Coercive Dog Dosing Criticised

Press, Volume CIV, Issue 30803, 15 July 1965, Page 16

Coercive Dog Dosing Criticised

(N.Z. Preus Association)

NELSON, July 14. The National Hydatids Council had used strong-arm tactics to enforce by legislation an unproved, impractical and expensive strip - dosing policy over the whole country, said the president of the Waimea Dog Owners’ Association, Mr M. Wilkes, in his annual report last night.

“Although independent scientific and research authorities recommend the setting up of field trials to evaluate alternative methods, and this was supported by conferences of Federated

Farmers and the Veterinary Association, the Hydatids Council has persisted with its one-eyed policy,” he said. “Now, having destroyed the good-will engendered by the earlier voluntary schemes, it seeks more money and harsher legislation to bolster a scheme which has failed. “It is fortuitous that a very promising non-purging drug from England has fallen into the empty lap of the Hydatids Council which is now testing it according to the principles of the ‘Wakefield scheme’ (a plan for on-the-farm dosing of dogs advocated by the association).” Mr Wilkes said the association would make submissions on hydatids dosing to the committee appointed by the Minister of Agriculture to inquire into all aspects of national policy on hydatids. The 85 members of the association passed a vote of no confidence in the Waimea

County Council for its "dic-i tatorial action* and mislead-! ing statements” on dog dosing. “1 believe the treatment we have received from the council must be unique in the history of New Zealand local body administration,” said the vice-president (Mr J. C. C. Bird). “They won’t come to a public meeting, they won't attend our meeting, and they won't have us at their meeting. All we can do is condemn them in the press and throw them out of office at the next election.” By its actions in observing the letter of the law, said Mr P. IL Malone, the Waimea County Council had made it impossible for a dog owner to have his dog dosed by a veterinary surgeon and present the required certificate of testing from the station at Taieri within the time prescribed in the act.

I But if the council observed the letter of the law, so could dog owners, he continued. In the second part of the Hydatids Act, a clause provided that dogs were not required to be dosed if their owners could produce a certificate from a veterinary surgeon “that they were not in . a fit state to be dosed.” I Mr Malone suggested that two neighbours should dose i their dogs with arecoline capi sules together and that each i should sign a prepared form : that he had witnessed the dosing procedure. “I am prepared to issue certificates on your sworn statement that your dogs have been adequately dosed.” said Mr Malone, who is a veterini ary surgeon. "They will certifly that your ■ dogs have been dosed with i arecoline, and are therefore unfit for further dosing within a period of six weeks.”

ary surgeon. “They will certifly that your dogs have been dosed with arecoline, and are therefor* unfit for further dosing within a period of six weeks.”