Select Committee on Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Written Evidence


Memorandum submitted by the Universities Federation for Animal Welfare

  1.  We welcome this Bill which will effectively modernise much existing animal welfare legislation.

  2.  Specific comments:

      2.1  Section 3(4)(c): "the need to be able to exhibit normal behaviour patterns". It is not specified here whether this should be some, most, or all normal behaviour patterns. We suggest that some guidance would be valuable. It would not be appropriate for animals to exhibit all normal behaviour patterns since these include normal behaviours to escape from predators and other potential harms. Also, although reproductive behaviour patterns are eminently normal, society accepts that a proportion of animals should be prevented from performing these behaviours (eg by spaying, castration, keeping sexes separate, or by other means).

          The Secretary of State's Standards of Modern Zoo Practice (March 2000) refer to "Provision of the opportunity to express most normal behaviour" (Section 4, page 14). One possible fix would be, in line with these Secretary of State's Standards, to refer to "most normal behaviour". Alternatively the wording could be more specific, eg: "the need to be able to exhibit those normal behaviour patterns prevention of which would be likely to lead to harm or distress".

      2.2  Sections 13(2), 16(2)(f), 17(1)(c) and elsewhere: these refer to killing and slaughtering animals. Slaughtering specifically involves killing by bleeding (and generally applies to farmed livestock being killed for human consumption). The reason for the use of the term "killing" in Section 13 but "slaughtering" in Sections 16 and 17 (and subsequently) is not apparent. This should be made consistent throughout the Bill (except where some distinction is intended), perhaps by using "killing or slaughtering" or "humane killing".

      2.3  Section 30: Here the term "destruction" is used. Is a different meaning than killing or slaughtering intended here? If not, we would advocate one word or expression throughout for consistency (see above).

  3.  Typographical error: Section 13(4), first sentence: vetinary (veterinary.

24 August 2004





 
previous page contents next page

House of Commons home page Parliament home page House of Lords home page search page enquiries index

© Parliamentary copyright 2004
Prepared 9 December 2004