Scottish Animal Welfare Commission - Exotic Pet Working Group: final report

5. Final conclusions

5.1 Need for further information

Evidence gathered for this report, as published in our interim report, has highlighted the lack of consistent, objective information about the importation, capture, breeding, trade, transport, keeping and regulatory monitoring of a wide variety of animals in Scotland in a wide variety of settings. However, the literature review does confirm the patchy nature of peer-reviewed welfare assessments in exotic pets and suggests that certain species and particularly the trends for breeding so called 'colour morphs' are more prone to recorded problems. It also points to the welfare issues around the management of species that require more complex husbandry (such as primates and many reptile and aquatic species) and, with growing concerns around animal welfare and sentience, these issues cannot be ignored.

At the time when the working group was initially gathering information for the interim report on licence conditions and record keeping, the Pet Animals Act 1951 still applied in Scotland. Since that exercise was undertaken, the Animal Welfare (Licensing of Activities Involving Animals) (Scotland) Regulations 2021 have come fully into force. Schedule 3 of the Regulations sets out specific licence conditions for selling animals as pets in the course of a business (a definition that covers all commercial sales of animals, including internet sales).

The Regulations provide that a register must be maintained for all the animals or groups of animals (such as fish) on the premises. In addition to details about the animal itself, such as age and sex, the register must include the full name of the supplier of the animal, the date of its acquisition, the date of the sale of the animal by the licence holder or the date of the animal's death, if applicable. All of these records must be available for inspection in a visible and legible form, either on the licensed premises or, if held elsewhere, kept in a manner in which they can be readily made available to an inspector.

SAWC believes that the setting down of these conditions in legislation (rather than relying on local authorities to implement model conditions at their discretion), has the potential significantly to improve knowledge and understanding of the different species being traded in Scotland, how many animals are involved, where they come from and how they thrive in retail or breeding premises. SAWC recommends that local authorities gather this information on a systematic basis, for example by requiring retailers to present it on a quarterly basis as part of their obligations under the licence.

5.2 Welfare and ethical issues of trading in animals captured from the wild

The working group reiterates its concerns about the trade in wild-caught animals purely for the pet industry and, whilst there are arguments for this trade from a human perspective, it cannot justify or support this continuing trade on animal welfare or ethical grounds. Our view regarding the ban on the importation of wild-caught animals purely for the pet trade is also held by many other organisations, such as the British Veterinary Zoological Society and British Veterinary Association. Our particular concern is not only the sudden change from the wild to captivity, to which the animal has to rapidly acclimatise, but also the frequently long transport times from the country of origin to their final destination in Scotland. This transportation often results in inappropriate environmental conditions (space, heat, light, nutrition, humidity provision, etc.), leading to compromised welfare and in some cases mortalities.

5.3 Regulation

There is evidence that for many species of pet, domesticated or exotic/non-domesticated, our understanding of how to keep that species in a welfare-friendly manner is good. However, there is also growing evidence that for many species of non-domesticated/exotic pet this is not the case and that whilst self-regulation may have many positive benefits for industry and government, it is failing to manage the extent of the current problem.

It is our view that negative lists of species (the listing of those effectively 'banned' from being kept in captivity) are difficult to manage from a legislative and enforcement perspective due to the sheer breadth of species that can potentially be kept and substituted. However, we do see merit in the different positive listing approaches being adopted in several countries across Europe. Some of these models, while introducing lists (of varying length), allow a degree of flexibility whereby specialist keepers with the knowledge and facilities for providing acceptable welfare for animals in their care can apply for individual permissions or for the addition of certain species to the original list, if they can provide robust evidence that these species can be kept in such a way as to meet their welfare needs.

The working group has considered a "traffic light" system for non-domestic/exotic pet keeping, where so-called green-listed species (such as dogs, cats, rabbits and mice) are permitted for keeping by responsible persons over the age of 16 (as set down in the Animal Health and Welfare (Scotland) Act 2006, s.18) as long as all care guidelines and animal welfare legislation are observed. Amber-listed species would be those requiring more knowledge and experience on behalf of the keeper and therefore an assessment of keeper competency. Red-listed species would be typically those species that should only be kept as pets by specialist qualified and licensed keepers. However, the working group has concluded that the listing of amber- and red-listed species would be extremely complex and time-consuming, potentially delaying the necessary reform to protect larger numbers of other animals. In addition, this approach would require considerable licensing authority inspection and regulation, which could become extremely onerous.

Therefore, it is our view that a single list of permitted species (the listing of only those species which can be legally kept as pets, with all others being prohibited unless an individual licence has been obtained by specialist keepers), while being less nuanced than a traffic-light system given the very large numbers of species involved, has the advantage of clarity and would be easier to enforce.

Examples of specific licensing can be found in European states, such as Belgium, where individuals may apply for authorisation to keep species that are not on the positive list, subject to the provision of evidence of competency and suitable accommodation and care for the animal. Responsibility for authorising the keeping of the animal lies with the regional ministries.

Animals that are not on one of the lists should not be kept. Transitional arrangements in the form of "grandfather provisions" could be agreed, to allow non-listed animals already in private ownership, where owners may lack expertise, to be kept until they die, but not bred or otherwise replaced. This is a standard provision in existing positive list systems in European countries.

As in other countries, for practical purposes a permitted-list system could initially be introduced for certain classes of animals, such as mammals and reptiles, with a view to expanding this to include other classes in due course as information is collated about the suitability of different species to be kept as pets. For example, legislation in the Belgian regions allows persons to make representations in favour of adding currently non-listed mammals (and also reptiles in Flanders) to the lists.