Жестокое обращение с животными

Недоедающая лошадь ест в ветеринарной клинике

Рентгенограмма грудной клетки подстреленной кошки; белые пятна - это дробовые дроби

Жестокое обращение с животными , также называемое жестоким обращением с животными , пренебрежением к животным или жестоким обращением с животными представляет собой причинение страданий или вреда людьми , животным либо по бездействию (пренебрежению) , либо по вине. В более узком смысле это может быть причинение вреда или страданий ради конкретных достижений, например, убийство животных ради развлечения; жестокость по отношению к животным иногда включает в себя причинение вреда или страданий как самоцель, называемую зоосадизмом . Различные подходы к законам, касающимся жестокого обращения с животными, встречаются в разных юрисдикциях по всему миру. Например, некоторые законы регулируют методы убийства животных ради еды, одежды или других продуктов, а другие законы касаются содержания животных для развлечения, образования, исследований или в качестве домашних животных. Существует несколько концептуальных подходов к проблеме жестокого обращения с животными.

Even though some practices, like animal fighting, are widely acknowledged as cruel, not all people and nations have the same definition of what constitutes animal cruelty. Many would claim that docking a piglet's tail without an anesthetic constitutes cruelty. Others would respond that it is a routine technique for meat production to prevent harm later in the pig's life. Additionally, laws governing animal cruelty vary from nation to nation. While it is routine practice in the United States, docking a piglet's tail as part of regular practice is prohibited in the European Union (EU).

Utilitarian advocates argue from the position of costs and benefits and vary in their conclusions as to the allowable treatment of animals. Some utilitarians argue for a weaker approach that is closer to the animal welfare position, whereas others argue for a position that is similar to animal rights. Animal rights theorists criticize these positions, arguing that the words "unnecessary" and "humane" are subject to widely differing interpretations and that animals have basic rights. They say that most animal use itself is unnecessary and a cause of suffering, so the only way to ensure protection for animals is to end their status as property and to ensure that they are never viewed as a substance or as non-living things.

Definition and viewpoints

Main articles: Animal welfare and Animal rights

Throughout history, some individuals, like Leonardo da Vinci for example, who once purchased caged birds in order to set them free, were concerned about cruelty to animals. His notebooks also record his anger with the fact that humans used their dominance to raise animals for slaughter. According to contemporary philosopher Nigel Warburton, for most of human history the dominant view has been that animals are there for humans to do with as they see fit. Sociologist David Nibert emphasizes that the process of domestication dramatically increased the exploitation of animals by humans, particularly in Eurasia, Much of this exploitation involved not only direct physical violence, but also structural violence as their systemic oppression and enslavement "resulted in their inability to meet their basic needs, the loss of self-determination, and the loss of opportunity to live in a natural way." He says that the remains of domesticated animals from thousands of years ago found during archeological excavations revealed numerous bone pathologies, which provide evidence of extreme suffering:

Excavations from 8500 BCE revealed bone deformities in enslaved goats and cows and provided "some indication of stress, presumably due to the conditions in which these early domestic animals were kept." Remains of sheep and goats from the early Bronze Age show a marked decrease in bone thickness, reflecting calcium deficiencies "resulting from the combined effects of poor nutrition and intensive milking."

Several religious traditions, especially those originating in India, have promoted animal welfare as an important or fundamental concept, even to the point of promoting vegetarianism or veganism. Examples include Buddhism, Jainism, Hinduism (cattle are sacred animals in India), and some forms of Judaism (many Orthodox Jews do not wear leather).

René Descartes believed that non-humans are automata—complex machines with no soul, mind, or reason. In Cartesian dualism, consciousness was unique to human among all other animals and linked to physical matter by divine grace. However, close analysis shows that many human features such as complex sign usage, tool use, and self-consciousness can be found in some animals.

Charles Darwin, by presenting the theory of evolution, revolutionized the way that humans viewed their relationship with other species. Darwin believed that not only did human beings have a direct kinship with other animals, but the latter had social, mental, and moral lives too. Later, in The Descent of Man (1871), he wrote: "There is no fundamental difference between man and the higher mammals in their mental faculties."

Modern philosophers and intellectuals, such as Peter Singer and Tom Regan, have argued that animals' ability to feel pain as humans do makes their well-being worthy of equal consideration. There are many precursors of this train of thought. Jeremy Bentham, the founder of utilitarianism, famously wrote in his An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation (1789):

The question is not, can they reason nor can they talk? but, can they suffer?

These arguments have prompted some to suggest that animals' well-being should enter a social welfare function directly, not just indirectly via its effect only on human well-being. Many countries have now formally recognized animal sentience and animal suffering, and have passed anti-cruelty legislation in response.

Forms

Animal cruelty can be broken down into two main categories: active and passive. Passive cruelty is typified by cases of neglect, in which the cruelty is a lack of action rather than the action itself. Oftentimes passive animal cruelty is accidental, born of ignorance. In many cases of neglect in which an investigator believes that the cruelty occurred out of ignorance, the investigator may attempt to educate the pet owner, then revisit the situation. In more severe cases, exigent circumstances may require that the animal be removed for veterinary care.

Industrial animal farming

Main article: Intensive animal farming

Footage of a 'Quality Assured' pig farm in England

Cruelty in a pig farm

Egg laying hens in a crowded cage

A chicken egg production facility

Farm animals are generally produced in large, industrial facilities that house thousands of animals at high densities; these are sometimes called factory farms. The industrial nature of these facilities means that many routine procedures or animal husbandry practices impinge on the welfare of the animals and could be considered cruelty, with Henry Stephen Salt claiming in 1899 that "it is impossible to transport and slaughter vast numbers of large and highly-sensitive animals humanely".It has been suggested the number of animals hunted, kept as companions, used in laboratories, reared for the fur industry, raced, and used in zoos and circuses, is insignificant compared to farm animals, and therefore the "animal welfare issue" is numerically reducible to the "farm animal welfare issue". Similarly, it has been suggested by campaign groups that chickens, cows, pigs, and other farm animals are among the most numerous animals subjected to cruelty. For example, because male chickens do not lay eggs, newly hatched males are culled using macerators or grinders. Worldwide meat overconsumption is another factor that contributes to the miserable situation of farm animals.Many undercover investigators have exposed the animal cruelty taking place inside the factory farming industry and there is evidence to show that consumers provided with accurate information about the process of meat production and the abuse that accompanies it has led to changes in their attitudes.

The American Veterinary Medical Association accepts maceration subject to certain conditions, but recommends alternative methods of culling as more humane. Egg-laying hens are then transferred to "battery cages" where they are kept in high densities. Matheny and Leahy attribute osteoporosis in hens to this caging method. Broiler chickens suffer similar situations, in which they are fed steroids to grow at a super-fast speed, so fast that their bones, heart, and lungs often cannot keep up. Broiler chickens under six weeks old suffer painful crippling due to fast growth rates, whilst one in a hundred of these very young birds dies of heart failure.

