied and sent by yourself to all the above representatives of the OIE, expressing your concerns about what we view as the continued ILLEGAL killing of stray animals in Serbia.

At the Belgrade veterinary meetings scheduled for the end of July, we require the representatives of the OIE to put on the agenda the issue of stray animal killings right across Serbia; especially when associated with the alleged mass Rabies outbreaks that appear nationwide as declared by the government and authorities.

Is this simply a license to continue killing strays by the government ?

We want answers from the OIE and from the Serbian government; and the Belgrade meetings are an ideal situation for this all to be provided to a global audience – and that is us.

We hope that by copying and sending the sample letter (provided below) to the very personnel involved with the OIE in Serbia, some note may be taken of our requests and that the Serbian government may be held to account in Belgrade at the end of July for its continued illegal killing of stray animals.

Past SAV posts relating to the above:

http://serbiananimalsvoice.wordpress.com/2010/05/27/serbia-rabies-across-the-nation-legally-allows-animals-to-be-killed-but-has-the-oie-been-informed-by-the-serbian-ministry-of-these-alleged-nationwide-outbreaks-or-just-a-creational-excuse/

http://serbiananimalsvoice.wordpress.com/2010/05/16/serbia-sample-letter-to-send-to-the-government-the-eu-commission-and-to-the-world-organisation-for-animal-health-the-oie-serbia-must-change-its-attitude-towards-stray-animals-and-willingless-to/

As we say in one of our posts given above, and what we consider a very important fact that must be remembered and which is given again here:

It should be remembered that the original (old) legislation to allow stray killing – named Pravilnik 29/94, was overwritten by Article 168 of 2005, the result being that all killing of animals was forbidden apart only from cases for Rabies infected areas, which were covered by application of Articles 64 and 65 of the Veterinary Law.

*** This is the important point, that animal killing is illegal apart only from cases for Rabies infected areas, which were covered by application of Articles 64 and 65 of the Veterinary Law ***.

It would seem strange that there are alleged mass outbreaks of rabies across Serbia now.

In effect, Article 168 of 2005 which does not allow animal killing is replaced by legislation that DOES ALLOW animal killing, simply because there is allegedly rabies in areas.  The word ‘rabies’ being the one which specifically gives right to animal slaughter rather than animal protection.

Even more strange that rabies is supposedly breaking out right across Serbia; which therefore allows all strays and wildlife to continue to be killed by ‘by-passing’ legislation of Article 168 of 2005 – the no kill animal legislation

No rabies in area = legislation Article 168 = NO animal killing, only animal care.

Rabies in area = Articles 64 and 65 of the Veterinary Law = allows Mass animal killing, including wildlife.

So, we suggest that a national rabies outbreak has suddenly arrived en masse, even been invented, devised etc in order that the continued mass slaughter of all animals, including strays and wildlife, can continue, when in fact, Article 168 which should allow for the care of animals, is very conveniently being by-passed 

The 2005 Veterinary Law Article 168 demands the care of animals, not the killing.

This has recently been verified to Serbian animal campaigners by the Constitutional Court of Serbia as being the legislation which should be applied. 

———————————————————————————————–

News B92 Tv station : 

Belgrade, 8 July 2010 –

Serbian Prime Minister Mirko Cvetkovic and Minister of Agriculture, Forestry and Water Management Sasa Dragin met today with President of the Regional Commission of the World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE) for Europe Nikola Belev.

Cvetkovic and Dragin thanked the OIE for the decision to hold an international seminar on veterinary medicine products in Belgrade on 26–28 July, as well as for its continued support to Serbia’s veterinary sector.

Belev delivered greetings from OIE Director General Bernard Vallat and voiced his pleasure at Serbia’s exceptional progress in veterinary medicine and food safety over the last few years.

He underlined the importance of permanent control and supervision over contagious animal diseases, which can jeopardise animal and human health, as well as threaten the environment and the country’s economic development.

Belev especially pointed out the economic underside of contagious animal diseases to any country, as well as the current dangers threatening the region, such as African swine plague, rabies, foot-and-mouth disease and foot-rot.

He said he is pleased that new regulations regarding disease control have been adopted over the last year in Serbia and voiced his full confidence in Serbia’s capacity to control these diseases.

He shared the expectation of the OIE and the EU concerning the establishment of an appropriate structure of veterinary services for their member states and providing financial and administrative capacity for these services.

The President of the OIE Regional Commission for Europe confirmed that he was very pleased with the way Serbia established its veterinary system, as well as with our country’s communication and cooperation with the OIE and the EU.

He outlined that the meeting in Belgrade will gather approximately 50 participants from European countries – members of the OIE, as well as representatives from international organisations.

The seminar will be organised by the OIE in collaboration with the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Water Management and the Ministry’s Veterinary Administration.

The conference is of great importance not only in terms of improving the registration and quality control and operations of veterinary medicines and medical supplies, treatment and control of infectious animal diseases, but also from the standpoint of food safety.

——————————–

** SAMPLE LETTER **  ** SAMPLE LETTER **  ** SAMPLE LETTER **

Block e mail listing to send to:

rr.easteurope@oie.intr.kostova@oie.ints.ralchev@oie.inta.vlasov@oie.inta.vlasov@oie.intjp.vermeersch@oie.intpredsednikvladesrbije@gov.rskabinet.zpv@gov.rskabinet.potpredsednika@gov.rsoffice@minpolj.gov.rsgeneralni.inspektorat@minpolj.gov.rsinfo@ekoplan.gov.rsgoran.milosev@minpolj.gov.rszoran.marinkovic@minpolj.gov.rszoran.micovic@minpolj.gov.rscab-rehn-web-feedback@ec.europa.euoie@oie.int

Letter to copy and send:

Dear regional representatives of the OIE for the Balkans states;

Whilst I welcome the move by the OIE to hold an international seminar in Belgrade at the end of July 2010 relating to veterinary medicine, I also wish to express my views and concerns to you in advance of this meeting, with the hope that you will quesion both Serbian Prime Minister Mirko Cvetkovic and the Minister of Agriculture, Forestry and Water Management, Mr. Sasa Dragin on what I have to say.

