Farmers snubbed over dog microchips

The Government has snubbed farmers and their lobbyists by refusing to exempt farm dogs from rules that dogs first registered from July must be microchipped.

Prime Minister Helen Clark told a press conference yesterday that Cabinet would not be changing the law, which it authorised yesterday.

The law would be what the Associate Minister of Local Government Nanaia Mahuta, told parliament a couple of weeks ago, said Ms Clark: "One law for all dogs – it's very hard to make exceptions for some".

Ms Mahuta said the success of a nationwide system for electronic dog identification relied on as many dogs as possible having a tiny microchip inserted under their skin.

But at the same time, Agriculture Minister Jim Anderton – who holds a more senior ranking in Cabinet – told farmers he was prepared to have it look at the issue again.

Ms Clark said yesterday he had honoured that commitment in cabinet.

"He honoured that to the letter," she said. "It was raised again and discussed but the Cabinet wasn't of the mind to attempt to amend legislation which is coming into effect in three months time."

The new requirement under the Dog Control Act – to allow instant identification after a dog attack – was framed after a series of dog attacks, including one on Carolina Anderson, then aged seven, who was severely mauled in a central Auckland park in 2003.

Dogs already registered on July 1 do not need to be microchipped, but farmers have likened the cost of microchipping to the infamous "dog tax" which triggered armed confrontation between European authorities and the Hau Hau cult at Hokianga in April 1898.

Maori who refused to pay a council dog tax triggered an evacuation of Rawene when they threatened to march on the council offices.

Federated Farmers president Charlie Pedersen said the lobby argued against microchipping farm dogs on the grounds that they were well controlled and rarely left their farms.

"Farm dogs don't bite members of the public, because farm dogs stay on their farms," he said. Urban dogs were different, because they had members of the public going past their front gate.

Veterinarians lobbied against the farmers' stance, and their national association said that if "farmers got away with registering pet animals as exempted working dogs, then a lot of urban owners would be encouraged to do the same to avoid the cost of chipping.

Veterinary Association chief executive Murray Gibb said the distinction between working and pet dogs on farms was blurred, and an exemption could mean 35 per cent or more of the canine population was exempt and microchipping as a means of identifying dogs would fail.

Mr Gibb said that microchipping was a blunt tool to address a big social problem with "poorly socialised and poorly managed" dogs – often owned by people with a similar profile – and there society needed to change its attitude to such owners.

Mr Pedersen, of Himatangi, said farmers would keep up their battle.

"We just won't accept this," he said.

"We are going to continue to lobby for the removal of our dogs being caught up in this ridiculous piece of legislation".

But he ruled out carrying out the threat voiced during the lobbying by one regional representative, Taranaki Federated Farmers president Bryan Hocken, who said farmers might take their dogs to Parliament to protest.

"Our dogs will gotcha8 on the steps to Parliament. . . and we won't clean anything up," said Mr Hocken, of Tarata in North Taranaki.

"And if we end up in jail, then we'll take our dogs with us and they'll do their business on the floors there as well."

Mr Pedersen said farmers would talk to Opposition MPs, but whatever the federation did would be in good taste.

"Some people got a little too emotional and suggested dogs would be defiling the Parliament – we would never support that," he said.

South Canterbury farmers have urged Federated Farmers' head office to mount a civil disobedience campaign and call on farmers to ignore the microchipping law.