To reduce aggression in overcrowded conditions, shortly after birth piglets are castrated, their tails are amputated, and their teeth are clipped, and earmarked. Calves are sometimes raised in veal crates, which are small stalls that immobilize calves during their growth, reducing costs and preventing muscle development, making the resulting meat a pale color, preferred by consumers.

In the United States, animal cruelty such as soring, which is illegal, sometimes occurs on farms and ranches, as does lawful but cruel treatment such as livestock branding. Since ag-gag laws prohibit video or photographic documentation of farm activities, these practices have been documented by secret photography taken by whistleblowers or undercover operatives from such organizations as Mercy for Animals and the Humane Society of the United States posing as employees. Agricultural organizations such as the American Farm Bureau Federation have successfully advocated for laws that tightly restrict secret photography or concealing information from farm employers.

Welfare concerns of farm animals

See also: Animal slaughter and Overview of discretionary invasive procedures on animals

The following are lists of invasive procedures that cause pain, routinely performed on farm animals, and housing conditions that routinely cause animal welfare concerns. In one survey of United States homeowners, 68% of respondents said they consider the price of meat a more important issue.

Welfare concerns of farm animals

Species	Invasive procedures	Housing
Broiler chickens	Debeaking	High stocking density Restricted movement
Cattle	Branding Castration Dehorning Ear tagging Nose ringing Restraint Tail docking Tongue resection (calves)	High stocking density (feedlots) Restricted movement (feedlots) Veal crates
Dairy cattle	Restraint Artificial insemination Dehorning Ear tagging Tail docking Branding Nose ringing	High stocking density Restricted movement Separation from a born child (calves) Bounded by milk machines
Domestic turkeys	Debeaking Desnooding Detoeing Devocalization Spur removal Toe clipping	High stocking density Restricted movement
Dogs	Castration Docking Ear cropping Ear notching Slaughter by electrocution Slaughter by beating	High stocking density Restricted movement
Ducks and geese	Force-feeding Live-plucking Wing clipping	High stocking density Restricted movement
Egg laying hens	Debeaking Blinders Dubbing	High stocking density Restricted movement
Goats and sheep	Ear tagging Ear notching Dehorning Marking Mulesing Tail docking Teeth grinding	High stocking density (fine wool industry, live export) Restricted movement (fine wool industry, live export)
Horses	Castration Branding Chaining	High stocking density Restricted movement
Pigs	Castration CO2 stunning Ear cropping Ear tagging Earmarking Nose ringing Tail docking Tattooing Teeth clipping Tusk trimming	Gestation crates High stocking density Restricted movement

Fur industry

A fox with dismembered tail in a fur farm cage

Animal welfare activists suggest a total ban on fur production due to the suffering inflicted on animals, especially minks. It has been suggested that fur production is immoral as fur clothes are luxury items. Minks are solitary and territorial animals; however, in fur farms, they are raised in cages and skinned after being killed either by breaking their necks or using lethal gas.

Alleged link to human violence and psychological disorders

There are studies providing evidence of a link between animal cruelty and violence towards humans. A 2009 study found that slaughterhouse employment increases total arrest rates, arrests for violent crimes, arrests for rape, and arrests for other sex offenses in comparison with other industries. A large national survey by the Norwegian Centre for Violence and Traumatic Stress Studies found a "substantial overlap between companion animal abuse and child abuse" and that cruelty to animals "most frequently co-occurred with psychological abuse and less severe forms of physical child abuse."

A history of torturing pets and small animals, a behavior known as zoosadism, is considered one of the signs of certain psychopathologies, including antisocial personality disorder, also known as a psychopathic personality disorder. According to The New York Times, "[the FBI has found that a history of cruelty to animals is one of the traits that regularly appears in its computer records of serial rapists and murderers, and the standard diagnostic and treatment manual for psychiatric and emotional disorders lists cruelty to animals a diagnostic criterion for conduct disorders." "A survey of psychiatric patients who had repeatedly tortured dogs and cats found all of them had high levels of aggression toward people as well, including one patient who had murdered a young boy." Robert K. Ressler, an agent with the Federal Bureau of Investigation's behavioral sciences unit, studied serial killers and noted, "Murderers like this (Jeffrey Dahmer) very often start by killing and torturing animals as kids."

Acts of intentional animal cruelty or non-accidental injury may be indicators of serious psychological problems. According to the American Humane Association, 13% of intentional animal abuse cases involve domestic violence. As many as 71% of pet-owning women seeking shelter at safe houses have reported that their partner had threatened and/or hurt or killed one or more of their pets; 32% of these women reported that one or more of their children had also hurt or killed pets. Battered women report that they are hesitant from leaving their abusers because they fear what will happen to the animals in their absence. Animal abuse is sometimes used as a form of intimidation in domestic disputes.

Cruelty to animals is one of the three components of the Macdonald triad, this behavior is considered to be one of the signs of violent antisocial behavior in children and adolescents. According to the studies used to form this model, cruelty to animals is a common (but not universal) behavior in children and adolescents who grow up to become serial killers and other violent criminals. It has also been found that children who are cruel to animals have often witnessed or been victims of abuse themselves. In two separate studies cited by the Humane Society of the United States, roughly one-third of families suffering from domestic abuse indicated that at least one child had hurt or killed a pet.

Sexual abuse

Animal sexual abuse, often referred to as Bestiality by many, occurs when an individual exploits a non-human animal for their own sexual pleasure or for the pleasure of others. Bestiality is strongly associated by many with Zoophilia, a Paraphilia that involves the sexual attraction to non-human animals. Over the last few years, there has been a rise of zoophiles advocating for the normalisation of bestiality. One such individual is Douglas Spink, who was convicted of allegedly owning a bestiality farm in which several animals such as dogs, horses and mice were found.Douglas Spink was the previous co-host of a zoophilic podcast under the name of Zooier than thou. The podcast aims to promote a more positive outlook on bestiality in an attempt to normalise the sexual exploitation of animals for the gratification of humans.

Cultural rituals

Many times, when Asiatic elephants are captured in Thailand, handlers use a technique known as the training crush, in which "handlers use sleep-deprivation, hunger, and thirst to 'break' the elephants' spirit and make them submissive to their owners"; moreover, handlers drive nails into the elephants' ears and feet.

The practice of cruelty to animals for divination purposes is found in ancient cultures(e.g. Scapulimancy), and some modern religions such as Santeria continue to do animal sacrifices for healing and other rituals. Taghairm was performed by ancient Scots to summon devils.

