Core Proposition

Instead of continued killing for fur during the transition period, this project proposes a structured transfer route into responsible pet adoption.
The objective is simple: create a practical pathway in which preserving life becomes economically and operationally more realistic than liquidation.

Core Finding — An Ethical Phase-Out Without an Ethical Transition

Article 13 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union requires the European Union and its Member States, when formulating and implementing relevant policies, to pay full regard to animal-welfare requirements because animals are sentient beings.

The European Citizens’ Initiative
Fur Free Europe
received 1,502,319 verified statements of support. It called for an end to keeping and killing animals for the sole or main purpose of fur production.

Romania subsequently prohibited the commercial breeding, intentional capture and killing of chinchillas and mink from 1 January 2027 through Law No. 286/2024, enacted within its Animal Protection Law.

The law establishes the date on which commercial killing becomes prohibited. It does not establish how the animals still alive during the transition must be treated. It contains no dedicated framework for pre-killing notification, a waiting period, transfer opportunities, responsible rehoming or a slaughter-last safeguard.

DG SANTE Unit G3 stated that responsibility lies with the Romanian authorities, confirmed that no EU-level mechanism exists to prevent the animals from being killed, referred to Regulation (EC) No 1099/2009, and subsequently declined further correspondence.

ANSVSA then formally confirmed that breeding and exploitation, including the killing of chinchillas, remain permitted until 31 December 2026, and stated that the means of concluding the transition are the option of the keepers or owners. Its reference to adoption was limited to stating that the possibility would be brought to operators’ attention during surveillance and monitoring. It did not establish or commit to an adoption program.

Commercial killing remains legally permitted, but it is not legally required.

Regulation (EC) No 1099/2009 governs how animals must be treated when killing has already been lawfully chosen. It does not require killing, provide a transition policy, or explain how continued commercial killing is consistent with a phase-out adopted in the name of animal protection.

The central issue is not that the SAVE15000 proposal has not been adopted. The issue is that the ethical purpose of the prohibition was not implemented for the animals still alive during the transition. SAVE15000 demonstrates that a decentralised non-lethal route, without a State-operated mass shelter or permanent public animal-care staff, is at least capable of practical consideration.

The European Commission transferred responsibility to Romania. Romania left continued killing available to owners. Neither authority has explained how this outcome is consistent with recognising animals as sentient beings and ending their killing for fur.

For NGOs and Authorities

This is an operational model, not a shelter-based rescue request.
The proposed role of participating organizations is limited to coordination, verification, and on-site support.
No long-term custody and no large-scale temporary shelter infrastructure are assumed.

📊 Public Contact and Response Record

Last updated: 5 August 2026

This section records the public authorities, political representatives,
animal-welfare organisations, companies, public figures and media formally
contacted or notified by the SAVE15000 Project, together with the response
status known at the date above.

Inclusion means that a documented communication was submitted or received.
It does not imply endorsement, cooperation, intervention or responsibility
for the SAVE15000 Project.

• European Commission — Europe Direct:
  replied under reference
  
  no. #7755651
  
  and confirmed that no EU-level mechanism exists to prevent the killing
  of fur animals during Romania’s transition period.
• European Commission — DG SANTE, Unit G3, Animal Welfare:
  
  formally replied
  
  that responsibility for the transition lies with the Romanian national
  authorities.
• European Commission — formal complaint reply
  
  Ares(2026)5011901
  
  stated that the Commission had identified no legal basis for intervention
  as long as Member States comply with existing EU rules. The reply referred
  to Council Regulation (EC) No 1099/2009 on the protection of animals at the
  time of killing. DG SANTE subsequently declined further correspondence on
  the matter.
• Ursula von der Leyen, President of the European Commission:
  formally contacted through the President’s official contact channel and
  asked to review the contradiction between Article 13 TFEU, the recognition
  of animals as sentient beings, and the acceptance of continued commercial
  killing during an ethically motivated phase-out.
  No substantive response has been received.
• ANSVSA / NSVFSA, Romania:
  initially confirmed under Ref. no. 6441/08.05.2026 that commercial breeding
  and exploitation, including the killing of chinchillas, remain permitted
  until 31 December 2026 and that the method used to conclude the transition
  remains the decision of keepers or owners.

  In its formal follow-up response issued on 5 August 2026, concerning the
  SAVE15000 follow-up registered under No. 6441/17.07.2026, ANSVSA confirmed
  that it had issued instructions to all regional structures and introduced
  a questionnaire for fur-animal holders.

