Information on the Animal Care and Protection Act 2001 for veterinarians
On this page:
- Duty of care responsibilities
- Regulated surgical procedures
- Prohibitions on poisons
- Requirement for veterinary treatment
- Power to require information
- Guidelines for providing veterinary opinions in animal welfare investigations
- Animal ethics committees must have a veterinarian
- Related web pages
This information is provided to veterinarians to highlight some of the areas of the Animal Care and Protection Act 2001 (the Act) that are particularly relevant to them.
Veterinarians have both general responsibilities and specific roles under the Act.
As persons in charge of and dealing with animals they have the same responsibilities to those animals under the Act as the rest of the community.
However the Act also allows:
- veterinarians to undertake certain procedures in the interests of an animal's welfare e.g. dock a horse's tail, declaw a cat.
- for the issuing of an animal welfare direction or seizure of an animal by an inspector for the purposes of seeking veterinary attention.
- veterinarians to administer harmful substances to an animal (e.g. lethobarb).
The Act however does not state how veterinarians should undertake their role. For example it does not say what a veterinarian should do when examining or treating an animal or the time frames for this. This is a matter of professional judgement. Discussion on whether such treatment is appropriate is an issue for the profession and is ultimately dealt with by the Veterinary Surgeons Act 1936.
Duty of care responsibilities
During examination and treatment the veterinarian, as the person who has temporary custody of the animal, has duty of care to the animal being examined or treated.
The duty of care in this situation would include appropriate handling of the animal, providing appropriate conditions, and where an animal is held, appropriate housing. In deciding what is appropriate, regard must be had for the species, environment and circumstances of the animal and the steps that a veterinarian under the circumstances would reasonably be expected to have taken.
If an animal in the veterinarian's custody is in pain, analgesics should be
used as appropriate and any manipulations undertaken without analgesia (eg to
assist in diagnosis) should be kept to a minimum.
The veterinarian's duty of care to an animal extends to members of staff associated with the practice.
The veterinarian does not have sole duty of care, rather it is a duty shared with the owner (or owner's representative). The owner always has a duty of care even when the animal is temporarily in the care of the veterinarian.
For example, the animal's owner is responsible for making the decision on what (if any) treatment that the veterinarian offers, is given. The veterinarian is responsible for providing the owner with information on the animal welfare consequences of such decisions. If an animal suffers because of a decision (or lack of decision) by the owner who has been informed of the possible consequences, the owner is the responsible person.
If the owner indicates a preferred treatment but is unable to pay for that treatment, the veterinarian may wish to negotiate further options. There are obviously professional ethical considerations that a veterinarian may wish to consider, however under the Act, the owner is the person responsible for the animal and lack of an ability to pay does not pass that responsibility to the veterinarian.
If a person brings an animal that has been found injured to a veterinarian, and the owner is not known, the veterinarian assumes a duty of care obligation if he/she accepts the care of the animal. If the animal's owner is located, it is again a duty shared with the owner.
There are numerous possible scenarios and circumstances that may occur where an animal is presented and the owner is not known. The Act does not define all possible circumstances, rather it qualifies the duty of care obligation to say that, in deciding what is appropriate, regard must be had to the circumstances and the steps a reasonable person would be expected to take in those circumstances. A veterinarian, acting reasonably, has nothing to fear from the Act in this regard.
The Act while allowing a veterinarian to euthanase animals does not confer any "right" to do this. Inspectors under the Act, and Police do have the power, under certain conditions, to destroy an animal if the inspector or police officer believes it is cruel to keep it alive.
Regulated surgical procedures
Certain surgical procedures can be done only by a veterinarian, and
only then if it is in the interest of the animal's welfare. These are:
- cropping a dog's ear
- de-clawing of a cat
- docking the tail of cattle or a horse
- docking the tail of a dog (see "A guide to Queensland's ban on tail docking dogs")
The interest of the animal's welfare is considered to be about the prevention of pain and suffering (for example due to a tumour or following an accident). A threat by the owner to have an animal destroyed if the procedure is not undertaken, is not considered to be a valid reason to carry out the procedure.
