Animal rights activists fight for animal rights. Animal protection in Russia. How German firefighters save animals

On Wednesday, December 13, the Russian State Duma adopted in the third reading a law on toughening penalties for cruelty to animals. New provisions of the Criminal Code increase the maximum penalty for killing and mutilating animals from one to three years in prison. Thus, Russia will be on par with Germany in terms of the severity of animal protection laws - but not in terms of their mandatory implementation. As animal advocates interviewed by DW say, the rule of law is half the battle. An equally important role is played by effective structures of the rule of law that ensure the implementation of laws in practice.

Animal Protection Law in Germany and the Russian Federation

The draft law “On the Responsible Treatment of Animals” was submitted to the Russian parliament seven years ago - in the fall of 2010. It was adopted in the first reading in the spring of 2011. Its adoption in the third reading on Wednesday, December 13, will be a symbolic victory for animal defenders at the end of the “Year of Ecology” in Russia, which was declared 2017.

During the discussion of the document, there were calls to increase the punishment for cruelty to animals to six years in prison. The law amends Article 245 of the Russian Criminal Code (“cruelty to animals”), as well as two articles of the Russian Criminal Procedure Code. Article 245 of the Criminal Code is used relatively rarely - in 2015, only 29 people were convicted under it within six months.

The German animal protection law provides not only a fine, but also a prison term of up to three years for killing a vertebrate animal or causing it unnecessary pain or suffering. In general, experts call Germany a model of careful treatment of animals, and the decisive factor in this matter is not so much the presence of laws in itself, but the effective work of the structures of the rule of law to protect it.

“The laws are similar everywhere, but the system of their implementation is different,” says a veterinarian from Russia, familiar with the state of affairs in animal protection both in Europe and at home, and who asked not to give his name. In Germany, for example, there are even lawyers who specialize in protecting animal rights. With their complaints they make the bureaucratic machine work. And, for example, they are seeking real prison sentences for those who keep dozens of cats and dogs in their apartments. This also happens in Russia, but animal rights activists there do not have the tools to enforce the laws.

“In Germany there is a working rule of law state, where no one is afraid to sue,” continues the veterinarian. “So toughening punishment for cruelty to animals in Russia will remain a symbolic act until there is no rule of law in the country. Otherwise, a new The law was adopted "for beauty."

In defense of flamingos

A concrete example of the effectiveness of the legal system in Germany is the campaign by the animal rights organization Peta to ban the wing clipping of birds kept in German zoos. According to the organization, as of 2016, there were about 10 thousand birds in zoos throughout Germany that were surgically deprived of the ability to fly.

Activists have called for criminal charges to be opened against 20 zoos in Germany where waterfowl's wings are clipped to prevent them from flying away. In two cities (including Berlin), prosecutors refused to open cases, but pre-investigation checks began against 18 zoos, Peta organization assistant Yvonne Würtz told DW.

According to her, zoos violate the federal law on the protection of animals, which, in particular, prohibits the “full or partial amputation of parts of the body” of an animal - including clipping the wings. If zoos start complying with the law, they will have to build expensive enclosures to house the birds, says Yvonne Wurtz. “In addition, zoos justify their actions with an educational mission, but this is an absurd argument - flightless birds cannot illustrate themselves in the wild in a zoo,” says Yvonne Wurtz.

About 6,000 crimes per year

Yet crimes against animals are also committed in Germany. According to the country's Ministry of Internal Affairs, about 6,000 cases of violation of the animal protection law are registered in Germany every year. “We assume that the real number of crimes against animals may be much higher, since not all cases become public or the police are not always able to find the criminals,” a spokesman for the German Animal Welfare Union (Tierschutzbund) with headquarters comments on the statistics in an interview with DW. -apartment in Bonn by Lea Schmitz.

According to her, even in the most civilized countries of Western Europe, more animals are being tortured and killed today than ever before. In Germany alone, over two million animals are killed every year for scientific purposes. And in the south and east of Europe, things are even worse - here they add the use of bulls in traditional fights (bullfighting in Spain), as well as cruelty to stray animals.

Holiday for homeless animals

And yet Germany can be called a model country in Europe in protecting animal rights. There are even Christmas parties held at dog shelters. For example, in the shelter of the Berlin Society for the Protection of Animals (Tierschutz Berlin), on the northeastern outskirts of the German capital, where about one and a half thousand stray cats and dogs live. This shelter is considered one of the largest and most modern not only in Germany, but throughout Europe. In one year, about 12 thousand animals “pass” through it - from here they are taken by new owners.

