Victoria

[Steve]

Domestic Animals Act 1994

Consultation document – puppy farm legislation amendments

Bureau of Animal Welfare Victoria

3 March 2011

During the 2010 election the Liberal Nationals Coalition Party made media statements and released a Plan for Agriculture included animal welfare matters that included suggestions to improve regulation of the operation of domestic animal businesses including for compliance management of illegal puppy farms.

Informal consultation with a number of key stakeholder organisations and domestic animal businesses has developed the following suggested amendments to the Act that may address the issues of concern to the community.

The Bureau of Animal Welfare ([email protected], ph 03 91217 4200) is seeking comment from stakeholder organisations and individuals on the following draft amendments to the Act in order to provide advice to the government for its consideration in due course.

Amend the definition of ‘domestic animal business’

1. At present only an establishment breeding ten (10) or more fertile female dogs and cats ‘for profit’ is defined as a domestic animal business. This must be registered with the Council and must operate in compliance with the Code of Practice for the Operation of Breeding and Rearing Establishments.

2. There have been a number of animal breeding establishments found to exercise poor welfare practices and non compliance with the code of practice applying to domestic animal businesses. However the current definition of “domestic animal business” does not apply to many of the businesses because the definition requires that the business is “run for profit” and that the enterprise has 10 or more fertile females. These conditions are either not always met and or they are difficult to prove in respect of many of these “puppy farms”. Even where they proved, the current penalty under section 45 of the DAA (conducting a domestic animal business on unregistered premises) is not sufficient to discourage non compliance.

3. It is suggested to reduce the limit to three (3) or more fertile female animals of each species (dog or cat) and to delete the words “that is run for profit” from the definition.

4. A proviso will be that for owners who are members of an applicable organisation and whose animals are registered with that organisation, the limit will remain at 10 or more fertile females. Registered domestic animal breeding businesses that are not members of an applicable organisation view this as an anti-competitive proposal.

5. This number will not include animals that have a veterinary certificate that determines that the animal should not be bred again but is recommended not to be de-sexed.

6. There are 65 registered breeding (dog and cat) businesses in Victoria and it is estimated that these amendments could increase the number to 300 enterprises.

Increase penalties for conduct of a non-compliant domestic animal business

7. The current penalties for operating a domestic animal business on unregistered premises or for one that is not compliant with the code standards or that is not compliant with the conditions of registration is 10 PU ($1,160).

8. It is suggested to increase the penalty for conduct of a domestic animal business that is not registered with the Council non-compliance with the relevant code to 30 PU($3,583) for a person and to 150 PU ($17,917) for a corporate offence.

9. It is suggested to increase the penalty for conduct of a domestic animal business in non-compliance with the relevant code to 30 PU($3,583) for a person and to 150 PU ($17,917) for a corporate offence.

Increase penalties for selling pet shop animals from an unregistered business

10. A pet shop animal as defined in the Act includes dogs and cats. These may only be sold from a registered domestic animal business or a private residence. There are cases where persons are detected selling significant numbers of animals from premises other than these two legal outlets.

11. It is suggested to increase the penalty to 20 PU (2,389) for a person and introducing 100 PU ($11,945) for a corporate offence.

Disposal of animals from a domestic animal business

12. There is no power in the Act to allow for the seizure and disposal of animals from a dog or cat breeding operation that will not apply for registration or fails to be compliant with the code of practice or where the Council or Court revokes the registration of the operation or where it is not compliant wit the conditions of registration.

13. It is suggested to provide for a court to order disposal by a Council of animals from a domestic animal business found guilty of conducting a domestic animal business on unregistered premises or that is non-compliant with the relevant code of practice or for failing to provide surety for care of seized animals until a legal case is concluded.

14. It is suggested to provide a power for a council authorised officer to seize and dispose of animals from a domestic animal business that is non-compliant with the code of practice for the particular domestic animal business or where the business remains non-compliant with the requirement by a Council to be registered, after a notice to comply has been issued that includes an appropriate time frame.

15. It is suggested to provide for a Council authorised officer to apply to a court for a bond or security to be provided by the owner for the care and maintenance of seized animals until legal proceedings are completed, including VCAT appeals, or until the animals are disposed of. Failure to meet the bond requirements will allow the Council to apply to the court for an order to dispose of the animals.

16. This will require consideration of the methods by which a court or Council authorised officer may dispose of the animals from a domestic animal business that are consistent with Part 7A of the Act eg through sale, destruction or giving to a registered domestic animal business.

17. The penalties and the proceeds from disposal of animals are to be directed to a fund for the purpose of providing grants to animal welfare organisations for provision of responsible pet ownership education programs. Currently the Act permits Councils to receive the penalties imposed by a court for the cases they proceed with and they object to such redirection. Penalties for cases raised by Police and RSPCA (note election commitment to authorise its inspectors under the Act with regard to puppy farm compliance) and for seizure and disposal of animals (after retention of costs of seizure and disposal) go to Consolidated Revenue and these amounts could be redirected.

