NewsNewsNewsNews
Animal Welfare – Public Policy Perspectives
W Viewpoint
ithin the community
individual views and values on
animal welfare cover a wide
spectrum. At one pole we have those who
believe no animal should be used for
pleasure, food, clothing or other human
benefit. People who utilise animals for
pleasure or profit with blatant disregard
for their welfare are at the opposite end.
The broader community view sits
somewhere in between, recognising the
benefits of animals to humans while
seeking to maximise the quality of life
from the animals’ perspective.
Blatant cruelty at the far right of the
spectrum is unacceptable to the
Australian community and cruelty to
animals is a criminal offence. Some
practices that involve cruelty to animals
(such as dog and cock fighting), are
prohibited. Circus acts involving animals
have also been prohibited in some
jurisdictions (ACT) irrespective of
whether there is evidence of cruelty.
Animal use for experimental and teaching
purposes now requires approval by an
animal ethics committee with
community input.
The views and values of veterinarians
are also diverse. While no self-respecting
veterinarian would support blatant
cruelty to animals there are many who
support activities involving hunting,
livestock production and performance
animals with some of these activities
being unacceptable to others.
Managing the Welfare Mix –
the Public Policy Perspective
Government policy on animal welfare
issues will generally reflect the
community expectations. The
community perspective on what
constitutes acceptable animal welfare
practices involves a complex mix of
arguments from emotional, scientific,
environmental, economic, social and
international trade perspectives.
Individuals are influenced by their
knowledge and personal values.
The community will seek to
progressively improve welfare outcomes
so the appropriate balance of the mix
from a community perspective will vary
over time.
Unfortunately there are still many gaps
590 Australian Veterinary Journal Volume 82, No 10, October 2004
AVA President Norm Blackman
in animal welfare science resulting in a
poorly informed community. There is
also limited community awareness of
welfare related economic and trade issues.
Emotional arguments concerning
animal welfare are actively promoted
within the community. Non-scientific
anthropomorphic arguments are used to
heighten the emotional response.
Community views will tend to be based
on this emotional perspective if other
perspectives are not considered.
Organisations promoting these emotional
views generally lack objectivity and rarely
provide support for objective research on
animal welfare issues.
As I see it, the RSPCA approach is
generally based on objective reasoning,
recognises these differing perspectives and
seeks to progressively improve the welfare
of animals over time. This approach is in
line with community expectations and
hence government policy expectations.
The social benefits of the value of
animals as companions and research are
often not well understood within the
community. The use of animals in
medical research and teaching provides
significant health benefits to humans.
In general, organisations representing
livestock producers or those involved
with performance animals understand
that animal welfare and animal health are
intrinsically linked. Both are important
for maximising productivity or
performance. Obviously there are costs to
be considered and these need to be
managed.
From an international trade
perspective animal welfare is becoming
increasingly important. Welfare standards
will soon be pre-requisites for market
access for livestock and livestock products
exported to the EU and other markets in
the near future.
So what is the Role of the
Veterinary Profession?
It has been said that one should never
let the facts get in the way of good public
policy. Too often government policy on
important issues is made on the run with
emotional hype driving the policy and
implementation decisions. I have seen
many examples of public policy on
science-based issues where the position is
scientifically indefensible, effective
implementation is impossible and the
position is still adopted because it is
politically irresistible. Animal welfare is
an area where this can easily occur.
The veterinary profession has a
responsibility to ensure that sound
science is introduced into the public
policy setting process. We should also be
striving for robust public debate on the
various animal welfare issues so that the
final policy position removes the
emotional clutter and is based on a
balanced assessment of the facts. Within
AVA our Policy Council consideration of
welfare issues goes a long way towards
achieving this.
The AVA has a vital role in
communicating animal welfare science
and our policies to the community and
government at all levels. This will ensure
the profession is well represented as the
provider of sound science into the animal
welfare debate.
From the trade perspective it will be
important for regulators in Australia’s
overseas markets to understand our
production systems and how welfare is
managed in this country. The AVA has an
important function here to help inform
and assist our overseas colleagues to
develop and implement animal welfare
policy amongst our trade partner
countries.
Norm Blackman
President
AVA National