The Valencian Parliament entered its second-to-last plenary session today with a lengthy agenda of regulations and opinions. One of the most anticipated points is about fixing positions within the Valencia Animal Welfare Law, with voting slated for tomorrow. Beyond the expected, a coalition of groups is prepared to back a plan that faces opposition and constitutional warnings from Vox and certain hunters.
A representative from Podem, Beatriu Gasco, advocated updating a law three decades old that would recognize all animals as sentient beings for the first time and establish a zero-slaughter policy. The proposal also includes measures for protecting and managing cat colonies. While the leader of the purple party praised the step toward animal defense and protection, he did not hesitate to point out contradictions noted by socialists on the definition of animal abuse. He remarked that the Socialist Party fell short in several aspects.
New pet law puts 400 pet stores on the brink of closing
Response and defense from PSPV. David Bald, a socialist lawmaker, argued there is no danger to hounds, linking the opposition’s criticisms to the election period as he spoke to reporters in the corridors of Les Corts. He was also asked whether the PPCV aligned with the Feijóo governments in Galicia or Madrid, noting a similar law approved during his time as Galicia’s president.
hunting dogs
Within Botànic, Cristina Rodríguez of Compromís observed that the current draft contains no explicit position on hunting dogs, while acknowledging that the measure does not adopt a blanket definition of who is included. She stressed that no animals are excluded and that dogs treated as pets should be included under the same framework. Beatriu Gascó added that this is not a straight yes-or-no debate about hunting; the goal is not to demonize hunting because the issue lies elsewhere.
That stance echoed through the hunting federation, where government partners debated during the drafting process. The consideration of hunting dogs and related activities drew much criticism from the opposition. Eliza Díaz, a PP member, framed the situation as unnecessary friction within the norm. She argued that the lack of consensus and clarity stemmed from a broader national debate and accused Botànic of sectarianism that burdens hunting and rural life.
Botànic will use the ‘broomstick’ plenary card in March to speed up the legislature
Eduardo del Pozo from Cs suggested the rule could be unconstitutional due to inconsistencies not clearly defined in the text, a concern echoed by José Luis Aguirre from Vox, who warned that the law might face 52 potential objections in Congress.
Lorraine Martínez, head of the Community Hunting Federation, acknowledged some progress in addressing animal abuse but warned that the law does not guarantee complete safety for hunting dogs because many provisions will require revisions once the law gains national approval. He noted that the project’s initial presentation months ago positioned hunting as a clear stance against the industry. He urged timely analysis and insisted Botànic groups understood that changes were coming, suggesting that opposition perspectives were answered with firm yeses and noes. Martínez added that the law’s launch a few months back framed hunting in a way that could be seen as opposing the rural economy.
defenders
Aida Gascon, director of AnimaNaturalis in Spain, welcomed the Valencian laws as a significant step forward and highlighted Valencia as one of the more advanced autonomous regions in animal protection. Gascon emphasized the inclusion of hunting dogs as pets and urged the national government to mirror this approach in broader regulation. She also highlighted the ban on circuses using animals or punitive methods as a positive feature.
The representatives of animal-rights groups argued that the Valencian norm does not conflict with national standards, noting that some points will need to be updated as the regulation evolves. They stressed that the move allows for regional adaptability while maintaining core protections, and they cautioned that only specific provisions may face constitutional scrutiny as changes are implemented across the country.