Document type : Opinion issued by the Human-animal relationships Committee of the Académie Vétérinaire de France
Authors: Michel Baussier, Bertrand Deputte, Jean Derégnaucourt, Marc Dhenain, Agnès Fabre, Jean-Pierre Hugot, Jean Kahn,Daniel Le Bars, Richard Lecomte, Yves Le Floc'h, ChristineMédaille, Henri Maurin-Blanchet, Claude Milhaud (Chairman), SergeRosolen, Jean-Paul Rousseau, Anne Marie Vanelle
CONCLUSIONS: SUMMARY: Necessary Articles, applicable proposal subjects, not restricted by the Commission :
- Article 2 Identification involving municipal police officers and field guards
- Article 4 Stray cats
- Article 6 Nevectomies
- Article 7 Abandoned equidae
- Article 12 Wild animals in captivity
- Article 13 Exhibition of Wild Animals
- Article 14 Travelling exhibition of wolves and bears
- Article 15 End to mink farming for fur
Article required, proposed clarification :
- Article 3: Distinction between pounds and refuges.
Articles for which the necessity or drafting is a problem for the Commission :
- Article 1: Awareness certificate: replaces a generally unimplemented text (the information document), randomly effective administrative solution, over-regulation.
- Article 5 New Pets: important problem concerning respect for bioavailability, restrictive list to be drawn up in consultation with the relevant professions.
- Article 8: Strengthening of penalties, effectiveness discussed.
- Article 9: Awareness training: application of the rules.
- Article 10 Prohibition on keeping of animals: creation of a register of persons prohibited from keeping animals would appear problematic.
- Article 11: Suppression of zoophilia, distinction between behavioural disorders and commercial exploitation: nature and severity of penalty? The concept of zoophilia is caricaturally anthropocentric. From the animal's point of view, there is only one question: is there abuse or not? From a human point of view, should not the risk of links to child pornography be taken into consideration?
Article regarding which the Commission declares itself to have no competence :
- Article 16.
CONCLUSIONS: The President of the Human-animal relationships Committee of the Académie Vétérinaire de France warmly thanks its members for engaging on a subject that the Human-animal relationships Committee has always considered essential. Following an email of 21 December 2020 from the Secretary General of the Académie Vétérinaire de France, the Human-animal relationships Committee acted swiftly to draft this report on a Bill registered with the President of the Assemblée Nationale on 14 December 2020, for which the Government has initiated the accelerated procedure so that it can be presented for first reading at the Assemblée Nationale on Wednesday 20 January, followed by public sessions on 26-29 January 2021. The members of the Human-animal relationships Committee are very conscious of the fact that their membership of an "Academy" should mean that they are "scholars" but that, as "veterinarians", they should also be closely involved with general practice. This exceptional expertise gives Veterinarians legitimacy in addressing certain issues concerning "Human-animal relationships" and "zoonoses". It is a resource to be cherished, as demonstrated by the excellent public image of the profession (see the outcry triggered by the contempt shown by the authorities for the offer made by veterinary laboratories to carry out RT-PCR tests for Covid-19). "Science" and "the Law" have two absolute requirements in common:
(1) to use a clearly-defined vocabulary excluding all imprecisions as sources of ambiguity.
(2) to base its work on the reality of facts obtained through observation and/or experience. For this reason, the Commission for Human-animal relationshipsshipss has embarked on a major project to create a glossary within its field of expertise of which the purpose is to enable these two fields of knowledge to interact with that of "ethics". It is on the basis of these principles that the Commission has reservations about this bill with regard to:
(3) The imprecision of the vocabulary used.
(4) The lack of statistical information on animal abuse and its ongoing practice.
(5) The lack of analysis concerning the application of previous laws or regulations.
To which is added:(6) The absence of reference to the frequent combination of human misery and animal abuse.
(7) The mixed nature of the proposed provisions.
(8) Problematic applicability of certain provisions.
(9) Failure to take into account the trade in exotic animals and their products.
