FAQs related to Code of Recommendations and Minimum Standards for Welfare of Horses
The code of welfare requires dog owners and people in charge of dogs to provide daily exercise sufficient to meet the health and welfare needs of the individual dog. It also lays out requirements for food, water and appropriate shelter (including ventilation and cleanliness), and minimum standards for collars and tethering. Requirements are also laid out to avoid dogs becoming too thin (or fat) to an extent that it causes health and welfare problems for the dog.
Please note this information is provided by way of general guidance only and does not constitute legal advice. Parties are advised to seek independent legal advice in relation to particular fact situations.
This code is for all dog owners and people in charge dogs, including at pet shops. There is a code of welfare for ‘temporary housing of companion animals’ being developed that will have minimum standards specifically for pet shops.
Please note this information is provided by way of general guidance only and does not constitute legal advice. Parties are advised to seek independent legal advice in relation to particular fact situations.
The Animal Welfare Act prohibits dog fighting and baiting, which means there is no need for additional minimum standards in a code of welfare.
Please note this information is provided by way of general guidance only and does not constitute legal advice. Parties are advised to seek independent legal advice in relation to particular fact situations.
Dog control and registration (and microchipping) are covered by the Dog Control Act 1996. Local authorities can provide further information on these requirements or this Act can be accessed at www.legislation.govt.nz 
Please note this information is provided by way of general guidance only and does not constitute legal advice. Parties are advised to seek independent legal advice in relation to particular fact situations.
The National Animal Welfare Advisory Committee (NAWAC) reviewed submissions and available information and determined that if used correctly, electric or electronic training devices can be effective for modifying the behaviour of dogs with serious behavioural problems where alternative methods have failed. However, these devices do have the potential to cause a great deal of pain and distress to dogs if incorrectly used, therefore they should only be used on suitable dogs, with care by competent operators, and where absolutely necessary.
Please note this information is provided by way of general guidance only and does not constitute legal advice. Parties are advised to seek independent legal advice in relation to particular fact situations.
Dogs can suffer from inherited disorders and diseases that significantly impact on their quality of life. Indiscriminate breeding can contribute to this problem and increase the frequency and/or severity of known disorders. The code of welfare for dogs has two minimum standards that are intended to reduce the incidence and severity of inherited disorders in dogs. One requires anyone breeding dogs to make all reasonable efforts to ensure that the combination of dam (mother) and sire (father) will not increase the frequency or severity of known disorders. There are tests available for some inherited disorders that might assist in this decision. The other requires anyone who sells or gives away puppies to tell the new owner about disorders that the puppy or dog might inherit. There is information on such disorders available on the internet, or vets can provide advice.
Please note this information is provided by way of general guidance only and does not constitute legal advice. Parties are advised to seek independent legal advice in relation to particular fact situations.
The National Animal Welfare Advisory Committee (NAWAC) is aware of one accredited tail banding scheme that is managed by the New Zealand Kennel Club. More information is available on their website. Anyone can establish an accreditation scheme, as long as it meets the requirements in the code of welfare.
Please note this information is provided by way of general guidance only and does not constitute legal advice. Parties are advised to seek independent legal advice in relation to particular fact situations.
The National Animal Welfare Advisory Committee (NAWAC) is aware of one accredited tail banding scheme that is managed by the New Zealand Kennel Club. More information is available on their website. Anyone can establish an accreditation scheme, as long as it meets the requirements in the code of welfare.
Please note this information is provided by way of general guidance only and does not constitute legal advice. Parties are advised to seek independent legal advice in relation to particular fact situations.
Tail injuries to adult dogs can be treated, although treatment may be prolonged and there can be complications.
Please note this information is provided by way of general guidance only and does not constitute legal advice. Parties are advised to seek independent legal advice in relation to particular fact situations.
