It is now a daily battle to keep up with the changes to animal legislation, with government being steered by animal rights agendas and emotive call outs. Most of these decisions are made with little knowledge or investigation on what the outcomes will be and are then just referred to as “unintentional consequences”. Let’s look at a few of the main ones that are currently playing out in our society that the public may or may not be aware of.
First let’s look at Victoria’s Domestic Animals Act which was heralded as a way to improve the welfare of animals in the state of Victoria by holding breeders accountable and to reduce the number of unwanted pets. Most of this was to occur with the development and roll out of the Pet Exchange Register. So has it worked? The simple answer is no. Our pounds and shelters are full of unwanted dogs and cats, and sadly there has been a huge increase in litters of puppies. So how can this be as breeders were supposed to be made sign up to the register in order for their litters to be tracked, and puppies could be traced from the breeder throughout their life?
You will find the majority of people registered for a government source number are registered breeders not backyard breeders, or those that thought their dog just needed one litter before desexing, or those looking to earn what they thought was a quick buck. As a result, there has been no reduction in these sorts of breeding practices or information circulated to people to inform them of the new compliance requirements. So how are they to know especially if, as we know, most are not microchipping their puppies and in turn not registering.
Which means it’s just a way to have further vision of those that are already registered with their membership organisation and are already tracked. The dogs and cats in our shelter and pound system are not from reputable registered breeders and historically they never have been but the government took the lead and followed the animal rights advice, the same groups that would just like to see animal ‘ownership’ stopped.
This is then compounded by the changes to Victoria’s planning overlays. In Victoria if you plan to breed on your property you are required to change your planning overlay to include breeding. This was a change made under the disguise of agriculture intensive breeding. Most dog owners with over 2 dogs or cats would have an excess animal permit which has been a requirement for many years, and apart from the cost there is no difference in these two processes. They both include an application, and inspection and then issue of a permit, but as the government gave registered breeders concessions in the Domestic Animal Act when it was contended, this is the way they knew they could still stop that breeding. All the government has done again is stop reputable registered breeders who either cannot afford the hefty price tag associated with DA demands ordered by councils or have a council that will not issue the land use changes.
Has it stopped those doing the wrong thing? No, because who is willing to look at this? No one. The Planning Minister has been contacted on many occasions and the response is “there will be no amendments made.” Again they call these “unintended consequences.” No one is willing to visit them and rectify or clarify, and up until this point we haven’t even been able to get a justification for the changes.
Elsewhere we have a State that thinks it acceptable to shoot horses from the air, all while the results of field studies on the damage caused by these animals and the actual number of horses is so ambiguous, it is laughable. Where is the welfare concern? Why do we not have concrete data and reports before we even start a process let alone one that is being carried out in a barbaric manner.
It is on par with the many years as a country we called dingo’s wild dogs and put bounties on their heads all while we lost other native species to predation by feral cats etc. that the Dingo’s would of usually kept away. Again this has taken international scientists to travel here and collect data to build a case.
And lastly lets quickly touch on the ducks. While I haven’t seen the test results I don’t think it would take Einstein to figure out that in years where duck hunting has been reduced we have what seems like an increase in bird flu. We now have huge outbreaks in Victoria, the State that reduced bag rates and hunting times, so less birds were obviously shot which has left us with an increase of these birds. These ducks carrying disease= our bird populations at an increased chance of disease. Was this another “unintentional consequence” brought about by the emotive animal rights agenda?
Its time now that we all have to band together, it doesn’t matter what you own or who you got it from. It is about a voice and a very loud one. I have heard enough times it will never happen to us. Well let me tell you if it hasn’t it will. We need to demand that this country is legislated properly and that activism does not belong in our law making system. That is not what Australia is built on.
By: Kylie Gilbert – Animal Care Australia Dog Representative. Originally published: June 2024 ACE Newsletter.
