VN May 2023

Vetnews | Mei 2023 31 Especially relevant here is section 8 of the APA, which details the powers of policing granted to any authorised officer for any Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals. Suppose a police officer is of the opinion that an animal is in such a bad state that it should be destroyed, and the owner is absent, or refuses to destroy the animal. The officer must summon a veterinarian to examine the animal in that case. If the veterinarian, after examining the animal, believes that it would be cruel to keep the animal alive, the officer can destroy the animal without the owner’s permission. Suppose there is not a veterinarian available within a reasonable distance. In that case, the officer may ask two adult persons that can be regarded as “reliable and of sound judgement” to examine the animal. The officer may then proceed to destroy the animal without the owner’s consent if both these adults are of the opinion that it is cruel to keep the animal alive. As per section 5 (3), the veterinarian is not bound by any of the steps above. A veterinarian’s role in society is noble, as the public expects us to do what’s in the best interests of the animals. The destruction of animals in terms of section 5 must be carried out with the least suffering practically possible. Police officers and veterinarians who destroy animals in terms of the APA must inform the owners of the animals if they were not present and if they have the contact details of the owners. Furthermore, they must “ cause for the carcass to be removed ” if it is in a public place or road, subject to the provisions of the Animal Diseases Act, No. 35 of 1984. Dr Marock is reminded of an incident where he and another veterinarian walked through a feedlot. At the end of the inspection, they came across the hospital pen. In the hospital pen, they found a ewe with a fractured forelimb. The animal was among several ewes, rams, wethers, and lambs with various ailments that the manager had designated “ destined for emergency slaughter ”. The manager agreed that the term emergency slaughter was used quite loosely. Obviously, no pain relief was given to the ewe. They were told that if the animals had food and shelter, an “emergency” slaughter could be done the next day when fit for the abattoir. The manager did not feel he had the authority to send animals to the abattoir immediately and to slaughter the ewe as required by the APA, even though, according to the APA, he was liable as an owner. The ewe was immediately humanely slaughtered because of the severity of the injury. A truck collected the rest of the animals to be slaughtered as per an emergency on the same day. Dr Marock wondered if he would have taken the same actions had he been the only veterinarian involved when the decision was made, inconveniencing several role-players. However, reading through the legislation again, he was reassured that the APA did not require the presence of another veterinarian or any grouping of lay people to make that decision. At least he could sleep well that evening knowing he had done what was best for the animals while being on the right side of the law! v Legal Mews