Edmonds Judd

animal welfare

The moral dilemma of virtual fencing

Animals, Rural
0

The popularity of virtual fencing is increasing quickly amongst dairy farmers, as an efficient method to contain and move stock.

The technology works through a collar around, say, a cow’s neck that moves it by sounds and guides it from left to right. If the cow steps over the virtual boundary, it is first guided back by sound and, if that cue is ignored, it is given a low energy shock (significantly weaker than an electric fence). It is also capable of guiding cows to walk themselves to the milking shed.

It’s not difficult to see why farmers around the country are inspired by this technology. It potentially removes the need for human labour which is not only in short supply, but is also accompanied by overwhelming regulation (think Health and Safety at Work Act 2015, Employment Relations Act 2000, Immigration Act 2009 – to name a few).

 

No brainer. . . why the opposition?

On 17 October 2024, submissions were heard before Parliament’s petitions committee from industry leaders (Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI), New Zealand Veterinary Association (NZVA) and the SPCA) after a Golden Bay dairy farmer lodged a petition due to the impacts of virtual fencing on animal welfare. The petition received 414 signatures, with concerns that the technology was cruel and could have a long term ‘brainwashing’ effect on stock. The petitioners want cows to be left to be cows, and not made to behave like robots.

One of the companies that provides virtual fencing (Halter), has said in its own submissions that there are safeguards in place to protect animal welfare and, that when cows learn the system (estimated to be within a week), they only experience the cues for 96 seconds of the day. Compared with the conventional methods of herding cattle with quad bikes or dogs, virtual technology arguably induces less stress. Cows can walk at their own pace and experience less lameness.

 

Efficient and ethical farming or dystopian nightmare?

Neither MPI nor the NZVA have identified any evidence that virtual fencing is a risk to animal welfare.

MPI has only received one complaint and on investigation found no concerns for the safety of animals. That being said, the industry leaders are still seeking regulations for the technology to mitigate welfare risks from any new agri-technologies, as that industry develops fast.

At this stage, there is no suggestion that virtual fencing systems do not already meet the requirements of the Animal Welfare Act 1999, Regulations or Codes of Welfare. There is already a legal requirement that wearable collars, such as those used for virtual fencing, do not cause injury to animals and are handled in a way that minimises risk of pain, injury or distress.

However, a draft code specific to virtual fencing and best farming practice has been prepared by the National Animal Welfare Advisory Committee that will amend minimum standards to safeguard cattle welfare even further in respect to emerging technologies.

Following the hearing of submissions, recommendations will be decided by the petitions committee and presented to Parliament. The government will then decide what action, if any, will be taken within 90 days. Ultimately, though, the risk of harm seems extremely low, with changes unlikely to impact those already using the technology.

 

 

 

 

DISCLAIMER: All the information published in Rural eSpeaking is true and accurate to the best of the authors’ knowledge. It should not be a substitute for legal advice. No liability is assumed by the authors or publisher for losses suffered by any person or organisation relying directly or indirectly on this newsletter. Views expressed are those of individual authors, and do not necessarily reflect the view of Edmonds Judd. Articles appearing in Rural eSpeaking may be reproduced with prior approval from the editor and credit given to the source.
Copyright, NZ LAW Limited, 2022.     Editor: Adrienne Olsen.       E-mail: [email protected].       Ph: 029 286 3650

Keep a Close Eye: Your Responsibility for Grazed Livestock

Animals, Health Issues, Latest news, Media, News, Online
0

When your livestock are grazing away from your property, your legal obligations as their owner under the Animal Welfare Act don’t go on holiday. It’s your duty to ensure their care meets the required standards, and that means staying actively involved in their well-being.

Here’s why regular checks and oversight are non-negotiable:

