Occupy for Animals
Exclude all Romanian FVE-representatives
This petition, started on 10th of November, 2015, is a joint action by 'Starromania - Schweizer Tieraerzte für Rumänien', 'Occupy for Animals' & 'Alliance against Abuses', and calls on all international members of FVE to pressurize their headquarters in Brussels to have the Romanian FVE-representation excluded from the Federation of Veterinarians of Europe, because of the behavior of their National Sanitary-Veterinary Authority (A.N.S.V.S.A.) and their representatives - most of all Liviu Harbuz - the "father" of the current murderous and corrupt law - and this until an end is being put to the unspeakable cruelty and horrors that the Romanian dogs are subjected to. A copy of our petition letter will go to:the Office of Mr Klaus Iohannis, President of Romania and to Ms. Nathalie Welschbillig, FVE-guest speaker from the Luxembourg Presidency of the Council of the European Union For further information on this petition, please visit: http://hopeforromaniandogs.weebly.com/the-petition-to-the-federation-of-veterinarians-of-europe-and-the-president-of-romania-to-have-all-romanian-fve-representatives-excluded-from-fve-until-the-cruelties-inflicted-on-romanian-dogs-have-come-to-an-end.html Pentru a citi acest post în limba română, vă rugăm să mergeți la:http://hopeforromaniandogs.weebly.com/federatia-veterinarilor-din-europa-exclude539i-toti-reprezentan539ii-romani-din-fve-pacircn259-cacircnd-cruzimile-asupra-cacircinilor-vor-icircnceta.htmlINTRODUCTIONIn Romania, brave women, acting all alone, put themselves in harm’s way, trying to fend off entire groups of brutal ASPA dog catchers (ironically, ASPA is the Authority for the Supervision and Protection of Animals) whilst dozens of members of the FVE European Commission who are – thanks to the Internet - perfectly aware of what is really going on in Romania, listen to the lies of the Romanian FVE-representatives. Corruption and nepotism kills. And not only dogs. The irresponsible, criminal and unscrupulous actions of Romanian authorities have recently claimed more than forty victims and severely injured over 150 others when a fire broke out at Colectiv Club in Bucharest - a nightclub that was "allowed" to function for years despite the fact that it did not have ONE SINGLE fire exit. The Romanians have had enough! They are taking to the streets to protest against a profoundly corrupt political system and we are currently witnessing the outbreak of a true revolution. The Romanian animal extermination law is a significant part of the corrupt Romanian political system, and we wonder: How long still before the European representatives of FVE finally stand up against the ongoing cruelties directed against Romania's dogs, and - at last - live by their high expectations asserted on their website? How much more unimaginable, and senseless pain, must the Romanian dogs endure before the European veterinarians show their Romanian colleagues the "red card"? How long still until they finally act as one against all the unbearable wrongdoings we are all aware of? How much longer will they watch passively how irreparable damage is caused to Romanian children and adults alike as they witness the cruel and criminal treatment of dogs on their streets?How long still until those veterinarians in Brussels, who represent also OUR culture, OUR conscience and OUR morals, will finally stand up and say: "ENOUGH!"? Surely, you recall our collective, unforgettable success and the concomitant disgrace of the corrupt Romanian Veterinary Authority (A.N.S.V.S.A.), when back in June, 2015, Claudiu Dumitriu was nevertheless eventually invited to participate at the General Assembly of FVE - the Federation of Veterinarians of Europe - in Iasi, and had his say? Our collective action was a success. But the next - and even more important step - is yet to come. A new meeting of FVE will now take place from 12th to 14th of November, 2015, in Brussels, and with this petition, we are calling on all international members of FVE to pressurize their headquarters in Brussels to have the Romanian FVE-representation excluded from the Federation of Veterinarians for Europe, because of the behavior of their National Sanitary-Veterinary Authority (A.N.S.V.S.A.) and their representatives - most of all Liviu Harbuz - the "father" of the current murderous and corrupt law - and this until an end is being put to the unspeakable cruelty and horrors that the Romanian dogs are subjected to. Dr Liviu Harbuz, who paradoxically:- is a top politician in a country that profoundly hates its politicians;- is the friend of ex-ex-prime-minister Adrian Năstase, locked away for corruption, in a country devastated by corruption;- is a most prosperous and successful business man (as revealed by his wealth statement available on the website of the Romanian Parliament) in a country where thousands of honest businessmen go bankrupt;- is the „father” of the National Sanitary-Veterinary Authority (A.N.S.V.S.A.) and of the concept of „animal welfare” in a country where it is the same A.N.S.V.S.A. that mocks „animal welfare” given that tolerating and covering up the horrors stray animals are subjected to is part of their so-called „management”- it is him who comes before you and boasts about a formidable law, namely the law for the mass-killing of stray dogs passed by Government Emergency Ordinance OUG 155/2001 amended by Law 258/2013 that has not caused - but revolt - repulsion, psychic trauma and countless street protests in Romania and Europe;- next to the tens of thousands of animals tortured, killed or let to die of starvation;- in addition to the undermining of public health by blocking the rabies vaccination of the dogs;- in addition to stimulating abandonment;- and creating an abusive monopoly of dog identification and registration in favor of the Board of Veterinarians of Romania (CNMVRo) Please see our website for TV reports on Dr Liviu Harbuz' corrupt doings: http://hopeforromaniandogs.weebly.com/the-petition-to-the-federation-of-veterinarians-of-europe-and-the-president-of-romania-to-have-all-romanian-fve-representatives-excluded-from-fve-until-the-cruelties-inflicted-on-romanian-dogs-have-come-to-an-end.htmlGiven that Ms Nathalie Welschbillig, from the Luxembourg Presidency of the Council of the European Union, will be present at this meeting, and as their guest speaker, will give a presentation on the role of the Presidency in the Council of the European Union, and also held two workshops later on, namely (and ironically) on reputation of the profession and public trust and on the ethics in veterinary medicine and the position of the profession in the society, we found it appropriate to also send a copy of our letter to Ms Welschbillig.