Entertainment

Television and filmmaking

Demonstrations against animal cruelty in Iran

Animal cruelty has long been an issue in filmmaking industry, with even some big-budget Hollywood films receiving criticism for allegedly harmful—and sometimes lethal—treatment of animals during production. Court decisions have addressed films that harm animals such as videos that in part depict dog fighting.

The American Humane Association (AHA) has been associated with monitoring American film-making since the release of the film Jesse James (1939), in which a horse was pushed off a plank and drowned in a body of water after having fallen 40 feet into it. Initially, monitoring of animal cruelty was a partnership between the AHA and the Motion Picture Producers and Distributors of America (also called the Hays office) through the Motion Picture Production Code. Provisions in the code discouraged "apparent cruelty to children and animals", and because the Hays Office had the power to enforce this clause, the AHA often had access to sets to assess adherence to it. However, because the AHA's Hollywood office depended on the Hays Office for the right to monitor sets, the closure of the Hays Office in 1966 corresponded with an increase in animal cruelty on movie sets.

By 1977, a three-year contract was in place between the Screen Actors Guild (SAG) and the American Federation of Television and Radio Artists which specified that the AHA should be "consulted in the use of animals 'when appropriate'", but the contract did not provide a structure for what "appropriate" meant, and had no enforcement powers. This contract expired in 1980.

One of the most infamous examples of animal cruelty in the film was Michael Cimino's flop Heaven's Gate (1980), in which numerous animals were brutalized and even killed during production. Cimino allegedly killed chickens and bled horses from the neck to gather samples of their blood to smear on actors for Heaven's Gate, and also allegedly had a horse blown up with dynamite while shooting a battle sequence, the shot of which made it into the film. This film played a large part in renewed scrutiny of animal cruelty in films and led to renewed official on-set jurisdiction to monitor the treatment of animals by the AHA in 1980.

After the release of the film Reds (1981), the star and director of the picture, Warren Beatty apologized for his Spanish film crew's use of tripwires on horses while filming a battle scene, when Beatty was not present. Tripwires were used against horses when Rambo III (1988) and The 13th Warrior (1999) were being filmed. A water buffalo was sliced nearly in half during the production of Apocalypse Now (1979), while a donkey was bled to death for dramatic effect for the Danish film Manderlay (2005), in a scene later deleted from the film.

Captured sea turtle at Jamestown, Accra, Ghana

There is a case of cruelty to animals in the South Korean film The Isle (2000), according to its director Kim Ki-Duk. In the film, a real frog is skinned alive while fish are mutilated. Seven animals were killed for the camera in the controversial Italian film Cannibal Holocaust (1980). The images in the film include the slow and graphic beheading and ripping apart of a turtle, a monkey being beheaded and its brains being consumed by natives and a spider being chopped apart. Cannibal Holocaust was only one film in a collective of similarly themed movies (cannibal films) that featured unstaged animal cruelty. Their influences were rooted in the films of Mondo filmmakers, which sometimes contained similar content. In several countries, Cannibal Holocaust was banned or allowed for release with most of the animal cruelty edited out.

The SAG has contracted with the AHA for monitoring animal use during filming or while on the set. Compliance with this arrangement is voluntary and only applies to films made in the United States. Films monitored by the American Humane Association may bear one of their end-credit messages. Many productions, including those made in the United States, do not advise AHA or SAG of animal use in films, so there is no oversight.

Some other animal welfare organizations worldwide, such as the Animal Anti-Cruelty League in South Africa, have also monitored the use of animals in the film.

Internet videos

Cruelty to animals has often been filmed on video and uploaded to social media websites or private Internet groups. This may involve large-scale, systematic operations; a notable example of this was a global monkey torture ring uncovered by the BBC in June 2023, where participants would produce and distribute videos of monkeys being hurt and killed. Individuals who have published animal cruelty content include Luka Magnotta, a Canadian murderer who uploaded YouTube videos of himself torturing and killing cats; Rubén Marrero Pernas, a man in Cuba who was found to be raping, torturing then killing dogs and recording the acts online for an audience; and Leighton Labute, a Canadian man who was arrested in 2020 for torturing and killing three hamsters, and uploading the video to social media.

The video-sharing site YouTube has been criticized for hosting thousands of videos of real-life animal cruelty, especially the feeding of one animal to another for entertainment and spectacle. Although some of these videos have been flagged as inappropriate by users, YouTube has generally declined to remove them, unlike videos that include copyright infringement. In 2021, YouTube banned staged animal rescue videos, where animals were purposely put in danger before being saved.

Circuses

Worldwide laws on animal use in circuses

Nationwide ban	Partial ban
Ban on import/export	No ban
Unknown

The use of animals in the circus has been controversial since animal welfare groups have documented instances of animal cruelty during the training of performing animals. Animal abuse in circuses has been documented such as keeping them in small enclosures, lack of veterinary care, abusive training methods, and lack of oversight by regulating bodies. Animal trainers have argued that some criticism is not based on fact, including beliefs that shouting makes the animals believe the trainer is going to hurt them, that caging is cruel and common, and that the use of whips, chains or training harms animals.

Bolivia has enacted what animal rights activists called the world's first ban on all animals in circuses.

Animal fighting

A bull dying in a bullfight

Bullfighting is criticized by animal rights or animal welfare activists, referring to it as a cruel or barbaric blood sport in which the bull suffers severe stress and slow, torturous death. Several activist groups undertake anti-bullfighting actions in Spain and other countries. In Spain, opponents of bullfighting are referred to as anti-taurinos.

The Bulletpoint Bullfight warns that bullfighting is "not for the squeamish", advising spectators to "be prepared for blood". It details prolonged and profuse bleeding caused by horse-mounted lancers, the charging by the bull of a blindfolded, armored horse who is "sometimes doped up, and unaware of the proximity of the bull", the placing of barbed darts by banderilleros, followed by the matador's fatal sword thrust. It stresses that these procedures are a normal part of bullfighting and that death is rarely instantaneous. It further warns those attending bullfights to "be prepared to witness various failed attempts at killing the animal before it lies down."

The Toro Jubilo, Madrid, 2014

The "Toro Jubilo" or Toro embolado in Soria, Medinaceli, Spain, is a festival associated with animal cruelty. During this festival, balls of pitch are attached to a bull's horns and set on fire. The bull is then released into the streets and will run around in pain, often smashing into walls in an attempt to douse the fire as spectators attempt to dodge the animal. The pitch balls can burn for hours, and they burn the bull's horns, body, and eyes. The animal rights group PACMA has described the fiesta as "a clear example of animal mistreatment".

Dog fighting is a sport that turns dogs against one another in a ring or a pit for gambling or the entertainment of the spectators.

