Dog question

Emilia Slabunova about how to remain a person in times of simple decisions

Did our distant ancestors think, taming the dogs as a guard for themselves and the assistant in the production of food that, after several thousand years, their descendants will lead the battles about whether to kill or not kill those of them that will be without hosts?! Yes, to discuss about the nuances: if you kill, then immediately how did you catch it or after the time allotted to the device? And how much effort will be spent on deciding on this time, waving budget calculation-is it enough for three months or for six months to still leave before making the sentence? Maybe if the ancestors were supposed to be something similar, then they would refuse to domestically?

After these issues, after these questions, they will want to declare me a wake of debate about the fate of hopeless animals with a terrible term “zooshiz”, I want to immediately notice that each tragedy with biting children and adults leaves the wound in mind and heart, and also report that I don’t have dogs and I don’t plan to start it. It is not because I do not consider it right to keep the dogs in the apartments of apartment buildings, and because, due to my lifestyle and over -time, I can’t provide her with a normal dog life - with the desired degree of freedom, such as to drive through the open spaces, as much as her soul pleases.

But these circumstances do not interfere with a completely defined position in relation to what methods the problem with abandoned animals should be solved. It is based on a simple maxim - "we are responsible for those who have been tamed." Moreover, the touched four -legged dozen or more thousands of years have been going with humanity side by side, serving faith and truth, ready to fulfill any roles, including new ones, in changing conditions - to brighten up loneliness, become a kind of home psychotherapist and even endure the bizarns of the owners and follow the dog fashion in haircuts and outfits.

It seems to be clear that the human dogs have earned their attitude, but the question of their hopeless part has become a stumbling block for our society.

More precisely, it was made by a stumbling block. I do not find objective reasons for the crisis that has developed in the system of handling hopeless animals. The causes of subjective are the management crisis. The APV strategy currently used in the field of abandoned animals (capture, sterilization, vaccination, return of non -aggressive animals on Wednesday), with all the flaws in it, are suffered. They went to her for a long time, and she is an achievement for our society, as it works for its humanization. But they could not cope with its implementation managerially, and the search for easy solutions began - to give the right to eliminate homeless animals with reference to some local features. This path will not be solving the problem. To overcome it, you must move in three directions:

1. increase the responsibility of animal owners for their maintenance (chipping, registration, pace ban and sanctions for violation of the rules);

2. in the implementation of the ATV strategy, focus on catching and sterilization as key tasks, which will significantly reduce the number of stray dogs and the burden of their content in shelters to the device;

3. In order to solve the problem of maintaining unsettled animals, to clearly decide on the execution of authority to keep them. The transfer of such powers from the level of a constituent entity of the Russian Federation to the level of local self -government often does not give the proper result due to the absence of the necessary resources. Our Yabloko faction in the Karelia parliament sees a way out to develop a modeling shelter as a standard for the maintenance of animals, place an order for their manufacture from local manufacturers, which will also become a measure of support for them, and establish such shelters in each of the municipal districts and districts. The material base of shelters should be left in state property, transfer it to the local authorities under the contract, and transmit to non -profit organizations (NPOs) to be subvented from the republican budget (NGOs) to be subvented from the republican budget on these purposes. In them, people are motivated, experienced, usually authoritative, proving confidence in local communities and capable of attracting additional resources for animal maintenance. They will be able to find new owners to them, and the shelter is expanded, if necessary.

If there is a will to solve the problem, this plan is not difficult to implement. But the most difficult issue is the will.

We sent the above position of the faction in May 2023 to the State Duma of the Russian Federation - the chairman of the Committee on Ecology, Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Dmitry Kobylkin as part of the discussion of the planned changes to the federal law “On responsible animal handling ..” with 1330 signatures of the inhabitants of Petrozavodsk, who opposed the regions of the right to decide the destiny animals, including the right to euthanasia. Instead of hearing the proposals of social activists, after two years of inaction, the federal legislator made a new attempt to offer the regions their “simple” decision - to put the dogs of the dog on the counter, setting the deadline for their maintenance in shelters with the right to kill after them. And again, a wave of public protest, and again at all sites we offer our plan.

The importance of the correct approaches in solving this issue cannot be underestimated, since this is a question about the value of life in general. It is low now and will be even lower, if you open the gateways for decision -making about animal euthanasia. The consequences will be an increase in conflict in society, aggression towards not only animals, but also to people. It will be much more difficult to remove this stress, to extinguish such aggression than to find managerly effective ways to solve this problem.

Is it really a country that first sent a person into space and declare ambitious plans in the field of artificial intelligence, such a task is not possible?! Moreover, the first person got into space only after the dog.

Deputy Nikolai Ced from United Russia stated that stray dogs are dangerous, and suggested turning to Soviet experience when the problem was solved, producing laundry soap from homeless animals.

“Each stray dog, a dog with a owner or without a owner, is a toothy weapon that can“ shoot ”at any time. Homeless dogs in a pack are more dangerous than wolves. Therefore, safety and control measures should be preventive. In Soviet times, the problem was solved simply - the production of laundry soap on soap from homeless dogs, ”the parliamentarian believes.