動物愛護法とイヌの福祉
The Animal Welfare Act and Dog Welfare
東京農業大学 農学部 教授／農林水産省 生物多様性戦略検討会 座長・林 良博

Yoshihiro HAYASHI, Veterinarian, Professor, Tokyo University of Agriculture;
Chairperson, MAFF National Committee for Biodiversity Strategy

Today, I am going to talk about the Animal Welfareof the subcommittee was that so many members ofAct, or to give it its full name, the ‘Act on Welfare

the public wished to observe its meetings that accessand Management of Animals’, for which revision

had to be determined by drawing lots. Also, when therecommendations were submitted on December

subcommittee invited the public to make comments,

21, 2011. This law was previously subject to major

120,000 comments were received for the first half ofrevisions in 1999 (when its name was changed fromthe proceedings and 50,000 comments for the secondthe ‘Law Concerning the Protection and Control ofhalf. Although the MOE has a large number of councils

Animals’). In addition, a stipulation had been added thatand committees, no other committee has received so

the law was to be reviewed at five-yearly intervals. So

many comments.

it was revised again in 2006 when heated discussions
once again took place. This time around the plan is to

In this sense, we can accurately state that a great

present a bill with major revisions to the Diet in the

many people have taken an interest in the Animal

form of a “lawmaker-initiated bill” during 2012.

Welfare Act. We began our studies in connection withthe latest revision of the act in August 2010 and first

At the Ministry of the Environment (MOE) there is

attempted to assess awareness for the act. According

a council called the Central Environmental Council

to our survey, the ratio of respondents who knew thatand within this council is a section called the ‘Animal

the legislation existed was 67% and the ratio claiming

Welfare Section’. I am the chief of this section. At our

to know the content was 24%. So, while a great many

26th section meeting on July 15th 2010, we decided

people had comments about the proceedings, fromto set up a subcommittee to examine the rights andthe standpoint of the nation as a whole, the number ofwrongs about revisions to the Animal Welfare Actcomments was not very high. Nevertheless, the fact thatand to begin deliberations on the subject. As the

67% of the general public knew the name of the act

Central Environment Council is a large organizationshows that, even then, a considerable number of people

it was further agreed that anything decided at thewere taking an interest in its revision.

subcommittee level would be considered as a Section
decision. In turn, things decided at Section level would

In Japan, the ratios for spaying and neutering

be considered as having been decided by the Council.

operations are currently 42% for dogs and 83% for cats.

This put the subcommittee in a very important position.

This is a controversial matter, in particular because theAlso, the arrangements were to be set up in such arate for cats is quite high.

way that the Section Chief became the Chair of thesubcommittee.

Compared with four decades ago, the number of dogs
and cats abandoned and taken to local public health

So the subcommittee began work in August 2010

centers has declined significantly. Back in the 1970s,

and completed its first round of deliberations in

the number of abandoned dogs alone amounted to

December 2011. Within the space of 17 months, we

700,000 per year. Japan is the only country in theheld a total of 25 meetings. One extraordinary feature242

りぶ・らぶ・あにまるず 神戸アニマルケア国際会議 2012

world to have reduced the number of abandoned dogs

such matters. Nevertheless, we have given someand cats to just a tenth of the 1970s level. The actual

consideration to the issues mentioned. For example, we

published figures depend on how the statistics are

conducted a questionnaire and carried out a review ofinterpreted. For example, in the U.S., between 800,000

standards. This is one of the merits of having legislationand 1.2 million cats are destroyed each year. Just as inreviewed every five years.

Japan, these are mainly kittens. As for dogs, according
to Dr. Benjamin L. Hart, probably 5 million dogs inNow, I will tell you briefly about what we discussed

the U.S. are abandoned by their owners and destroyed

during our first 25 meetings at the Central

every year. I think that Japanese people are somewhat

Environmental Council and what we submitted in our

averse to the idea of killing animals. However, in Japan,

report. Firstly, a major focus of our discussions was theeven today, over 200,000 cats are destroyed annually.

subject of animal handling businesses. Based on our

These are mainly kittens because a great many cats

discussions, we produced a report recommending thatgive birth to unwanted offspring. It is for this reason

late-night sales be prohibited. Essentially, we urgedthat I believe the Japanese people are becoming morethat the display and sale of puppies and kittens shouldaware of the need to spay or neuter their own pets.

be prohibited after 8 pm. But we decided it would beunrealistic to try to prohibit all animal-related activities

There is currently a debate going on about theafter 8 pm. As the Director of the Japan Kennel Club,advantages and disadvantages of issuing animals with

Nagamura-san, has said people of today are busy,

an official identification (IDs). From my point of view,

myself included. I come home at 11 pm after which I

IDs are necessary in order to give animals “citizenship”,

take my dog for a walk. If that sort of behavior were toor perhaps I should say they are necessary for instillingbe prohibited, it would be a very bad thing for dogs.

