Locally Tackling Pet Theft What Can We Do?

We all recognize that Pet Theft is sweeping across our United Kingdom and in Suffolk, we are equally as afflicted by this rise in crime as other counties. This report will be following on from my conversation with Suffolks Police and Crime Commissioner Tim Passmore.

Tim as an avid dog owner and lover was very open about the impacts on Pet Owners across the county. Now in Suffolk, we have eighteen reported cases of Dog Thefts. This is a clear distinction which we need to make as cases are reported as Thefts not as specific crimes. Now as I spoke to Tim he expressed his views candidly about how “Adhorrent the crime is and how it affects owners like a child being taken from them”.

The importance to remember here was that local constabularies are obligated to record the crime as a possession theft as they are recorded as an object first. Tim makes the clear point that the animal is a living being and it is my view that we should rightly view them as such this links back to Animal Welfare Sentencing reform which would recognize a greater severity for sentencing guidelines. We still have work to do in this area as we need to apply this sentence in my view to a specific act of UK law. Now whilst Suffolk Constabulary records these thefts as both traditional item theft and pet thefts is certainly useful in tackling this crime. It is also where we must recognize not only the distress that this has caused on owners but also on how wider implications of sentencing could be applied against those that commit these offenses.

Presently the UK like other countries applies sentences in a discounted way where the crimes will have been recorded but the time they have served will be served concurrently or at the same time as the first sentence. Rather than a cumulative approach where if the offender commits a series of offenses the sentences do not sequentially add on to each other. Now in the UK, we have three specific types of sentencing Suspended sentences where the duration is less than a year this is often how Pet Theft is dealt with nationally which also highlights the need for reform. The aim would be to push for a Determinate sentence were unlike the suspended sentence where the sentence is held unless the guilty party reoffends a determinate sentence sees half of the offender’s sentence in prison and half in the community. This is where the probationary sentence comes into account and ensures that the guilty party does not re-offend. Indeterminate sentences are used to identify where the courts can use their powers to determine a minimum imposed sentence which could be used where you have a repeat offender or when the individual is linked to organized crime.

Now Tim highlights that the maximum sentence for theft is up to seven years but this does not mean that the judiciary has to sentence up to this amount and the guidance for the courts may be tied from using tougher sentences. Now why is this the case, one area is culpability is an area that should be reflected on in a specific act because although this relates to the planning and coordination of the theft. Guidelines then have to further examine the level of harm to an individual now this form of measurement is a subjective matter and should not necessarily be applied in this way. If the animal itself was recognized as having harm applied to it by recognizing the conditions or impact on it and the distress to owner or keeper in a way that is more referencable to the courts this could likely lead to tougher sentences. We went on to discuss the importance of the Animal Welfare Sentencing Bill both its importance and significance as a way to develop specific and tougher sentences but also as a way to build on changes brought in at a later stage.

In terms of trends, Tim says that present data does not trend to any particular breed but as always high demand or popular breeds can be easier targets as the criminals are aware they can move them on easier. Now from this, I draw the conclusion that they are also aware of how much these popular breeds fetch online and as a result the value of the breed specifically. Whereas we could draw from this less well-known breeds may not be as identifiable and whilst we certainly should not let our guard down as dogs are stolen for a variety of reasons where we must be vigilant to protect our precious pets. There is no evidence as of yet to suggest that breeds are stolen to order and therefore business owners should remain vigilant of their risk to theft but they are at no greater risk of opportunistic thieves than the general public. Now building on my previous article Tim points out that whilst these thieves are stealing pets from gardens as well as kennels they have a variety of methods and are not deterred from entering a house to steal a litter of puppies. Now, this highlights ways you can reduce the risk of break-ins by methods such as alarm systems which must be armed, CCTV, robust locks, and not advertising any litters of puppies or kittens which may attract opportunistic thieves. One area which Tim points out that we have not spoken about is how something which may not be outrightly suspicious may be a tool for criminal groups using distraction theft to talk to the owner and cause someone to let their guard down and allow someone to abduct their pet.

https://www.law.ox.ac.uk/centres-institutes/centre-criminology/blog/2016/01/more-one-crime-sentencing-multiple-offences

https://www.lawtonslaw.co.uk/resources/sentencing/

https://www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk/offences/crown-court/item/theft-general/

https://www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk/offences/magistrates-court/item/theft-general/

Aspirations for Animal Welfare Reform a Summary

In this article, I want to touch on what elements of Animal Welfare reform that we should be advocating for, covering farm, and companion animals.

