fao legislative study no. 104_vapnek_chapman

8/2/2019 FAO Legislative Study No. 104_Vapnek_Chapman

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/fao-legislative-study-no-104vapnekchapman 1/97

Legislative andregulatory optionsfor animal welfare

FAO

LEGISLATIVE

STUDY

104

ISSN 1014-6679



Legislative and

regulatory optionsfor animal welfare

by

Jessica Vapnek

Megan Chapman

for theDevelopment Law Service

FAO Legal Office



TABLE OF CONTENTS

PREFACE

I INTRODUCTION

II INTERNATIONAL AND REGIONAL CONTEXT

III NATIONAL REGULATION OF ANIMAL WELFA

IV ESSENTIAL ELEMENTS OF ANIMAL WELFARE

LEGISLATION

V CONCLUSION

VI REFERENCES



PREFACE

In countries around the world, the demand for animal prises as the level of development increases. Animal welfagarner more attention as consumers recognize the links

health and animal welfare, and animal welfare and humanchallenge is to increase food animal production whilensuring good animal welfare and protecting food security.

Animal welfare is not a new subject for regulation in countries, owing to a sophisticated consumer base and greanimal welfare issues. Growing international trade is generain animal welfare elsewhere in the world, in particular in coincrease trade with Europe. To date, countries wishingexisting veterinary legislative frameworks have had littlguidance on the options for regulating animal welfare.

In this text, Jessica Vapnek and Megan Chapman (forme

and Volunteer, respectively, in the Development Law Se ways in which countries can choose to legislate on animoutline the philosophy behind animal welfare, as well as thanimal welfare science. Against the backdrop of internationthey review national options for the regulation of summarizing the main elements of animal welfare leg

regulatory choices available to law-makers. It is hoped tprove useful to researchers, government policy-makers anadvocates in search of a window onto animal welfare legisla

The authors would like to thank Fulvia Basile, Charles



Legislative and regulatory options for animal welfare

1.1 Overview

In addition to the various religious, ethical and philosoanimal welfare, there is increasing recognition of the ties

welfare indicators and animal health.1 Disregard for anim

leads to poor animal health – increased susceptibility of anto disease and injury and poor quality or contaminated anproducts – with resulting economic losses (Broom, 2001). thus intrinsically related to other government concerns suchfood safety and long-term economic development.

Consumers increasingly link animal welfare indicators with

quality (Harper and Henson, 2001), in addition to etresponsible preferences. These consumer preferences incentives for producers to meet animal welfare standards,legislation or voluntary certification programmes. In adcitizens and animal welfare advocates may exert pressure onset and enforce animal welfare standards.

Because food animals are important to human welfare –nutrition and income – concern for animal welfare is iconcern for human needs. This is particularly the case ideveloping economies, where current and expected populaputting pressure on food security and economic grow

Increased food animal production is often a necessary part goals. In newly industrialized countries, a growing midincreasing domestic demand for meat and animal by-pr2003), even where these may cost more due to complia

welfare standards. The key challenge is to find ways to incrd i hil i l l i i i



4 Legislative and regulatory options for animal welfare

globalization of animal health concerns and pressure fofood safety standards, many other countries are also canimal welfare (Mitchell, 2000). To improve their legisome countries use or adapt pre-existing legislation oncruelty to animals, while others draft new animal wel

national and local concerns with international animal wel

Because the earliest animal welfare legislation was dev where industrialized production is the norm, these legtend to focus on farm animals housed, transported and technology environments designed to intensify productio

welfare legislation need not be limited to industrialized

drafted legislation can and should apply to other types ofsubsistence farming and small-scale commercial productof production raise different concerns (FAO, 2009), b

welfare principles are common to all.

This text aims to provide practical information to leg

makers wishing to revise, update or draft animal welfchapter begins by reviewing the philosophical bases (Section 1.2), and then the basic principles (Section 1science (Section 1.4) of animal welfare. It then surveys tregional context for the regulation of animal welfare, disinternational and regional standards and agreements d

and currently in force (Chapter II). Next, the text out with which countries can regulate animal welfare (Chaoutlines the subjects covered in most animal welfare legistransport, slaughter, housing and management – offerinanimal welfare issues and choices facing regulators (Chh id b i f l i (Ch V) Th h




1.2 Philosophical bases of animal welfare

What people understand by "animal welfare" depends in pdiffer between cultures and individuals. These differenceemphasize different elements of animal welfare that can

under three broad headings (Fraser, 2008). The first is an physical health and biological functioning of animals. universal agreement that such elements are important fohence disease, injury and malnutrition are more or less unas animal welfare problems. The second is concern abostates" of animals, especially negative states such as pain, dis

These are common concerns in many cultures, but in some

emphasized by certain people – often animal producers an who may, for example, regard the short-term pain of important enough to warrant pain management interventiobelief that the welfare of animals depends on their abreasonably "natural" manner, either by being free to peelements of their natural behaviour or by having natural e

fresh air) in their environment. This last belief arisindustrialized countries and is common in critiques of indusanimal production. It generally has less currency in culturundergone industrialization of their economies or ansystems.

These different elements of animal welfare help explain whobjectives are pursued although they are sometimes sometimes unfavourable for the cost of production andconcerns. In general, improvements in animal welfare thaimproving basic health and biological functioning – for exadi i j l i i d d h ill i h f




factors and the philosophical bases for animal welfare given society, different aspects of animal welfare will belesser priority.

1.3 Evolution of basic animal welfare principles

In 1965, the British Government commissioned an in welfare of farmed animals and thereafter proposed thahave freedom to stand up, lie down, turn around, grostretch their limbs. These became known as the "Five

Animal Welfare Council, 2009). In 1993, the United Kin Welfare Council (FAWC) decided that the original defin

too much on space requirements and on the comfortbehaviour, to the exclusion of other relevant elements ofas good food, good health and safety. The expanded Festablished by the FAWC are:

1. freedom from hunger and thirst – by ready acces

a diet designed to maintain full health and vigour2. freedom from discomfort – by the provision

environment including shelter and a comfortable3. freedom from pain, injury or disease – by pre

rapid diagnosis and treatment;4. freedom to express normal behaviour – by

sufficient space, proper facilities and company kind; and5. freedom from fear and distress – by the assuranc

avoid mental suffering.

Th Fi F d h b id l d




Animal Welfare Act (1999) where they were used as part ofanimals' "physical, health and behavioural needs" (sec. 4),

Animal Welfare Act (1994) where they are considered the "for animal welfare (art. 3). The Five Freedoms have also bincorporated into regional agreements such as the Europea

the Protection of Animals Kept for Farming Purposes (197they were expanded to include far broader animal welfare pr

As a complement to the Five Freedoms, 12 criteria for tanimal welfare have been identified by the Welfare Quality research partnership of scientists from Europe and Latin Athe European Commission. The WQP aims to develop

system for assessing animal welfare – a system that would bEurope – and more generally to develop practical strategiesimprove animal welfare (Welfare Quality, 2009).

The WQP criteria for the assessment of animal welfare are:

1. Animals should not suffer from prolonged hungerhave a sufficient and appropriate diet.

2. Animals should not suffer from prolonged thirsthave a sufficient and accessible water supply.

3. Animals should have comfort around resting.4. Animals should have thermal comfort, i.e. they s

too hot nor too cold.5. Animals should have enough space to be able freely.

6. Animals should be free from physical injuries.7. Animals should be free from disease, i.e. farmers

hi h d d f h i d




12. Negative emotions such as fear, distress, frushould be avoided, whereas positive emotions contentment should be promoted.

The WQP emphasizes that these 12 criteria are anim

assessing an animal's experience of its own situation. based and management-based criteria are also relevant toanimal welfare situation, according to the WQP such crto those assessing the animal's experience. Since thconsensus, the WQP criteria provide a powerful fdevelopment of legislation in line with internationprinciples. Moreover, relative to the Five Freedoms, th

more concrete and specific and may therefore be morepractice. Finally, because these criteria may eventually unand standardized animal welfare labelling system for Euthey should be increasingly important to producers in animal products to Europe.

1.4 Animal welfare science

In the development of legislation on animal welfgovernments and international organizations rely onanimal welfare science in addition to broad animal welfarthose just reviewed. Animal welfare science combines distudy of animal behaviour, stress physiology, nutri

veterinary medicine to determine, for instance, how varioaffect animal welfare. This scientific foundation help

welfare legislation away from reliance on "common sento equate "traditional" or "natural" husbandry practices (F 2005) I l i f h i b




comfortable, well nourished, safe, able to exprebehaviour, and if it is not suffering from unpleasasuch as pain, fear, and distress . . . . (OIE, 2008) (added).

Chapter 7.1 of the OIE Terrestrial Animal Health Code (thof international standards on animal health and recommend welfare for farm animals), states that its recommendationsbasis (art. 7.1.3). In addition, all nine members and two obse

Working Group on Animal Welfare have a backgroumedicine or another relevant science (OIE, 2009).

Many national governments take an active role in bodevelopment of animal welfare science and implementinlegislation. For example, in the United Kingdom (UK), theEnvironment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) has anresearch and development programme with a large annual bstated objectives is to "provide the evidence base to su

policies to improve standards of animal welfare in the UK[European Union]" (DEFRA, 2009). In countries economies, one concern is how to leverage limited resoufindings of animal welfare science (often focused oproduction) to local production conditions, rather than simin" outside expertise (FAO, 2009).

The establishment of a strong and dynamic institutional relaanimal welfare scientists and regulatory agencies is an impogood animal welfare legislation. An important related factoupdate legislation to keep pace with scientific development

i i l i l l i l i b k b i i h



II

INTERNATIONAL AND REGIONAL CON

Contents

2.1 World Organisation for Animal Health

2.2 World Trade Organization

2.3 Universal Declaration on Animal Welfare

2.4 Regional agreements2.4.1 Council of Europe2.4.2 European Union2.4.3 Non-binding instruments




2.1 World Organisation for Animal Health

The World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE3 ), an inorganization that had grown to include 176 member countcreated in 1924 to fight animal diseases at the global levincreased in prominence and influence in recent years, espeidentified in the World Trade Organization (WTO) Ag

Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS Asource of international standards for animal health.

The original goal of the OIE was to work towards internatand the creation of a communication network among coun

animal disease outbreak; today, the organization also provscientific information and develops guidance on various ahealth. OIE's codes, guidelines and science-based standardbe used by the veterinary authorities of member states. Thea variety of guidelines to address the treatment of animals uresearch or kept for companionship, and has elaborated he

intensive farming. These standards are found in the OIE THealth Code (the Code).

The Code aims to ensure the health of terrestrial animals animal products in international trade. It establishes detaileimplemented by the veterinary authorities of both importicountries to prevent the transfer of pathogens without crbarriers to trade. Accordingly the Code regulates improcedures and specifies the diagnostic tests to be appli(sec. 5). Since 2005, the Code also addresses some animparticularly those arising (1) during the transport of animai (2) h l h f i l f h i




philosophical foundations of all OIE work on animprinciples were adopted by the International Committcountries during the 72nd General Session in May 2004 anin the Code (sec. 7) as follows:

1. There is a critical relationship between animal welfare.

2. The internationally recognized "Five FreedomSection 1.3) provide valuable guidance in animal

3. The internationally recognized "three Rs" (reduanimals, refinement of experimental methods animals with non-animal techniques) provide va

the use of animals in science.4. The scientific assessment of animal welfar

elements which need to be considered togethe weighing these elements often involves value which should be made as explicit as possible.

5. The use of animals in agriculture and

companionship, recreation and entertainmencontribution to the well-being of people.6. The use of animals carries with it an ethical resp

the welfare of such animals to the greatest extent7. Improvements in farm animal welfare ca

productivity and food safety and hence lead to ec8. Equivalent outcomes based on performance

identical systems based on design criteria, shoucomparison of animal welfare standards and reco

The first OIE Global Conference on Animal WelfarF b 2004 b h h l




implementation of OIE standards, adapted tosituation and capacities of [OIE] members is appro

recognized OIE as "the unique reference organizthe elaboration of international animal welfare stand

expressed concern that "some private standards fo

are not consistent with the OIE standards"; requested that OIE members "create or update,

legislation that prevents cruelty to animals as well establishes a legal basis for complying with OIE sanimal welfare"; and

requested that OIE members promote the adopti

Nations of a declaration addressing animal welfare

These policy statements indicate that the OIE and its mcommitted to the harmonization and implementation of thstandards contained in the Code, while taking into considand social development needs. The need to balance animal

with economic capacities will be particularly important in

of OIE member states that are not fully industrialized.

