WRITTEN QUESTION E-2679/02 by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission. Application of the same licensing conditions to refuges providing a temporary home for protected animal species as are applied to zoological gardens.
Date: 2002-09-24
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: European standard, Netherlands, application of EU law, competence of the Member States, protected species, protection of animals, voluntary organisation, zoo

8.5.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 110 E/87

(2003/C 110 E/089)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2679/02

by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(24 September 2002)

Subject: Application of the same licensing conditions to refuges providing a temporary home for protected

animal species as are applied to zoological gardens

Is the Commission aware that refuges for protected animal species that are run, on a limited budget,
1.
by voluntary organisations such as the AAP Foundation in the Netherlands town of Almere are concerned
that, as from 9 April 2003, they will no longer be able to operate because they will be subject to the same
requirements as zoological gardens if they house more than 10 protected animal species and are open to
the public for more than seven days a year?

2.
Is it likely that applying the same conditions as for zoological gardens will result in licences
containing a requirement that the pens in which the animals (cid:1) which are always changing (cid:1) are
temporarily housed must be provided with a sign with the name of the species and that an evacuation
plan must be drawn up, whilst circuses and the majority of children’s farms where animals are kept on a
permanent basis and also pet shops will be exempt from such requirements?

3.
Can, in the view of the Commission, establishments run by volunteers for the purpose of temporarily
housing animals, which only receive very small numbers of visitors, seriously be compared with major
professional establishments where animals are kept on a permanent basis and which are attended by the
public in large numbers?

Are, in its view, concerns regarding the implementation of Directive 1999/22/EC (1) relating to the
4.
keeping of wild animals in zoos (minimum standard) based on the objective of the directive itself or the
way in which it is implemented in the national legislation of the Member State concerned and the way in
which monitoring bodies such as the ‘visitatiecommissie’
in the Netherlands assess applications for
licences?

5. What should be done, in its view, if the new rules make it impossible in practice to continue as at
present to provide a temporary refuge for animals belonging to protected species that do not have a
home?

Source: Rotterdams Dagsblad, 7 September 2002

(1) OJ L 94, 9.4.1999, p. 24.

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(4 November 2002)

The Commission is aware of the Dutch ‘Dierentuinenbesluit’ of 19 April 2002 which entered into force on
26 July 2002 and which transposes Council Directive 1999/22/EC of 29 March 1999 relating to the
keeping of wild animals in zoos.

The Directive binds Member States as to its requirements. However, national authorities have a margin of
discretion with regard to the measures to be used as long as they are in line with the provisions of the
Directive and its objectives, i.e. the protection of wild fauna and the conservation of biodiversity.

Article 2 of Council Directive 1999/22/EC states that For the purpose of this Directive,
‘zoos’ means all
permanent establishments where animals of wild species are kept for exhibitions to the public for seven or
more days a year, with the exception of circuses, pet shops and establishments which Member States
exempt from the requirements of this Directive on the grounds that they do not exhibit a significant
number of animals or species to the public and that the exemption will not jeopardise the objectives of
this Directive. While the Directive therefore allows for an exemption for certain establishments, it does not
define the concept of ‘significant number’ quoted above. Therefore, while the Directive could apply to
refuges housing more than 10 protected animal species, the Directive does not explicitly require this.