New animal welfare legislation approved in Northern Ireland

2011 ◽  
Vol 168 (9) ◽  
pp. 225-225
Keyword(s):  
Northern Ireland ◽  
Animal Welfare ◽  
Animal Welfare Legislation

scholarly journals Increasing Maximum Penalties for Animal Welfare Offences in South Australia—Has It Caused Penal Change?

Animals ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (12) ◽  
pp. 236 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rochelle Morton ◽  
Michelle Hebart ◽  
Alexandra Whittaker
Keyword(s):  
Animal Welfare ◽  
Interdisciplinary Research ◽  
South Australia ◽  
Companion Animal ◽  
Animal Abuse ◽  
Electronic Form ◽  
Before And After ◽  
Case Files ◽  
Animal Welfare Legislation

Animal welfare legislation in South Australia underwent amendments in 2008, where all the maximum penalties for animal welfare offences were doubled. This commitment to increased penalties arguably provides evidence of the legislature’s intent with respect to penalties. Studies have speculated that the legislative intent behind the increased penalties is not being reflected in the courts. This interdisciplinary research sought to gain evidence to confirm or disprove these speculations, by quantifying the average custodial sentence and monetary fine handed down in court before and after the 2008 amendments. Furthermore, trends relating to the species of animal affected and the demographics of the offender were identified. A total of 314 RSPCA (SA) closed case files from 2006 to 2018 were converted into an electronic form. Since the amendments, the average penalties have doubled in magnitude; fines have increased from $700 to $1535, while prison sentences have increased from 37 days to 77 days. Cases of companion animal abuse were most common (75% of all cases) and the location of the offence was found to influence offending. These findings suggest that the 2008 amendments have caused the average penalties to increase. However, it is debatable whether these increases are enough to effectively punish animal abusers.

scholarly journals American Animal Welfare Legislation

2010 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 1
Author(s):  
Oriol Caudevilla Parellada
Keyword(s):  
Animal Welfare ◽  
Animal Welfare Legislation

scholarly journals The Benefits of Farm Animal Welfare Legislation: The Case of the EU Broiler Directive and Truthful Reporting

2018 ◽  
Vol 70 (1) ◽  
pp. 135-152 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard Bennett ◽  
Kelvin Balcombe ◽  
Philip Jones ◽  
Andrew Butterworth
Keyword(s):  
Animal Welfare ◽  
Farm Animal ◽  
Farm Animal Welfare ◽  
Animal Welfare Legislation ◽  
The Eu

Wildlife as Property

2020 ◽  
pp. 19-36
Author(s):  
Angus Nurse ◽  
Tanya Wyatt
Keyword(s):  
Animal Welfare ◽  
Animal Rights ◽  
Companion Animals ◽  
Wildlife Trade ◽  
Entertainment Industry ◽  
Short Discussion ◽  
Criminological Perspective ◽  
Psychological Harm ◽  
Human Animal ◽  
Animal Welfare Legislation

This chapter examines the notion of wildlife as property or ‘things’ and critically analyses the extent to which anthropocentric notions of wildlife as a resource for human exploitation determines harm caused to non-human animals. This chapter examines how anthropocentric notions of morality and human-centred values underpin the exploitation of non-human animals and the sense in which they are owned. Employing a green criminological perspective, the chapter examines the use and abuse of wildlife within the animal ‘entertainment’ industry. The chapter examines the use of wildlife within aquariums, zoos, and circuses and examines both the legality of this use and the non-human animal harm contained within such uses. Evidence exists, for example, of psychological harm caused to wildlife in zoos that would likely be unlawful if experienced by companion animals. Yet, zoos and safari parks are ostensibly legal operations, thus animal welfare legislation is often the only mechanism through which action can be taken in respect of what would otherwise be deemed unlawful captivity (see also Chapter 7 on animal rights). We end the chapter by touching on how wildlife come to be property – that is a short discussion of wildlife trade, including the online market.

scholarly journals The slaughter of increased numbers of pregnant cows in Tanga abattoir, Tanzania: A cause for concern?

2015 ◽  
Vol 82 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Emmanuel S. Swai ◽  
Abdu A. Hayghaimo ◽  
Ayubu A. Hassan ◽  
Bartholomeo S. Mhina
Keyword(s):  
Observational Study ◽  
Animal Welfare ◽  
Third Trimester ◽  
Local Breed ◽  
The Third ◽  
High Level ◽  
Animal Welfare Legislation

Information on the level of foetal wastage in slaughtered cattle in Tanzania is limited. A three-month observational study (April – June 2014) of animals slaughtered at the Tanga abattoir in Tanga region, Tanzania was carried out to determine the number of pregnant cows slaughtered. The total number of cattle slaughtered during the study period was 3643, representing a monthly kill average of 1214 and a daily kill average of 40. Over 98% of the cattle presented to the abattoir for slaughter were local breed (Tanzania shorthorn zebu) and most were above 3 years of age. Improved breeds of cattle represented only 1.3% of all slaughters. Of the cattle slaughtered, 2256 (61.9%) were female and 1387 (38.1%) were male. A total of 655 slaughtered cows were pregnant, representing a foetal wastage of 29.1%. Of the 655 recovered foetuses, 333 (50.8%) were male and 322 (49.2%) were female. Of the recovered foetuses, 25.8% were recovered in the first, 42.7% in the second and 31.6% in the third trimester. This study indicates cases of significant foetal losses, negatively impacting future replacement stock as a result of the slaughter of pregnant animals. The indiscriminate slaughter of pregnant cows suggests that existing animal welfare legislation is not sufficiently enforced and routine veterinary ante-mortem inspection of trade animals is failing to prevent the high level of foetal wastage.

scholarly journals Evaluation of Criminal Sanctions Concerning Violations of Cattle and Pig Welfare

Animals ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (4) ◽  
pp. 715
Author(s):  
Sofia Väärikkälä ◽  
Tarja Koskela ◽  
Laura Hänninen ◽  
Mari Nevas
Keyword(s):  
Animal Welfare ◽  
Time Span ◽  
Court Cases ◽  
District Courts ◽  
Precautionary Measure ◽  
Start Date ◽  
Criminal Sanctions ◽  
Eu Legislation ◽  
Almost All ◽  
Animal Welfare Legislation

EU legislation requires the violations of animal welfare standards to be sanctioned. Our aim was to evaluate criminal sanctions concerning violations of cattle and pig welfare on Finnish farms. We analyzed 196 court cases heard in Finnish district courts from 2011 to 2016. Almost all the cases (95%) concerned the violations of cattle welfare, of which 61% occurred on small farms. The lack of cleanliness and inadequate feeding and watering were the most common reported violations. Median time span from the start date of an offending to a judgement was slightly less than two years. Of the cases, 96% resulted in conviction. The court did not perceive the violations as being highly blameworthy as a small fine and a short conditional imprisonment were the most often imposed sanctions. A ban on the keeping of animals was used as a precautionary measure in half of the cases. Veterinarians were shown to have an important role in the initiation of criminal procedures, providing evidence for the police, and acting as witnesses. Therefore, it is crucial to achieve a well-functioning collaboration between veterinarians and the police and prosecutors. The expertise of these authorities on animal welfare legislation should also be emphasized to improve the efficacy of criminal procedures.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document