The National Animal Welfare Advisory Committee (NAWAC) considered, on the available evidence, that the amount of pain that a dog experiences when its tail is docked is reduced if the puppy is of a very young age. At this age, some of the connections in the puppy’s brain which carry signals to let the puppy experience pain are not yet fully developed and scientific evidence suggests that, at this age, the puppy does not experience pain as it would if the tail was removed in an older dog.
Please note this information is provided by way of general guidance only and does not constitute legal advice. Parties are advised to seek independent legal advice in relation to particular fact situations.
Tail banding involves tying an elastic band around a puppy’s tail. The band is left in place for several days, cutting off the blood supply to the end of the tail so that the end of the tail drops off. This is compared to surgical removal, where the tail is cut off with a sharp instrument, which may only be done by a veterinarian.
Please note this information is provided by way of general guidance only and does not constitute legal advice. Parties are advised to seek independent legal advice in relation to particular fact situations.
The code of welfare for dogs only allows tail banding (removal by an elastic band), and only by knowledgeable, trained and competent people acting under a quality assurance scheme using bands on puppies less than four days old. Vets can still remove injured tails if they have to.
The tail docking issue is complex, and the National Animal Welfare Advisory Committee considered that there isn’t enough evidence to show whether tail docking newborn puppies according to current good practice (rubber bands within three days of age, by a trained, knowledgeable, competent person) causes significant pain. But, the evidence that NAWAC does have suggests that little or no pain is caused if tail docking is performed as the code requires. This issue will be looked at again when the code of welfare is reviewed.
Please note this information is provided by way of general guidance only and does not constitute legal advice. Parties are advised to seek independent legal advice in relation to particular fact situations.
Glueboard traps were declared 'restricted' traps due to animal welfare concerns over the pain and distress exhibited by captured rodents, the length of time that live animals may be left on the traps and the potential for the inhumane disposal of live captured animals.
Please note this information is provided by way of general guidance only and does not constitute legal advice. Parties are advised to seek independent legal advice in relation to particular fact situations.
Yes. Glueboards may continue to be used to control insects. However, placing a glueboard in such a way as to deliberately target a rodent is an offence punishable by a fine or imprisonment.
Please note this information is provided by way of general guidance only and does not constitute legal advice. Parties are advised to seek independent legal advice in relation to particular fact situations.
No, only a person employed to conduct pest control on food production premises can use glueboard traps.
Please note this information is provided by way of general guidance only and does not constitute legal advice. Parties are advised to seek independent legal advice in relation to particular fact situations.
Until 31 December 2014, you will be able to continue to sell glueboards. After that date, you will not be able to sell glueboards unless you have applied for and have been granted an approval from the Minister of Agriculture. Please note that the regulations prohibit use by anyone not in the categories specified in the Order.
Please note this information is provided by way of general guidance only and does not constitute legal advice. Parties are advised to seek independent legal advice in relation to particular fact situations.
The Minister of Agriculture may approve the use or sale of a glueboard trap that would otherwise be prohibited only if he/she considers that the approval is in the public interest and no viable alternative is available in the circumstances. Matters in the public interest include for biosecurity, conservation, public health or animal health purposes.
Applications for an exemption must be made to the Director-General of MAF in the first instance. Applicants must provide relevant information to support their application. MAF cannot consider applications received without relevant supporting information.
An application form will shortly be available on the Traps and Devices page. On the form, please note the timeframes you are working to and whether your application is urgent. MAF will do its best to respond to applications within 15 working days.
Applications must be made in writing and addressed to:
Director-General
Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry
PO Box 2526
WELLINGTON
or by email to: animalwelfare@maf.govt.nz
Call MAF's animal welfare complaints hotline toll-free on 0800 008 333.
The Animal Welfare (Glueboard Traps) Order 2009 defines these traps as follows:
"glueboard trap means a trap, whether or not commercially manufactured, consisting of an adhesive glue layer on a base material and that is intended to capture and hold live rodents."
Such traps used to target insects are not covered by this Order. Such traps used to target rodents are covered by this Order.