So when we look at Welfare Reform we need to recognise a suitable comparison between our laws and other countries which arguably have a better welfare standard then we do. Looking at the Swiss and Austrian systems. In the UK with our five animal welfare needs are the standards that we must hold people to account for the abuse of animals.

So what are these needs: Need for a suitable environment, Need for a suitable diet, Need to be able to exhibit normal behaviour patterns. Need to be housed with, or apart, from other animals and the Need to be protected from pain, suffering, injury and disease. These needs allow us to recognise the basic rights of the animal and what they require to be able to exist. This is furthered by are they able to meet the basic requirement of life as well as limiting suffering on the animal to ensure that they can behave in a normal way preventing abnormal behaviours which cause acute and prolonged suffering.

Now in terms of points where we can go further with Swiss and Austrian law provisions about freedom of an animals movement which could be arguably a move to prevent intensive farming in particular pigs who are kept in farrowing crates. This freedom of movement would protect them from a number of points that cause behaviour concerns and problems due to confinement. Now in intensive farming, it is arguable that whilst some farmers would argue confinement is necessary for the production of the animal associated products. Yet whilst Austria does still have clauses for this to allow farmers to use a form of confinement for safety reasons such as farrowing (when the sow has piglets) but generally speaking these limitations are vastly limited. Now carrying on with the farming point poultry are still getting the beaks trimmed which is a known area of suffering. The same arguably in areas that look at keeping calves with the heifer this is still recognisable as a form of suffering for the calf but it is something that can still be practiced. Both the Swiss and Austrian laws also mandate that they must see and be exposed to human interaction if it is deemed necessary. The three countries also recognise the need for animals to have suitable light exposure now all three make particular points for livestock with regards to light and this is something which is rightly protected. The other contentious issue is the exemption around religious slaughter many argue that any form of unnecessary suffering is overtly wrong. However, they specify that stunning is then done immediately following the ceremonious slaughter. This is something that is not required in other laws but does offer a way to protect the animal from prolonged suffering and although limiting the suffering further should be a goal this is a step in the right direction and easier to achieve than an outright ban. Laws around suffering looking particularly at pain and pain-causing circumstances as well as offering protection to selective invertebrates such as crustaceans and squid species. Now one area which certainly ranks lower across the board is animals used for draught and recreation which I will revisit in a later article.

In terms of the companion animal point, all three countries roughly meet the same standard of companion animal welfare. The main criticisms of all the items of legislation are as follows; Austria requires breeders to have a license to breed animals this would be something that if regulated correctly would reduce the advertising, of mass-produced litters and regulate the sale of young animals and banning on sales of animals. All of these limit the distribution of animals and would make criminal exploitation of these animals more difficult. This is something the Swiss and UK laws do not yet facilitate. UK provisions against mutilations for animals used in breeding is far more safeguarded in the UK which is a benefit to the animals as a whole. All countries arguably need to review how we control stray animal populations whether that be in the UK looking at how we rehouse animals that have been abandoned or in mitigating cat populations impact on wildlife. In the UK we arguably need to address the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 which is disputed globally as a poor method for protecting public safety and not euthanising animals unnecessary. All countries were also suggested to encourage a more sustainable pet ownership mechanism.

Now, this is only an introduction which is something which I aim to look at each point more specifically to revise a more apt system to protect our animals. We certainly should do more and elements of these laws can protect are animals from abuse which should then coincide with animal welfare legislation. Now this works is likely to make a series rather than a sole article which I will look at over the latter weeks. Please do look at https://api.worldanimalprotection.org to investigate which countries have stronger laws.

https://www.blv.admin.ch/blv/en/home/tiere/tierschutz.html

https://www.rspca.org.uk/whatwedo/endcruelty/changingthelaw/whatwechanged/animalwelfareact

https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/animal-welfare_how-well-are-swiss-animals-protected-/45489148

https://www.loc.gov/law/help/religious-slaughter/europe.php#switzerland

https://thehumaneleague.org.uk/article/why-welfare

https://www.alaw.org.uk/the-law-as-a-driving-force-for-animal-welfare-reform/

https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/228468611.pdf

https://www.dpi.nsw.gov.au/animals-and-livestock/animal-welfare/issues-paper