End all EU-subsidies for bulls raised to die in bullfights
This petition was started by Occupy for Animals on 29th of October, 2015, and submitted to the European Parliament's Committee on Petitions for official registration at the same date. For further information, please visit: http://www.occupyforanimals.net/will-the-eu-commission-respond-in-favor-of-the-eu-parliaments-vote-to-end-eu-subsidies-for-bullfighting.html------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 28th of October, 2015, the European Parliament voted to end EU-subsidies for bullfighting. Now it's up to the EU-Commission to respond to this demand. Currently, subsidies from the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) allow Spanish (and some Portuguese and French) farmers to use Single Farm Payment on hectares used to rear bulls used in the fights. An amendment passed on 8th of October, 2015, means the European Parliament has voted against this use, and was followed by an astonishing victory of 438 votes to 199 (50 abstentions) on the non-binding resolution that says ‘CAP appropriations or any other appropriations from the budget should not be used for the financing of lethal bullfighting activities'. 199 MEPs - of which we will publish the names as soon as they will be made public - voted against the following amendment: 26 c. Reiterates that CAP appropriations or any other appropriations from the budget should not be used for financing lethal bull fighting activities; recalls that such funding is a clear violation of the European Convention for the protection of animals kept for farming purposes (Council Directive 98/58/EC) The inclusion of the word "lethal" is worrying as it would exclude all the bulls bred, used and abused in the many other sadistic fiestas such as the 'Toro Jubilo', the bull-runs, like the famous and still popular one held in Pamplona and others, as well - and most importantly - the Portuguese bullfights where the bull is/should not be killed in the ring, but is often being killed or simply left to perish behind the scenes, conveniently out of public sight. According to a 2013 report called 'Torres and Taxes' compiled by Spanish MEPs, no less than €129.6 million were spent by the European Union on subsidising bullfighting each year. In an article published on the website of the GREEN PARTY, MEP Keith Taylor said: “I am delighted that MEPs have voted today to stop EU money being used to prop up the bullfighting industry. “Bullfighting is barbaric and cruel and, without the support of misplaced EU farming subsidies, it’s a failing business. While the vote today will not stop bullfighting, it could be a massive blow to the industry - stopping millions of pounds going to those involved.” Yes, indeed: it COULD be a massive blow. IF the EU-Commission and the 28 Finance Ministers of the EU Member States agree with the Parliament's vote. That said, in a next step, the Parliament’s report will be sent to the Commission, who in turn will sent it to the Finance Ministers of all 28 Members States, in order to reach an agreement with the European Parliament as to whether the budget appropriations may now still be used to subsidise the breeding of bulls meant to die in bullfights. Or rather not... With this petition, we are calling on the Commission, and the Finance Ministers of all 28 EU-Member States, to respect the vote of the European Parliament representing the European citizens, and to agree with the European Parliament with respect to the EU budget for 2016 and to stop the budget appropriations that may be used to subsidise activities associated with bullfighting.
I pledge to boycott your country and its products
This petition was started by Occupy for Animals on 12th of October, 2013. For further information on this petition, please visit: http://occupyforanimals.wix.com/romania-tourism ON THE BACKGROUND: Voices of terror and anguish are being heard across the country of Romania. Death cries of over one million animals which the recently introduced law has condemned to death. Let us also not play with semantics by using words like 'euthanasia' and 'humane'. Animals will and are being killed grotesquely on the streets and in extremes of inhumane activity in the shelters. Voices of concern have been raised! Accompanying this cacophony are the voices of the children whose screams of terror will soon be silenced. Silenced by a natural process where they will desensitize to the horror. Their psychological defense mechanism will protect their emotions. Exposure to abuse and violence will become normal to them, they will not care. Unfortunately desensitization comes at a cost. They will lose the ability to be empathic and compassionate towards animals and people. An uncaring, compassion-less society, determined primarily by government practice. A practice which has polarized a society... some aggressing against animals and some seeking to protect. Lest the gravity not be understood, six deaths have already occurred because of this polarization... after only one week since its introduction. One can only imagine her death count as the weeks, months and years pass. Many are the entreaties, the petitions, the appeals in the past but now a different dimension of outrage is being expressed by the people of Europe. The Romanian Government's introduction of a Law which impacts on the animals, the children and grossly negatively on their society has created outrage at an unprecedented level. One cannot conceive of a more counter productive, societally destructive direction taken by any European Union Member Government in recent times! Not only have the Romanian Government dismissed the warnings expressed by the experts, and failed to acknowledge T-N-R as a strategy (ALL 'catch & kill' policies have historically proven unsuccessful) but being aware of the costs and profits to be made from implementing the proposed 'eradication' strategy, are aware that significant personal profits can be made through corrupt alliances. The Romanian government does not observe/enforce EU laws, disregards international treaties, doesn't care about world opinion nor about the EU, and does not even respond to their official questions. But if the Romanian Government does not want to listen to its people, nor to the EU, nor to all other 'voices of reason'... well then they must feel where it hurts them most. And that is in their wallets... Economic boycott is something not to be taken lightly. Economic boycott affects both governments AND people and is therefore a serious threat to any country and especially to those who depend on tourism. Last year, Romania's international tourist arrivals rose to 1.65 million from 1.51 million in 2011. Tourism brought in $1.46 billion (1.1 billion euros) in revenue, but Romania lags behind neighbouring Bulgaria, which earned more than $6 billion (4.5 billion euros) from tourism last year. Speaking at the opening of the International Tourism Conference hosted in Bucharest early this month, Romania Minister of Tourism Maria Grapini said he seeks to bring tourism to 5 percent of GDP by 2016, up from 1.5 percent currently. Part of this strategy consists of opening new tourism offices in Japan and Dubai and promoting the Romanian spa resorts as an alternative to the already known destinations in the country. We are sure that you would not want to support a corrupt government with your hard earned tourist money by visiting a country of which the government does not respect its citizen, does not care about its children and kills animals in the most gruesome ways imaginable. And if YOU would refuse to visit Romania because you have come to know of the horrible animal cruelty and the newly introduced 'eradication program' AND if you would take a little time to sign OFA's petition to Romania's Government to let them know what you won't be visiting, you would have a very powerful weapon to bring change to both the animals AND people of Romania! Thank you, in advance, for signing our petition.