recognition that animals have a certain social status.
In any case, it is a major advance that the number ofConcerning this issue, our main question was, knowing

animals with an ID increased from 60,000 at the end ofthat there are buyers who visit pet shops while

2006 to 330,000 in 2010.

drunk, would it be acceptable to restrict the shopping
convenience to such people in order to reduce the

As a result of the revisions to the Animal Welfare Act instress placed on the animals, particularly where these

2006, the number of traders subject to the regulations

animals were young dogs and cats?

governing animal handling businesses has, as of 2010,
expanded dramatically and the number of registered

The same reasoning also applies to mobile retailers

facilities have increased 1.7 times.

(sales vans, etc.). In many of the more mountainous
regions of Japan where most of the local residents

Next, I’d like to talk about promoting appropriate

are elderly people, there are mobile shops that travel

treatment for experimental (laboratory) animals andaround selling daily goods. Because these shops help toindustrial (farm) animals. It is difficult for the MOE

support the lives of the elderly, these retailers should

to become involved in these two issues because thenot be subject to regulation per se. But because we

Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare (MHLW) andsee no end to the examples of mobile retailers selling

the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science andanimals in a way that negatively impacts the health andTechnology (MEXT) have jurisdiction over experimental

safety of these animals, the subcommittee reported thatanimals. Likewise, the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries

some sort of regulation is required to deal with suchand Forestry (MAFF) has jurisdiction over industrial

cases.

animals. The prevailing attitude in officialdom is that
if there is a governing agency for a specific issue,

Another thing we looked at was ‘Internet Retailing’. The

we should leave all matters related to that issue

Internet is a very convenient method for people wanting

to the agency concerned and not attempt to touch

to buy an animal from excellent breeders located far

2nd Live Love Animals International Conference on Animal Care in Kobe 2012243

away. But in principle, pet sales not permitted except

Another reason is that there are six or seven guidewhen the selling is conducted face-to-face. The Internet

dog associations in Japan established as foundations,is a very good way to exchange information between

although the number of dogs managed by each ispeople located far away from each other. But it is not

not particularly large. Guide dog associations entrust

permissible for people to sell a pet animal without the

puppies to ordinary families (puppy workers) for abuyer seeing it first or without there being a face-to-certain period. When the dogs are returned, they selectface explanation about the animal being given to thethose they consider to have the aptitude to be a guidepurchaser.

dog and then train them up. In Japan, puppies areusually handed over to puppy workers at the age of 50

These days, the scale of the auction business has

days. This is just over seven weeks of age. If a minimal

become huge, so we also reported that it is necessary

legal limit of eight weeks of age were to be established,

to improve transparency and thoroughly disclose

these associations would have to delay the time they

information about auction markets.

hand over the puppies to the puppy workers.

A major task that had remained from the time of

In the National Diet, however, the Democratic Party

the previous revision was deciding the minimumof Japan is sticking with eight weeks of age, while theage at which puppies and kittens could be sold. Our

Komeito political party say that seven weeks is good, so

recommendations were based on debating how long

I don’t know how things will finally be decided. Therepuppies and kittens need to stay with their motheris also a possibility that the minimum age may differ

in order to experience sufficient maternal love andaccording to the breed of dog. The JKC recognizes

attention and obtain the initial education they needapproximately 150 breeds, and the development offrom their mother. We gave this discussion a very highpuppies does differ according to the breed. It would

priority.

be quite rough if we were to simply group all breeds
together and employ a common standard to cover them

There was quite a diversity of opinion on the issue. The

all. I think the best way would be to tentatively decide

thinking on the animal industry side, including the pet

on a general minimum age of seven weeks, then single

retailers, was that the minimum age should be 45 days.

out specific breeds for which a higher minimum age

At present, the industry is employing a self-regulated

is required. After that, before the next revision of theminimum age of 40 days and they believe 45 days is alaw five years from now, we should acquire scientificfigure they can aim at in the future.

data to provide a reason for raising the minimum age
to eight weeks and then revisit this issue at the time

Meanwhile, Dr. James Serpell, who was mentionedof the next revision. To decide to establish a minimum

earlier by Professor Uchiyama, has published accurate

age of eight weeks just because certain other countries

data resting on a scientific foundation suggesting thathave done so is not an appropriate way for a sovereign

seven weeks should be the minimum age for separating

nation to determine legislation.

puppies and kittens from their mothers. Also, within244

the developed world, there are some countries andRegarding limitations on breeding dogs and cats,states that use eight weeks as the minimum age. I don’an opinion was raised that for protecting breedingt know the rationale behind settling on eight weeks, but

dog health, stricter controls should be exercisedperhaps it has been implemented on an experimental

over irresponsible breeders who currently use highbasis. This issue has been passed down to us named

breeding frequencies and short breeding intervals. On

as “the eight weeks of age problem”. As chair of thethe other hand, another opinion was expressed that

subcommittee, I felt that seven weeks of age was

optimum breeding frequencies and intervals should

the best figure, because it was backed by a scientificdiffer according to the breed, because some breeds canrationale.