  The questionnaire includes questions concerning the possibility and
  willingness of holders to entrust chinchillas and mink for adoption to
  Romanian or international non-governmental organisations.

  ANSVSA stated that all data will be collected by the end of August,
  producing an accurate overview of the number of remaining chinchillas
  and mink and the action plans chosen by farmers and breeders.

  ANSVSA also clarified that entrusting animals for adoption through donation
  is permitted under Romanian civil law. Transfers to organisations in other
  EU Member States may proceed under applicable EU animal-health and
  intra-Community trade rules, while transfers to third countries, including
  Japan, are possible subject to the legal and animal-health requirements of
  the destination country.

  This nationwide data collection and the inclusion of adoption willingness
  represent a concrete operational step toward identifying animals that may
  be transferred rather than killed.

  ANSVSA nevertheless reiterated that killing remains legally permitted until
  31 December 2026 and that the final choice remains with the owners.
  No mandatory waiting period, transfer obligation or slaughter-last safeguard
  has yet been established.

• Embassy of Romania in Japan:
  acknowledged receipt and stated that the SAVE15000 petition had been
  officially forwarded, in accordance with OG 27/2002, to ANSVSA and the
  Ministry of Environment, Waters and Forests.
• Embassy of Romania in Japan — subsequent clarification request:
  asked to explain the discrepancy between its confirmation that the petition
  had been forwarded to the Ministry of Environment and the Ministry’s later
  statement that it had never received or registered the petition.
  No response to the clarification request has been received.
• Ministry of Environment, Waters and Forests of Romania / MMediu:
  previously replied that it had neither received nor registered the
  SAVE15000 petition and considered the matter outside its field of competence.
  The Prime Minister’s Office subsequently forwarded the SAVE15000 request
  to the Ministry through the Government’s official administrative channel.
  A further substantive ministerial response remains pending.
• Nicușor Dan, President of Romania:
  formally contacted through the Presidency’s official contact form and asked
  to initiate urgent national coordination among the Government, ANSVSA,
  Parliament and other relevant authorities.
  The Presidency was informed that its substantive response, or the absence
  of a response, would be recorded publicly.
  Response pending.
• Prime Minister and Government of Romania:
  formally contacted through the Government’s official contact form.
  The request called for the designation of a responsible national coordinator,
  a verified inventory, pre-killing notification, a temporary waiting period,
  regulated transfer procedures and a slaughter-last safeguard.
  The Prime Minister’s Office subsequently forwarded the request to the
  Ministry of Environment, Waters and Forests for examination and handling.
  A substantive governmental or ministerial response to the requested
  transition safeguards remains pending.
• Romanian Government / Prime Minister’s Control Body:
  requested to conduct an administrative review and provide guidance concerning
  the handling of the SAVE15000 petition and the absence of a substantive
  transition safeguard.
• Romanian Government petition route / DRP:
  forwarded the SAVE15000 administrative review request to ANSVSA and the
  Ministry of Environment petition contact channel, with SAVE15000 copied.
  The Ministry subsequently stated that it had not received or registered
  the petition. The later forwarding by the Prime Minister’s Office placed
  the matter before the Ministry through a separate official route.
• Romanian Parliament — Chamber of Deputies and Senate:
  formally petitioned to examine the legislative gap in Law No. 286/2024 and
  consider urgent corrective safeguards, including a verified inventory,
  pre-killing notification, a waiting period, regulated transfer and a
  slaughter-last mechanism.
  The Chamber of Deputies, relevant Senate committees and parliamentary
  petition channels were copied on the SAVE15000 response thanking ANSVSA
  for initiating nationwide data collection and including adoption-related
  questions.
  No separate substantive parliamentary response has yet been received.
• Nicolae Ștefănuță, Vice-President of the European Parliament:
  formally contacted and asked to consider submitting a priority parliamentary
  question concerning Romania’s failure to establish an ethical transition
  framework.
  Response pending.
• Anja Hazekamp, Member of the European Parliament:
  formally contacted regarding a possible parliamentary question addressing
  the absence of transition safeguards for Romania’s remaining chinchillas.
  Response pending.
• Tilly Metz, Member of the European Parliament:
  formally contacted regarding the inconsistency between Fur Free Europe,
  Article 13 TFEU and the continued commercial killing of animals during the
  Romanian transition.
  Response pending.
• Manuela Ripa, Member of the European Parliament:
  formally contacted and asked to consider parliamentary intervention regarding
  the documented transition-design failure.
  Response pending.
• Niels Fuglsang, Member of the European Parliament and Chair of the
  Intergroup on the Welfare and Conservation of Animals:
  formally contacted regarding possible parliamentary and intergroup action.
  Response pending.
• Humane World for Animals / HSI Romania:
  responded that its logistical resources for directly implementing an adoption
  or purchase programme in Romania were limited. It stated that discussion might
  be possible if a coherent and realistic plan involving a local implementing
  organisation were available.

