New Zealand Dog News

Reviewing the dog news in New Zealand with editors comments. Someone needs to keep reviewing how our dogs are doing in society.

June 29, 2009

SDC keeps its dog fee lowest

Worried about the price of registering your dog? Then you need to move to the Southland District.

After deciding to keep its dog registration fee at $16.80 for the new financial year, the Southland District Council officially has the cheapest rates in the country.

Council regulatory services group manager Lindsay McKenzie said it was council's intention to keep the registration fee as low as possible.

While it only cost $16.80 to register a dog it was surprising how many people decided to avoid the fee and risk a $300 fine, he said.

When I went back to Ottawa, Canada, I found out that the registration fee were $25.00, BUT that they didn't have a high rate of complying either. Obviously, it's not the money, but the principle, or something else....

Like in my previous blog entry, $16.80 is just about the right amount to pay for registration. In Chch it's $80 and unneutered it's something like $75. I seem to remember that 'it' dogs were a lot less expensive to register. So how come is the price almost the same to register intack, neutered dog?!?

....

Owning a dog in Invercargill is set to be more expensive from July 1, with prices rising from $69.50 to $80 or from $45 to $52.50 with a discount for dogs that have not previously come to the attention of the council.

That Invercargill POUND can't even keep dogs in !?

I have a problem with this.... " for dogs that have not previously come to the attention of the council." An un-substantiated complaint is deemed to 'come to the attention of the council' and therefore an elevated fee is required.... hum.....

lining the pockets of the council

From the CCC website

How does the Council spend my registration fee?

Funds collected from dog registration helps the Council have better control of Christchurch's dog population.

Registration fees can only be used for dog related services.

Benefits of registration may include:

  • Positive identification of your dog. So they know who to fine when your dog wanders
  • Re-uniting of lost or injured dogs with their owners. Yes, but they charge you for getting your dog back!
  • Better planning of dog control services through accurate population data. Oh really? So, Bexley gets more of a look-in than say, Merivale?!
  • Investigation and resolution of dog problems.
  • Educational programmes encouraging responsible dog ownership practices amongst young people. If this were working, why do family dogs still have the highest rate of dog bites?
  • Maintenance of the City Dog Shelter facilities for lost, injured, aged and young dogs. What an awful place for a dog!
  • Dog patrol services aimed at reducing wandering dogs and so reducing nuisance to the public. Actually, isn't the cost of recoving your dog from the pound pay for this?!
  • Encouragement of de-sexing through discounted registration. Oh! $10 discount ?! How does this help with "How does the Council spend my registration fee?"
  • Generous prompt registration concession for owners granted Responsible Dog Owner Status. How does this help with "How does the Council spend my registration fee?"
  • Provision of dog park areas where owners may exercise their dog/s in pleasant surroundings. I just wish that the dog parks were accessible for non-car owners. These parks are great, but again, they are far to get to. What about for those worried about carbon footprints?
  • Friendly advice in regard to dog ownership and property suitability. Why is it then that one feels on the back foot when you get a door knock from the Dog Pound Officer and he says 'this is a warning' but you see him sitting across the street in his van writing you out a fine?! And why is it when you want to go to court and dispute a ticket, you don't get your day.
  • 6 Comments:

    • At 7:57 a.m., Blogger Karen Batchelor said…

      What a shameless load of drivel the councils are getting away with serving up to justify their high fees, appallingly bad service, and the inhumane conditions they subject dogs to when they get their hands on them, never mind their "Kill 'em all" culture for the Bull Terrier types.
      On calling North Shore City's dog control call centre to report 3 stray dogs causing a noise nuisance and traffic hazard, the terse and dismissive call taker stated that they don't come out on a Sunday. As an ex-dog control officer I knew that to be untrue and said so. She then said they wouldn't come out unless I caught the dogs for them. Isn't this their job? It's potentially dangerous for untrained members of the public to collar a strange dog. Too bad, was her attitude, unless I catch the dogs they'll do nothing. I went and caught the dogs and secured them in my hallway since I didn't have fences at the time or kennels to put them in. The males cocked their legs all around my walls, soaking my wallpaper and carpet in urine. I called the council again and got the same rude person who said they now wouldn't come out unless I gave them my name, so I said "OK, my name is JANE SMITH". They then sent someone out to collect the oestrus bitch and her 2 male suitors. I pay $100 per year to that council to register my dog.

       
    • At 12:15 p.m., Anonymous Anonymous said…

      what a lot of drivel you talk Natalie. so you are honestly telling us, thjat you want to live in a lawless society where dogs roam the streets in packs and foul the streets etc, and people should just know which dogs they shouldnt go near and accept it!! grow up!
      EVERYTHING IN LIFE HAS A COST AND DOG OWNERSHIP IN NZ IS NO DIFFERENT, YES, I THINK ALL COSTS SHOULD BE PAID FROM GENERAL RATE TAKE AS IN UK AND PARTS OF AUSTRALIA,BUT ITS NOT , SO GET OVER IT . BUT YOUR WHINGING ON ABOUT EVERY DOG CONTROL LAW EVER MADE IS TIRESOME. IF YOU HAVE GOOD OBEDIENT DOGS THAT CAUSE NO TROUBLE THEN ALL YOU PAY ANNUALLY IS THE SET REGO FEE... IF YOU GET INFINGED YOU HAVE THE LEGAL RIGHT AS STATED ON THE FORM TO SEEK A DISTRICT COURT HEARING....

       
    • At 12:32 p.m., Blogger Natalie's Life said…

      You are allowed to sign your name to your opinion, otherwise what you say is just fluff, and not worthy of a discussion.

      PS. Read what I write and not what you want to read into it.

       
    • At 12:54 p.m., Blogger Karen Batchelor said…

      A typical "anon" poster. You've sooled into Natalie for her opinion but made no comment regarding my post as to the appalling culture and standards of so-called dog control agencies in this country, based upon fact. How cowardly.
      Perhaps you are a peanut-paid little megalomaniac employed by a local bureaucracy making a pathetic attempt at justifying your existence?
      Btw, 'flaming' - i.e. shouting in upper case - is poor form. Perhaps you could at least do us the courtesy of practicing acceptable internet etiquette.

       
    • At 6:58 a.m., Blogger Unknown said…

      Sorry to hear about the high fees in your area. What then is the population of Dogs in CC. If it only based on registrations or estimations?
      Gad ben Rosen
      www.petsplash.com

       
    • At 8:22 p.m., Blogger Natalie's Life said…

      Tim Shadbolt makes news as dog of an issue has its sequel at standards authority

      "Invercargill Mayor Tim Shadbolt and TVNZ have been accused of making unsubstantiated claims that could tarnish young reputations after allegedly inferring a group that he struggled to identify would grow up to be dangerous.

      Southern Squall has just obtained a Broadcasting Standards Authority determination relating to North Shore woman Karen Batchelor claims that the state broadcaster had breached standards relating to controversial issues, accuracy, and fairness in an item on the TV One show Breakfast last year."

      http://www.bsa.govt.nz/decisions/2009/2009-123.htm

       

    Post a Comment

    << Home

     
    web page hit counter