Europe's homeless animals
"Recognising that man has a moral obligation to respect all living creatures and bearing in mind that pet animals have a special relationship with man"
- European Convention for the Protection of Pet Animals, Strasbourg, 13.XI.1987 -
Make a video of your own at Animoto.
The OIE-recommendations
on dog population management
Abstract
At the 73rd General Session the OIE decided to develop guidance for Members on humane methods for the control of stray animal populations. In 2006, an ad hoc Group was convened under the leadership of the OIE Permanent Animal Welfare Working Group. With valuable assistance from the OIE Collaborating Centre on Animal Welfare, a Questionnaire was developed and sent to OIE Members, of which 81 countries submitted responses.
In light of this information, the ad hoc Group prepared a first draft report, which notes the importance of controlling stray dog populations to help prevent zoonotic diseases and non-disease related nuisances to society and the environment.
In choosing the preferred method of control, the risks to operators must be taken into account, as well as religious, cultural and economic contexts of the country concerned. Depending on the situation, methods requiring individual animal restraint or methods for use at a distance may be recommended.
While activities that aim to physically reduce the numbers of stray dogs are important, achievement of the long term goals of dog population control and avoidance of risks to human health depends on the education of dog owners and the general public as to their responsibilities.
The draft report notes that sub-national jurisdictions are often those responsible for the control of stray dog populations. The key role played by non-governmental organisations in stray dog management in many countries is acknowledged.
The draft report emphasises that the close involvement of veterinarians and of official Veterinary Services, working in collaboration with public health authorities, is necessary to realise long term goals.
At the 73rd General Session the OIE decided to develop guidance for Members on humane methods for the control of stray animal populations. In 2006, an ad hoc Group was convened under the leadership of the OIE Permanent Animal Welfare Working Group. With valuable assistance from the OIE Collaborating Centre on Animal Welfare, a Questionnaire was developed and sent to OIE Members, of which 81 countries submitted responses.
In light of this information, the ad hoc Group prepared a first draft report, which notes the importance of controlling stray dog populations to help prevent zoonotic diseases and non-disease related nuisances to society and the environment.
In choosing the preferred method of control, the risks to operators must be taken into account, as well as religious, cultural and economic contexts of the country concerned. Depending on the situation, methods requiring individual animal restraint or methods for use at a distance may be recommended.
While activities that aim to physically reduce the numbers of stray dogs are important, achievement of the long term goals of dog population control and avoidance of risks to human health depends on the education of dog owners and the general public as to their responsibilities.
The draft report notes that sub-national jurisdictions are often those responsible for the control of stray dog populations. The key role played by non-governmental organisations in stray dog management in many countries is acknowledged.
The draft report emphasises that the close involvement of veterinarians and of official Veterinary Services, working in collaboration with public health authorities, is necessary to realise long term goals.
The dog
one animal, three classifications
companion animal - abandoned animal (stray) - feral animal
Despite a global attachment of our society towards companion animals, millions of dogs are relinquished to shelters each year and several millions of those are euthanised. Professionals in the veterinary, animal control and animal welfare fields are now seeing companion animal overpopulation as a "people problem" rather than an animal problem (e.g., Arkow, 1991; Arluke, 1991; Miller, Staats, Partlo & Rada, 1996; Moulton, Wright & Rindy, 1991) with the individual and collective behaviour of people as a causal agent, while variables in the environment (animal welfare agencies, pet industry, media) are also believed to be contributing factors.
Other than being placed in overcrowded shelters and/or euthanised, many dogs are strays and roam free, becoming a nuisance and causing illness and harm to the community (Allen & Westbrook, 1979). These animals are either owned and allowed to roam unsupervised, or without an owner. Between these two extremes are animals which have some interaction with humans but do not officially belong to one particular person or family (neighbourhood or community owned dogs/cats) (Wandeler, 1985; Slater, 2002).
A subgroup of free roaming dogs are strays: recently owned but lost, escaped or abandoned animals and their offspring (Rubin and Beck, 1982; Slater, 2002). Further complicating the classification of these sub-populations is the fact that dogs may move between these sub-populations during their lives, becoming more or less socialized or going from a pet to a stray to a pet again. Free roaming dogs are commonly socialized to some degree and they have contact with human beings who provide the food and shelter needed for survival. While feral dogs do exist, they are rather rare and elusive (Boitani et al., 1995).
