Petition Review and centrally Record Pet Euthanasia Data
With some reports suggesting a rise in euthanasia rates, we think research must be undertaken by government and relevant bodies to centrally record how many dogs and cats are being euthanised: where, why, age, breed, gender and microchip status. All veterinarians must be required to report this data
More details
A potential upcoming loss of rescue spaces could place a greater burden of abandonment on local authorities. Any new restrictions on rehoming from UK rescues and restricted rescuing from abroad could lead to more demand for purchased pups and encourage back street breeding with no Rescue Back Up. We want Government to centralise data as currently there is no obligation to provide accurate euthanasia numbers outside of local authorities. We believe transparency is needed from all stakeholders
12,930 signatures
Show on a map the geographical breakdown of signatures by constituency
100,000 signatures required to be considered for a debate in Parliament
Government responded
This response was given on 23 February 2026
The vast majority of pet euthanasia cases are for health and welfare reasons to relieve suffering. There is no indication of systemic issues that would necessitate new reporting obligations.
Read the response in full
Decisions around euthanising an animal are often complex and emotionally sensitive, particularly when the animal is a cherished family pet. Veterinary surgeons play a central role in these considerations, especially in relation to companion animals. Euthanasia serves as a key safeguard for animal welfare by alleviating suffering where necessary, while surgeons must also consider the owner’s wishes and circumstances.
The requirements within the veterinary profession already provide safeguards against unnecessary euthanasia. Advice about euthanasia is laid out in the guidance underpinning the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons (RCVS) Code of Professional Conduct for Veterinary Surgeons, which all veterinary surgeons practising in the UK must adhere to. Where a veterinary surgeon considers a request for euthanasia is not in the best interest of the animal, they can challenge this.
In 2021, Defra worked closely with the veterinary profession to provide greater assurance that alternatives to euthanasia are explored before a healthy dog or cat is put down. Following these discussions, the RVCS agreed to incorporate the principle of microchip scanning before euthanasia into the guidance that underpins their Code of Professional Conduct. Checking the details on the relevant microchip database can alert the vet to anyone else who may have an interest in the animal such as a rescue centre. This information can help inform consideration about alternatives to euthanasia. The Code of Professional Conduct also provides guidance on obtaining consent before euthanasia. The person presenting the animal is required to sign a consent form attesting to the fact they are the owner or are authorised by the owner.
Earlier this year, Defra concluded an exercise involving campaigners, the veterinary profession and animal welfare stakeholders, to consider how the new scanning requirements prior to euthanasia have been embedded. The responses will now be analysed and aggregated findings shared with key stakeholders.
In addition, Defra maintains regular contact with key animal welfare stakeholders, including the Canine and Feline Sector Group, which brings together leading welfare charities, veterinary bodies, and trade associations. Through this forum, Defra receives up-to-date intelligence on emerging issues and operational challenges.
We have not seen any evidence that unnecessary euthanasia is occurring on a scale that would justify further research or the introduction of an additional reporting requirement.
Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
At 100,000 signatures...
At 100,000 signatures, this petition will be considered for debate in Parliament