Animal welfare law called ‘feeble’

There is a ‘‘major problem’’ with New Zealand’s animal welfare law, with just 17 inspectors in charge of protecting millions of animals, experts say.

One animal lawyer says the law is ‘‘completely inadequate’’, while a top veterinarian says underfunding and vague wording has left it ‘‘non-enforceable’’.

The clout of authorities dealing with animal welfare complaints was questioned this week after Canterbury horse breeder David Marshall received 12 complaints – including claims of skinny, wounded, and dead animals – between 2010 and 2017.

Some claim the Holly Farm owner has mistreated horses for years and authorities take too long to act.

Marshall has been given until the end of May to improve the condition of the horses on his Leeston Arabian stud farm under Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI) investigation orders following a January complaint.

One complainant, Belinda Gordge, called the country’s animal welfare law ‘‘feeble’’ and ‘‘pathetic’’ after she made four or five complaints about animal neglect on Marshall’s farm while she lived in Leeston between 2008 and 2013. Each time, authorities found the horses’ conditions met minimum standards, despite appearing skeletal.

New Zealand Vet Association head of veterinary services Callum Irvine said the law was ‘‘non-enforceable at the moment’’.

There were grey areas regarding ‘‘minimum standards’’ for an animal’s condition, and unless serious enough to prosecute, the approach was often to ‘‘educate’’.

Inspectors were stretched, and it was going to become more of a problem, he said.

‘‘New Zealand public are less and less tolerant of poor animal welfare standards.’’

MPI did not have enough resources, and the SPCA was a charity tasked with enforcing the law with little government funding, he said.

New Zealand Animal Law Association president Danielle Duffield said the law was sufficient, but agreed enforcement was underfunded.

She understood MPI had just 17 full-time animal welfare inspectors for nearly 200 million farm animals nationwide. ‘‘It’s simply inadequate.’’ The SPCA had a memorandum of understanding with MPI to monitor complaints about companion animals and small farms.

It had about 100 inspectors, but the Government did not dedicate enough funding, she said.

Where there were instances of repeated complaints, MPI should take history into account, rather than consider each complaint on its own. ‘‘It does seem there are very few farm animal welfare prosecutions.’’

Duffield did not believe MPI should be responsible for animal welfare when it had a possible ‘‘conflict of interest’’ to promote the nation as a top agricultural contender.

It needed to be explored whether animal welfare be managed by a separate government agency, she said. ‘‘I think it’s quite telling that a lot of the footage [of suspected animal neglect] is coming from members of the public rather than MPI.’’

Primary Industries Minister Nathan Guy denied there was a conflict of interest.

‘‘It is the opposite, because our global reputation depends on us continuing to produce animal products within strong animal welfare standards.’’

Global charity World Animal Protection ranked New Zealand first equal for its animal welfare systems, he said.

‘‘It does seem there are very few farm animal welfare prosecutions.’’ New Zealand Animal Law Association president Danielle Duffield