  1. Weighing and Monitoring
    Insist that the grazier regularly weighs your animals and provides detailed reports. But don’t just rely on the numbers—attend these weighing sessions periodically to verify the accuracy of the data and get a firsthand look at your animals’ condition.
  2. Feed and Water
    Livestock require enough feed to maintain good health and condition. Check that they have consistent access to high-quality, clean water to prevent dehydration and support overall well-being.
  3. Safe Surroundings
    Ensure the grazing environment is safe, free from hazards, and appropriate for the type of stock being grazed. Unsafe conditions can lead to injuries, poor health, and stress for your animals.
  4. Signs of Illness or Injury
    Early detection is key to preventing long-term issues. Look for signs of lameness or other health concerns. Timely treatment can make the difference between a full recovery and chronic problems like susceptibility to bone damage or ongoing mobility issues.
  5. Correct Handling
    Observe how your animals are being handled. Poor handling practices can lead to stress, injuries, or behavioural issues. It’s your responsibility to ensure they’re treated with care and respect.
  6. Accountability
    Don’t take a “set and forget” approach to sending livestock out for grazing. Visit them regularly to ensure the care described by the grazier matches the reality. This keeps the grazier accountable and ensures you’re meeting your obligations as an owner.
  7. Development of Young Stock
    For young stock, this period is critical to their growth and development. Regular monitoring ensures they’re meeting weight targets, growing at a healthy pace, and building the foundation for a productive future.

Ultimately, livestock owners must remain hands-on, even when animals are in someone else’s care. Regular checks safeguard their well-being and ensure you’re compliant with the Animal Welfare Act. After all, your animals rely on you to advocate for their welfare, wherever they are.

Ensuring Animal Welfare This Summer

Animals, House, Media, News
0

As the summer sun blazes, it’s a timely reminder to step up and meet our animal welfare responsibilities, whether you’re a dedicated farmer or a devoted pet owner. The Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI) Codes of Welfare provide the essential roadmap, setting minimum standards for animal care and offering best practices to help you go above and beyond.

Summer brings unique challenges for animals, and heat stress is a major concern. For pets, never leave them in cars, even for a short time—internal temperatures skyrocket, creating a life-threatening situation. Adequate ventilation and shade are equally crucial indoors to keep your furry friends comfortable.

For farmers, the stakes are high, especially for dairy cows. According to DairyNZ, cows thrive in temperatures between 4-20°C. Above this, they begin to experience heat stress, exacerbated by the energy-intensive process of digesting food and producing milk. As temperatures rise, they absorb more heat from their surroundings, making it harder to maintain their body weight and productivity.

Combatting heat stress means getting strategic. Ensure your grazing plan allows cows access to shade, such as tree cover, during the hottest parts of the day. Keep plenty of fresh, clean water available and adjust feeding practices to help them stay cool and maintain their condition.

This summer, let’s prioritise our animals’ comfort and well-being. To ensure you are on the right track, dive into the Codes of Welfare on MPI’s website. And if you are after expert advice tailored to your needs, our friendly team at Edmonds Judd is just a call away. Let’s make this summer safe and stress-free for all!

 

Fiona Jack

Calf Grazing: ensuring welfare and legal compliance beyond the farm

Rural, Your Own Business
0

With calving season coming to an end, many farmers will soon be sending their calves off to grazing. However, this does not mark the end of your responsibility for their welfare. As the owner, you remain fully accountable for the care of your animals, even while they are under the grazier’s supervision. While day-to-day care may be delegated, it’s crucial to carry out regular checks to ensure your animals are receiving proper attention. Relying solely on weight records or reports isn’t enough. We recommend attending weigh-ins or arranging for a local vet to perform Body Condition Scoring (BCS) to ensure adequate oversight. The cost of these measures is a valuable investment in correctly raised cattle.

Equally important is ensuring that your grazing contract clearly defines each party’s responsibilities and that these align with the Animal Welfare Act and relevant Codes of Welfare. If you’re unsure whether your contract offers sufficient protection, our farming team at Edmonds Judd can review or draft a contract that ensures compliance with your legal obligations.

If you’d like to discuss your responsibilities or receive a copy of the applicable Code of Welfare to go over with your grazier, contact our team.

Fiona Jack, Senior Associate (rural specialist)

Over the fence

Property, Relationships, Rural, Your Own Business
0

Contract grazing

Contract grazing is one of the ways you can farm that does not require land ownership. It is an arrangement where land ownership, livestock ownership and organising the grazing can all be managed separately.

Any species of livestock that are bred for meat or dairy (for example: cattle, sheep, goats or deer) can be the subject of contract grazing arrangements.

When involved in contract grazing, it’s imperative that you have a written contract that ensures a mutual understanding and definition of the obligations and responsibilities amongst the parties.

It is also important to include an animal health programme ensuring the animals’ welfare is protected and maintained, including the day-to-day management, health management, animal arrival obligations and reproduction requirements. The contract should include how and when payments should be made, and how any conflicts could be resolved.

