Animals, Welfare and the Law

Fundamental Principles for Critical Assessment

Ian A. Robertson

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2015
• ISBN:
  9781136281914
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Law
• Subtopic: Law Theory & Practice
• Index: Law

In this objective, practical and authoritative introductory text the author reveals how the fundamental principles of the human-animal relationship drive the development of animal law.

The book explains the criteria by which the lawful use of animals is determined, and how these criteria impact evolving standards of animal protection and define the responsibilities of people in their interactions with animals. The author identifies 29 key principles which constitute the core knowledge necessary for people involved in debating, assessing, and guiding the evolution of society's national and international rulebook of animal welfare law. The book also considers animal welfare and law in the context of a global market through discussion of common issues such as climate change, biosecurity, food safety and food supply.

Based on successful law courses run by the author and his own expertise as an animal law lecturer, prosecutor and specialist legal adviser, the book combines insights from science, ethics and law to provide an essential understanding of what informs society and the law with regards to animals and their welfare.

1 Introduction

People and animals: one world and a common future

Almost every aspect of human society relies on animals, and an understanding of how the law sets out people’s responsibilities for animals is relevant to anyone who has direct and/or indirect business, professional, or personal interests involving animals.

The lifestyle of almost every individual is touched in some way by animals, and human uses of them, from the food they eat, their clothes, their medicines, to almost every use and interaction involving animals including sports, entertainment, and the companionship many people enjoy with their pets. Humankind’s uses and relationships with the enormous range of species occurs across the globe, affecting national and international, economic, environmental and social interests. One way of recognising the enormous impact that animal-related events have on people is to look at some past animal-related events that have ‘gone wrong’.

Economic, environmental and social impacts

Mentioning ‘mad cow disease’, ‘foot-and-mouth disease’, ‘bird flu’, or ‘swine flu’ is usually enough to have people agreeing that issues of animal-related disease control have a significant impact not just on the animals who suffer from the disease, but also on people and economies. Consider ‘mad cow disease’: Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (CJD) is a degenerative neurological disorder that is incurable and invariably fatal. When the UK announced, on 20 March 1996, that a new variant of CJD¹ had been identified in ten victims, and it could not be ruled out that there was a link with consumption of beef from cattle with bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE), the British beef market collapsed almost overnight. Consumption of beef across the European Union (EU) dropped 11 per cent in 1996, and the BSE crisis cost the EU an estimated US$2.8 billion in subsidies alone to the beef industry,² with the cost to the UK estimated to be in excess of £4 billion.³ That national loss affected the wider UK public, and wasn’t restricted simply to farmers, animal transporters and others whose livelihoods dealt directly with the culled and slaughtered animals.

Disease outbreaks are not the only category of disease-associated risks associated with animals that have enormous potential impacts on people. There are a wide range of ongoing disease categories which warrant constant attention. They include exotic diseases, endemic diseases, re-emergence of controlled diseases, emergence of previously unknown diseases (e.g., novel virus combinations) and human-induced risks which are either inadvertent (e.g., failure in containment systems in laboratories) or deliberate (e.g., bioterrorism). Management of animal-related diseases faces increasing challenges including, for example, increasing globalisation and speed of trade, the development of genetically modified material, the spread of people into new habitats the movement of products, people and animals across national boundaries, climate change, a looming shortage of appropriately trained animal health professionals, and resource constraints that compromise border control and biosecurity efficiencies.⁴

So what does the law have to do with disease control, and the array of other animal-related activities that occur every day, from companionship and entertainment through to agriculture and research? Law has many roles in society, one of which is to manage the risks to the public as it endeavours to balance and prioritise society’s varied, competing and often conflicting interests. In this respect, the law may be viewed as the rule book for managing the risks to the wider public by governing the function, procedure and standards of human–human, as well as human–animal, interactions.

Identifying those who have ‘direct and/or indirect interests involving animals’

The law applies a broad net of responsibility – and potential liability – regarding the treatment of animals. There is a lengthy list of professions, businesses and organisations whose members have a vested interest in matters and responsibilities related to animals. They range from research laboratory scientists to those working in biosecurity and the fashion industry. Less well-known examples include a number of people whose business, professions and personal activities involve areas of ‘private animal law’.⁵ For example, social workers, lawyers, veterinarians and enforcement agencies are among those who are increasingly recognising that animal abuse is a potential indicator of domestic violence. Research demonstrating the link between domestic violence and animal abuse⁶ has consequently raised questions about how to assist professionals (e.g., veterinarians) in fulfilling their guardianship role to animals and people under the care of the professional.⁷

The use of animals and animal products in fashion, furniture, food, entertainment, security, medicine, agriculture and a range of other uses, means that the following list is just a small sample of the people and organisations who – whether they like it or not, and whether they are aware of it or not – are likely to have legal responsibilities and/or an impact upon societal standards of acceptable animal welfare:

• lawyers, policy advisers, politicians, enforcement personnel;

• health professionals including veterinarians, doctors, medical paraprofessionals;

• economists, accountants, financial advisers; and

• scientists representing a range of specialties including biology, food quality, ethics, social services, environmentalists, behaviouralists, psychologists.

