Anim al Healt h in Yukon. Pr ovide Your Opinion on Pr oposed Changes t o t he Animal Health Act

Similar documents
Attachment 4: Jurisdictional Scan

3. records of distribution for proteins and feeds are being kept to facilitate tracing throughout the animal feed and animal production chain.

2009 WISCONSIN ACT 90

Companion Animals Amendment Act 2013 No 86

Article VIII. Potentially Dangerous Dogs and Vicious Dogs

A BYLAW OF THE TOWN OF LANGHAM TO REGULATE & LICENSE DOGS AND CATS

LEGISLATURE

The Integration of WTO Agreements into National Legislation: Case of the SPS Agreement

Under particular circumstances set forth in the ADA regulations at 28 CFR (i), a miniature horse may qualify as a service animal.

ANNUAL PERMIT TO KEEP CHICKENS

WHEREAS, The Municipalities Act, 2005, provides that a Council may by bylaw:

Recognition of Export Controls and Certification Systems for Animals and Animal Products. Guidance for Competent Authorities of Exporting Countries

THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF ADELAIDE METCALFE

Chapter 506. Dangerous and Vicious Animals Adopted July 21, 2008

Recommendations of the Greyhound Reform Panel

THOMPSON-NICOLA REGIONAL DISTRICT DANGEROUS DOG CONTROL BYLAW NO. 2383

BYLAW NO. 1/2005 A BYLAW OF THE TOWN OF REGINA BEACH FOR LICENSING DOGS AND REGULATING AND CONTROLLING PERSONS OWNING OR HARBOURING DOGS

CONSULTATION ON THE REVIEW OF THE NON-COMMERCIAL MOVEMENT OF PET ANIMALS ORDER 2011 (AS AMENDED)

The Contagious Diseases (Animals) Act

CYPRESS COUNTY BYLAW 2016/09 A BYLAW OF CYPRESS COUNTY IN THE PROVINCE OF ALBERTA FOR THE PURPOSE OF RESTRAINING AND REGULATING DOGS.

ASSEMBLY, No STATE OF NEW JERSEY. 217th LEGISLATURE PRE-FILED FOR INTRODUCTION IN THE 2016 SESSION

TOWN OF MAIDSTONE BYLAW NO

BYLAW NOW THEREFORE the Council of the Town of Banff, in the Province of Alberta, duly assembled, enacts as follows:

BE IT ENACTED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF CORNWALL AS FOLLOWS:

BYLAW NO. 3429/2009. Being a Bylaw to regulate and control Dogs within The City of Red Deer. COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RED DEER ENACTS AS FOLLOWS:

R.S.O. 1990, CHAPTER D.16

Legal Supplement Part C to the Trinidad and Tobago Gazette, Vol. 53, No. 17, 30th January, No. 1 of 2014

international news RECOMMENDATIONS

CHAPTER 2.26 ANIMAL CONTROL

ORDINANCE NO

ARTICLE FIVE -- ANIMAL CONTROL

BERMUDA 2008 : 28 DOGS ACT 2008

ANIMALS. Chapter 284 DOG - LICENSING - REGULATION CHAPTER INDEX. Article 1 INTERPRETATION. Article 2 GENERAL PROVISIONS

JOINT BVA-BSAVA-SPVS RESPONSE TO THE CONSULTATION ON PROPOSALS TO TACKLE IRRESPONSIBLE DOG OWNERSHIP

RABIES ACT CHAPTER 365 CAP Rabies LAWS OF KENYA

AND WHEREAS by motion 13-GC-253 the Council of the Corporation of the Town of Bracebridge deems it expedient to amend By-law ;

TITLE 10 - ANIMAL CONTROL

OHIO LEGISLATIVE SERVICE COMMISSION

DOGS (JERSEY) LAW 1961

CHAPTER 2.20 POTENTIALLY DANGEROUS AND DANGEROUS DOGS

Import Health Standard

Import Health Standard

BYLAW NUMBER

CONSOLIDATION OF DOG ACT. R.S.N.W.T. 1988,c.D-7. (Current to: May 29, 2011)

Chief Administrative Officer or CAO means the Chief Administrative Officer for the Village or their designate.