The arrangement can involve up to a maximum of three separate entities each carrying out a specific role – the landowner, the livestock owner and the grazier (grazing manager). The grazier oversees the grazing activities and provides management expertise to the land and livestock owners.

If you are involved in contract grazing, don’t hesitate to contact us when you need to organise the contract.

90-day trial periods available again for all employers

As it had indicated pre-election, the government reinstated the 90-day trial periods for all employers. The 90-day trial period has had something of a flip-flop history.

First introduced in 2008, trial periods were initially applicable for employers with 19 or fewer employees; the overarching idea was that it would reduce the risks that employers face when hiring a potential employee. In 2010, the 90-day trial period was extended to all organisations – whatever their size. In 2018, the Labour coalition amended the law back to being applicable to only employers who had fewer than 20 employees. However, since December 2023, the 90-day trial periods have been reinstated for organisations of all sizes. There is ongoing debate that the 90-day trials diminish the risks for employers and increases the uncertainty for employees.

A 90-day trial period can be used for your employees if they have not previously worked for you. For you to include a trial period when hiring a new employee, you and your prospective employee must agree to the trial period before they start work. The trial provision must be included in their employment agreement to be able to terminate within that trial period. If you want to dismiss your ‘trialled’ employee, it’s essential the correct steps are taken during the process.

You should note that your dismissed employee is not entitled to bring a personal grievance in respect of the dismissal if it is within the trial period. It’s important to be aware, however, this does not prevent your employee raising a personal grievance on other potential qualifying grounds such as discrimination or bullying.

We strongly recommend you talk with us early if you intend including a trial period or using a trial period to dismiss your employee. Getting it wrong can cause much distress for them, and a great deal of money and time for you.

Minimising phosphorus in waterways

Most farmers work hard to manage the water quality on their properties. They change grazing arrangements, manage their fertiliser applications, fence riverbanks and wetlands, plant trees and place sediment traps.

Dairy farm fertiliser effluent contains phosphorus that may enter freshwater from run off or leaching from paddocks. Although phosphorus is essential for plant growth and crucial for food security, it leaves a devastating footprint on the environment. A key ingredient in synthetic fertilisers, the damaging impacts are seen when phosphorus contaminates lakes, rivers and (ultimately) the ocean. Phosphorus can encourage the growth of algae in fresh water that pollute and degrade the health, mauri and wairau of our water. It means our waters may not be suitable for swimming, fishing and drinking, and affects its biodiversity.

The good news is, however, that in many areas the amount of phosphorus in our waterways is declining. All farmers should minimise the impact of phosphorous leaching by stock exclusion, creating riparian buffers, undertaking planting and preventing runoff from critical source areas.

The National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management (NPS-FM 2020) provides guidelines for monitoring and managing dissolved reactive phosphorus in rivers and how freshwater should be managed. Farmers are recommended to apply phosphorus to paddocks only if necessary. An increase in plant productivity could lead to a decrease in run off and less erosion. Using a phosphorus index ensures you can find paddocks that have high potential for phosphorus loss and therefore avoid using that fertiliser.

 

DISCLAIMER: All the information published in Rural eSpeaking is true and accurate to the best of the authors’ knowledge. It should not be a substitute for legal advice. No liability is assumed by the authors or publisher for losses suffered by any person or organisation relying directly or indirectly on this newsletter. Views expressed are those of individual authors, and do not necessarily reflect the view of Edmonds Judd. Articles appearing in Rural eSpeaking may be reproduced with prior approval from the editor and credit given to the source.
Copyright, NZ LAW Limited, 2022.     Editor: Adrienne Olsen.       E-mail: [email protected].       Ph: 029 286 3650

Over the fence

Rural
0

Obligations of working dog owners

There are a range of legal obligations and responsibilities associated with owning working dogs. ‘Working dogs’ are specifically defined under the Dog Control Act 1996 and include dogs used solely or principally for the purpose of herding or driving stock.

Registration and microchipping: Working dogs do not have to be microchipped unless they are kept on the farm as a family pet or used for recreational hunting. While working dogs may not need microchipping, they must be registered and wear a collar with a council-provided disc or label.

When registering a working dog, you must specify that they are a working dog. If you don’t register or micro-chip (where required) working dogs, you can be fined up to $3,000.

