Unknown number of dogs fall victim in military's chemical-weapons test
by Emil Kuzmanov
(This article was first published in Indymedia UK 15 February 2013)
The access to information on what happen to tens of thousands of impounded animals in Bulgaria is failing due to corruption and dirty interests obsessing Bulgarian authorities. And communication on how to deal with pet population dynamics, too.
"Other animals such as dogs, rats or guinea pigs, are used in military experiments, particularly in the testing of chemical warfare agents", Bulgarian National Television quoted the Sofia Military Medical Academy chief, General Stojan Tonev. It was also clarified that Bulgarian military run their own research facility to test various weapons.
The only phrase leaked along recent media discussions on the potential of a gas gun provoked by the Oktay Enimehmedov's armed attack on the political leader Ahmed Dogan.
During the last decade, Bulgarian Animal Programs Foundation is looking for a suspected nexus between untransparent animal control policies pursued in Sofia and nationwide and unfailing opportunity for the experimental industry to perform harsh, precursory animal tests that involve thousands of strays and are quite uncontrolled by relevant authorities. Indeed, since 2000, it was predetermined to increase the dog pound capacity with no adequate approach in animal birth control. Up to date, five animal shelters are already opened in Sofia and their total capacity reached about 2000 dogs.
According to municipal officials, a total of about 31,377 roaming dogs were collected between September 2006 and December 2012 by Ecoravnovesie Municipal Enterprise, the Sofia's lead animal control agency. It is unclear what actually happen to impounded animals. Relatively small numbers were reported as adopted, euthanized or transferred to rescue. The rest 22,177 dogs - over 70 per cent - were reported as released outside after neutering.
In fact, evidence shows a collection of even bigger numbers of roaming dogs as the primary activity; and a very meager but expensive neuter-release. For instance, the number of operating dog catcher teams was heigthened through the years from four to six and to eight. They are equipped with large vans, while no reciprocal surgical capacity. Also, Sofia stray population does not consist of identifiable individuals and neutered neighbourhood dogs often disappear. Just recently, a sporadic identification by earmarks was performed as it involves very few strays.
Inconsistency in the Sofia Animal Control records raises worries about the types of discharge