European Union: Please take action regarding Romania, a European country challenging Europe
This petition has been started by Occupy for Animals on 27th of September, 2013 and has been submitted to the European Parliament for official registration at the same date. Information on this petition is compiled at: http://www.occupyforanimals.net/romania---on-the-greatest-animal-genocide-in-european-history-government-initiated-anarchy-violations-of-human-rights-and-children-rights.html For the background on this petition, please visit: http://www.occupyforanimals.net/romania--a-country-cries-out-for-revenge-after-the-tragic-death-of-a-four-year-old-boy-who-had-been-attacked-by-dogs.html VIDEO by: Pro Media Sud, Bucharest, Romania: >https://vimeo.com/75658757 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- On 27th of September, 2013 Occupy for Animals has sent the following letter to the mentioned addressees: To:The European ParliamentThe European CommissionThe Council of EuropeThe European OmbudsmanThe European Anti-Fraud OfficeThe Belgian State Secretary for European AffairsThe European Parliament's Intergroup on the Welfare and Conservation of Animals Dear Sir / Madam, On 10th September the Lower House of the Romanian Parliament voted GEO 155/2001 to legitimise a 'catch and kill' policy for all homeless animals. The terminology used during the debate at the parliament was 'eradication'. Since this date media frenzy has been created because of the death of a young boy under what remains dubious circumstances. However the stray animals were blamed and as a result of the media frenzy and the vote, a state of abuse of animals exists now in Romania. Animals and their owners and protectors were immediately, and still are, at serious risk. It must be remembered that many millions of Romanians are animal owners or protectors of the animals. This law has polarized Romania's society and made it dangerously divisive. It had to be expected that millions of animal lovers would seek to protect their own animals or the animals they 'protect' on the streets. Millions! It had to be expected that half a country would seek to defend and protect, and that the other half would seek to aggress. Not only would this policy, bring infamy to Romanian authorities and by association, with Romania, apparently ill considered was the fact that an 'eradication' strategy simply will not be successful. Owned dogs will continue to breed and thereby ensuring a plentiful and constant supply of animals on the streets. Occupy for Animals, along with many others, suggested and still maintains, that this is a desirable condition! If implemented, it would therefore be a futile and ineffective policy. The 'Making The Link' Study and Project Group - a major collaboration of international organisations, academics and world leading experts in THE LINK between exposure to animal abuse and the resulting effect on children's psychological health and development, had warned the Romanian Constitutional Court that the implementation of GEO 155/2001 - their 'eradication' strategy, which can best be described as potentially 'the greatest animal genocidal impact on human health in European history' - would have a deleterious impact of the health of the children of Romania. 'Making The Link' - initiator Malcolm Plant (BSc, BA (Hons), MSc, Dipl Psych., Fellow of the Institute for Human-Animal Connection, University of Denver) wrote (among other): "We would urge you to re-enforce your decision last year on precisely the same issue and with no additional changes to circumstances. Our concern is primarily for the health of the children which we will be measuring over the next few years. Academically we are anticipating hitherto profound impact on the children's health unseen in any previous study if you were to ratify the proposed amendments. As human beings, as parents, we are frightened about the effects if the new generation of Romanians are exposed to street horrors on a previously unprecedented scale." On 25th September, 2013 Constitutional Court judge Petre Lazaroiu, suggested that "the mass killing of stray dogs in Romania could traumatize the population"... Then the entire place ruled to cull all dogs... and that the eradication of Romania's homeless animals - although it had been ruled unconstitutional in January 2012 - was now "constitutional"! On 25th of September, the Romanian Constitutional Court had an opportunity to define whether Romania is a country worthy of being called civilized or whether it should be consigned to popular perception of a country unworthy of being considered anything other than barbaric, mismanaged, corrupt and dangerous. They chose the latter. Their approval of, and the implementation of GEO 155/2001, has produced worldwide condemnation and a perception that Romania is a country which introduces medieval practices and governs in a draconian mode. Most of the 'civilized' countries have introduced a 'Catch, Neuter, Vaccinate and Return' policy and now have very few homeless animals on the streets. This is a 21st century methodology. Not only have the Romanian Government dismissed the warnings expressed by the experts, and failed to acknowledge T-N-R as the only proven successful strategy to control and curb stray animal populations (in fact: ALL 'catch & kill' policies have historically proven unsuccessful) but being aware of the costs and profits to be made from implementing the proposed 'eradication' strategy, are aware that significant personal profits can be made through corrupt alliances. The net result will be abject strategic failure and the number of animals will not decrease. Through corrupt alliances, personal profits from the animal corpse disposal will have been secured. But the biggest cost is in the human domain. Children exposed to the capture and often immediate slaughter of the animals will seek to psychologically protect themselves from such trauma. They will desensitize. Reduce their sensitivity towards living creatures including fellow humans. Some will embrace the attributes of their violent society and finding legitimized sanction for the destruction of the animal sub-group, will also aggress against the animals. There is then some inevitability that once such aggression is socially sanctioned, their journey will continue by aggressing against person, against property. They will see no distinction. Their journey can easily lead to the killing of another person. Significant research has identified this development and ending. This is the slow diminishment of a society's moral substance and gradual increase into a prevalence of violence but a more immediate but equally destructive effect can be seen. In any society, irrespective of political dictats, there is no homogeneity of support. Emotive issues exacerbate differences. Any society will contain those who passionately support the rights of companion animals and also those who have no regard or who are motivated by political hysteria. At such levels of passion, in counterpoint to each other, this polarization can produce levels of acute violence. Neighbor against neighbor! Even before official recognition of the law in Romania, two neighbors have fought over this issue and one was killed. Even before! One can only stand and watch now and wait while the death count gets higher! So we have a government introduced policy which at best is ill informed, historically proven to be unsuccessful with previously proven successful strategies dismissed. And on top of all, a strategy which will polarize society resulting in violence between citizens and almost as if to reinforce the evidence that the strategy is ill advised, ill considered and incompetent, the children will be psychologically damaged. One cannot conceive of a more counter productive, societally destructive direction taken by any European Union Member Government in recent times. Additional information is compiled at: http://www.occupyforanimals.net/romania--a-country-cries-out-for-revenge-after-the-tragic-death-of-a-four-year-old-boy-who-had-been-attacked-by-dogs.html And: http://www.occupyforanimals.net/romania---on-the-greatest-animal-genocide-in-european-history-government-initiated-anarchy-violations-of-human-rights-and-children-rights.html