European Convention for the Protection of Pet Animals
Revision - November 1987
¹ 125 of the European Treaties Series
(extract)
“If a state feels that the population of homeless animals presents a problem to it, it should take legislative or administrative measures to reduce the population by methods that will not cause inevitable pain, suffering or mental sorrow”. (Chapter 3. Article 12. 1st paragraph)
Comments:
The existing situation in Moscow contradicts Article 12 (1st paragraph, see above) of the European Convention for the Protection of Pet Animals, because:
1. The population of homeless animals is a serious problem to major cities of the RF, in particular, to Moscow, because according to official data alone of the “Federal Supervision Agency for Customer Protection and Human Welfare”, in 2005 in Moscow around 40 persons get bitten by stray dogs every day, the bites being of varying degree of gravity, which is comparable with numbers of those injured in road traffic incidents. Besides, over the last 5 years, there have been at least 3 cases of humans bitten to death by stray dogs in Moscow (1 case in 2004, 2 cases – in 2005).
2. The population of homeless cats and stray dogs is being reduced not all by “methods that will not cause inevitable pain, suffering or mental sorrow” (Art. 12 1st paragraph of the Convention), because:
(à) homeless cats die on a mass scale as a result of being attacked and chased by stray dogs (see Topic 4. Sections: 4.1, 4.2, as well as the data of VTSIOM’s sociological survey; published results of monitoring of the death of homeless cats in 2 Moscow districts during 2000-2005; written evidence of Moscow dwellers)
(b) stray dogs and homeless cats often run out onto the carriage-way and die under the wheels of vehicles (see Topic 1. Section 1.2);
(c) there is a great number of injured stray dogs (see Topic 6. Section 6.2), and according to different independent surveys (e.g. Makarov, Dudnikov, Poyaganov), at least 30% of stray dogs have infectious and parasitic diseases, such as leptospirosis, toxocariasis, toxoplasmosis;
(d) stray dogs are a nuisance to so many people, which is why the population regulates stray dog numbers on its own by cruel methods, including poisons, expedient means, weapons, etc. (see Topic 6. Section 6.2, written evidence of residents, articles in mass media)
3. The state not at all takes “legislative and/or administrative measures needed to reduce the numbers of homeless animals” (Art. 12 1st paragraph of the Convention), which becomes clear from the following:
(à) there is a large number of homeless puppies and kittens, breeding outdoors (see Topic 4. Section 4.3 and Topic 6. Section 6.1), but disappearing without trace, presumably dying of cruel handling in a matter of a few months;
(b) the package of measures currently applied in Moscow within the framework of Moscow Government decrees No 403-RZP dated 19.07.2001 and No 819-PP dated 01.10.2002, referred to as a municipal sterilization programme:
- fundamentally is unable to resolve the tasks formulated in the decrees;
- does not correspond to the main goal of its application formulated in the decrees, i.e. “reduce the population of stray dogs and homeless cats”(Moscow Government decrees 403-RZP dated 19.07.2001 and 819-PP dated 01.10.2002);
- according to public audits, the package of measures did not pass the stage of project documentation approval, mandatory for budget-financed purpose-oriented regional and municipal, because documentation in full scope is not available, i.e. results of mandatory state expert reviews; legal, ecological and economic feasibilities of the need for such programme for the city; evidence of the compliance of the programme with stated goals and tasks as well as with programme safety to citizens as users and taxpayers (pursuant to the RF Law “On Protection of Consumers’ Rights”), and finally, proofs of mandatory compliance of the programme with the RF expenditure obligations. However, the aforesaid stage of approval is provided for by the RF federal legislation (RF Law “On Placement of Orders for the Delivery of Goods, Execution of Works, Provision of Services for State and Municipal Needs" (Art. 1, 3), the RF Fiscal Code (Art. 179), Moscow Law “On State Purpose-Oriented Programmes in Moscow" (Art. 1, 2, 3, 4, 8, 9 ).
For reference: at present, the RF has not signed the European Convention for the Protection of Pet Animals. Yet, pursuant to the Agreement on Partnership and Cooperation between the EU Countries and RF, the RF should seek convergence with the standards existing in the EU countries in the field of environment. Which means that in pursuance of the above international treaty of the RF, Russia should comply with the European standards and requirements of humane handling of pet animals and humane controlled regulation of their numbers, as formulated by the European Convention for the Protection of Pet Animals. |