My concerns include:

the original (old) Serbian legislation to allow stray animal killing – named Pravilnik 29/94, was overwritten by Article 168 of the new Serbian Veterinary Law in 2005, the result being that the killing of all animals was forbidden apart only from cases for Rabies infected areas, which are covered by application of Articles 64 and 65 of the Veterinary Law.

Under the existing Veterinary Law, as supported by the Serbian Constitutional Court,  it is now the national Serbian law that animals, including stray animals, must be given care rather than be killed.

Serbian authorities and government are not enforcing this existing Serbian legislation.  I now feel that with the sudden drastic increase in alleged Rabies outbreaks right across Serbia, the authorities are simply using rabies as an excuse to detour around the existing animal protection law of 2005  (the Veterinary Law) – where rabies can still be used as a legitimate reason for continuing to kill animals.

I feel this is a deliberate attempt by the Serbian authorities to continue their policy of killing stray animals regardless of what existing serbian legislation requires.  I go as far as to say that I feel that rabies is being used by the autorities throughout Serbia to continue with their kill frenzy rather than adoting the legal national requirement of caring stray animals.

I also have concerns that you, the OIE, who are responsible for ensuring global disease control and recoding global disease outbreaks, are not actually being informed of all these alleged rabies outbreaks by the Serbian authorities, quite simply, because they do not actually exist.  They are simply an excuse to allow the continued killing of stray animals, which is against existing Serbian national legislation.

I also have large concerns that there is no real programme for the future by Serbian authorities to make any long term attempt at stray animal population reduction.  A programme which would include sterilisation, vaccination and microchipping for both stray and also pet (owned) animals is the only way that Serbia can ever hope to reduce the vast numbers of animals which it currently has on the streets.  Public education is required here also, and again the Serbian authorites are showing no attempt to become involved in this.  Serbian autorities are interested in one approach to stray animal control only; and that is to kill everything.  This is doing nothing to reduce stray animals numbers and in the 21st century, is simply not acceptable to normal decent global citizens.

Serbia is wishing to become a future member of the European Union (EU).  In her Issue 1, June 2010 newsletter,  Paola Testori, the EU Director General for Health and Consumers; who is responsible for animal welfare also, declares:

“The Treaty of Lisbon, which came into force last December (2009), has created an explicit duty regarding animal welfare under EU law.  Article 13 of the Treaty speaks of animals as “sentient beings” that must be respected in the EU decision-making process”. 

My current opinion is that Serbia is not showing any attempt to enforce its own national animal welfare legislation, that it certainly does not comply with the requirements of the Treaty of Lisbon, and that in no way does it show that it (Serbia) accepts animals as sentient beings.  One only has to witness their treatment of stray animals over many years to support this view.

As a global animal welfare campaigner, I am asking you, the OIE, the World Organisation for Animal Health, to step up onto the stage at the Belgrade meetings this July and acting on my behalf, demand a proper response from the Serbian authorities as to why they are continuing to use the rabies threat as an excuse to detour around caring for animals under existing Serbian legislation as they are required, and that in my opinion, with their current global status of being a nation of stray animal killers, what they aim to do about it prior to any membership of the EU.

Until the Serbian authorities change their attitude to stray animal population controls through a no kill, sterilisation strategy, which I trust you as the OIE, and animal welfare defending global organisation will support, I have no alternative but to continue campaigning for the protection of Serbian stray animals as endorsed by the Serbian Constitutional Court.

It is the Serbian authorities and government who need to move from a Dark Ages approach to animals and progress into the 21st Century; no one else.

I trust that you will make my views on Serbian animal welfare policy, or the lack of it in the 21st Century, clear to the Serbian authorities at the July, Belgrade meetings.

Respectfully yours;

 ***Name and nationality***.

  

  

  

SAV has today (23/06/10) submitted a written response to ‘EUPAW’ – the Evaluation of the EU Policy on Animal Welfare.

EUPAW – what is it ?

Background

Within the last 30 years the EU has adopted a series of legislation concerning the protection of animals. The scope of this legislation includes the protection of animals kept for farming purposes, during transport and at the time of killing. It also includes the protection of animals used for scientific purposes. Furthermore the welfare of wild animals is part of EU legislation through a directive on zoo animals as well as initiatives prohibiting the trade in seal products from commercial seal hunts and establishing trapping standards. The EU has also banned the importation and intra-community trade of cat and dog fur.

The EU adheres to the principle that, beyond specific objectives, people have an ethical duty of taking care of animals which are under their responsibility. EU legislation in those fields reflects the increasing importance given by the public on the ethical dimension of economic activities dealing with animals. The intervention of the proper care of animals is sufficiently significant as to affect the functioning of the internal market.

In 2006, the Commission adopted the first EU Action Plan on the Protection and Welfare of Animals 2006-2010 (later called ‘Action Plan’) where strategic lines and future actions were described. The Action Plan was the first document grouping in a single text the different aspects of the EU policy on animal welfare.

These terms of reference now envisages an evaluation as to establish a follow-up programming beyond 2010.

EUPAW – Introduction

GHK Consulting Ltd and ADAS UK Ltd have been commissioned by the European Commission, Directorate General Health and Consumers (DG SANCO), to evaluate the EU Policy on Animal Welfare (EUPAW) with reference to farm animals, experimental animals, pet animals and wild animals which are kept in captivity or submitted to a treatment which is controlled by humans.

The evaluation covers four types of EU action (legislation, research, communication and international activities) and is concerned with EU animal welfare actions over the 2000-2008 period only.  An overview of EU animal welfare policy is available at:  http://ec.europa.eu/food/animal/welfare/index_en.htm.

As part of the evaluation we are keen to hear the views of stakeholders and are therefore requesting stakeholders to complete this on-line survey to assist us with the evaluation.

The survey is short and easy and can be completed in 15 minutes but allows you to spend longer and give more detailed explanations if you wish. When processing the results to the survey, all responses will be treated as confidential and not attributed to individuals or organisations.

