January 6th, 2012 - Animal Welfare Policy for S.A.

TOWARDS AN ANIMAL WELFARE POLICY FOR SOUTH AFRICA.

Why We Urgently Need a Policy to Govern Human-Animal Interactions
Animal Welfare – The Way Forward

By: -

Chris Mercer LLB
(Retired Advocate of the High Courts of Zimbabwe and Botswana, Co-author of the book Kalahari Dream and Director of the Campaign Against Canned Hunting.)

&

Janice H. Cox MBA
(Director of World Animal Net, International Management Consultant: Animal Welfare & Development. Projects included research and support to the OIE’s Southern African representation on the development of the Regional Animal Welfare Strategy.)

Paper1: WHY DO WE URGENTLY NEED AN ANIMAL WELFARE POLICY?

Because we really have no choice. The reasons are simply overwhelming. To ignore animal welfare is to ignore public health, an increasingly violent society, public opinion, economic benefits, international markets, tourism and consumer demand. Failure to stamp out animal cruelty will prejudice our ability to raise international finance for development; lead to increasing boycott of S.A. produce, products and services; aggravate unemployment; and harm our national image.
Ignoring animal welfare will threaten the integrity of the Constitution and weaken our efforts to preserve our national heritage and culture.
Failure to recognise and take into account the sentience of animals will violate moral standards spelled out by Mahatma Ghandi and adopted by our Parliament. We will be left behind: isolated, as more progressive countries, well aware of the adverse consequences of continuing to treat animals as mere property, move towards establishing a new, more caring international community, through organisations such as the O.I.E, F.A.O, I.F.C, the European Union, the Council of Europe, C.I.T.E.S. and U.D.A.W.

Let us examine some of these reasons more closely, and classify them as practical, constitutional, moral and international.

1. PRACTICAL REASONS
a) Public opinion
Public opinion demands an end to animal cruelty. Active animal welfare organisations may be small in South Africa, but they represent a huge amorphous sector of the community, something of which business interests are well aware; and addressing positively.
Polls in the developed world consistently show that more than 80% of populations are opposed to any kind of cruelty to animals. Websites are one indication of this vast pool of compassion: www.worldanimal.net lists 17,000 animal welfare organisations in 170 countries. This is a huge constituency. Why would South Africa want to offend such a large body of citizens, clients, customers, tourists and investors?
The Internet is a force for democracy which is unprecedented in human history. The old days where cruelty to animals could take place out of sight - and therefore out of mind - are gone forever. Instead, concerned citizens have the power to mobilise millions at the touch of a button. The Arab Spring and other areas of growing social unrest have shown how effective modern digital communications have been in airing grievances and uniting people against injustice.
The point is this, that in a global economy the attitudes of consumers, both local and foreign; of customers, and of foreign tourists, are important to the well being of all South Africans and especially to the growing ranks of the unemployed in S.A.

b) Public Health
Animals and humans co-exist. What affects one will sooner or later affect the other. An animal in a poor state of welfare is susceptible to disease as its immunity is compromised. A diseased animal is a source of disease to humans, sometimes with disastrous global effects, e.g. Avian ‘flu, SARS.
All it takes is for one country to flout concerns for animal welfare, and the next tragic, costly global pandemic is being incubated in over-crowded cages and unhygienic breeding conditions.

c) Violence
A wealth of research has proved beyond doubt the link between violence towards animals and violence to people. Almost all serial killers begin by torturing animals for fun and then move on to torturing and killing humans for fun. South Africa is one of the most violent nations on earth. Here are comments made in Parliament by Deputy Speaker, Mrs Gwen Nkabinde:-
“ Satyagraha, like ubuntu, was about love and compassion.
The message of non-violence was now needed more than ever, said Mahlangu­Nkabinde. The critical challenges were rising incidents of aggression, violence,
war and destruction.
She said schools were no longer safe, homes had to be barricaded, streets were danger-
ous and countries were at war. Anger and competition were at the base of violence.
In this situation it becomes even more imperative for us to discuss the need for invoking our humanistic philosophies.”
On Tuesday 5th September 2006, the SA Parliament adopted the motion to introduce the values of ubuntu in to the school syllabus, and to make a caring society to found our cultural and political values.
Any form of violence towards animals is therefore a direct threat to the safety and security of humans in society.

