Hide wants fair go for man's best friend

Dog owners should be free to enjoy the companionship of their dogs, says Local Government Minister Rodney Hide. Photo / Supplied

Local Government Minister Rodney Hide plans a complete review of dog laws, saying dogs are subject to more controls than ever, and their owners' rights to enjoy them are overly restricted.

Mr Hide said he had asked officials to look at a "first principles" review of all dog laws, describing present legislation as an "onerous muddle," much of it created through emotion after of individual high-profile dog attacks rather than after clear thinking.

He was concerned councils were taking their powers too far, and said they needed to remember dog ownership was a property right and good reasons were needed to fetter it.

"I believe dog owners should be free to enjoy the companionship of their dogs and that their freedom should be constrained only if they or their dog interfere with the rights of others.

"I would go further, in fact, to say 'significantly interferes with the rights of others'."

The review was unlikely until 2011 because it was not a high priority for the Government. But he hoped to address the issue before the next election - which is in 2011.

Mr Hide laid out his views of where the balance between public demands and owners' responsibilities should lie.

People had the right to be protected from dogs wandering onto their property, barking constantly, biting or pushing people over or acting in a way that would frighten a normal person.

He also believed farmers had the right to shoot dogs threatening their stock.

"But I am not sure that people should be protected from dogs running on a beach off the leash, or from dogs on private property marked with clear warnings about the dogs, or from people owning a large number of dogs on private property or from being approached by a dog.

I am not sure that people with an irrational fear, however real, of dogs have a right to require the physical restraint of all dogs in public places."

He hoped local councils would "work hard to ensure the emphasis is on freedom rather than restriction" in applying the dog laws until the review was done.

It would consider whether central or local government should be responsible for dog control laws.

Any replacement laws - including the continuation of microchipping - would have to be backed by clear evidence that they would be effective.

Mr Hide's words were welcomed by Kennel Club spokesman Phil Lyth who said it had been many years since there was a "foundations up" review of dog control laws.

He also agreed with many of Mr Hide's beliefs about restrictions on responsible dog owners.

"I think there's very few dog owners that would disagree with that."

Public attitudes to dogs in New Zealand had changed tremendously over the past 30 years.

"The pendulum has swung tremendously the other way now. In some areas dogs are severely restricted in terms of where they can exercise. But good dogs in the hands of the right owners are an integral part of society."

He said the review should also canvas whether councils were the best placed to handle dog registration and control, or if organisations such as the SPCA or Kennel Club could play a part.