2.2 World Trade Organization

The World Trade Organization (WTO) international tdesigned to eradicate barriers to international trade through

enforcement of market access rules. As noted earlier, theidentifies the OIE as the source of binding international stahealth. However, it is an open question whether "sanitary ameasures" would include animal welfare and whether, therimposition of a trade restriction based on animal welfa




national treatment: imported and locally producetreated equally, at least after foreign goods havemarket;

most favoured nation (MFN): like products from must be given the same treatment as the

treatment given to any state's products.5

Article XX of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Ttrade-restricting measures that can be exempted from 2008), including measures "necessary to protect publicand measures "necessary to protect human, anima(para. (b)). Legal arguments have been framed to justifanimal welfare trade restrictions under both paragragenerally agreed that animal welfare issues can more eprotecting human or animal health than public moral

WTO has not yet directly addressed the issue, the argumthe likelihood that they might succeed are all speculation

At the second special session of the WTO Committee oin June 2000, the European Union (EU) submitted a

welfare and trade in agriculture, arguing that the Waddress animal welfare standards.7 The EU has more strinregulations, and therefore higher production costs in certaI, Section 1.2), than some of its trading partners. In its sub

the EU expressed concern that its animal welfare undermined and that it could suffer negative trade effecproducts produced to meet high EU animal welfare stanrisk of being edged out of the market by cheaper impolower standards. The EU agreed in its proposal t




greater international efforts are needed to win recognitio welfare standards and to ensure that they are not underminobligations.

The EU proposal set out several potential ways to addrestandards within the WTO. The first suggestion was the cmultilateral agreement on animal welfare.8 The second wlabelling regime pertaining to animal welfare standards forenabling consumers to make informed choices. Third, thecompensation scheme to enable producers to meet the adproducing food to meet EU animal welfare standards.

The proposal did not receive widespread support amomembers. A number of countries, including Bolivia,

Thailand and Uruguay, indicated that although they were animal welfare, the priority for their resources was the allepoverty and suffering. Argentina and India stressed that coleft to set their own standards. Colombia and again In

labelling proposal as simply a disguised barrier to trade. these issues continues along with the ongoing Doha Round

Another way that the WTO could address animal welfcomplaint filed before its Dispute Settlement Body (DSB2009, Canada and Norway formally requested WTO consutheir complaints challenging import bans of seal products

welfare concerns) passed by Belgium, the Netherlands and2009). This dispute will likely force the WTO to directlyanimal welfare is a justified exception under Article XX(aalthough not precisely in the context of farm animal welfare.




2.3 Universal Declaration on Animal Welfare

In recent years, a number of NGOs under the leadeSociety for the Protection of Animals (WSPA) have United Nations elaborate and adopt a Universal Dec

Welfare (UDAW). A global petition launched to suinitiative had acquired over 2.2 million signatures b(www.udaw.org). According to established principles of iUDAW would not be binding although it would repamong states regarding animal welfare and would therecustomary international law. Customary internationalpractices which a group of states recognize as legally

1992), and generally creates an expectation that those bbe observed in the future (Janis, 2003). A practice will onrule of international law if a large number of states consion them, and if the international community does not pextension to international relations (Greig, 1976).

In 2003, the Government of the Philippines hosted anconference which produced a draft declaration agreeingthat could form the basis for a UDAW. The draft decupon by 21 delegations (19 countries, one commonweal

with the United States (Saipan) and one regional organizCommission)). The four UDAW principles agreed umeeting are as follows:

The welfare of animals shall be a common objecti

The standards of animal welfare attained by promoted, recognized and observed by im




In 2007, the highest authority of the OIE (the Internatidecided to support, in principle, the development of a UDcall on countries to acknowledge the importance of animal

would, at the same time, recognize the OIE as the princanimal welfare standard-setting body. The Internaticonsidered that a UDAW would "complement and promotOIE, and facilitate global acceptance of OIE standards andat a national, regional and global level".10 The OIE is actithe participation of member governments as well as gloanimal welfare organizations in the development and adopti

2.4 Regional agreements

2.4.1 Council of Europe

The Council of Europe (COE), an international orgmembership consists of the governments of nearly all theEuropean continent, has been one of the leading fora for

animal welfare since the 1960s. Seeking to recognize thanimal welfare and the contributions animals make to humquality of life, over time the COE has adopted six conve

welfare. These have facilitated regional harmonization ostandards in the COE's member states11

The three COE conventions of principal interest for farm anim

and have served variety of public and private standards adopted in Europe an

The European convention for the protection of animals kept f(ETS No. 87) of 1976, revised in 1992 (ETS No. 145)framework convention introducing principles for

f f l l f




The European convention for the protection of animatransport (ETS No. 65) of 1968, revised in 2003 (revised version of ETS No. 65 applies to all veris based on the principle that local slaughter is ptransport. The convention is supplemenrecommendations for the international transpogoats, pigs, poultry and horses. It covers a varietytransport, including the preparation of the journunloading; vehicle design; animal fitness for trav

veterinary controls; and certification. It also sets ofor transport by road, air, sea and rail.

The European convention for the protection of animals fo102) of 1979. ETS No. 102 covers the treatmslaughterhouses and slaughter operations.

These COE conventions are based on the principle thabeing, man may, and sometimes must, make use of anim

moral obligation to ensure, within reasonable limits, thatand welfare is in each case not unnecessarily put at member states have signed these conventions, theresupport, and many have become parties, agreeing to be le

2.4.2 European Union

Since the mid-1970s, the European Union (EU) has specific legislation on animal welfare. European region

with EU directives, which impose a duty on member stfulfil the directives' requirements. Later, the EU devel




following language: "Whereas the Community should alsavoid in general all forms of cruelty to animals; whereas it aas a first step, that this action should consist in laying downas to avoid all unnecessary suffering on the part of animslaughtered".

At first, EEC legislation on animal welfare mainly invoincorporating the COE conventions into the laws of the1992, into the regulations of the European Communityagricultural policy and internal market. ETS No. 87 (on farming purposes) was adopted by Council Decision 78/92Council Directive 98/58/EC.13 ETS No. 102 (on animals k

was approved by Council Decision 88/306/EEC, later upDirective 93/119/EC.14 ETS No. 65 (on transport) was ratiEC member states and used as basis for the later CouncilNo. 1/2005.15

Despite the implementation of the COE conventions in th

was no specific legal basis in the EEC/EC treaties for animal welfare in internal production within member cbecause the original treaty framework for the EEC/EC mjustify any action other than regulating trade of agriculturalEEC/EC member states.

Since the Maastricht Treaty in 1992, however, the legal welfare in EC treaties has been progressively strengthenereference to animal welfare was the non-binding Declaratioof Animals annexed to the Maastricht Treaty on the Eapproved in 1992, which called upon EC institutions to "ph lf f i l " h d f i d i l i l




Next, the Amsterdam Treaty of 1997 included a Protoco Welfare of Animals,16 which recognizes animals as "sentidistinct from property or agricultural products. It introdulegal obligations to consider animal welfare in thimplementation of EC agriculture, transport, internal mpolicies. The protocol specifies that "the Community andshall pay full regard to the welfare requirements of animthe legislative or administrative provisions and customStates relating in particular to religious rites, cultural traheritage". The last clause is a subject of debate amadvocates, who feel that it leaves too large a loophole forOthers, however, acknowledge that no animal welfare p

been included at all without such a compromise allowflexibility with respect to issues of culture or religion and

The Lisbon Treaty of 2004, which came into effect on 1establishes a Constitution for Europe, reiterated thprotocol. Therefore, the treaty provides for the

constitutional basis for animal welfare in the EU. Wi Article III-121 crystallizes and makes legally binding t Amsterdam Treaty protocol, as follows:

In formulating and implementing the [European] fisheries, transport, internal market, research development and space policies, the Union and

shall, since animals are sentient beings, pay requirements of animal welfare, while respectinadministrative provisions and customs of Membparticular to religious rites, cultural traditions and r




the Protection and Welfare of Animals 2006-2010 (COMidentifies five key actions to be undertaken in EU member st

1. upgrading existing minimum standards for anima welfare;

2. giving a high priority to promoting policy-orienteon animal protection and welfare and the applicprinciple (see Chapter II, Section 2.1);

3. introducing standardized animal welfare indicators;4. ensuring that animal keepers/handlers and the g

more involved in animal welfare issues and informstandards of animal protection and welfare and full

role in promoting these values; and5. continuing to support and launching further intern

to raise awareness and create a greater consensus on

With respect to the third action area, the plan emphasized tstrive to introduce standardized animal welfare indicators

EU and internationally with its trade partners. For the fiftplan specified that the EU would attempt to engage countries by providing trade opportunities to those that friendly production systems" (COM (2006) 13).

The second document is the Animal Health Strategy fUnion 2007-2013 (COM 539 (2007)), which explicitly li

objectives the promotion of "farming practices and animprevent animal health related threats and minimise environmsupport of the EU Sustainable Development Strategy (ESDgoal in the ESDS is the inclusion of animal welfare statusl b lli ll d "TRACES" (TRAd C l d E




have also been included in ongoing FTA negotiations wof Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) and the Merca(MERCOSUR).

2.4.3 Non-binding instruments

In recent years, the OIE has begun working through itbuild awareness of animal welfare issues and, where possdevelopment of regional strategies on animal welfare. Altstrategies are not binding, they do set out guiding pcountries that are likely to trade in animals and animproducts in a particular geographic region.

The most successful example is the Regional Anim(RAWS) agreed to by the 31 member states of the Oceania (AFEO) OIE regional representation in 2008.

with a statement of its vision for the AFEO as a "regioof animals is respected, promoted and increm

simultaneously with the pursuit of progress adevelopment". The strategy's scope includes the welanimals in the care of humans or used by humans, andfollow OIE standards and guidelines for the handlslaughter of farm animals.

The OIE regional representation for the Americas also

towards creating a regional animal welfare strategy fo workshop in Panama in August 2008, representativesprepared a proposal for the creation of a regional anim

The outcome of this proposal has yet to be seen.



III

NATIONAL REGULATION OF ANIMAL WE

Contents

3.1 Introduction

3.2 Constitutional provisions

3.3 Prevention of cruelty to animals

3.4 Non-binding instruments

3.5 Economic and other alternative policies




3.1 Introduction

Countries can choose to regulate animal welfare in a varistrongest is to adopt constitutional provisions that recogniprinciples or to provide another constitutional basis for animal welfare. Countries that adopt a constitutional pro

welfare may also enact national legislation on animal welcountries may enact only legislation.

There is much diversity in national legislation on animal welfare provisions may appear in a free-standing animal weform part of a broader law on animal health and welf

matters in general. The most common form of legislation acriminalizes cruelty against animals. Many nations limistatutes to certain animals used in scientific research o

whereas for farm animals they regulate only slaughter metho

Increasingly, more nations and sub-national jurisdictions ar

adopting provisions that explicitly set out animal welfarextend coverage to farm animals, not just animals usentertainment or companionship. This type of animal welfabeen passed in most countries in Europe, as well as in CNew Zealand (1999), the Philippines (1998), Taiwan Pr(1998), the United Republic of Tanzania (2008) and sevecountries employ non-binding instruments such as nation

strategies or model welfare codes in lieu of binding legislatio

3.2 Constitutional provisions

S l i h d d i i l i i h




Swiss Constitution had established the mandate for fedareas of farm animal welfare.

In 2002, Germany added a provision to its constitution

Box 1 – 101st Federal Constitution of the Swiss Con

Art. 80 Protection of animals

1. The Confederation shall legislate on the animals.

2. It shall in particular regulate:

a. the keeping and care of animals;

b. experiments on animals and procedures living animals;

c. the use of animals;

d. the import of animals and animal productse. the trade in animals and the transport of an

f. the slaughter of animals.

