« Previous | Contents | Next »
Listen
ANALYSIS OF RESPONSES TO THE CONSULTATION DOCUMENT 'PROPOSALS TO REVISE EXISTING ANIMAL WELFARE LEGISLATION'
(3) Abandonment
Paragraph 13 of the consultation document stated: It is important that proper provision should be made for the welfare of an animal by its owner or keeper and that failure to do so can lead to very serious welfare problems. We are interested in views on whether a specific offence should be created to deal with people who abandon animals or introduce captive animals to the wild without first taking due regard to their welfare.
Overview
79 responses were received on this subject. Responders included 16 local authorities and their representative organisation, LACORS; two police forces and their representative organisation, ACPOS; 8 canine organisations (and 1 business); 3 feline organisations; 2 equine organisations; 9 animal welfare organisations; 2 pet organisations; 4 vet organisations; 8 rural and agricultural organisations (and 1 business); 18 individuals also responded.
Views on the proposal
Most responders agreed that a specific offence relating to the abandonment of animals should be introduced.
Four organisations suggested an alternative approach. All their responses were based on the same approach (local authorities, their representative body and a police force).
One organisation (The Home of Rest for Horses), a business (Mr Bug Ltd) and two individuals suggested that a specific offence was not required.
One organisation asked for the status quo to be retained. (Ornamental Aquatic Trade Association)
Eight organisations (ACTA, Animal Concern, BVA Scottish Branch, NEWC, RCVS, Scottish Centre for Animal Welfare Studies, Scottish Gamekeepers Association and WAG), one business (Scotlean Pigs), and 4 individuals did not state a view, but commented on aspects of the proposals.
Two organisations (RCVS and Canine Concern Scotland Trust) and a business (Scotlean Pigs) considered that the need for the offence should be considered in light of drafting considerations.
Reasons for disagreement with the proposals or alternatives to it
Responders gave a number of reasons why they did not agree with the proposal. They also suggested how abandonment should be dealt with under the proposed legislation:
(1) The status quo
One organisation thought that the current legislation was satisfactory:
(2) Alternative proposals
Four responders considered that the offence of abandonment could be dealt with in an alternative way to that suggested in the proposals:
Should have three general offences to cover all aspects of welfare i.e. (1) causing or permitting unnecessary suffering (as in the Protection of Animals (Scotland) Act 1912); (2) causing or permitting unnecessary distress (as in the Agriculture (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1968; (3) keeping animals in manner or doing anything likely to cause unnecessary suffering or distress - new provision (similar to the provision in the Welfare of Animals (Transport) Order 1997 - article 4(1). These general offences could be used to address even temporary abandonment of animals, releasing of captive animals to the wild, or the re-location of wild animals if their welfare is or likely to be compromised. General charges then become known to Procurators Fiscal and they may then be happier to pursue the case. (North Lanarkshire Council, Highland Council, LACORS, Central Scotland Police)
(3) Reasons why the proposal is not needed
Two responders suggested why they considered that there should not be a specific offence for abandonment:
It is submitted that abandonment need not continue to be expressed as a specific offence of cruelty. It is the general rule that an animal must have suffered before an offence of cruelty can be committed. The exception is in relation to abandoned animals, when it is sufficient to demonstrate that the circumstances were
likely to cause the animal unnecessary suffering (a similar test is applied in respect of animals at markets, during commercial transport, and in the context of wild mammals). At a practical level, this avoids difficult decisions for the prosecution in assessing when an animal's situation has crossed the line from inadequate to unlawful, especially in cases of neglect where its condition and environment may deteriorate gradually over a period of time. More significantly, this prospective test meets the principle which underlies its legislation, namely the
protection of animals. It is ironic that, in most circumstances where cruelty is alleged, the law is powerless to intervene until an animal is actually suffering. Prior to that point, prevention is entirely dependent upon persuasion and encouragement. (Mr Mike Radford)
A specific offence of abandonment would no longer be appropriate where an animal has suffered unnecessarily, and where the legislation specifies that where an animal is left unattended in circumstances where it is likely to suffer unnecessarily amounts to a contravention of the duty to ensure good welfare. (Mr Mike Radford)