The traditional Christmas holiday for stray cats and dogs causes such an influx of visitors that there are not enough parking spaces and organizers are running shuttle buses on three routes from the nearest S-Bahn stations.

See also:

• A rescue team from Dortmund was called by a car owner who heard meowing from under the hood of his car, and when he opened it, he saw a kitten stuck deep below. The kitten was saved only after firefighters dismantled the underbody of the car. How he managed to get in there is a mystery. Apparently, the kitten was trying to stay warm there on a cold December night.



How German firefighters save animals

Firefighters in the city of Goppingen in southern Germany had to rescue this raccoon from a fireplace chimney. Only with the help of a cable to which a shield was attached, they managed to literally push the animal into the basement, where rescuers were waiting for him.



How German firefighters save animals

In June 2017, Dortmund firefighters rescued two young roe deer who fell into the shaft of a former thermal power plant. The roe deer were lucky that their roar was heard by passers-by, who called rescuers for help.



How German firefighters save animals

Hedgehog in the fence

In September 2017, a hedgehog got stuck between the bars of an iron fence in Bonn. The rescuers who arrived were able to free him by cutting through the thick metal bars using special reinforcement shears



How German firefighters save animals

A roe deer was stuck in the closed metal gates of a waste recycling plant in the city of Stendal in Saxony-Anhalt, trying to crawl between the metal bars. There was no need to cut through the rods here: the firefighters used a special jack expander to free the frightened animal.



How German firefighters save animals

The parrot was afraid of the quacking ducks

Circus performer Alessio Fogesato from Stuttgart is grateful to firefighters for being able to get his parrot, Paco, from a tree. A twelve-year-old parrot escaped from the artist's hands during a rehearsal near a lake and landed on the top of a tree. He was afraid of the quacking ducks in the park. Paco did not give in to his master's persuasion to return to earth. Rescuers came to the rescue by climbing the fire escape.



How German firefighters save animals

Hannover fire department employee Stefan Albrecht carried a cat out of a burning apartment in July 2017. She suffered carbon dioxide poisoning, so she was given pure oxygen to breathe. And they saved her.

LEVCHENKO Natalya Valerievna — junior researcher at the Institute of Sociology of the Russian Academy of Sciences

The article undertakes an analysis of the activities animal protection non-profit organizations whose essence is to protect the rights of homeless animals. The problem of coexistence between humans and “domesticated” animals is relevant for Russian cities, which is reflected in numerous articles in the media.

Our research is based on data from an expert survey (2013) of veterinarians, representatives of animal protection organizations and initiative groups. Geography of the study: Moscow, St. Petersburg, Nizhny Novgorod, Kazan and Obninsk. The main focus is the attitude towards the situation related to homeless animals, as well as the interaction of animal rights activists with the authorities and the public.

The actionist approach of A. Touraine was chosen as the theoretical basis for the analysis. Actionism makes it possible to create an idea of ​​the position of the subject, the essence of which lies in the individual’s desire to be an actor. “Social movements are agents of change,” and some “consider problems that are practically excluded from public life and are considered to belong to private life” [Touraine, 1998: 55 – 64]. Based on the approach of A. Touraine, the article examines the activities of Russian animal rights activists, their interaction with authorities at various levels and the possibility of changing the current situation.

Consequences of the high number of stray animals in the city. Based on the results of an expert survey, the following consequences of the situation with homeless animals on the city streets were identified.

Firstly, it is stressful for people who love animals. Zoo defenders say that city residents constantly contact their organization with requests for help for stray animals or to find a lost pet: “We often receive calls about animals in trouble, for example, someone was hit by a car or an animal injured its paw.”(“Cat and Dog Help Service”, St. Petersburg). In Obninsk, residents are concerned that the number of animals is increasing due to the location of the dacha sector: “Quite a lot of people call us in the fall about abandoned animals left at their dachas.”

Many respondents became volunteers for animal protection organizations precisely as a result of compassion for homeless animals. “One day, returning home, I saw six kittens, and could not pass by, I decided to take them home. I immediately started looking for shelters and contacted the Lost Organization.”(volunteer).