  A formal follow-up was submitted after the DG SANTE and ANSVSA replies were
  received.

  No commitment to coordinate or implement a non-lethal transition has been
  received.

• Eurogroup for Animals / Fur Free Europe:
  formally contacted and asked whether the continued commercial killing of at
  least 4,613 chinchillas can be accepted as the normal conclusion of a
  phase-out promoted in the name of animal protection.
  No substantive response has been received.
• PETA:
  contacted regarding the documented and time-limited risk to Romania’s
  remaining chinchillas. A senior public-facing representative was also
  contacted.
  No substantive response or intervention addressing SAVE15000 has been
  received.
• Billie Eilish management and related public contact routes:
  formally contacted because of Billie Eilish’s public opposition to fur and
  animal-welfare advocacy. A time-sensitive request was submitted through her
  current management company’s official contact route, asking for one public
  share or statement supporting an urgent non-lethal transition.
  No substantive response has been received.
• Prada Group:
  formally notified regarding the unresolved transition gap and the potential
  continued killing of Romania’s remaining chinchillas.
  Prada was the only contacted major fashion or luxury group to provide a
  response. Prada Client Service confirmed that the request had been forwarded
  to the appropriate internal department for further review. A substantive
  response from that department is currently pending.
• Other major fashion and luxury brands with publicly stated anti-fur or
  fur-free positions:
  several well-known brands were formally notified regarding the unresolved
  transition gap and whether opposition to fur should also include protection
  for animals remaining alive during the industry’s phase-out.
  No substantive response has been received.
• Romanian and international media:
  HotNews.ro, Digi24, Libertatea, G4Media, PRO TV, Reuters,
  Associated Press, Euronews, POLITICO Europe, Euractiv,
  EUobserver and The Brussels Times were contacted and supplied
  with information concerning the confirmed animal numbers,
  Romania’s legislative transition gap, the formal European
  Commission replies and the ANSVSA responses.
  No significant media coverage or substantive editorial response
  has resulted to date.
• White House:
  formally notified for international attention.
  No operational intervention has been identified.
• Public legal and policy analysis:
  published on Medium under the title
  
  “An Ethical Phase-Out Without an Ethical Transition”
  
  and subsequently shared through LinkedIn, X and Threads.

Transparency note:
Response status is reported factually according to the project’s
communication records. “No substantive response” means that no reply
addressing the requested action or policy issue had been received by
the stated update date.

⚠️ Latest European Commission Reply: No Immediate EU-Level Safeguard Identified

In a further formal reply from DG SANTE, Unit G3 – Animal Welfare, the European Commission stated that the EU currently has no mechanism to prevent the killing of fur animals during Romania’s transition period.

“The EU has no mechanism to prevent the killing of fur animals during the transition period.”

The Commission also stated that Member States establish their own conditions for implementing national bans on fur farming, and that the Commission has no legal basis to intervene as long as Member States comply with existing EU rules.

“There is therefore no violation of EU law, since no EU legislation exists on this matter.”

At the same time, the reply stated that any killing of animals must be performed in accordance with Council Regulation (EC) No 1099/2009 on the protection of animals at the time of killing.

Romania has already moved toward ending fur farming on ethical grounds. If fur farming is being phased out because it is ethically unacceptable, the remaining chinchillas should not be treated merely as disposable production assets during the transition period.

The central issue is therefore not only whether killing can be performed under existing procedural rules, but whether avoidable killing should remain the default outcome when a practical non-lethal transition route may still be possible.

This is the implementation gap addressed by the SAVE 15000 Project: EU-level principles recognize animals as sentient beings, but no immediate EU-level operational safeguard has been identified to protect chinchillas currently at risk during Romania’s national transition away from fur farming.

The SAVE 15000 Project therefore calls for a practical national and local transition pathway: structured transfer from farms into responsible pet adoption, where feasible, instead of avoidable liquidation during the transition period.

Contact

For coordination, institutional contact, or implementation discussions: