5 Application and enforcement
70. Responsibility for applying and enforcing the
regulatory framework applicable to the welfare of pet primates
generally rests with local authorities. Local authorities are
responsible for administering and enforcing the Pet Animals Act
1951 and the Dangerous Wild Animals Act 1976. Depending on the
type of offence and the animals involved, enforcement of the Animal
Welfare Act 2006 may be led by the RSPCA, local authorities, the
police or Defra. The RSPCA usually leads on AWA cases relating
to companion and domestic animals.[94]
High levels of non-compliance
71. Evidence suggests that the regulatory framework
is not being applied or enforced adequately and that levels of
non-compliance are high. Much of the evidence we received on this
topic referred to the DWAA, and the Primate Code, but some witnesses
referred to non-compliance with other elements of the regulatory
framework such as the Pet Animals Act 1951 and CITES.
72. The RSPCA and Lisa Riley described "extremely
high levels of non-compliance [with the DWAA], estimated to be
85 to 95%".[95]
Rachel Hevesi of Wild Futures told us that "Of those animals
that arrive at the Wild Futures Monkey Sanctuary, about 82% have
never been licensed or were not licensed at some stage".
Research by the RSPCA revealed that "amongst local authorities
awareness of the Primate Code is low, greatly restricting its
usefulness, and that provisions within the Code are not always
applied".[96] The
RSPCA had also found "very little evidence of awareness of
the Primate Code amongst keepers" and that "even when
owners are aware, they do not appear to abide by it".[97]
73. A lack of awareness of the rules and guidance
is likely to be an important factor in explaining high rates of
non-compliance. Lord de Mauley, described "a misconception
among some members of the public that it is acceptable to keep
a primate in a cage, feed it an inappropriate diet and keep it
on its own".[98]
He suggested that, while this was against the law, there was a
need to explore "how we get that message out".[99]
74. Mike Seton, Senior Veterinary Officer at the
City of London Corporation, told us that while "Some local
authorities are quite keen on enforcing the Dangerous Wild Animals
Act … Almost certainly, there is a large underreporting of
animals under the [Act]".[100]
He put this down to two factors: the cost of a licence and the
relative ease with which people can avoid it.[101]
75. For many witnesses, high non-compliance rates
reflected the limitations in resources and expertise in local
authorities charged with enforcing the legislation. REPTA acknowledged
that "Animal welfare is a low priority for local authorities
which, whilst regrettable, is understandable when resources are
stretched thinly".[102]
The Pet Industry Federation said
consideration must be paid to those carrying
out the inspection process … inspectors must have a thorough
knowledge and understanding of the species in question and …
local authorities should have sufficient resources for adequate
enforcement, as we understand that compliance under the DWA[A]
is low.[103]
Monkey World told us that:
Local authority persons in charge of assessing
DWA licences are not qualified in the care of exotic animals and
in particular primates, nor are RSPCA inspectors. This makes applying
the Code of Practice a nonsense as there is no understanding of
basic animal husbandry or animal behaviour.[104]
76. If lack of expertise is one of the main drivers
of weak enforcement, one potential solution is for local authorities
to buy in specialist expertise. Mike Seton told us that this is
something that most local authorities would do,[105]
but some witnesses highlighted a potential shortage of appropriately
qualified vets. Rachel Hevesi told us that "appropriately
qualified vets are still in very short supply"[106]
while the Born Free Foundation explained that "Exotic animal
medicine remains a minor part of the veterinary curriculum and
specialist knowledge of primate medicine is not widespread among
veterinary practitioners".[107]
77. Andrew Greenwood, a member of the British Veterinary
Zoological Society (BVZS), had a different view. He said:
We at BVZS have tried to pressure Defra to ask
local authorities to use people off the zoo-licensing inspectors
list and people who have diplomas in zoo and wildlife medicine,
of which we have quite a lot. There are quite a lot of people
who could do the job properly … It is not a question of not
being able to find somebody. However, if local authorities have
contracted somebody to do their other inspections, they tend to
give them that, too.[108]
78. A regulatory framework will not achieve its
objectives if levels of non-compliance are high, and evidence
suggests that non-compliance with the framework governing the
welfare of pet primates is too high. Reasons for this include
low awareness of the rules and guidance amongst local authorities,
keepers and members of the public, and limitations on the resources
and expertise held by local authorities. Constraints on public
funding make it unlikely that more resources will become available
in the near future.