Secondly, this is the aggression of homeless animals, as well as people. Thus, an analysis of publications showed that the media often describe emerging threats from the presence of stray animals, as well as cases of their attacks on people 1 . At the same time, the media publishes articles about the threat to animals from human actions 2 .

Thirdly, conflicts between people who care about animals and those who have a negative attitude towards this. This mainly applies to residents of the same house. Some, taking care of cats and dogs, feed them, which leads to a large accumulation of homeless animals, and causes irritation among other residents who strive to maintain cleanliness, order and safety near their place of residence. “Coming out onto the loggia, I saw a dog that had given birth to 8 puppies and began feeding them. However, problems began with the neighbors on the first floor, who were categorically against feeding these animals. The catching service was called several times, and some of the puppies were caught, while others remained there.”

Fourthly, this is the result of human irresponsibility, when pets unhindered breed from stray animals, or become homeless themselves. Some experts believe that responsibility of this nature can only be brought about through fines and taxes. In addition, experts see a connection between irresponsibility and low morality: “The person himself is to blame, i.e. his indifference to everything, starting with his environment” (“Noah’s Ark”, Obninsk).

As a result of such consequences of the uncontrolled presence of stray animals on the streets of Russian cities, the need for the existence and activities of non-profit organizations arises, since local authorities do not take any action in relation to stray animals, except for their capture and destruction. This can be explained by the fact that “such social and cultural problems that appeal to collective choice have not yet found political expression” [Touraine, 1998]. The measures taken by local authorities do not lead to a solution to the problem.

Organized animal rights activists: social composition. There are several reasons why people become activists in the animal protection movement. Basically, people become members of animal protection organizations or initiative groups as a result of compassion for homeless animals: “One day I read an advertisement that we needed help from an animal protection organization and decided to respond.”(“Zoo-spas”, Kazan). First of all, as a result of the lack of shelter (Obninsk, St. Petersburg). In Nizhny Novgorod, the reason for involvement in volunteer activities was the negative influence of an existing organization involved in the sterilization of stray animals: “In 2004, representatives of the organization... killed my dog. I started working on this issue, and we united with several people into one organization.”(“Living Planet”, Nizhny Novgorod). “One environmentalist brought me photographs from ... in which the animals looked like children from a concentration camp. I was so imbued with this, I felt so bad that I decided to take puppies from there, and then, after looking at what shelters and groups there were, as a result I joined one of them.”(“Peace Group”, Nizhny Novgorod). Another reason for involvement is the desire to improve the ability to care for sterilized animals.

As a rule, people who help homeless animals are mainly representatives of the intelligentsia, but there are also representatives of those strata whose work is much less skilled. The professions of members of animal organizations are most often associated with working with people (teachers, educators, doctors, sales consultants, accountants, etc.). Some respondents emphasize the role of young people, most often girls, as well as people with disabilities.

The need to solve the problem associated with the presence of animals in the city also arises among a number of representatives of small and medium-sized businesses who are not satisfied with their uncontrolled reproduction and the presence of threats caused by them. One of the businessmen expressed a desire to provide financial support for the creation of a shelter for homeless animals: ‘Yun wants there to be a normal nursery in the city, he is ready to hire a person who will take care of it’(Nizhny Novgorod).

Typology of animal protection non-profit organizations. Basically, animal protection organizations in megacities actively began their activities in the 1990s, in regional centers - in the mid-2000s. In Obninsk - one animal protection organization, in Kazan two animal protection organizations are the most active, in Nizhny Novgorod - four, in Moscow - three, in St. Petersburg - four. Some of them arose precisely as a shelter for homeless animals, because... at that time they did not exist or were in short supply. As a rule, these are fairly closed groups that are difficult to contact, because... If assistance, for example, to orphans or people with disabilities does not cause disparate opinions, then assistance to homeless animals is perceived ambiguously by both the public and government officials. In addition, some animal organizations arouse suspicion among the population about the extent to which their activities are truly non-commercial.

New animal protection organizations appear as a result of their members’ different visions of how to solve the problem of homeless animals, as well as different views on the activities of the organization. During the study, the following groups were identified:

1. Organizations implementing the SALT program (capture - sterilization - return to habitat). Its representatives are also involved in the care and treatment of animals. As a rule, members of the organization actively promote responsible treatment of animals and the need to sterilize pets.

