Published on:
16
September 2014
A husband and wife have been convicted of causing unnecessary suffering to a number of pigs and horses at a small agricultural holding in Fishcross.
The 46-year-old woman was fined £100 and the 47-year-old man was fined £350, after they were found guilty of offences under The Animal Health and Welfare (Scotland) Act 2006 at Alloa Sheriff Court last week. They were both banned from keeping non-domestic animals for a period of two years.
The case was reported by Animal Health & Welfare Inspectors from Clackmannanshire Council, who carried out a visit to their premises during July 2012. They discovered 3 adult sows, 14 weaner piglets, 4 horses and some hens which were being kept in wholly unsuitable conditions. No feeding was available for the animals at the time of the visit. The two small fields on the holding consisted mainly of mud and areas of bare soil with small patches of heavily over-grazed grass and ragwort in full bloom, which is highly toxic to livestock. The fields had been subdivided by a makeshift fence of wooden pallets and boards with protruding nails, and broken glass was present on the ground. The only accommodation consisted of an open-sided, ramshackle wooden shed which did not provide adequate shelter from the weather. The bedding was contaminated with dung, and a large number of rats were present.
The Animal Health & Welfare Inspectors served a Care Notice on the couple, requiring them to take immediate steps to improve the living conditions and safeguard the welfare of the animals. However, when they returned to the holding a few days later, they found that nothing had been done. As a result, they took possession of the animals on welfare grounds and arranged for them to be moved to another location, where they could be looked after properly. The Courts subsequently ordered that the animals should be signed over to Clackmannanshire Council, and they have now been successfully re-homed.
A Council spokesperson said: "In this case, it was clear that the original owners did not possess the necessary skills or expertise to look after these animals properly, and they failed to seek appropriate veterinary advice. As a result, the welfare of these animals was severely compromised.
"We hope that this conviction sends a clear message to those who are responsible for animals but fail to satisfy their basic welfare requirements. The law is quite clear on this point - you must be capable of ensuring that the needs of the animals are met to the extent required by good practice, and you must protect them from suffering, injury and disease.
"Looking after large animals requires a considerable commitment in terms of time and resources, and you should not take on this responsibility unless you are a competent stocksman and have an adequate knowledge of animal husbandry."
Section 19(2) of The Animal Health and Welfare (Scotland) Act 2006 provides that where a person is responsible for an animal, they shall be guilty of an offence if they fail to take reasonable steps to prevent unnecessary suffering, in circumstances where they knew or ought reasonably to have known that their act or omission would be likely to cause unnecessary suffering.
Section 24 provides that where a person is responsible for an animal, they shall be guilty of an offence if they fail to take such steps as are reasonable in the circumstances to ensure that the needs of an animal are met to the extent required by good practice. An animal's needs are deemed to include -- (a) its need for a suitable environment; (b) its need for a suitable diet; (c) its need to be able to exhibit normal behaviour patterns; (d) any need it has to be housed with, or apart from, other animals; and (e) its need to be protected from suffering, injury and disease.
Local Authorities are responsible for enforcing the provisions of The Animal Health and Welfare (Scotland) Act 2006.