Rattlesnake round-ups

Rattlesnake round-ups, also known as rattlesnake rodeos, are annual events common in the rural Midwest and Southern United States, where the primary attractions are captured wild rattlesnakes which are sold, displayed, killed for food or animal products (such as snakeskin) or released back into the wild. The largest rattlesnake round-up in the United States is held in Sweetwater, Texas. Held every year since 1958, the event currently attracts approximately 30,000 visitors per year and in 2006 each annual round-up was said to result in the capture of 1% of the state's rattlesnake population.Rattlesnake round-ups became a concern by animal welfare groups and conservationists due to claims of animal cruelty. In response, some round-ups impose catch-size restrictions or releasing captured snakes back into the wild.

Warfare

Military animals are creatures that have been employed by humankind for use in warfare. They are a specific application of working animals. Examples include horses, dogs and dolphins. Only recently has the involvement of animals in war been questioned, and practices such as using animals for fighting, as living bombs or for military testing purposes (such as during the Bikini atomic experiments) may now be criticized for being cruel.

Princess Anne, Princess Royal, the patron of the British Animals in War Memorial, stated that animals adapt to what humans want them to do, but that they will not do things that they do not want to, even with training. Animal participation in the human conflict was commemorated in the United Kingdom in 2004 with the erection of the Animals in War Memorial in Hyde Park, London.

In 2008 a video of a US Marine throwing a puppy over a cliff during the Iraq conflict was popularised as an internet phenomenon and attracted widespread criticism of the soldier's actions for being an act of cruelty.

Unnecessary scientific experiments or demonstrations

Worldwide laws regarding testing cosmetics on animals

	Nationwide ban on all cosmetic testing on animals		Partial ban on cosmetic testing on animals1
	Ban on the sale of cosmetics tested on animals		No ban on any cosmetic testing on animals
	Unknown

¹some methods of testing are excluded from the ban or the laws vary within the country

Main articles: Testing cosmetics on animals and Countries banning non-human ape experimentation

Under all three of the conceptual approaches to animal cruelty discussed above, performing unnecessary experiments or demonstrations upon animals that cause them substantial pain or distress may be viewed as cruelty. Due to changes in ethical standards, this type of cruelty tends to be less common today than it used to be in the past. For example, schoolroom demonstrations of oxygen depletion routinely suffocated birds by placing them under a glass cover, and animals were suffocated in the Cave of Dogs to demonstrate the density and toxicity of carbon dioxide to curious travelers on the Grand Tour.

No pet policies and abandonment

Main articles: Overpopulation in domestic pets and Pet abandonment

Many apartment complexes and rental homes institute no-pet policies. No pet policies are a leading cause of animal abandonment, which is considered a crime in many jurisdictions. In many cases, abandoned pets have to be euthanized due to the strain they put on animal shelters and rescue groups. Abandoned animals often become feral or contribute to feral populations. In particular, feral dogs can pose a serious threat to pets, children, and livestock.

In Ontario, Canada, no pet policies are outlawed under the Ontario Landlord and Tenant Act and are considered invalid even when a tenant signs a lease that includes a no pets clause. Similar legislation has also been considered in Manitoba.

Hunting

Rhinoceros killed for their horns

Trophy hunting is largely a recreational activity causing death and injury to a significant number of animals. In poaching the animal is killed and valuable parts such as tusks or bones are collected. Canned hunting refers to the practice of bringing exotic animals as trophies to private land for hunting. Despite being cruel to animals, hunting is practiced in thousands of private properties around the world and is considered a profitable business.

Laws by country

Main article: Animal rights by country or territory

Many jurisdictions around the world have enacted statutes that forbid cruelty to some animals but these vary by country and in some cases by the use or practice.

Africa

Egypt

Main article: Animal welfare in Egypt

Egyptian law states that anyone who inhumanely beats or intentionally kills any domesticated animal may be jailed or fined. The Egyptian Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals was established over a hundred years ago and was instrumental in promoting a 1997 ban on bullfighting in Egypt.

In ancient Egyptian law, the killers of cats or dogs were executed.

Nigeria

Animal cruelty in Nigeria is prohibited under Section 495 of the Criminal Code (1990). These include, according to 495(1)(a), cruelly beating, kicking, over-loading, infuriating, or terrifying an animal, or allowing this to happen as the owner. Section 495(1)(b) defines failure to act as the willful or unreasonable doing or omission of any act that causes unnecessary suffering (or as the owner, permitting an act that causes unnecessary suffering). This section also prohibits transporting animals in a way that causes unnecessary suffering (c), administering poison (d), performing operations without due care (e), and actions related to animal fighting (f).

South Africa

The Animal Protection Act No 71 of 1962 in South Africa covers "farm animals, domestic animals and birds, and wild animals, birds, and reptiles that are in captivity or under the control of humans."

The Act contains a detailed list of prohibited acts of cruelty including overloading, causing unnecessary suffering due to confinement, chaining or tethering, abandonment, unnecessarily denying food or water, keeping in a dirty or parasitic condition, or failing to provide veterinary assistance. There is also a general provision prohibiting wanton, unreasonable, or negligible commission or omission of acts resulting in unnecessary suffering. The Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries for 2013/14 to 2016/17 mentions updating animal protection legislation.

The NSPCA is the largest and oldest animal welfare organization in South Africa that enforces 90% of all animal cruelty cases in the country by means of enforcing the Animals Protection Act.

South Sudan

The Criminal Code of South Sudan has laws against the maltreatment of animals. The laws read:

196. Ill-treatment of Domestic Animal.

Whoever cruelly beats, tortures, or otherwise willfully ill-treats any tame, domestic, or wild animal, which has previously been deprived of its liberty, or arranges, promotes, or organizes fights between cocks, rams, bulls, or other domestic animals or encourages such acts, commits an offense, and upon conviction, shall be sentenced to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two months or with a fine.

197. Riding and Neglect of Animal.

Whoever wantonly rides, overdrives, or overloads any animal or intentionally drugs or employs any animal, which by reason of age, sickness, wounds or infirmity is not in a condition to work, or neglects any animal in such a manner as to cause it unnecessary suffering, commits an offense, and upon conviction, shall be sentenced to imprisonment for a term not exceeding one month or with a fine or with both.

Americas

Argentina

In Argentina, National Law 14346 sanctions from 15 days to one year in prison for those who mistreat or inflict acts of cruelty on animals.

Brazil

Main article: Animal welfare and rights in Brazil

Brazil is a high-volume animal producer, slaughtering around 30.8 land-based animals per person per year, compared to a global average of 10.1. The country's dependency on farmed animals is relatively high, with around 8 farmed animals per person, double the global average of 4.1.A 1998 law prohibits the abuse of domestic and wild animals. It imposes more serious penalties for cruelty than the 1934 decree, with a sentence of 3 months to a year plus a fine, with the penalty increased by one-sixth to one-third of the animal is killed.