BISHOP PAIUTE TRIBE DOG CONTROL ORDINANCE NO BISHOP PAIUTE RESERVATION BISHOP, CALIFORNIA

CHAPTER 3.3. VETERINARY LEGISLATION

University Council on Animal Care

CITY OF STERLING HEIGHTS MACOMB COUNTY, MICHIGAN ORDINANCE NO. 411

1. Introduction Exclusions Title Commencement Interpretation Definitions... 4

CITY OF STERLING HEIGHTS MACOMB COUNTY, MICHIGAN ORDINANCE NO.

Agency Profile. At A Glance

Referred to Joint Committee on Municipalities and Regional Government

Title 10 Public Health and Welfare Chapter 4 Dangerous Dogs

The Corporation of the Town of New Tecumseth

CURRENT TEXAS ANIMAL LAWS

Classification and Salary: Registered Veterinary Technician Classification

Guideline to Supplement to Codes of Practice Greyhound Euthanasia

Ordinance for the Control of Dogs

Veterinary Expenditures

2013 No. (W. ) ANIMALS, WALES. The Animal Welfare (Breeding of Dogs) (Wales) Regulations 2013 ANIMAL WELFARE

GUIDELINES FOR THE OPERATION AND MANAGEMENT OF DOG BREEDING ESTABLISHMENT

V E T E R I N A R Y C O U N C I L O F I R E L A N D ETHICAL VETERINARY PRACTICE

CITY OF PITT MEADOWS Dog Control Bylaw

Dog Licensing Regulation

TMCEC Bench Book CHAPTER 17 ANIMALS. Dangerous Dogs. 1. Dogs that Are a Danger to Persons. Definitions:

WARREN COUNTY ANIMAL CONTROL ORDINANCE

CITY OF MELVILLE BYLAW NO. 09/2008 A BYLAW TO PROVIDE FOR THE LICENSING AND CONTROLLING OF CATS AND DOGS IN THE CITY OF MELVILLE.

OIE Standards on Veterinary Legislation: Chapter 3.4 of the OIE Terrestrial Animal Health Code

TITLE 10 ANIMAL CONTROL 1 CHAPTER 1 IN GENERAL

THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF GEORGIAN BAY BY-LAW NO

GOOD GOVERNANCE OF VETERINARY SERVICES AND THE OIE PVS PATHWAY

DOG BY LAW NO ADOPTED: October 28, 2013

FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS. General. 1. How can I provide feedback on the stop puppy farming provisions?

ORDINANCE NO AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ALBANY MUNICIPAL CODE (AMC) 6.18, "DANGEROUS DOGS," AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY.

(e) The registration year shall be one year starting with the date of registration.

The Animal Control Perspective

BYLAW NUMBER

CITY OF LACOMBE BYLAW 265

Aquatic Animal Health Code: 2016 Antimicrobial use in aquatic animals

Guidelines to Reduce Sea Turtle Mortality in Fishing Operations

PLEASE NOTE. authority of the Queen s Printer for the province should be consulted to determine the authoritative statement of the law.

This ordinance shall be called the Rabies Ordinance, 1934.

RESOLUTION: BE IT RESOLVED AND ORDAINED That the City of Shelton adopt the Vicious Dogs "Gracie's Law" Ordinance as follows following Ordinance:

MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN

Proposed Pet Shop (Licensing) (Scotland) Bill

SUMMARY: An ordinance amending the Washoe County Code by revising provisions relating to dangerous dogs. BILL NO. ORDINANCE NO.

Overview of the OIE PVS Pathway

BY-LAW NUMBER WHEREAS The Corporation of the Town of Whitchurch-Stouffville has pursuant to The Municipal Act, Section 354 (1), and Part 1

TITLE 10 ANIMAL CONTROL CHAPTER 1 IN GENERAL

(3) BODILY INJURY means physical pain, illness, or any impairment of physical condition.