In addition, there are organizations in this area that win tenders in a city competition to implement a program for the sterilization of homeless animals. However, these organizations, as a rule, do not position themselves as non-profits. Animal rights activists are often not satisfied with the work of such organizations. “When catching stray animals, they use a drug that is fatal.” Despite the differences in the activities of animal protection initiative groups, their representatives unite and cooperate in the fight against the “common enemy” in the person of a commercial organization implementing a sterilization program.

2. Organizations involved in the treatment of homeless animals with their further placement. Most organizations fall into this type. They rarely engage in public relations work because... “I don’t have enough time or energy for this.” Their members either take a crippled animal from the street, or city residents bring the animal to them, then they collect money for the treatment of the animals and give it a home. Keeping animals “on demand” most often occurs in the homes of some animal rights activists; less often it is possible to maintain a shelter.

3. Organizations that are shelters for homeless animals. They begin their activities with the founding of a shelter. These, for example, include the “Charitable Fund for Helping Homeless Dogs” in St. Petersburg. Its leader talks about his organization like this: “U “The need arose for us to organize a shelter, then our activities began to take on a more educational form and veterinary assistance on a wide scale.”

4. Organizations whose activities take place only on the Internet. Their activities are also related to the placement of animals, but this is carried out during discussions on forums, where city residents post information (description and photograph) about the animal they would like to adopt, indicate their contact number, and other site visitors select the animal they would like take it for yourself.

5. The information type of activity of organizations is a rather rare type, its representatives practically do not deal with the adoption of animals, their activities are mainly educational: animal rights activists collect material, actively appeal to government officials with proposals for improving legislation concerning stray animals.

Based on size, animal protection organizations can be divided into two groups: small and large. The first group, as a rule, includes 5 - 6 activists and several volunteers, the composition of which is constantly changing. Such organizations do not have a clear structure.

Large organizations often exist for a long time and have about 30 members. Among them, one or two people are the initiators of the creation of a group or organization who have become leaders, two or three people are moderators of the organization’s website, and the rest are volunteers who help care for animals. There are organizations that include a certain number of operators involved in housing animals, compiling an information base and working with the public.

In addition, animal protection organizations can be divided into officially registered and unregistered organizations that position themselves as initiative groups.

Despite the differences between animal organizations in structure, types of activities, etc., all animal rights activists need the help of the public to be more effective in their activities. As a result, many animal protection organizations and initiative groups are actively working with the population. This is mainly carried out by distributing leaflets and brochures at doorsteps, publishing our own newspapers, which contain information about the responsible treatment of animals, the need to sterilize pets, information about animal protection organizations, involvement in charitable activities, etc.

Problems of consolidation of actions. The activities of some animal rights activists complement, and sometimes contradict, the actions of others. But despite this, there is an opinion that animal protection organizations need to cooperate to solve common problems. A doctor at the Veterinary Hospital of Saints Florus and Laurus (Nizhny Novgorod) talks about the need to unite animal rights activists from different regions: “We We want to start creating a ‘Coordinating Council’.” It is difficult to solve all the problems within one group, i.e. We have one initiative group that selects animals and is not able to think about holding pickets, and in general the activities of all these groups are scattered, i.e. there is no unity in solving the problem, there is no comprehensive work.”

According to respondents, reducing the number of stray animals is only possible with the participation of the authorities: “We need the support of the authorities so that funds are allocated for sterilization, operations and shelter"(Help Service for Cats and Dogs, St. Petersburg). The need for government support also follows from the measures listed by experts that would help reduce the number of stray animals: a program for sterilization of stray animals, microchipping, registration of pets, and the introduction of fines for non-compliance with accepted standards for keeping a pet. In an interview with one of the organizers of the Obninsk animal protection center, it was noted that “It is impossible without the participation of municipal authorities to introduce administrative sanctions that increase people’s responsibility. Now, in our country, animals are considered property, and as a result, whatever you want to do with this property, that’s what you do.”

The reaction of the authorities to appeals from animal protection organizations in the capital is demonstrated by the following case: in December 2010, Moscow Mayor S. Sobyanin, answering questions asked on the RIA Novosti Facebook page, said that “The Moscow Government pays close attention to the issues of keeping ownerless animals. The city has a program for humane regulation of the number of animals, measures are being taken to prevent the introduction of rabies and other dangerous diseases into the city, and shelters are being built to house ownerless cats and dogs 3.”