In reality, the concept of 'pet animals' in western cultures is very different from those in Eastern and indeed parts of Southern Europe. In Romania, where public abuse of animals is significant (86% identified having witnessed this), with millions of animals living on the street, they are being regarded as verminous which seem to justify their abuse. Some are considered 'community dogs' and are fed and cared for by local residents who regard them as their own responsibility, although only to a certain point given that these dogs are rarely being vaccinated and most certainly not sterilized. Domestically, animals are commonly kept on short chains or allowed to roam unrestricted. The definition of 'pets' therefore varies between cultures.
The European Council's Convention for the Protection of Pet Animals clearly defines a "pet animal" as "any animal kept or intended to be kept by man in his household for private enjoyment and companionship", but in reality the western perspective of an animal being regarded as a member of the family, loved and living in domestic contentment is a rarity in many such cultures in Eastern and Southern Europe.
Unknown or ignored by many,
Europe has a very serious stray animal issue.
An estimated 100 Million free roaming dogs live in Europe,
be it in municipal enclosures or on the streets.
The amount of stray cats is even higher.
‘Stray’ is a general term given to any domestic animal found roaming freely without human supervision.
In many countries the majority of stray animals have been abandoned by their owners or are owned but allowed to roam freely. The unsupervised dogs then breed, resulting in unwanted puppies. Strays depend on humans for most of their essential resources, such as food, although this may be found indirectly from rubbish discarded by humans. Because of this dependence on humans, stray animals are found roaming within and around human settlements.
Life on the streets is hard. Stray dogs will fight over the limited amounts of food and that which can be scavenged. Injuries sustained this way are rarely treated. Tumors, skin infections and open sores are common for stray dogs. Over three quarters of puppies in developing countries die in agony from diseases including rabies and distemper.
Conflict with humans and public health
Stray animals can become a problem for many reasons: they carry diseases that can be passed to humans and other animals (such as rabies), they can cause road accidents, harass and attack citizens, damage property and pollute the environment. They are often seen as a nuisance and health hazard by the people who live alongside them, resulting in persecution by humans in the form of cruelty, abuse and inhumane methods of killing. The dogs are treated as nothing more than a vermin to be exterminated.
Population control
Dogs follow their basic instincts and breed to propagate their species. Humans can make the decision to control their own population, and they have also been given the gift of taking responsibility for dogs. Sadly, some people see that responsibility as a power to kill unwanted dogs sometimes in the most inhumane of ways. This has been proved ineffective as a method of population control because the vacuum left is soon filled by other dogs from surrounding areas who move in to utilise the resources available, or by the existing dogs using these resources to raise more puppies.
Trap-neuter-release (TNR for cats) or Catch-neuter-return (CNR for dogs) is the only effective method to control and reduce animal over-population.
Why is dog population management important for public health?
FAO / WSPA / ICT held an expert meeting in Banna, Italy, with a multidisciplinary group of experts that addressed the different reasons and options for dog population management!
About the issue in Europe
Although an estimated 100 million free roaming dogs (owned dogs and stray dogs) live in Europe, there are no governmental sterilization programs in none of the most affected countries, which would improve the situation greatly. This results in a constant flow of kittens and puppies to replace the dying adult population, and so the sad cycle starts again, year in, year out.
The lack of vaccinations means that parvovirus and cat flu are very common, and parasite born diseases such as Leishmanisis and Ehrlrichia are prevalent - all being potentially lethal illnesses, especially in sick and starving animals. Some diseases, including rabies, can be transmitted to, and are very dangerous to humans. Animals suffering with any of these conditions will rarely be offered any veterinary care, as few people bother to help them. The results are truly shocking.
None of the most affected European countries has made any serious efforts to curb the stray animal population by implementing neutering campaigns, and/or by informing their citizens about the importance to spay and neuter their animals and/or not to let them roam freely and mate as they wish.
Instead, they try - year in year out - to clean the streets from unwanted animals. Poisoning, although illegal, is common practice. Every year, tens of thousands of dogs are poisoned or shot in an effort by municipalities to rid their streets of the 'menace' of stray dogs. Some countries lock them away in municipal shelters that are real death camps for the animals. Out of the public eye, the dogs are left to starve. Many die of the consequences of injuries and diseases left without veterinary care. Countless animals die of thirst during the hot summers, thousands freeze to death in the cold winters.