POLICY. Number: Animals on Campus Responsible Office: Administrative Services I. PURPOSE & INTENT

93.02 DANGEROUS ANIMALS.

TITLE 17 B HEALTH AND SAFETY CHAPTER 7 ANIMAL CONTROL

AN ENLIGHTENED APPROACH TO COMPANION ANIMAL CONTROL FOR CANADIAN MUNICIPALITIES

TITLE 10 ANIMAL CONTROL CHAPTER 1 IN GENERAL

KINGDOM OF CAMBODIA Nation Religion King. DRAFT (Draft dated 11 June 2002) SUB-DECREE ON SANITARY INSPECTION OF ANIMAL AND ANIMAL PRODUCTS

Sec Mandatory spaying and neutering. a. 1. Requirement. No person may own, keep, or harbor an unaltered and unspayed dog or cat in

THE LAW OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION "ON VETERINARY MEDICINE" No DATED 14 MAY 1993

STATE OF NEW JERSEY. SENATE, No th LEGISLATURE

Transcription:

Anim al Healt h in Yukon Pr ovide Your Opinion on Pr oposed Changes t o t he Animal Health Act

Help the Government of Yukon better respond to the full range of health threats involving wild and domestic animals. Please review the issues and provide your comments on the proposed solutions. Five w ays you can subm it your com m ent s: 1. Com plet e t he on-line sur vey at: w w w.env.gov.yk.ca/anim alhealt h 2. Dr op t his quest ionnair e at : Envir onm en t Yuko n 10 Bur ns Road, Whit ehorse 3. Mail t his quest ionnair e (by Apr il 25 th ) t o: Anim al Healt h Act Review Envir onm en t Yuko n PO Box 2703, V-2 Whit eh orse, Yuko n Y1A 2C6 4. Scan and em ail it t o: anim alhealt h@gov.yk.ca 5. Fax it t o: At t n: Diane Nikit iuk (867) 393-6213 Th e co llect io n, use, an d d isclo sure o f in f o r m at io n is d o n e in co m p lian ce w it h t h e Access t o In f orm at ion an d Prot ect ion of Privacy Act. Yo ur w rit t en co m m en t s t o t h e Yuko n go vern m en t m ay b e sum m arized in o r d er t o p rovid e a f in al rep o rt. Per so n al in f o rm at io n t h at yo u p ro vid e, e.g. yo ur n am e, w ill b e p ro t ect ed in acco r d an ce w it h t h e Act.

Pr oposed Changes t o t he Animal Health Act Yukon s Animal Health Act needs to be updated for rapid and decisive action to respond to any threat to the health of wild or domestic animals and prevent risks to public health. The Act was put in place in 1997, before the position of Chief Veterinary Officer (CVO) and the Animal Health Program were established. Today, there is increased awareness of animal diseases that threaten human health and more evidence of the economic impact that animal disease can have; locally, nationally and internationally. The departments of Environment (Animal Health Unit) and Energy, Mines and Resources (Agriculture Branch) are seeking comment and suggestions on the changes proposed to update the Animal Health Act: 1) To expand the scope of the Act; 2) To define the role of the Chief Veterinary Officer; 3) To address compensation for losses from an order under the Act; 4) To introduce a process to appeal decisions; and 5) To align penalties to other jurisdictions. You can indicate your answer below each question, or use the Answer Summary on the second last page of this book.

1. Scope of t he Act Yukon s Animal Health Act only provides the legislative authority to "prevent the entry and spread of disease". The Yukon government needs to be able to respond to the full range of animal health risks including exposure to toxins and for the protection of food sources. Proposed Changes: Remove the limitations with respect to federally reportable diseases. Add the following objectives to the Act: protecting animal and human health; preventing, detecting, responding to, controlling, and recovering from hazards associated with animals that may affect animal health or human health or both; providing a consistent approach to activities related to animals that may affect animal health, human health or both; and enhancing food safety from animal products that humans may consume or use. Enhance the scope of the Act to include animal parts, animal products and dead animals, not just live animals. Expand the scope of the Act to allow for disease control areas in addition to the ability to quarantine. Question: 1) Do you support expanding the scope of the Act?