Canada

Main article: Animal welfare and rights in Canada

In Canada, it is an offense under the Criminal Code to intentionally cause unnecessary pain, suffering, or injury to an animal. Poisoning animals is specifically prohibited. It is also an offense to threaten to harm an animal belonging to someone else. Most provinces and territories also have animal protection legislation. However, it is not explicitly illegal in Canadian law to kill a dog or cat for consumption.

The Animal Legal Defense Fund releases an annual report ranking the animal protection laws of every province and territory based on their relative strength and general comprehensiveness. In 2014, the strongest four jurisdictions were Manitoba, British Columbia, Ontario, and Nova Scotia. The weakest four were Saskatchewan, Northwest Territories, Quebec, and Nunavut.

Chile

Law 20380 established sanctions including fines, from 2 to 30 Mensual Tributary Units, and prison, from 541 days to 3 years, for those involved in acts of animal cruelty. Also, it facilitates animal care through school education and establishes a Bioethics Committee to define policies related to experiments with animals.

A bullfight in Bogotá, a legacy of Spanish culture. The practice of bullfighting is criticized by numerous organizations in Colombia. It remains legal in the country.

Colombia

Main article: Animal rights in Colombia

In Colombia, there is little control over cruel behaviors against animals, and the government has proposed that bullfighting be declared a "Cultural Heritage"; other activities like cockfighting are given the same legal treatment.

Costa Rica

Toucan Grecia with 3D printed prosthetic beak after losing half its beak

In 2017, after many years of legal wrangling, Costa Rica passed their Animal Welfare Law. It includes prison sentences of three months to one year for harming or killing a domesticated animal or for conducting animal fights. There are monetary fines for those who mistreat, neglect or abandon animals, for breeding or training animals for fighting, or for violating regulations on animal experimentation. The law does not cover agricultural practices, aquaculture, zootechnical or veterinary activities, killing of animals for consumption, for sanitary or scientific reasons, or reproductive control. Wild animals are covered under the Wild Life Act.

The bill had stalled its motion through the legislature until an injured toucan was found which had lost the top half of its beak. News and images of the injured bird, now named Grecia, raised enough contributions to create a 3D printed prosthesis for her, and helped spur the bill's progress.

Mexico

The current policy of Mexico, in civil law, condemns physical harm to animals as property damage to the owners of the abused animal, considering the animals as owned property.

In criminal law, the situation is different. In December 2012, the Legislative Assembly of the Federal District reformed the existing Penal Code of Mexico City, establishing abuse and cruelty to animals as criminal offenses, provided the animals are not deemed to be plagues or pests. Abandoned animals are not considered to be plagues. A subsequent reform was entered into force on 31 January 2013, by a decree published in the Official Gazette of the Federal District. The law provides penalties of six months to two years imprisonment, and a fine of 50 to 100 days at minimum wage, to persons who cause obvious injury to an animal, and the penalty is increased by one-half of those injuries endanger its life. The penalty rises to two to four years of prison, and a fine of 200 to 400 days at minimum wage, if the person intentionally causes the death of an animal.

This law is considered to extend throughout the rest of the 31 constituent states of the country. In addition, The Law of Animal Protection of the Federal District is wide-ranging, based on banning "unnecessary suffering". Similar laws now exist in most states.

United States

Main article: Animal welfare in the United States

The primary federal law relating to animal care and conditions in the US is the Animal Welfare Act of 1966, amended in 1970, 1976, 1985, 1990, 2002, and 2007. It is the only Federal law in the United States that regulates the treatment of animals in research, exhibition, transport, and by dealers. Other laws, policies, and guidelines may include additional species coverage or specifications for animal care and use, but all refer to the Animal Welfare Act as the minimum acceptable standard.

The Animal Legal Defense Fund releases an annual report ranking the animal protection laws of every state based on their relative strength and general comprehensiveness. In a 2013's report, the top five states for their strong anti-cruelty laws were Illinois, Maine, Michigan, Oregon, and California. The five states with the weakest animal cruelty laws in 2013 were Kentucky, Iowa, South Dakota, New Mexico, and Wyoming.

In Massachusetts and New York, agents of humane societies and associations may be appointed as special officers to enforce statutes outlawing animal cruelty.

In 2004, a Florida legislator proposed a ban on "cruelty to bovines", stating: "A person who, for practice, entertainment, or sport, intentionally fells, trips, or otherwise causes a cow to fall or lose its balance using roping, lassoing, dragging, or otherwise touching the tail of the cow commits a misdemeanor of the first degree." The proposal did not become law.

In the United States, ear cropping, tail docking, rodeo sports, and other acts are legal and sometimes condoned. Penalties for cruelty can be minimal if pursued. Currently, 46 of the 50 states have enacted felony penalties for certain forms of animal abuse. However, in most jurisdictions, animal cruelty is most commonly charged as a misdemeanor offense. In one recent California case, a felony conviction for animal cruelty could theoretically net a 25-year to a life sentence due to their three-strikes law, which increases sentences based on prior felony convictions.

In 2003, West Hollywood, California, passed an ordinance banning declawing of house cats. In 2007, Norfolk, Virginia passed legislation only allowing the procedure for medical reasons. However, most jurisdictions allow the procedure.

In April 2013, Texas Federal Court Judge Sim Lake ruled that the Animal Crush Video Prohibition Act of 2010, which criminalized the recording, sale, and transport of videos depicting animal cruelty as obscenity, violates the First Amendment. Judge Lake noted that obscenity tests require an explicitly sexual depiction, which the criminalized videos lack. This follows the precedent set by United States v. Stevens, which additionally held that restrictions on the possession of animal cruelty videos were unconstitutional.

In November 2019, U.S. President Donald Trump signed the Preventing Animal Cruelty and Torture Act, making certain intentional acts of cruelty to animals federal crimes carrying penalties of up to seven years in prison. The Act expanded upon the 2010 Animal Crush Video Prohibition Act signed by President Barack Obama that banned the creation and distribution of videos that showed animals being crushed, burned, drowned, suffocated, impaled, or subjected to other forms of torture. The underlying acts, which were not included in the 2010 bill, are part of the PACT Act and are now felony offenses. The bill was unanimously passed in both the House and Senate.

State welfare laws

Several states have enacted or considered laws in support of humane farming.

