|
|
REPORT
ON ANIMALS AND BIOTECHNOLOGY
EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
Developments in biotechnology have huge implications for society’s relationships with animals. It is vital that we think about the issues now, not when GM or cloned animals are reaching our farms or are ready for release into the environment.
Government and the livestock industry must get it right, to avoid the problems we have seen with public acceptance of the introduction of GM crops and food. The use of genetic biotechnology is particularly sensitive because of the speed and nature of the changes to animals it makes possible. There is a broad range of views about these changes. Some people see them as an extension of previous selective breeding. Some are already worried about the potential for making previously impossible changes. Some are against them in principle. Therefore the methods for giving independent advice to Government and engaging the public on these new developments must be strengthened.
Commercial applications of GM or cloning to farm animals in the UK, with the exception of GM sheep that produce pharmaceuticals in their milk, are unlikely in the next few years. So the UK has time to plan for these potential developments. And planning is needed: in other countries prize cows and bulls have already been cloned and sold, and research on farm animals is developing.
We have taken a strategic look at the issues and investigated the regulatory system to see if it could cope with future developments in GM and cloned animals. In doing so we made sure that our recommendations were influenced by the public’s views. Our research shows that mistrust of official institutions affects attitudes to these issues. There seems to be little outright rejection of applying GM and cloning to animals, but people are worried about the speed of developments and the possibility of mistakes. They are anxious about the possibility of substantially altering the nature of animals, and want to understand the purposes and justification for applying genetic biotechnology. Above all they ask for a transparent regulatory system that they can trust.
We therefore believe there is a strong case for a new advisory body to take a strategic look at these issues, particularly in relation to farm animals. It makes sense for it to do so in the context of the application of GM and cloning to other animals. Some developments like cloning are beginning to be applied to farm animals, pets and research animals. The new body would also need to examine genetic biotechnology in agriculture in the context of current and future developments in livestock farming and consumer attitudes.
RECOMMENDATION
A NEW STRATEGIC ADVISORY BODY SHOULD BE SET UP BY STATUTE TO EXAMINE ISSUES RAISED BY THE USE OF GENETIC BIOTECHNOLOGY ON FARM ANIMALS IN THE CONTEXT OF ITS USE ON OTHER ANIMALS AND CURRENT LIVESTOCK FARMING PRACTICES.
Decision-makers should engage the public far more effectively on which applications of GM, cloning or more conventional technology are acceptable. Adequate funds will be needed for this.
RECOMMENDATION
NEW METHODS AND FUNDING SHOULD BE USED TO ENGAGE THE PUBLIC IN DECISIONS ABOUT GENETIC BIOTECHNOLOGY.
GM and cloned animals should be part of the same regulatory system as other animals wherever possible. All developments in livestock farming need to be justifiable. They need to have a clear purpose and be seen in the context of society’s wider relationship with animals, whether they involve traditional or new techniques. We think, however, that because of public concerns, there should be a strong focus on the use of GM and cloning. The existing law relating to farm animals meets most concerns about the welfare of future GM farm animals and particularly any problems which could cause risks to human health or the environment. We believe, however, that the law as it stands would not necessarily protect animals from some potential fundamentally objectionable changes to their natures. We also think that the existing legislation on animal welfare needs to be updated and consolidated. It is good news that DEFRA is now reviewing it. The effectiveness of the interpretation and enforcement of existing regulation relating to farm animals should be independently scrutinised. Effective enforcement is needed both to improve animal welfare and increase public trust in the regulatory system.
RECOMMENDATION
GM, CLONED AND CONVENTIONAL ANIMALS SHOULD BE GOVERNED BY THE SAME REGULATIONS
WHEREVER POSSIBLE. THE 1911 PROTECTION OF ANIMALS ACT SHOULD BE UPDATED AND OTHER PIECEMEAL ANIMAL WELFARE LEGISLATION CONSOLIDATED. PROVISION WILL BE NEEDED TO PROTECT FARM ANIMALS FROM DEVELOPMENTS WHICH SUBSTANTIALLY ALTER THEIR NATURE IN UNACCEPTABLE WAYS. THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE INTERPRETATION AND ENFORCEMENT OF EXISTING FARM ANIMAL WELFARE REGULATIONS SHOULD BE REVIEWED.
There is also a need for adequate monitoring of cloned and GM farm animals, if and when they enter conventional production, because there are fears of unanticipated health or welfare problems in adult animals.
RECOMMENDATION
POST-COMMERCIALISATION MONITORING OF GM AND CLONED FARM ANIMALS SHOULD BE PLANNED TO LOOK FOR UNEXPECTED WELFARE OR HEALTH PROBLEMS.
Thought should also be given ahead of time to people's attitudes to purchasing or consuming products from GM or cloned animals. Labelling and segregation in production will be needed to guarantee consumer choice if GM or cloned animals enter commercial production.
RECOMMENDATION
ARRANGEMENTS SHOULD BE MADE TO MAINTAIN CONSUMER CHOICE ABOUT WHETHER TO PURCHASE MEAT OR OTHER PRODUCTS FROM GM AND CLONED ANIMALS.
Unlike GM and cloned farm animals, the commercialisation of GM fish raises significant environmental concerns because of the possibility of the fish escaping from the aquatic net pens used in offshore fish farms. Therefore, while there is significant uncertainty about the environmental consequences of the escape of GM fish into the wild and about the containment of the fish, we believe that GM fish should not be raised in offshore aquatic net pens. This judgement could change if the containment was assessed as adequate by the regulatory authorities or the environmental assessment changed. The release of GM insects into the environment must also be considered very carefully.
RECOMMENDATION
THE COMMERCIAL PRODUCTION OF GM FISH IN OFFSHORE AQUATIC NET PENS SHOULD NOT BE PERMITTED WHILE THERE IS SIGNIFICANT UNCERTAINTY ABOUT THE ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES OF THE FISH ESCAPING TO THE WILD AND ABOUT THE CONTAINMENT OF THE FISH IN NET PENS.
To protect the environment and guarantee post-commercialisation monitoring of GM and cloned animals, a system for tracing the international import and export of these animals, and of GM eggs, semen and embryos and cloned reproductive material, should be developed. A sophisticated system is needed because a GM animal often looks no different to a conventional animal. As with all other issues in this area of development, the problem needs to be addressed before there is widespread concern or any problem arises.
RECOMMENDATION
THE INTERNATIONAL MOVEMENT OF GM AND CLONED ANIMALS AND REPRODUCTIVE MATERIAL SHOULD BE MONITORED.
|
 |
