yo yo yo search it!

Monday, May 01, 2006

you really DO have to admire italy for it's animal protection laws



no goldfish bowls, you MUST walk your dogs daily..... i like i like

ROME (Reuters) - An Italian restaurant was fined 688 euros ($855) for displaying live lobsters on ice to attract patrons, in an innovative application of an anti-cruelty law usually affecting to household pets.
A court in the northeastern city of Vicenza ruled the display was a form of abuse dooming the crustaceans to a slow death by suffocation.
"We're appealing," said Giuseppe Scalesia, who runs La Conchiglia D'Oro, or "Golden Shell," restaurant along with his brother Camillo.
"They said that the lobsters, laying on the ice, suffer... They compared them in court to other animals, like cats and dogs."
The case was brought by Gianpaolo Cecchetto, a former environmental activist, who took his two young children to the Vicenza restaurant in May 2002..........


some more italian animal protection laws Italian animal rights law puts lobster off the menu

By Bruce Johnston in Rome
Residents in the prosperous Italian town of Reggio Emilia were outraged yesterday after its council adopted an animal rights bylaw that bans boiling live lobster as "useless torture".
Supporters of the move said that it gave animals - both pets and those in the wild - equal rights to man, but local pet-owners criticised it as terrifying political correctness.
Under the bylaw, "sociable" birds such as budgerigars and parrots must be kept in pairs. Birdcages must be at least five times the bird's wingspan in width, and three times in height. It also makes it illegal to keep a goldfish in a round glass bowl. Anyone who breaks the law faces a fine of up to €495 (£325). .....


and this

Law August 14th,1991, # 281 Translated by Piera Bignetti
Law "quadro" on the matter of pets and the prevention of straying
The Chamber of Deputies and the Senate of the Republic approved. The President of the Republic approved the following law:


1) General Principles The State enforces and regulates the treatment of domestic animals, condemns any violence against them, condemns the bad treatment or the abandoning of them, with the aim to promote the cohabitation of humans and animals, and to promote public health and the environment.
2) Treatment of dogs and other pets 1. The control of the population of dogs and cats through the limitations of births is done ? keeping into account the scientific progress ? at the local public health facilities. Pet owners or guardians can use veterinarian offices approved by recognized dog associations or animal-protective corporations, at their own expense. 2. Stray dogs found or captured or hospitalized at the above institutions (comma 1 article 4) cannot be put to sleep. 3. Dogs captured or coming from the above institutions (comma 1 article 4) cannot be used for clinical trials. 4. Stray dogs found or captured with a tattoo must be handed back to the owner or guardian. 5. Stray dogs found without a tattoo, as well as the dogs hospitalized at the above institutions (comma 1 article 4), must be tattooed; if no one searches for them within 60 days, these dogs can be given in adoption to private individuals who can guarantee them a good treatment or to animal-protective corporations, after receiving a treatment against rabies, "echinococcosi", and other transmissible diseases.6. Dogs hospitalized at the above institutions (comma 1 article 4)- with the exception of what defined by the articles 86, 87, 91 of the veterinarian police corps approved by the President of the Republic on February 8th 1954, number 20 and following modifications ? can be put asleep, only in a euthanasia way, by veterinarians, only if severely ill, incurable, or of proven danger. 7. It is forbidden for anyone to mistreat stray cats. 8. Stray cats are neutered by the health authority responsible for the territory and eventually reinserted in their group. 9. Stray cats can be put asleep only if severely ill or incurable. 10. The protective associations can ? in agreement with the local authorities ? manage the colonies of local stray cats, guaranteeing the good health and the surviving conditions. 11. The protective associations can manage the associations in comma 1 article 4, under the authority of a veterinarian office for that territory. 12. The associations in comma 1 article 4 can keep dogs in custody against a payment and offer an emergency service
3) Regional Responsibilities
1) The regions rule with their own laws, within 6 months the approval of this law, the institution of a canine register at the city hall or the local public health offices, as well as the modalities dog owners should follow to register their dogs and how to release the dog identification, which should be given using a painless tattoo. 2) The regions should determine, with their own law, within 6 months of the approval of this law, the criteria to rehabilitate dog pounds and housing for dogs. These structures should guarantee healthy living conditions for the dogs, follow sanitary rules, and are subject to the health and sanitary control from the local public health authorities. The regional law also determines the criteria and the division between the counties for the implementations of the project under their responsibilities. 3) The regions should adopt, with their own law, within 6 months of the approval of this law, and after a hearing of the associations for animals, protective, and hunting (?) ? which operate in that regional territory ? a program to prevent straying. 4) The program at comma 3 includes intervention for the following: a) Initiatives to create awareness ? including schools ? on a correct relationship between the respect for animal life and the defense of their habitat. b) Courses to instruct the personnel of the regions and the regional health units working on the services this law provides, as well as courses for the "guardie zoofile" who collaborate with the above authorities. ........