2. Chief Vet er inar y Of f icer r ole The Chief Veterinary Officer needs to be able to act rapidly in response to a disease event, using scientific and technical expertise. The current structure does not enable this. Proposed Changes: Add the role of the Chief Veterinary Officer, setting out the qualifications of the position. (te: any proposed Chief Veterinary Officer authorities would be consistent with those set out in animal health laws in other recently updated Canadian jurisdictions). Add the following areas of authority of the Chief Veterinary Officer including: Act as Chief Animal Health Inspector; Take action on reportable/notifiable diseases; Issue orders relating to infections, quarantines, and actions to be taken to mitigate and or prevent outbreaks; Issue permits; and Act with authority as delegated by the Minister. Question: 2) Do you support adding the role and authority of the Chief Veterinary Officer?

3. Com pensat ion Animal owners can be ordered to destroy animals in order to limit or eliminate a disease outbreak. Currently animal owners must go to court to obtain compensation. Most jurisdictions recognize that when government takes action to control a disease outbreak there will likely be a financial impact on animal owners. Granting the Minister the authority to provide compensation will encourage animal owners to report a disease even if it may result in the destruction of their animal(s). Proposed Changes: Add to the Animal Health Act the authority for the Minister to offer compensation. Questions: 3) Do you support adding authority for the Minster to offer compensation in the following circumstances? a) When the destruction of privately owned animals is ordered, b) For the costs of disposal, cleaning and disinfection as ordered to control disease, c) For the loss of an animal that died, was injured or had to be killed as a result of testing or other actions ordered under the Act, d) Should compensation be adjusted if an owner has, by error or omission, contributed to the introduction or spread of disease? For additional comment space, see inside back cover.

4. The r ight t o appeal The Animal Health Act does not provide for an appeal process. Proposed Changes: Add to the Act the specific decisions or actions that may be appealed along with what will be excluded from the appeal process. This would include a clearly-defined time limit and require proof of loss. Question: 4) Do you support establishing an appeal process?

5. Penalt ies f or of f ences The Yukon government wants individuals to understand that any deliberate action that would jeopardize the health of either the human, domestic or wildlife population is a serious offense (for example the deliberate disregard of orders designed to prevent disease spread, or violation of permit conditions). The Animal Health Act provides for modest fines ($200-$500) and the option of six months imprisonment. Other Canadian jurisdictions retain the option of imprisonment (up to one year) and have much higher penalties exceeding $1,000 per day for the offense. Proposed Change: Update the penalties to align them with other Canadian jurisdictions. Implementing a penalty would be through a graduated response, beginning with educational initiatives intended to encourage voluntary compliance and selfreporting when inadvertent non-compliance occurs. While enforcement actions including penalties and imprisonment would remain an option, this action would be generally reserved for repeated non-compliance or deliberate action/inaction. Questions: a) Do you support increasing penalties to align them with other Canadian jurisdictions? b) What do you think should be the highest penalty for a first offence under the Act? Up to $1,000 or $1,001 - $5,000 or $5,001 - $10,000 or $

(Optional) Please use t he inside back cover t o pr ovide any ot her com m ent s you m ay have about changes pr oposed f or t he Animal Health Act. ANSWER SUMMARY If you do not have extensive comments, you can mark your answers here, cut or tear the sheet out, and submit this sheet only. 1) Do you support expanding the scope of the Act? 2) Do you support adding the role and authority of the Chief Veterinary Officer? 3) Do you support adding authority for the Minster to offer compensation in the following circumstances? a) When the destruction of privately owned animals is ordered, b) For the costs of disposal, cleaning and disinfection as ordered to control disease, c) For the loss of an animal that died, was injured or had to be killed as a result of testing or other actions ordered under the Act,

d) Should compensation be adjusted if an owner has, by error or omission, contributed to the introduction or spread of disease? Comments on 3)... 4) Do you support establishing an appeal process? 5) Penalties for offenses a) Do you support increasing penalties to align them with other Canadian jurisdictions? b) What do you think should be the highest penalty for a first offence under the Act? Up to $1,000 or $1,001 - $5,000 or $5,001 - $10,000 or $ (Optional) Please provide any other comments you may have about changes proposed for the Animal Health Act.

Pr oposed Changes t o t he Animal Health Act over all (Optional) Please provide any other comments you may have about changes proposed for the Animal Health Act.