Every year, NGOs from all over Europe spend millions of Euros of private funds collected via donations to care for abandoned animals in numerous ways. They feed the animals, treat the injured and sick ones, they run private shelters and they try to find homes for as many as possible and above all: they organize sterilization campaigns to prevent that new animals are being added to this never ending cycle of misery and despair.
Tens of thousands of people come together on social networks such as Facebook, giving all their commitment and spending all their free time to clean up a mess created by a society that has no clue about responsible animal-ownership, that does not care about animal welfare nor animal rights, and governments that fail their responsibility:
- to educate their citizens about the need to spay and neuter their companion animals,
- to create laws to prevent that more animals are being abandoned,
- to create laws that prevent and severely punish animal abuse,
- to make sure that existing laws are being respected and that those who breach the laws are being prosecuted and severely dealt with
It is the duty of any serious government to take care of the problems occurring in its country, such as it is the duty of the governments to pay for, and to implement neutering campaigns when it appears that its country has a serious stray animal issue resulting from lack of education, responsibility and - in the end - also from lack of appropriated laws.
Unlike developing countries that lack the necessary funds and the needed staff to implement massive sterilization campaigns, is this not the case for the countries discussed here. We are talking about countries of Europe, most of them member of the European Union where the necessary funds for sterilizations - which would amount to only a fragment of the gigantic amounts spent each year by these countries to fight the effect instead of the cause - should not be the problem. The problem lays rather in corrupted interests and a lack of vision and will.
By intentionally not taking the necessary measures to reduce the stray animals population, these governments support the prosperity of a dirty industry in which many people profit from :
- the collecting of dogs
- the construction of unnecessary shelters (including research and design)
- the housing of animals, including supposedly feeding and caring of the animals
- the incarceration of the deceased animals
It is not only a blatant shame that these problems are not being resolved by those governments, but it is also a total non-respect and absolute dismissal of their legal obligation to comply with the European Conventions and Treaties to which they are legally bond as a member of the European Union and/or as a signatory of the European Convention for the Protection of Pet Animals.
Companion animals (stray animals included)
are NOT within the competence of the EU
There is currently no EU legislation for the protection of pets and stray animals, despite the fact that the EU’s pet population (not stray animal population) is estimated at over one hundred million (figure according to the EU-Framework - see bottom of this page). The EU has only very limited competence in this field, given to them by the Treaty of Lisbon, Article 13.
On July 4, 2012 the EU announced their "European Parliament resolution on the establishment of an EU legal framework for the protection of pets and stray animals" calling on the Commission (among other points) to put forward an EU legal framework for the protection of pets and stray animals, including:
• rules for the identification and registration of animals,
• stray animal management strategies, including vaccination and sterilisation programmes,
• measures to promote responsible ownership,
• the prohibition of unlicensed kennels and shelters,
• the prohibition of the killing of stray animals without medical indication,
• information and educational programmes in schools on animal welfare,
• severe sanctions to be imposed on any Member State which fails to comply with the rules;
You can read the entire framework below...
Also, the resignation of Commissioner Dalli announced on 16 October, 2012 brings new hope for Europe’s animals. Many important decisions have been left in the air by Commissioner Dalli, including maintaining the hard fought for ban on testing cosmetics on animals, but also in the area of animal transport, the animal welfare strategy, the adoption a robust animal health law, as well as for the introduction of measures that will protect Europe’s pets. (Text: Eurogroup)
On July 4, 2012 the EU announced their "European Parliament resolution on the establishment of an EU legal framework for the protection of pets and stray animals" calling on the Commission (among other points) to put forward an EU legal framework for the protection of pets and stray animals, including:
• rules for the identification and registration of animals,
• stray animal management strategies, including vaccination and sterilisation programmes,
• measures to promote responsible ownership,
• the prohibition of unlicensed kennels and shelters,
• the prohibition of the killing of stray animals without medical indication,
• information and educational programmes in schools on animal welfare,
• severe sanctions to be imposed on any Member State which fails to comply with the rules;
You can read the entire framework below...
