The Utah House approved Senate Bill 197 on Tuesday, 62-6. The bill would make torturing a domesticated cat or dog a third-degree felony, punishable by up to five years in prison and a $5,000 fine. Sponsor Rep. John G. Mathis, R-Vernal, calls the measure a ''hammer" that will deter people from intentionally hurting animals.

''Society wants it raised to the level of a felony," he said. ''It's also a statement by us saying that we're not going to tolerate this being done."

The measure was a compromise between lawmakers who said other proposals were either too harsh or too lenient. Unlike other bills this session, the compromise covers only ''companion animals" and doesn't require repeat offenses to warrant a felony charge.

But some animal advocates don't think the bill goes far enough.

Rhonda Kamper said the scope of animals protected under the bill is too limited. Kamper's dog Henry, a black Chihuahua-mix dog, was burned in an oven in May 2006 and also lost an eye in a leaf blower attack. Henry's attacker, Marc Christopher Vincent, was sentenced to four months in jail.

''Feral cats and stay dogs - you know, you can torture them to death, and it's still just a misdemeanor," she said. ''I think it's pretty sad."

The definition of torture is also set prohibitively high, which could limit the number of offenders who would face felony charges, she said. The bill defines torture as ''intentionally or knowingly causing or inflicting extreme physical pain to an animal in an especially heinous, atrocious, cruel, or exceptionally depraved manner."

''Who's to say Henry would even have met that definition?" she said. ''The definition of torture is set so high, the judge might have said, 'You know what? He survived it."'

Kamper said she plans to lobby for amendments in future legislative sessions that would protect all animals and change the definition of torture.

Gene Baierschmidt, executive director of the Utah Humane Society, is pleased with the compromise.

''It's a landmark piece of legislation," he said. ''People should hold their dogs and cats tonight and tell them that they're more protected than they were this morning."

Baierschmidt said he would have liked to see other animals, like horses, protected, but he has no plans to push for further changes to the law in the near future. If Kamper or somebody else were to come forth with a proposal to expand protection, he said he would support it.

The United States Humane Society also commended the House for approving the bill.

Before the final vote, some lawmakers expressed concerns that they might not be addressing the problem in the right way.

''The major breakdown, from my perspective, is in the court system," said John Dougall, R-American Fork. ''We have laws on the books that are quite strong, but the courts are not following through with punishments that the public deems necessary."

Under current law an animal cruelty conviction could result in up to one year in jail, but Dougall said he's more often seen sentences of just a few days.

Lorie D. Fowlke, R-Orem, said prosecutors are ill-prepared in cruelty cases because animal workers don't adequately catalog offenses.

The bill now goes to Gov. Jon Huntsman, who has previously said he would sign anticruelty measures.