Laws regulating animal welfare
Cruelty to animals is regarded as unacceptable and all jurisdictions have enacted legislation making it an offence. Cruelty, however, is common and the courts deal with large numbers of cruelty cases every year. The majority deals with pets, but mistreatment of livestock and especially horses is not uncommon. For example, it is an offence if owners fail to provide an animal with proper and sufficient food, drink and shelter. A fine of 60 penalty units and/or 6 months gaol could apply.
The legal framework for animal welfare in Victoria is contained in the following sources:
-
Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act 1986 (Vic)
-
Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Regulations 2008 (Vic)
The Act and the Regulations can be viewed at www.legislation.vic.gov.au (select 'Victorian Law Today ') or through AUSTLII at www.austlii.edu.au.
The Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act (s.7) allows the Governor-in-Council, on the recommendation of the Minister for Primary Industries, to make, vary or revoke Codes of Practice relating to for the keeping, transportation, sale, killing, husbandry or management of any animal or class of animals.
What is an 'animal ' under the Act?
'Animal ' is defined in the Act as a live member of a vertebrate species including any fish, amphibian, reptile, bird, mammal (other than a human being)or any reptile, bird or other mammal that is below the normal mid-point of gestation or incubation for the particular class of reptile, bird or mammal, or a live adult lobster, crab or crayfish.
What is a "Farm Animal" under the Act?
'farm animal' means—
(a) if kept for or used in connection with primary production—cattle, sheep, pigs, poultry, goats and deer; and
(b) horses other than horses kept for or used in connection with sporting events, equestrian competitions, pony clubs, riding schools, circuses or rodeos;
The meaning of 'cruelty ' and 'aggravated cruelty ' to animals
Cruelty as defined in the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act 1986 (Vic)- a lengthy definition in s.9 of the Act - , can range from wounding, torturing and overworking animals to neglect, abandonment, ear cropping and debarking, and includes laying poison bait except as allowed by legislation. 'Aggravated cruelty ' occurs where a person commits any act of cruelty and the animal dies or is so seriously disabled that it is cruel to leave it alive.
People who keep animals should ensure they are familiar with the definitions of cruelty and aggravated cruelty as the consequence of both are very severe
Penalties for animal cruelty
Penalties differ depending on whether you are an individual, a corporation (companies), a partnership or an unincorporated body.
Where a corporation is found guilty of an offence, not only can the corporation be fined but also 'anyone who is concerned in or takes part in the management of the company '.
If a partnership or unincorporated body is convicted of an offence under the Act, each partner or each member of the management committee (as the case may be) may also be guilty of that offence.
The penalty for cruelty to animals can lead to fines of up to 120 penalty units or imprisonment for up to twelve months. For aggravated cruelty, you may be fined up to 240 penalty units or be imprisoned for up to 2 years. A corporation may be fined 600 penalty units for cruelty and 1200 penalty units for aggravated cruelty.
You may also be disqualified for up to ten years from having custody of an animal in addition to imposing penalties. The court could also place conditions on how you keep any animal for a specified period of time.
Cases of successful prosecutions for cruelty.
Starving Cattle
In February 2007 an RSPCA inspector was advised by phone by the police that they had found on a property in Western Victoria three cows who were down and could not get up. The police later advised that the cows had been euthanased by a veterinary surgeon. A field post-mortem found that they had been suffering from starvation.
On visiting the property the Inspector found a large herd of Angus cattle in a state of emaciation. The owner admitted he had probably not fed them enough. The inspector issued him with a Notice to Comply to feed proper and sufficient feed to the cattle.
Subsequent visits to the property by the inspector found little change and a second Notice to Comply was issued. A fourth cow was euthanased because she could not get up.
In December 2007 the owner of the cattle was charged and convicted in Colac Magistrate’s Court on 3 charges of failing to provide sufficient feed, and 2 charges of aggravated cruelty. He was fined $2500 and ordered to pay $1050 costs.
Starving Horses
A woman of Cranbourne West was convicted of nine charges of animal cruelty at Frankston Magistrates Court on October 13 2008. The charges related to failing to provide sufficient feed and causing pain and suffering to five horses at Cranbourne last year.
She pleaded guilty to nine charges. She was convicted and fined $5,000 with $482.80 costs and banned from owning more than two horses for two years .
Prosecution for Ignoring Animal Ban order
A woman was found guilty and convicted of 35 charges of animal cruelty in Geelong Magistrates Court in on September 17 2007. She was given a Banning Order from having any animals in her custody for five years. She was also sentenced to six months imprisonment wholly suspended for two years and fined $6,000.
On Tuesday August 5 2009 , again at Geelong Magistrates Court, the same woman was convicted and sentenced in respect of eight counts of breaching a Section 12 Order for not having custody of any animals and for breaching her suspended sentence.
She was placed on a 12 month Community Based Order and has to perform 100 hours of unpaid community service. She was also ordered to undergo assessment for psychiatric treatment.
RSPCA (Victoria) was awarded $25,889.23 costs.
Source: To see other cases go to www.rspca.org/campaigns and scroll down to “latest news”.
Source:
To see other cases go to www.rspca.org/campaigns and scroll down to “latest news”.
Defences to charges of cruelty
It is a defence to a charge of cruelty or aggravated cruelty if you acted reasonably in defence of yourself or another person against attack by an animal.
If an individual is charged on the basis of corporate liability, that person can use a defence to the charge if they can prove that the corporation committed the offence without their knowledge.
Also, the cruelty or aggravated cruelty provisions do not apply to the following situations:
- any conduct that complies with a code of practice that is part of Victorian law (unless conduct procedures were not carried out in accordance with that code).
- the slaughter of animals done according to the Meat Industry Act 1993 (Vic) or any Commonwealth law or on a farm under certain conditions.
- any act done according to the Catchment and Land Protection Act 1994 (Vic) or the Wildlife Act 1975 (Vic)
- the treatment of any animal by a veterinarian that is done for the purpose of promoting the health or welfare of the animal
- any fisheries activity done within the Fisheries Act 1995 (Vic).
Allegations of animal cruelty can be reported to an animal health officer of the Department of Primary Industries (DPI), inspectors for the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (RSPCA), police or authorised council officers. Allegations of cruelty to farm animals are normally reported in the first instance to the local DPI office inspectors. Companion animal cruelties are normally reported to the RSPCA.
Prev
Next
Table of Contents
Index
Search Law Topics