The enforcement of the regulations shall be the respoCantons, except where the law reserves this to the Con

* non-authoritative translation available on Swiss Government web




the inclusion of animals in this provision means that thCourt must balance the protection of animals against otheenshrined state objectives.

Several other countries that provide for the protection o

constitutions do so in sections devoted generally toprotection or sustainable development. For exampl Article 225(1)(VII) of Brazil's Constitution (1988) prgovernment must protect flora and fauna from all practanimals to cruelty prohibited by law. Part 4 of the Serb(2006) also mentions the "protection and improvement ofas an area for government protection, although the term

generally interpreted as applying only to wildlife, not animproduction.

3.3 Prevention of cruelty to animals

Legislation prohibiting cruelty against animals originated

Parliament in 1822, and variations of this type of legislationthe next century, particularly in countries formerly underrule. A number of countries continue to have laws on prevto animals that date from early to mid-20th century, befodevelopment and internationalization of the animal we

Animal cruelty legislation prohibits the most extreme, de

forms of mistreatment of animals, imposing criminal sancacts that constitute "cruelty to animals". This is in contrast legislation, which assumes that some conditions are unaveffects of productive economic activity and seeks to munnecessary suffering. Animal welfare legislation aim




animals transported by train, but otherwise does protection for farm animals.

One example of an anti-cruelty statute that provides moto farm animals is the Malaysia Animals Act (1953, last relegislation defines as an animal "any living creature other

prohibits a series of acts constituting cruelty to animaprohibited acts would implicate any handling of farm "unnecessary pain or suffering" or transportation wiadequate water and food. With respect to slaughter, the destruction, or the preparation for destruction, of any mankind" if "such destruction or such preparation was

infliction of unnecessary suffering." Any of these pconstitute cruelty carry a criminal penalty.

India's Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act (1960) was that it established an oversight body, the Animal Welf"[f]or the promotion of animal welfare generally and

protecting animals from being subjected to unnecessary(Chapter II).21 The creation of such a Board to implemlaw led to the promulgation of a series of specifitransportation and slaughter that are closer to the realmthan anti-cruelty legislation.

Often, legislation that contains "animal welfare" in its

definition of animal welfare that is similar or identicacruelty against animals, centred on the prevention of unSuch legislation may still go beyond the realm of anthrough substantive provisions that cover areas comm

i l lf l h i i l h i




3.4 Non-binding instruments

There are two types of non-binding instruments commocountries wishing to further animal welfare.22 One is a docnational animal welfare strategy, such as is used in Australi

coordinating or harmonizing the animal welfare legislatiostates. Australia adopted this strategy because within itdefined federal structure, animal welfare is a subject regulevel. The Australian Animal Welfare Strategy (AAWcoordinating vision, defines its purpose and scope and goals. This framework also led to the establishment of AA

working groups dedicated to different animal sectors, as w

implementation plan that contains procedures for creporting on the strategy.

Another type of non-binding instrument is a model code which usually sets out standards with which producercomply, sometimes for the purpose of receiving product

to export. New Zealand is a country that uses model "c which include both binding minimum standards and npractice recommendations. The method for drafting ancodes, with civic participation, is outlined in Part 5 of New

Welfare Act (1999). Australia is also in the process of draftmodel codes of practice for animal welfare, which are ent

but serve as guides for best practice. The United Kingdo Welfare Act (2006) authorizes the creation of non-biRecommendations, which farmers are legally required to kn

Sometimes non-binding instruments relate directly to b




created an offence of causing or permitting unnecessarand also commissioned the writing of codes (sec. 3(1)).

were not mandatory, failure to comply with them couldevidence in prosecutions (sec. 3(4)). By contrast, AustralZealand also developed non-binding codes, but at first link them to law. Subsequently, both New Zealand

Province of Manitoba followed the UK's lead bycompliance with the codes as admissible evidence ofoffence.23

Another link between non-binding codes and law oprohibiting causing distress to animals excludes acti

conformity with generally accepted practices of animal ma case, if a practice is allowed in a code, it is likelyexemption. Examples of such laws exist, with some vCanadian provinces including Alberta, British Columbia a

3.5 Economic and other alternative policies

To encourage compliance with animal welfare standartimes establish policies that go beyond direct regulationeconomic incentives, government-supported food labeducation or public awareness campaigns. The Europeexample, has implemented economic incentives tied to itprogram (European Commission, 2008) and has b

feasibility of community-wide labelling options (Euro2009).24 Public education and awareness-building aroundcommon in many countries, and may be specifically call

welfare legislation. Public awareness and education provl h i Ch IV S i 4 2 4




In addition, some governments may fund or support priprograms designed to improve animal welfare. For examMinistry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Supplies has con

World Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals toin animal welfare standards to veterinarians and to im

methods in the country.25

The Brazilian Ministry also officiaa voluntary animal welfare protocol for broiler chickdeveloped and issued by a private organization, the BUnion.26

Although these non-regulatory measures can provide addiachieve animal welfare objectives, they are complementary

governments have to regulate animal welfare: legal instrupart examines in more detail the main elements of animalregulations.



IV

ESSENTIAL ELEMENTS OF ANIMAL WELFARE LEGISLATION

Contents

4.1 Background

4.2 Institutional framework 4.2.1 "Competent authority"4.2.2 Animal welfare board4.2.3 Police and law enforcement4.2.4 Civil society

4.3 Slaughter4.3.1 Unloading, inspection and prioritization of anim4.3.2 Lairaging and holding pens4.3.3 Design of post-lairage stunning and slaughter fa4.3.4 Restraint4.3.5 Stunning 4.3.6 Bleeding and alternative slaughter methods

4.4 Transport4.4.1 Pre-trip planning 4.4.2 Selection and grouping of animals4 4 3 L di d l di




4.6.4 Veterinary treatment4.6.5 Non-therapeutic surgical procedures and dru4.6.6 Breeding and genetic engineering




4.1 Background

This chapter surveys the most common substantive areanimal welfare legislation and the institutional mechanismsestablished to implement and enforce animal welfare lawdrawn from recommendations of the OIE as well as regiolegal instruments on animal welfare. The aim is to idenelements and options for countries wishing to draft oranimal welfare legislation.

Throughout the discussion, examples are highlighted from subsidiary legislation, as well as non-binding instrument

codes of best practice. Which type of instrument is approprdetail should be included depends on a variety of factnational legislation related to animal welfare or protectiolegislative system; the institutions and resources available foand enforcement; the local policy priorities and political fathe country's international obligations.

Despite national variations, there are certain essential elemincluded in primary legislation. These include the framing

welfare principles and fundamental legislative goals; thauthority and establishment of enforcement mechanismframework for the substantive areas of animal welfare (slahousing and management) to be regulated by subsidiary

guidelines for how such subsidiary legislation will be devedetailed substantive regulations, including species-specific pbetter left to subsidiary legislation, which can be updatedfrequently than primary legislation to reflect improve




agency. In addition to identifying the primary minislegislation often creates an animal welfare board made upfrom relevant fields.

The enforcement of animal welfare legislation should aprimary legislation. This means defining both the enfor

and the actors responsible for enforcement, which mayfrom the ministry, members of the animal welfare boardpolice or other law enforcement officials. Where insduring road transport, police or traffic officials may neethe enforcement system. If this is case, it will be importanpersonnel involved in inspections are properly trained

welfare issues.

Often, implementation and enforcement of animal requires licensing of facilities (farms, animal transporslaughterhouses) and personnel (farm animal owners, hantransporters and slaughterhouse personnel). The speinspection, licensing, testing and certification do not nein primary legislation, but it may be useful to set out soFor example, the OIE Code frequently emphasizes the im"trained and competent" personnel involved at all stahandling, and such a provision could be included in the le

Finally, national legislation often includes provisions aim

stakeholders, building community awareness of animal wencouraging civic participation in animal welfare enforcinvolvement may be key to successful implementation, esare potential conflicts between animal welfare goals an

h i Ci i i i i l h l




recommendations in the Terrestrial Code in the whoCode, Glossary).

Choosing the ministry that will serve as the competent aut welfare depends on many factors. Depending on the goverin the country, the competent authority for animal welfare

be the same as that designated for animal health, and may o veterinary authority. Depending on the types of animcompanion animals, wild animals, animals used in scienentertainment or farm animals used for food productministry may be appropriate. For example, the minisenvironmental protection may be suitable to regulate wild

the ministry of agriculture may be more appropriate to admgoverning farm animals used in food production.

In some jurisdictions, authority may be assigned to competent authority. For example, in Peru, the Law on tDomestic Animals and Wild Animals in Captivity responsibilities among the Ministries of Health, AgriculturSimilarly, in Puerto Rico's Law for the Welfare and Prote(2008), there is no single coordinating competent authorityleft to local government, while certain activities are cofollowing federal agencies: the Department of Health; thNatural Environmental Resources; the Department of Conthe State Office of Animal Control. Similarly, the Taiwan P

Animal Protection Law (1998) specifically identifies authorities" both the central Council of Agriculture and prrural area governments (sec. 2).

Th C i A i l P i A (2006) i d




licensing farms, transport vehicles and slaughterhousetesting and licensing personnel involved in animal handslaughter; responding to complaints or reports of animataking part in prosecution or sanctioning of animal wedeveloping subsidiary legislation or non-binding instranimal welfare standards. The competent authority may

out public awareness activities, or this may be assigneeducation, ministry of information or an animal welfare the animal welfare legislation.

4.2.2 Animal welfare board

Animal welfare legislation often establishes some formcouncil or animal welfare board comprised of key stake welfare experts. Lawmakers revising or drafting anima will need to assess the national context to identify key may include members of a national veterinary authority amission relates to farm animals or animal-based food pand veterinary experts, perhaps from universities; induinvolved in raising, transporting and slaughtering advocates from animal welfare NGOs.

A key question is whether the members of the board aretheir personal expertise or to represent a certaistakeholders. Comparison between the experiences o

Animal Welfare Council (FAWC), an advisory body maexperts, and a similar body in Canada, made urepresentatives and now defunct, suggests that the formsuccessful model.




In India, where the Animal Welfare Board both plays an adempowered to make regulations, the board includes rseveral ministries and six members of Parliament (sec. 4).

Animal Welfare Act (1998) establishes an Animal Weattached to the Department of Agriculture, which may necessary rules and regulations, subject to the approval of th

Agriculture (sec. 5).

Another option is to have a fully independent board withrepresentatives directly involved, with the board reportcertain ministry. The UK's FAWC, for instance, reportMinisters of Agriculture and hence tends to be able to

decisions. Without at least such a reporting relationship, a prove unable to have any real impact on legislation or imple

Norway offers an alternative example of a decentraliincorporates stakeholders in both an advisory and enforcemthan one central animal welfare board, the Animal Wemandates the creation of one or more animal welfare com

veterinary district. With a district veterinary officer servisecretary, each committee is made up of between three a

who "must primarily be persons with practical experienccaring for animals, and with knowledge of, and interest in(sec. 23). The committees are not involved in issuing reguleft to the ministry in charge of animal welfare (sec. 3

committee is charged with inspection and enforcement, spe

keep itself informed of the keeping of animals in the out inspections without prior notice. Should the

i h b li h li k




4.2.3 Police and law enforcement

Police and traditional law enforcement are implicated implementation of animal welfare legislation, and whereroles of such authorities should be identified in the primexample, they may be assigned to take over where the p

mechanism is not successful. As noted earlier, the Welfare Act assigns responsibility for primary inspec welfare committees as seen above, but if these comdifficulties, they are empowered by legislation to "take t(which can include resort to the police). The law providshould the committee so request, assist in the impleme

and inspections" (sec. 24). Similarly, the Croatian Ani(2006) states, "On request of the competent inspector, pMinistry of Interior shall, within the limits of their powerin the carrying out of inspectional supervision" (sec. 62).