Dangerous dogs: If your working dog attacks a person, another animal or protected wildlife, you may be fined up to $3,000 and your dog may be destroyed. If your dog causes serious injury (or death) to a person, animal or to protected wildlife you may be imprisoned for up to three years and/or fined up to $20,000.

If your dog attacks a person or animal and no destruction order is made, your local council can still classify your dog as dangerous, meaning it must be kept within a fenced area, neutered, muzzled and kept on a leash in public places. You will also be liable for higher registration fees and cannot dispose of the dog to another person without the written consent of your local council.

Protection of working dogs: You must ensure your dogs receive proper care and attention, including sufficient food, water and adequate exercise. Failing to care for your dogs is considered an offence and you could be imprisoned for up to three months or fined up to $5,000.

Local councils also have the power to impose certain obligations regarding dog controls. Therefore, it is crucial to check your local council’s policies regarding working dogs to ensure you are compliant.

MPI: Animal welfare checks

The Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI) regulates animal welfare and ensures the safe treatment of animals in New Zealand. Since 1 July 2023, MPI is responsible for delivering inspectorate services for all animal species in New Zealand.

The Animal Welfare Act 1999 provides the legislative framework for the care, treatment and obligations relating to animals, including when using animals for the purposes of research, testing and teaching. MPI inspectors have wide-reaching authority under the Act. This allows them to enforce the rules under the legislation and to ensure that animals are being treated and cared for properly.

In particular, section 127 of the Act authorises an inspector to enter onto private land, premises, vehicles, aircraft or ships (without a warrant) to carry out a routine inspection on an animal. The power of entry does not require an inspector to hold a belief that any offence has been committed. However, inspectors may only enter onto private land at a reasonable time and evidence must be provided to the animal’s owner of the inspector’s identity. No force must be used; entry into private dwellings or a marae can only be undertaken with a search warrant.

If nobody is present at the time of entry, the inspector must leave in a prominent place a written statement of the time and date of entry, the purpose of entry, the condition of the animals inspected, the animals removed (if any), and the address of the police station or other office to which enquiries can be made.

If an inspector has reasonable grounds to believe an animal has been mistreated, they can move that animal to a place chosen by them. Inspectors may also remove an animal if they believe it requires veterinary care or the owner is disqualified from owning animals. The animal will be kept at the chosen location until a judge orders the animal be returned to the owner, or the owner is charged and the animal is forfeited to the Crown.

Firearms Registry opened 24 June 2023

After the Christchurch terrorist attacks, the government introduced laws strengthening the management of firearm use, including establishing a Firearms Register. The Register opened on 24 June 2023.

All New Zealand firearms licence holders must now register all non-prohibited firearms, restricted weapons, pistols, major parts, prohibited firearms/magazines and pistol carbine conversion kits. Do note that firearms that do not work must still be registered.

Licence holders have until 24 June 2028 to register the items listed on the previous page. However, there are a number of activating circumstances that will require someone to register the items sooner. Examples of the activating circumstances are where a firearm is being purchased or sold, where a firearm has been lost or stolen, or where a person is applying for a new (or renewing an existing) firearms licence/endorsement.

Individual firearms licence holders do not need to register antique firearms or airguns (excluding specifically dangerous airguns). Individuals are also not required to register  ammunition in their possession, nor to record sales or purchases of ammunition to or from other firearms licence holders.

To find out more about the Firearms Registry, click here.

 

 

DISCLAIMER: All the information published in Rural eSpeaking is true and accurate to the best of the authors’ knowledge. It should not be a substitute for legal advice. No liability is assumed by the authors or publisher for losses suffered by any person or organisation relying directly or indirectly on this newsletter. Views expressed are those of individual authors, and do not necessarily reflect the view of Edmonds Judd. Articles appearing in Rural eSpeaking may be reproduced with prior approval from the editor and credit given to the source.
Copyright, NZ LAW Limited, 2022.     Editor: Adrienne Olsen.       E-mail: [email protected].       Ph: 029 286 3650

Over the fence

Property, Rural
0

Resource Management (National Environmental Standards for Freshwater) Regulations 2020 now amended

Wetlands have many environmental benefits; they can significantly reduce nutrient and sediment losses on farms, improve water quality, and provide a habitat for birds and fish.

