Explain who is responsible for executing horse welfare laws or animal neglect etc

[indie999]

As title states.

I am confused who is responsible in light of recent Severn events etc

Charities seem to get knocked ie RSPCA or "where is horse welfare"? and the numerous others..."Defra???

Who is responsible for acting in dire situations? Who should be first point of call(I dont mean owners necessary as they are going to lie ....lets face it).

Who is first point of call? Perhaps their should be a flow chart as when to call XYZ.

I am confused who? Please enlighten me?

 

[Spottyappy]

You will probably remain confused!
When we had a situation with poor condition equines abandoned on our land and,tried the RSPCA,who frankly were useless to start with.
So,I rang Redwings,as am longtime supporter.
They were fantastic,moved swiftly to contactWHW and the local RSPCa inspector.
The latter two took over,including involving the police and once involved,the after two charities were fantastic. The RSPCA kept us fully informed,and of the outcome when the owner was traced and eventually prosecuted. The punishment didn't fit the crime,but I was informed that it was, in fact,as severe as could be possible under the current laws.

 

[Natch]

I don't think it is as straightforward as being able to have a flow chart

Horse owner and care giver (groom/yard manager if not owner) are primarily responsible.

If there is a welfare issue and it is reported to an equine welfare charity, they will always liaise with the above first to try to resolve the situation. They won't always lie, sometimes they are grateful for the help, sometimes it isn't intentional but a lack of knowledge.

If after liasion the situation does not improve, the charity may serve an improvement notice, and/or they may offer for the owner to surrender ownership to the charity voluntarily. If it has to go to legally removing the animals against the owner's wishes then it's complicated and I'm not sure of the ins and outs, but it's not something a charity has the power to do without (police/DEFRA/local authority, I'm not sure who).

The ammended 2006 animal welfare act is supposed to enable authorities to remove animals before suffering takes place. I don't think the charities are finding it that easy in practice.

A charity can have an equine(s) 'in holding' while the case goes to court. RSPCA is the only charity I know of that has a legal department who has the experience and ability to prepare a case to go to court. Cases can be and are lost, which means the animals have to go back to the owner and the charities have to foot the livery and legal costs bill, all for nothing Of course, they can still monitor the equines upon their return. Because ownership is not transferred unless the owner agrees or a judge rules it, the charities can't castrate, which as you can imagine causes more problems when in-foal mares give birth to a colt or yearlings and stallions are involved but the case takes years to go through.

Defra's website has a copy of the animal welfare act which may answer your questions a bit more clearly.

 

[Sixteen Hands]

Information for Local Authorities

Defra has been working closely with the Local Authorities Co-ordinators of Regulatory Services (LACORS) and local authorities with regards to the new Animal Welfare Act 2006.

Whilst there are new powers available to local authority inspectors in the Act in relation to animal welfare, there is no obligation on local authorities to use these powers. The government expects that many of the new powers will help inspectors carry out their existing duties more effectively, with an extra focus on prevention of suffering before it occurs. Inspectors are those persons with responsibility for animal welfare appointed under section 51 of the Act by either a local authority or, in England, the Secretary of State. This includes Animal Health officers.

Training sessions were held in late 2006 to explain the provisions of the Act and how they will impact on local authority enforcers.

Who enforces the Act?

It is envisaged that day-to-day enforcement of animal welfare law will not change significantly. The Act provides for certain specific enforcement powers for the police and inspectors such as the power of entry, inspection and search and the power to seize documents.

The Act (like most law) is a ‘common informers’ act’, and this means that anyone is allowed to bring a prosecution for an offence. Whilst it is envisaged that the RSPCA will continue to investigate offences and bring prosecutions, particularly in relation to companion and domestic animals, RSPCA inspectors will not have formal enforcement powers under the Act. So, for example, where access to premises without the owner’s consent is sought, the RSPCA will have to be accompanied by a local authority or Animal Health inspector or police officer, as was the case in previous law.

Inspectors can be appointed by local authorities on a full-time, part-time or temporary basis. They can exercise the enforcement powers as detailed in the Act (powers of entry and seizure, for example), but the local authority remains responsible for their actions.

An inspector can also be accompanied by an expert in relation to particular welfare issues (for example, in inspecting exotic species).

See:

http://archive.defra.gov.uk/foodfarm/farmanimal/welfare/act/las.htm

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/45/contents

http://www.elmbridge.gov.uk/envhealth/lic/animal.htm

 

[Polos Mum]

In a welfare situation I think it would be best to contact everyone and anyone (police, WHW, RSPCA, council, Defra etc. etc. ) repeatedly until some action was taken.
Most of the larger cases seem to involve lots of agencies in conjunction so making them all aware of an issue as early as possible can only be a good thing (I think)