Memorandum submitted by Bournemouth and
Counties CBA
1. INTRODUCTION
The members of Bournemouth and counties CBA
a club with an unbroken record of active and responsible bird
keeping since 1890, wish to submit the following matters for consideration
by the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee in relation
to the proposed animal welfare legislation. These submissions
include a number of issues which were forwarded by the club to
the national council for aviculture prior to the February 2004
consultation with Defra and also from a paper sent by the club
to the animal fair working group following the open meeting hosted
by the Parrot Society at Coventry on Saturday 17 July 2004. Two
members of the club attended this meeting which was addressed
by Mr Graham Thurlow of Defra.
2. PURPOSE OF
THE PROPOSED
BILL
Our members support the broad principles envisaged
by the bill, and have no objections to the clauses, 1. Cruelty.
Or 2. Fighting. Both of which seem proper to the humane and responsible
care of animals.
We also support the concept of ensuring the
proper welfare of animals outlined in clause 3 (1) 3- (2) 3- (3).
Of the proposed bill.
3. AREAS OF
CONCERN CLAUSE
3 -(4)
The clubs members expressed serious concern
as to the interpretation which might be put upon some of the needs
listed in clause (4).
It is abundantly clear from the statements in
many of the paragraphs in the regulatory input assessment section
of the draft bill. That most, if not all of its provisions have
originated from so called (welfare groups)—including those
with a radical (agenda ) see para 9.
Whilst our members support the opportunity which
the bill affords to regularise and improve animal welfare. We
are deeply suspicious of the potential for malicious or ill founded
actions being brought by zealous, non-statutory organisations
in mounting or supporting prosecutions.
No one can argue against the ideals proposed
in clause 4 but who is to say what are normal behaviour patterns
for a canary, rabbit, or goldfish? Or what is a suitable environment
in which it should live?
We fear that those with extreme or radical views
on the keeping of animals will be granted a field day despite
the provisions of clause 5 (a) 5 (b) and 5 (c) and that the courts
will be used as platforms for the agendas of extreme views.
4. ANIMAL SALES
TO YOUNG
PERSONS
Our members are not happy about the proposal
under clause 4 to ban animal sales to persons under 16 years of
age. There is much to be said for introducing young people to
the care and compassion which small animals husbandry can bring,
and we should be encouraging this rather than stifling it by unnecessary
legislation.
Most young owners show great affection for their
charges and quickly acquire a first class understanding of their
needs. In reality, adults are just as likely to neglect or abandon
animals as youngsters and given all other safeguards proposed
in the bill we this clause is unnecessary.
Should it be considered that some tightening
of the law governing the sale of animals to young persons between
12 and 16 years of age should only be permitted when accompanied
a parent or guardian?
5. APPOINTMENT
OF LOCAL
AUTHORITY INSPECTORS—CLAUSE
44
Our members feel most strongly that under no
circumstances, should local authorities be permitted to appoint
inspectors who are, or have been members of any non-statutory
or non-professional (animal welfare) group or organisation, such
as the RSPCA or RSPB etc. Most of which have either open or implied
agendas concerning the very keeping of animals for purposes other
than agriculture, and whose impartiality will inevitably always
suspect.
This anxiety is particularly significant to
all animal fanciers and pet keepers bearing in mind the protection
which would be afforded to authorised inspectors under clause
45.6 performing animals.
The reference in annex a (second paragraph)
to the preferred option would be to extend the regulation to require
that all performing animal acts should be licensed and subject
to regular inspection by a local authority ) raises a particular
worry for the bird fancy.
Our members feel that the regular roller canary
singing contests which are held each year both in Britain and
elsewhere might be held to be animal acts and therefore subject
to both licensing and inspection. With the suggested fees for
licensing, such a proposal would destroy at a stroke one of the
oldest and most carefully regulated elements of the cage bird
fancy.
Roller canary singing contest are strictly private
events, organised by specialist clubs with strict rules and entry
fees. The birds are housed for the duration of the contest only,
in specially designed cages and judged in private by qualified
adjudicators on their ability to sing specified repertoires, each
of which carries a scale of points.
The wording and apparent Defra views on this
subject seem likely to now encourage those with extreme attitudes
to animal keeping, to demand local authority licensing of such
contest even if this is not the intention of the legislation,
in much the same way and with the same confusion as has been experience
over pet fairs of recent years.
7. PET FAIRS
ANNEX-B
It is the view of our members that the regular
or routine meetings of bird clubs whether birds are brought there
or not are under no circumstances (pet fairs ). The meetings are
open only to club members and invited guests and regulated by
club rules which invariably specify an annual membership fee.