Occupy for Animals is being bombarded with emails and calls from desperate Romanian animal activists and rescuers who are pleading for help! Not only are their own companion animals, and/or the animals that are in the care of their organisations and who most certainly constitute no 'danger' to the public and who often even already have potential adopters (outside of Romania) at risk of being taken by the dog catchers and thrown in their so-called 'shelters' where death is a certainty and not an option, but the people, too, are at risk of being physically attacked! And it's only the beginning! Considering the scale of the tragedy that is already unfolding, the societal disaster along with the potentially 'greatest animal genocidal impact on human health in European history' that we are heading towards, we are respectfully begging for you to intervene and to help Romania to get back on track before it's too late! In addition to our plea for help, we also have a few questions that we - together with very very many people from Europe and from all around the world - would really love to have an answer to. Below, our questions, suggestions, and remarks. To the EUROPEAN COMMISSION, the COUNCIL OF EUROPE, the EUROPEAN OMBUDSMAN, and the European Parliament's Intergroup on the Welfare and Conservation of Animals - regarding the new 'legislation': Romania's Constitutional Court ruled on 25th September, 2013 that the proposal which had been accepted by the Lower House of the Romanian Parliament on 10th of September, 2013, is "constitutional" and that the 'euthanasia' of all homeless dogs in Romania, after 14 days spent in their so-called 'shelters if not adopted or perished before this time has elapsed, is 'constitutional', too, although they had ruled in January 2012, that: "the killing of healthy animals was unconstitutional as a mean to control stray animal populations until all other solutions had been applied". What has changed since January 2012 on the "management" of Romania's stray animals populations? We haven't heard of any massive sterilization campaigns! We haven't heard of any 'education of the populace regarding the importance of spay & neuter' their owned (but allowed to roam freely and to mate as they wish) companion animals! And in this context, we would like to remind you that an estimated 5 million puppies are born each year in Romania in rural areas of which some are being killed by their owners, and the others are simply being thrown out on the streets or in the woods. We haven't heard of any measures taken to undermine breeding, including "back yard breeding"! To the European Parliament's Intergroup on the Welfare and Conservation of Animals - regarding the before mentioned points: Can, and will, the European Parliament's Intergroup on the Conservation and Welfare of Animals, please ask Mrs Daciana Sarbu - Vice President of the Intergroup, co-initiator of the Written Declaration on Dog Population Management 0026/2011, wife of Romania's Prime Minister Victor Ponta - what she has done in her own country to promote and implement a humane management of the stray animals populations as she has so brightly described in the WD 0026/2011? Please ask Mrs Sarbu what she has done to promote responsible animal ownership in her own country? Please ask Mrs Sarbu what she has done to educate the populace of Romania about the importance of spay and neuter, and/or not to let their animals roam freely and to mate as they wish? Please ask Mrs Sarbu what she has done to avoid the tragedy that is now unfolding, bringing unnecessary suffering and death to both animals and their protectors? As the wife of Romania's Prime Minister Vîctor Ponta, and a Vice President of the Intergroup, she had, and still has a unique position and opportunity to bring change to her country regarding stray animals population control and welfare, but we haven't - sadly and to our very great deception - heard of any actions taken by Mrs Sarbu in this field. In fact, we haven't heard anything from her since the adoption of WD0026/2011. The questions might be, and probably are, irrelevant because they simply won't change a thing to the situation of the poor homeless dogs in Romania, but we really would love to know her, and/or your answer to our questions. In fact, we are sure that very very many people are interested in knowing the answers to these reasonable and justified questions. Also, with the speech that Mrs Sarbu has given at the Intergroup-meeting from 12th of September, 2013, her totally misinformed and erroneous statements self-declared her as being unfit for office as either a member of the Intergroup, let alone as Vice President. Please, download and listen to said speech at the following link: https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B_iBJnK4Nmk1ZjhFYl9tMVNmU0k/edit In light of the surprisingly misinformed content of the presentation by Mme Sarbu and her continued absence from Intergroup involvement especially when a serious focus is placed on her country, we would reserve the right to further explore Mme Sarbu's suitability for office and we are sure that you would encourage any adverse detail to be presented, as you of course only want officials who exemplify the highest quality in seeking the best of interest for the animals and people of Europe. UPDATE October 3, 2013 - the additional information regarding Madame Sarbu's profoundly unprofessionally uninformed delivery can now be read at: http://www.occupyforanimals.net/romania---daciana-sarbu-a-head-with-two-faces---one-face-smiling-at-the-death-bringers-the-other-face-smiling-at-the-protectors.html Can the Intergroup please advise us as to who to complain to if someone is failing in his/her duty as regards to the position he/she, maybe now un-deservingly, finds himself/herself in? To the EUROPEAN COMMISSION, the COUNCIL OF EUROPE, and the EUROPEAN OMBUDSMAN - regarding the new 'legislation': Former senator Marius Marinescu, president of the Romanian Animal Protection Association FPAM, and initiator of the Law 'Marinescu 1' commonly known as Law 9/2008, officially stated that: "LAW NO. 9/2008 (Law MARINESCU 1) remains in force. Euthanasia is prohibited. And that: Article 7 index 1 of the Act provides: "It is forbidden to euthanize dogs, cats and other animals, except animals with incurable diseases identified by the veterinarian." and that: GEO (Government Emergency Ordinance) 155/2001 concerning euthanasia, approved on 10 September, 2013 by the Parliament, does not repeal the law 'Marinescu 1'" and, considering that the dog catchers are already in action all over Romania - at the order given by their Government - and are catching all dogs that they can get hold of and sometimes even owned dogs on private properties (gardens and yards) to take them to an "uncertain" destiny, we believe this to be unlawful. QUESTION: Can, and will, the EU-Commission help to shred some light into the matter as to which law is now the one that must be respected? Can, and will, the EU-Commission help to restore the "order" in Romania if proven that the Romanian Government acts unlawfully? To the COUNCIL OF EUROPE - regarding human rights violations and the safety of Romanian citizens: We have seen people been arrested (already days before the vote on the new 'legislation'), we have seen dog catchers entering private properties and "stealing" owned companion animals, we have seen people being physically attacked by dog catchers when trying to defend their owned companion animals who they consider being part of their family, and we have (already) seen people (neighbors) killing each other. One just needs to check the Romanian news to find many cases, and one just needs to wait and watch while the death count gets higher. Or one can take action now and try to stop the anarchic madness. And those who are not being physically aggressed are being forced to witness extreme cruelty to animals, and even to humans, on a daily basis, and to such an extent that they lose any good quality of life, and the feeling of being safe. Experts have warned that exposure to abuse has an impact upon any individual who witnesses it, and that the exposure to uncontrolled animal abuse as happening right now