231
Animal Welfare — the local authority
responsibility
SMALL ANIMAL WELFARE — INEFFECTUAL LEGISLATION
M. J. R.
STOCKMAN, M.R.C.V.S., Honorary Secretary, British Veterinary areas in which the legislation in ’bite’, but much of the ineffectual side is caused by the failure of local authorities to use the various Acts as they were intended to be interpreted. The main Acts which concern the welfare of small animals in the main are: (a) Protection of Animals Act, 19111 (b) Performing Animals Act, 1925 (c) Pet Animals Act, 19511 (d) Animal Boarding Establishments Act, 1963 (e) Transit of Animals Act, 1973 (f) Breeding of Dogs Act, 1973 (g) Guard Dogs Act, 1975 (h) Dangerous Wild Animals Act, 1976
HERE ARE certain
is
lacking
The other important Acts from the welfare point of view are the Riding Establishments Acts of 1964 and 1970, but these hardly concern us on the small animals side except where they are useful as comparison with other Acts. The Protection of Animals Act has been added to and amended on several occasions, but in general it can be looked on as an instrument concerned with cruelty to animals. It is quoted in several of the other Acts in that any person who has been convicted under any of its provisions is as a result banned from owning such things as an Animal Boarding Establishment or a DogBreeding Establishment. The Performing Animals Act is unusual in that it gives authority for the person inspecting to enter any premises where it is suspected that performing animals are kept. Unfortunately unless the inspector of the local authority finds conditions which in his or her opinion come under the definition of cruelty, there is very little in the way of penalty which can be invoked. The Pet Animals Act applies by definition, with a few especially excluded categories, to all premises of any nature, including a private dwelling, where a business of selling animals as pets or of keeping animals with a view to sale is conducted. The dealer’s premises are not an exception, and it is high time that local authorities took steps to control the activities of such dealers under the provisions of this Act.
Association
Establishments Act suffers from of vagueness in its definition owing to the large number of exceptions excluded by their being ancillary to other businesses carried on within the same premises as in the case of hotels, airports and the like. The Home Office view is that where a Boarding Establishment is run on the same premises as another business to which it is in no way ancillary, as in the case of a veterinary surgeon who boards dogs or cats for some business purpose other than treatment, those premises come within the terms of the Act and are therefore subject to inspection. The Breeding of Dogs Act fails chiefly because of the difficulty of defining what is meant by a Breeding Establishment. The Act’s own definition is &dquo;any premises (including a private dwelling) where more than two bitches are kept for the purpose of breeding for sale.&dquo; Unfortunately the courts have so far disagreed in different parts of the country, and as there is no provision for right of entry unless the owner applies for a licence, by and large dog breeders have simply not applied. It also fails to control the very people aimed at by the sponsor when he drafted his Bill, namely the puppy farmers, those with one or two bitches only, but who breed them twice yearly. The Guard Dogs Act was originally intended to cope with untrained, uncontrollably savage dogs used for guarding purposes by totally unskilled handlers and trainers, the dogs often being turned loose in a compound with little in the way of fencing between them and the passing public. As such it started its foetal life as a measure concerned with the safety of human beings, and only in the later stages of gestation did the canine welfare aspect become grafted on. As a result, it is yet another animal welfare Act, sponsored in the Houses of Parliaments by a private member, which has come to parturition with anomalies which tend to make it a less useful piece of legislation than could have been the case with little more care in drafting. However, the child is still of a very tender age and may eventually prove a worthy member of the family. The Dangerous Wild Animals Act started out as a private member’s Bill and then gained government The Animal some
Boarding
degree
Downloaded from rsh.sagepub.com at Univ of Illinois at Chicago Library on May 3, 2015
232
backing, a most unusual happening. It shares with the Riding Establishments Acts the distinct advantage that the local authority must employ a veterinarian as inspector. The others make no such demand, leaving the local authority to employ &dquo;any of its officers, or any veterinary surgeon or practitioner&dquo; (the Breeding of Dogs Act the Animal Boarding Establishments Act) or &dquo;any two of the following ... its own veterinary officer, the veterinary officer of another authority, or a veterinary surgeon or practitioner or the Environmental Health Officer of the Authority&dquo; (Pet Animals). Most of these, Acts are the object of ridicule in many areas simply because individual local authorities are simply not prepared to spend money on Animal Welfare Acts and their enforcement, consequently in many parts of the couritry the Breeding of Dogs Act is almost ignored while in other areas strict inspection is carried out and improvements are demanded before the licence is granted. There are several methods by which this Act could be improved, not least, it has been suggested, by ensuring that those who deal in puppies (Pet Shops/Puppy Dealers) may only purchase pups from those who hold a licence under the Breeding of Dogs -
Act, this to apply to anyone breeding from bitches, however few.
