A FARMER AND HIS BISON

Press, Volume CXI, Issue 32637, 19 June 1971, Page 1

A FARMER AND HIS BISON

A bureaucratic battle over a bison was one of the cases dealt with by the Ombudsman (Sir Guy POwles) last year

and covered in his annual report tabled in Parliament yesterday.

The complainant was a farmer who for some time, the Ombudsman said, had felt a strong desire to keep a bison, having acquired an affection and admiration for the species.

"He had been negotiating for the purchase of one of these animals from one of the New Zealand zoos, and had received letters of approval from the Department of Agriculture with reference to the conditions under which he proposed to house the animal,” said the Ombudsman. “There were many delays, but just after approval had been given by the department in April, 1969, he was advised by the zoo concerned that because of overcrowding, the surplus bison had

been sold to Australia. The director of the zoo, however, promised that future offspring would be reserved for him. “He therefore proceeded to complete his fence and shelter—quite a substantial construction, which cost him many hundreds of dollars. It was duly inspected and approved by the local livestock inspector. Everything seemed in order, and he confidently awaited the arrival of a bison calf from the zoo. “He was astonished to receive, in January, 1970, a letter from tee Department of Agriculture in Wellington saying that under regulations that had come into force in December, 1969, he could no longer have a permit to obtain or keep his bison. “He felt that these regulations must have been under study in the department for some time, and must have been in the course of preparation during the whole time that he himself was negoti--1 ating for his bison and build- ■ ing his bispn enclosure. Had 1 he known what was going on, he would'either have given up his plan and avoided expense, or could have made representations which might have involved the regulations being passed in a slightly different form,” the Ombudsman said.

Investigation showed that the regulations had been in preparation for almost two

years, but it had been thought that the department was not entitled, as the law then stood, to decline permission to the farmer, nor to assume that the Government would, in fact, approve the proposed regulations. However, the Director-General of Agriculture felt the farmer could be compensated for his expense. “This was not an acceptable conclusion to the complainant, as he was interested not in compensation but in bison,” the Ombudsman said.

Later in 1970, a further complication arose over the farmer’s registration for a B class zoo. In April, 1969, he had obtained from the department approval to operate a B class zoo, believing it would give him authority to keep bison. “Unfortunately for the complainant, the departmental handling of the matter had separated the question of his being able to keep a bison from the question of being granted a permit to operate a B class zoo. The new regulations prohibited any animal imported after December 15, 1969, being held in a B class zoo other than a circus, and there were prohibitions against any sale of such animals within New Zealand,” the Ombudsman said. “I could not justifiably criticise the regulations themselves —which seemed to be proper and in the public

interest—but the result was that, while the complainant could be entitled to operate a B class zoo, he could, under no circumstances, get permission to keep bison. “I thought it best for him to accept the compensation offered, and to close the matter at that point. He, however, decided that under the circumstances he would go ahead with his B class zbb, and forget the compensation.”