• On 5 November 2002, Florida voters passed Amendment 10 by a margin of 55%, amending the Florida Constitution to ban the confinement of pregnant pigs in gestation crates.
• On 14 January 2004, the bill AB-732 died in the California Assembly's Agriculture Committee. The bill would have banned gestation and veal crates, eventually being amended to include only veal crates. On 9 May 2007, the bill AB-594 was withdrawn from the California State Assembly. The bill had been effectively killed in the Assembly Agriculture Committee, by replacing the contents of the bill with language concerning tobacco cessation coverage under Medi-Cal. AB-594 was very similar to the current language of Proposition 2.
• On 7 November 2006, Arizona voters passed Proposition 204 with 62% support. The measure prohibits the confinement of calves in veal crates and breeding sows in gestation crates.
• On 28 June 2007, Oregon Governor Ted Kulongoski signed a measure into law prohibiting the confinement of pigs in gestation crates (SB 694, 74th Leg. Assembly, Regular Session).
• In January 2008, Nebraska State Senate bill LB 1148, to ban the use of gestation crates for pig farmers, was withdrawn within five days amidst controversy.
• On 14 May 2008, Colorado Governor Bill Ritter signed into law a bill, SB 201, that phases out gestation crates and veal crates.

Venezuela

Venezuela published a "Law for Protection of Domestic Fauna free and in captivity" in 2010, defining responsibilities and sanctions regarding animal care and ownership. Animal cruelty acts are fined, but are not a cause for imprisonment. The law also forbids the possession, breeding, and reproduction of pit bull dogs, among similar breeds that are alleged to be aggressive and dangerous. It elicited reactions from dog owners, who said that aggressiveness in dogs is determined more by treatment by the owner than by the breed itself.

Asia

Israel

Israel banned the sale of fur to the fashion industry in June 2021, being the first country in the world to do so.

China

Main article: Animal welfare and rights in China

As of the year 2006, there were no laws in China governing acts of cruelty to animals. There are no government-supported charitable organizations like the RSPCA, which monitors the cases of animal cruelty. All kinds of animal abuses, such as to fish, tigers, and bears, are to be reported to law enforcement and animal welfare.

In the absence of a unified law against animal mistreatment, the World Animal Protection notes that some legislation protecting the welfare of animals exists in certain contexts, especially ones used in research and zoos.

In September 2009, legislation was drafted to address deliberate cruelty to animals in China. If passed, the legislation would offer some protection to pets, captive wildlife, and animals used in laboratories, as well as regulate how farm animals are raised, transported, and slaughtered.

В 2008 году Китайская Народная Республика находилась в процессе внесения изменений в законы о численности бродячих собак в столице Пекине . Г-н Чжэн Ган, директор Внутреннего и судебного комитета при Пекинском муниципальном народном конгрессе (BMPC), поддержал проект Пекинского муниципального постановления о собаках от местного правительства. Закон заменит Пекинское муниципальное постановление о владении собаками, введенное в действие в 1989 году. В существующем постановлении говорилось о «строгом» ограничении владения собаками и контроле над количеством собак в городе. Вместо этого предлагаемый проект сосредоточился на «строгом управлении и сочетании ограничений с управлением».

Гонконг

С 2010 года Гонконг дополнил или заменил законы против жестокости позитивным подходом, используя законы, определяющие, как следует обращаться с животными. Государственным ведомством, которое несет основную ответственность за благополучие животных в Гонконге, является Департамент сельского хозяйства, рыболовства и охраны природы (AFCD).

Законы, применяемые AFCD, включают в себя:

• Постановление о предотвращении жестокого обращения с животными (также соблюдается полицией)
• Постановление об общественном здравоохранении (животные и птицы) (включая правила выдачи лицензий животноводам и торговцам животными, а также Кодекс стандартов для лицензированных торговцев животными)
• Постановление о собаках и кошках
• Постановление о фунтах
• Постановление о бешенстве
• Постановление о защите диких животных

Кроме того, Департамент пищевой и экологической гигиены (FEHD) делает следующее:

• обеспечивает соблюдение Постановления об общественном здравоохранении и муниципальных услугах, которое включает правила для боен и влажных рынков.
• публикует Кодекс практики по благополучию пищевых животных (в котором описывается их транспортировка)
• публикует «Руководство по обеспечению благополучия животных, употребляемых в пищу на бойнях».

Департамент здравоохранения делает следующее:

• обеспечивает соблюдение Постановления о животных (контроль экспериментов).
• публикует Кодекс практики по уходу и использованию животных в экспериментальных целях.

По состоянию на 2006 год в Гонконге действует закон «Постановление о предотвращении жестокого обращения с животными», предусматривающий максимальное наказание в виде трехлетнего тюремного заключения и штраф в размере 200 000 гонконгских долларов.

Индия

Основная статья: Благополучие и права животных в Индии

Закон о предотвращении жестокого обращения с животными 1960 года были внесены поправки. В 1982 году в Согласно недавно измененному Закону о защите животных Индии от 2011 года жестокое обращение с животными является преступлением и наказывается штрафом в размере не менее десяти тысяч рупий , который может быть расширен до двадцати пяти тысяч рупий, или тюремным заключением на срок до двух лет или оба в случае первого правонарушения. В случае второго или последующего правонарушения - штрафом в размере не менее пятидесяти тысяч рупий, но может достигать одного лакха рупий, а также тюремным заключением на срок не менее одного года, но может быть продлен до трех лет. . Эта поправка в настоящее время ожидает ратификации правительством Индии. Закон 1962 года применяется по настоящее время. Максимальный штраф в соответствии с Законом 1962 года составляет рупий. 50 (менее 1 доллара). Многие организации, в том числе такие, как местное SPCA , PF, A и Fosterdopt, активно участвуют в оказании помощи населению в сообщении о случаях жестокого обращения в полицию и привлечении преступника к ответственности. В связи с этим на субконтиненте наблюдаются большие изменения. В 2022 году было предусмотрено максимальное наказание в виде пятилетнего тюремного заключения со штрафом в размере не менее 75 тысяч рупий за убийство животного. Законопроект также предлагает пять свобод животных, включая свободу от жажды, голода и недоедания, а также от страха и страданий, согласно разделу 3А.

Иран

Правительство Ирана выступило спонсором закона, запрещающего домашних животных, их разведение, продажу, выгул и содержание в городах, в том числе Наджи . животных/птиц Жизнь и благополучие животных в некоторой ограниченной степени защищены исламским уголовным кодексом и фикхом . Съёмка жестокого обращения с животными является незаконной. Эвтаназия – это харам.

Япония

Основная статья: Благополучие и права животных в Японии

В Японии действует Закон о благополучии и содержании животных 1973 года (с поправками, внесенными в 1999 и 2005 годах). предусматривает, что «никто не имеет права убивать, ранить или подвергать жестокому обращению животных без надлежащего судебного разбирательства», и, в частности, криминализирует жестокое обращение со всеми млекопитающими, птицами и рептилиями, находящимися во владении людей; а также крупный рогатый скот, лошади, козы, овцы, свиньи, собаки, кошки, голуби, домашние кролики, куры и домашние утки независимо от того, находятся ли они в неволе.

