Citizens are hereby informed that Mayoral Ordinance No. 18 of April 4, 2026, has been issued, prohibiting feeding or leaving food for stray dogs along the SS 195.
A controversy erupted in Teulada after the mayor's decision to ban the feeding of biscuits and other food to a poor stray dog . The order states that "this measure was necessary following the failed attempt to capture the animal, which was particularly wary and unapproachable, as well as due to environmental conditions that made any intervention difficult. The presence of food encouraged the dog to remain near the main road, posing a risk to traffic safety and the animal's own safety."
The web is up in arms, with unspeakable insults and even threats: "One day those who decided this will lack bread and water," is the tone of the comments, some of which are even more serious.
So much so that Mayor Angelo Milia was forced to intervene and explain: "I would like to clarify the situation that has arisen regarding the ordinance on stray dogs along the SS 195. I have read many words, some very harsh, directed at me and the Administration. I understand the sensitivity this matter is arousing because we are talking about an animal in need, and no one can remain indifferent . But precisely for this reason, it is necessary to report the facts, without distortion or manipulation."
The Municipality—the reconstruction—has entrusted the care, custody, and capture of stray dogs to a specialized facility, Canile Dog Hotel srl in Assemini. After several capture attempts, in consultation with the local health authority (ASL), local police, Compagnia Barracellare, and animal protection officers, which unfortunately failed due to the dog's wary behavior and the difficult conditions of the area, it was decided to issue the ordinance. This decision was based on precise technical evaluations of the reports from the local police and the Dog Hotel operators, who deemed this the most appropriate way to safely recover the animal. If someone had truly wanted to "not care," as has been alleged, there would not have been continuous inspections, interventions, and attempts carried out for weeks. I too tried to recover him several times, without making any grand proclamations. Unfortunately, I was unsuccessful.
"This ordinance isn't against that dog," the clarification stated. "It's to save him. Leaving food on site may seem like a helpful gesture, but in this situation, it means keeping him in an extremely dangerous area, exposing him to daily risks and making his capture more difficult. The decision to limit food sources to facilitate his movement and finally allow for a safe recovery was difficult, but necessary, and supported by the operators. Reading accusations like 'they want to starve him to death' is painful. It's a completely unrealistic portrayal."
The ordinance "requires that he not be fed near the road, for his safety and that of others. Spreading inaccurate reports about such a delicate situation helps neither the animal nor the community. Those in government have a duty to make decisions, even unpopular ones, but always with one goal in mind: protecting life, both of animals and people. Let's remember: we are on an objectively dangerous stretch of road. That said, we continue to work to resolve the situation. There are far too many keyboard warriors and couch potato fixers. Ignoring the issue would likely have been the least visible option on social media, but it would certainly be futile in trying to avoid unpleasant situations."
Finally, the conclusion: "I am saddened to read comments like this: 'The mayor should be hung in the town hall square for something like this... and beaten.' These are extremely serious words, completely irrelevant to civil and democratic debate. We have gone far beyond criticism, slipping into what has taken on the character of a veritable media lynching. Respect must be the foundation of any community: institutions can be challenged, but they cannot be dehumanized."
(Unioneonline/D)