In the context of inspection during animal transport,inspection duties may, by necessity or as a matter of expeto police and other law enforcement officials since in mmonitor road transport. This is especially the case for transport. For example, the German Animal Welfare Athat customs officers under direction of the Ministry involved in monitoring welfare standards for imported an(art. 14(1)).

Training of police and other law enforcement persinvolved in inspections is crucial to effective enforcemestandards. The OIE Code frequently emphasizes t" " hi h i l d b h f ili i i h i




arrest (sec. 24). Other countries assign to veterinary inspecpowers traditionally reserved for police: the power to efacilities involved in the handling of animals; the power to lpower to seize animals that are suffering under persisteserious violations of animal welfare standards.

4.2.4 Civil society

A unique feature of animal welfare legislation is the attentsociety as both a raison d'être for such legislation and a kimplementation. Many laws offer as a primary legislatiestablishment of a culture of respect for animal welfare an

of the symbiotic relationship between animal and humobjective, which may be phrased in various ways, is a relegislation (see Box 2). In addition, animal welfare legisincludes civil society and the general public in theimplementation: the legislation may provide funding and oanimal welfare organizations; may make the drafting of suba public, participatory process; or may offer incentivemonitor animal welfare and file complaints. For example

Animals Act (1953, last revised 2006) offers a reward to anya violation (sec. 50(1)).

Japan's Act of Welfare and Management of Animals (1973focus on public awareness building as part of the implem

Article 3 directs the government to "endeavor to achieve dawareness raising with regard to the welfare and proper cathrough educational activities, publicity activities and otheat such places as schools, communities and homes." One

id d f i l "B Ki d A i l " k (




"education, information, training and assistance to Organisations" (sec. 14(b)). The law also allows the Ministo appoint "any person" as an Animal Trustee, who can of a person suspected of committing an offence under thbe able to file a complaint (sec. 7). Procedures for be

Trustee are made generally available online, and are

citizen over the age of sixteen.

Box 2 – Public Awareness as a Central Legislative G

Costa Rican Animal Welfare Act (1994)* The family and educational institutions will encourage, i

youth, the values that sustain this law. The following willemphasized:a) The consciousness that cruel acts against and m

animals harms human dignity.b) The foundation of respect for all living beings.c) The consciousness that compassion for suffering an

human beings.

d) The knowledge and practice of the norms that govof animals.

Korean Animal Protection Law (2007)** The purpose of this act is . . . to cultivate Korean peoplefor animals' lives and their safety and to respect animals'

Peruvian Law on Protection of Domestic Animals and Wild ACaptivity (2004)*

The objectives of this law are . . . (d) to encourage anparticipation of all members of society in the adoption oat the protection of animals




Under its Animal Welfare Act (1999), New Zealand haparticipatory process for drafting and adopting Codes oestablish minimum welfare standards and outline best practcompliance. The framework for this participatory process iin the primary legislation and includes several opportuparticipation. First, the act specifies that in addition to

animal welfare board, "any other person may prepare welfare" (sec. 70(1)). It also requires that before the adop welfare, the public must be notified (sec. 71) and the draftfor comment and consultation between members of thanimal welfare board (sec. 72). The procedures for draftingcode of welfare are made public on a New Zealand gov

along with already adopted codes and those currently und The website also offers information about filing a comcompliance with the Animal Welfare Act, including an accesact and a complaint hotline.

From public awareness campaigns to participatory draftisubsidiary legislation, the implementation of animal welfarerelies on the active participation of civil society. Simila

welfare laws include a variety of key stakeholders in advisoboards. The goal is broad public participation to support

widespread understanding and implementation of animal wand standards.

4.3 Slaughter

Whether or not particular jurisdictions have general animamost do regulate slaughter in some fashion, and most le

h i i i i ff i i




latest knowledge of animal welfare science.27 Becauseconstant review, the details of slaughter methods will nosubsidiary legislation rather than the principal legislationthe Humane Methods of Slaughter Act (HMSA) of the Ualso authorize scientific research and development omethods.28

As with other areas of animal welfare, slaughter regulaanimal behaviour into account and requires that personnel be involved in all aspects of slaughter, inclhandling and inspection, supervision and slaughter

Terrestrial Animal Health Code, in Chapter 7.5 ("Slau

notes the importance of having sufficient numbers of "competent" personnel who are familiar with the recommthat chapter of the Code and their application in the natio

Most slaughter legislation focuses on the killinslaughterhouses for human consumption. Legislationseparate provisions for, or specifically exclude from cov

animals for fur or disease control, slaughter outside of spersonal consumption), hunting and ritual and religious s

One area of controversy in slaughter regulation is threligious or ritual killing of animals ought to be regulatypes of slaughter or rather exempted from oversight. S

blanket exemptions for religious or ritual killing, whslaughter for these purposes only on condition that cert

27 For example the Philippines Animal Welfare Act (1998) provi




are met. Often, the approach taken is determined by polifactors in a given country.30 The Tanzania Act, for examcomplete exemption for slaughter according to religious provided that:

it is performed by a person in possession of nece

and skill; it is performed exclusively in the presence of a vete

of slaughtering and meat inspection;

it is performed in a way that the large blood vesarea are opened with one single cut;

equipment is available to ensure that the animals i

slaughtering can be brought into the positioslaughtering without any delay; and

it is performed so that other animals waiting for slathe slaughtering process.

In the United States, by contrast, the abrogation of slaughte

complete and unconditional for ritual or religious slaughtprotect freedom of religion, ritual slaughter and the hpreparation of livestock for ritual slaughter are exempted f[the HMSA]" (7 U.S.C. 48 sec. 1906).

Internationally, Chapter 7.5 of the OIE Code offers deta

recommendations based on animal welfare science for eacareas covered in national slaughter legislation. Perhaps moareas, the OIE Code recommendations on slaughter areproduction in large, industrialized slaughterhouses ratherslaughterhouses (see e g the design recommendations




Most national legislation on slaughter sets out basic gincluding providing maximum comfort before slaughter fear, pain and suffering that an animal experiences slaughter (see Box 3). Generally, these principles are capaimed at controlling the slaughter process so that aimmediately before slaughter and remain unconscio

slaughter, that they are slaughtered using the quickestmethod available and that animals do not witness oslaughtered.

4.3.1 Unloading, inspection and prioritization o

The subjects covered by slaughter legislation often beginat the slaughterhouse, when they are unloaded from a vafter transportation. Many animal welfare issues arise at tIn addition to the equipment and handling methods thboth loading and unloading phases, the unloading phtransport inspection of animals and identification of immediate euthanasia according to emergency slau

prioritization for slaughter as soon as possible.

The OIE Code recommends that "the conditions of thassessed upon their arrival for any animal welfare and hethat "injured or sick animals, requiring immediate slaughhumanely and without delay" (sec. 7.5.2.1(a)–(b)). In add

recommends that certain animals be prioritized for slpossible, including:

animals that have been transported in containers




Almost all animal welfare legislation requires that sick or ineuthanized immediately, either in the transport vehicle imoved without causing additional suffering or at a designated for emergency slaughter. Some legislation ident

d b d

Box 3 – General Principles of Slaughter in National A Welfare Legislation

Austrian Animal Protection Act (2005) sec. 32(1) The killing of an animal may be performed only in such avoid unjustified inflicting of pain, suffering, injury or heanimal.

Costa Rican Animal Welfare Law (1994) art. 5*[Animals] should be slaughtered with adequate technologthe species, to reduce their pain to a minimum.

Tanzanian Animal Welfare Act (2008) sec. 29(1) An animal shall be slaughtered through a method whicinstantaneous killing; or (2) instantaneously [renderunconscious and ends in death without [it recovering] con

Republic of Vanuatu’s Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act (198

Every person who slaughters an animal, whether or nconsumption, shall do so in a humane manner so asunnecessary suffering and to cause death as quickly as pos

* authors' translation




possible and does not entail any unnecessary suffea trolley or a movable platform to the place of eme

Several of the classes of animals that the OIE Codprioritized for slaughter may not be universally accereligion, culture and economic considerations in India

recommendations on prioritizing unweaned animals orbirth during transport inappropriate. The Prevention of(Slaughter House) Rules (2001) ("Indian Rules") issued b

Welfare Board absolutely prohibit the slaughter of anypregnant, (ii) has offspring less than three months old three months old (sec. 3). The Animals Slaughter Contr

of Punjab in India (1963) prohibits the slaughter of a(sec. 3(1)), which would include any female animals thcapable of breeding. The Tanzania Animal Welfare Acslaughter of a pregnant animal unless it is to prevensuffering or for disease control purposes (sec. 31).

Animal welfare legislation will naturally reflect local eco

religious factors, and the goal is to accommodcompromising animal welfare principles. In many countanimal that is pregnant, can give milk or has the potentigreater than the value of that animal's meat. In suchabsolute or near absolute prohibition on the animal'sappropriate. The legislation should also explicitly prohi

such animals to the slaughterhouse.

4.3.2 Lairaging and holding pens

L i i l h dli f ili i l h h




The definition of the term "lairage" varies, reflecting direalities and sophistication of slaughterhouse facilities. prescribes a particular lairage design (sec. 7.5.3) so that one

various purposes: a place for animals to rest and receivfeeding and watering; controlled passageways ("races") slaughter point; and waiting pens for animals immediately p

The European Council Directive 93/119/EC (art. 2.3) de"keeping animals in stalls, pens, covered areas or slaughterhouses in order to give them necessary attentiorest) before they are slaughtered". The Indian Rules refefacilities: a reception area or resting grounds where veteshould occur (sec. 4), and lairages where animals must b

after veterinary inspection for 24 hours before slaughtedefinitions preview divergent views of the animal welfare of lairaging.

There are at least two legislative trends on the duration of in lairaging facilities. Some legislation requires movingslaughter as quickly as possible rather than prolonging the

lairages. Other legislation sets mandatory rest periods, somebased on the distance animals were transported beforeslaughterhouse. The European Convention is an examplproviding first that animals not be taken to the place of they can be slaughtered immediately" (art. 6(1)), whereas "anot slaughtered immediately on arrival shall be lairaged" (art

The second approach (making a certain period of rest mandBrazil, India and Mexico. The Indian Rules require that 24 hours in a lairage after inspection and prior to slaughB ili R l i f I d i l d H l h I i

5 l d l l l




mortem veterinary inspection is determined to provide ventilation. NOM-033-Z00-1995 (Humane Slaughter of Animals) allows a further postponement of slaughter in ssuspected that an animal is temporarily unfit for human can infection or traces of drugs in its system. Whatever ththe NOM requires that animals receive adequate care thr

A significant animal welfare consideration is that lairacomfortably accommodate the number of animals that wslaughterhouse on any given day (the "throughput raterecommends that the lairage be designed and constrappropriate number of animals in relation to the thro

slaughterhouse without compromising the welfare (art. 7.5.3.1). Similarly, the Indian Rules provide that slaughter house shall be adequate in size [to be] sufficienanimals to be laired" (sec. 5(2)).

There may be some difference, for legislative purposthroughput rate is determined – whether it is d

slaughterhouse or a regulator. The Indian Rules, for exama municipal or other local authority should "determnumber of animals that may be slaughtered in slaughterhouse capacity and the needs of the local poputhe slaughterhouse (sec. 3.3). This may be more appro

where the resources to design and build new lairages a

that the throughput rate is determined based on existinOther laws may establish strict numerical limitations whicat all costs.

Th i f d i d i f l i

L i l ti d l t pti f i l lf




National legislation echoes these requirements: space, grfacilities and comfort of animals. For example, the Protection Act (2000) requires that lairages be designed tofrom harmful weather (sec. 12(1)), high temperatures an12(2)), and calls for the separation of animals that would th(sec. 12(3)). The Indian Rules require that the resting groun

protective shelters (sec. 4(7)), and that ante-mortem pen arflooring and drainage capacities (sec. 4(8)). Lairage pens mminimum space requirements for large and small animalanimals must be separated by their type and class and bheat, cold and rain (sec. 5(4)).

