By Bond Robertson 
The fate of the Serval remains unclear. Politicians want the Minister of Climate and Environment on the field.
Nino and the owner remained in hiding for more than four months. Now the issue has become a topic in Parliament.
– It would be completely wrong for an animal to lose its life, says MP Tor Andre Johnsen (Frp).
background
– The issue concerns me because many people are interested in it. We receive many inquiries. What a beautiful animal, says Johnson (FRP) of Hedmark.
The serval was discovered this summer while wandering around one of Bjornavjorden’s neighbourhoods.
It is illegal to transport servos or assist in transporting them into Norway. It is also illegal to keep them as pets. The owner pleaded guilty to both charges in a telephone interview with police.
The case has aroused great interest. Especially when the Norwegian Environment Agency said the most likely outcome was El Niño euthanasia.
They also denied NOAHS’s request to move the service to a rescue center in South Africa.
Johnsen questions the Norwegian Environment Agency’s interpretation of the regulations.
-It would be wrong to use taxpayer money for euthanasia. He says there are alternatives.
He believes a rescue center in South Africa and a zoo in Norway are two reasonable solutions.
– Personally, I am very happy with Dyreparken in Kristiansand. It would be great if he came there, so the Norwegian people could see him.
The zoo had previously said it could accept the service temporarily, but this is not a permanent solution.
“But everything can change,” says Johnson.
You want to change the rule
Ingvild Wittrus Thorsvik (V) of Agder challenged the Minister of Climate and Environment to change the regulations.
According to Norwegian regulations, you must relocate rather than euthanize in cases where someone illegally transports endangered species to Norway. But this only applies to List A threatened species, i.e. those most vulnerable to extinction. The serval is on List B.
Both politicians point out that this is just a rule in Norway. The international CITES region, on which the Norwegian regulation is based, does not differentiate between List A and List B animals.
– Will the Minister take the necessary measures to improve the systems in accordance with the agreement? asks Thorsvik in his question to the Minister.
She told BT she believes regulations should be clearer.
– I think the Serval case shows that the regulations do not take sufficient account of the fact that euthanasia should always be a last resort, she says.
Won’t comment
When BT contacts the Department for Climate and Environment, it refers to the Minister’s written response to both representatives.
He writes that the ministry will evaluate whether there is a need to change the regulations.
At the same time, he writes that he cannot comment now, because the Ministry is dealing with two complaints about the Environment Agency’s decisions in this matter:
– So I can’t comment on it at the present time, he writes.