Band on tail = jail

Rogue and the rubber ring placed on her tail. Photo / Whangarei SPCA

Darren Godfrey is in jail for docking his dog's tail with a rubber ring commonly used for lambs; a practice he copied from his neighbours and didn't think was illegal.

The 25-year-old was yesterday sent to prison for four months by Judge John McDonald in the Whangarei District Court after earlier admitting ill treating an animal and one of not seeking treatment to alleviate pain and distress.

The Whangarei SPCA, which laid the charges, welcomed the sentence and said the dog had been in agony with an infection.

Under the Animal Welfare (Dogs) Code of Welfare 2010, tails may only be shortened or removed using a tail band in puppies less than four days old.

Godfrey was also ordered to pay $2000 of the $3519 sought to the SPCA and was disqualified from owning or exercising control over animals for five years.

Judge McDonald said Godfrey did not seek advice or carry out research before putting the rubber ring on his female six-month-old pitbull terrier-type puppy named Rogue.

He said research had proven that animals suffer acute pain for 90 minutes after the ring placement. Godfrey's actions had long-term consequences and health problems for Rogue, the judge said.

The dog had to be heavily sedated, and its tail below the rubber ring was amputated by a veterinarian.

A summary of facts stated that acting on a complaint from the public, an animal welfare and a field officer, accompanied by a police officer, went to a house Godfrey lived in at Kamo on August 12, 2013. The puppy's tail was swollen and her ribs and hip bones were visible.

In explanation, Godfrey said he placed the ring three days before the visit by the officers because he wanted to shorten the tail.

In court, he said through his lawyer John Watson that he had seen neighbours do it and didn't think it was illegal.

Mr Watson submitted that a sentence of community detention was appropriate and wouldn't be seen as a "letaway" or a sentence that would enable his client to care for his two children on a part-time basis.

But Judge McDonald said the offence was serious and the pre-sentence report said an electronically-monitored sentence was not suitable.

Outside court, Mr Watson said the penalty imposed was "quite stern" and seemed out of sync with sentences imposed for similar offences.

He has not received instruction from Godfrey on appealing the sentence.