In its bill submission, the Federation acknowledges animals come first and that clearer guidelines are required for maintaining this principle. Besides, it's not only an ethical issue.
With 50 per cent of our annual export earnings reliant on animals and animal products, the need to review animal welfare codes is essential to ensure 'Made in New Zealand' commands a premium market position.
Massey Professor of Veterinary Ethology, Kevin Stafford, says New Zealand has historically been progressive in terms of animal welfare.
"Animal welfare is an important part of the food story for marketers and consumers.
"The companies that buy our milk and meat are looking at how they can use animal welfare as part of marketing.
"Animal welfare, environmental costs and food safety are now all part of our food story," he said.
Nevertheless, the significant increase in livestock aligned to increasing consumer demands presents new challenges to primary industries and how they operate.
And where animal welfare is concerned, there has to be a trade-off against daily practicalities and economical realities involved in farming production.
Federated Farmers board member Katie Milne says policing animal abuse is not necessarily straightforward as there tend to be wider external issues at play.
"The welfare of animals can slip due to a family tragedy, divorce, financial stress and what you would technically call depression," she said.
Sometimes a farmer's judgement was not what it should be and those implicated are not suddenly terrible farmers. In most cases, farmers could be assisted and turned around again to better practices.
Ms Milne said the Federation was open to a more proactive approach to improve compliance.
This included the early targeting of offenders where necessary as this would prevent a spiral of abuse to animals developing.
``There have been cases where there were delays of a few weeks before the right inspector or agency got there. This has led to animals deteriorating in condition dramatically. This is obviously something that needs to be looked at.''
As a starter to maximising compliance the Federation believes all animal welfare
inspectors should be trained and accredited.
``Nothing surpasses a life spent in the field. Ideally, we would prefer inspectors to come from a background related to animal care. This role needs a high level of training so there is fairness and uniformity in decision-making,'' Ms Milne said.
Effectively, it meant retaining and building relationships with farmers. This would ultimately help where cases of an ambiguous nature arose.
``If we can achieve this, we can move forward with confidence. Where there
is respect and dignity it will work out well for all parties,'' said Ms Milne.
Federated Farmers dairy chair Willy Leferink believes the proposed infringement regime of `instant fines' for those 'black and white' offences will act as a strong deterrent against being served with a court notice.
Waiting for the court date, which may be two years away, can leave the perpetrator feeling like the victim, said Mr Leferink.
However, what will have impact ``is having to tell your wife you have been fined $750 today for breaking cows' tails'', he said.
Under new proposals individuals would be fined a maximum $5000, while a body corporate penalty would not exceed $25,000 for non-compliance.
More co-ordination with MPI Federated Farmers supports more collaboration amongst all industry and government agencies. It is hoped this will allow for greater transparency,
especially where lower levels of animal abuse activity, detected by animal welfare inspectors has not been shared with the industry.
Currently, some abuse cases are subject to the Privacy Act 1993 which the Federation views as unhelpful and a restriction to acting early on cases of animal harm.
Moreover, in instances where MPI have investigated and taken photos or video evidence but found no offence, this information should be carefully managed to avoid any long-lasting damage to a person's or farm's reputation.
As it happens, the Federation is often better positioned to intervene, says dairy policy advisor Ann Thompson.
``Our office extends to the countryside. We have our farmer members out there most days at the farm gate; they can see what the front paddock is looking like,'' she said.
``We can help farmers who are having issues, offer advice and seek solutions on their behalf. Above all, we can take care of the animals and organise their welfare.''
Farmers who noticed unsuitable conditions were advised to ``call in'' on the farm in question and have a chat with the farmer. Depending on the circumstances, silage or feed might be the answer or, in the worst case, the farm might be de-stocked to prevent
further animal neglect.
This process is understandably fraught with difficulties and needs a calculated and compassionate approach.
``It's often a delicate situation. Farmers are obviously distraught at the prospect
of losing animals. We encourage families to get involved and to talk through management options with the relevant people such as Rural Support Trusts,'' said Ms Thompson.
