Sometimes all it takes is a news report, a photo shared by an organisation, or a petition circulated on social media to change the course of our lives forever. A moment that goes unnoticed for most people, but that in others manages to awaken something visceral. This is what happened to Sara Turetta in 2001, when she first discovered what was happening to stray dogs in Romania and realised that her place was not at the advertising agency where she worked, but by their side, fighting for their rights — and more — in a deeply wounded country. Twenty years have passed since that moment, and today Turetta is the president of Save the dogs and other animals, an organisation that has changed the lives of thousands of dogs both in Romania and in Italy.

I cani, la mia vita is Sara Turetta's new book

We spoke with Turetta on the occasion of the publication of her latest book, I cani, la mia vita, published by Edizioni sonda, in which she retraces the key milestones that marked her time in Romania, the challenges she had to face, the injustices she encountered, and above all the lives — both canine and human — that she saved thanks to the Save the dogs centre. We also discussed activism together, analysed the situation in Italian dog shelters, and talked about all the work that still needs to be done.

How does the situation at the centre compare now with what is described in the book?
I'd say we're now in a completely different phase from the one I write about in the book. There I talk about the beginnings of this adventure; now we are far more structured, we have a beautiful centre and many employees. We started in a makeshift, cobbled-together way, but then we truly built something unique that Italy should be proud of, because there is an Italian flag flying at the top of this centre. There is nothing more we could wish for beyond what we have, because we invested the money we raised wisely and because we drew inspiration from centres of excellence abroad. We have welcomed other Romanian organisations and other organisations from Eastern Europe. We have also had delegations from the Far East.

I never wanted to settle for saving a handful of animals. I wanted to develop projects, because I believe the impact of a project is far greater than individual rescue or adoption actions. I have always tried to take a more articulated and structured approach to intervention, which however requires a great deal of effort. Naturally, difficulties and problems are never in short supply.

For instance?
The thing that still surprises me after so many years is how hard it is to do good, and I think that is something everyone learns when they set out to improve a small corner of the world, in whatever field. The feeling I believe we all share is that of having forces working against you, and of your perseverance and determination being constantly put to the test.

What is the situation in Romania today?
Unfortunately, progress in Romania has happened but only to a very limited extent, and above all only in certain places — in the north, north-west and west of the country, where the social fabric is different. There the situation has improved over twenty years. Unfortunately, that has absolutely not been the case in the south and east of the country, nor in rural areas in general, where there is extreme poverty, a great deal of corruption, very little volunteering and a non-existent civil society.

How does the law work in this area?
The laws are dreadful: after two weeks the dogs are killed, the release of sterilised dogs is not permitted, government institutions do not engage in dialogue and do not have the issue of animals or strays on their agenda. Bear in mind that Romania continues to be a country people emigrate from and do not return to, because it does not offer a good quality of life — so those who emigrate tend not to come back. It is therefore also a country that struggles greatly to find skilled professionals; qualified young people leave and go abroad. Rebuilding a country like that is difficult, very difficult.

In the book you made a very fine reflection on activism — on the fact that sometimes there seems to be an almost hierarchical scale that decides which categories of vulnerable beings should be helped first and which later, when in reality helping one does not exclude the other. Why do you think this preconception still exists?
It would be wonderful — and I think this is beginning to happen to some extent — to adopt an inclusive outlook, that is, not an "either/or" approach: not excluding categories of suffering subjects and drawing up rankings, but choosing "both/and". It is easier with regard to the environment than with regard to animals, because the environment is seen on the whole as one with humanity, and we are genuinely starting to understand that our health depends on the health of the environment. The problem is that people cannot see animals as an integral part of that environment.

The injustices of the world are always the offspring of the same lack of respect for the value of life, in all its forms.

Sara Turetta

If we understood that we cannot save ourselves alone, but that we save ourselves together with animals and the environment, people would stop criticising those who dedicate themselves to something other than the human, because they would understand that in reality the work of Save the dogs, or the work of environmental organisations, or of those who look after wild animals, has a positive effect on everyone, on the entire human community.

What's more, phenomena such as straying also have social roots and consequences.
Straying is a phenomenon that, if not brought under control, leads to enormous health problems for people, because there are risks associated with living alongside packs of dogs, as well as risks for the ecosystem. I am thinking, for example, of hybridisation with the wolf.