Some conclusions. As the study showed, the population is concerned about the presence of animals in the city, but in most cases they are not ready to act. People's opinions and positions are different, which leads to the formation of groups opposing each other; this, in turn, does not lead to the consolidation of society on this issue.

Turen A. Social changes of the twentieth century // Sociological Review. 2002. T. 2. N 4. P. 50.

Andrey Shalygin: I, like most sane people, have the obvious conviction that it is absolutely not surprising that all anti-state, anti-Russian initiatives come from grant-eaters from NGOs and so-called human rights activists - they protect the rights exclusively of those who nurtured and created. All the white-ribbon bastards come precisely from the tolerant, democrat and pederast vipers. With the adoption by 30 states of the United States, Americanists like Greenpeace and other mercenaries can officially be considered official propagandists of pederasty. The truth about these two-legged outcasts and what they bring to people is perfectly illustrated in dozens of communities that show what follows ecoterrorism.

It is under the flag of pederasty that they hold their Maidans from Ukraine to Geyropa, from where they are sponsored - multi-colored flags do not even need proof. It is with bare tits that they will jump in the Cathedral of Christ the Savior, with bare ass they will cut down worship crosses on the Maidan where it began, stick frozen chicken into the vagina against the Prime Minister and fuck on camera...Perverts, the scum of society, the marginalized. At the same time, it is clearly clear that for society they are complete freaks, since more than 85% of the population officially supports the president, but these are precisely against it. And the Russian leadership does not completely hide the fact that eco-terrorists for the most part are terrorists, and not eco-

Outcasts, renegades, freaks, outcasts, all the bastards rejected by society, certainly want to take revenge. And there is no more evil beast than cattle - who came to power in the struggle for the rights of cattle. This is an axiom known at all times. This is why the West so actively sponsors openly anti-social forces, including and above all animal rights activists, Greenpeace, WWF and other eco-terrorists. Precisely ecoterrorists who not only attack Russian economic facilities, but also people personally -.

Why do the so-called defenders of stray dogs do not keep any stray dogs at home, do not work in any nurseries at all, earning money to feed them, and when they work, no budget grows there - even in urban areas they steal neither more nor less - billions ( see links below). Sterilizers in general are almost universal thieves and schemers... They steal in billions: . At the same time, for the rights of dogs in Russia they will gnaw out anyone’s throat , but they will be the ones at rallies in defense of the fascist Ukrainian bastard, and not a single bastard of them will go to a rally in front of the US Embassy with photographs of the killed Russians of Donbass.

Because protecting tramps for them, first of all, is an opportunity, at least under some pretext, to fight with society, to at least somehow take revenge on this very society for the fact that they are superfluous in it. This is Freud. They identify themselves with stray dogs, and that is why they supposedly fight for their rights and increase. This is a simple test of identification. Moreover, this struggle is always directed against people precisely because they protect dogs that kill people, and not people from dogs. By protecting stray dogs on city streets, you are simultaneously promoting the legality of their killing of children and women killed by them. There is no alternative, that's obvious. City streets are for people and not for dogs, and this is obvious. But pseudo-animal rights activists want, at our expense, to legalize city streets specifically for dogs. They hate people -.

They do not pay taxes on protected animals, they do not vaccinate them, do not register them, do not put muzzles on everyone, do not create living conditions that meet the standards... they simply breed them, thereby violating the legislation of the Russian Federation. They are criminals even formally - on all counts, since they illegally create conditions for violating Russian legislation and breed lawlessness.

Not a single government resource in the media doubts why British Petroleum, which committed the most massive oil spill in history, was not even condemned verbally by Greenpeace, and Prirazlomnaya, which had not yet started production, was attacked by international Greenpeace pirates - because BP finances Greenpeace and the fight against oil production Russian oil in the Arctic is one of the main functions of Greenpeace -
At the same time, they all themselves promote violence and killing of animals; moreover, sex education lessons with incest, pedophilia and pederasty are precisely the very European values ​​that they promote along with the protection of stray dogs:

For you and me, at least one killed child is not worth a million stray dogs. And for them, 10-20 killed a year is such a trifle that they are ready to defend with foam at the mouth as the natural right of stray dogs to kill children.