Also, the resignation of Commissioner Dalli announced on 16 October, 2012 brings new hope for Europe’s animals. Many important decisions have been left in the air by Commissioner Dalli, including maintaining the hard fought for ban on testing cosmetics on animals, but also in the area of animal transport, the animal welfare strategy, the adoption a robust animal health law, as well as for the introduction of measures that will protect Europe’s pets. (Text: Eurogroup)
European Parliament resolution on the establishment of an EU legal framework for the protection of pets and stray animals
The European Parliament,
– having regard to the large number of petitions from EU citizens requesting the establishment of an EU legal framework for the protection of pets and stray animals (1613/10, 1274/2011, 1321/2011, 1377/2011, 1412/2011 and others),
– having regard to the European Convention for the Protection of Pet Animals (CETS No 125),
– having regard to Rule 202(2) of its Rules of Procedure,
A. whereas Article 13 of the TFEU stipulates that, since animals are sentient beings, the Union and the Member States must pay full regard to their welfare requirements;
B. whereas there is no EU legislation for the protection of pets and stray animals, despite the fact that the EU’s pet population is estimated at over one hundred million;
C. whereas the European Convention for the Protection of Pet Animals has not yet been signed by all Member States;
D. whereas pets and stray animals are victims of mistreatment and cruelty in many Members States, and whereas the petitioners mainly refer to Member States in southern and eastern Europe;
1. Calls on the European Union and the Member States to ratify the European Convention for the Protection of Pet Animals and to transpose its provisions into national legal systems;
2. Calls on the Commission to put forward an EU legal framework for the protection of pets and stray animals, including:
• rules for the identification and registration of animals,
• stray animal management strategies, including vaccination and sterilisation programmes,
• measures to promote responsible ownership,
• the prohibition of unlicensed kennels and shelters,
• the prohibition of the killing of stray animals without medical indication,
• information and educational programmes in schools on animal welfare,
• severe sanctions to be imposed on any Member State which fails to comply with the rules;
3. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council and the Commission.
– having regard to the large number of petitions from EU citizens requesting the establishment of an EU legal framework for the protection of pets and stray animals (1613/10, 1274/2011, 1321/2011, 1377/2011, 1412/2011 and others),
– having regard to the European Convention for the Protection of Pet Animals (CETS No 125),
– having regard to Rule 202(2) of its Rules of Procedure,
A. whereas Article 13 of the TFEU stipulates that, since animals are sentient beings, the Union and the Member States must pay full regard to their welfare requirements;
B. whereas there is no EU legislation for the protection of pets and stray animals, despite the fact that the EU’s pet population is estimated at over one hundred million;
C. whereas the European Convention for the Protection of Pet Animals has not yet been signed by all Member States;
D. whereas pets and stray animals are victims of mistreatment and cruelty in many Members States, and whereas the petitioners mainly refer to Member States in southern and eastern Europe;
1. Calls on the European Union and the Member States to ratify the European Convention for the Protection of Pet Animals and to transpose its provisions into national legal systems;
2. Calls on the Commission to put forward an EU legal framework for the protection of pets and stray animals, including:
• rules for the identification and registration of animals,
• stray animal management strategies, including vaccination and sterilisation programmes,
• measures to promote responsible ownership,
• the prohibition of unlicensed kennels and shelters,
• the prohibition of the killing of stray animals without medical indication,
• information and educational programmes in schools on animal welfare,
• severe sanctions to be imposed on any Member State which fails to comply with the rules;
3. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council and the Commission.
The "Framework" was rejected by the European Commission
The "Framework" was rejected by the European Commission on the following reasons:
"The Commission is unable to propose the adoption in EU law of the remainder of the desired legal framework because Union competences are governed by the principle of conferral (Article 5 of the Treaty on European Union – TEU). Thus competences not conferred upon the Union by the Treaties remain within the Member States (Article 4 TEU).
The Treaties do not provide a legal basis for the requested rules which all relate to animal welfare protection falling within the competence of the Member States. Article 13 TFEU is not a legal basis, nor does it describe an objective of the Treaties that could justify the use of the "flexibility clause" (Article 352 TFEU).
Only a change in the Treaties making the protection of the welfare of animals an objective of the Treaties can provide the necessary legal base for the desired legal framework. There is currently no unanimity of the Member States to engage in such a treaty reform with this aim in mind.
