dc.contributor.author
Kuhtz, Martina
dc.date.accessioned
2018-06-07T21:41:59Z
dc.date.available
2000-12-14T00:00:00.649Z
dc.identifier.uri
https://refubium.fu-berlin.de/handle/fub188/8296
dc.identifier.uri
http://dx.doi.org/10.17169/refubium-12495
dc.description
Die komplette Dissertation im pdf-Format (433.728 Bytes):
kuhtz.pdf
dc.description.abstract
Details, relating to the execution of the Animal Protection Legislation, of
German Veterinary Offices were analyzed. Provisions in each of the Federal
States were examined with the purpose of determining which were of benefit and
which were a hindrance to Veterinary Officers carrying out their duties.
The analysis concentrated on the staff situation and the structure of the
Offices. Additionally, offences against the Animal Protection Legislation were
evaluated with the regard to the concerned animal species and the measures
taken against the offender.
The Animal Welfare Officials of the Ministries of ten Federal States agreed to
approve this study. A questionnaire was prepared which was sent to 347
Veterinary Offices. 155 Veterinary Officers answered, 25 others were
interviewed, so in total 180 questionnaires could be evaluated.
On average, three Veterinarians worked at one Veterinary Office. They spent
around 20% of their work time for animal protection matters. Obviously some of
the Veterinary Offices are understaffed, because 8% of the Veterinarians did
not inspect animal keepings according to Art. 16 of the Animal Protection Law.
In 53% of the Veterinary Offices the Veterinarians are also empowered to
execute. It was considered that the restriction of working on a consultant
basis only is prejudical and it was agreed by 126 Veterinary Officers, that
means by 70%, that all Veterinary Offices should have executive power.
The Veterinarians were asked which problems with the execution of the Animal
Protection Law were most imortant within the catchment area of their
Veterinary Office.
Art. 16a of the Animal Protection Law was considered most often, that means by
76 Veterinary Officers (42%) to be difficult to realize. It was demanded to
change the Law accordingly, but it also appeared necessary to clarify who
would assume the costs incurred, if the owner of the animal was not able to
pay.
Three other problematic topics, which were payed special attention, were
circusses, the cooperation with animal welfare organizations and the handling
of dangerous dogs. It became evident that most Veterinary Offices are already
in good contact with the local animal welfare organizations, which reduces the
animal welfare related case load of the Veterinary Officers.
13,997 cases were stated by 159 Veterinary Officers, which refered mostly -
that means in 79% - to pets. The offences concerned mainly the keeping of the
animals.
The results gained by this study as well as possible improvements were
discussed with the Animal Welfare Officials of the ten Federal States.
en
dc.rights.uri
http://www.fu-berlin.de/sites/refubium/rechtliches/Nutzungsbedingungen
dc.subject
legislation animal-welfare veterinarians law
dc.subject.ddc
600 Technik, Medizin, angewandte Wissenschaften::630 Landwirtschaft::630 Landwirtschaft und verwandte Bereiche
dc.title
Möglichkeiten und Probleme beim Vollzug tierschutzrechtlicher Bestimmungen
dc.contributor.firstReferee
PD Dr. R. Struwe
dc.contributor.furtherReferee
Prof. Dr. E. Ripke
dc.date.accepted
1998-10-23
dc.date.embargoEnd
2001-02-06
dc.identifier.urn
urn:nbn:de:kobv:188-1998000616
dc.title.translated
Possibilities and problems with the execution of the Animal Protection
Legislation
en
refubium.affiliation
Veterinärmedizin
de
refubium.mycore.fudocsId
FUDISS_thesis_000000000078
refubium.mycore.transfer
http://www.diss.fu-berlin.de/1998/61/
refubium.mycore.derivateId
FUDISS_derivate_000000000078
dcterms.accessRights.dnb
free
dcterms.accessRights.openaire
open access