In the type of industrial slaughterhouse envisioned by the Ohave specific design features that differ from other housinthey should be "designed to allow a one-way flow of aunloading to the point of slaughter, with a minimum nucorners to negotiate" (art. 7.5.3.2(a)). This design moves aholding pen with capacity for inspection, watering, feeding a passageway or "race" to a waiting pen and through an

point of stunning or slaughter. The races ought to be straigcurved, with space for one or two animals to move side solid walls (art. 7.5.3.2(f)). The waiting pen should preferaensure a steady supply of animals to the stunning and (art. 7.5.3.2(h)).

As in other areas of animal welfare legislation, the OIE rfor lairage design may be feasible for certain national cindustrial facilities but too strict for smaller slaugNevertheless, the animal welfare concerns that

d i h ld b k i i d h d f i l

54 Legisl tive nd regul tory options for nim l welf re




method. However, all methods share one general considefrom an animal welfare perspective is to minimize the feanimals may experience if they witness other animals bein

National legislation sometimes requires that certain stepsanimals from having sensory experience of other anim

example, the Zambian Prevention of Cruelty to Animrevised 1994) includes a provision that slaughtering ananother constitutes cruelty. The Indian Rules make a sim6(1)) and translate the principle into design requiremenhall, which must "provide separate sections of adsufficient for slaughter of individual animals to ensure th

slaughtered is not within the sight of other animals" (sec.provides that the slaughterhouse include a "curbed-iadequate size . . . so located that the blood could not banimals being slaughtered" (sec. 6(6)). Poland's Animal Palso makes design provisions to protect animals from animals' slaughter, although the purpose of these provisstated: "The waiting room of the slaughterhouse sho

insulated and separated by a partition from the room deanimals unconscious. Similarly, the room designated founconscious should be separated from rooms in whichand undergo further slaughter-related processing" (art. 34

These concerns are not reflected in the OIE Code rec

international animal welfare science is unresolved on wextent animals suffer from witnessing other animals beingis no scientific evidence that animals react to the sighbeing slaughtered, so long as the animal is slaughteri di l l i i d ll i d





restraint may make it easier to quickly stun the animal werror, thereby minimizing the animal's suffering immediduring slaughter.

At minimum, animal welfare legislation should establish tmethods of restraint should be employed so as to minimiz

to animal suffering during stunning and slaughter. The lemay not include more specific prescriptions, limitations orestraints. For example, the European Convention providanimals shall be restrained when necessary immediately be(art. 12). Article 14 provides specific restrictions: "No mcausing avoidable suffering shall be used; animals' hind legsnor shall they be suspended before stunning or, in thslaughter, before the end of bleeding." Article 14 also prspecific limitation: "Poultry and rabbits may, however, bslaughtering provided that stunning takes place directly aEuropean Council Directive 93/119/EC Annex B.2 inprovisions as the Convention, and adds that, in the casecattle subjected to stunning by mechanical or electrical mea

head, the competent authority may authorize "the use of ato restrain head movements" (Annex B.3). However, eequipment may not be used as a means of restraint (Annex B

The OIE Code provides very detailed recommendationrestraint methods. Article 7.5.2.3 provides that "Methods o

avoidable suffering should not be used in conscious animcause severe pain and stress," and then lists a number of mavoidable suffering, such as the hoisting and shackling of anpoultry. Article 7.5.6 lays out a chart of the various mh dli d i f i l i di l b f l





4.3.5 Stunning

The most common provision on pre-slaughter stunninstunning method should be sufficient to ensure that unconscious until it is dead, and also requires that eprocedures be in place in case an animal regains con

welfare legislation may also prescribe particular stunntailored to the species) or particular ways of employing meets animal welfare requirements.

Some regulations treat stunning and slaughter versus instas equivalents. The Belize Slaughter of Animals Act (provides that every animal slaughtered in a slaughinstantaneously slaughtered or shall by stunning slaughtered, or shall by stunning be instantaneously renpain until death supervenes" (Chap. 154 sec. 5). The

Welfare Act offers the same two alternatives (sec. 29(1))Methods of Slaughter Act, as another example, identifies qualifying as humane: "(a) in the case of [livestock], all a

insensible to pain by a single blow or gunshot or an eleother means that is rapid and effective, before beingthrown, cast or cut; or (b) by slaughtering in accordarequirements of the Jewish faith or any other religious famethod or slaughter whereby the animal suffers loss oanemia of the brain caused by the simultaneous and insta

of the carotid arteries with a sharp instrument . . . ." (sec.

More common is to require stunning prior to slaughcertain exceptions. For example, the European Co

ll h " i l h ll b d b





Adopting this convention, the European Council Directivamong EU member states, certain farm animals slaughterhouses be "stunned before slaughter or killed inaccordance with the provisions of Annex C"32 (art. 5).authority in each member state may grant exceptions "forpigs, sheep and goats slaughtered or killed [not in] slaught

owner for his personal consumption provided that [the slaughter principle] is complied with and that pigs, sheepbeen stunned in advance" (art. 9(2)).

The OIE Code emphasizes that "persons carrying out stuproperly trained and competent" and should "be able to reanimal is not correctly stunned" (art. 7.5.7.1). For mecmethods, the OIE Code includes the following list of stunning:

the animal collapses immediately and does not attem

the body and muscles of the animal becomimmediately after the shot;

normal rhythmic breathing stops; and

the eyelid is open with the eyeball facing straight rotated.

The purpose of these provisions is to ensure that those slaughter can swiftly recognize when stunning has not

correctly. This then triggers the emergency measures provided for.




g g y p f f

4.3.6 Bleeding and alternative slaughter methods

The most common method of slaughter authorized legislation is bleeding after an animal has been effectivelythe animal regains consciousness. The Croatian Animactually defines slaughter for purposes of the act as "cau

animal by bleeding" (art. 3.8). As discussed above, soallow for killing by other methods that cause immediate animal immediately unconscious, although some of controversial from an animal welfare perspective.

The European Council Directive requires that animals be with provisions laid out in Annex D (art. 5.2). Annex bleeding be started as soon as possible after stunningmanner, so that bleeding is complete before thconsciousness; (2) that all animals be bled by sticking carotid arteries or the major blood vessels from which tperson charged with stunning, shackling, hoisting ancomplete all these tasks on a single animal before contin

and (4) that a manual back-up system be in place for poof automatic neck cutters.

To these requirements, the OIE Code adds severa

(art. 7.5.7.5). It recommends limiting the delay between s(or cutting, depending on the species) to 20 seconds by e

a non-penetrating captive bolt. It also recommends thatout by cutting both carotid arteries unless the stunning cardiac arrest. Personnel should observe animals throuprocess, in case an animal shows signs of regaining cons




g g y p f f

4.4 Transport

Along with slaughter, animal transport is one of the arfrequently addressed in animal welfare legislation, as it is stressful experiences that animals go through in their lives. Ipublic stage of animals' lives, and visible suffering is likely to

and pressure from the public for government intervent welfare concerns during transport – whether by land, air real, as animals are kept in close confinement in a moving vpotential for injury, extreme climatic conditions, disorieheightened stress are highly likely. From an animal heaperspective, excess stress during transport may lead to susceptibility to disease, birthing and reproductive probl

weight loss, and may have adverse consequences on the quaCareful planning, good management and handling skills aequipment must therefore be used to ensure animal welfare

The OIE Code includes three separate chapters on the protduring transport: by sea (Chapter 7.2), land (Chapter 7.3) and

Each chapter begins with a list of general animal behaviotaken into consideration in planning transport, and tresponsibilities and competencies of the various actors invoof transportation: owners, exporters, importers, animal hcompetent authorities of both importing and exporting couthen lays out specific recommendations for each phase o

planning, documentation, the pre-journey period, loading, and post-journey inspection. For transportation by sea, Code recommends particular designs for the vessels, contain




The OIE Code establishes standards for international tranimals. OIE member states should be mindful of theCode assigns to the competent authorities of both expocountries (ch. 7.2.3.2(h)-(i)). Both authorities should: (1)standards for animal welfare, including requirementsanimals before and during travel, and for certification a

(2) approve facilities, containers, vehicles and vesseltransport of animals; (3) set competence standards for afacility managers; and (4) implement these standardexporting country's competent authority should monithealth and welfare of animals at the point of loadicountry's competent authority should: (1) ensure that this aware of the required standards for the transportingand evaluate animal health and welfare at the point of unanimal consignments priority to allow import procedur

without unnecessary delay. Regionally, the European Protection of Animals during International Transport European Council Regulation (EC) No. 1/2005 set sttransportation within and between EU member states.

At the national level, countries take different approdomestic and international transportation of animals, bone of the most frequently and strictly regulated areasEven some jurisdictions that do not have comprehenstatutes nonetheless regulate animal transportation

countries address transportation within general animal wexample, the 2008 Animal Welfare Act of Tanzania incthe OIE Code language as well as its key recommetransport.




transportation experiences for animals may be those wheron foot (Rahman et al., 2005). The general principles oduring transportation may easily be applied to such movemmore specific standards ought to be developed in subsidiary

4.4.1 Pre-trip planning

Careful planning of any journey is essential to ensure that aprovided for and to avoid unnecessary delays. The OIE Cthe importance of planning by devoting an entire articlelements to be considered: preparation of animals fconsideration of type of transportation and

vehicle/vessel/container design, route, distance, weathermanagement of animals (including proper staffing), groupof animals and proper veterinary and emergency resp(arts. 7.2.5, 7.3.5). One important element of pre-trip plannithat any required documentation is in order (arts. 7international transit, this requires compliance with the reqexporting, importing and any transit countries.

The OIE Code devotes a separate section to the steps thaduring the pre-journey period, including cleaning and i

vehicle; providing animals with pre-journey rest and preconfoods, feeding methods or social groups; and pre-journey

veterinarian (arts. 7.2.7, 7.3.7). Many countries' animal w

echoes the importance of planning and pre-trip preparati Act, for example, requires that steps "be taken in advancelength of the journey and of any delay, and to meet the animthe journey" (art. 12(2)1). To meet the requirements of

i l l i l i h ld i i l i




4.4.2 Selection and grouping of animals

Careful selection and grouping of animals is one of the mto ensure animal welfare during transportation. The basiin virtually all animal welfare statutes is that the anim

intended journey. In some legislation, what constitutes "left undefined (or left to the determination of a veterinalegislation spells out the necessary elements. For instanc(2006) simply requires that "animals must be fit for th

Box 4 – General Principles of Animal Welfare Durin

Croatian Animal Protection Act (2006) art. 12It is prohibited to transport animals in a way that suffering, injury or death.

Peruvian Law on Protection of Domestic Animals and WiCaptivity (2000) art. 15*

The transportation of animals by truck or any otherequires the use of procedures that do not involve cruextreme fatigue or lack of rest, water or food for the tr

with special attention to sick animals.

Tanzanian Animal Welfare Act (2008) sec. 22(1) A person shall not transport an animal in a manner thapain, injury or undue suffering or distress.

