Shock in Styria: 15 dogs freed from catastrophic keeping!

Shock in Styria: 15 dogs freed from catastrophic keeping!

In Styria, a 46-year-old dog owner was shown a worrying level of disregard for animal welfare. After an inspection that took place on Sunday morning, catastrophic conditions were found on the man's property. There were several lost dogs living in the area, including a seriously injured husky puppy that was found in a doghouse. An official veterinarian from the Murtal BH was called in to assess the situation. The discovery of a decomposed carcass of a young husky in a broken freezer also caused horror. These conditions led to some of the dogs being captured and taken to a nearby animal shelter. The dog owner, under whose responsibility around 20 animals were kept in torturous conditions, is facing criminal and administrative criminal investigations for animal cruelty. He has already been reported to the Leoben public prosecutor's office after the municipality informed the population about the circumstances. Three dogs have not yet been caught and are probably still in the area and are at risk.

Animal protection law, as formulated in most countries, including Austria, is intended to protect the lives and well-being of animals. According to Section 1 of the Animal Welfare Act, it is forbidden to cause pain, suffering or harm to animals without a reasonable reason. Violations of this law may result in fines and imprisonment. Those convicted of animal cruelty face sentences of up to three years for both mistreating and killing an animal, depending on the severity of the offense. Common penalties also include fines for administrative offenses such as failing to remove dog feces or failing to keep on a leash.

Legal consequences of animal cruelty

However, according to reports, the likelihood that such animal welfare crimes will be appropriately punished is decreasing. In 2020, only 1,027 people were convicted of animal welfare offenses in Germany, with 95 percent of them receiving fines. The legal treatment of animal cruelty reveals that in many cases the requirements for proving pain or suffering are very high, which makes criminal prosecution more difficult. This is particularly worrying when one considers that most actions that violate Section 17 of the Animal Welfare Act, which prohibits the killing of an animal without reasonable cause, are not adequately prosecuted.

In addition to the above-mentioned incidents, what makes matters worse is that different standards are often applied to animal welfare violations in agriculture than to domestic animals. It is often reported that many animal welfare crimes in agriculture go unreported and many cases are dropped by public prosecutors. Political influence and structural connections hinder the effective application of animal protection law. Nevertheless, according to experts, calls for fundamental reforms to effectively sanction animal welfare offenses have become louder.

The case in Styria is an alarming example of the challenges in animal protection and the serious consequences of mistreatment. It remains to be seen how the relevant authorities will respond to these violations and whether the legal consequences will be appropriate in such a serious case of animal cruelty. The dog owner and the circumstances of his animal ownership are now at the forefront of legal and official disputes.