Please note this information is provided by way of general guidance only and does not constitute legal advice. Parties are advised to seek independent legal advice in relation to particular fact situations.
The Animal Welfare (Glueboard Traps) Order 2009 allows the use of glueboard traps for rodents by boat operators moving in close proximity to mammalian pest-free islands. This is so that islands that are free of rodent pests are not threatened by rodents that may be accidentally carried on boats and escape to swim ashore. This exemption is in place while the Department of Conservation explores alternatives to glueboard traps that are effective at capturing rodents on boats.
'Close proximity to mammalian pest-free islands' means near enough for rodents, of a kind that are not present on the island and are the target of the glueboard trap, to be able to swim from the boat to the island. In practice, this is within 1 km.
Please note this information is provided by way of general guidance only and does not constitute legal advice. Parties are advised to seek independent legal advice in relation to particular fact situations.
Generally, a risk is "probable" if it is more likely than not to occur.
Whether it is probable that a companion animal would be caught in a certain area is a matter of judgment dependent on the particular circumstances. In trapping operations, both the trapper and the person in charge of or overseeing the operation are responsible for making this decision and for ensuring leg-hold traps are not set where there is a "probable risk". Obvious places where there may be a probable risk include parks, recreational areas, beaches, other places where people walk their dogs and places where pets are known to be kept. Particular consideration should be made in rural areas, in and around riverbeds, in roadside reserves and in known hunting areas, as these are areas where there may be pets and pest control is likely to occur. Please note this list of places where there may be "probable risk" is not exhaustive and is by way of example.
Persons setting leg-hold traps should refer to local bylaws and dog control policies for areas where dogs must be kept on a leash or otherwise controlled. It should be noted that measures may be taken to reduce the risk of capture of companion animals so that there is no longer a "probable risk". Such measures include, but are not limited to, the use of cubbies or other means of exclusion and appropriate placement of traps. Signage can be considered but should not be the only measure.
Please note this information is provided by way of general guidance only and does not constitute legal advice. Parties are advised to seek independent legal advice in relation to particular fact situations.
Call MAF's animal welfare complaints hotline toll-free on 0800 008 333.
An 'animal' (as defined by the Animal Welfare Act 1999) that is
(a) Not a 'wild animal' (as defined by the Animal Welfare Act) or a 'pest' (as defined by the Animal Welfare Act) and that
(b) lives with humans as a companion and is dependent on humans for its welfare.
Please note this information is provided by way of general guidance only and does not constitute legal advice. Parties are advised to seek independent legal advice in relation to particular fact situations.
Note: In the Animal Welfare Act 1999 (section 2):
"Animal" -
(a) Means any live member of the animal kingdom that is -
(i) A mammal; or
(ii) A bird; or
(iii) A reptile; or
(iv) An amphibian; or
(v) A fish (bony or cartilaginous); or
(vi) Any octopus, squid, crab, lobster, or crayfish (including freshwater crayfish); or
(vii) Any other member of the animal kingdom which is declared from time to time by the Governor-General, by Order in Council, to be an animal for the purposes of this Act;
and
(b) Includes any mammalian foetus, or any avian or reptilian pre-hatched young, that is in the last half of its period of gestation or development; and
(c) Includes any marsupial pouch young; but
(d) Does not include -
(i)A human being; or
(ii) Except as provided in paragraph (b) or paragraph (c) of this definition, any animal in the pre-natal, pre-hatched, larval, or other such developmental stage.
"Pest" means -
(a) Any animal in a wild state that, subject to subsection (2), the Minister of Conservation declares, by notice in the Gazette, to be a pest for the purposes of this Act:
(b) Any member of the family Mustelidae (except where held under a licence under regulations made under the Wildlife Act 1953 ):
(c) Any feral cat:
(d) Any feral dog:
(e) Any feral rodent:
(f) Any feral rabbit:
(g) Any feral hare:
(h) Any grass carp:
(i) Any Koi or European carp:
(j) Any silver carp:
(k) Any mosquito fish:
(l) Any animal in a wild state that is a pest or unwanted organism within the meaning of the Biosecurity Act 1993 .