Those people who have associated legal responsibilities regarding the standards of care concerning those same animals involved. And where there is responsibility, it is not unusual to identify relevant legal liability as well. The list of people and professions who have interests, and therefore legal responsibilities attached to their direct or indirect involvement with animals extends well beyond what most people would consider ‘obvious’. However, some things are not that simple. The terms of animal ‘rights’, ‘interests’, ‘protection’ and ‘welfare’ do not have the same meaning in terms of the law. Confusion is often caused by incorrect interchanged use of the terms.

Understanding the fundamental principles of animal law is also valuable in predicting the future of animal welfare, and distinguishing realistic initiatives from aspirational ones. That same understanding explains why, in order to protect animals and the public, it is important to ensure that all people who have dealings concerning animals do so in a way that is not only ‘lawful’, but also demonstrates a degree of reliable competence.

Even outdated legislation has value

Some of the referenced law may be viewed as ‘old’, or has already been superseded. For example, the Animal Protection Act 1911, which formed the basis of England’s animal welfare laws for almost a hundred years, was superseded by the Animal Welfare Act 2006. On the other hand, many nations and states around the world have animal welfare laws that remain a hundred years behind that of existing contemporary animal welfare leaders. Law is an evolving record of the human–animal relationship, and even ‘outdated’ law from existing leaders has benefits for the purposes of comparison and contrast of a nation’s progress, or not, in this subject.

In theory, when people are ‘better informed’, they make better decisions. This assumption overlooks the fact that information in isolation, or an inability to actually apply the information, may result in knowledgeable individuals, but not necessarily better decision making that benefits the wider populace.

With this in mind, this book’s chapters begin by posing questions for the reader to consider prior to reading the chapter contents, and subsequently pose additional questions at the end of the chapter as a way for the reader to see if they can identify the relevant animal–human issues, and apply the chapter content to critically assessing those issues. To further develop this question-learn-apply formula, two specific chapters (7 and 8) of this book are dedicated to two of the more contentious uses of animals. The principles used in assessing these two uses (i.e., use of animals in agriculture, and the use of animals in research) can then be applied by the reader in critically assessing almost any other use of animals.

How much do you already know?

There is frequently a difference between what people know, and what they think they know – even if they have considerable previous experience working in the related field.

As a prerequisite to reading the rest of this book, it is highly recommended that the reader answer the questions below. There are only twenty questions. In addition to providing you with a useful outline of the information that you can expect to cover, this will provide you with an idea of your current familiarity with – and assumptions about – the foundational principles of animal welfare and law.

Additionally, the questions provide a useful self-assessment for the reader of what has been learnt by comparing answers to the questions before reading, and their answers after reading the book. Each chapter follows this similar pattern, of providing the reader with questions to consider prior to reading the chapter, and then posing further questions at the end of the chapter which enable the reader to apply the chapter contents in critically assessing relevant animal-related issues.

Who/what dictated how you should view animals?

The starting point of the human–animal relationship

• What were the three key concepts that established past and present cultural/societal attitudes concerning animals? Explain how these concepts have resulted in differing attitudes concerning human responsibilities regarding animals.

• Name five key figures (and their doctrines) who were instrumental in establishing ‘societies’ rules’ regarding humankind’s treatment of animals.

• Name and explain the key moral philosophies that apply to, and explain, the enduring conflicts of opinion about human responsibilities regarding animals.

• Using examples, identify which of these philosophies underpin the law.

• Explain the role of ‘law’ in animal welfare, and the human–animal relationship.

Can you recognise historical informants in contemporary law?

• By reference to contemporary animal welfare law, demonstrate where the foundational concepts (regarding the human–animal relationship) have been translated and codified in to law (or not)?

• Define and distinguish (with reference to relevant authority) ‘the animal’ and the ‘legal animal’.

• Name and explain the three elements of ‘animal law’. To illustrate your answer, apply these three elements to at least five uses of animals in human society.

• What are the four key words used in contemporary animal welfare law that are central to the legal definition of animal welfare? Using these four words, provide the legal definition of ‘animal welfare’ in one line. Define and distinguish each of the identified four key words.

• Name the six elements/owner-rights that legally defi...

Table of contents

• Cover Page
• Animals, Welfare and the Law
• Title
• Copyright
• Contents
• Preface
• Twenty-Nine Fundamental Principles of Animal Welfare Law
• 1 Introduction
• PART I: Animal Welfare and the Need for a Critical Perspective
• PART II: The Foundational Principles of Animal Welfare Law
• PART III: Putting the Principles and Law into Practice
• Suggested Key Further Reading
• Index