03/03/2026
When I wrote the article "The business of killing street dogs in Romania" on February 13, 2026 (https://streuner-seelen.blogspot.com/2026/02/das-geschaft-mit-der-totung-von.html in german), I have already followed several publications by the veterinarian Emma Stratulat as well as other Romanian animal rights activists and NGOs to the killing camp in Suraia.
Together with other animal rights activists and NGOs, she is one of the "faces" who oppose the current handling of the stray dog problem. There is also a video recording from the Suraia killing camp's security camera, which shows the fate of one dog. So that the dog wouldn't remain nameless, Emma Stratulat named her "Heidi"—she became a symbol of the outcry.
https://www.facebook.com/share/v/1FWKKVGCsz/
The outcry in Romania over the horrific events in Suraia (not an isolated incident) has forced authorities and politicians to take the issue of stray dogs, neutering, and euthanasia more seriously. Discussions and demonstrations have already taken place in various cities (Bucharest, Cluj, and others).
Since this issue is something I personally care about, I asked Emma Stratulat for an interview, and here it is:
Q: Would you please briefly introduce yourself and how you got involved in animal welfare?
Ever since I was a child, I’ve been deeply connected to animals. I understood very early what abandonment and suffering meant for them in our country and it affected me profoundly. I remember
dreaming that one day I would sterilize every animal in the world so that suffering would never exist again, maybe a childish dream, but a sincere and powerful one. This desire to protect animals shaped
my entire path. I always knew what I wanted to become and that pushed me to choose veterinary medicine. Becoming a veterinarian allowed me to help them directly and later I founded the association I represent today. For me, animal welfare has never been just an option, it has always been my purpose.
Q: How did you become aware of the Situation at the Suraia killing camp? Were there any prior suspicions that legal regulations were not always being followed?
I became aware of the Suraia killing camp through reports from fellow activists and disturbing social media posts. There had long been whispers in the animal welfare community about irregularities and a lack of transparency in certain shelters, but the extent of the violations at Suraia was only revealed when direct evidence surfaced.
Q: Perhaps my information is incorrect, but I always assumed that shelters with kill shelters also work together with NGOs from Romania and foreign countries so that some dogs could be rescued before the 14-day waiting period expired. Is it known whether Lazar's business model involved any such agreements with NGOs, and if any dogs ever left there alive in this time?
Based on available information, Lazar’s business model focused more on contracts with local authoritiesthan on collaborating with NGOs. Very few dogs, if any, were released or rescued before the 14-day period expired. Most were kept in poor conditions and euthanized once the legal waiting period ended.
Q: Can you say how many dogs from Suraia were rescued by Romanian animal rights activists and NGOs after the camp was closed?
Around 205 dogs were taken out of Suraia after the facility was shut down, though it’s possible the real number was even higher. What we do know for sure is that the vast majority of the dogs rescued were sick, many of them suffering from severe infections, parasitic diseases and overall extremely poor health conditions. Most were in a critical state and required immediate, intensive veterinary care.
Q: I read on social media that many dogs are sick; can you tell me anything about that and what illnesses they are?
Many dogs rescued from Suraia were suffering from diseases such as distemper, parvovirus, mange and severe malnutrition. Some also had untreated injuries and chronic infections due to the neglectful conditions.
Q: After the images and reports about us at the Suraia death camp became public, it felt like a cold horror, and many social media posts conveyed despair, anger, and frustration, but also a nascent spark of hope that perhaps the time has finally come for something to change on a political level. What's your take on this?
The public outcry was immense: people were horrified and demanded accountability. While frustration and anger were palpable, there’s a growing hope that this scandal will finally push authorities to reform the system and enforce stricter oversight.
Q: I read that the dogs didn't receive "humane euthanasia", but rather deadly-injections without sedation. What information do you have on this?
Eyewitnesses and whistleblowers reported that many dogs were euthanized without sedation, causing immense suffering. Unfortunately, this is not an isolated case; lack of proper protocols is a widespread problem in many shelters (private and public ones).
Q: How great is the hope that something will change in the "street dog management" system? Specifically, that there will be more transparency and government oversight?
I’m cautiously optimistic. The situation at Suraia has put pressure on the authorities and there’s a realchance for improvement, but it will require sustained public attention and continued advocacy.
Q: How could people from foreign countries support you and the many other animal welfare NGOs in Romania? Is there perhaps a central place where one can donate towards veterinary costs, special food, etc.?
Foreigners can support Romanian animal welfare NGOs by donating directly through each organization’s official website, sharing their campaigns or supporting adoption and fostering efforts. There is no central donation platform, as NGOs fundraise independently and promote their work individually. For example Asociația Kola Kariola, Asociatia Ramses, Asociatia Save our Paws each collect donations on their own websites and communicate updates directly to their supporters.
Q: In Germany, we often hear about "kill shelters," but these are actually municipal animal shelters. Could you please briefly explain how they differ from privately run animal shelters?
Municipal kill shelters are funded by local governments and are required by law to hold stray dogs fora waiting period (usually 14 days) before euthanasia. Privately run shelters, on the other hand, are typically run by NGOs or individuals and focus on rescue, rehabilitation, and rehoming, with euthanasia only as a last resort( or should be like this).
Q: Are there any estimates or information on how many more killing camps, similar to the one in Suraia, still exist? Since these "private killing camps" have contracts with municipalities and are financed through tax revenue, are these municipalities and cities
not obligated to disclose this information?
Exact numbers are hard to come by due to lack of transparency. Many municipalities contract out to private operators, but details are not always publicly disclosed, despite the use of taxpayer money. Activists are pushing for full transparency and public accountability.
---
A heartfelt thank to you Emma Stratulat and the many other animal rights activists and NGOs who are so active and dedicate themselves so much to the dogs every day. And thank you for taking the time for this interview.
I sincerely hope that the authorities have also realized that this business model only lines the pockets of those who run these killing stations – at the expense of the dogs who are subject to suffering, torment, and pain. Because with public funds, lives could be saved through numerous large-scale spay/neuter campaigns, education, registration (microchipping), and other initiatives, all without killing.
Tom van den Abbeele-Pedall
Autor / Podcaster
Engelskirchen/Germany
https://streuner-seelen.blogspot.com/
https://www.youtube.com/
