FAQs related to Code of Recommendations and Minimum Standards for the Welfare of Ostrich and Emu
Call MAF's animal welfare complaints hotline toll-free on 0800 327 027.
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.
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:
Under the Animal Welfare Act 1999, people must attend to the physical, health and behavioural needs of animals in their care. These needs are further detailed in codes of welfare. Codes of welfare also contain minimum standards, including minimum standards on the provision of shade and shelter.
The provision of shade and shelter has important economic and practical implications for farmers. The issue of shade and shelter is not clear cut. Shelter and shade may be provided in a number of ways including the use of topographical features such as gullies or hollows (of adequate depth), natural features such as stands of trees or scrub, hedges or shelter belts, or artificial structures such as buildings, hay stacks, etc.
There is ongoing research on shade and shelter in New Zealand conditions, and NAWAC will be studying this research in order to make practical recommendations in new codes of welfare for farmed animals.
New Zealand exports a wide range of species including horses, deer, cats, dogs, bees, goats, day-old chicks, ferrets, wallabies, embryos and semen. Livestock are especially sought after because of their high genetic value and because New Zealand is free of most major exotic diseases. Animals are shipped live because they are used for breeding, or for slaughter in the country of arrival. Groups that are too large for transport by air may be taken by sea.
New Zealand is currently not shipping any cattle for slaughter, and the export of live sheep for slaughter has dwindled since the 1990s, with the last shipment being in 2003. It does, however, export cattle and sheep for breeding.
Under the Animal Welfare Act 1999, all animals for export (unless specifically exempted) must be issued with an Animal Welfare Export Certificate (AWEC), which takes account of animal welfare requirements and covers compliance with standards.
An experienced New Zealand stockman must accompany shipments of cattle. Some shipping companies also send veterinarians. All shipments are inspected by a MAF veterinarian before they depart.
A shipping report is completed at the end of each voyage which records any deaths, the weather, feed and water supplies, and any issues which affected the welfare of the animals.
Sea-bound shipments have additional requirements in the Maritime Rules, which are monitored by the Maritime Safety Authority. These cover ventilation, feed and water, space requirements, pen height requirements etc.
As a member of the World Trade Organisation (WTO), New Zealand has certain obligations under WTO agreements. New Zealand cannot prohibit the export of animals to other WTO member countries on the basis of management procedures in the country of importation.
The National Animal Welfare Advisory Committee is currently developing a code of welfare for the shipping of livestock.
After consultation the Government has decided to restrict the sale and use of leg-hold traps in New Zealand. New regulations came into effect on 1 January 2008.
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.
It depends on the type of collar you intend to use. Some modern electronic “training aid” collars are considered acceptable. For a detailed explanation read the Electric dog collars section of the code of recommendations and minimum standards 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.
Animal welfare legislation can be found at www.legislation.govt.nz 
. Click on Statutes (which are listed alphabetically) and you will find the Animal Welfare Act. You can also purchase all legislation from Bennetts Bookshops.
Hard copies of the Guide to the Animal Welfare Act and the User’s Guide to Part 6 of the Animal Welfare Act 1999 (dealing with the use of animals in research, testing and teaching) can be obtained by emailing the Animal Welfare Group.
Codes of welfare can be found on this website or obtained by email. University libraries hold copies and you can request a copy from your public library.
Customs will collect the new levy on behalf of MAF, using existing systems and reducing duplication of government resources.
The biosecurity risk screening levy will be applied to all goods that attract Customs' import entry transaction fee. The import entry transaction fee is charged on commercial imports with duty and/or GST liability of $50 or more, and on private imports of good with a value of $1,000 or more and a duty and/or GST liability of $50 or more.
This levy is part of a whole-of-government response to border management, which will result in more effective goods clearance at the border. It is a fairer, more consistent charge on importers and is significantly lower than the previous charge of $28.70 (GST inclusive) on identified risk goods.
Automated risk assessment of all import documentation will fund biosecurity screening for goods coming into New Zealand. It will also reduce MAF Biosecurity New Zealand Clearance's administrative tasks, thus freeing up extra inspection capability without additional cost to industry.
MAF is improving procedures for assessing imported goods for biosecurity risk. Under the 2003 Regulations, risk assessment on import documentation is performed manually and MAF recovers the cost through an import documentation fee. This fee has been applied to risk goods only, but all imported goods need to be assessed for risk.