• Убийство или нанесение телесных повреждений без уважительной причины: тюремное заключение на срок до одного года с принудительным трудом или штраф в размере до одного миллиона иен.
• Жестокость, например, причинение истощения путем прекращения кормления или поения без уважительной причины: штраф в размере до пятисот тысяч иен.
• Отказ: штраф до пятисот тысяч иен.

Существуют отдельные национальные и местные постановления об обеспечении здоровья и безопасности животных, имеющих дело с зоомагазинами и другими предприятиями.

Эксперименты на животных регулируются Законом о гуманном обращении и содержании животных 2000 года, в который в 2006 году были внесены поправки. Этот закон требует от тех, кто использует животных, следовать принципам, изложенным в 3R, которые перечислены как замена, сокращение и улучшение. использовать как можно меньше животных и причинять минимальные страдания и страдания. Регулирование осуществляется на местном уровне и основано на национальных руководящих принципах, но не существует государственных проверок учреждений и требований по отчетности о количестве используемых животных.

Малайзия

Основная статья: Благополучие и права животных в Малайзии

Жестокое обращение с животными, охраняемыми Законом о защите животных (2015 г.), наказывается штрафом в размере от 20 до 100 000 ринггитов и/или тюремным заключением на срок до трех лет. Жестокое обращение с животными, охраняемыми Законом об охране дикой природы (2010 г.), наказывается штрафом в размере от 5 до 50 000 ринггитов и/или тюремным заключением на срок до одного года.Согласно Закону об ассоциации, человек совершает преступление жестокого обращения с животными, если он «жестоко бьет, пинает, плохо обращается, подавляет, перегружает, перегружает, пытает, приводит в бешенство или пугает любое животное.

Саудовская Аравия

Ветеринар Лана Данн и несколько граждан Саудовской Аравии сообщают, что не существует законов, защищающих животных от жестокого обращения, поскольку этот термин не имеет четкого определения в правовой системе Саудовской Аравии. Они указывают на отсутствие руководящего органа, который бы контролировал условия содержания животных, особенно в зоомагазинах и в сфере торговли экзотическими животными с Восточной Африкой.

Южная Корея

Основная статья: Благополучие и права животных в Южной Корее

Законы Южной Кореи о защите животных слабы по международным стандартам. Закон Южной Кореи о защите животных гласит, что любой, кто жестоко обращается с животными или жестоко обращается с ними, может быть приговорен к тюремному заключению максимум на три года или к штрафу в 30 миллионов вон (25 494 доллара США), но стандарты для принятия решения о наказании были низкими, поскольку с животными обращаются как с животными. объекты в рамках действующей правовой системы, сказал Чунг.

Тайвань

В 1998 году был принят Тайваньский Закон о защите животных, предусматривающий штрафы в размере до 250 000 тайваньских долларов за жестокость. Уголовное наказание за жестокое обращение с животными было введено в 2009 году., включая лишение свободы на срок до одного года.

Таиланд

Основная статья: Благополучие животных в Таиланде

Таиланд принял свой первый закон о защите животных в 2014 году. Закон о предотвращении жестокости и благополучии животных, BE 2557 (2014 г.) вступил в силу 27 декабря 2014 г.

Европа

Евросоюз

Директива Совета Европейского Союза 1999/74/EC – это директива Европейского Союза о минимальных стандартах содержания кур-несушек, которая фактически запрещает использование обычных батарейных клеток . Директива, принятая в 1999 году, запретила использование обычных аккумуляторных батарей в ЕС с 1 января 2012 года после 13-летнего поэтапного отказа от них.

Во многих частях Европы также запрещено удалять когти у кошки.

Франция

Во Франции жестокое обращение с животными карается лишением свободы на срок до двух лет и финансовым штрафом (30 000 евро).

Германия

Дополнительная информация: Благополучие и права животных в Германии и Благополучие животных в нацистской Германии.

В Германии убийство животных или причинение им значительной боли (или продолжительной или повторяющейся боли) наказывается тюремным заключением на срок до трех лет или денежным штрафом. Если животное иностранного происхождения, деяние также может быть наказуемо как преступный ущерб.

Италия

Акты жестокого обращения с животными могут наказываться тюремным заключением на срок от трех месяцев до трех лет и штрафом в размере от минимум 3000 евро до максимум 160 000 евро, как это предусмотрено законом № 189. /2004.

Ирландия

Закон о здоровье и благополучии животных 2013 г. вступил в силу в 2014 году, улучшив защиту животных. Максимальное наказание составляет до 250 000 евро и до пяти лет тюремного заключения. В ряде случаев были вынесены приговоры сроком до трех лет.

Португалия

преступлением С 1 октября 2014 года насилие над животными признано в Португалии . Законодательство, опубликованное в газете Diário da República 29 августа, квалифицирует жестокое обращение с животными как уголовную ответственность и указывает, что «те, кто без уважительной причины причиняет боль, страдания или любые другие трудности жестокому обращению с животными-компаньонами», подлежат тюремному заключению на срок до один год. Если такие действия приведут к «смерти животного», «лишению важного органа или члена» или «серьезному и необратимому нарушению его способности передвигаться», виновные будут наказаны тюремным заключением на срок до двух лет.

Что касается домашних животных, новый закон предусматривает, что «тому, кто, имея обязанность хранить, контролировать или присматривать за домашними животными, бросает их, подвергая тем самым опасности их еду и обеспечение причитающегося ухода», грозит тюремное заключение на срок до шести месяцев.

Швеция

В Швеции жестокое обращение с животными карается финансовым штрафом и тюрьмой на срок до двух лет. Владелец потеряет право владения животными, и животные будут изъяты у владельца.

Швейцария

Швейцарские законы о защите животных являются одними из самых строгих в мире и всесторонне регулируют обращение с животными, включая размер клеток для кроликов и количество физических упражнений, которые необходимо предоставлять собакам.

В кантоне Цюрих правительство кантона нанимает юриста по делам животных Антуана Гетшеля , который представляет интересы животных в делах, связанных с жестоким обращением с животными.

Турция

Согласно Закону Турции о защите животных № 5199, жестокое обращение с животными считается уголовным преступлением и карается лишением свободы на срок до четырех лет. В июле 2021 года Турция запретила открытие цирков с использованием животных и дельфинариев. Существующие объекты прекратят работу через десять лет. HAYTAP , Федерация прав животных в Турции, раньше считала, что предыдущий закон не предусматривал достаточно строгого наказания для лиц, жестоко обращающихся с животными. В 2024 году дело о жестоком обращении с животными вызвало широкое возмущение в социальных сетях Турции. Эрос, кот, содержавшийся в жилом комплексе в Кючукчекмедже в Стамбуле, был замучен до смерти Ибрагимом Келогланом 1 января рано утром. Моменты, когда Келоглан замучил Эроса до смерти, зафиксировали камеры видеонаблюдения. Келоглан был освобожден со скидкой за хорошее поведение на первом слушании дела, состоявшемся 8 февраля в 16-м уголовном суде первой инстанции Кючукчекмедже. В социальных сетях была запущена кампания против Келоглана, которому была предоставлена ​​скидка за хорошее поведение со словами: «Пусть Ибрагима Келоглана арестуют».