18. It is suggested that the animal welfare organisations be defined by their service to

a. Provide an ‘animal shelter’ service; or

b. Provide subsidised veterinary treatment services to the Community; or

c. Promote the considerate treatment and responsible ownership of animals.

d. Provide services as a community animal foster care organisation or emergency animal relief services to the community.

Court imposed ban on ownership of dogs and cats for breeding

19. There is no court power to ban ownership of pet shop animals, including dogs and cats, by a person or their agent, who has been found guilty of conducting a domestic animal business on unregistered premises or for conducting a business that is not compliant with the relevant code of practice.

20. It is suggested to provide for a court to ban ownership by a person or their agent, or to impose conditions on a person or their agent with regard to being in charge of pet shop animals for the purpose of operating a domestic animal business, for a period of up to 10 years if found guilty of an offence under the Act associated with registration or conduct of a domestic animal business.

<H1 style="MARGIN: 3pt 0in">Auditing of a registered domestic animal business</H1>21. Council authorised officers may use their powers to audit a domestic animal business. There is no power in the Act to permit a Council to require a registered domestic animal business to provide evidence that they are compliant with code of practice. It is suggested that a Council may require a registered domestic animal business to undertake an audit for compliance with conditions of the relevant code of practice or the conditions of registration. The audit will be required by notice from a Council to the domestic animal business and permit use of a Council approved independent auditor or by a Council authorised officer or by a veterinary practitioner appointed by the Council.

22. Council to be able to set their own fees for such audits. The domestic animal business is liable for the cost recoverable by Council in court for any audit requested by the Council.

23. Failure to conduct and report the audit results to Council within a reasonable time frame would be grounds for a Council to revoke or refuse registration of that domestic animal business.

Notice to Comply

24. The Act provides for a notice to comply to be issued by an authorised officer if reasonable grounds exist that the person has committed an offence against the Act. No penalty is associated with failure to comply with that Notice.

25. It is suggested to introduce a penalty of 30PU ($3,583) for a person or 150 PU($17,917) for a corporate body to fail to comply with a Notice to Comply issued by a Council authorised officer including for a non-compliance with a code provision by a domestic animal business (ie an offence under section 63A of the DAA) or a requirement to register as a domestic animal business.

Welfare of dogs impounded pending the completion of legal proceedings.

26. Dogs can be seized and kept impounded for a number of offences in the Act. In the cases of restricted breed dogs or dogs that are suspected of causing an attack the court and appeals processes may leave the animal incarcerated for several months with deleterious effects on its welfare and behaviour in most circumstances.

27. It is suggested to allow for a person to apply to the court to apply for custody of their impounded dog pending completion of legal proceedings where these are likely to take longer than 6 weeks

28. The court will be able to place conditions on the release to the owner’s custody that ensure public safety and to impose a surety on the owner for compliance with the conditions.

<H1 style="MARGIN: 3pt 0in">Measures to improve administration of the Act</H1>29. The definition of an animal shelter is to be amended to mean a premises on which cats and dogs are kept and maintained for the purpose of rehousing. This is to exempt foster care and animal rescue volunteers keeping animals on their private residential premises in compliance with council planning provisions.

30. A Council registered animal shelter will not be required to register with Council a cat or dog that is in their possession. This is the general and accepted practice which could be considered as non-compliant with the Act.

31. An amendment is required that defines a ‘community animal foster care organisation’ as an organisation that provides for the housing of cats and or dogs in private residential premises of a person approved by the organisation.

32. In addition an amendment is required that excludes a ‘community animal foster care organisation’ from the definition of an ‘animal shelter’.

33. A registered animal shelter is to be permitted to release microchip identified and desexed animals (they will be provided to the shelter desexed if they were seized by Council under current provisions in the Act) under a S.84Y type written agreement that requires desexing, vaccination and worm treatment prior to rehousing. The shelter is to be able to amend the microchip entry registry to make the rescue organisation the new owner.

34. Animals are often advertised for sale or giving away in various ways that prevent a Council checking on registration or ownership or source (eg an unregistered domestic animal business for breeding). It is suggested to provide an offence for a person or organisation to advertise or give notice or to accept advertisement of the sale or giving away of a dog or cat unless the microchip identification number (or the domestic animal business registered number) of the animal is included in the advertisement or notice. Animals that cannot be microchip identified based on veterinary advice could be advertised with the microchip of their bitch or queen. Registered domestic animal businesses will be able to use their Council domestic animal business number as an alternative given the understanding that the Act requires their animals to be microchip identified prior to disposal.

35. The reduction for a Council registration fee for microchip identification of a cat or dog is to be removed for all new registrations as this is now a compulsory requirement. It is suggested that in future the reduction should be for an animal that is both de-sexed and microchip identified.