At the same time, the eco-creatures will threaten everyone who disagrees with them, write letters, send threats on social networks. They also write to me demanding that I remove articles containing threats, ranging from physical threats to “sueing” (with Euro money, of course). And they do this all over the world. The so-called animal defenders are an international terrorist organization:

That is, in fact all these pseudo-defenders of tramps are protesting AGAINST THE LAW. That is why they are willingly paid money from abroad. , Yakutia could no longer withstand several successive killings of children by stray dogs and, simply raising the question of recognizing them as wild animals, without waiting for the result, they shot the vast majority of garbage wolves in Yakutsk.

Why should thousands of children become infected?(and at the same time receive persistent long-term damage to the body) from cat and dog worms from stray dogs, which, among other things, shit in children's sandboxes? Why doesn’t all this zooshit pay lifelong benefits to the relatives of the victims as accomplices in the crime? Why is it not with their money that the biocenosis around cities is restored, which stray animal waste eats away for tens of kilometers?

In Chita alone in 2014, 507 people were bitten by stray dogs, 156 of them children. Why not entrust the payment of compensation to those bitten to all this eco-scum who, at someone else’s expense, wants to be a lawyer and apologist for murder and mass terror against people?

Doesn’t all this eco-bastard want to pay for and work off all the total labor losses that the whole of Russia suffers in one and a half hundred cities of Russia as a result of lobbying by eco-cats for the right of dogs to attack people?

And only after this, let’s talk about some rights of some animal rights activists to open their filthy mouths.

The cynicism of animal rights activists - stray dogs kill few people, it’s not scary

Often in the demagoguery of defenders of stray predators there is a cynical phrase - “in Russia more people die from pedophiles, maniacs and cars than from dogs.” According to this opinion, it turns out that since people die under the wheels of cars, then they can also be poisoned by dogs? Or do we meet maniacs and pedophiles every day, like stray dogs, on the way home? Come on, what’s the point - you’re still going to die anyway. Then let’s scatter mines everywhere on the streets and not observe safety precautions in production. We are closing hospitals - why get treatment if sooner or later you will end up in the ground?

Yes, this is exactly how radical lovers of stray dogs talk when it comes to human life - coldly, cynically and indifferently. But when it comes to a stray dog, “animal defenders” suddenly change their minds and proclaim, foaming at the mouth, that it “has the right to life.” And the fighter for the rights of the urban predator does not care about the fact that a dog, too, will someday die on the street from hunger, cold, under the wheels of a car. But before that, she will have time to form a flock, chase cyclists, and protect playgrounds from children.

It’s worth mentioning separately about “dog rights,” for which “animal defenders” are fighting in all seriousness. Animals are not an object of law, which means that the guarantor of a dog’s rights must be someone who will be responsible for the animal’s behavior and perform certain duties. But “animal defenders” do not want to do this.

And who will return to the people who died from the fangs of dogs in Russia their right to life? This year alone, dozens of small children were mauled and maimed to death by stray dogs, who are certainly not to blame for the problem of stray dogs. Do “animal defenders” really believe that one of their favorite phrases, “well, in Russia, more people die under the wheels of cars” will serve as a consolation for parents? Yes, more than that, it’s stupid to argue with that.

Therefore, by declaring that “let’s destroy all cars then,” “animal defenders” show their narrow-mindedness. By destroying cars, humanity will only lose and degrade. There will be no disadvantages for Homo Sapiens from the euthanasia of stray dogs. Inhumane?

Humanism is a worldview centered on the idea of ​​man as the highest value; arose as a philosophical movement during the Renaissance.

Humanism affirms the value of man as an individual, his right to freedom, happiness, development, and manifestation of his abilities.

In conclusion, I just want to give statistics on people torn to death by dogs for the year 2014, which has not yet ended:

21.01 - Bryansk region, 6 year old boy

18.02 - Berkakit village (Yakutia) 9 year old boy Vanya

11.03 - Tiksi village (Yakutia) 9 year old girl
20.03 - Pupyshevo (L.O.) 60 year old woman
08.04 - Primorye, warehouse worker
11.04 - Volgograd, woman
16.04 - Shchekino (Tula region), man
22.04 - Gorodishchensky district (Volgograd region), man
03.07 - Yalta, middle-aged man
03.08 - p. Uchkeken (Karachevo-Cherkess Republic), 2 year old child
08.08 - Volgograd region, 62-year-old man, summer resident

Svetlana Ilyinskaya