The Environment
and Animal Welfare



The first report on the environment to be issued by the Board was Man in his Living Environment. This was debated by the Church Assembly in 1970.

In 1986 the General Synod received the report Our Responsibility for the Living Environment. A working party was set up by the Board in 1990 to produce a ‘statement of Christian Stewardship in relation to the whole of creation’. This statement was issued as Christians and the Environment (GS Misc)

In July, 1992, the General Synod carried the following motion from the Lichfield Diocese:

‘That this Synod, affirming its belief and trust in God the Father who made the world, believe that the dominion given to human beings over the natural order is that of stewards who have to render an account, urge HM Government:

  1. to take all possible steps, both nationally and internationally, to establish a just and economical use of the earth’s energy resources, and to minimise the impact of consequential environmental pollution;

  2. to take positive steps to curtail damage to flora and fauna by human activities in this country, and seek to extend such restraint elsewhere in the world;

  3. to consider what contribution it can make to the encouragement of the stabilising of the world’s population so that human beings can live in sustainable harmony with the rest of the natural order and flourish without want;

and ask that dioceses be given the necessary information to consider what individual dioceses may do practically in their affirmation of this faith.’

Following the debate, the Board prepared a leaflet for parishes wanting to take practical action. This was entitled Conservation and the Environment.

 

July 1995 - Ethical Investment - Private Member’s Motion

‘That this Synod:

  1. recognise the need for a stronger and clearer ethical investment policy on the handling of Church assets, as proposed, for example in Faith in the Countryside; and

  2. welcome the establishment of an ethical working party by the Church Commissioners to keep ethnical theory and practice under review and request that it report annually to Synod.’

 

ANIMAL WELFARE

The Church Assembly, during a debate in 1970, registered its disapproval of hare coursing, deer hunting and otter hunting.

In order to mark Animal Welfare Year 1976-77 the General Synod carried the following Private Member’s Motion put down by Mr Oswald Clark:

‘That this Synod

  1. applauds the action taken by nearly 70 national and local animal welfare societies in this centenary year of the (unamended) Cruelty to Animals Act, 1876, in promoting and supporting Animal Welfare year, 1976-77;

  2. welcomes the declared Animal Welfare Year Objective, viz: "to prevent cruelty to animal life by the promotion of humane behaviour so as to reduce pain, fear and stress inflicted upon animals by mankind whether relating to pet animals, wild animals, animals used in laboratory experiments, farm animals, performing animals or any other form of animal life"; and

  3. urges members of the Church of England and all others concerned for the due recognition of the rights of sentient creatures in God’s world to have regard to this objective; to make more widely known the plight of many animals and birds today; and to take all possible steps:

    1. to make life more tolerable for those creatures,

    2. to safeguard species threatened with extinction, and

    3. generally to prevent ignorance, neglect, cruelty, degradation and commercial exploitation so far as animals are concerned.’

In 1990, the General Synod debated a Private Member’s Motion put down by the Archdeacon of Colchester which read:

‘That this Synod, recognising the welfare of animals and their just treatment as an essential part of our responsibility towards creation,

  1. urges the Board for Social Responsibility to initiate a full theological exploration of human responsibility towards animals;

  2. is opposed in principle to all forms of cruelty and the wanton killing of animals, and calls upon the Government to assess the effectiveness of present legislation;

  3. invites the Church Commissioners to review critically hunting for sport and intensive farming on Church owned land’.

In preparation for this debate the Board prepared a background paper Animal Welfare (GS Misc 341) .

The motion was amended during the debate and was carried in the following form:

‘That this Synod, recognising the welfare of animals and their just treatment as an essential part of our responsibility towards creation calls upon the Board for Social Responsibility urgently to prepare a statement of Christian Stewardship in relation to the whole of creation to challenge Government, Church and people to engage in a critical review of human responsibility to the living environment.’

There were two developments in the mid-1990’s which gave rise to a debate on animal welfare in November 1996. The first was the growth in public awareness of and protest against the export of bull calves for veal production and the conditions under which they were being transported. The second was the spread of Bovine Spongiform Encepalopathy (BSE or ‘mad cow’ disease) which had dire consequences both for animals and the farming community and associated concerns. The text of the Motion was as follows:

That this Synod:

  1. urge improvement in the conditions in which livestock are transported on the mainland of Europe;

  2. support the efforts of the UK Government to tighten EU legislation in this respect;

  3. express its support for British farmers and others adversely affected by current confusion over BSE;

  4. in the light of the current backlog in slaughter arrangements, call on the Government to take urgent measures to end the present overstocking on farms and attendant suffering to farm animals and the farming community; and

  5. call on the Government to prohibit the export of veal calves to countries that permit these animals to be reared in conditions which would be illegal in the UK.

The Board for Social Responsibility set up a working party to produce the statement as requested in the July 1990 motion. This was published as Christians and the Environment in 1991. It is available from the Board’s offices on request (please send a 35p stamp).

 

HUNTING

Land is owned both by the Church Commissioners and by some of the 42 Diocesan Boards of Finance. As far as the Commissioners are concerned, it is for tenants to decide whether or not to allow local hunts to cross their land. The addition of new clauses to an existing tenancy agreement cannot be achieved by unilateral action by either tenant or landlord alone, but must also have the other party’s consent. It seems to the Commissioners that those tenants who would be prepared to accept a clause prohibiting hunting over the land in their tenancy would be unlikely to allow a local hunt on to their land in any event; conversely, those tenants willing to give the hunt access to the land would not be prepared to agree to such a clause. The Commissioners believe that it is up to the individual conscience of their tenants and that coercion either way would be unacceptable.

 

FACTORY FARMING

The Church Commissioners require anyone who is renting a farm from them to adhere to a strict code in relation to the way in which animals are kept. This is not part of normal tenancy agreements.

 

GENETICALLY MODIFIED ORGANISMS

The Report of the Ethical Investment Advisory Group on GMOs, 5 April 2000, is available as an RTF download.

 

update April 1999


Go to the top