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

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.

Author(s):  
Christian Lenzi ◽  
Chiara Grasso ◽  
Siobhan Speiran

The aim of the present study is to investigate themes related to visitors’ perceptions of captive wildlife in particular, attitudes towards non-human primates (henceforth, primates). This research took place in free-roaming, multi-species primate sanctuary, Monkeyland (South Africa), where 400 visitors were interviewed using an anonymous survey both before and after attending a guided tour. The answers were divided into different categories, in order to standardize the motivations behind tourists’ choices. The results of the survey demonstrated that most visitors agree that a primate would not be a good companion animal. Visitors’ desire to touch primates was found to be positively correlated with desire for companion primates and inversely associated with visitor age. In response to: “would you like to touch a monkey?”, the majority of tourists who expressed this desire seemed aware that such interactions are not appropriate, with concern for animal welfare and human health. Of the various primate species present in the sanctuary, visitors preferred the ring-tailed lemur (Lemur catta) and, generally speaking, expressed appreciation for primates’ “cuteness”. Our results indicate a general awareness by the visitors on the importance of animal welfare in the human interactions with captive wildlife, in agreement with the “hands-off” policy of Monkeyland primate sanctuary. We discuss the findings from a general to zooanthropological point of view, proposing some reflections on the attitudes of visitors toward non-human primates.


1997 ◽  
Vol 5 (3) ◽  
pp. 205-218 ◽  
Author(s):  
David S. Wood ◽  
Claudia V. Weber ◽  
Frank R. Ascione

AbstractThe maltreatment of animals, usually companion animals, may occur in homes where there is domestic violence, yet we have limited information about the prevalence of such maltreatment. We surveyed the largest shelters for women who are battered in 49 states and the District of Columbia. Shelters were selected if they provided overnight facilities and programs or services for children. Ninety-six percent of the shelters responded. Analysis revealed that it is common for shelters to serve women and children who talk about companion animal abuse. However, only a minority of respondents indicated that they systematically ask about companion animal maltreatment in their intake interview. We discuss the implications of these results for domestic violence programs, animal welfare organizations, and programs serving children of women who are battered by their partners.


Author(s):  
Emily Shoesmith ◽  
Luciana Santos de Assis ◽  
Lion Shahab ◽  
Elena Ratschen ◽  
Paul Toner ◽  
...  

Background: Companion animals may be a positive presence for their owners during the Covid-19 pandemic. However, the welfare of a companion animal is strongly influenced by the behaviour of their owners, as well as their physical and social environment. We aimed to investigate the reported changes in companion animal welfare and behaviour and to examine the association between these changes and companion animal owners’ mental health. Methods: A cross-sectional online survey of UK residents over 18 years of age was conducted between April and June 2020 (n = 5926). The questionnaire included validated, bespoke items measuring outcomes related to mental health, human-animal bonds and reported changes in animal welfare and behaviour. The final item of the survey invited open-ended free-text responses, allowing participants to describe experiences associated with human-animal relationships during the first UK lockdown phase. Results: Animal owners made up 89.8% of the sample (n = 5323), of whom 67.3% reported changes in their animal’s welfare and behaviour during the first lockdown phase (n = 3583). These reported changes were reduced to a positive (0–7) and negative (0–5) welfare scale, following principal component analysis (PCA) of 17 items. Participants reported more positive changes for cats, whereas more negative changes were reported for dogs. Thematic analysis identified three main themes relating to the positive and negative impact on companion animals of the Covid-19 pandemic. Generalised linear models indicated that companion animal owners with poorer mental health scores pre-lockdown reported fewer negative changes in animal welfare and behaviour. However, companion animal owners with poorer mental health scores since lockdown reported more changes, both positive and negative, in animal welfare and behaviour. Conclusion: Our findings extend previous insights into perceived welfare and behaviour changes on a very limited range of species to a wider a range of companion animals. Owner mental health status has a clear, albeit small, effect on companion animal welfare and behaviour.


2010 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 1
Author(s):  
Oriol Caudevilla Parellada

2018 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 1806
Author(s):  
Vivian Fanny ◽  
Ahmad Redi

The emerging of entertainment development in Indonesia, increasing number of tourists is one aspect for the world entertainment competition. The increasing insistence and urge in the world of entertainment making the business perform a variety of ways in order to survive and able to compete in the competition. One of the example is the dolphins entertainment, they do a lot of tricks and do interact directly to human. Apart from all the entertainment that we get as the consumer, we do not know how the way dolphins suffer of to do all the orders given for the tricks, to do the direct interaction without injuring humans. All things they went through was a hard painfuly and unpleasant process. As a protected species, the care maintenance and ownership rules should be followed for the sake of the animal welfare. The protection of dolphins entertainment considered as important and should be monitored according the rules to avoid animal abuse.


2018 ◽  
Vol 70 (1) ◽  
pp. 135-152 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard Bennett ◽  
Kelvin Balcombe ◽  
Philip Jones ◽  
Andrew Butterworth

Author(s):  
Angus Nurse ◽  
Tanya Wyatt

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.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document