The number of animal welfare inspections based on suspicion continued to climb, but at a slower pace than in previous years. Suspicion of animals being kept in breach of animal welfare regulations led to 6448 inspection visits in 2017, which is 80 visits more than the previous year.
Urgent action was necessary in almost six hundred inspection visits
The number of actions to be taken by the authorities based on observations during animal welfare inspection visits was somewhat higher than the previous year. The increase was mainly due to the increase in the total number of inspection visits, but also by percentage actions had to be taken by the authorities somewhat more often than a year earlier. Seen over a longer time period, it is to be noted that giving advice during the inspection visits is sufficient more and more often. At the turn of the decade almost every second inspection visit led to actions by the authorities, but currently the share of visits requiring actions by the authorities out of all inspection visits is below 40 %.
At 1894 targets (29 per cent of the inspection visits), breaches were observed which led to the animal owner or holder being issued with either an order to correct the deficiencies within a set timeframe or being prohibited from continuing the practices in breach of the animal welfare legislation. The purpose of these measures is to raise the quality of animal care to the minimum level required by law. In addition, serious negligence which required the authorities to take urgent action to secure the welfare of the animals was detected in 578 cases (9 % of the inspections). Such urgent actions usually involve taking smaller animals elsewhere for care, whereas in the case of larger animals or large numbers of animals they are in the first instance given food and water and are provided with somebody to look after them. If it is not possible or suitable to arrange care for the animals, they can also be sold or euthanized.
The number of inspections of companion animals is still increasing
The number of inspections of production animals reported has not changed much during the last few years, but has remained at around 3600 inspections annually. The number of inspections of companion animals on the other hand, has increased continually which is also seen as an increase in the total number of inspections. During the reporting year, the number of inspections of companion animals exceeded 5000. As to the results reported per species it has to be noted that the number of actual inspection visits is not as high. If there are several species at the site inspected, it is reported as several inspections based on the number of species.
Reported per species, clearly the largest share of inspections was targeted at dogs, which were inspected in nearly 3000 cases. The next most inspected animals were cats and cattle, both about 1400 times. Equidae are counted as production animals in the reporting, and their care was inspected nearly 800 times during the year. The conditions of poultry were inspected during more than 600 visits and sheep during 400 visits. These species are also classified as production animals in the reporting, regardless of whether they were kept for production purposes or as companion animals. In addition to the animals mentioned above, the animal species on the holding was not reported in about 150 cases. This group also includes the more unusual targets for inspection, such as for example circuses and zoos.
Similarly to previous years, clearly the largest share (nearly 80 % in 2017) of urgent action taken was aimed at companion animals. Numerically, prohibitions or orders issued in accordance with the Animal Welfare Act were given somewhat more often on farms with production animals than to keepers of companion animals, even though the difference has decreased in the last few years.
In proportion to the number of inspection visits about 41 % of the inspections targeted at production animals led to a prohibition or order being given to the person responsible for the care of the animal in order to improve the rearing conditions of the animals, whereas prohibitions or orders were given in 26 % of the inspections of companion animals. Urgent action was needed in four per cent of the inspections of production animals, whereas urgent action had to be taken in 12 % of the inspections of companion animals.