It is also obvious that children who grow up watching animals — strays — being rounded up, dragged away, suffocated, locked in cages and then destroyed without any care or respect, those children will grow up with violence in their eyes and with the idea that all of this is legitimate and acceptable. There are many studies showing that it is often the very minors who inflict violence on animals who go on to develop sociopathic or even criminal behaviour as adults. Teaching respect, protection and dignity towards other creatures is in effect the same as passing these values on to society as a whole.

I do not see our work as an alternative to that of humanitarian organisations; I see it as complementary.

Sara Turetta

You are also active in Italy. In your view, what is the situation in our country right now, and what should we be working on?
Well, the situation in our country is split in two. There is a northern Italy — and by north I mean, let's say, from Tuscany and the Marche upwards — where an excellent situation has been reached with regard to stray animals, which practically no longer exist. The kennels are essentially under control, sterilisation is carried out and dogs are also adopted from the south. Over the last thirty years, this part of Italy has made enormous strides, the situation is good and voluntary work is also very active and present.

In the south, on the other hand, the situation is very serious, with differences between regions, but certainly in Campania, Puglia, Calabria and Sicily, and in certain respects also in Sardinia, the situation is very serious. Umbria, however, has passed a regional law that prevents dogs from leaving the region — in practice, it prevents adoption outside Umbria itself.

For what reason?
They claim it is to protect animal welfare, but in reality it is something of unheard-of gravity and also very little known. It is absurd that this can happen, when tens of thousands of dogs from other southern regions are being moved to the north to find a family.

What are you doing in southern Italy?
For two years now we have been working in Campania. From this year we will be working in Calabria with activities to prevent and tackle stray animals, primarily through sterilisation campaigns for owned dogs, but we are also building pathways with public administrations to ensure that municipalities and local health authorities take their responsibility and play their part.

Locking dogs in kennels is not the solution to the stray animal problem.

Sara Turetta

We need to act upstream and promote sterilisation as good practice and responsible ownership of one's dogs, which means registering them on the microchip database, not letting animals roam and not allowing them to reproduce in an uncontrolled way.

How many stray dogs are there in Italy?
According to the latest Lav report, there are more than 100,000 dogs in Italian kennels, and that already speaks volumes. It is an unacceptable figure for a civilised country. So it is all well and good that dogs are not put down — and we wave that around as a great achievement — but if dogs are not killed and are instead locked away for life in kennels that in Calabria can hold as many as two thousand animals, you can see that the whole thing makes no sense. Romania has kennels with two thousand dogs. Do we realise what we are talking about? It is impossible to protect animal welfare under these conditions, and there are many kennels where volunteers cannot get in because the rule of law does not apply, because there is no situation of legality. All of this should truly provoke the outrage and rebellion of citizens and of the municipal authorities themselves, who instead often wash their hands of it.

Why is Italy so divided when it comes to stray animals?
There are various factors: a cultural factor comes into play — the one that means that people who own a dog in certain parts of Italy do not experience it as a dog they are responsible for 24 hours a day, one that therefore lives with them, on their property, with the family, goes on holiday with them. Instead, the dog is often left free to go out and roam, so there is no total sense of responsibility towards that animal. By wandering around it inevitably mates and feeds the stray population, and in the south the practice of sterilisation is culturally far less accepted than in the north. Then there is the question of voluntary work, which is more structured in the north. And finally, the lack of legality and corruption mean that dogs are treated as a source of income for unscrupulous entrepreneurs, often in cahoots with institutional representatives. These situations existed in the north too, but they were fought and eliminated, also through effective regional legislation. Yet there is still the Calabria regional law that allows kennels to hold two thousand dogs, while in northern Italy the maximum number is 200. Some laws have been crafted to facilitate the accumulation of dogs and the enrichment of those who make a great deal of money on the backs of animals — which was absolutely not the spirit of Law 281, the stray animal law. So: corruption, lack of legality, and cultural and mindset problems. It is a combination of these factors.

How can citizens help?
Certainly by supporting organisations like Save the dogs, by supporting our projects, because we are trying to have a measurable impact so that we can go to institutions and demonstrate that it is possible to solve these problems, that it is possible to have winning strategies. So definitely support serious and transparent associations through the 5 per mille tax donation, through donations, through distance adoptions. You should not donate indiscriminately but donate to those who explain clearly what they do, who explain and demonstrate how they spend the money. This is extremely important. The other thing is to make your voice heard and to make those we vote for understand that these issues matter — that they are not second-, third- or fourth-tier concerns, but that Italians do care about animal welfare and animal rights. Because only when this is understood will politics truly take ownership of these problems.