d) Economics
The influence of animal welfare in commerce is so great that corporations in retail and agri-business are adopting innovative policies to profit from this consumer demand and protect themselves from potential consumer backlash.
A healthy, content livestock animal grows faster and is more disease-resistant. So it makes business sense to spend money on improving the living conditions of the animals.
For example, retail giants such as Woolworths will only stock badger-friendly honey. Since Woolies pays more for honey, it means that honey producers who do not conform to its animal welfare specifications will be excluded from the higher prices and forced to sell their honey cheaper down the market chain. Woolies is also the leader in the marketing of free range animal products, and other supermarkets are now following this lead.
Food exporters are also responding to consumer demand in overseas markets, by uplifting standards of animal care. They realise very well how vulnerable they are to a consumer boycott.
Because animal welfare is such an important issue, foreign investors are increasingly insisting upon higher standards of care for animals even in indirectly related fields. For example, the International Finance Corporation (IFC) (the private sector arm of the World Bank Group), has also included animal welfare within its remit. It has a Good Practice Note (GPN 2006) on Animal Welfare in Livestock Operations. This states that the IFC will ‘consider animal welfare issues when selecting and funding projects and will seek ways to promote systems that positively impact animal welfare’. The note states that the main reason why animal welfare is important is for the animal themselves – and it goes on to recognise that animals are sentient beings.

The Note also states that: ‘Animal welfare is being addressed not only by governmental agencies and academic institutions, but by a growing number of professionals at different locations in the agricultural supply chain. A number of regional and global initiatives have therefore emerged to provide guidance on acceptable practices to actors ranging from individuals caring for animals on farms to large-scale commercial enterprises providing animal-based products from different livestock systems. Many corporate groups - from producers to retailers - are also acknowledging social and environmental responsibilities and pursuing programmes designed to enhance animal welfare’.

Higher animal welfare standards are increasingly seen to be a prerequisite to enhancing business efficiency and profitability, satisfying international markets and meeting consumer expectations.

2. CONSTITUTIONAL REASONS
When ordinary decent people are upset by witnessing or knowing about, cruelty to animals, their dignity and well-being is offended. Thus the cruelty is actually felt, vicariously, by compassionate citizens. Although the position will be clearer once the sentience of animals has been expressly recognised in the Constitution, many lawyers feel that subjecting compassionate citizens to human action that offends their dignity and emotional well-being, is unconstitutional and therefore unlawful.
Considering:

1. The supremacy of the Constitution;
2. The duty of the state to respect, protect, promote and fulfil the rights in the Bill of Rights;
3. The relevance to any policy on animals of the constitutionally guaranteed rights to human dignity, psychological integrity, freedom from violence, the right to associate freely, the right to an environment which is not harmful to health and well-being, the rights to property and not to be expropriated without compensation, and the paramount nature of the best interests of children;
4. The sentient nature of all animals, whether wild or domesticated;
5. The way in which humans interact with animals both domestic and wild: our historical and social relationship with them; the way in which they enrich people’s lives; and the problems that can be caused to humans and human settlements when their interests and natures are not properly taken into account by humans;
6. The outdated ethos and principles informing the existing legislation relating to animals;
7. The need to align all legislation concerning animals with the values and principles of the Constitution;
8. The need to articulate an appropriate policy on animals to inform and guide the public administration and lawmakers in all spheres of government.

It is proposed that all policy and laws regarding animals:

1. Adopt a humane, non-violent, anti-cruelty approach to the treatment of animals consonant with respect for and promotion of all the rights set out in note 3 above;
2. Recognize animals as sentient beings whose treatment by humans reflects the nature of the value system in place in society;
3. Encourage best practice in relation to the interests of animals and those who care for and own them in a manner which promotes and empowers socio-economic progress;
4. Reverse the unconstitutional features of out-dated existing legislation;
5. Create a regimen in which all practices in conflict with the humane treatment of animals are eliminated and reinforce this by way of humane education;
6. Regulate the interaction between humans and animals in a manner which promotes the values and principles of the Constitution.

As can be seen in the next paragraph, the Joint Constitutional Review Committee has already involved itself with the issue of animal ethics, and the sentience of animals. It will take a final decision once this issue has been further advanced by government. It is vital that this government action is based on a clear policy analysis of the situation, and a clear proactive strategy, which will in turn ensure a full and considered decision by the Constitutional Review Committee.

3. MORAL REASONS
As mentioned above, on Tuesday 5th September 2006, the SA Parliament adopted the motion to introduce the values of ubuntu in to the school syllabus, and to make a caring society to found our cultural and political values. For reasons explained in that debate, the SA Parliament has already made the decision to adopt the Ghandi’ principles, which are founded on the recognition of sentience i.e. that animals have feelings and should not be treated as if they were inanimate resources, like tin or copper.
We support the wisdom of Mahatma Gandhi when he stated: -
“The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated.”