In 2020, Resource Management (National Environmental Standards for Freshwater) Regulations were introduced. These regulations protected wetlands to preserve their environmental benefits. The initial regulations had limited consenting pathways and resource consents were not obtainable for the construction of any water storage facility that could adversely impact the extent or values of the wetland.

In January 2023, these regulations were amended to introduce new consenting pathways for the purposes of:

  • Urban development
  • Quarrying activities
  • The extraction of minerals and ancillary activities (with additional controls on coal mining)
  • Landfill and cleanfill areas, and
  • Water storage, ski area infrastructure and New Zealand Defence Force activities, that are included in the definition, and the existing National Environmental Standards for Freshwater provision for ‘specified infrastructure.’

There are certain ‘gateway tests’ under the new consent pathways that must be satisfied before consent is granted.

The effects of the activity must also be managed using the ‘effects management hierarchy.’ This addresses any adverse effects the activities may have on the extent or value of the wetland. There are also certain conditions imposed on the new consenting pathways, including the requirement that water storage infrastructures must provide significant national or regional benefits.

 

Affordable Water Reform replaces Three Waters Reform Programme

On 13 April 2023, the government announced changes to its Three Waters Reform Programme. Three Waters was introduced in 2022 to change the delivery of drinking water, wastewater and stormwater to ensure all New Zealanders have safe and reliable water infrastructure.

After a significant negative public response to the Three Waters proposal, the government has made key changes to what is now called Affordable Water Reform. These are:

  • Ten publicly owned specialised service entities rather than four
  • The entities will be based around the existing regions and will be connected to the communities that they serve
  • The entities will be owned by local councils and will be operationally and financially independent
  • Each entity will be governed by a professional board and local input will be enhanced through the regional representative group for each entity. There will be an equal number of mana whenua and council representatives on each entity’s regional representative group, and
  • The introduction of the entities will occur through a staged approach between early 2025 and 1 July 2026 at the latest.

The original Better-Off funding model was designed to support councils through the transition period and to manage the financial impacts of the reforms. The Crown will still provide Better-Off funding for the first phase ($500 million) but not for the second phase ($1.5 billion). The first phase of funding has been implemented to try to negate the financial implications that the councils face during the transition.

The latest amendments do not largely impact the Water Services Legislation Bill and the Water Services Economic Efficiency and Consumer Protection Bill currently before Parliament. The government intends to pass legislation to implement these new changes before the election in mid-October.

Reaction to the changes to the government’s revised water reform programme has, it is fair to say, been mixed. It will be interesting to see how these reforms progress over the next six months before the election.

 

Cyclone Gabrielle – animal welfare management

Cyclone Gabrielle had a significant impact on farms in the North Island and left many animals stranded and in danger. This has highlighted the importance of having a disaster management plan in place which sets out what is required to keep your stock and pets safe.

When preparing for a disaster there are a range of factors to consider including:

  • What items should be included in an emergency kit, such as necessary food, medicine and water
  • Where the emergency kit will be stored so that it is accessible in the event of a disaster
  • Evacuation routes
  • Where animals can be safely stored in the event of a disaster including high points and well sheltered areas
  • What will happen with the animals while your property is restored, and
  • How will your animals be cared for if your property is damaged?

When a disaster occurs it can greatly impact the health of your animals. They are often stressed from the disaster which weakens their immune systems and increases their risk of becoming sick. As medical supplies are usually difficult to obtain following a disaster, it is important to ensure that you always have sufficient supplies on hand to keep your animals healthy.

There is also the possibility that stock feed could be damaged as a result of the disaster. Following Cyclone Gabrielle, the floodwaters caused some feed to become contaminated with sewage, bacteria, chemicals and other toxins. Moisture also increases the risk of mould.

As a part of your disaster response planning you need to consider what will happen where there is limited feed, including what animals take priority such as animals that are pregnant or newly born animals that will be at the highest risk.

 

DISCLAIMER: All the information published in Rural eSpeaking is true and accurate to the best of the authors’ knowledge. It should not be a substitute for legal advice. No liability is assumed by the authors or publisher for losses suffered by any person or organisation relying directly or indirectly on this newsletter. Views expressed are those of individual authors, and do not necessarily reflect the view of Edmonds Judd. Articles appearing in Rural eSpeaking may be reproduced with prior approval from the editor and credit given to the source.
Copyright, NZ LAW Limited, 2022.     Editor: Adrienne Olsen.       E-mail: [email protected].       Ph: 029 286 3650