Exposing a Euromyth

Exposing a Euromyth, The European Convention For The Protection Of Pet Animals

Myth: Certain breeds of the Queen’s favourite dog could be outlawed under a controversial EU convention being considered by ministers, it emerged last night. Some corgis – along with bulldogs, cocker spaniels and King Charles spaniels – could be among 100 breeds banned, animal lovers fear.
Daily Mail, 30 April 2002, p 5

Fact: This so-called ‘EU convention’ has nothing whatsoever to do with the EU. A committee of animal protection experts drew up the European Convention for the Protection of Pet Animals in 1987 under the auspices of the Council of Europe - an intergovernmental organisation based in Strasbourg and not to be confused with the EU. The two organisations are quite distinct. The 15 European Union states, however, are all members of the Council of Europe which has 45 member states.

The Council of Europe's work leads to European conventions and agreements in the light of which member states may subsequently harmonise and amend their own legislation to comply with them. Negotiation culminates in a decision of the Committee of Ministers establishing the text of the proposed treaty. It is then agreed to open the treaty for signature by member States of the Council. European Conventions and Agreements, however, are not statutory acts of the Organisation; they owe their legal existence simply to the expression of the will of those States that may become Parties thereto, as manifested inter alia by the signature and ratification of the treaty..

The convention includes a general prohibition against causing unnecessary pain, suffering or

distress to any pet or stray animal, and also against abandoning a pet. Articles regarding the

keeping of pets cover their physiological and behavioural needs.

There are provisions relating to the breeding of animals and to the registration of breeding

establishments. Unless deemed necessary by a vet, cosmetic procedures such as the docking of tails, cropping of ears, and declawing and defanging are specifically prohibited.

The following States have are signatories to the convention, plus I believe Austria has now signed. Some of these States signed up to the Convention over 10 years ago, dog breeds and dog shows as we know them haven’t disappeared.

State Date Entered into Force

BELGIUM 01-JUL-92

CYPRUS 01-JUL-94

DENMARK 01-MAY-93

FINLAND 01-JUL-92

FRANCE

GERMANY 01-MAY-92

GREECE 01-NOV-92

ITALY

LUXEMBOURG 01-MAY-92

NETHERLANDS

NORWAY 01-MAY-92

PORTUGAL 01-JAN-94

SWEDEN 01-MAY-92

SWITZERLAND 01-JUN-94

The UK generally complies with the aims of the Convention. If we do sign up to this Convention any amendments to our existing animal welfare legislation would be drawn up by HM Government.

Every 5 years or so, signatories to the Convention meet to review the working and implementation of the Convention. They produce a number of Resolutions. Objections to the Convention are usually objections to some of the details in the Resolutions. If you read the Resolutions in full the intention becomes clear. The Resolutions mention bowed front legs and prominent eyes as matters of concern in Shih Tzu. Please remember that the Convention and Resolutions are written for all 45 member States, not just the UK. This is (in part) how the Resolutions suggest signatories deal with matters of concern:

- encourage breeding associations, in particular cats and dogs breeding associations:

 to reconsider breeding standards in order, if appropriate, to amend those which can cause potential welfare problems.

- to ensure, by good information and education of breeders and judges, that breeding standards are interpreted in such a way as to counteract the development of extreme characteristics (hypertype) which can cause welfare problems;

- to raise public awareness to the problems related to some physical and behavioural characteristics of the animals;

If these measures are not sufficient, to consider the possibility of prohibiting the breeding and for phasing out the exhibition and the selling of certain types or breeds when characteristics of these animals correspond to harmful defects such as those presented in the Appendix.

In conclusion, nobody in Europe wants to ban our breeds or impose a “Eurodog” on us. They ask only that we phase out harmful defects by amending breed standards (where necessary) and educating breeders, judges and the public. Only if all else fails do they ask us to CONSIDER the possibility of prohibiting the breeding/exhibition/selling of animals with harmful defects.

So why all the fuss? Could it be because those shouting loudest haven’t sat down and read the Convention and Resolutions? In my opinion there is nothing to worry about but why not read the Convention and Resolutions and form your own opinion.

Home