in Romania, connects directly with children's psychological health. That children exposed to the capture and often immediate slaughter of the animals will seek to psychologically protect themselves from such trauma. They will desensitize. Reduce their sensitivity towards living creatures including fellow humans. Some will embrace the attributes of their violent society and finding legitimized sanction for the destruction of the animal sub-group, will also aggress against the animals. QUESTIONS: Can, and will, the Council of Europe intervene in trying to protect the safety and the human rights of Romania's citizens? Can, and will, the Council of Europe intervene in order to protect Romania's children from psychological impairment due to the exposure of uncontrolled animal abuse? To the COUNCIL OF EUROPE - regarding the 'European Council's Convention for the Protection of Pet Animals' and violations of said Convention: Romania has signed said Convention on 23/06/2004 - has ratified it on 06/08/2004 - and it entered into force on 01/03/2005 - and in addition to this, Romania has also embraced parts of said Convention in their National Animal Protection Law 9/2008. Being a signatory of the 'European Council's Convention for the Protection of Pet Animals', Romania had and still have a binding obligation to take adequate measures in the field of stray animal population control, including the housing and care of these animals. As you know all of the before mentioned points of the Convention are NOT being respected. QUESTIONS: Can, and will, the Council of Europe take any measure to remind Romania of their binding obligations regarding the management of stray animal populations and the adequate care of these animals, among others? Can, and will, the Council of Europe, please remind Romania that the 'European Council's Convention for the Protection of Pet Animals' is NOT an essentially cosmetic, futile, and very expensive useless piece of paper initiated at the expense of European tax payer's money, but without any value other than the paper on which it is being printed, and which can readily be dismissed? To THE EUROPEAN ANTI-FRAUD OFFICE, and THE BELGIAN STATE SECRETARY FOR EUROPEAN AFFAIRS - regarding corruption, misuse and potentially misappropriation of public funds and EU-funds ALL 'catch & kill' or 'catch & incarcerate & starve to death' policies have proven unsuccessful in Romania. The WHO clearly states that killing stray animals does not stop the problem and only offers a temporary “solution”. The World Health Organization’s “Guidelines for Dog Population Management” (Geneva 1990) and various other academic studies show that killing dogs is ineffective. Despite mass extermination campaigns by misguided municipalities the street dog population grows, and the best examples of both good and bad stray animal population control policies come from their own country: In 2001, Traian Basescu, the then-mayor of Bucharest launched a campaign that led to the extermination of about 144,000 stray dogs in the capital alone, spending almost 9,000,000 Euros (62 Euros per dog) during the period from 2001-2007. Between 2008-2010, 20,000 dogs have been killed in Constanta spending 1,500,000 Euros (75 Euros per dog). The only towns in Romania that used catch/neuter/release programs were Oradea and Lugoj, and the results are showing: ORADEA 2006 – stray dog population: 4,000 2011 – stray dog population: 270 Costs incurred to spay/neuter a dog: 14 euro – program run and funded by Robert Smith - FPCC/Dog - Project Oradea, UK, in collaboration with city hall Oradea LUGOJ 2008: 2,500 stray dogs 2011: 235 stray dogs Costs to spay/neuter a dog: 12 euro – program run and funded by city hall Lugoj in collaboration with local animal welfare organization, Free Amely. According to Princess Maja von Hohenzollern, Romania has killed an incredible 10 million stray dogs during the period from 2004 to 2009. That IS a 'genocide of dogs' that has never happened in Europe - and the entire world - before. Romania has killed almost as many dogs as the entire population of Romania with the only "result" that the streets of Romania are again (still) littered with live and dead dogs. Overall it is estimated that Romania has spend between 25 and 40 million euros between 2001 and 2008 for the 'management' of the stray animals, while their numbers only grew larger! Contrary to the popular belief that fuels the anti-stray protests, the money spent on food for the strays was just a infinitesimal part of the budget, as the dogs were being fed “subliminal” quantities, to quote the so called specialists from DSVA Brasov. Out of a total budget of 1,500,000 lei for 2008, the dog catchers in Brasov allocated only 5,000 lei for the dog food, less than 3%. The stray dog business as a very lucrative business and by intentionally NOT taking the right decisions to solve the problem, the Romanian government supports the prosperity of a dirty industry in which many people (including mayors and other politicians who accept bribes) 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 incineration of the deceased animals YES: "interestingly", even culling dogs can be very profitable. The President is therefore asking the tax payer to fund an expensive, non-evidence based, ineffective practice! QUESTIONS: Can, and will, the OLAF please investigate the correct (or fraudulent) use of public funds spent under the pretext of stray animals management in Romania? As you know best, Romania ranks high at the corruption-index and It has been suggested countless times by many Romanian organisations during the last years, that the money would disappear into the pockets of greedy, dishonest politicians, mayors and business men, but that the dogs would not benefit from the public money that is being spend for their supposed management and care. We have seen shelters where the dogs were not even given a drop of water all the while the municipality had spent gigantic sums for their "care". Can, and will, the Belgian State Secretary for European Affairs please let us know if the European Union gives money for animal welfare to Romania and the exact amount? If that proves to be the case then an independent commission should be assigned to do a complete investigation as to the appropriation of these monies. What could perhaps be happening is that money slated for animal welfare could very well be used for purposes other than it was intended maybe even for the personal gains of those individuals who advocate these atrocities. Misappropriation of money and falsification of documents to coverup such misappropriation is nothing new and has been uncovered in other countries of the Eastern Block. Such information, however, is usually covered up and a wall of silence is put up by methods of intimidation. Thank you, in advance, for the time taken to read this, for considering our plea for help, and for answering our questions! For and on behalf of Occupy for Animals and the signatories of this petition:Pia Berrend / Founder at Occupy for Animalswww.occupyforanimals.netoccupyforanimals.wix.com/straysofeuropeEmail: firstname.lastname@example.org
Please don't let the animals suffer in your zoos
This petition has been started by Occupy for Animals on September 27, 2012. Despite all our previous pleas to the CITES director and after several meetings of our Egyptian activist members with the responsible authorities, nothing much has changed inside the zoos and the animals in Egypt's seven governmental zoos continue to suffer terribly. As our last resort, we are now turning to the President of Egypt asking him to intervene and to appoint a person to specifically ensure that the changes needed are carried out as soon as possible. For further information, pictures, videos and press reports, as well as the links to other, related petitions, please visit: http://www.occupyforanimals.org/egypts-zoos--hell-holes-for-animals.html By signing our petition, the letter that you can read below will be sent instantly to the President of Egypt. We thank you very much, in advance, for signing our petition and for speaking up for the poor animals who are imprisoned in the governmental zoos of Egypt.
EU: make spaying and neutering compulsory!