"Wild animal" has the meaning given to it by section 2(1) of the Wild Animal Control Act 1977 .
The Minister of Agriculture may approve the use or sale of a leg-hold trap that would otherwise be prohibited only if he or she considers that the approval is in the public interest and no viable alternative is available in the circumstances. Matters in the public interest include for biosecurity, conservation, public health or animal health purposes.
Applications for an exemption must be made to the Director-General of MAF in the first instance. Applicants must provide relevant information to support their application. MAF will not be able to consider applications received without relevant supporting information.
An application form is available on Traps and Devices page. On the form, please note the timeframes you are working to and whether your application is urgent. MAF will endeavour to respond to applications within 15 working days.
Applications must be made in writing to:
- Director-General
Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry
PO Box 2526
WELLINGTON
or by email to:
The requirements for keeping pigs are described in the code of welfare for pigs.
The National Animal Welfare Advisory Committee (NAWAC), which recommends codes of welfare to the Minister of Agriculture, looked at conflicting evidence for and against various production systems for pigs when it was considering this code.
It decided that the current alternatives to these systems do not guarantee better welfare for pigs and may, in fact, reduce the welfare of the sows and/or their piglets. Alternative systems need very careful management to ensure adequate animal welfare.
Although pigs can be free to roam and perform normal behaviours in alternative systems, they can have some problems for the welfare of pigs. For example, aggression can be a problem in group-housed pigs and piglets can be crushed when sows lie down.
NAWAC will review its decisions in 2009.
For detail on the reasons for its recommendation, see the report 
(216 KB) with the code of welfare for pigs.
For detail on the ways in which NAWAC makes decisions on codes of welfare, see the NAWAC guidelines.
The requirements for keeping egg laying hens are described in the code of welfare for layer hens. The National Animal Welfare Advisory Committee (NAWAC), which recommends codes of welfare to the Minister of Agriculture, looked at conflicting evidence for and against various production systems for egg laying hens when it was considering this code.
It decided that based on the limited information available about current alternatives to cages, it cannot be concluded that these alternatives guarantee better overall welfare for hens.
Alternative systems need very careful management to ensure adequate animal welfare. Although hens are free to roam and perform normal behaviours in these systems, cages provide some advantages over them. For example, hens are not exposed to adverse weather conditions or predators (eg harrier hawks) and fighting, dust, disease from faecal material, ammonia levels, and the cleanliness of eggs and birds is more easily managed.
NAWAC will review its decision in 2009. For detail on the reasons for its recommendation, see the reports (first (133 KB) and second (263 KB)) with the code of welfare for layer hens. For detail on the ways in which NAWAC makes decisions on codes of welfare, see the NAWAC guidelines.
This falls under a specific provision controlled by the New Zealand Racing Conference or New Zealand Harness Racing Conference. For other horse users the provisions for use of the whip are spelt out in the Whips and spurs section of the code of minimum standards and recommendations for horses.
Yes, but under certain conditions. Minimum standards for the use of electric or electronic collars are in the code of welfare for dogs.
A code of welfare for zoo animals came into force in January 2005. Codes of welfare contain minimum standards and may include recommended best practices. The code for zoo animals includes details on such things as animal management, food and water, housing and environment, behaviour and stress, health and disease, transport, and euthanasia. A copy of this code is available on this website and in your public library, or can be obtained by emailing animalwelfare@maf.govt.nz.
A code of welfare for circus animals came into force in January 2005. Codes of welfare contain minimum standards and may include recommended best practices. The code for circus animals includes details on such things as the obligations of owners, circus operation, food and water, shelter, accommodation and housing, animal training and performances, disease and injury control, and transport. A copy of this code is available on this website and in your public library, or it can be obtained by emailing animalwelfare@maf.govt.nz.