Putting Animals Back into the Animal Welfare Act
11 February 2026
On the 10th of February, the The Animal Law Foundation and the League against Cruel Sports presented a letter to the Department of the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. The full text is attached to this post. In the letter, which marks the twentieth aniversary of the passing of the Animal Welfare Act 2006, the ALF and the LACS ackowledge that the Act has undoubtedly improved the lives of many animals. However, its full potential is yet to be realised.
The authors of the letter identify several key areas that have yet to be addressed:
a. The overly permissive interpretation of what constitutes
“unnecessary suffering”;
b. The inconsistent and inadequate application of animals’ welfare
needs; and
c. The exclusion of certain animals from protection.
The term “unnecessary” has been far too loosely interpreted. Harmful practices continue not because they are genuinely required, but because they are traditional, convenient, or commercially profitable. Details of these practices are set out in the letter. Commercial expediency is often enlisted as a necessity, but, as the letter points out, ” the law is clear: financial gain can never justify cruelty.”
“Under section 9 of the Act animals are entitled to a suitable environment, an appropriate diet, the ability to express normal behaviour, appropriate social contact, and protection from pain, suffering, injury, and disease. Despite this, many millions of animals continue to live in conditionsthat plainly fail to meet these minimum legal standards.”
The authors point out that robust interpretation of this law is both possible and effective, as was demonstrated by the ban on foie gras production in the UK, secured through the requirement under the Act to provide animals under the control of humans with a “suitable diet”. Force feeding geese to produce grossly oversized fatty livers is clearly not an “appropriate” way of provisioning them.
Tradition is not enough to justify suffering under the Act. The recent proposal to ban boiling lobsters and other crustaceans alive was secured through the Welfare at the Time of Killing Regulations 2015 and the Animal Sentience Act 2022 which officially recognises suffering and pain in most animals, not just mammals. This ban also demonstrates a serious weakness of the Animal Welfare Act 2006 in that it excludes whole categories of animals from its protection, most notably wild animals not deemed to be “under the control of man” and invertebrates, like crabs and lobsters.
“Excluding animals from protection also sends a damaging message about whose lives matter, rather than recognising them as sentient beings capable of suffering. This position is increasingly at odds with scientific evidence, which consistently demonstrates sentience across a wide range of species.
…If the Animal Welfare Act is to remain credible and fit for purpose, it must reflect suffering itself as the trigger for protection, rather than an artificial test of ownership, domestication, or control.”
The authors urge upon DEFRA a proper logical interpretation of the 2006 Act’s commitments, which then would allow regulations passed under the Act to be used to “give full and effective practical effect to these commitments.”
This anniversary, it is noted, provides a clear opportunity and responsibility to reset the interpretation of the Act, ensure consistency, and confirm the principle that all animals deserve adequate protection. “Animals cannot wait another 20 years for the protections they are already legally entitled to receive.”