For many captive animals, release into the wild is as much an end to their lives as neglect, as they lack the necessary survival skills. (Mr Bug Ltd)
(4) Need to consider drafting issues
Four responders considered that the need for the offence should be considered in the light of drafting considerations:
The creation of a specific offence, rather than the relying on a general duty of care, is a drafting question. (RCVS)
Does not require to be a separate offence provided the blanket legislation is sufficient to demonstrate actual suffering. (The Home of Rest for Horses)
Not sure whether there should be a specific offence or whether it should be covered under the offence of compromising the animal's welfare. (Canine Concern Scotland Trust)
Whether creation of a separate legal offence is needed is largely a matter of law. (Scotlean Pigs)
Agreement with the proposals
Responders noted their support of the proposal by: (1) expressing the extent of their support for the proposals, (2) noting their attitudes towards abandonment; (3) outlining the problems caused by abandonment, (4) listing reasons why the proposal was needed, (5) stating the advantages that would be brought about if the proposal was introduced:
(1) The extent of the support for the proposals
A number of the organisations which supported the proposal recorded the extent of their support. Not only did they express this as support but as welcome for the proposal:
Support. (NFU Scotland, Scottish Association for Country Sports, Scottish SPCA)
Strongly support. (Scottish SPCA)
Would be desirable. (Glasgow City Council)
Would be welcomed. (East Ayrshire Council)
Is welcomed. (East Lothian Council, LACORS, Central Scotland Police)
Welcome. (ACPOS, Perth and Kinross Council)
A welcomed offence for animal sanctuaries, rescue centres and other animal charities. (Scottish Kennel Club)
(2) Attitudes towards abandonment
Two responders stated their attitudes towards the abandonment of animals. Each one did not consider that it was an acceptable practice:
Animal owners leaving their stock to look after themselves is not acceptable under any circumstances. (BVA Scottish Branch)
Abandoning animals is similar to fly tipping - people will continue to do it until there is a better alternative or until the likelihood and penalty for being caught is too high. (Avon (Lanarkshire) Dog Agility Club)
Is a very important issue for wild animals as well as domestic ones. (Skye Environment Centre)
(3) Problems caused by abandonment
Responders cited a range of problems caused by abandonment. They included animal welfare problems, the need for animal welfare organisations to take care of animals, and environmental problems:
Can lead to very serious welfare problems. (National Working Terrier Federation, The Royal Institute of Chartered Surveyors in Scotland)
Can and does have physical and emotional damage to the animals concerned. (individual)
May significantly and adversely affect the welfare of a dog. (Dogs Trust)
Causes much suffering and sometimes life long ill-health and death. (Cat Action Trust)
Much work arises from the abandonment of animals. (Cat Action Trust)
The abandoning of pregnant and non-neutered animals leads to an increase in the feral/stray population, causing not only hardship and distress to the animals themselves, but increasing environmental health problems as they scavenge for food in bin areas etc. (Catflap)
Such actions, not only place animals introduced to the wild at a significant risk to their own health and welfare, but these animals also provide a risk to the health and welfare of animals in the environment in which they are placed. For example, there are periodic reports of released large cats causing serious damage to farm sheep. (Scottish Agricultural College)
(4) The need for the proposal
A number of responders noted reasons why they considered that it was important that there should be a specific offence relating to abandonment. They suggested that legislation should continue to be made available (and also be strengthened). They also cited cases where animals had been abandoned and welfare problems caused by abandonment:
There has been legislation on different aspects of abandonment in place for over 40 years now, and there should continue to be specific offences relating to those who abandon animals. (BASC Scotland, Aberdeenshire Council)
There is a need to make the law tougher. (Grampian Animal Defence League)
It has been too easy for individuals to abandon animals leaving many of the welfare organisations frustrated at the impact they may have on the animals. (WAG)
Organisations such as Catflap are frequently called upon to deal with 'strays' who are quite clearly abandoned domestic pets, or who have been left behind when their owners move away. (Catflap)
The dumping of cats has been a considerable problem around Inverness. They are dumped when the kittens get too big, or when the owners go on holiday. There is also a problem with cats being put out at night, and this causes a serious problem for ground nesting birds. (individual)