a
bitch
or
It tends to be forgotten that the basic reason for these Acts reaching the Statute Book was to improve the welfare of animals, and it is with this in mind that inspectors should carry out their duties. The British Veterinary Association has produced and issued guidance notes to assist inspectors under the Pet Animals, Breeding of Dogs, Animal Boarding Establishments Acts, and the Dangerous Wild Animals Act, and in all these the aim is concentrated on the welfare of the animals concerned, other considerations taking second
place.
General improvement in the animal welfare scene could be gained with relative ease if two things happened if all local authorities took the Acts seriously and realized the advantages of employing veterinary surgeons as inspectors in all those cases where it is not already mandatory, and those veterinary inspectors made certain that they understood the meaning and intent of the various Acts so that their mode of inspection led to an improvement in the lot of animals concerned. -
DOMESTIC ANIMAL TRANSPORT REGULATIONS
T. N.
ALLSUP,
Divisional
B.V.M.&S.,
D.V.S.M., M.R.C.V.S.
Veterinary Officer, Ministry of Agriculture,
IN THIS paper, the title &dquo;Domestic Animal will refer to that legislation which deals with the welfare of cattle, sheep, pigs, horses and domestic poultry transported by road and rail in Great Britain, viz., The Conveyance of Live Poultry Order of 1919; Transit of Animals Order and Amending Orders of 1927, 1931, 1939 and 1947; The Transit of Animals (Road and Rail) Order 1975
Transport Regulations&dquo;
Other orders not listed here apply to the welfare of animals during other stages of transportation, e.g. in markets, in lairages and in abattoirs. Additionally, some Orders can be related to the welfare of such animals exported and imported from and to G.B. respectively, e.g. the Transit of Animals (General) Order 1973, but again do not apply directly to the welfare of animals in transit in G.B. However, the latter Order has been used to deal with contraventions in transit in areas not covered by the main Orders listed, e.g. during the transportation of poultry in receptacles, under Article 8 there must be unimpeded access; this can be applied to the road transportation of domestic poultry in crates because the Conveyance of Live Poultry Order of 1919
Fisheries and Food.
has no part which deals with the road transportation of such poultry in crates. The Conveyance of Live Poultry Order of 1919 provides protection for poultry conveyed on a vessel to or from a port in G.B., by rail and road and during exposure for sale in G.B. also, and includes domestic fowls, turkeys, geese, ducks, guinea-fowls and pigeons. This Order is out of date and a new draft Order is in the pipeline which deals more specifically with the transportation of poultry by road and rail in G.B. The Transit of Animals Order and amending Orders of 1927, 1931, 1939 and 1947, more particularly the main Order of 1927, deals with the protection of animals carried to and from ports in G.B., Ireland, the Channel Islands or the Isle of Man, by road and rail transit in G.B. Revocations have been made wholly or partly in the above-mentioned Order and some parts incorporated into the Transit of Animals (Road and Rail) Order 1975. Animals means cattle, sheep, goats, all other ruminating animals and swine. The Transit of Horses Order 1951 deals with the carriage of horses which includes small ponies, asses, mules and jennets and other horses carried by road and rail in G.B. Again, parts of this Order have been
Downloaded from rsh.sagepub.com at Univ of Illinois at Chicago Library on May 3, 2015