The survey will remain open and online until Friday 31st July 2010.

For further information about the evaluation please visit the project website www.eupaw.eu

——————————————————————————- 

Whilst we at SAV are aware that primarily, EUPAW evaluation (through the on line questionnaire) covers four types of EU action, we consider that this is an ideal opportunity to once again present information to the EU regarding our concerns for:

  • Stray animal welfare in the Balkans states
  • Stray animal welfare within the EU
  • EU accession criteria and responsibilities for nations wishing to gain membership of the EU, including implementation of the rule of law; something we do not see at all from within Serbia; even though the (Serbian) Veterinary Law of October 2005 says otherwise.  This has been backed by recent actions at the Serbian Constitutional Court.

And so today, 23/06/10, SAV has submitted lots of data and evidence to EUPAW, asking that the current illegal killing policy undertaken by many Serbian authorities be seriously considered for future EU membership by Serbia.

Serbia is not enforcing its own ‘rule of law’ with regard animal welfare for stray animals – enforcement of the law which must be shown to be implemented by Serbia if it requires EU membership.

A copy of the SAV letter to the EUPAW dated 17/06/10 can be viewed by clicking on the following link:

EUPAW data submission 17 June 2010

As you can see, within this letter we have included many links to the SAV site which show animal suffering through illegal activities within Serbia.  We have also included many links to the situation in Skopje, Macedonia, as well as links covering stray animal abuses in Turkey, Greece and Romania.

As Greece and Romania are already existing EU member states, we feel that the time is due for the EU to introduce an EU wide policy / legislation relating to the treatment of stray animals.  It is hoped that our letter of today makes this clear to the EU authorities.

We are well aware through our many EU contacts that there are many organisations / NGO’s throughout the EU who are also making representations to EUPAW about the situation for stray animals both within EU member states and EU accession states.  We hope that by presenting a combined front of evidence to the EU on the treatment of stray animals in all parts of Europe, the EU has no choice but to consider this issues further.

The general animal welfare survey is open to both EU and non EU citizens and can be completed by visiting the following link:

http://www.ghkint.com/surveys/EUPAW/

The survey is short and easy and can be completed in 15 minutes but allows you to spend longer and give more detailed explanations if you wish. When processing the results to the survey, all responses will be treated as confidential and not attributed to individuals or organisations.

The end of the survey allows contributors to give further details of issues which are of concern to them regarding animal welfare.  We hope that all contributors will make special comment here regarding the lack of EU legislation FOR STRAY ANIMALS both within the EU and in nations seeking EU membership.

We hope that our response letter (see the link above) will give contributors an overview of what we would like contributors to say.

The survey will remain open and online until Friday 31st July 2010.

If you are an EU citizen, this is an ideal opportunity to be a real voice for future actions for stray animals right across Europe, both in existing EU and non EU member states.

If you can do nothing else, please complete the survey.  We have a huge opportunity here to be a voice for animals and we must not let it pass us by.

Thank you – SAV.

Important Note – the survey can also be completed by NON EU participants.

For anyone who wishes to provide additional evidence and / or reports to the EUPAW evaluation team, please email them directly via the following link:

eupaw@ghkint.com

Again, we ask that if you do mail, you please demand that the EU produces legislation for the protection of all stray and roaming animals throughout the European Union.  Please also comment that you are disgusted by the reports which are being given to you of stray animal cruelty in the Balkans states.  If an accession  nation requires membership of the EU, such as a balkans state, then it must comply with its own national legislation – the rule of law; which is NOT being done regarding animals in Serbia.  In addition, the EU is failing stray animals who have no legislation to protect them; therfore the EU needs to act, and act now !!

We have included one of the pdf files detailed in our written submission in the following link.  For security reasons we do not provide all.

To Hutchinson

 

We now have copies of the contracts between the Subotica government / authority and the public garbage firm ‘JKP Cistoca i zelenilo’ who have the contract to capture (and subsequently kill) the strays in the city.

In 2009 the city government awarded 5,400,000 dinars from the municipality budget, whilst an additional 5,800,000 dinars was given from the republic budget.

This closed shop system equals 11,200,000 dinars in just 2009 (12 months) alone to a public firm FOR THE CAPTURE AND KILLING OF STRAY ANIMALS.

Now that the contract for stray animals is open to public tender / competition, including proposals that can be presented by animal welfare organisations with a No kill policy;

the budget has now been reduced to 4,100,000 dinars for the first 12 months of the contract, followed by 6,100,000 over the next 18 month period.

This equals 10,200,000 dinars over a 30 month period (two and a half years) now that the contract has been put out for public competition !

This means that a closed shop city organised budget (NO PUBLIC COMPETITION) of 933,333 dinars each month for 2009

has now (FOR PUBLIC COMPETITION)

been REDUCED to 340,000 dinars per month.

*** We make that a CUT OF APPROXIMATELY TWO THIRDS ***.

As we have stated in our recent post:

http://serbiananimalsvoice.wordpress.com/2010/06/02/serbia-subotica-city-now-stray-animal-control-is-opened-up-to-public-competition-including-welfare-organisations-suddenly-the-budget-for-same-is-drastically-reduced-the-closed-shop-big-money-w/ 

“We consider that this immediately shows a fear factor in the depths of municipal authorities financial controllers – one which immediately shows that now that tendering is open to public competition, the vast fortunes of money which have been provided by authorities in the past, and which have been controlled by elicit groups and organisations within the authority, may now be lost by them when it has to be handed over to another party undertaking the work – such as the animal welfare organisations”.

For example; up to this present time, many contracts for things such as the control of stray animals within cities has had what could only be classified as political support and leanings – namely that the Director of one of the Shinter firms engaged in the capture and killing of stray animals, one Vlada Dragin, also happens (by just pure chance !) to be the brother of the Serbian Minister for Agriculture, one Sasa Dragin. 

Keep contracts within ‘the family’ along with the millions of dinars financially involved each year and you have basically what could be referred to as a bit of a closed shop !

Now ‘outside parties’, including animal welfare organisations, who propose an alternative ‘No Kill’ way of addressing stray animal control, are immediately given advance information that this budget for such tasks will be greatly reduced in the coming years.

A fear factor concern that things in the dynasty type establishment will not be controlled from within the close knit community now that all future contracts for animal control will be going out to public competition, or just the way things are now days ? – lets leave the decision up to you all to see what you think”.

Strange what happens to money when it is no longer under the closed shop control of a few individuals and has to be put out to public tender – the amounts available fall so dramatically !!

It leads one to question if there was any corruption going on in the past ?

Just for the record, here are the official copies of all documents associated with these past and future budgets.

Now why should animal welfare No Kill stray control policies be under threat from the government and city authorities ? – after all, if they win the public competition to control stray animal numbers, animal welfare organisations suddenly (under public competition) now have only have one third of the past money available with which to undertake their programmes !

Strange that, isnt it ? – or is it ?

Pictures have just arrived from Loznica, where a dog belonging to a local animal welfare activist has been killed.  It is suspected that either shinters or hunters did this.

 

 

The man who saw this done to his dog has had to be taken to hospital with heart problems.

The ‘official’ answer to this from Zvonimir Rot ,on behalf of Mr. Micovic states that the killing of dogs and cats is necessary as a method of prevention and the dispersion of rabies.  It continues that dogs and cats must be killed immediately on the streets in areas where rabies is present.

E mail contact details are left on the mail below in order that people can send messages to those authorising the killings if they so wish.

————————————————————————————————- 

From: *Zvonimir Rot* <zvonimir.rot@minpolj.gov.rs <mailto:zvonimir.rot@minpolj.gov.rs>>
Date: 2010/6/1
Subject: Odgovor na PITANJE

To: radavolizivotinje@gmail.com <mailto:radavolizivotinje@gmail.com>
Cc: Uprava za veterinu <vetuprava@minpolj.gov.rs <mailto:vetuprava@minpolj.gov.rs>>, Zoran Micovic <zoran.micovic@minpolj.gov.rs <mailto:zoran.micovic@minpolj.gov.rs>>

Поштовани грађани Лознице и Бање Ковиљаче,
 Поводом појаве беснила на Вашој територији и упућеног дописа у име Др Зорана Мићовића желим да вaс обавестим следеће:
 Поштујући Закон о ветеринарству и Правилник о утврђивању мера за рано откривање, дијагностику, спречавање ширења, сузбијања и искорењивања заразне болести беснила и начину њиховог спровођења, када се на основу дијагностичког испитивања потврди присуство болести, Министар пољопривреде, шумарства и водопривреде доноси Решење о проглашењу зараженог и угроженог подручја и налаже мере у истим.
 Као једна од мера налаже се лишавање живота паса и мачака луталица, што је у складу и са Законом о добробити животиња који прописује, да се ради спречавања ширења, сузбијања и искорењивања заразних болести животиње могу лишити живота, чак и на јавним местима.
 Све друге мере се односе на власничке псе и мачке.

На основу члана 6. Закона о ветеринарству власник, односно држаоц животиња је дужан да се стара о здрављу и добробити животиња  и да предузме све мере заштите здравља животиња ради спречавања појаве и ширења заразних болести животиња и зооноза. Беснило је нарочито опасна заразна болест и зооноза. Као мера спречавања ширења ове болести обавезна је вакцинација паса и мачака, старијих од три месеца, и касније ревакцинација на годишњем нивоу. Тако се једино може спречити ланац преношења вируса са дивљих животиња, у овом случају лисица, на псе и мачке, и наравно на људе. Животиње познатих власника, осим што имају познати здравствени статус на беснило, у зараженом и угроженом подручју морају имати и контролисано кретање, тако што се мачке држе у безбедно ограђеном простору, а пси при извођењу у шетњу морају ићи на повоцу и са брњицом.

Пси и мачке луталице, осим што имају непознат здравствени статус, њихово кретање нити је могло нити може бити праћено, те веома лако могу бити преносиоци болести ако дођу у контакт са бесном лисицом, те је стручно и оправдано лишити живота те животиње.

У циљу искорењивања ове болести, и уз помоћ предприступних (ИПА) фондова Европске Уније, почело се са реализацијом  вишегодишњег пројекта оралне вакцинације лисица.

Борба са беснилом је тешка и дуготрајна, али Управа за ветерину спроводи све законске и стручне мере како би била и успешна и са што мање последица по здравље и добробит животиња, а наравно и самих људи у околини.

Срдачан поздрав

Звонимир Рот

Zvonimir Rot
Viši savetnik
Uprava za veterinu
Ministarstvo poljoprivrede,
Šumarstva i vodoprivrede
Omladinskih brigada 1
B e o g r a d

Zvonimir Rot
Special adviser
Vetrinary directorate
Ministry of agriculture,
forestry and water managment
1 Omladinskih brigada
B e l g r a d e

Tel./Fax: +381 11 2602320

www.minpolj.gov.rs <http://www.minpolj.gov.rs/>
zvonimir.rot@minpolj.gov.rs mailto:zvonimir.rot@minpolj.gov.rs

————————————————————————–

Further to this we have a picture which again has arrived from Loznica.

This female dog was killed by having wood inserted into her vagina.

Her body was thrown into the local pound at Loznica city.

It is thought that this act is one of revenge by hunters.

Past links relating to Loznica city animal abuses:

http://serbiananimalsvoice.wordpress.com/2010/05/13/serbia-loznica-city-shelter-captured-stray-dogs-used-for-target-practice-by-local-hunters/

http://serbiananimalsvoice.wordpress.com/2010/05/18/serbia-180510-new-photographs-of-loznica-pound-animal-killings-and-conditions-at-city-dump-no-wonder-stray-animals-are-attracted/

http://serbiananimalsvoice.wordpress.com/2010/05/16/serbia-sample-letter-to-send-to-the-government-the-eu-commission-and-to-the-world-organisation-for-animal-health-the-oie-serbia-must-change-its-attitude-towards-stray-animals-and-willingless-to/

http://serbiananimalsvoice.wordpress.com/2010/05/11/serbia-loznica-city-pound-3-million-dinars-for-what-certainly-not-for-animal-welfare-politicians-maybe/

http://serbiananimalsvoice.wordpress.com/2010/03/09/serbia-many-cases-of-rabies-throughout-the-country-but-is-the-serbian-government-reporting-this-to-the-oie-world-organisation-for-animal-health-as-they-should-maybe-not/

http://serbiananimalsvoice.wordpress.com/2009/10/13/serbia-loznica-city-pound-death-camp-why-does-the-government-not-act-re-leskovac-city-policy-and-why-not-the-european-union-with-a-policy-for-stray-animal-welfare/

 

 

 

 

Serbia – the Rabies issue goes on and on.