Debarking is also a regulated surgical procedure. Before debarking a dog the veterinarian must:
- be assured that it is in the interests of the animal's welfare; or
- be given a relevant nuisance abatement notice[1] or an "appropriate" notice[2] by the owner, and the vet reasonably consider that the operation is the only way to comply with the notice without destroying the dog.
A person must not supply an animal that has undergone a regulated surgical procedure unless it is accompanied by a veterinarian's certification stating that the procedure was done in accordance with the Act. (This does not apply to tail docked cattle or dogs).
Prohibitions on poisons
Only a veterinarian, an inspector, or a "prescribed entity"[3] can administer a harmful or poisonous substance with the intention of injuring or killing an animal (exemptions exist for feral and pest animal control).
Requirement for veterinary treatment
An inspector can require that a person seek veterinary treatment for an animal through an animal welfare direction. The direction may require that the person obtain and produce a certificate or other document from the veterinarian as evidence that they have complied with the direction. The person is responsible for payment of any fees to the veterinarian.
Power to require information
An inspector can require information (including documents) from a veterinarian on the veterinary treatment of an animal if the inspector reasonably suspects that the Act has been contravened or if an animal welfare direction has been given about the animal. (Giving this information to an inspector does not breach privacy legislation.)
Guidelines for providing veterinary opinions in animal welfare investigations
Statements of veterinary opinion are a vital part of most animal welfare investigations and legal briefs. It is important that these statements are able to address the needs of the Act.
Veterinarians are recognised as having a specialised role and are expected to provide a professional and objective opinion based on all the relevant information at their disposal.
The following guidelines have been developed to assist veterinarians in this regard. The statement should include:
For the veterinarian:
- Name, address and telephone number
- Qualifications, where and when they were achieved
- Current employment
- Number of years' experience. It is optional to include experience with particular species involved
In the statement:
- What date the animal was examined. For multiple examinations or when animal was under veterinary care, this could between the date of xx/xx/xx and xx/xx/xx
- Full description of the animal: age (estimated from dentition when not known), breed, sex
- Who presented the animal and why
- True and accurate record of findings: summary and detailed report (including observations)
- Details of tests performed, treatments provided and response/results
- Estimate of duration of illness and prognosis for cure
- Objective assessments of pain and suffering, i.e. animal's demeanour, response to manipulation and handling etc
- Any underlying conditions for which there is no reasonable cure, e.g. cancer, old age
- A final summary of professional opinion of cause of condition of the animal (conclusion)
- Recommended actions and treatment options
- Veterinarian's signature and date the statement is made
Animal ethics committees must have a veterinarian
Those who use animals for scientific purposes must have this use approved by an animal ethics committee. This committee must have a member who is a veterinarian. The role of the veterinarian on the committee, besides contributing in general to the process, is to provide expert advice on the impact of the work on the animal, the ways of minimising and monitoring this impact.
Need more information?
- Refer to the DPI&F website
- Contact the DPI&F Business Information Centre on 13 25 23
- For animal ethics, refer to the ANZCCART Fact Sheet: The Role of Veterinarians in the Care and Use of Animals in Research and Teaching, or contact Department of Primary Industries and Fisheries Business Information Centre on 13 25 23
Related web pages
This page is the last in the Laws series.
[1] A nuisance abatement notice under the Environmental Protection Act 1994 or equivalent.
[2] an appropriate notice means a notice signed by each owner of the dog asking the veterinary surgeon to perform the operation and stating that the dog's barking is a nuisance, that attempts have been made and unsuccessful (for each attempt the nature of the attempt); and enough details of the attempt to allow the veterinary surgeon to form a view.
[3] The RSPCA and any other organisation prescribed under the Animal Care and Protection Regulation 2002. This currently includes local government, Environmental Protection Agency and the Animal Welfare League Queensland Inc.
Last updated 20 December 2004