Any sales of birds which might take place at such meetings would
be unusual and would be a private transaction between members
acquiring or disposing of stock.
Such meetings should not be the subject of any
form of regulation or licensing.
Almost all birds clubs hold either (open shows)
or (invitation shows) annually, depending upon the size and finances
of the club. The public are generally admitted on payment of a
very modest entrance fee and there may be sales classes for exhibitors
to enter birds, which however must be judged and staged in the
appropriate standard show cage for the breed. An entry fee is
also invariably charged for each such exhibit. These birds are
always fanciers surplus stock rather than any commercial enterprise.
It is also quite common for clubs to invite a local pet dealer
to rent a table for the day (customarily £10 or so) at which
he offers seed, appliances and sometimes, but not commonly, birds.
This is a small scale activity, used by clubs to offset the deficit
which they always incur in mounting a show. Such shows are generally
held in somewhat (out of the way) venues so public attendances
is often minimal and the trader participates more as a good will
gesture to his local club than as a viable financial venture.
It is strongly urged that such shows, which
are competitive exhibitions and not (fairs) or sales orientated,
should not be regulated or licensed.
There are also specialist club shows, held generally
annually, at which members only of a particular breed society
enter their birds competitively against those of other members.
Entry fees are charged per exhibit. Birds have to be staged in
special breed show cages and they are judged against a set of
standards. The shows may or may not be open to the public and
there may be sales classes on the lines listed above. We do not
see any justification for the registration or licensing of these
club events, which are conducted to a very high standard.
Commercial fairs and auctions are held in two
main forms and can justifiable be said to be appropriate for local
authority licensing.
(a) Local birds clubs sometimes organise
auctions to generate funds in support of their annual show which
would often be otherwise unviable. The public are admitted on
payment of a modest fee and anyone, including dealers can generally
put up items for auction, including livestock. It is felt that
because of the commercial element involved, there is justification
for local authority licensing, though should the fees demanded
for this be more than moderate, most if not all such auctions
will be abandoned.
(b) Much larger auctions are held as commercial
ventures by either special breed clubs such as the parrot society,
or by traders. They offer fanciers the opportunity to examine
and purchase stock of their choice under one roof instead of having
to visit breeders, often a long distance from their home. However
it is stressed that the nature of these auctions, their location
and the entry fees charged which are generally quite high, all
tend to deter casual visitors, the organisers aiming primarily
at existing fanciers.
(c) Finally, there is the very large, combined
bird show and trade show, such as the national cage and aviary
bird exhibition staged annually by the management of cage and
aviary magazine.
This is by far the biggest cage bird show of
its kind held in Britain and ranks only second in size and importance
to the international bird shows held annually at various locations
across the continent. It involves both a large competitive bird
exhibition with an average of 7,000 to 9,000 birds and a trade
section in which large numbers of birds are displayed for sale
as well as all kinds of appliances. The national attracts large
numbers of fanciers, being almost a pilgrimage, but the numbers
of non-fanciers is relatively small since factors such as distance,
entry fees and car parking etc, will discourage the casual visitor.
Both the national exhibition and the larger
shows such as the parrot society etc, could be expected to withstand
the impact of licensing fees and because of the exiting high standards
of bird welfare which they invariable carry, would really need
little adjustment to meet any reasonable demands by the authorities.
8. EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
Whilst broadly supporting the draft bill. The
club makes the following recommendations:
(a) the total removal of clause 3(4) and
3(5).
(b) the removal of clause 4 or its amendment
to allow animal sales to persons between the ages of 12 to 16
years, only when accompanied by a parent or guardian. No animal
sales to persons under 12 years of age.
(c) a requirement upon local authorities
that they shall under no circumstances appoint existing or ex
members of non-statutory or non-professional animal (welfare groups)
as animal inspectors.
(d) that roller canary singing contest shall
not be deemed to be (animal acts) within the purports of the bill.
(e) that regular or routine meetings of birds
clubs shall not be deemed to be (animal fairs) and require neither
registration nor licensing.
(f) that members shows, (or open shows) or
(invitation shows) staged by bona-fide bird clubs should
not require to be registered or licensed, providing that no large
scale trading in birds is to take place.
(g) that where a show involves large scale
animal trading, registration and licensing by the appropriate
local authority shall be required but that the fees so involved
shall not be so burdensome upon the promoters as to defeat the
purpose of the event.
August 2004
| 