DairyNZ, dairy processors and Beef +Lamb also facilitated support and consultation to resolve any issues towards better farm management.
A Federated Farmers provincial president said that in the three years since he had taken on his role, he had encountered two cases of animal neglect and assisted these farmers who had fallen foul of the MPI guidelines.
These farmers were predominantly elderly and `old-school', having no interaction with industry groups or the Federation. This was exacerbated by adverse weather events where ill-prepared farmers fell short of what is needed to nurture animals.
Farmers who had issues were often relieved to find Federation support, especially when dealing with MPI inspectors.
``Farmers can talk to us with confidence. But we do have bottom lines, and we will call in the authorities in extreme cases as we do not want to see animals suffer,'' said the North Island-based president.
MPI inspectors had a job to do and in most cases were happy to discuss the issue with Federated Farmers to achieve a satisfactory outcome for the farmer and animals.
``It can be daunting as someone's livelihood and way of life is threatened. But MPI are not out to shut your farm down,'' he said.
NAWAC
The National Animal Welfare Advisory Committee (NAWAC) is an arm of the Ministry of Primary Industries' biosecurity department. NAWAC was established under the Animal Welfare Act with the role as an independent advisory to MPI.
The committee convenes four times annually and oversees codes of welfare
instructing on appropriate guidelines. MPI Minister Nathan Guy appoints members
and the committee is made up of a diverse field of experts from throughout the primary sector.
Ms Milne sits on the committee and says NAWAC plays a crucial liaison role between MPI and respective industries.
``They consult widely on any codes, collating all industry and wider public views and have specialists to apply the relevant science which they put forward for recommendation,'' she said.
Federated Farmers strongly endorses NAWAC and believes its role is fundamental to achieving suitable animal welfare.
That said, the Federation favours more consultation between the primary industry groups and NAWAC prior to the Minister forming new regulations. While a code of welfare may already be established, the Federation opposes it becoming a regulation with
out all relevant parties being consulted.
Where codes and regulations are proposed, the Federation would like assurances that NAWAC can fully consider the economics and practicalities involved. As it stands, this
decision-making process is open to interpretation.
Ms Milne said: ``As with any Bill the devil is in the detail. There is wording in there which we are uncomfortable with. Without more clarity, it could have catastrophic
implications for all farmers.
``The risk is real and needs addressing. While we respect the Minister has the final say, it would be wrong to have decisions made based on political motives rather than science-based policy.''
The dynamic nature of modern farming meant the ``playing field was moving constantly'', with all codes reviewed on a 10-yearly basis. This latest evaluation of codes was especially timely in respect to the recent focus on bobby calves and dairy housing.
As with any industry, there are always grey areas around practices and those who use them. Federated Farmers Waikato president James Houghton believes animal harm on-
farm is confined to a select few who lack business acumen and animal husbandry experience, who let the majority down.
``Ill-treatment of animals on-farm makes no commercial sense, quite the opposite in fact. Ill-treated farm animals do not produce well or gain condition so good animal welfare is good for business, just as bad animal welfare is self-destructive,'' Mr Houghton said.
Ms Milne said: ``Times have changed and we have to farm our brand. We are in the public eye. [Perhaps] we are becoming more urbanised as a society and farmers tend to forget that some practices are in reality unpleasant and not easily digestible to those not on-farm.''
NAWEM
The National Animal Welfare Emergency Management committee is a cluster of agencies whose purpose is to provide advice on animal welfare issues during emergencies through individual and multi-agency action. NAWEM was convened by MPI (the
then Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry) in 2006.
The main catalyst was the Lower North Island Floods in 2004.
NAWEM's mission is to provide advice on animal welfare emergency management to the civil defence and emergency management (CDEM) sector, agencies concerned with the welfare of animals, and the emergency services.
Federated Farmers, along with other NAWEM members, are lobbying for Animal Welfare Emergency Management to be added to the list of NAWAC's terms of reference or
functions. This will lift the profile of responding to animals during an adverse event.
The Animal Welfare Amendment bill will be before Parliament for a second reading on June 26.