Prelim:  27/05/120.

Today, SAV have been in contact by telephone with the OIE; the ‘World Organisation for Animal Health’, http://www.oie.int/eng/en_index.htm  starting in Brussels and then moving through to Paris, the headquarters of the OIE.  We need to ascertain exactly the situation regarding Rabies in Serbia; including;

 

  • How large are the alleged outbreaks ?
  • What animal species are involved ?
  • Are / have the OIE been informed and kept up to date of these alleged rabies outbreaks in Serbia by the OIE ‘official delegate’ in Serbia – Dr Zoran Micovic, Chief veterinary Officer, Ministry of Agriculture and Water Management ?
  • If they have not been informed by Dr Micovic, then why not ? – he is the official delegate for the OIE in Serbia 
  • Are the OIE monitoring the situation in Serbia with regard the alleged infected regions ? 
  • Are the OIE encouraging the use of Serbian authorities to undertake a national oral vaccination programme of all animals which could be affected ? 
  • If not, why not ? 
  • Is the OIE aware that Serbian hunters could be out killing many wildlife animals which are NOT affected by rabies, and that this may be supported and even encouraged by the Serbian government and authorities ? 
  • What is the official reporting procedure / structure that the Serbian OIE ‘official delegate’ in Serbia – Dr Zoran Micovic should be undertaking to keep the OIE informed of what is happening ? 
  • Where is this documentation being held ? 
  • Is the information available to animal welfare NGO’s such as SAV ? 

SAV aim to be in discussion with the OIE Sub-Regional Representative in Brussels during next week (June 2010) in order to further investigate and ask / discuss the alleged Serbian rabies outbreaks.

It is understood that 170 million Euros were given to Serbia by the EU during the financial period 2009/10, and that some of this money was provided for the vaccination of animals against rabies within Serbia.

So, what is the situation now ? – we hope to obtain more answers during the coming week(s) when we hope to be in discussion with the OIE.

Ends.

—————————————————————————————– 

According to information supplied from our contacts within Serbia, we are told that Rabies is ‘everywhere’ in Serbia.

Whilst it is not doubted that there are some cases of rabies within the country, it has to be questioned what are the real reasons for all these alleged ‘everywhere’ outbreaks.  More importantly, it has to be asked why, when provided with such huge amounts of financial support from the EU, and with such a wide range of (animal) oral vaccines for rabies available now, the Serbian government has allegedly still not shown any intention on embarking on a nationwide programme of oral rabies vaccination for all stray animals (ie. Dogs and cats) and wildlife such as foxes ?

We ask, would this (oral vaccine) thus prevent hunters and the government from using rabies as the reason to undertake their mass enjoyment of the mass killing of animals in Serbia ? – a way and excuse to allow for large number killings of stray animals. 

Very Important Point:

It should be remembered that the original (old) legislation to allow stray killing – named Pravilnik 29/94, was overwritten by Article 168 of 2005, the result being that all killing of animals was forbidden apart only from cases for Rabies infected areas, which were covered by application of Articles 64 and 65 of the Veterinary Law.

This is the important point, that animal killing is illegal apart only from cases for Rabies infected areas, which were covered by application of Articles 64 and 65 of the Veterinary Law.

It would seem strange that there are alleged mass outbreaks of rabies across Serbia now.

In effect, Article 168 of 2005 which does not allow animal killing is replaced by legislation that DOES ALLOW animal killing, simply because there is allegedly rabies in areas.  The word ‘rabies’ being the one which specifically gives right to animal slaughter rather than animal protection.

Even more strange that rabies is supposedly breaking out right across Serbia; which therefore allows all strays and wildlife to continue to be killed by ‘by-passing’ legislation of Article 168 of 2005 – the no kill animal legislation. 

No rabies in area = legislation Article 168 = NO animal killing, only animal care.

Rabies in area = Articles 64 and 65 of the Veterinary Law = Mass animal killing.

So, we suggest that a national rabies outbreak has suddenly arrived en masse, been invented, devised etc in order that the continued mass slaughter of all animals can continue, when in fact, Article 168 which should allow for the care of animals, is very conveniently being by-passed.

Reference – http://serbiananimalsvoice.wordpress.com/2010/05/04/serbia-temerin-city-their-animal-shelter-death-after-3-days-and-a-national-public-attorney-who-says-all-is-ok/

——————————————

Is rabies the new alibi which is being ‘created’ by Serbian authorities in order that they can undertake mass killings of both strays and wildlife animals such as foxes ?

In the financial period 2009 / 10, the EU allegedly donated 170 million Euros to Serbia for vaccination of animals against rabies and swine flu.  So what has happened to the money ?

Serbia is a relatively small country in terms of landmass and we envisage that a rabies oral vaccination programme could be undertaken nationwide within a 1 month period.

Immunity of animals against rabies would start approximately 2 weeks later and animals would have an immunity against rabies for a period of 3 years.

http://www.rabies-vaccination.com/control-rabies.asp

http://www.rabies-vaccination.com/oral-vaccination.asp

“Dog rabies control programs by parenteral vaccination in developing countries often fail because an insufficient number of dogs can be vaccinated. Oral vaccines allow for easy mass vaccination and is proposed for the vaccination of large ownerless dog populations. Intervet/Schering Plough Animal Health is in the process of developing an oral rabies vaccine.