*authors' translation




The OIE Code sets out in detail the types of animals thunfit to travel, including "those that are unable to stand

weight on each leg", "those that are blind in both eyes" aunhealed wounds from recent surgical procedures" (arts. Code also identifies animals requiring special conditions andtransport, including animals that are very large or obese, v

very excitable or aggressive, subject to motion sickness orlittle human contact. Similarly, the European Conventiospecial attention must be paid to animals in late stages of phave recently given birth, and prohibits the transportatfemale animals within the period immediately before or aftnewborn mammals before their navels are healed (art. 9(3

Act states that pregnant females during a period prior to giv10 percent of the total gestation time and for one week aftenot be considered fit for transport, except for required emetreatment (art. 12(2)11). The Tanzanian Act forbids themovement permit "where an animal (a) has given birth before the departure; [or] (b) is likely to give birth during ca

Animals' fitness for the journey is often enforced by requirement, such as the need to be in possession of a c

veterinarian or from the competent authority certifying Under the Tanzanian Act, an animal may not be tran

veterinarian issues a "movement permit" (sec. 22(5)(a))Convention requires a general certificate by an authorized v

that animals are "fit for the intended journey" (art. 10(2)). Sthe Transport of Animals Rules (Indian Rules) require that cand pigs travel with "a valid certificate by a qualified veterinaeffect that the [animals] are in a fit condition to travel" (arts. I h b f h ifi i f




is a provision that allows for the revocation of a permchanged circumstances. The Tanzanian Act, for examprevocation of a movement permit if there are changed ocircumstances relating to the fitness of an animal (art. 24)

Another important feature of legislation on the transpo

requirement that they be properly grouped together, to tbehaviour patterns which are likely to be aggravated duclose confinement of transportation. Tunisia's detailed

Transport (2007) is one example of national legislgrouping requirements:

art. 11. – Animals of similar weight, size and agetransported together and tethered or free inside thtransport.

art. 12. – Animals should be separated within thtransport in the following instances:

- according to breed,

- animals with horns,- bulls more than 18 months old,- yoked females,- dangerous animals,- tethered animals,- stallions from other equines and from cameli

The OIE Code also recommends maintenance of soestablished on the farm, especially with species that tendsocial structures (arts. 7.2.7, 7.2.12). When mixing is C d h i l h h i d f i




4.4.3 Loading and unloading

Because animal injuries occur during loading and unloadi welfare regulations specifically address this phase. The OIEseveral elements: competent supervision; proper facilities; and other aids; and post-journey examination and treat

injured animals. Provisions on loading and unloading also ofhandling during this phase. For example, the Tunisian Decrforbidden to lift or pull [animals]by the head, the tail, the feears, or to hold them by the skin" (art. 8).37 The Europincludes the additional prohibition on "noise, harassmentexcessive force" (art. 14.2). It also regulates the use ohandling aids, limiting those that administer an electric prods that could cause injury.

Proper design and construction of loading and unloadingimportant to ensuring animal welfare. The OIE Code rloading facilities be "designed and constructed to take into aand abilities of the animals" (art. 7.2.8.2(b)), with particular

surface, sharp projections, ventilation, appropriate ligh(arts. 7.2.8.1, 7.2.8.2). The European Convention requirefeatures to prevent slipping in circumstances where losteeper than 10 degrees, and calls for well-lit loading fbarriers as necessary (art. 13). The Tunisian Decree specramps must be on less than a 30 degree incline, with

minimum heights depending on the animal type: more tcows, sheep and goats; more than 1.3 metres for bulls;1.5 metres for horses and camelids (art. 7).

4 4 4 T hi l d di i




animals are often closely confined and occasionally immand the vehicle is in motion.

The OIE Code provides detailed design and mainten vehicles for sea (art. 7.2.5.4), land (art. 7.3.5.4) and air t There are several common design considerations: contain

slippery floors; proper ventilation, illumination and windby handlers; protection from adverse weather conditiontemperatures; and no sharp protrusions. They must alsoanimal faeces and urine may be absorbed by bedding orso that they do not contaminate food and water or facontainer has multiple levels.

Space allowances are dealt with separately and in greateither be stated in terms of a desired animal-based oucertain minimum space requirements according to specriterion. For example, the European Convention requithat animals have sufficient space to stand in a natural p(art. 17). The Tunisian Decree lays out certain minimum

for bulls, cows, sheep, goats, horses and camels, all linkeand age of the animals being transported. For livestockairplanes, the OIE Code includes detailed sperequirements (art. 7.4.1.2).

Aside from the vehicle design and space allowances, an

transportation depends on proper inspection and cajourney, as animals may require more or less water or fooconditions of transportation.38 The Croatian Act, forseveral provisions aimed at animal care during transport

b l l h k d d i i d"




"appropriate" or "properly" do not give any meaningful crijudge compliance. Accordingly, subsidiary legislation maymake such standards more enforceable. The availability oparticular country will affect the design of these transporta

well as their enforcement.

4.4.5 Duration of travel and rest stops

Most legislation regulating animal welfare during transportfor minimizing delays or limiting the duration of travel. Croatian Act states that "steps must be taken in advancelength of the journey and of any delay" (art. 12(2)1). Thesimilarly provides that "the transporter of animals must avduring the trip"39 (art. 17). The OIE Code takes a different for the maximum duration of a journey to be determined baof factors: animal fitness, prior transport experience and

well as weather conditions, space allowance and type of veh

Other legislation establishes specific requirements for trips o

The European Convention states that any journey exceemust comply with additional documentation requiremeanimals other than poultry (art. 7(2)). In India, the rulessheep, goats and pigs apply only to trips exceeding six houduring which sufficient food, fodder and water must be prointervals" (secs. 70, 91). Poultry cannot be transported conti

than six hours and must be inspected every six hours, anstops, transportation shall not remain stationary for more tha time (sec. 84(e)–(f)).

S l i d h h li i i




lairaging. Thus a few European countries have mregulations. In Austria, animals may be transported for umaximum of 130 km on country roads or 260 km on mlimitations cannot be avoided by rest stops during a longcountries, national conditions such as the distances slaughterhouses and the quality of roads may make su

impractical.40

4.4.6 Emergency treatment and slaughter

The issue of emergency treatment and slaughter of animinjured during transport is complex, since it raises inregarding animal health, animal welfare and food sa

considerations include the need to segregate sick animcarcasses of animals that die during transport so as to prdisease and treatment or slaughter during transport or Unsurprisingly, the concerns differ depending on the mdo the applicable legislative provisions.

The OIE Code includes a variety of recommendationsemergency treatment and slaughter, such as havingemergency plan in place and ensuring that a veterinavailable during transport and post-trip unloading (art. calls for medication to be administered only orecommendation, cautions at length against the use of

air transport and requires keeping a detailed record of tretransport (arts. 7.2.9.2(c), 7.4.7).

The European Convention makes a general provision l d i "A i l h f ll ill




does not cause them any additional suffering" (art. 25). Thprovisions are for treatment during air transport: drugs shoin response to a specific problem and be administered byanother authorized professional; and sedation and euthanasused in an emergency with a species-suitable means (art. 30)

The most generous provisions from an animal welfare stfor immediate mid-trip treatment of any injured or si Tanzanian Act, for example, provides: "The transporter shanimal which falls ill or gets injured during transpoappropriate veterinary attention" (sec. 25(2)). Similarly, theof Animals Act (1990), which prohibits the transportation oby reason of infirmity, illness, injury or fatigue cannot be tra

undue suffering (sec. 138(2)), requires that an animal whicfor transport while en route must be taken to the neare

where it can receive proper care and attention (sec. 138(4)).4

Official Mexican Standard NOM-033-Z00-1995 on the humdomestic and wild animals prescribes specific humane killin

used in a mid-trip emergency (secs. 7.2, 7.2.1–7.2.6). Thesfrom the humane methods prescribed for slaughterhouspecies-specific. For birds, depending on the size, the appcould be decapitation, cervical dislocation or a single bul

wing. For cows, sheep, goats and pigs, the method is a gunsregion of the head or across the left elbow in the direction

the size of the pistol depending on the species. For rabbprescribes stunning and death by breaking the neck. recommendations for killing and slaughter of different spedetailed scientific reviews conducted by bodies such Sl h A i i d h A i V i M d




Housing generally refers to the type and condition of the which animals are kept, while management refers to mcontrolling and caring for animals throughout their livinclude choices about whether animals are kept indooallotment of living space, the temperature and ventilatioand materials used in construction of facilities. Manage

feeding, disease prevention, veterinary treatment, surgictherapeutic drugs, genetic modification and breeding mpersonnel and handling.

Despite being perhaps the most important areas of anihousing and management issues affect animals' day-to-dathe point of transport and slaughter – housing and m

extensively regulated either at international or natiinternational level, the OIE Code includes "approprdefinition of animal welfare and mentions the Five Fprinciples, but otherwise includes no specific animarelated to housing. However, certain standards for systems are being developed with a view to presenting t

countries for consideration and possible adoption. Therthe European regional level, in that EC Directive 9freedom of movement, safe buildings and accommocirculation, dust levels, temperature and relative humidity

Although the housing needs of different animal specie

certain basic welfare principles apply to housing for a Animal welfare legislation generally embraces the princmovement and freedom to express natural behaviourSwedish Animal Protection Ordinance (1988) includ

i i




Some legislation actually prescribes minimum space requireon the species, although such specifications are more oftenbinding instruments such as New Zealand's Code of Welfar

The safety of housing materials and construction is also crthe welfare of confined animals. For example, the Aus

"(1) Materials used for the construction and accommoda with which the animals may come into contact, and in construction of pens and equipment, must not be dangerouand be cleaned properly. (2) Accommodation and installatior caging animals shall be built and maintained in a way sharp edges or protrusions likely to cause injury to the animals"

Whether animals are confined or kept outdoors, legislation physical comfort and well-being. If kept outdoors, animals

with adequate shelter from adverse weather conditionsconfined, the buildings must be adequately ventilated to promoderate temperatures. Other factors, such as appropriacontrol, flooring and bedding, are also important to anim

Austrian Act (2005), for example, addresses climatic coperson] who keeps any animals shall ensure that . . . the climlight and temperature . . . corresponds to their physiologicaneeds" (sec. 13(2)). The Swedish ordinance requires thdesigned in such a way as to ensure a satisfactory indoor clibe kept at a low level" and, buildings must "be fitted with

the daylight" (sec. 2(1)–(2)). The Taiwan Republic oProtection Law (1998) requires that an animal keeper "paysafe living environment, shelter, ventilation, lighting, tempand other appropriate care to prevent the animal frh i h " ( 5)




As housing issues differ from one species to anothlegislation often explicitly leaves flexibility for species-spaddresses these needs directly. Because of the wide vrequirements between species, these will not be detailedOIE Code, although it does not directly address housing,of species-specific issues in several of its animal we

Chapter 7.3.12), which can provide good background inthe formulation of specific recommendations.

4.6 Management

As indicated above, management techniques refer to thare handled, cared for and controlled throughout their

management has a profound impact on animals' daily lneglected in animal welfare legislation. The key managfrom competence of personnel and proper handling whenor from housing or pasture, to feeding, veterinary treatherapeutic surgical procedures or drugs and breeding genetic modification. Some of these issues, such as per

are frequently included in legislation and internationalother issues, such as feeding, breeding or genetic modaddressed in detail outside Europe. These issues shouconcern both from the perspective of animal welfare sccountries wishing to expand international trade in animproducts, especially with European trading partners.

4.6.1 Personnel

The employment of knowledgeable, well-trained and comi l h dli d i f d l




"Animal handlers should be experienced and compand moving farm livestock and understand the behaanimals and the underlying principles necessary ttasks" (art. 7.2.2).

"Persons engaged in the unloading, moving, lairagstunning, slaughter and bleeding of animals play an

the welfare of those animals. For this reason, thsufficient number of personnel, who should be pacompetent and familiar with the recommendationpresent Chapter and their application within the (art. 7.5.1.2).

National legislation will usually outline the qualifications oor handling animals. For example, the German Act specifkeeping, caring for or required to care for an animal . . . knowledge and skills necessary for providing the animal witcare and housing in accordance with its behavioural requirem

Another legislative strategy is to charge the competent aut

body with monitoring and certifying that personnel haknowledge and skills. The German Act authorizes the M

Agriculture and Forestry to issue provisions as necessarknowledge and skills of persons keeping, caring for or reqanimals and the proof of such knowledge and skills of caring for or required to care for animals for comm

(art. 2a(1)). The Croatian Act goes one step further, personnel either be trained or have "equivalent experiencand the competent authority is required to determine how be trained (art. 37(1)–(2)).




Legislation also often includes additional training, certifrequirements for personnel involved in transport or slau

with respect to handling in connection with slaughtrecommends that the competent authority establiscompetence program (art. 7.5.1.2). The Croatian Act involved in animal transportation, but does not do t

personnel (sec. 14).

4.6.2 Handling

As used here, handling refers to the way that animalhousing or pasture in the course of day-to-day managenerally addresses the permitted or prohibited methods

personnel in their physical interactions with animals. Thicertain goads, prods or physical force.

