Thread: Time to submit against tail docking and dew claw removal ban (they never give in )

Made my submission.

Don't be part of the silent majority (don't like but not likely to have a whinge), be part of the vocal minority, add your ten cents worth. :angry

Heres what I sent, its a bit long winded, (get a cupa tea and get comfy). If your interested in making a submission, feel free to plagiarise this below. PM me and ill forward by e-mail if you want.


Submission on Animal Welfare Regulations

19 April 2016.

I would like to make a private submission regarding the consultation document
Proposed Animal Welfare Regulations (Care & Conduct & Surgical & Painful Procedures)

In General.
Any legislation that is for the welfare of animals against cruelty or suffering can only be seen as a good idea. No responsible animal handler wants to see any of their animals under their charge or someone else’s charge suffer unnecessarily.
In general terms the proposals look to be reasonable and fair. I do however see some points that will cause some alarm to animal handlers throughout the country.
I do notice the organisations who have helped to propose the changes to the document are known for their bias, and I believe that by only including the NAWAC, RNZSPCA and the Vet Council, that it is possible that the proposals may be lacking some balance.
Some of the newly proposed legislations potentially turn simple procedures by suitable experienced people into procedures to be carried out by Vets or Vet trainees. Further to this it makes it possible for prosecution and in some instances criminal charges.
This will be adding further financial burdens to some of the handlers, and if they are prosecuted could potentially turn normally law abiding handlers into criminals.
For this reason I would like to see more direct input from other organisations and groups such as Federated Farmers and Breeders. It should be expected that people who have worked and cared for the various breeds with their extensive knowledge would more direct input on the sensibilities of some of these proposals. I also note that there are more issues that need to be worked through than has been highlighted in Blue in the document, which MPI may have over looked.

In Particular.
Although I have read the document I wish only to comment directly regarding Dogs, as I am a dog owner and enthusiast, and feel qualified only to speak about these proposed changes.

12.0 Surgical and Painful Procedures Regulatory Proposals.

61. Dogs – Dew Claws.
In the wording “Must only be performed for therapeutic reason” does not go far enough to cover the necessities of this procedure. Many Working, Hunting and Agility dogs suffer from having a due claw ripped off, partially torn away from the vigour’s of carrying out their work or duties.
It must be an option to have the Dew Claws removed at a young age if they are deemed by the breeder, owner or Vet to be at risk of causing injury to a dog latter in its life.
I have experienced this with a hunting dog climbing rocks in a creek and it was painful for the dog involved and stressful for the dog and myself. This can be sensibly avoided by the simple procedure.
It would be remiss to not allow this option.

62. Dogs – Tail Docking.
The existing regulations are suffice, but in the new proposal the wording “Must only be performed for therapeutic reason” does not go far enough to cover the necessities of this procedure. Some of the reasons that hunting and working dogs have this procedure done is for the long term welfare of the ends of their tails. NZ has particularly thick, and thorny areas these dogs work and they are prone to tearing the ends of the tails away. This injury never really heals up that well and once it happens they are prone to further injury when working.
The way the proposed changes are worded it reads that a dog owner must wait until his dog has an injured tail before the procedure can be done. For most dogs this would be from a year onwards, making it total unnecessary and involving a traumatic visit to the vet, not to mention another financial burden.
A hunting dog can at times become ineffectual if they are prone to wagging of the tail in cover which could alert or flush the object of the dog’s attention.
The breeds that have their tails docked have had them done so for many years and shown that the procedure does not affect the animal in later life, and are beneficial to the dog’s welfare and function. I believe that the breeds with docked tails should be able to continue to be so, and to let the breed retain the desired look.
MPI must seek more direct input from Dog breeders regarding the appearance of their breeds. Not enough emphasis has been allowed for breed appearance and function in this proposal.

It is interesting to note that you approve of Lambs having their tails docked, at a much older age than a dog and this is considered to be Ok, This is appears to be a double standard, if MPI are concerned about the pain caused by this procedure. Docking a dog’s tail when it is less than four days old would be far less traumatic than docking a lamb’s tail when it is six months or less.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment and place a submission on the proposed changes.

Sincerely,

Must include in your submission:
Name.
Contact details.

PDF and Email to:
Animal.welfaresubmissions@mpi.govt.nz

In Subject line include term:
Submission on Animal Welfare Regulations.

Or Post to:
Animal Welfare Policy
Minister for Primary Industries.
PO Box 2526
Wellington 6140.

Addressed to: Submission on Animal Welfare Regulations.