Previous rabies control programmes using baits containing other oral rabies vaccines to vaccinate foxes in some European countries and wildlife in certain US states, have been successful”.

http://www.rabies-vaccination.com/intervet-oral-rabies-vaccine.aspOral vaccine strain – SAD – B19

“The vaccine virus SAD B19 is the most widely used oral vaccine virus to immunize wild life in Europe. The distribution of more than 100 million vaccine baits in 13 countries has resulted in a significant decrease in the rabies incidence or complete eradication of terrestrial rabies in baited areas.

Vaccine induced rabies has not been reported from any country where this vaccine virus has been used. However, this vaccine has some residual pathogenicity for certain rodent species after intracerebral inoculation”.

“In developed countries the risk to humans has been minimized mainly due to mandatory rabies vaccinations of dogs and other pets. Progress in the control and elimination of wildlife rabies has been made through successful oral vaccination programs”.

 

Publication links

http://www.rabies-vaccination.com/publications-rabies-vaccination.asp 

 Other information sources and links:

http://www.aphis.usda.gov/ws/rabies/vaccine_faq.html

http://www.aphis.usda.gov/ws/rabies/vaccine.html 

“There is an immune response to the rabies antigen which creates antibodies to fight off the disease.  After two to three weeks the “blueprint” to create rabies antibodies exists in the animal’s immune system which can easily be created should the animal be exposed to a rabid animal”.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rabies_vaccine 

Recombinant rabies vaccine (V-RG)

Aerially distributed wildlife rabies vaccine in a bait from Estonia.

In 1984 researchers at the Wistar Institute developed a recombinant vaccine called V-RG by inserting the glycoprotein gene from rabies into a vaccinia virus.[5] The V-RG vaccine has since been commercialised by Merial under the trademark Raboral. It is harmless to humans and has been shown to be safe for various species of animals that might accidentally encounter it in the wild, including birds (gulls, hawks, and owls).[6]

V-RG has been successfully used in the field in Belgium, France, Germany and the United States to prevent outbreaks of rabies in wildlife. The vaccine is stable under relatively high temperatures and can be delivered orally, making mass vaccination of wildlife possible by putting it in baits. The plan for immunization of normal populations involves dropping bait containing food wrapped around a small dose of the live virus. The bait would be dropped by helicopter concentrating on areas that have not been infected yet. Just such a strategy of oral immunization of foxes in Europe has already achieved substantial reductions in the incidence of human rabies. In November 2008, Germany had been free of new cases for two years and is therefore currently believed as being rabies-free, together with few other countries (see below). A strategy of vaccinating “neighborhood dogs” in Jaipur, India, (combined with a sterilization program) has also resulted in a large reduction in the number of human cases.[7]

Modern vaccines 

The human diploid cell rabies vaccine (H.D.C.V.) was started in 1967. Human diploid cell rabies vaccines are made using the attenuated Pitman-Moore L503 strain of the virus. Human diploid cell rabies vaccines have been given to more than 1.5 million humans as of 2006.

Aside from vaccinating humans, another approach was also developed by vaccinating dogs to prevent the spread of the virus. In 1979 the Van Houweling Research Laboratory of the Silliman University Medical Center in the Philippines, then headed by Dr. George Beran,[3] developed and produced a dog vaccine that gave a three-year immunity from rabies. The development of the vaccine resulted in the elimination of rabies in many parts of the Visayas and Mindanao Islands. The successful program in the Philippines was later on used as a model by other countries, such as Ecuador and the Yucatan State of Mexico, in their fight against rabies conducted in collaboration with the World Health Organization.[4]

In addition to these developments, newer and less expensive purified chicken embryo cell vaccine, and purified Vero cell rabies vaccine are now available. The purified Vero cell rabies vaccine uses the attenuated Wistar strain of the rabies virus, and uses the Vero cell line as its host.

————————————-

We hope that discussions with the OIE next week will provide more of an insight into the rabies situation in Serbia.  After all, the OIE should be informed of all rabies outbreaks in order that they can keep their world disease outbreak database updated.

And as we have shown, the OIE allegedly does have a Serbian ‘official delegate’ in the form of Dr Zoran Micovic, Chief Veterinary Officer, Ministry of Agriculture and Water Management.

We trust that Dr Micovic would be informing the OIE of all the Serbian rabies outbreaks; but we also appear to be witnessing on the OIE web site that there is in fact nothing which appears to substantiate this !

Strange !

Maybe next week will clarify the situation or shine a light on a bit more of what is happening.

SAV.

 

 

 

 

 

Regarding our recent post which declares that there must be a Public Competition – Tendering for the catching of stray dogs and cats in Subotica city;

http://serbiananimalsvoice.wordpress.com/2010/05/29/serbia-public-competition-by-law-may-now-enable-animal-welfare-groups-to-present-proposals-to-authorities-for-their-no-kill-stray-animal-numbers-control-programmes/

already there are signs that the city authorities are attempting to cause the animal welfare approach to fail.

The way they will be attempting this is by drastically reducing the budget allocated for stray animal control.

We consider that this immediately shows a fear factor in the depths of municipal authorities financial controllers – one which immediately shows that now that tendering is open to public competition, the vast fortunes of money which have been provided by authorities in the past, and which have been controlled by elicit groups and organisations within the authority, may now be lost by them when it has to be handed over to another party undertaking the work – such as the animal welfare organisations.

For example; up to this present time, many contracts for things such as the control of stray animals within cities has had what could only be classified as political support and leanings – namely that the Director of one of the Shinter firms engaged in the capture and killing of stray animals, one Vlada Dragin, also happens (by just pure chance !) to be the brother of the Serbian Minister for Agriculture, one Sasa Dragin. 

Keep contracts within ‘the family’ along with the millions of dinars financially involved each year and you have basically what could be referred to as a bit of a closed shop !

Now ‘outside parties’, including animal welfare organisations, who propose an alternative ‘No Kill’ way of addressing stray animal control, are immediately given advance information that this budget for such tasks will be greatly reduced in the coming years.