Many current cases of abandonment are dealt with by the Scottish SPCA. They involve animals (usually dogs) left in houses after a tenant has moved out, returning intermittently to collect mail and leave food for the dog. It might not be considered abandonment under current legislation, as long as the occasional visits continue. In 2003, the Scottish SPCA call centre received 1,010 calls regarding animals abandoned in buildings; 38 calls regarding dogs shut in cars; and approximately 60 calls regarding animals apparently dumped in various locations. (Scottish SPCA)
We accept that there are dogs that will escape no matter what provisions you may make but there are others who are 'latch key' dogs and the owners should not be allowed to have dogs returned under certain criteria imposed within legislation. (WAG)
Local authorities are concerned about the number of stray dogs and feral cats neglected or abandoned by their owners. (North Ayrshire Council)
Complaints are received about pet animals left unattended. It can be extremely difficult to determine if they have been abandoned. (Animal Concern)
Several cases of horses have been abandoned or turned out on moorland to run with existing populations. This has caused considerable problems for the 'rescuing' authorities. (individual)
Cases of stray and abandoned horses seem to be increasing. The options and responsibilities available to the police and others finding abandoned horses on their land are not clear. This situation also applies to livery yards. The power given to a landowner to impound for 14 days and then to sell at public auction is only of value to those with the time and facilities to do so. Many landowners, especially in suburban areas have neither the facilities or the knowledge to do this. (NEWC)
There is evidence that large numbers of greyhounds cannot be traced once their all too short racing careers are over. (Dogs Trust)
There are many ill-founded but well meaning releases into the wild. (The Federation of Zoological Gardens of Great Britain and Ireland)
The largest introduction of animals to the wild is undertaken each summer and autumn by gamekeepers with respect to either partridges or pheasants (those stocking lochs and lakes with salmonids and other fish are dealing with larger numbers than gamekeepers are). (BASC Scotland)
If gamekeepers release into an area a number of birds that is significantly over the carrying capacity of that area, without food, then they are introducing captive animals into the wild without first taking due regard to their welfare. They are effectively abandoning farmed pheasants. The large-scale release of captive-bred pheasants should be looked at more closely. If pheasants are given support they are clearly still being farmed and should be treated as such under legislation. However, this only delays the issue of abandonment until the end of the season. (League Against Cruel Sports)
We believe that less than 50 per cent of pheasants that survive the shooting season remain alive three months after feeding has stopped. The League believes that reared pheasants are currently being farmed well beyond their 'release dates' and are therefore not wild. The provision of feed, continuing predator control and game keeping all clearly show that released pheasants are farmed to the end of the shooting season. We therefore believe that they should continue to fall under the terms of the Agriculture (Miscellaneous) Act and should not be regarded as wild. If there is insufficient feed and the reared animals fail to survive in reasonable numbers, we believe that this should constitute evidence of abandonment. For your information, we believe that 50 per cent of animals that survive the shooting season remain alive 3 months after feeding has stopped. We believe that a 50 per cent mortality provides clear evidence that the animals are being abandoned with insufficient resources being available to sustain them in the wild. If there is insufficient feed and the reared animals fail to survive in reasonable numbers, we believe that should constitute evidence of abandonment. (League Against Cruel Sports)
(5) Advantages of introducing the proposal
A small number of responders considered that the proposal had a number of benefits. They believed that it reinforced other proposals in the consultation, it would promote animal welfare and the responsibility of animal keepers and owners:
It would reinforce the obligation to ensure good welfare. (North Ayrshire Council)
It would serve as a deterrent measure to those who wilfully disregard their responsibilities once the usefulness of an animal has elapsed. (City of Edinburgh Council)
It would enable authorities to deal more effectively with irresponsible owners or keepers. (West Lothian Council)
It would make it easier to determine the number of charges preferred and the level of conviction. (East Ayrshire Council)
The current legislation: issues
Two responders remarked on how the current legislation could be used to deal with cases of abandonment. They noted both the problems and benefits of this legislation:
The Cruelty to Animals Act 1960 has not been without its difficulties. The concept of temporary abandonment is confusing. English courts have ruled that (unlike other offences of cruelty), intention is a constituent of the office, thereby undermining its effectiveness. (Mr Mike Radford)