One key consideration is animal behaviour packnowledging that the "behaviour of individual animanimals will vary depending on their breed, sex, temper

the way in which they have been reared and handled," thea set of "behaviour patterns [] which are always presendomestic animals, [and] should be taken into consideratmoving the animals" (art. 7.2.2). These include:

the instinct of animals kept in herds to follow a l

the natural hostility of certain animals towards should accordingly be identified and not mixed;

the desire of some animals to control their perso

the "flight zone" of an animal, which indicates th




According to the OIE recommendations, the best way to en welfare and handler safety is to employ handling methods ththese animal behaviour patterns and the elimination of potfrom the spaces in which animals are moved. One example use an animal's natural "point of balance" at the shoulderstanding behind this point to encourage forward movemen

encourage backward movement (art. 7.2.2.1).

The use of goads and other aids in moving animals shouaccount the animal behaviour patterns listed above. First aOIE Code recommends that goads and other aids be necessary (art. 7.2.8.3). Electric goads should be used situations, not routinely, and should never be used on certa

of animals' bodies. Certain goads are identified as prefuseful, including flags, plastic paddles, canes with a short strap attached, plastic bags and rattles. Other handling mexcessive shouting, loud noises and grasping or lifting anim

wool, skin, horns, tails or other body parts, are specifically OIE Code, except in emergencies.

National legislation, particularly in Europe, often includes son the use of certain goads or handling methods. These teincluded in a list of acts strictly prohibited or defined as coto animals. For example, the Croatian Act prohibits the "devices, aids and tools aimed at controlling behaviourpunishment, including prong collars or training devices invelectric current or chemical substances" (art. 4(1)7). Tcontains a similar provision, prohibiting any method thaequipment, devices or auxiliary means aiming at infb h i b h i h i i " (




Animal feeding can be addressed in animal welfare legilegislation specifically governing animal feeds. Whelegislation addresses feeding, the provisions are framed inrelated to adequate and appropriate food supply. For Council Directive 98/59/EC provides: "Animals must bdiet which is appropriate to their age and species and whsufficient quantity to maintain them in good healthnutritional needs. No animal shall be provided with fmanner, nor shall such food or liquid contain any subcause unnecessary suffering or injury." Similarly, thProtection Act provides that the "type, characteristics, qufodder must be adequate for the species, age and need fodder must be of a characteristic and composition th

satisfy their nutritional need corresponding to the neespecies associates with feeding" (sec. 17(1)).

Some animal welfare legislation prohibits certain feedingconstituting animal cruelty, such as force feeding animathan veterinary necessity. For example, the Croatian An

prohibits giving animals substances "the ingestion of suffering, injury, fear or death" and forcing animals t"unless instructed by a veterinarian to do so for animaunless it is scientifically justified" (art. 4(1)14–15). In sprohibition against force feeding is limited to geese or duforce fed in the preparation of foie gras . For example,Protection Act (1997) states: "It is forbidden to fatten gthe purposes of the fatty degeneration of their livers" (art

At the international level, the OIE Code addresses ani l lf i di (i h




practices, some of which relate to animal welfare. FAO GPractices (GAP) principles specify, for example, that agrishould "minimize risk of infection and disease bymanagement" and ensure that animals receive "adequate feed.42 CAC has also released a Code of Practice on Goodalthough its main purpose is to ensure the "safety of consumption" (sec. 2).

Many countries are adopting increasingly detailed legislatioIn 2009, for example, the European Council of Agricadopted regulations that include: (1) a list of prohibiingredients; (2) a participative process for drafting and updalist of safe feed ingredients; and (3) mandatory labelling

animal feeds. Also in 2009, Malaysia adopted the Feed Bother detailed provisions establishes a Feed Board and requirements. The stated purpose of the Malaysian bill comand animal welfare concerns, aiming "to ensure that feed sarequirement [sic] of animals, is not harmful to animcontaminated so that animals and animal products are

consumption."

Whether in animal welfare legislation or in animal feedregulation of animal feed should serve the purposes of phealth and welfare and human health. Legislative provipermitted and prohibited feed ingredients and additives, erequirements and generally ensure that animals are providesafe and nutritious food. The rules should vary by specieZealand Code of Welfare for Pigs (2005), which states that level of feeding will be best determined by monitoring the bh i d f di di l h h f di




handlers must provide sick or injured animals with veter veterinary consultation must be provided in connectiocertain surgical procedures and drugs on animals.

There is some variation in national legislation on w veterinary treatment must be administered by a veterinarthe Taiwan Republic of China Animal Protection "[Animal owners] must provide necessary medical treatmthat are injured or sick. The medical treatment or surgeon the need for the health or management of the animaby veterinarians" (sec. 11). Similarly, the Latvian Ani(2000) provides: "In cases of disease or trauma of animapurposes, the owner must obtain the opinion of a pra

regarding necessary care and treatment" (sec. 15).

A variation is the German Animal Welfare Law (199requires that vertebrates receive anaesthetic prior to paonly requires that the anaesthetic be administered by acase of warm-blooded vertebrates, amphibians and rep

law also lists a number of common surgical procedurecertain of these be performed by a veterinarian while othout by other persons with the requisite expertise and skill

The determination of whether a veterinarian must be cmade in light of available resources in the country –

veterinarians and their distribution. Animal welfare coalso come into play, after a real assessment of wprocedures really require veterinary expertise. Thus, rarequirement that treatment be administered by a vete

h fl fl ibl h h i




poor housing and management. Other procedures (e.g. brachemical castration and use of growth hormones) are jusbusiness necessity or farm management but are not based o(Prunier et al., 2006).43 Animal welfare legislation ranges frolimiting the use of such non-therapeutic procedures to pelong as they are used to minimize animal suffering.

Commonly employed non-therapeutic surgical proceduresfall into three classes: (1) identification procedures (e.g. earnotching, branding and tattooing); (2) reproductive proceduand vasectomy); and (3) other management procedures (edocking and beak trimming). Non-therapeutic drugs includor sedatives used to control animal behaviour; (2) hormones

agents used to increase growth and otherwise improve (3) antibiotics used either to increase growth or to preventthese non-therapeutic drug treatments arguably improve anexample the inclusion of antibiotics in the diets of newly weto prevent disease, while others – such as growth hormoneentirely by concerns for productivity rather than for animal w

In the UK, a variety of legislative instruments govern therapeutic surgical procedures. The Animal Welfare Act (2offence to "carry out a prohibited procedure", defin"interfere[s] with the sensitive tissues or bone structurotherwise than for the purpose of its medical treatment" (sto this prohibition are detailed in subsidiary legislation,(Permitted Procedures) (England) Regulations (2007) and amendment (2008). Specific procedures for each commonare permitted by the regulations, provided that certain pr

k i i i h i l' i d ff i




"carried out for other than therapeutic or diagnostic pexpert marking of animals in accordance with legal regu

The act then specifies the following prohibited mana(many of which are permitted by the UK regulations):

tail docking;

ear cropping; devocalization;

de-clawing and de-fanging; and

beak trimming.

Exceptions to these prohibitions are permitted "to pre

and "if the intervention is indispensable for the intendefor its protection or for the protection of other animalsother extreme, some laws impose no limitations ontherapeutic surgical procedures but simply require that sgood veterinary practice. For example, the Korean Ani(1991, last revised 2007) states: "Surgery on animals suchorning and docking tails must follow veterinary method

In European animal welfare laws, it is common to prohifor non-therapeutic purposes. The Swedish Animal Pr(1988), for example, states: "Animals must not be . . . giv

where they are necessary for veterinary medical reason Austrian Animal Protection Act also makes it a violation

ingest food or substances, as long as this is not neces veterinary medicine" (sec. 5(12)).

The UK Welfare of Farmed Animals (England) Regulati




Although the UK Regulations permit the use of certainhormones, other European animal welfare legislation progrowth-producing hormones or drugs. For example, thProtection Act states simply: "It is forbidden to give hormones" (art. 12.3). The Croatian Animal Protectionprohibition a bit more loosely, prohibiting the ad"unauthorised stimulants and substances to animals in ordegrowth and weight gain" (art. 4(1)). The word "unauthoallow the use of some stimulants or substances.

4.6.6 Breeding and genetic engineering

Breeding is generally addressed in animal welfare legislation

first concerns the use of breeding methods that in and of tcause suffering to the animals being bred. The second conbreeding techniques or genetic modifications that select fcharacteristics which would result in the birth of animaincreased pain and suffering during their lives. Both issuesEuropean animal welfare legislation and may be of incre

countries engaged in trade of animals, animal products or European partners.

The Austrian Animal Protection Act is an example oaddresses both issues simultaneously, and also extends prohto international trade partners. First, section 22(1) states: "Nbreeding or breeding methods which cause or are likely tothe well-being of animals for a longer period of time or pnot be practised." Next, section 5(2)1 defines as a punishabany person "breeds animals which either directly themd d ill ff f h i ff i i j




"breeding, the object of which is such that it may entaanimals or affect their natural behaviour" (sec. 12). Protection Act requires permission of the competent au"introduction of a previously unapplied technology of astating that it meets the requirements of [the Anim(art. 13.1). Since breeding can also be used to select foranimal welfare, for example by decreasing aggressive socdegree of legislative flexibility may be required.



V

CONCLUSION

This text has set out to provide an overview of the legal animal welfare for animals used in food production, anessential elements of comprehensive animal welfare legislathe text the discussion has offered a variety of legislative different national contexts, set against the backdrop recommendations on animal welfare science and regulation.

The OIE's formal recognition of the scientific connection

welfare and animal health, and the resulting development orecommendations set out in the OIE Code, provide strongrowing consensus on the importance of animal welfare

when the WTO directly addresses the question of animinternational trade law, the OIE recommendations on an

well become binding on WTO members. This suggests th

are members of the OIE, members of the WTO or engagetrade in animal-based or animal-derived food productsincentives to begin national discussions on drafting and enfcapturing animal welfare principles.

There is some scientific evidence that compliance withstandards strengthens both the health of farm animal poputheir resistance to disease outbreaks) and the quality products. Animal welfare science identifies a number of csynergy between animal welfare, animal health and product2009) R dl f h hi l i




against other government policies and with a realistic capacities and abilities to comply with legislative requiron the national context, the essential elements of animaoutlined in this text may well need to be modincrementally or supplemented with economic incenschemes. The answer for each country will depend on locand resources, and legislation should be developed with t



VI

REFERENCES

Broom, D. 2001. Does Present Legislation Help Animal We www.agriculture.de.

Canadian Food Inspection Agency. Animal Welfare in C www.inspection.gc.ca.

Caponera, D.A. 1992. Principles of water law and adminiand International. Rotterdam, The Netherlands, AA Balkem

Commission of the European Communities (European2009. Options for animal welfare labelling and the establishment of a of Reference Centres for the protection and welfare of animals.

Commission of the European Communities (Europea2008. EU Rural Development Policy 2007 – 2013, available at e

DEFRA (Department for Environment, Food and United Kingdom. 2009. Animal Welfare: Research and Develavailable at www.defra.gov.uk.

Delgado, C. 2003. Rising Consumption of Meat and MiCountries has Created a New Food Revolution. WInternational Food Policy Research Institute.

FAO. 2009. Capacity Building to Implement Good P i P 4 1 R ( l il bl f )




Fraser, D., Kharb, R.M., McCrindle, C.M.E., MencCosta, M.J.R., Promchan, K., Song, W., Sundrum, A Whittington, P. 2009. Capacity Building to Implement GPractices: Report of the FAO Expert Meeting . FAO.

Fraser, D. 2008. Understanding Animal Welfare: The SContext. Oxford, Wiley-Blackwell.

Fraser, D. 2006. Animal welfare assurance programs in food pr for assessing the options . Animal Welfare 15: 93–104, availabl

Fraser, D. 2005. Animal welfare and the intensiproduction: An alternative interpretation. FAO, Rom

www.fao.org).

Greig, D. 1976. International law (2nd ed.). London, Butt

Harper, G. & Henson, S. 2001. Consumer Concerns abouthe Impact on Food Choice , EU FAIR CT98-3678, available a

Haupt, C. 2008. Assessing the German Constitution's AniPaper presented at the annual meeting of the Law and Montreal, Quebec, 29 May 2008.

The Independent. 2009. End 'cruel' religious slaughter, say www.independent.co.uk.