Animal Welfare — the local authority
responsibility
SMALL ANIMAL WELFARE — INEFFECTUAL LEGISLATION
M. J. R.
STOCKMAN, M.R.C.V.S., Honorary Secretary, British Veterinary areas in which the legislation in ’bite’, but much of the ineffectual side is caused by the failure of local authorities to use the various Acts as they were intended to be interpreted. The main Acts which concern the welfare of small animals in the main are: (a) Protection of Animals Act, 19111 (b) Performing Animals Act, 1925 (c) Pet Animals Act, 19511 (d) Animal Boarding Establishments Act, 1963 (e) Transit of Animals Act, 1973 (f) Breeding of Dogs Act, 1973 (g) Guard Dogs Act, 1975 (h) Dangerous Wild Animals Act, 1976
HERE ARE certain
is
lacking
The other important Acts from the welfare point of view are the Riding Establishments Acts of 1964 and 1970, but these hardly concern us on the small animals side except where they are useful as comparison with other Acts. The Protection of Animals Act has been added to and amended on several occasions, but in general it can be looked on as an instrument concerned with cruelty to animals. It is quoted in several of the other Acts in that any person who has been convicted under any of its provisions is as a result banned from owning such things as an Animal Boarding Establishment or a DogBreeding Establishment. The Performing Animals Act is unusual in that it gives authority for the person inspecting to enter any premises where it is suspected that performing animals are kept. Unfortunately unless the inspector of the local authority finds conditions which in his or her opinion come under the definition of cruelty, there is very little in the way of penalty which can be invoked. The Pet Animals Act applies by definition, with a few especially excluded categories, to all premises of any nature, including a private dwelling, where a business of selling animals as pets or of keeping animals with a view to sale is conducted. The dealer’s premises are not an exception, and it is high time that local authorities took steps to control the activities of such dealers under the provisions of this Act.
Association
Establishments Act suffers from of vagueness in its definition owing to the large number of exceptions excluded by their being ancillary to other businesses carried on within the same premises as in the case of hotels, airports and the like. The Home Office view is that where a Boarding Establishment is run on the same premises as another business to which it is in no way ancillary, as in the case of a veterinary surgeon who boards dogs or cats for some business purpose other than treatment, those premises come within the terms of the Act and are therefore subject to inspection. The Breeding of Dogs Act fails chiefly because of the difficulty of defining what is meant by a Breeding Establishment. The Act’s own definition is &dquo;any premises (including a private dwelling) where more than two bitches are kept for the purpose of breeding for sale.&dquo; Unfortunately the courts have so far disagreed in different parts of the country, and as there is no provision for right of entry unless the owner applies for a licence, by and large dog breeders have simply not applied. It also fails to control the very people aimed at by the sponsor when he drafted his Bill, namely the puppy farmers, those with one or two bitches only, but who breed them twice yearly. The Guard Dogs Act was originally intended to cope with untrained, uncontrollably savage dogs used for guarding purposes by totally unskilled handlers and trainers, the dogs often being turned loose in a compound with little in the way of fencing between them and the passing public. As such it started its foetal life as a measure concerned with the safety of human beings, and only in the later stages of gestation did the canine welfare aspect become grafted on. As a result, it is yet another animal welfare Act, sponsored in the Houses of Parliaments by a private member, which has come to parturition with anomalies which tend to make it a less useful piece of legislation than could have been the case with little more care in drafting. However, the child is still of a very tender age and may eventually prove a worthy member of the family. The Dangerous Wild Animals Act started out as a private member’s Bill and then gained government The Animal some
Boarding
degree
Downloaded from rsh.sagepub.com at Univ of Illinois at Chicago Library on May 3, 2015
232
backing, a most unusual happening. It shares with the Riding Establishments Acts the distinct advantage that the local authority must employ a veterinarian as inspector. The others make no such demand, leaving the local authority to employ &dquo;any of its officers, or any veterinary surgeon or practitioner&dquo; (the Breeding of Dogs Act the Animal Boarding Establishments Act) or &dquo;any two of the following ... its own veterinary officer, the veterinary officer of another authority, or a veterinary surgeon or practitioner or the Environmental Health Officer of the Authority&dquo; (Pet Animals). Most of these, Acts are the object of ridicule in many areas simply because individual local authorities are simply not prepared to spend money on Animal Welfare Acts and their enforcement, consequently in many parts of the couritry the Breeding of Dogs Act is almost ignored while in other areas strict inspection is carried out and improvements are demanded before the licence is granted. There are several methods by which this Act could be improved, not least, it has been suggested, by ensuring that those who deal in puppies (Pet Shops/Puppy Dealers) may only purchase pups from those who hold a licence under the Breeding of Dogs -
Act, this to apply to anyone breeding from bitches, however few.