and of course THIS:

Rome bans goldfish bowls, orders dog walking
Italian capital also backs feeding of the city's stray cats


ROME - The city of Rome has banned goldfish bowls, which animal rights activists say are cruel, and has made regular dog-walks mandatory in the Italian capital, the town’s council said on Tuesday.
The classic spherical fish bowls are banned under a new by-law which also stops fish or other animals being given away as fairground prizes. It comes after a national law was passed to allow jail sentences for people who abandon cats or dogs.
“It’s good to do whatever we can for our animals who in exchange for a little love fill our existence with their attention,” said Monica Cirinna, the councilor behind the by-law.ROME - The city of Rome has banned goldfish bowls, which animal rights activists say are cruel, and has made regular dog-walks mandatory in the Italian capital, the town’s council said on Tuesday.
The classic spherical fish bowls are banned under a new by-law which also stops fish or other animals being given away as fairground prizes. It comes after a national law was passed to allow jail sentences for people who abandon cats or dogs.
“It’s good to do whatever we can for our animals who in exchange for a little love fill our existence with their attention,” said Monica Cirinna, the councilor behind the by-law........

8 comments:

pissed off patricia said...

Nice to know that some country appreciates animals and doesn't just see them as a means to an end.

Unknown said...

yes it is nice BUT i don't know how they justify veal. of course italy is famous for it's veal dishes.

there is a town here in northern connecticut way up route 44. it's called norfolk. they have these little calves tethered to what looks like little dog houses. so very sad

Lily said...

Good point about the veal. I think the lobster thing SHOULD be outlawed. Its senseless.

Veal should be outlawed.

RE: below, Glenda has some great stuff in that post! Wish I had them all on shirts!

Guerrillas in the Midst said...

I'll be the first carnivore (and by the looks of it, carnivorous male) to post. I'll also be the first to admit that vegetarianism, let alone veganism, takes much more self-discipline than I have and am willing to generate. But I'm a potential convert nevertheless. I was vegetarian for a long time until McRibs came back. Those are the obligatory "Warning: I'm pathetic" prefatorial remarks.

Where's the line drawn, if there is any, here? In all seriousness, if we can accept the idea that lobsters deserve not to be displayed because they suffer, ought we not swat mosquitoes too? What about tapeworms? Ticks?

If the world is ultimately made of the same "stuff" (whether it's spirit, waves, particles, etc.), and life does indeed feed on life, then what's the real problem with doing this?

Perhaps the moral question is far too big for the space allowed here, but I just wonder.

Neil Shakespeare said...

As the 'owner' (actually, I think it's the other way around) of an abandoned dog myself, I heartily applad the Italians!

Unknown said...

glenda, i cannot agree MORE. everytime i watch animal cops (or whatever it's called) on animal planet i go mental. how CAN people treat animals that way? leave them chained outside with NO shelter, with no room on that chain to move, with the collar GROWING INTO their skin.... SPAY AND NEUTER and NO ONE should have an animal that cannot care for it in a way it DESERVES

e b - i cannot fathom how anyone COULD eat veal after knowing how it's raised but it's their decision

g i t m - i'm vegan (as much as i can be that is. i eat honey and i knit with wool) and i have NO self-discipline. i just happen NOT to be able to eat meat from the time i was a child. oh, i had some but it couldn't have a bone anywhere near it and it had to be almost burnt. it was easy for me to stop. i have NO issues with people who do eat meat and i never preach. one doesn't want to confront me (in a nasty manner that is) about why i'm not eating meat though because i will skewer them. that is NOT to say i mind being questioned about my veganism, i don't and i would discuss it with anyone as long as they are not attacking me.

i don't think the italians had a problem with the lobsters being displayed. they had a problem with them being displayed ON ICE. i don't care what ANYONE SAYS i believe in my heart of hearts animals and yes crustaceans have feelings too. no person or 'thing' should ever be made to suffer (unless one is a maso of course and DESIRES AND NEEDS it)

mr shakespeare-one day could you post a picture of your hound? i should very much like to see her/him!

Guerrillas in the Midst said...

I think it's admirable not to eat meat actually. I think there's a way to consume other animals without inflicting that much nastiness (but it also requires abandoning industrial farming, which we're all for).

Didn't want to sound obnoxious or combative or belligerent though! I've discussed these things with many vegans/vegetarians and it always digresses into demagoguery and has never gotten anywhere.

Surely all life has intelligence of varying sorts (not degrees). Well, other than ourselves.

Unknown said...

oh hell g i t m you did NOT come across as nasty or obnoxious or belligerent. damn

oh and i don't digress into demagoguery at all. i'm far too inarticulate for that! i get frustrated and do one of two things. i declare myself to be RIGHT and will hear nothing further OR i declare myself to be right and will hear nothing further