The benefit of the current legislation is that the actual abandonment is an offence, providing grounds for intervention before the animal has had to suffer unnecessarily. By invoking the Cruelty to Animals Act 1960, Scottish SPCA Inspectors can obtain the co-operation of police officers to force entry to premises where animals have been abandoned and are at risk of suffering. In the case of dogs left in cars, temperatures on warm days can reach dangerous levels within a very short time, and it is important to be able to act quickly. (Scottish SPCA)
Comments on aspects of the proposal
Responders made comments on a range of aspects of the proposal. These were: (1) the definition of abandonment, (2) the time period which constitutes abandonment, (3) the nature of abandonment, (4) the nature of the offence of abandonment, (5) native and non-native species and their release into the wild, (6) traceability of animals that have been abandoned, (7) administrative procedures, and (8) penalties for the offence of abandonment:
(1) The definition of abandonment
Responders noted a number of issues which should be considered in developing a definition of abandonment. They suggested that there should be a proper definition and proposed a number of definitions that could be used. Some of these referred to specific species of animals:
Abandonment needs to be properly defined. (Glasgow City Council, Animal Concern, West Lothian Animal Rights and Veggies, ACTA)
Definitions should be made with advice from veterinary surgeons and animal welfare organisations. (individual)
Abandonment of animals should be species specific. (Animal Concern, 3 individuals)
The definition of abandonment will be crucial as it could include dog owners who allow their dogs to stray often. This would assist us in carrying out our duties with regard to the control of stray dogs and we would welcome its introduction. (South Ayrshire Council)
If a specific offence was to be included in the bill, the term 'abandonment' should be replaced by 'leaving unattended'. (Mr Mike Radford)
Need to define 'due regard'. (individual)
(2) The time period which constitutes abandonment
Responders believed that there was a need to define the time period that would constitute abandonment. This was expressed through periods when it was unacceptable to leave different species of animals unattended:
It would be helpful if the new legislation could define periods beyond which it is unacceptable to leave an animal, in specific circumstances. (Scottish SPCA)
For farm animals it would be sensible to define maximum periods between checks on stock. This would vary as to the type of animal, how it is being kept, time of year and weather conditions. Dairy cattle have to be milked at least twice a day while beef cattle on good summer grazing with a secure water supply may not need to be inspected more than once every few days. (Animal Concern)
Animals in intensive or semi-intensive systems … should be inspected several times a day to ensure injured animals are humanely destroyed or given veterinary treatment, morts removed to minimise disease risk and cannibalism and system controls are maintaining a survivable environment. (Animal Concern)
The greatest difficulty is going to be how to determine when sheep have been abandoned or not. Over recent years we have dealt with many cases of sheep left to their own devices both on the hill and when gathered on lower ground. (Animal Concern)
As long as animals have access to water and food, it is not welfare unfriendly to leave a dog unattended for a period of say as long as 18 hours or a cat for 24, 48 hours and it could be okay to leave other animals such as pet fish or reptiles for longer periods (again so long as they have access to food and water and are maintained in the right environment). (Animal Concern)
Cruel to leave an animal alone for extended periods of time even with sufficient food and water. (2 individuals)
(3) The nature of abandonment
Responders suggested a number of definitions of abandonment. They considered that it was a complex concept caused by a number of factors such as domestic and economic issues:
Total disregard of the duty to ensure good welfare. (individual)
An extreme example of failure in the duty to provide adequately for animals. (The Home of Rest for Horses)
'Abandonment' is not a one size fits all approach. (individual)
Animals are abandoned for a number of reasons. (BVA Scottish Branch, Avon (Lanarkshire) Dog Agility Club)
Animals can be left deliberately because they have outlived the space initially provided, to the release of wild animals in the hope that they can fend for themselves. Another form includes the failure to look after properly, for example sheep, cattle or goats by not providing food or adequate shelter. (BVA Scottish Branch)