On 21st August 2007, Dr Manie Schoeman MP, Chairman of the Joint Constitutional Review Committee, wrote:
The Constitutional Review Committee has involved itself with the issue of Animal Care and the ethics pertaining to animal protection. The proceedings of the latest meeting with high-ranking officials of the Department of Agriculture were extensively reported on in the Animal Voice of August 2007.

Although the view was expressed that a constitutional amendment could be advisable, the committee was of the opinion that time should be given to the Department of Agriculture to finalise the envisaged draft legislation and regulations. Once this is evaluated a final decision will be taken. This includes the issue of the recognition of animals as sentient beings.

The Council of Europe (CoE) started its work on animal welfare through similar moral reasoning: “The dignity of mankind could not be disassociated from the respect man owed to his environment and the animals which inhabited it.” It is now time for South Africa to reassert its own dignity and moral progress by embracing animal welfare as one of its core values.

4. THE INTERNATIONAL SITUATION

Not surprisingly in the light of the compelling reasons listed above for improving the status of animals, there has been an upsurge in international activity. Regrettably, South Africa has so far failed to grasp the urgency and importance of this movement, and is now lagging behind other nations, including African countries like Tanzania.

The scientific assessment of animal welfare has progressed rapidly in recent years.
This includes a body of scientific evidence of the ‘sentience’ of animals, which demonstrates that animals are aware of a range of sensations and emotions; and have the capacity to feel pain and suffering, and states of well being. The lives of animals are much more complex than we previously understood; and we are increasingly aware of the potential impact of our behaviour on their well being.
Trade has also been increasingly impacted by animal welfare considerations. Animal welfare is now mentioned in Free Trade Agreements, in Corporate Social Responsibility policies, and in documents circulated by farmers and governments in local and international trade arenas. We have to comply with any animal welfare requirements stipulated by the nations to whom we export our animal products, and some such as the European Union visit us to ensure that we are complying. Animal welfare is also a significant issue for consumers worldwide.
Animal welfare rose in status from a national and regional concern to become a recognised international political concern when the World Organisation for Animal Health (the OIE) identified it as a priority in its 2001-2005 strategic plan; and OIE Member Countries and Territories mandated the organisation to take the lead internationally on animal welfare, giving it the authority to establish international recommendations and guidelines covering animal welfare practices. Since this time, considerable progress has been made, with a preparation of a body of science-based standards covering both general animal welfare principles and various animal welfare issues (and these continue to be developed apace). The OIE is also spearheading the development of regional animal welfare strategies (RAWS), including one under preparation for the OIE’s Southern Africa sub-region, which covers the 15 SADC countries.
The OIE’s General Principles on animal welfare recognise the critical relationship between animal health and welfare, and include important internationally recognised concepts including: -
 The ‘Five Freedoms’
Freedom from hunger, thirst and malnutrition; freedom from fear and distress; freedom from physical and thermal discomfort; freedom from pain, injury and disease; and freedom to express normal patterns of behaviour.
 The ‘Three Rs’
Reduction in numbers of animals, refinement of experimental methods and replacement of animals with non-animal techniques. Principles which provide valuable guidance for the use of animals for scientific and experimental purposes.

The principles also recognise that the use of animals carries with it an ethical responsibility to ensure the welfare of such animals to the greatest extent practicable.

The important point is that the provision of good animal welfare goes beyond the avoidance of cruelty and suffering, to the provision of sound, humane care which takes account of an animal’s physical and psychological needs.

The OIE’s animal welfare standards are all science-based. Its role as the international standard setting body for animal welfare was accepted due to its strong science-based approach, which is specifically stated and reflected in its standards and recommendation. All members and observers of the OIE Working Group on Animal Welfare have a background in veterinary medicine or another relevant science.

Animal welfare science reinforces the connection between animal welfare and animal health. This is also included in the OIE’s General Principles of Animal Welfare. If good animal welfare is not provided, this can lead to poor animal health, with increased disease risk and reduced quality animal products. This has economic and public health implications. This is why animal welfare is increasingly being recognised as intrinsically linked to other national concerns such as public health, food security, food safety and economic development.

There is now a substantial, and growing, body of animal welfare science internationally.

Many national governments and international organisations rely on multi-disciplinary animal welfare science - in addition to broad animal welfare principles - in the development of legislation on animal welfare, and many take an active role in funding the development of animal welfare science. The development of good animal welfare legislation relies on both sound animal welfare science, and the ability to update legislation to keep pace with scientific developments. For that reason, it can help to keep principal national legislation more basic, with more detailed requirements set out in subordinate legislation which can more easily be changed.