In relation to any other non-legislative initiative concerning the points raised, the Commission would like to refer to the comments provided in the follow up fiche related to the European Parliament Resolution on the "European Union Strategy for the Protection and Welfare of Animals 2012-2015 (2012/2043 INI)"
Conventions and Treaties
As far back as 1979, the European Council issued its RECOMMENDATION 860 (1979) [1] on the dangers of overpopulation of domestic animals for the health and hygiene of man, and on humane methods of limiting such dangers, that reads:
1. Aware that overpopulation of domestic animals, particularly dogs and cats, constitutes a problem in several member countries, contributing, for example, to the pollution of the urban environment ;
2. Concerned particularly at the health risk for human beings resulting from the existence of a large number of stray animals, which can act as carriers for dangerous infectious diseases including rabies ;
3. Recalling the continuous activity of the Council of Europe in favour of humane treatment of domesticated animals, and particularly the drawing up of European Conventions for the Protection of Animals during International Transport (1968) and for the Protection of Animals kept for Farming Purposes (1976) ;
4. Conscious of the need to attack the human ignorance which is the root cause of animal overpopulation through school education and information campaigns in the mass media, centred on the life of the animals, their needs, their requirements and the resulting obligations for man, and also the risks of disease ;
5. Recommends that the Committee of Ministers instruct the appropriate intergovernmental expert committee to draw up a European convention which should aim, in particular :
i. to control the trade in animals :
a. by imposing strict standards of hygiene and welfare for animal rearing and sale ;
b. by imposing a ban on the import of exotic animals ill-suited to European climatic conditions ;
c. by encouraging the trade to organise itself into national or international associations, with a view to drawing up an enforceable code of conduct ;
ii. to control animal populations :
a. by making registration and marking of dogs compulsory and possibly by imposing a special tax on all dog-owners living in built-up areas, exempting pensioners, the blind and owners of watchdogs ;
b. by introducing free or subsidised sterilisation of dogs and cats ;
c. by ensuring that when it is necessary for reasons of public health and hygiene to destroy stray animals the operation is carried out by qualified personnel, using humane and up-to-date scientific methods.
On 8 May 1979 (3rd Sitting) the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe recommended that the Committee of Ministers "instruct the appropriate intergovernmental expert committee to draw up a European convention".
The European Convention for the Protection of Pet Animals is a treaty of the Council of Europe to promote the welfare of pet animals and ensure minimum standards for their treatment and protection. The treaty was signed in 1987 and became effective on May 1, 1992, after at least four countries ratified it. Adherence to the treaty is open and not limited to member countries of the Council of Europe.
The European Convention for the Protection of Pet Animals is not part of the body of EU legislation and it remains up to each Member State to decide whether they want to ratify and implement this Convention prepared under the aegis of the Council of Europe, i.e. outside the EU institutional framework.
Several countries (such as France and the United Kingdom) did not sign or ratify the treaty due to concerns by dog breeding association who opposed the treaty's ban on tail docking (§ 10.1 (a)) and on the cropping of ears (§ 10.1 (b)).
A review of the treaty performed in 1995 resulted in minor modifications of the text and allowed signatory states to declare themselves exempt from certain paragraphs of the treaty. Subsequently, a number of additional countries signed and ratified the treaty, making use of this commission by declaring themselves exempt from the prohibition of tail docking. No country that hock ratified the treaty made any reservations regarding the other cosmetic surgeries prohibited by § 10: cropping of ears, removal of vocal cords, and declawing.
The Treaty of Rome, signed in 1957, established the European Economic Community. The Treaty is the legal base which is periodically revised to take account of institutional and policy changes within the European Union. The Treaty of Rome did not include a reference to animal welfare. In 1992 a declaration on animal welfare was annexed to the revised Treaty of Maastricht. A further revision resulted in the Treaty of Amsterdam which, thanks to Eurogroup campaigning, included a protocol on animal welfare requiring EU policy-makers to pay "full regard" to animal welfare when adopting legislation in a number of policy areas. The Treaty of Amsterdam became effective on 1 May 1999. In 2009 the text of the protocol was incorporated in the text of the Lisbon Treaty, as Article 13, which includes additional policy areas. (Source: Eurogroup for Animals)
The animal welfare protocol included in the 1997 Treaty of Amsterdam introduced a significant change, as, for the first time in European law, animals were referred to as sentient beings - able to feel pain and suffering. The Treaty of Lisbon, which entered into force on 1 December 2009, incorporated an article on animal welfare, which provides that:
“In formulating and implementing the Union's agriculture, fisheries, transport, internal market, research and technological development and space policies, the Union and the Member States shall, since animals are sentient beings, pay full regard to the welfare requirements of animals, while respecting the legislative or administrative provisions and customs of the Member States relating in particular to religious rites, cultural traditions and regional heritage”.
