HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Subject Index
Legislative Council - Fifty-Second Parliament, Second Session (52-2)
2013-05-14 Daily Xml
Contents
Pdf Xml

ANIMAL SHELTERS

The Hon. T.A. FRANKS (15:13): I seek leave to make a brief explanation before directing a question to the Minister for Sustainability, Environment and Conservation on the topic of animal shelters.

Leave granted.

The Hon. T.A. FRANKS: The minister may be aware of the No Kill or Counting Down to Zero movement that seeks to reduce as close to zero as possible the number of abandoned, unwanted or surplus companion animals that have to be euthanased in an animal shelter.

My understanding is that last year, according to the annual report of the RSPCA, of the 4,284 dogs they took in, 899 of those were euthanased for various reasons—that is 21 per cent of the dogs. Of the 2,400 cats, 822 were euthanased—that was 34 per cent of those cats. I actually commend the RSPCA for making those figures available. I was not able to get similar statistics for the Animal Welfare League. I was told that that information was only to be given to financial members.

However, the American-based No Kill Advocacy Centre has developed model legislation known as the Companion Animal Protection Act (CAPA). This legislation mandates programs and services which have proven successful at reducing euthanasia rates in shelters which have implemented them and focuses on those shelters with high rates of euthanasia. CAPA focuses on mandating a shelter's primary role as saving the lives of animals and believes that saving lives and protecting public safety are compatible.

It makes it illegal for a shelter to euthanase an animal if there is another organisation or shelter willing to take that animal. It provides minimum standards for nutrition, veterinary care and hygiene and environmental enrichment, including exercise. It also makes it illegal for shelters to euthanase surrendered animals without first making them available for rehoming or transfer to another shelter, even when an owner wants that animal euthanased.

My question is: will the minister undertake to task his department to investigate and assess the approaches advocated by the No Kill Advocacy Centre and report back to this council on how these policies and programs may be utilised by animal shelters across South Australia (if they are not already) to reduce the toll of animals euthanased in this state?

The Hon. I.K. HUNTER (Minister for Sustainability, Environment and Conservation, Minister for Water and the River Murray, Minister for Aboriginal Affairs and Reconciliation) (15:15): I thank the honourable member for her most important question. Animal welfare is an issue I know she cares a great deal about, so I can understand the passion with which this question is raised. Those who work to ensure the welfare of animals, including the operators of shelters, are to be commended for their work. They provide an invaluable service to animals that are unable to protect themselves.

I am confident that all members here would agree that shelters have an obligation to ensure that animals are treated humanely and never left to suffer unnecessarily. The concept of a no-kill shelter is an admirable one. I would like to agree with the idea of a no-kill shelter but with certain limitations, where a no-kill shelter is seeking to enact that policy, to prevent the euthanasing of animals for the sake of convenience; for example, where the number of animals being surrendered outweighs the capacity of that shelter to care for them, ideally animals should not be euthanased.

However, all shelters have an obligation to ensure that animals are treated humanely. This means that no-kill shelters should not be allowed to prevent the euthanasing of animals where the animals are injured or sick and unable to recover or in an unimaginable amount of pain. Indeed, I understand that shelters run by the RSPCA and the Animal Welfare League refuse to euthanase animals for the sake of convenience. I understand that neither organisation will euthanase an animal if it is healthy and has a temperament that will allow it to be rehomed.

As I am sure members are aware, there is currently a select committee in the other place looking into dogs and cats as companion animals. This select committee has broad terms of reference that include the goals of eliminating cruelty to dogs and cats, as well as reducing the number of animals being euthanased. I am advised that the select committee is currently considering submissions made by a wide range of individuals and industry stakeholders, and I understand this includes submissions made to the committee by advocates of no-kill approaches. I am also advised that it is expected that the committee will provide a report to parliament on its findings later this year.

I believe that the select committee may be the best place to seek the action the honourable member requires. Having said that, I would be very happy to be briefed by the honourable member on any research she has or does into this important policy area. I know it is an ongoing concern of hers, and I would be pleased to have her advice on how this operates in shelters around the country and overseas.

PARLIAMENTARY BUSINESS
MEMBERS
GET INVOLVED
ABOUT PARLIAMENT
VISIT
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL
HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY
CONTACT