Northland Federated Farmers has criticised as farcical and totally inadequate the sentence handed down to a Northland farmer convicted of ill-treating his cows. Northland Federated Farmers is right.
The sentence was pathetic and fails utterly to send a message that animal cruelty is unacceptable.
Allan Summers pleaded guilty to a
blanket charge of ill-treating his animals, and two charges of ill-treating specific animals.
Ministry of Agriculture officials visited his farm in 2002, finding emaciated cows in a shocking condition. Three hundred and eighteen animals were removed and taken away to be fed properly. Sixty-eight were in such bad condition they had to be shot.
The vet who saw the animals said he was horrified, and the farm consultant said the situation was a 10, on a scale of one to 10, and the worst she had seen.
Summers had repeatedly been offered help but had turned it down. He has two previous convictions for ill-treating animals and has still not accepted responsibility for what happened.
This month he was sentenced to 350 hours community work, ordered to pay $4000 costs and banned from owning cows for two years. He immediately said he would transfer ownership of his cows to his wife, make his son farm manager and continue working himself as a farmhand. His punishment is accordingly negligible.
Judge Graeme Hubble said a jail term was not appropriate as the ill-treatment had not been wilful.
This is difficult to accept. If a person is warned and repeatedly offered help and refuses to accept it, surely this is a deliberate decision.
It is also difficult to understand how this sentence complies with the 2002 Sentencing Act. That sets outs the purposes of sentencing, including denunciation, deterrence, protection of the community, accountability, promotion of responsibility and provision for the victim's interests.
Not one of those purposes is served by the sentence handed down in this case.
The act also requires judges to take into account the gravity of the offending, the seriousness of the offence in comparison with others, and the effect on the victim.
Judges must impose penalties near the maximum for the most serious cases.
None of that was done in this case.
Aggravating factors here were the destruction of 68 cows, the number of animals involved, Summers was in a position of authority over the animals, his previous convictions and the victims' vulnerability.
No farmer has been jailed for offences under the 1999 Animal Welfare Act. It is about time judges changed that by recognising the horrifying suffering of the animals involved and sentenced accordingly.
On March 17, three Culverden farmers were sentenced after pleading guilty to charges of de-velveting deer without being licensed or supervised by a vet.
Several stags were de-velveted roughly, with antlers cut too low. It was unlikely analgesia had been used and veterinary advice was that, without anaesthetic, lopping the velvet off was like chopping off a finger.
An impact report warned the New Zealand industry could suffer because de-velveting of stags was illegal on animal welfare grounds in Europe.
The report noted that European deer farmers had challenged New Zealand's exports in 2003, and illegal de-velveting would jeopardise an already vulnerable market.
The company involved was fined $7500, the director $5000 and each of the workers $750. The maximum penalties were fines of up to $125,000 and six months' jail.
Federated Farmers needs to take the lead by educating farmers about the importance of treating animals well. It is no longer good enough to say cruel practices can continue because it costs more to act humanely.
Shock waves are at present going through the Australian sheep industry, after North American animal rights activist Ingrid Newkirk said she would shut it down if it did not stop mulesing.
Mulesing involves terrified animals being held against their will while razor-sharp shears are used to slice away the skin around their rump. Their rear ends are left streaming with blood.
The practice is designed to protect animals from blowflies. About a million New Zealand sheep are subjected to it.
Newkirk, of People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, has warned farmers to stop the practice or face the ruin of their $4 billion a year industry.
New Zealand farmers may be complacent and believe they will never face an economic threat from Northern Hemisphere consumers. But Peta's campaign against the Australian wool industry is already hitting home.
Retailer Abercrombie & Fitch has announced it will no longer stock Australian wool products.
Northern Hemisphere visitors to New Zealand regularly express distress at seeing malnourished farm dogs chained for long periods, badly treated bobby calves, and animals sweltering in paddocks with no shade.
Some farmers punish cows by breaking their tails when they do not move quickly enough to do what farmers want.
Farmers should take steps to protect their economic livelihood by introducing better practices.
* Catriona MacLennan is a South Auckland barrister.
Opinion by
Northland Federated Farmers has criticised as farcical and totally inadequate the sentence handed down to a Northland farmer convicted of ill-treating his cows. Northland Federated Farmers is right.
The sentence was pathetic and fails utterly to send a message that animal cruelty is unacceptable.
Allan Summers pleaded guilty to a
AdvertisementAdvertise with NZME.