Many are abandoned because it is inconvenient or too costly for the keeper to 'pass' the animal onto someone else. The simple case of a dog no longer wanted would cost the owner up to £25 to leave it at a rescue shelter, plus transporting the animal to the shelter all assuming the shelter had room. The owner will find it quicker, cheaper and less hassle to turn the animal out into the street or worse leave it in the house for the next tenant to deal with, whenever they may show up! (Avon (Lanarkshire) Dog Agility Club)
(4) The nature of the offence of abandonment
The scope of the offence was considered by a number of responders. They suggested a range of species and activities that should be included in the offence:
Should be a specific offence which should cover the abandonment of dogs which end up as strays to be dealt with by local authorities. (East Ayrshire Council)
Should include the 'latch key' animals turned out daily to fend for themselves. (Scottish Kennel Club)
The offence should go 'hand in hand' with viable options to abandonment and enforcement. (Avon (Lanarkshire) Dog Agility Club)
The release of an animal into the wild that is not truly able to cope with the hazards of living in the environment is inappropriate, as is releasing an animal that is not equipped to cope with any new stimuli. (PDSA)
Should equally relate to releasing captive animals into the wild or the relocation to the wild or the relocation of wild animals if their welfare is to be compromised. (Aberdeenshire Council)
It should be recognised as an offence under the Abandonment of Animals Act to abandon pheasants at the end of the shooting season. If there are insufficient food resources in the habitat, and the released animals fail to survive in reasonable numbers, we believe this should constitute evidence of abandonment. (League Against Cruel Sports)
It should be an offence not to have due regard to the welfare of the wildlife which may be affected by the release of the captive animal. (Stirling Council)
Legislation should have regard to the releasing of rehabilitated injured animals and the release of captive bred endangered species for re-stocking or re-introduction. (Aberdeenshire Council, Central Scotland Police)
(5) Native and non-native species and their release into the wild
The above section noted the release of captive or wild animals into the wild and the need to carefully monitor the release of these animals. Their release raised a number of concerns. These included the need to release rehabilitated animals with care and regard to their environment:
If a person abandons or releases a domesticated, or non-native animal to the wild, they
cannot be giving due regard to its welfare (or ecological responsibilities). People releasing captive native wild animals after rehabilitation, or captive bread native animals into endangered populations can take due regard for the animal's welfare. (Scottish Centre for Animal Welfare Studies)
If the release of non-indigenous species is not covered elsewhere, it should be covered in proposed legislation - this can obviously have dramatic effects on the nature ecosystem. (The release of non-indigenous species is covered in the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981). (North Lanarkshire Council, LACORS)
The general biodiversity of the area into which such a release is made should be considered. … The Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 covers the release of non-native animals. There are many examples where releasing native animals into new areas causes untold ecological damage, as evidenced by the release of hedgehogs on the Uists. Such a release was not covered by the Act, but the consequences were just as serious as had the animal been a non-native species. (ACPOS)
Captive to wild animal release must be undertaken with care and by experts in the species to be released. There are very few successful cases of captive release and the advice of proven experts in this field should be sought and heeded in every case. Perhaps a list of these experts could be made available to all private animal owners. (PAWSI)
(6) Traceability of animals that have been abandoned
A number of responders noted that it may be difficult to trace the ownership of animals that had been abandoned. They suggested how these animals could be more easily traced. These included licensing, microchipping, and neutering of pets:
There would be difficulty in identifying and tracing the owner and it may not be possible to prove who the owner was. (Falkirk Council, South Ayrshire Council, Scottish Kennel Club, Scottish Centre for Animal Welfare Studies, individual)
Provision would only be of worth if the ownership of an animal could be traced. (East Lothian Council)
Identification would be difficult unless there was a system to indicate previous ownership. (Scottish Centre for Animal Welfare Studies)
The legislation must also tighten up on how abandonment/lost animals are dealt with where an owner is not traceable. There is some confusion currently of the roles and responsibilities for dealing with such incidents mainly because of the practical difficulties involved in dealing with animals and, in particular, livestock. The obligations of The Animals (Scotland) Act 1987, Section 3, Paragraph 2 are rather obscure and fraught with difficulties for police officers and this issue needs to be looked at carefully not least on health and safety grounds. (LACORS, Central Scotland Police)