Institute for Development Policy and ManagemeManchester. 2008. Evaluación de Impactos de SustenabilidadC i l d l A d d A i ió C d N i ió


J i M 2003 A i d i i i l l (4th



Janis, M. 2003. An introduction to international law (4 Aspen Publishers.

Liphshiz, C. 2009. Haaretz. EU backs legalizing kosher activists' protest, available at www.haaretz.com.

Mitchell, L. 2000. The Economics of Animal Welfare Issues . AReform – The Road Ahead, AER 802:58.

OIE. 2009. Members of the OIE Working Group on 2007/2008, available at www.oie.int.

OIE. 2008. Regional Animal Welfare Strategy: Asia, the Far

available at www.rr-asia.oie.int.

Prunier, A., Bonneau, M. & von Borell, E.H., et al . 2006 welfare consequences of surgical castration in piglets and non-surgical methods. Animal Welfare 2006, 15: 277–289.

Rahman, S.A., Walker, L. & Ricketts, W. 2005. Global pewelfare: Asia, the Far East and Oceania . Revue Scientifique l'Office International des Epizooties 24, 597–612.

Thiermann, A.B. & Babcock, S. 2005. Animal welfare andRevue Scientifique et Technique de l'Office International d747–755.

Welfare Quality. 2009. Aims and objectives Welfare Quality p www.welfarequality.net.


LEGISLATIVE INSTRUMENTS



LEGISLATIVE INSTRUMENTS

Austria Animal Protection Act. 2005.

Belize Slaughter of Animals Act. 2000.

Brazil Constitution. 1988.

Brazil Regulation of Industrial and Health InspectiOrigin. 2005.

Canada Health of Animals Act. 1990.

Chile-European Community Association Agreement

Codex Alimentarius. 2004. CAC/RCP 54-2004.

Costa Rica Animal Welfare Act. 1994.

Council Directive 74/577/EEC on the stunning slaughter [Official Journal L 316, 26.11.1974]

Council Directive 88/166/EEC of 7 March 1988 cojudgment of the Court of Justice in Case 131/86 (anDirective 86/113/EEC of 25 March 1986 laying down for the protection of laying hens kept in battery cage

L 074 of 19.03.1988].

Council Directive 91/629/EEC of 19 November i i d d f h i f l [Of


C il Di ti 98/58/EC f 20 J l 1998 i



Council Directive 98/58/EC of 20 July 1998 concerninof animals kept for farming purposes [Official Journ8.8.1998].

Council Directive 99/74/EC of 19 July 1999 laying dstandards for the protection of laying hens [Official Jou3.8.1999].

Council of Europe, Recommendation Concerning Cat21 Oct. 1988. Standing Committee of the European CoProtection of Animals Kept for Farming Purposes.

Council of Europe, Recommendation Concerning Pig

Dec. 2004. Standing Committee of the European ConProtection of Animals Kept for Farming Purposes.

Council Regulation (EC) No. 1/2005 on the protecduring transport and related operations of 22 Decemb

Journal L 3 of 5.1.2005) with effect from 5.1 2007].

Council Regulation (EC) No. 1099/2009 on the protecat the time of killing of 24 September 2009 [Official Jo18.11.2009].

Croatia Animal Protection Act. 2006.

Estonia Animal Protection Act. 2000.

European convention for the protection of animals duri1965 ETS N 65 (1968 i d i 2003 (ETS N


Germany Animal Welfare Act 1998



Germany Animal Welfare Act. 1998.

Germany Basic Law for the Federal Republic (Grund

India Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act. 1960.

India (Transport of Animals Rules). 1978, as amended

India (Rules on the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals

Israel Animal Protection Law. 1994.

Japan Act of Welfare and Management of Animals. 1

Korea Animal Protection Law. 1991, last revised 2007.

Latvia Animal Protection Act. 2000.

Malaysia Animals Act. 1953, last revised 2006.

Malaysia Feed Bill. 2009.

Manitoba (Canada) Animal Care Regulation 126/98.

Mexico Official Mexican Standard NOM-009-ZProcessing of Meat). 1994.

Mexico Official Mexican Standard NOM-033-Z0Slaughter of Domestic and Wild Animals). 1995.


OIE Resolution No XIV adopted by the Internationah OIE d i i 75 h G l S i 20 25 M 200



OIE Resolution No. XIV, adopted by the Internationathe OIE during its 75th General Session, 20–25 May 200

OIE Resolution XXIV, adopted by the International COIE during its 76th Annual General Session, 25–30 May

OIE Terrestrial Animal Health Code. 2009.

Peru Law on Protection of Domestic Animals and Wilin Captivity. 2000.

Philippines Animal Welfare Act. 1998.

Poland Animal Protection Act. 1997.

Protocol on Protection and Welfare of Animals. Amsterdam Amending the Treaty on European UniEstablishing the European Communities and Related ActsC 340, 10.11 1997].

Puerto Rico Law for the Welfare and Protection of Anim

Punjab (India) Animals Slaughter Control Act. 1963.

Republic of Vanuatu Prevention of Cruelty to Animals A

Serbia Constitution. 2006.

Sweden Animal Protection Ordinance. 1988.


United Kingdom Agriculture (Miscellaneous Provisio( h 34)



United Kingdom Agriculture (Miscellaneous Provisio(ch. 34).

United Kingdom Animal Welfare Act. 2006.

United Kingdom Mutilations (Permitted ProcedRegulations. 2007.

United Kingdom Welfare of Farmed Animals (Eng2007.

United States Humane Methods of Slaughter Act, P1901 et seq. 1958.

Universal Declaration on Animal Welfare (UDAW). 2

World Trade Organization Agreement on the Appland Phytosanitary Measures. 1995.

Zambia Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act. 1921, l

FAO LEGISLATIVE STUDIES

1. Wildlife and national park legislationin Asia, 1971 (E*)

2 Wildlife and national park legislation

20. Legislation protected a

countries 1



2. Wildlife and national park legislationin Latin America, 1971 (E* S*)

3. Vicuña conservation legislation,1971 (E* S*)

4. Legal systems for environmentprotection: Japan, Sweden, United

States, 1973 (E*)5. Agrarian law and judicial systems,1975 (E* F* S*)

6. Agricultural credit legislation inselected developing countries, 1974 (E*)

7. An outline of food law, 1983 (E* F S*)8. Legislación de aguas en América Central,

Caribe y México – Vol. I, 1983 (S)9. A legal and institutional framework

for natural resources management,1983 (E S)

10. Water law in selected Europeancountries (Belgium, England and

Wales, France, Israel, Italy, Spain,Turkey) – Vol. I, 1979 (E* F S*)11. Fundamentos teóricos para una

legislación tributaria en el sectoragropecuario, 1976 (S*)

12. International food standards andnational laws, 1976 (E F*)

13. Derecho agrario y desarrollo agrícola:estado actual y perspectivas enAmérica Latina, 1978 (S*)

14 Legal and institutional responses to

countries, 121. Coastal stat

fishing has FISHLEX dathttp: / /faol

22. Agricultura

1981 (E* S*23. The law of resources, 1

24. Irrigation uthe legislatof certain L1983 (E S)

25. Legislation areas in Afr

26. The UN ConSea: impact1982 (E F)

27. Regional co

legislation –Region), 1928. Plant protec

1984 (E* F S)29. Legislation

small childr30. Water law i

countries (CNetherlandRepublics, Y

31 The role of

36. Legislation controlling theinternational beef and veal trade,1985 (E* F S)

37. La législation forestière aure au

Cap-Vert, en Ethiopie, en Gambie,

51. Pesticide re1995 (E F)

52. Preparing nfor water re

1994 (E)



Cap Vert, en Ethiopie, en Gambie,au Mali et en Mauritanie, auNiger, au Rwanda et au Sénégal,1986 (F)

38. The environmental impactof economic incentives foragricultural production: acomparative law study, 1990 (E F S)

39. Propiedad, tenencia yredistribución de tierras en lalegislación de América Central yMéxico, 1986 (S)

40. International groundwater

resources law, 1986 (E F S)41. Land tenure systems and forest

policy, 1987 (E F)42. Regional compendium of fisheries

legislation (Indian Ocean Region)– Vols I and II, 1987 (E)

43. Pesticide labelling legislation,1988 (E F S)

44. La réforme du droit de la terredans certains pays d’Afriquefrancophone, 1987 (F)

45. Legal aspects of international jointventures in agriculture, 1990 (E)

46. The freshwater-maritime interface:legal and institutional aspects,1990 (E)

47. The regulation of driftnet fishing

1994 (E)53. Evaluation

l’environnedéveloppemétude jurid

54. Legislation and qualityauthorities 1995 (E F)

55. Treaties connavigationawatercours

56. Tendances d

législationsAfrique fra

57. Coastal statforeign fishby the FISHat http: / /fa

58. Readings inwater law,

59. Cadre juridalimentaire

60. Le foncier-e– Fondemeninstitutionn

viable des rrenouvelab

61. Treaties connavigationa

66. Trends in Forestry Law in Americaand Asia, 1998 (E F S)

67. Issues in water law reform, 1999 (E)68. Extracts from international

and regional instruments

81. Administraagua, 2003

82. Administratfisheries law

83. Legislating



gand declarations, and otherauthoritative texts addressing theright to food, 1999 (E/F/S)

69. Élaboration des réglementationsnationales de gestion desressources en eau – Principes etpratiques, 1999 (F)

70. Water rights administration –Experience, issues and guidelines,2001 (E)

71. Fisheries enforcement – Relatedlegal and institutional issues:

national, subregional or regionalperspectives, 2001 (E)

72. Trends in forestry law in Europeand Africa, 2003 (E F)

73. Law and sustainable developmentsince Rio – Legal trends inagriculture and natural resourcemanagement, 2002 (E)

74. Legal trends in wildlifemanagement, 2002 (E S)

75. Mountains and the law– Emerging trends, 2003 (E F S)

75. Rev. 1 Mountains and the law

– Emerging trends, 2006 (E F S)76. Gender and law – Women’s rights

in agriculture, 2002 (E)76. Rev 1 Gender and law – Women’s rights

g gfisheries, 20

84. Land and winterface, 2

85. Intellectual plant varietregimes andnational go

86. Groundwatlaw – Compother legal

87. Perspectivefood legisla

model food88. Legal and in

urban and greening, 2

89. The legal frmanagemeresources, 2

90. Marco analde un sistemde la biotec(biosegurid

91. Directrices legislación a

modelo de para paísesromano-ge

92. Modern wa

96. Development of an analytical toolto assess national Biosecurity legislation, 2007 (E)

97. Designing national pesticide

legislation, 2007 (E S)i l d l d h



g98. International trade rules and the

agriculture sector – Selectedimplementation issues, 2007 (E)

99. Forest fires and the law – A guide– A guideA guidefor national drafters on the FireManagement VoluntaryGuidelines, 2009 (E)

100. Creating legal space for wateruser organizations: transparency,governance and the law, 2009 (E)

101. Law for water management: aguide to concepts and effective

approaches, 2009 (E)102. Case studies on bioenergy policy

and law: options for sustainability,2009 (E)

103. Wildlife law and theempowerment of the poor,2010 (E)

104. Legislative and regulatory optionsfor animal welfare, 2010 (E)

ANNUAL PUBLICATION

A selection of significant and illustrativelaws and regulations governing food andagriculture in FAO Member Nations hasbeen replaced by the FAOLEX database

1 0 4



9 7 8 9 2 5 1 0 6 7 1 1 6

I1907E/1/01.10

ISBN 978-92-5-106711-6 ISSN 1014-6679

L e g i s l a t i v e

a nd r e g ul a t or y o p t i on s f or

a ni m a l w el f a r e

Animal welfare is inextricably linked to animal health, human health and ethical

concerns. Burgeoning international trade is triggering more interest in animal

welfare, in particular in countries wishing to increase trade in animals and foods of

animal origin. This publication reviews the legislative framework for animal welfare,

providing options for policy-makers and legal drafters. The text is set against the

backdrop of developments in animal welfare science and growing international

consensus on the importance of animal welfare.

F A O

fao legislative study no. 104_vapnek_chapman

Documents