Dopo una prolungata pausa estiva, dovuta anche a seri problemi col PC, volevo riprendere a scrivere proprio pubblicando delle riflessioni in merito ad un articolo apparso sul numero di Summa n°6 e scritto da Paola Fossati e Franco Pezza (responsabili della sezione Medicina Legale Veterinaria del Dipartimento di Scienze Cliniche Veterinarie dell'Università statale di Milano) che ha per tema la questione del randagismo e le definizioni legislative dei termini "Stray" and "cat colony."
We will see below that, although in common parlance often uses the term stray, as it does for dogs, even to define a cat without owner (or suspicious), and in reality things are not so simple .
The vocabulary and the common law in fact are not always fully converged, and this often creates misunderstandings, doubts and difficulties in interpretation of applicable laws.
In this case the legislation in question is the Law n.281/91 whose theme is precisely the prevention of stray dogs, which applies to enforce the need to identify in advance which animals il legislatore intenda riferirsi in concreto, ovvero in quali casi un animale d'affezione assuma propriamente lo status di "randagio".
Va ricordato a questo proposito che nella norma giuridica il termine randagio indica propriamente solo una condizione particolare in cui si viene a trovare il cane, ma non si estende mai al gatto.
Facendo un passo indietro bisogna far riferimento, in ossequio all'etimologia del termine, al precedente D.P.R. n. 320, ovvero al Regolamento di Polizia Veterinaria del 1954 (art.85, capo V - Rabbia), in cui per randagio si intende il cane trovato vagante e quindi non tenuto al guinzaglio e altresì privo della prescritta museruola (si noti che manca ogni riferimento alla presenza del proprietario).
In fact in the original text the term stray does not appear as such, but that it should be understood that periphrasis is confirmed by subsequent explanatory circulars issued regarding the prevention of rabies, which reads:
-l 'health action against rabies made it possible to achieve tangible benefits, through the capture of an increasing number of dogs "stray" caught;
-particular attention should be paid to hook up to the service dogs "stray", which is the main, if not and the only fundamental factor of contagion rabid;
-to get more tangible results requires that the service is conducted mainly at night.
In the vocabulary of the Italian language, the word is said about a stray animal without an owner, while the study etymology connects the word evil to stray, leading to a negative evaluation and danger.
Also in common language becomes the condition of the stray pets that have no owner or holder and, therefore, some say the cat.
also due to the definition of a stray cat, however, is improper. In fact, the cat can not be in the same legal status of the dog "stray" as may be wandering without a leash or muzzle. But you can not stray even define in the usual sense of the word and, because you can almost always find an owner or keeper responsible, be treated as the owner under Article .931 CC
not part of the behavioral habits of the cat, fact, wander aimlessly in urban areas or on a public road. This attitude may possibly occur only in the transitional stage of transfer from one owner to another in search of more favorable environmental conditions with regard to housing and feeding. In this sense, the law also expressed n.281/91, calling the cats "wild animals".
A particular situation then it deserves separate mention is the so-called feral colonies: in towns it is possible to identify populations of cats (feral colonies precisely defined), who seem to live in a state of natural liberty, but which are almost always assisted by private citizens who take charge of feeding and keep them (in Rome are sometimes identified as "Gattari s).
They also settled preferably in places belonging to certain social subjects.
When "colonize" the condominiums for example, cats find themselves in environments managed by an administrator (the building), which can then be identified as having responsibility, in spite of himself! Or
colonies occupy appliances an industrial establishment, under the management responsibility of the owner or administrator of the system.
If you live in public buildings, is one who has the legal responsibility of those to be vested with powers of the state of well-being of cats, while in the case where there are complex hospital or other health or social care, colonies invest directly the responsibility of the administrative director of health or property.
Also, if colonies are present on construction sites directly empower the legal representative of the company. Finally, again by way of example, colonies can be found in free public lands, not circumscribed, and in this case becomes legitimate intervention forced the Administration.
In conclusion in the management of feral colonies is almost always possible, contrary to what happens to stray dogs, correctly identify the owner or keeper responsible, that while the law takes on them (for example, to oppose restrictive measures put in place by the health authorities), similar but must also be borne by the conditions of well-being of those parts of the colonies and for any damage caused by them (the duty holder responsible).
Ultimately, you can have two situations:
- the owner / keeper is known and is therefore responsible for any damage caused by the same (omitted case), unless the chance of Article. 2052 CC and beneficiary of the measures of restrictive measures Animal health, animal welfare standards and standards of hygiene and soil dwelling;
- the owner / holder can not be identified and then no one has the right to oppose the enforcement action by the competent authority.
We will see below that, although in common parlance often uses the term stray, as it does for dogs, even to define a cat without owner (or suspicious), and in reality things are not so simple . The vocabulary and the common law in fact are not always fully converged, and this often creates misunderstandings, doubts and difficulties in interpretation of applicable laws.