There should be a way of keeping a database of addresses to record the details of the pet. (individual)
A step in the right direction may be to insist all animals are 'registered' to their owner/keeper. (Avon (Lanarkshire) Dog Agility Club)
Dog and Cat licences should be introduced - although the workload on local authorities may prove to be too much. (PAWSI)
A certificate of ownership should be provided similar to that of the old dog licence. (Greyhound Action Scotland)
This may require the introduction of compulsory identification microchipping of all domesticated animals. (East Lothian Council, Greyhound Action Scotland)
In the case of racing greyhounds, it is highly recommended that this becomes a statutory requirement for all racing greyhounds to be chipped in addition to their ear marks. (Greyhound Action Scotland)
To make this work, all animals in human care would have to be microchipped (or something similar) to prove ownership. This would work fine for law abiding people who go to the expense involved in such a procedure but falls flat when people don't How do you prove who owns the cat? (Scottish Gamekeepers Association)
To reduce the problem of abandoned pets, cats and dogs should be neutered. As unwanted puppies and kittens are the most abandoned animals, all animal owners, not licensed as breeders, should have their dogs and cats neutered. This may prove too difficult to enforce. (PAWSI)
Major control on the stray dog/feral cat population would be to promote/require/
identify chipping of all dogs and cats and the neutering/spaying of animals not intended for breeding purposes. (North Ayrshire Council)
To reduce the current problem of abandoned dogs they should be spayed or neutered unless there are special reasons for not doing so. Breeding should only be done under licence from a new statutory body. All dogs/bitches not under aforesaid licence to breed should be neutered unless there is proper medical or behavioural reasons, evidence of which should be provided in the form of veterinary or trainer documentation. In the case of racing greyhounds, further control needs to be put in place, particularly with the importation of dogs from outwith Scotland. (Greyhound Action Scotland)
(7) Administrative procedures
A small number of responders, largely local authorities, commented on the difficulties that would be involved in the collection of evidence to bring a case of abandonment to a court in Scotland. They also suggested the need for guidelines which would include information on responsibilities of management of stray animals:
In certain circumstances the gathering of appropriate criminal evidence with which to secure a conviction may be difficult. Many abandonment problems that arise are not wilful i.e. individuals who are struck down by ill health or mental illness and therefore are no longer in a position to provide adequate care for their pet. (City of Edinburgh Council)
There are obvious difficulties in providing court proceedings. (South Ayrshire Council)
Clear procedures should be in place regarding who is responsible for the care and the cost of looking after abandoned animals. (South Ayrshire Council)
There needs to be a specific provision for the management of stray horses and a clear statement of where the responsibility falls. (NEWC)
There is need for specific guidance. (Glasgow City Council)
(8) Penalties for the offence of abandonment
Responders suggested that the offence should carry a specific penalty and there should be specific levels of penalties set. They considered that there should be a high level of sentencing and a level of penalties which would be dependent on the nature of the offence:
Should be a specific offence with high sentencing. (Grampian Animal Defence League)
Should carry a specific penalty under the law. (individual)
A stiff penalty must also accompany the offence. (Catflap)
Perpetrators should be dealt with in a consistent manner. (West Lothian Animal Rights and Veggies)
Aggravated abandonment - where death or injury are intended e.g. by drowning or abandonment in dangerous environments - should be a higher level of offence. This pre-supposes that ownership can be determined and the need for compulsory registration of dogs should be considered in terms of cost and practicality. (Kirkwall Dog Training Club)
Stronger penalties should be placed upon those perpetrators who release their animals into the wild, and a ban on keeping pets should be properly enforced and reviewed. Tougher penalties should be implemented and enforced. (CARROT)
Anyone convicted of abandoning or dumping animals should be banned for life from keeping any animal again and compliance with the ban should be strictly checked and enforced. The same penalty should be applied to anyone convicted of deliberately releasing a domesticated animal which is unable to fend for itself, into the wild i.e. pet bird, rabbit, reptile. (Grampian Animal Defence League)
« Previous | Contents | Next »