Великобритания

Основная статья: Благополучие животных в Соединенном Королевстве

В Великобритании жестокое обращение с животными является уголовным преступлением, за которое можно получить тюремное заключение на срок до 6 месяцев.

18 августа 1911 года Палата общин представила Закон 1911 года о защите животных (c.27) после лоббирования со стороны Королевского общества по предотвращению жестокого обращения с животными ( RSPCA ). Максимальное наказание — шесть месяцев «каторжных работ» со штрафом в 25 фунтов.

В Законе о столичной полиции 1839 года «драки или травля львов, медведей, барсуков, петухов, собак или других животных» были запрещены в Лондоне и наказывались тюремным заключением на срок до одного месяца с возможными каторжными работами или штрафом до пяти фунтов. . Закон налагал многочисленные ограничения на то, как, когда и где можно перегонять животных, разгружать вагоны и т. д. Он также запрещал владельцам выпускать бешеных собак на волю и давал полиции право уничтожать любую собаку, подозреваемую в бешенстве, или любую собаку, укушенную подозрение на бешеную собаку. Тот же закон запрещал использовать собак для тяги телег.

До этого собаки использовались для доставки молока, хлеба, рыбы, мяса, фруктов, овощей, корма для животных («кошачий человек») и других товаров на продажу, а также для сбора мусора (« старьевщик» ). Как отмечает Найджел Ротфелс, запрет собакам тянуть тележки в Лондоне или его окрестностях привел к тому, что большинство собак были убиты их владельцами. поскольку они превратились из вкладчиков в семейный доход в непосильные расходы. На смену тележным собакам пришли люди с ручными тележками. Около 150 000 собак были убиты или брошены. Эрика Фадж цитирует Хильду Кин :

В основе кампаний по защите животных девятнадцатого века лежит желание среднего класса не видеть жестокости.

- Хильда Кин, Права животных , 1998 г.

Закон о защите животных 1911 года распространил запрет на тягловых собак на остальную часть королевства. Было убито или брошено около 600 000 собак.

Закон о защите животных 1911 года с тех пор был в значительной степени заменен Законом о защите животных 2006 года . который также заменил и объединил более 20 других законодательных актов, включая Закон о защите животных 1934 года и Закон об отказе от животных 1960 года . Закон ввел новое правонарушение в отношении благосостояния, которое означает, что владельцы животных имеют позитивную обязанность заботиться о них, и ставит вне закона пренебрежение основными потребностями своих животных, такими как доступ к адекватному питанию и ветеринарной помощи.

В соответствии с Законом о преступном ущербе 1971 года домашние животные могут быть классифицированы как имущество, которое может быть «повреждено или уничтожено». Обвинение в причинении уголовного ущерба может быть уместным в случае травмы или смерти животного, принадлежащего кому-либо, кроме ответчика, а также может быть уместным судебное преследование в соответствии с Законом о защите животных 2006 года.

Океания

Австралия

В Австралии все штаты и территории приняли законы, регулирующие благополучие животных. Законодательство:

• Закон о защите животных 1992 г. (ACT)
• Закон о предотвращении жестокого обращения с животными 1979 г. (Новый Южный Уэльс)
• Закон о защите животных (NT)
• Закон об уходе и защите животных 2001 г. (Qld)
• Закон о защите животных 1985 г. (ЮАР)
• Закон о защите животных 1993 г. (Тас)
• Закон о предотвращении жестокого обращения с животными 1986 г. (Виктория)
• Закон о защите животных 2002 г. (Вашингтон)

Законы о благосостоянии подвергались критике как недостаточно защищающие животных. Хотя полиция сохраняет общую юрисдикцию в судебном преследовании уголовных дел, во многих штатах сотрудникам RSPCA и других благотворительных организаций по защите животных предоставлены полномочия расследовать и преследовать по суду преступления, связанные с жестоким обращением с животными.

Новая Зеландия

Дополнительная информация: Благополучие животных в Новой Зеландии.

Закон о защите животных 1999 года защищает животных от жестокого обращения.

См. также

• Травля медведя
• Кот горит
• Преступления против природы
• Краш-фетиш
• Моральное развитие
• RSPCA
• Козье метание
• Боль у животных
• Браконьерство
• Общество по предотвращению жестокого обращения с животными
• Список организаций по защите животных

Дальнейшее чтение

• Арнольд Арлюк . Грубая сила: полиция животных и проблема жестокости , Purdue University Press (15 августа 2004 г.), твердый переплет, 175 страниц, ISBN   1-55753-350-4 . Этнографическое органов исследование гуманных сотрудников правоохранительных .
• Файбер-Остроу, Памела, Ловелл, Джаррет С. «За завесой тайны: жестокое обращение с животными, промышленные фермы и законодательство Ag-Gag». Обзор современного правосудия (2016) 19(2), 230–249.
• Леа, Сюзанна Гудни (2007). Преступность и жестокое обращение с животными: мифы и реальность о социальной патологии , твердый переплет, 168 страниц, ISBN   978-1-59332-197-0 . Леа оспаривает аргумент защитников прав животных о том, что жестокое обращение с животными, совершаемое в детстве, является предшественником насилия со стороны человека.
• МакАртур, Джо-Энн ; Уилсон, Кейт, ред. (2020). Скрытое: Животные в антропоцене . Книги фонарей . ISBN  978-1590566381 .
• Манро Х. Избитое домашнее животное (1999). В книге Ф. Асционе и П. Аркоу (ред.) Жестокое обращение с детьми, домашнее насилие и жестокое обращение с животными. Вест-Лафайет, Индиана: Издательство Университета Пердью, 199–208. ISBN   1-55753-143-9
• Тичелар, Майкл. «Королевская власть и противодействие кровавому спорту в Британии двадцатого века: от имперских трофеев к охране дикой природы?». История 103.357 (2018): 588–609.
• Манс, Генри (2021). Как любить животных: в мире, похожем на человека (первое издание для Северной Америки). Нью-Йорк. ISBN   978-1-9848-7965-3 . ОСЛК   1226175333
• Певец, Питер (16 мая 2023 г.). «Думаете, за 50 лет отношение людей к животным улучшилось? Подумайте еще раз» . Лос-Анджелес Таймс .