A fear factor concern that things in the dynasty type establishment will not be controlled from within the close knit community now that all future contracts for animal control will be going out to public competition, or just the way things are now days ? – lets leave the decision up to you all to see what you think.

And the numbers ?

From information provided, see documents provided below, it would appear that for the next year, 4.1 million dinars has been allocated for stray animal control.  The two years following, 2011 and 2012, 3.5 million dinars per year is allocated.

This is a little different to how things have always been.  The shinters of JKP Cistoca were always provided with a minimum of 4 to 5 million dinars per year.  In addition there were separate payments made for buildings, for vehicles and for workers salaries.  We understand that in 2009 shinter teams have been provided with 5.8 million dinars from the republic budget, and also provided with 5.2 million dinars from the municipality budget.  That makes 11 million dinars for the year of 2010.

Now it would appear that the tendering for work is being opened up to public competition, which involves proposals being provided by animal welfare organisations, the budget announced on 25/05/2010 has now been slashed to 4.1 million dinars for the period of the first 12 months, and thereafter 3 million dinars per year for the next 2 years.

It could be declared, argued and stated, that by suddenly reducing these budgets immediately by such large amounts, the authorities are already accepting defeat in a system that will no longer allow them to operate a closed shop system, and also that by allocating such small amounts of money when compared to the past, they are also attempting to show that those ‘public competition’ organisations who are tendering to take over management of programmes, such as stray animal control in Subotica city, are just not worthy and completely inadequate for the task !

It could be cynically stated that should any contract be awarded to a public organisation in the near future, things may decline and fail within a few years due to budget restrictions.  Whether this budget allocation would suddenly make a dramatic rise again after this period if contracts were given back to elicit groups and organisations within the authority one can only question – time will no doubt tell.

Again, lets leave the decision up to you all to see what you think.

Finally, Serbian campaigners who will be submitting proposals for the public competition for stray animal control are now going to use the public freedom of information request to obtain data from the city authorities as to why suddenly there is such a drastic reduction in money being provided now that the system has been opened up to public competition.

It will be very interesting to see what reasons are going to be provided by the authorities relating to this, now that the closed shop system has been closed for the future.

Whatever, we will be monitoring events and will hopefully be providing regular updates on a system which has finally been opened up to public control and management.  At what cost we have yet to establish, but there is little doubt that money will be harder to grasp for the ‘public’ organisations undertaking work on behalf of the public, using money provided by the public.

A corrupt closed shop system in the past ? – again, lets leave the decision up to you all to see what you think.

Serbian, Italian and SAV activists are currently cooperating to try and devise a proposal for the strays control of Subotica.  We have been given a limited time for this (around 30 days) and so several avenues to find a way forward are currently being looked at.

Further news in the very near future.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Today there has been some good news arriving from Serbia.

Campaigners have been waiting since 2002 for a verdict, but now, the Constitutional Court of Serbia has officially demanded that there must be a Public Competition – Tendering for the catching of stray dogs and cats in Subotica city.

Subotica city is finally starting to / having to act in agreement with the court, by allowing public competition for the process of catching strays in the city.  Until now, this process has been very much a closed shop type set up, with shinter (dogcatcher) firms having a stranglehold on the awarding of stray animal contracts.  Every year, shinter firms would effectively be awarded millions of dinars to undertake the rounding up, catching and killing of all stray dogs and cats in the city.  There was never any real plan or progress towards a policy of reducing stray animal numbers through a long term sterilisation programme.  In effect, a sterilisation programme to reduce stray animal numbers over a period of time was not to the benefit of these organisations.  Their approach to the stray numbers was one of kill, kill, kill.

Effectively the shinter management policy was one of – strays could continue to reproduce on the streets; shinter teams could be paid annually from the public purse to continually round them up and kill all the animals, and as a result the authorities could continue to inform a largely uneducated public (on this issue) that they are doing everything in their power to try and control stray animal populations.  It all looked good for those involved and was financially very beneficial.  Almost a never ending way of being financially supported to solve an issue, but an issue which never diminishes no matter how much money is thrown at it.

But as we, the animal welfare lobby have always argued, stray animal numbers can never be reduced unless a long term sterilisation programme is introduced somewhere into a system which aims to eventually eliminate or at least very drastically reduce stray animals from the streets.  With a sterilisation programme, stray numbers will gradually reduce over a period of time – ie. a sterilised (stray) animal cannot reproduce and thus continue to constantly add further to the large numbers of strays in cities.

As a result of this new public competition / tendering scheme, it is hoped that the current large costs involved in stray animal ‘control’, which could be argued does not really work in controlling numbers and always results in large numbers of animal deaths, can now be diverted into a sterilisation programme aimed at long term animal numbers reduction – a positive programme for the future and one which will especially be of benefit to the animals; as the programme will definitely be a ‘no kill’ strategy.

And so now, animal welfare campaigners in Subotica city can commence work to produce a proposal programme of stray animal control for the city using ‘no kill’; a programme which will be much more financially beneficial to the authorities and tax paying public of the city.  Whilst not wanting to provide detail of their proposal, as this site is frequently visited by governments and authorities who may learn from the proposals when compiling their own bid, animal welfare campaigners will at last be given the opportunity to present a programme / plan for stray animal control which will include:

  • Sterilisation of animals taken in from the streets to ensure that these animals cannot contribute further offspring to the numbers which exist at present
  • Vaccination of same animals to ensure both animal and public safety from infectious disease
  • Microchipping of each animal; including owned (but roaming) pet animals, to compile a database to allow identification of animal owner should it be collected from the street 
  • If animals are ever returned to the streets, then identification tags (such as a small high visibility ear tag) to be fitted to every animal that has been sterilised.  This to provide immediate identification to catchers that the animal in question has previously been caught, sterilised, vaccinated and microchipped and that it is NOT necessary to capture this animal again
  • Public education schemes to inform of the benefits of long term sterilisation programmes, especially where expenditure from the public purse is involved
  • Production of very strong and durable shelters for (captured street) animals who once sterilised will be kept in facilities such as the ‘Delta’ shelters used in Brcko district, Bosnia and Herzegovina.  Delta shelters are made of straw bales, cement and wood, which although cheap to produce, especially using schemes involving authority prisoners for manpower / labour, can provide strong, warm and weather protective shelters for the animals that reside within them.