List of European countries
and their binding conventions, treaties and declarations
Isn't it ironic, that most of the signatories of the 'European Convention for the Protection of Pet Animals' have considerable and growing stray animal populations?
These countries are:
- Azerbaijan
- Bulgaria
- Cyprus
- Czech Republic
- Greece
- Italy
- Latvia
- Lithuania
- Portugal
- Romania
- Serbia
- Turkey
- Ukraine (signed the European Convention for the protection of Pet Animals, but did not ratify it)
If these governments would abide by the rules of the 'European Convention for the Protection of Pet Animals' there would be no so-called 'stray animals' in the first place. 'The Convention' clearly states:
Chapter II – Principles for the keeping of pet animals
Article 3 – Basic principles for animal welfare
1. Nobody shall cause a pet animal unnecessary pain, suffering or distress.
2. Nobody shall abandon a pet animal.
If these governments would abide by the rules of the 'European Convention for the Protection of Pet Animals' the so-called 'stray animals' would be treated with respect and the problem would be dealt with responsibly and most of all: the number of stray animals would have dropped since a long time given 'The Convention' clearly states:
Chapter III – Supplementary measures for stray animals
Article 12 – Reduction of numbers
When a Party considers that the numbers of stray animals present it with a problem, 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.
a. Such measures shall include the requirements that:
- i. if such animals are to be captured, this is done with the minimum of physical and mental suffering appropriate to the animal;
- ii. whether captured animals are kept or killed, this is done in accordance with the principles laid down in this Convention;
- iii. Parties undertake to consider:
- iv. providing for dogs and cats to be permanently identified by some appropriate means which causes little or no enduring pain, suffering or distress, such as tattooing as well as recording the numbers in a register together with the names and addresses of their owners;
- v. reducing the unplanned breeding of dogs and cats by promoting the neutering of these animals;
- vi. encouraging the finder of a stray dog or cat to report it to the competent authority.
Article 13 – Exceptions for capture, keeping and killing
Exceptions to the principles laid down in this Convention for the capture, the keeping and the killing of stray animals may be made only if unavoidable in the framework of national disease control programmes.
Chapter IV – Information and education
Article 14 – Information and education programmes
The Parties undertake to encourage the development of information and education programmes so as to promote awareness and knowledge amongst organisations and individuals concerned with the keeping, breeding, training, trading and boarding of pet animals of the provisions and the principles in this Convention. In these programmes, attention shall be drawn in particular to the following subjects:
- a. the need for training of pet animals for any commercial or competitive purpose to becarried out by persons with adequate knowledge and ability;
- b. the need to discourage:
- i. gifts of pet animals to persons under the age of sixteen without the express consent of their parents or other persons exercising parental responsibilities;
- ii. gifts of pet animals as prizes, awards or bonuses;
- iii. unplanned breeding of pet animals;
- iv. the possible negative consequences for the health and well-being of wild animals if they were to be acquired or introduced as pet animals;
- v. the risks of irresponsible acquisition of pet animals leading to an increase in the number of unwanted and abandoned animals
Other European countries with considerable and growing stray animal populations, but that are NOT a signatory of the European Convention for the Protection of Pet Animals, are:
- Albania
- Armenia
- Bosnia & Herzegovina
- Croatia
- Georgia
- Hungary
- Malta
- Moldova
- Montenegro
- Poland
- Russia
- Slovakia
- Slovenia
- Spain
- Ukraine (signed the European Convention for the protection of Pet Animals, but 'missed' to ratify it)
From all the countries of Europe, there is only a handful that have no stray animals.
Below, all relevant documents in chronological order