Bucharest = a fortunate city regarding the path taken for the protection of animals

Oprescu= a decisive mayor, unlike any other

 

Today, February 23, 2009, a debate on the proposed decision regarding the detainment and population control for dogs and cats in the municipality of Bucharest took place at City Hall. Those who participated in the debate were individuals interested in the acute problems related to companion animals in general, namely:

 

– the issue of dogs who have owners, yet, because they are allowed to breed and the offspring are dumped onto public property creates the second problem:

– the issue of homeless dogs

 

as well as authorities and ONGs.

 

The conclusion is a first at the level of local councils and a great model/incentive to follow for mayors throughout the country.

 

Mayor Oprescu proved, at least to those of us who know all the inner workings related to stray dog management that he is a mayor looking to truly serve the people.

 

We have been struggling for many years to establish a dialogue with the authorities. The path was opened for us by senator Marius Marinescu when the decision was made to change the fate of oppressed animals. Until now, all that we have been able to obtain in regard to animal protection required a huge effort on our behalf, involving extreme stress, worry and humiliation. However, this effort also strengthened our conviction that we will succeed to restore normality to the situation.

 

We are starting on the right path and are in great need of help from all those who no longer wish to see animals suffering, abused, and also see people terrorized by packs of stray dogs. We want to get to a point where we are able to control the population of dogs and cats so that there will be only as many animals coming into the world as will have owners. This is not an ambitious goal, only one of common sense and decency…a humane one.

 

We do not understand the position of the Council of Veterinary Physicians representatives who submitted amendments to the decision. Many of these amendments, in our opinion, do nothing more than impede its implementation. We were also warned that the representatives will contest the decision if their proposed amendments are not included, which means that implementing the decision will be delayed once again. During this time, so many animals will be born and abandoned in the public domain, which is in everyone’s disadvantage.

 

We would expect that the Council of Veterinary Physicians would come up with proposals for collaboration. We never imagined that representatives of this council in particular will come forward not to cooperate but to create obstacles.

 

We would expect that veterinary medicine colleges, hospitals and commercial entities would also contribute in a positive way to this cause. We also hope to see a great show of support from private veterinary offices/clinics who maintain that they act to promote animal welfare.

 

“Our client, our owner” is the motto. Is this how it really is?

 

We would also expect that mass media will promote this decision not as a brief news flash, but for a long time from now as a absolute necessity. 

 

We live with the hope that people will wake up, that all we have dreamed for our dear and good animal friends will become reality. 

 

Only this hope has put us on the right path. We will remain vigilant so that our goals will become reality, just as we have done until now.

 

Don’t forget that we wish for nothing more than a normal situation.

 

On February 27, 2009, the decision will be on the PMB Administrative Council’s daily agenda. We hope it will be unanimously voted in, and nobody will dare contest it.