In countries with developing economies, one concern is how to leverage limited resources to adapt the findings of animal welfare science (often focused on industrialised production) to local production conditions, rather than simply ‘parachuting in’ outside expertise. This requires the development of local research capacity, which examines both animal welfare science as this relates to the national situation, and also the capacity of traditional knowledge and systems to improve welfare.

In 2011, there was an ‘International Conference on Veterinary and Animal Ethics’. Veterinary ethics combines professional and animal ethics, and can be interpreted as a critical reflection on the humane treatment of animals.
Awareness and support for animal welfare is increasing throughout the world, in various circles including: political, industry, trade and amongst citizens and consumers (as well as the scientific circles already mentioned above). The fact that there are now international standards on animal welfare is practical evidence of this increasing concern in political circles.

The OIE’s meeting on ‘Training of National Focal Points of the OIE for Animal Welfare’, which took place in Addis Ababa in November 2010 recognised rising international awareness in other circles. It reported that livestock breeders are increasingly taking it into account, because a well-treated animal yields products of better quality and quantity. Also, as countries develop, animal welfare increasingly becomes one of the criteria requested by consumers. Thus, taking it into account increases the added value of animal products. It has also become part of the values of veterinary ethics, and veterinary specialists are needed teach its ethics and practical application.

The OIE is not the only official international body to take account of animal welfare. For example, the Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations (FAO) has developed an animal welfare ‘Gateway’, which it describes as a ‘participatory platform to retrieve and submit information, as well as to engage in commonly developed projects and thematic discussions’.
The FAO recently (2010) published a study on ‘Legislative and Regulatory Options for Animal Welfare Law’. This publication provides an overview of the legal issues relevant to animal welfare for animals used in food production, and examines a variety of legislative approaches, set against the backdrop of international recommendations on animal welfare science and regulation.

As previously stated, the International Finance Corporation (IFC) (the private sector arm of the World Bank Group), has also included animal welfare within its remit. It has a Good Practice Note (GPN 2006) on Animal Welfare in Livestock Operations. This states that the IFC will ‘consider animal welfare issues when selecting and funding projects and will seek ways to promote systems that positively impact animal welfare’.

Higher animal welfare standards are thus increasingly seen to be a prerequisite to enhancing business efficiency and profitability, satisfying international markets and meeting consumer expectations.

The World Society for the Protection of Animals (WSPA) is now carrying out international advocacy on animal issues, which includes public awareness work. Also, it has also produced various guidelines and advice on animal welfare law, including: ‘Animal Protection Legislation: Guidance Notes and Suggested Provisions’.

International Standards
Amongst this changing landscape, the most important ‘driver of change’ has been identified as the OIE’s work on establishing international standards for animal welfare. The OIE, which has now been officially accepted as the international standard setting body for animal welfare, has a wide global membership of 178 countries. It has now agreed a wide range of animal welfare standards, and more are in progress.

Animal Welfare at Regional Level
The OIE has a regional representation for Africa, which covers the continent. Their 2nd Global Conference on animal welfare entitled ‘Putting the Animal Welfare Standards to Work’ was held in Egypt in 2008. This included a recommendation on OIE support for the development of strategies to address regional needs and priorities for the development of animal welfare. Following this, the OIE’s regional office for Asia, the Far East and Oceania (AFEO) developed a Regional Animal Welfare Strategy (RAWS) to harmonise animal welfare work in that region.
The OIE Sub Regional Representation for Southern Africa then committed itself to developing a Southern Africa Regional Animal Welfare Strategy (SARAWS) covering all of the 15 SADC countries. This process is now well underway: country reports have been prepared on the status of animal welfare; relevant stakeholders and ‘drivers of change’ analysed; and strategy recommendations prepared. Of interest, is that South Africa is no longer the leading country in animal welfare amongst the SADC nations – with Tanzania having made strides in the policy and legislation arena.
The SARAWS is likely to be finalised in 2012, and a cornerstone of this will be the formulation of national animal welfare policies. It is likely that other regions will follow the lead and introduce their own RAWS. International animal welfare standards are a reality: Their implementation is a ‘work in process’ – but one that is underway.

The European Union (EU) has a lengthy, practical, institutional experience of animal welfare, and has included this in its founding Treaty. It has a ‘Community Action Plan on the Protection and Welfare of Animals’, and a large body of animal welfare legislation covering all 27 member countries. The EU also monitors animal welfare standards in countries which export livestock products to the EU, and includes animal welfare in its training initiative ‘Better Training for Safer Food’.