a
bitch
or
It tends to be forgotten that the basic reason for these Acts reaching the Statute Book was to improve the welfare of animals, and it is with this in mind that inspectors should carry out their duties. The British Veterinary Association has produced and issued guidance notes to assist inspectors under the Pet Animals, Breeding of Dogs, Animal Boarding Establishments Acts, and the Dangerous Wild Animals Act, and in all these the aim is concentrated on the welfare of the animals concerned, other considerations taking second
place.
General improvement in the animal welfare scene could be gained with relative ease if two things happened if all local authorities took the Acts seriously and realized the advantages of employing veterinary surgeons as inspectors in all those cases where it is not already mandatory, and those veterinary inspectors made certain that they understood the meaning and intent of the various Acts so that their mode of inspection led to an improvement in the lot of animals concerned. -
DOMESTIC ANIMAL TRANSPORT REGULATIONS
T. N.
ALLSUP,
Divisional
B.V.M.&S.,
D.V.S.M., M.R.C.V.S.
Veterinary Officer, Ministry of Agriculture,
IN THIS paper, the title &dquo;Domestic Animal will refer to that legislation which deals with the welfare of cattle, sheep, pigs, horses and domestic poultry transported by road and rail in Great Britain, viz., The Conveyance of Live Poultry Order of 1919; Transit of Animals Order and Amending Orders of 1927, 1931, 1939 and 1947; The Transit of Animals (Road and Rail) Order 1975
Transport Regulations&dquo;
Other orders not listed here apply to the welfare of animals during other stages of transportation, e.g. in markets, in lairages and in abattoirs. Additionally, some Orders can be related to the welfare of such animals exported and imported from and to G.B. respectively, e.g. the Transit of Animals (General) Order 1973, but again do not apply directly to the welfare of animals in transit in G.B. However, the latter Order has been used to deal with contraventions in transit in areas not covered by the main Orders listed, e.g. during the transportation of poultry in receptacles, under Article 8 there must be unimpeded access; this can be applied to the road transportation of domestic poultry in crates because the Conveyance of Live Poultry Order of 1919
Fisheries and Food.
has no part which deals with the road transportation of such poultry in crates. The Conveyance of Live Poultry Order of 1919 provides protection for poultry conveyed on a vessel to or from a port in G.B., by rail and road and during exposure for sale in G.B. also, and includes domestic fowls, turkeys, geese, ducks, guinea-fowls and pigeons. This Order is out of date and a new draft Order is in the pipeline which deals more specifically with the transportation of poultry by road and rail in G.B. The Transit of Animals Order and amending Orders of 1927, 1931, 1939 and 1947, more particularly the main Order of 1927, deals with the protection of animals carried to and from ports in G.B., Ireland, the Channel Islands or the Isle of Man, by road and rail transit in G.B. Revocations have been made wholly or partly in the above-mentioned Order and some parts incorporated into the Transit of Animals (Road and Rail) Order 1975. Animals means cattle, sheep, goats, all other ruminating animals and swine. The Transit of Horses Order 1951 deals with the carriage of horses which includes small ponies, asses, mules and jennets and other horses carried by road and rail in G.B. Again, parts of this Order have been
Downloaded from rsh.sagepub.com at Univ of Illinois at Chicago Library on May 3, 2015