This petition has been started on September 9, 2012 by Occupy for Animals and has been submitted to the European Parliament for official registration at the same date.For additional information concerning this petition, please visit: http://occupyforanimals.wix.com/petitions-to-the-eu#!spay--neuter/c10en On the same website are compiled all our petitions that are addressed to the EU and that had been submitted for official registration, with acceptance pending. Please check them out! ABOUT THIS PETITION Despite a global attachment of our society towards companion animals, millions of dogs and cats 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 animals are abandoned. They become strays and roam free, becoming a nuisance and causing illness and harm to the community. 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. Europe's shelters are full of unwanted animals and an estimated 100 million free roaming dogs (owned dogs and stray dogs), and probably twice as much cats, live in countries member of the European Union. 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 and the importance of spay and neuter. But all their efforts will always remain insufficient as long as new animals are being added to this sad circle. Dogs and cats follow their basic instincts and breed to propagate their species. Just one unaltered female dog and her offspring can produce 67,000 puppies in only six years. In seven years, one female cat and her offspring can produce an incredible 370,000 kittens! Male animals contribute to the companion animal overpopulation crisis even more than females do. Just one unsterilized male animal can impregnate dozens of females, creating dozens upon dozens of unwanted offspring. Humans can make the decision to control their own population, and they must also take responsibility for their companion animals and the single most important thing that we can do to save cats and dogs from all the suffering and death that their overpopulation causes, is to spay and neuter them. Since the problem of pet-overpopulation in Europe has become a problem of epidemic proportions, we are calling on the European Union to make spaying and neutering compulsory for all owned companion animals in the European Union, imposing hefty fines on those who will chose to ignore this law. Governments shall provide free sterilizations to community members that can not afford the fees, so that there will be no excuse not to spay or neuter. Considering that communities spend millions of Euros of private funds and that governments spend millions of Euros of taxpayer's money each year coping with problems that a failure of spay and neuter causes, the one-time cost of spaying or neutering is far lower than the expense involved in rounding up strays, feeding and housing abandoned animals, and euthanizing those for whom homes can not be found. By signing this petition the message that you can read under the tab 'Petition Letter' will be sent instantly to the Chair of the Committee on Petitions at the European Parliament, Mrs Erminia Mazzoni.Thank you in advance for your signature.
Ban animal live exports!
Petition started by Occupy for Animals on September 7, 2012 For more information about this petition, please visit: http://www.occupyforanimals.org/australia--shocking-new-evidence-of-live-export-breaches.html Over the past 30 years Australia’s live export industry has exported over 150 million animals to the Middle East – to countries where there are no laws to protect them from acts of cruelty. During this time, some 2.5 million have died en route. Animals Australia’s seven investigations in the Middle East since 2003 have revealed that these animals may well have been the fortunate ones. They have also revealed Australia’s live export industry’s culpability in the cruel treatment of all animals in the region. A memorandum of understanding put in place after the Cormo Express disaster of 2003, where 6,000 sheep died, is meant to protect animals involved in the live export trade. But the new cases, including the most recent ones from September 2012, suggest procedures for animal welfare in the live export trade have failed. In regard to the new shocking evidence of live export cruelty that has emerged when tens of thousands of sheep where stranded - rejected by Kuwait and Bahrain after they had been on board for weeks - even senator Lee Rhiannon said that the situation is unacceptable. "The memorandum of understanding now looks like worthless bits of paper," she said. The 30,000 baby cows from Australia that had been slaughtered - after weeks of transportation in horrible conditions and after they had been stranded for weeks in the Red Sea port - by the Egyptian authorities after they had discovered what they described as a “hormonal capsules” in the animals - is just another very sad story to add to those of live export cruelty from Australia to the middle east and other places. Evidence is mounting that Australian government regulations cannot protect animals from extreme suffering in the live export trade. The government's attempts to protect the welfare of Australian livestock are dependent on importers and exporters playing by the rules. They clearly cannot be trusted to do so. With all the shocking evidence that has emerged over the last years, we believe that the point has been reached where the Australian government must do what the vast majority of Australians have been long calling on governments to do - and that is to end these cruel live exports once and for good. By signing our petition, the message that you can read under the tab 'Petition Letter' will be sent instantly to Australia's Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry, Mr Joe Ludwig (email@example.com). We thank you very much in advance for your signature.
EU: ban fur farming in the European Union
This petition was started by Occupy for Animals at date of August 31, 2012 and has been submitted to the European Parliament for official registration at the same date. For additional information on this petition, please visit:http://www.occupyforanimals.org/ban-fur-farms-in-the-european-union.html While wearing fur clothing in cold weather as protection goes back to the stone age, the source for this material came from the wild. As human populations grew, furs, leathers and hides for use in clothing came from farm stock such as sheep (sheepskin), rabbits, cattle, pigs and goats. The earliest records of breeding mink for fur in North America were in the 1860s. Foxes were first raised on farms for fur in Prince Edward Island in Canada in 1895. Historically, the fur trade played an important economic role in the United States. Fur trappers explored and opened up large parts of North America, and the fashion for beaver hats led to intense competition for supplies of raw materials. Starting in the latter half of the 20th century, producers and wearers of fur have been criticized by animal rights activist because of the perceived cruelty involved in animal trapping and because the availability of synthetic fibers (from petroleum oil) that competed with natural fibres such as fur and wool. Today, 80 percent of the fur clothing industry's pelts come from animals raised on farms. The rest is from animals caught in the wild. The most farmed fur-bearing animal is the mink (50 million annually), followed by the fox (about 4 million annually). Asiatic and Finnish raccoon and chinchilla are also farmed for their fur. 64 percent of fur farms are in Northern Europe, 11 percent are in North America, and the rest are dispersed throughout the world, in countries such as Argentina and Russia. Fur used from animals caught in the wild is not considered farmed fur, and is instead known as 'wild fur'. Most of the world’s farmed fur is produced by European farmers. There are 6,000 fur farms in the EU. The EU accounts for 63% of global mink production and 70% of fox production. Denmark is the leading mink-producing country, accounting for approximately 28% of world production. Other major producers include China, the Netherlands, the Baltic States, and the U.S. Finland is the largest United States supplier of fox pelts. The United States is a major exporter of furskins. Major export markets include China, Russia, Canada, and the EU. Exports to Asia as a share of total exports grew from 22% in 1998 to 47% in 2002. China is the largest importer of fur pelts in the world, therefore making them the largest re-exporter of finished fur products. Animals on fur farms spend their entire lives confined to cramped, filthy wire cages. Fur farmers use the cheapest and cruelest killing methods available, including suffocation, electrocution, gas, and poison. Whether it came from an animal on a fur farm or one who was trapped in the wild, every fur coat, trinket, and bit of trim caused an animal tremendous suffering - and took away a life. Several EU Member States have recognised the inherent cruelty of raising wild animals in intensive confinement and have already taken steps to restrict or ban fur production altogether. Austria and the United Kingdom are the two countries that have thus far passed legislation to fully prohibit the breeding of animals for fur production. Production of fox and chinchilla fur was banned in the Netherlands in 1995 and 1997, respectively. Following a long phase-out period, all fox and chinchilla farms were eradicated by 2008. The Dutch Parliament also voted in favour of a ban on mink production in the Netherlands in June 2009. This legislation, which must still be approved by the Dutch Senate, would lead to the phase-out of all mink farms by 2024. At present, the Netherlands is Europe’s second largest mink producer, with nearly 5 million mink being gassed to death there each year. Although it is the world’s largest fur producer, Denmark recognised the inherent welfare problems associated with raising foxes in captivity and consequently prohibited fox farming in 2009. The Danish ban does, however, include a phase-out period for fox producers. Sweden also effectively ended fox farming in 1995 through an amendment to its Animal Protection Ordinance, which required that foxes be kept in such a way that they can engage in natural behaviours, such as digging. This legislative change rendered fox farming economically unviable and all Swedish fox farms closed by 2000. Finally, it should be noted that Croatia, which is expected to accede to the European Union in 2012, already passed a ban on fur farming in December 2006. We now request the European Parliament to please consider banning the practice of fur farming in the entire European Union for the following reasons: Animal welfare problems on fur factory farms The main species, namely mink and fox, that are reared on fur factory farms are still essentially wild animals. As the European Commission’s own Scientific Committee on Animal Health and Animal Welfare (SCAHAW) concluded in its 2001 report, "The Welfare of Animals Kept for Fur Production": “...these species, in comparison with other farm animals, have been subjected to relatively little active selection, except with respect to fur characteristics. There has thus been only a limited amount of selection for tameness and adaptability to captive environments.” Mink and fox are carnivores, predators and highly inquisitive, active animals, with complex social lives. Unlike most other types of farm animals, who tend to be flock or herd species, mink are solitary by nature. Mink and fox are territorial and, in the wild, go to great lengths to defend their territories. These animals are unsuited to farming conditions and especially intensive breeding and rearing. Kept in small, wire cages, animals on fur farms have been found to exhibit stereotypical behaviour (such as pacing along the cage wall, repetitive circling/nodding of the head, etc.) as well as self-mutilation (i.e. sucking or biting of the animal’s tail fur, or other parts of their pelts). Studies on Swedish farms showed that 70-85% of the adult minks were performing stereotypic behaviours. This is a serious behavioural disorder and a clear sign that the animals are stressed and can not act naturally. Killing methods for fur animals The methods used to kill fur animals also leave much to be desired. Mink, for example, are generally gassed to death after being placed one after the other in killing boxes. Carbon monoxide (either pure source or associated with other gases) is the most widely used technique for killing mink. EU legislation continues to permit the use of gas produced from engine exhaust, despite scientific evidence which shows that even filtered exhaust gases induce unconsciousness in mink more slowly than pure CO, while first provoking excitation and convulsions. EU legislation also continues to allow the use of carbon dioxide as a manner of killing mink. The aversiveness of carbon dioxide and the practical difficulties in achieving reliable high concentration of gas in the killing chamber make CO2 an unpalatable and unacceptable method for killing mink in groups. Semi-aquatic and highly evolved physiologically to hold their breath, mink are able to detect a lack of oxygen in their blood and are prone to hypoxia, which means that they can suffer particularly during gassing. Finally, anal electrocution is also a permitted means of killing animals on factory fur farms. However, electrocution requires considerable restraint, and use of electrodes inserted into orifices. If cardiac arrest is caused without first inducing unconsciousness, there is potential for the animal to experience severe pain and distress. It should be noted that New York State banned electrocution of foxes; this method was also banned in the UK before fox farming was prohibited there altogether. Fur farming legislation in the EU There is no specific EU legislation providing detailed animal welfare requirements for the keeping of animals for fur production. Fur factory farms are covered by Council Directive 98/58/EC, which lays down the general minimum requirements for the protection of all animals kept for farming purposes. According to this Directive, EU Member States may maintain or apply stricter provisions than those laid down in this legislation, thus creating the possibility for individual countries to restrict or prohibit the keeping of animals for fur production. In addition to the aforementioned legislation, killing methods for fur animals are also included Council Directive 93/119/EC on the protection of animals at the time of slaughter or killing. This legislation was revised and, from 1st January 2013, will be superseded by Council Regulation (EC) No 1099/2009. Unfortunately, under the terms of this legislation, killing methods such as the use of carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide (pure source, or associated with other gases) and anal electrocution will still be permitted in the killing of fur animals. Impact on the environment The farming of animals for fur - while a profitable venture for fur farms - has proven to be an environmental disaster for the planet. The intensive confinement of animals, in it's self, has always been of environmental concern. With thousands of animals being kept over a small area, the build-up of excrement is obvious concern, as it will either be soaked into the soil and end up in our ground water, or it will run off into near-by streams as a result of heavy rain. There is an obvious health factor involved with groundwater contamination. Each mink skinned by fur farmers produces about 44 pounds of feces in his or her lifetime. The nitrogen of these farms also impedes the wintering of trees. This accounts for added frost damage and easier access for insects and fungi into the weakened tree. Fur farms are a source of air pollution as well due to the tons of ammonia they produce every year! Fur is only "natural" when it's on the animal who was born with it. Once an animal has been slaughtered and skinned, his or her fur is treated with a soup of toxic chemicals to "convert the putrefactive raw skin into a durable material" (i.e., to keep it from rotting). Various salts - along with ammonia, formaldehyde, hydrogen peroxide, and other chromates and bleaching agents - are used to preserve and dye fur. Furs are loaded with chemicals to keep them from decomposing in the buyer's closet, and fur production pollutes the environment and gobbles up precious resources. Producing a fur coat from ranch-raised animals takes more than 15 times as much energy as does producing a faux-fur coat. Considering the above facts and with all the natural and synthetic materials available today, there is simply no justification for this disgusting industry to continue and we request the European Parliament to consider a ban on fur farming in the entire European Union.