breed more frequently without problem while others

りぶ・らぶ・あにまるず 神戸アニマルケア国際会議 2012cannot. So it is difficult to regulate breeding in a single

The majority opinion was that it was more meaningful

uniform way. The subcommittee came to recognize

to discuss this issue as a hygiene issue than an animal

that we should leave breeding regulations unchanged

handling business issue. On the other hand, someand treat it as an animal welfare issue. Accordingly wemembers did argue that if Japanese pet owners were

decided not to submit any concrete proposals regarding

asked if it would be acceptable to dispose of their deadmaximum breeding frequencies at this time.

pet’s carcass in the same way as raw garbage, perhaps
90% of them would disagree. Obviously, people are

Another issue on which we were unable to set

emotionally attached to their pets in the same way

numerical values was the standardization of rearingthat they are attached to human family members. They

facilities. I will talk more about this later but, in order toremain so even after their pets have died. This being

guarantee the five freedoms for animals, it is importantthe case, rather than handling the carcasses as raw

that animals can move about freely and be free fromgarbage, the view was expressed that disposal should

hunger and thirst. To this end, breeding facilities need

be regulated under the Animal Welfare Act and theto be set up in a way that matches the requirements ofcompanies performing this disposal should be accepted

specific dog or cat breeds. We found this it difficult toas animal handling businesses. While holders of thismake a scientifically based judgment on this issue. So

opinion were in the minority this time, the argument

in its report the subcommittee recommended that an

may be brought up again in future.

expert committee comprised of specialists in ecology,
etc., should discuss the issue. I expect that the MOE will

Also, the opinion was voiced that amphibians and fish

establish such a committee.

should be added to the classes of animals coveredby the Animal Welfare Act. Currently, the act applies

Although the subcommittee was comprised of 16

only to mammals, birds and reptiles. Its scope does

members, these people came from a variety of othernot extend to amphibians, fish or invertebrates. Under

fields and most were not experts on the subject at issue.

the current legal situation, if somebody were to tearThat is why our report recommended that a specialist

a live frog limb from limb, they would not be liable tocommittee be established as a future task.

prosecution under the law. The subcommittee agreed
that it would be natural to include amphibians andOver the course of our work we examined a great manyfish under the scope of the Animal Welfare Act but the

points. Firstly, we studied the addition of other kinds ofmajority opinion was that it would be premature tobusiness. We received insistent appeals from operators

include these classes at present.

of animal carcass cremation and burial services who
told us they wanted to be registered as animal handling

However, there is the problem of many cases in whichbusinesses. Usually, businesses in most industries

amphibians and fish raised as pets are abandoned

dislike being registered. My impression was that the

because their owners are no longer able to take carereason why these operators also want to be registeredof them. As a result they live here and there in theas animal handling businesses is to be sociallywild as alien species. In particular, exotic freshwaterauthorized. However, Article 2 (Fundamental Principle)

fish proliferate in rivers and lakes across the countryof the Animal Welfare Act begins with the phrase, “In

causing environmental problems. During thelight of the fact that animals are living beings.” With

subcommittee meetings, the opinion was expressed that

this in mind, the majority of subcommittee members

traders in live amphibians and fish should be controlled

took a negative stance on the issue, believing that such

under the Animal Welfare Act in order to crack down

companies, although they do handle animal carcasses,on the situation. However, the majority opinion was

are unsuitable to be classified as animal handlingthat this issue should be discussed from the standpoint

businesses.

of biodiversity in Japan and the preservation of native
species rather than from an animal welfare standpoint.

2nd Live Love Animals International Conference on Animal Care in Kobe 2012245

So it should not be an issue to which the Animal

responsible for implementing the regulations could

Welfare Act is applied.

increase their staff numbers or budgets, but in thepresent financial climate, this would be difficult.

The issue of whether the Animal Welfare Act should be
extended to cover the raising of experimental animals

Accordingly, we believe that instead of pushing forwas subject to a lively debate in which the pros anduniform regulation across the board, it would be bettercons were hashed out. As I mentioned earlier, without

to use more flexible strategies to deal with highly

more sufficient time to discuss such issues in depth,

professional operations such as animal hospitals, zoos

this subcommittee cannot solve the problems related

and aquariums.

to experimental animals and industrial animals. Our
discussions remained bogged down on the pros andHowever, for some species, there are some things

cons behind the issues.

that must be more strictly explained. When importing
various species from overseas and selling them in Japan

Next, we talked about homes for old dogs and cats,as pets, it is necessary to increase the traceability ofwhich is another problem. It is younger women who

each individual animal with a clearly stated ‘country of

most frequently say that they would worry about their

origin’. Also, such animals sometimes need extra special

pet, and would want a pet care service to take overattention.

after they die. So they make arrangements to transfer
ownership of their animals while they are still alive.