 

 

 

Photos –  Low Cost but Very Effective  – ‘Delta’ shelters as used in Bosnia and Herzegovina.

Pictures with thanks to ‘ARKA’ animal welfare.

It is envisaged and hoped that the proposal presented by animal welfare campaigners in Subotica city will provide a long term solution and a very forward looking scheme which will over time, ensure that the numbers of stray animals in the city are reduced.

As we have always stated, the continual killing of stray animals does nothing to reduce stray animal numbers.  Killing strays in any location in any part of the country simply creates a void in that specific region which within a matter of days or a few weeks maximum, then allows stray animals from other outlying areas to venture into the location, which always amplifies the risk of diseases being spread and always guarantees that within a short time, the region in question gets provided with a new, fresh crop of fertile, unsterilised animals arriving, to search for possibly more food which they always seek, to continue to procreate and as a result further contribute to the never diminishing pyramid of stray animals in that particular area / region.

 

The Results of NOT Sterilising Stray and Pet (Owned) Animals – there IS NO RESULT, only a constant supply of animals to fill any void left by those which have been killed by authorities.

Killing strays does not reduce stray animal numbers; a programme of sterilisation and vaccination ensures that animal numbers reduce over time and disease risk is minimised.

Subotica campaigners who produce this proposal for an effective, no kill stray animal numbers reduction programme, are then in a position to be able to share their data with other campaigners throughout the nation; making every one of the 170 communities be able to present a no kill sterilisation programme to their local authority through the public competition process.

The public education programme must be geared to the education of all citizens about the positive aspects of animal sterilisation, including their own pets, the necessity for responsible pet ownership, and using the microchip database which is proposed (and undertaken during sterilisation), a scheme which could allow for fining irresponsible owners who let their animals wander the streets.  Small fines by this system could be fed back into further funding of schemes and databases used for such purposes.

Currently, campaigners are initially looking at Subotica as the first of (hopefully) many cities throughout Serbia in which they can now propose stray animal control programmes to regional authorities.  It does not matter which city is first, it is only important to address the management of stray animal numbers using a scheme which will be financially beneficial in the long term, whilst also of benefit to citizens throughout the country.

The government and authorities to date have not grasped effective management and control of stray animal numbers throughout Serbia.  It is now hoped that through the public competition process the animal welfare movement can show the government a scheme which they, the government, should have accepted and instigated many, many years ago.

That is a NO KILL programme of sterilisation, vaccination, microchipping and identification for the stray animals of Serbia.

Maybe now a change on the horizon …

for the benefit of all stray animals in Serbia.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Some of our recent post relating to Loznica city pound:

http://serbiananimalsvoice.wordpress.com/2010/05/11/serbia-loznica-city-pound-3-million-dinars-for-what-certainly-not-for-animal-welfare-politicians-maybe/

http://serbiananimalsvoice.wordpress.com/2010/05/13/serbia-loznica-city-shelter-captured-stray-dogs-used-for-target-practice-by-local-hunters/

http://serbiananimalsvoice.wordpress.com/2009/10/13/serbia-loznica-city-pound-death-camp-why-does-the-government-not-act-re-leskovac-city-policy-and-why-not-the-european-union-with-a-policy-for-stray-animal-welfare/

http://serbiananimalsvoice.wordpress.com/2010/05/16/serbia-sample-letter-to-send-to-the-government-the-eu-commission-and-to-the-world-organisation-for-animal-health-the-oie-serbia-must-change-its-attitude-towards-stray-animals-and-willingless-to/

In the following photographs you can see the location of the city pound / shelter for stray animals.  Convenient, as it is adjacent to the city dump, the place where a lot of the dead strays seem to end up.

Note – many of the following photographs show different parts of the Loznica shelter; and the dead animals killed by hunters which surround it.

The proximity of the shelter to the dump (facility behind cars).

Dead animal bodies everywhere !

The Animal Protection Society from Loznica city has obtained information that the building which is shown in the photographs, the ‘shelter’ for homeless animals, – 

http://serbiananimalsvoice.wordpress.com/2010/05/11/serbia-loznica-city-pound-3-million-dinars-for-what-certainly-not-for-animal-welfare-politicians-maybe/

has been provided with 14 million dinars + for animal welfare.

Below are 5 of our archive pictures of the situation at Loznica ‘shelter’ – note the red brickwork in other photographs:

The photographs have been supplied by the people of Loznica city.  It is alleged that the fencing around the shelter has been partly destroyed in order that some of the animals  held at the shelter can escape; only to then be killed by hunters from the area.  One of the photographs shows used gun cartridges as used by the hunters. 

A used hunters cartridge lies in the waste.

 

A hunters ‘target’ which survived the ordeal – but since killed ???

We are including also many pictures of dogs (ex strays which have been captured and sent to the shelter, only then to escape via the destroyed fencing and become a hunters target). 

The President of the local hunters society, which we are informed is called ‘Gucevo’, has said that the pound / shelter is ‘located in the hunters area, and so the hunters have the right to kill the animals’ !!

Less fortunate hunters ‘targets’ shown below:

 

Red brickwork above – see previous photographs.

Again Note the Red brickwork – dead animals very close to the ‘shelter’.

The Shelter in the Background.

Any wonder that other stray animals are attracted ?

When things such as this are lying around the city dump !!

– a haven for rats also, as well as stary dogs and cats, one would guess.

Dead Animals Strewn Amongst the Garbage.

TAKE ACTION    TAKE ACTION    TAKE ACTION 

Please take action as outlined in our previous posts.

A sample letter, complete with e mail addresses is provided.

Link:

http://serbiananimalsvoice.wordpress.com/2010/05/16/serbia-sample-letter-to-send-to-the-government-the-eu-commission-and-to-the-world-organisation-for-animal-health-the-oie-serbia-must-change-its-attitude-towards-stray-animals-and-willingless-to/

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »

Categories