79. We recommend that Defra launch a public education
campaign to raise awareness of the Dangerous Wild Animals Act
1976 and the Primate Code among local authorities, primate keepers
and members of the public.
Variation in practice
80. In June 2001, Defra published an Effectiveness
Study of the Dangerous Wild Animals Act 1976.[109]
The authors of the study found that the "licensing procedures
and fees charged … vary widely between areas".[110]
They also found that "some local authorities have failed
to apply mandatory conditions to licences, [while] others have
granted unlawful retrospective licences".[111]
The authors noted that "Local authorities received a guidance
circular from the Home Office shortly before the Act came into
force, but there has been no official guidance from a government
department since then".[112]
81. On the evidence we received during our inquiry,
it seems that little has changed on these matters since the Effectiveness
Study was published. Andrew Greenwood, one of the authors of the
Study, told us:
The gap we are waiting to be filled with the
DWA is actually from Defra, which has been promising guidelines
for local authorities on how to properly administer the DWA for
quite a long time. We are pressing them to actually get them out
there.[113]
82. When we asked the Minister to explain the reasons
for the delay in issuing this guidance he said, "we are actively
working on that guidance and will expedite it. I will take away
that message … It is going through the usual procedures to
get it right".[114]
A page from Defra's website, originally published in October 2008
and updated in June 2010, states that
the Department will soon be publishing comprehensive
guidance for local authorities and keepers on the provisions of
the Act … It is hoped the guidance … will promote a
more consistent implementation of the legislation, assist with
increasing support and compliance amongst animal keepers and,
ultimately, in more effective operation of the Act.[115]
83. These objectives seem laudable, but we are keen
to ensure that the opportunity is taken to encourage local authorities
to employ inspectors with the necessary expertise in zoo and wildlife
medicine. As Alison Cronin told us, "it would be very easy
for the Government to issue advice … to local authorities
to employ the inspectors and the known experts in this field of
work in licensing situations".[116]
Guidance from central Government to local authorities
on the provisions and implementation of the Dangerous Wild Animals
Act 1976 is long overdue. As a result, opportunities have been
lost to reduce wide variations in the application and enforcement
of the Act and to ensure that DWAA inspectors have sufficient
expertise to carry out their role effectively.
84. We recommend that Defra issue its guidance
to local authorities on the provisions and implementation of the
Dangerous Wild Animals Act 1976 without further delay. This guidance
should include advice to authorities on employing experts from
the zoo-licensing inspectors list or those with diplomas in zoo
and wildlife medicine.
94 Defra, Animal Welfare Act 2006: Who enforces the Act?,
15 August 2008. Back
95
RSPCA [PAP 36], para 16 and Lisa Riley [PAP 24], p.2 Back
96
RSPCA [PAP 36], para 21 Back
97
RSPCA [PAP 36], para 22. Back
98
Q 45 Back
99
Q 45 Back
100
Q 11 Back
101
Q 11 Back
102
Reptile and Exotic Pet
Trade Association [PAP 11], para 23. Back
103
Pet Industry Federation [PAP 40], p.1-2 Back
104
Monkey World [PAP 31], para 14. Back
105
Q 14 Back
106
Q 14 Back
107
Born Free Foundation [PAP 15], p.3 Back
108
Qq 33-34 Back
109
Defra, Effectiveness Study of the Dangerous Wild Animals Act 1976,
June 2001. Back
110
Defra, Effectiveness Study of the Dangerous Wild Animals Act 1976,
June 2001. P.2 Back
111
Ibid. Back
112
Ibid. Back
113
Q 34 Back
114
Q 48 Back
115
Defra, Dangerous Wild Animals Act: Review of the Act, June 2010.
Back
116
Q 38 Back
| 