Founded in 1949, the Council of Europe (CoE) is a political intergovernmental organisation which covers virtually all the European continent, and has 47 member countries. It seeks to create a common democratic and legal area, ensuring ‘respect for its fundamental values: human rights, democracy and the rule of law’. It is considered to be the defender of human rights in Europe.
The CoE became concerned about animal welfare because it realised that:
“The dignity of mankind could not be disassociated from the respect man owed to his environment and the animals which inhabited it.”
Animal Welfare and Trade
The OIE now has a raft of standards and conventions designed to protect the welfare of animals in different situations.
The OIE's formal recognition of the scientific connection between animal welfare and animal health and the resulting international recommendations set out in the OIE Codes provide strong evidence of the growing consensus on the importance of animal welfare standards. If and when the WTO directly addresses the question of animal welfare under international trade law, the OIE recommendations on animal welfare may well become binding on WTO members. This suggests that countries that are members of the OIE, members of the WTO or engaged in international trade in animal products have increasing incentives to draft and enforce legislation capturing animal welfare principles.

There is some scientific evidence that compliance with animal welfare standards strengthens both the health of farm animal populations (including their resistance to disease outbreaks) and the quality of animal food products. Animal welfare science identifies a number of common areas of synergy between animal welfare, animal health and productivity. Regardless of the ethical concerns, many countries choose to enact and enforce animal welfare legislation in the interest of increasing production and trade in animal-based foods for both international and domestic markets.

Animal welfare is increasingly being taken into consideration in the burgeoning bilateral trade agreements between countries or groups of countries. This has the potential to increase, and to facilitate and enhance, trade in higher-welfare products at the local and international level, thus expanding the potential of higher-welfare production systems.

Industry publications now constantly mention animal welfare, highlighting the fact that this is a real and pressing issue for the industry, being driven by increasing consumer concern. For example, an article on the ‘Poultry Site’ entitled ‘Farm Animal Welfare Issues Affect Poultry Producers’ states: ‘The poultry industry must constantly assess the situation and enhance animal welfare in a manner the public will accept. If production practices cannot pass the test of public acceptance, modern-day consumers have no problem changing their buying habits, leaving animal agriculture searching for answers. A good first step is a heightened awareness within the industry and among producers about animal welfare concerns and problems.’

With regard to wild animals, The Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES) is primarily concerned about the effects of trade on species population levels, but animal welfare is included in both the original text and in ranching and captive breeding resolutions.

Any attempt to deny the connection between animal welfare and trade is countered by the evidence: animal welfare is now mentioned in Free Trade Agreements, in Corporate Social Responsibility policies, and in documents circulated by farmers and governments in local and international trade arenas. Animal welfare is also a significant issue for consumers worldwide.

Universal Declaration on Animal Welfare
In recent years, a number of NGOs under the leadership of the World Society for the Protection of Animals (WSPA) have advocated that the United Nations elaborate and adopt a Universal Declaration on Animal Welfare (UDAW). A global petition has been launched, and an intergovernmental conference held in the Philippines in 2003 produced a draft declaration to form the basis of the UDAW.

The four UDAW principles agreed upon in the Philippines meeting are as follows: -
 The welfare of animals shall be a common objective for all states.
 The standards of animal welfare attained by each state shall be promoted, recognised and observed by improved measures, nationally and internationally.
 All appropriate steps shall be taken by states to prevent cruelty to animals and to reduce their suffering.
 Appropriate standards on animal welfare shall be developed and elaborated on such topics as the use and management of farm animals, companion animals, animals in scientific research, draught animals, wild animals and animals used for recreation.
The full UDAW text is available at www.animalsmatter.org .

According to established principles of international law, the UDAW would not be binding although it would represent a consensus among states regarding animal welfare and would therefore be considered customary international law. Customary international law derives from practices which a group of states recognise as legally binding, and generally creates an expectation that those binding practices will be observed in the future.

In 2007, the highest authority of the OIE (the International Committee) gave in principle support to the development of the UDAW, considering that this would ‘complement and promote the work of the OIE, and facilitate global acceptance of OIE standards and their application at a national, regional and global level’.10 The OIE is actively encouraging the participation of member governments as well as globally recognised animal welfare organizations in the development and adoption of a UDAW.

The South African government has not yet signed up to the UDAW.

The case is incontrovertible: South Africa is lagging behind the international community, and we must develop animal welfare and the humane ethic in our country without further delay. But there is much to be done, and an animal welfare policy is needed in order to guide animal-human interactions into the future. This policy would need to: -
 Clarify the moral values which will guide our interactions with animals
 Establish a proactive strategy for the development of animal welfare in the country, both in policy and practice
 Establish a proactive strategy for the development of the humane ethics (the ‘culture of caring’) in the country
 Determine priorities for organisational and capacity development to support the above.