In this case the legislation in question is the Law n.281/91 whose theme is precisely the prevention of stray dogs, which applies to enforce the need to identify in advance which animals il legislatore intenda riferirsi in concreto, ovvero in quali casi un animale d'affezione assuma propriamente lo status di "randagio". Va ricordato a questo proposito che nella norma giuridica il termine randagio indica propriamente solo una condizione particolare in cui si viene a trovare il cane, ma non si estende mai al gatto.
Facendo un passo indietro bisogna far riferimento, in ossequio all'etimologia del termine, al precedente D.P.R. n. 320, ovvero al Regolamento di Polizia Veterinaria del 1954 (art.85, capo V - Rabbia), in cui per randagio si intende il cane trovato vagante e quindi non tenuto al guinzaglio e altresì privo della prescritta museruola (si noti che manca ogni riferimento alla presenza del proprietario). 
In fact in the original text the term stray does not appear as such, but that it should be understood that periphrasis is confirmed by subsequent explanatory circulars issued regarding the prevention of rabies, which reads: -l 'health action against rabies made it possible to achieve tangible benefits, through the capture of an increasing number of dogs "stray" caught;
-particular attention should be paid to hook up to the service dogs "stray", which is the main, if not and the only fundamental factor of contagion rabid;
-to get more tangible results requires that the service is conducted mainly at night.
In the vocabulary of the Italian language, the word is said about a stray animal without an owner, while the study etymology connects the word evil to stray, leading to a negative evaluation and danger. Also in common language becomes the condition of the stray pets that have no owner or holder and, therefore, some say the cat.
also due to the definition of a stray cat, however, is improper. In fact, the cat can not be in the same legal status of the dog "stray" as may be wandering without a leash or muzzle. But you can not stray even define in the usual sense of the word and, because you can almost always find an owner or keeper responsible, be treated as the owner under Article .931 CC
not part of the behavioral habits of the cat, fact, wander aimlessly in urban areas or on a public road. This attitude may possibly occur only in the transitional stage of transfer from one owner to another in search of more favorable environmental conditions with regard to housing and feeding. In this sense, the law also expressed n.281/91, calling the cats "wild animals". 
A particular situation then it deserves separate mention is the so-called feral colonies: in towns it is possible to identify populations of cats (feral colonies precisely defined), who seem to live in a state of natural liberty, but which are almost always assisted by private citizens who take charge of feeding and keep them (in Rome are sometimes identified as "Gattari s). They also settled preferably in places belonging to certain social subjects.
When "colonize" the condominiums for example, cats find themselves in environments managed by an administrator (the building), which can then be identified as having responsibility, in spite of himself! Or colonies occupy appliances an industrial establishment, under the management responsibility of the owner or administrator of the system.
If you live in public buildings, is one who has the legal responsibility of those to be vested with powers of the state of well-being of cats, while in the case where there are complex hospital or other health or social care, colonies invest directly the responsibility of the administrative director of health or property. Also, if colonies are present on construction sites directly empower the legal representative of the company. Finally, again by way of example, colonies can be found in free public lands, not circumscribed, and in this case becomes legitimate intervention forced the Administration.
In conclusion in the management of feral colonies is almost always possible, contrary to what happens to stray dogs, correctly identify the owner or keeper responsible, that while the law takes on them (for example, to oppose restrictive measures put in place by the health authorities), similar but must also be borne by the conditions of well-being of those parts of the colonies and for any damage caused by them (the duty holder responsible). 
Ultimately, you can have two situations: - the owner / keeper is known and is therefore responsible for any damage caused by the same (omitted case), unless the chance of Article. 2052 CC and beneficiary of the measures of restrictive measures Animal health, animal welfare standards and standards of hygiene and soil dwelling;
- the owner / holder can not be identified and then no one has the right to oppose the enforcement action by the competent authority.
As can be seen even in everyday speech we use interchangeably for both the dog and the cat the term stray, in fact we make a suggestion as well as with regard to legislative, since the two species are subject to different regulations, including the behavioral standpoint, since dog and cat do not look alike at all regarding how to go about their lives and the implications that follow: the long- famous feline independence in fact, combined with attendance at a limited area, are in fact the cat a permanent entity and therefore much easier to control the dog, when left to itself.
dog because by its nature tends to be organized in schools, in order to get food, they can also become dangerous, not to mention the fact that they tend to roam over an area much più ampio e difficilmente circoscrivibile rispetto a quello delle cosiddette colonie feline. Attenzione dunque a non fare di tutta un erba un fascio, dal momento che la condizione di libertà per il cane e per il gatto comporta notevoli differenze...
0 comments:
Post a Comment