There are some animals for which more detailed

But the operators of these facilities ask for significant

explanations are needed, but then again, does a species

amounts of money, and their industry is expanding

such as the Mongolian gerbil really need the same

rapidly. The subcommittee concluded that suchdegree of detailed explanation as a dog? Accordingly,

businesses should be subject to regulation as animal

explanations that differ according to the species orhandling businesses.

breed are required.

Moreover, animal welfare organizations frequently

Another item on the subcommittee’s agenda was thehandle live animals, as do organizations that find foster

increasing of penalties. Although penalties for various

families for animals, and carry out other activities. But

offenses under the act had already been raised during

although these organizations handle animals, we agreed

the previous revision, nobody was opposed to further

that they require a different response.

increases. In the old days, regardless of how bad theanimal abuse case, the maximum fine was 50,000 yen.

There are also vocational schools raising a large

This was the same level of penalty as a minor offense

number of dogs and cats for educational purposes rather

such as urinating in the street.

than for profit per se. If we include trimming schools,
there must be over one hundred such places in Japan.

Under the previous revision, the maximum fine for

We concluded that it is necessary to consider putting

abusing an animal was increased to 1 million yen and,these vocational schools into the same framework as

in addition, prison terms were introduced. However,businesses from the perspective of how the animals arewithin the Invasive Alien Species Act, which is under

treated under their roof.

MOE jurisdiction, the penalties for some offenses can
carry prison terms of up to three years and fines of up

On the other hand, ways to ease restrictions were also

to 3 million yen for individuals (or 100 million yen inon our agenda. Simply strengthening regulations may

the case of corporations).

only result in local government personnel becoming

246

too busy to the point of exhaustion. Of course, it would

It is noteworthy that more severe penalties werebe wonderful if the local government departments

instituted when the Food Sanitation Act was revised

りぶ・らぶ・あにまるず 神戸アニマルケア国際会議 2012

recently. So I think it is possible that the penalties fordiscussed again in the future.

animal abuse will also be increased. In reality, a balanceshould be maintained between the penalties imposed

Concerning industrial animals, there was an opinion

under different laws. From the standpoints of boththat the five freedoms should be more clearly stated.

ordinary and legal commonsense, penalties related

However, the subcommittee concluded that, since theto animal welfare offenses should not be markedly

five freedoms apply not only to industrial animals

different or unreasonably low. While we were unsure ofbut to all animals kept by humans, it would be more

what result might be achievable, the subcommittee did

appropriate to clearly state the five freedoms as aagree that the penalties for these offenses should bephilosophy applied to animals as a whole.

increased.
With that, I complete my summary of the subcommittee’
It is difficult to apply such legislation to the handlings discussions on eight major tasks applicable to theof experimental animals or industrial animals. At therevision of the Animal Welfare Act.

previous revision, it was decided to adhere to the ‘3Rs’of ‘replacement, reduction and refinement’, thereby

Thank you very much for listening.

reducing the number of experiments that need to
employ animals. Instead alternative methods should be
used. Major pharmaceutical makers and the cosmetics
industry practice the 3Rs by installing councils tooversee the policy. At universities, there are medical andagricultural departments that have installed councils.
However, liberal arts faculties also occasionally perform
animal tests and some of these departments have notinstalled appropriate councils.
In addition, some food makers perform animal
tests, but it is difficult to grasp the extent. So on thesubcommittee, opinions were expressed that it would
be good to introduce a notification or registration
system.
In Japan the welfare of experimental animals is carriedout under a system of voluntary controls. But in manyother countries their welfare is evaluated by external
inspectors, etc. Among the subcommittee members two
opposing opinions were voiced. The first was that, as
there have been requests from universities and research
institutions that conduct animal experiments but whichmake efforts to observe the 3Rs, so we should respect
their efforts and maintain a wait and see attitude, atleast for the time being. The other opinion was that,whatever these institutions may say, it is generally
doubtful whether fairness can be guaranteed byvoluntary controls alone, and animal experimentation
cannot be treated as an exception. So this issue will be

2nd Live Love Animals International Conference on Animal Care in Kobe 2012

247

248

【Slide 1】【Slide 5】【Slide 2】【Slide 6】【Slide 3】【Slide 7】【Slide 4】【Slide 8】

りぶ・らぶ・あにまるず 神戸アニマルケア国際会議 2012

【Slide 9】【Slide 10】【Slide 11】【Slide 12】

2nd Live Love Animals International Conference on Animal Care in Kobe 2012249