Ban religious slaughter in the European Union
Petition started by Occupy for Animals on August, 19, 2012. For more information concerning this petition please visit: http://www.occupyforanimals.org/ban-religious-slaughter-throughout-europe.html Occupy for Animals has requested the European Parliament to register this petition and is awaiting confirmation. By signing this petition, we will be able to notify you as soon as we have received confirmation from the European Parliament. ABOUT THIS PETITION: The ritual slaughter of animals decreed by Jewish and Muslim dietary laws require that the animals are conscious when they have their throats slit. In the European secular food industry, regulations strive to minimise "the risk of causing pain, fear or distress to the animals" in their being slaughtered for food. Crucially, these rules require the stunning of animals before being killed, either with a bolt to the brain, or with electricity. However, the law kowtows before the Jewish kashrut and Islamic halal guidelines in permitting avoidance of stunning. In 2009, New Zealand veterinarian scientist Craig Johnson was given an award from the Humane Slaughter Association, for his body of work that demonstrates that animals suffer more without stunning. In one crucial experiment, Johnson et al administered mild anaesthetics to calves so that they could not feel the pain of the incision, but the pain response was still measurable. It remained present in the animals without stunning, but was immediately erased by stunning."I think our work is the best evidence yet that it's painful", Johnson told New Scientist. While this may appear to come from the oft-referenced University of the Bleeding Obvious, in fact defenders of Jewish shechita and Muslim dhabiha slaughter cite scientific evidence that the practice is not painful to the animal. In 2003, the Muslim Council of Great Britainclaimed that "the brain is instantaneously starved of blood and there is no time to start feeling any pain." Johnson's work says otherwise. [A. Rutherford 2009]Since then at least two studies have been published in Europe (Lambooij 2008 and DIALREL 2011). In the DIALREL report of last year, nine researchers (among them Lambooij) concluded that throat cutting without anaesthetic carried the highest risks of animals suffering: 'Pain, suffering and distress during the cut and during bleeding are highly likely.' Sedation methods are admittedly not without risks for animal wellbeing, but they are considerable smaller, claim the researchers. They cite from about 300 scientific articles and base their views on observations by veterinary researchers in slaughterhouses in Germany, Spain, England, France, Belgium, Italy, the Netherlands, Israel and Australia.The European Union directive, "European Convention for the Protection of Animals for Slaughter", generally requires stunning before slaughter, but allows member states to allow exemptions for religious slaughter: "Each Contracting Party may authorize derogations from the provisions concerning prior stunning in the following cases: – slaughtering in accordance with religious rituals ...".In May 2009 the European Parliament voted in favour of allowing ritual slaughter in member states.What is the difference for the animals?Non-stunned animals are slaughtered in vivid mindfulness, they experience unacceptable suffering. Their agony can last several minutes.In the context of slaughter with stunning, the animal does not suffer at the time of slaughter, since there is loss of consciousness. Scientists have clearly stated: "Because of the serious animal welfare associated with slaughter without stunning, stunning should always be carried out before the slaughter."In some countries, ritually killed animals are stunned before bleeding (Norway, Sweden, Austria, Switzerland, New Zealand). The steps are then the same as for conventional slaughter. The video (graphic!) in the following link demonstrates the difference between slaughter with prior stunning, vs slaughter without stunning (ritual or religious slaughter). While the animal in the first method is rendered unconscious immediately, the animals slaughtered without prior stunning experience their agony in full consciousness. You don't need to be an expert to see that this causes immense unnecessary suffering to the animals.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EvH8rz7QwZM&feature=player_embedded If we, as the dominant species on Earth (!), are to use and consume animals, it is our duty to minimize their suffering in doing so. The anachronism of slaughter without stunning has no place in the modern world and should be outlawed. This special indulgence to religious practices should be replaced with the evidence-based approaches to which the rest of us are subject. For us, religious freedom stops where human or animal suffering begins.Our petition requests that the European Parliament prompts the Council to delete from Council Regulation (EC) No. 1099/2009 of 24 September 2009 on the Protection of Animals at the Time of Killing the derogation whereby animals can be killed without prior stunning where such methods of slaughter are prescribed by religious rites (Art. 4.4). By signing this petition, the letter that you can read under the tab 'Petition Letter' will be sent instantly to Mrs Erminia Mazzoni - Chair of the Committee on Petitions at the European Parliament.Thank you very much in advance for your signature.
Implementation of an honest labeling mechanism for meat and dairy products in the EU
This petition has been started by 'Occupy for Animals' and was submitted to the European Parliament for registration at date of August 31, 2012. All information concerning this petition is contained here: http://occupyforanimals.wix.com/meat#!home/mainPage ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- About this petition and the related website: Everybody knows what 'meat' is. Meat is animal flesh that is eaten as food. Generally, this means skeletal muscles, fat and other tissues, but may also describe other ‘edible’ parts, such as organs and offal. The term ‘meat’ most often denotes the flesh of mammalian species (pigs, cattle, lambs, etc.), specifically reared for human consumption; it generally excludes fish and other seafood, poultry, and other species, including wild or non-domesticated animals (game). Terminology varies worldwide, depending on country-specific, cultural or religious preferences. What doesn’t vary, is that the product we call 'meat', was a sentient and conscious living being… right until the moment it was slaughtered and ‘processed’. When talking 'meat', there is more, much more to consider than just the rampant cruelty involved in the murder of species other than our own, which is somehow deemed acceptable. Of equal concern is the fact that scientifically, meat and dairy, in fact all animal protein, is acknowledged as being harmful to human health. Additionally, raising animals for food requires massive amounts of land, food, energy and water, and contributes to climate change. Livestock is recognized as a serious threat to the environment, causing air, water and soil pollution. We have created this website to compile all this information in one single place; it covers: - animal cruelty - diseases linked to meat and dairy consumption - livestock and environment - livestock and climate change - meat production and water usage - meat demand and deforestation - human starvation - slaughter - exploitation of slaughterhouse workers Everything on these pages is based upon scientific facts and information taken from reliable and established sources. All sources and references are acknowledged at the bottom of the relevant page. There is no personal interpretation on these pages; this enables you, the reader, to reach your own conclusions, rather that be manipulated into a certain way of thinking. It is not uncommon to hear people saying that vegans care only for animals and not for people. That is a misperception. By the time you have read all this information, you will understand that vegans DO care a great deal for people. And that veganism isn’t just good for animals, it’s good for people AND the planet, too. We, at Occupy for Animals, care greatly about animals; that is a fact. At the same time, we are equally concerned about the health of our children and grandchildren, and yours. We are also increasingly concerned for their future, because of the current state of the climate and our environment. We care about the starving children, the majority of whom are barely surviving, in countries that export most of their grain production to western countries where it is used to feed livestock. We care about the farmers in developing countries who are being driven off their land because their efficient, plant-based agricultural model is being replaced with intensive livestock rearing. We care about the slaughterhouse workers who face physical dangers and psychological problems based on their work, and continue to be exploited by a greedy system. We are concerned that animal products these days are sold with a feel-good story: the animal was humanely raised, it was cage-free, it was free-range, it was pasture-fed, it’s hormone-free, etc. Excluded from these stories is the fact that an animal was killed; that he or she was a sentient and conscious being who didn’t want to die. Excluded also, is that meat dramatically increases the risk of many diseases such as cancer, heart disease, harmful cholesterol levels, diabetes and obesity; that meat production contributes to climate change and damages the environment; that it is responsible for most deforestation; that it contributes to poverty in developing countries and to human starvation; and that the person who slaughtered the animal - the person we almost never consider - has to cope daily with the trauma of his/her job. Vegans care about all of this, as you will see in every section of this website. We hope you will care about it, too, and read all the pages here (most of them are short!), because these things impact us all. Our petition asks for an honest labeling of all meat and dairy products, among other points. By signing this petition the message that you can read under the tab 'petition letter' will instantly be sent to Mr John Dalli, European Commissioner for Health and Consumer Policy. We thank you very much in advance for taking the time to read the information compiled on our website and to sign and support our petition. Occupy for Animals!