The Biosecurity (Costs) Regulations 2003 have been in place since May 2003 and charges have not been amended since then. The new charges reflect current costs and changes in MAF’s operations. In its provision of cargo clearance services, MAF needs to:
- Ensure that any changes in practices required at the border are adequately cost recovered;
- Avoid under and over recovery of costs over time;
- Ensure charges remain fair and equitable.
The key changes are:
- An increase in the MAF hourly rate inspection charge to $100 per hour;
- A new method of charging to recover costs relating to the primary screening of import documentation; a biosecurity risk screening levy of $3.38 will be charged on all imported goods that attract New Zealand Customs Service's import entry transaction fee. The biosecurity risk screening levy replaces the current inspection of import documentation fee from 1 October 2006. The levy will be collected by Customs on behalf of MAF.
- A new method of charging to pay for sea container clearance system costs and the increased monitoring and verification activities required by the revised import health standard for sea containers; A levy will be charged on all imported sea containers of $16 for full sea containers and $7 for empty containers.
- The number of categories of inspection charges for used vehicles has been reduced from 15 to four and the fee structure has been simplified. Inspection and re-inspection of used vehicles will be charged at the same rates.
After the release of its discussion paper Border Clearance Costs and Organism Identification Requirements in April 2006, MAF found that it needed to make modifications to some of its proposals outlined in that discussion paper in light of the consultation feedback received and changes in trade volumes and some costs. The reasons for this were:
- The volume of used vehicles, containers and general cargo had fallen further than anticipated;
- The Office of the Auditor- General had released its report on Managing biosecurity risks associated with high-risk sea containers recommending that MAF undertake additional work on containers;
- Some further costs had been identified.
Consequently, the shipping container levy was increased to enable more work to be undertaken on sea containers and the biosecurity risk screening levy was increased to fund more risk profiling effort and systems development as recommended by the Office of the Auditor-General report and further internal work. The hourly inspection rate was also increased slightly to ensure sustainability of the fees for the next 3 years.
The new charges under the Biosecurity (Costs) Regulations 2006 become effective from 7 September 2006. Imported goods that land in New Zealand and require biosecurity clearance from 7 September onwards will be charged the fees contained in the Biosecurity (Costs) Regulations 2006.
Importers will be able to pay in cash for fees incurred under the Biosecurity (Costs) Regulations 2006.
A charge for waiting time will be applied in the Biosecurity (Costs) Regulations 2006. This is payable at the applicable hourly rate for a MAF inspector or veterinary inspector for the time each inspector spends in waiting for the goods to become available.
Those being charged can minimise charges by ensuring compliance with the required standards and thus avoid additional inspections. Importers/transitional facilities can minimise charges by ensuring that risk goods are available for inspection at the time that has been booked, and that labour is provided for unpacking and repacking goods. Transitional facilities also need to be kept to the required standard.
Organism identification is costly work and the fees in the 2003 Regulations charged by the MAF Investigation and Diagnostic Centres (IDCs) did not reflect the true cost of the organism identification work. The fees for the identification of organisms provided by MAF IDCs are not set by the Biosecurity (Costs) Regulations 2006 but are contestable and subject to market forces. Where MAF Biosecurity New Zealand Clearance Service inspectors undertake an organism identification, this would be charged at $100 per hour.
Travel zones fees have been introduced to ensure consistency nation-wide and to provide transparency for such fees. There are four zones. Each zone has been calculated to account for a return trip from the base site. MAF Biosecurity New Zealand Clearance Service has developed zone maps for each key location:
- Zone 1: $45 0-10 km radius
- Zone 2: $70 11-25 km
- Zone 3: $140 26-50 km
- Zone 4: $200 51-75km
Travel over 75 km is charged on the hourly rate of the inspector for the time that he or she has spent away from base, plus actual and reasonable costs. A zone fee will be applied for each visit. Where more than one inspection is undertaken during the same visit, the zone fee will be shared. If a subsequent re-inspection is required, then an extra zone fee will apply.
MAF anticipates that the new charges will stay in force for at least 3 years. The biosecurity risk screening levy, the shipping container levy and used vehicle inspection fees in the Biosecurity (Costs) Regulations 2006 are subject to memorandum accounting. Memorandum accounting means that if for example, trade volumes were to increase and MAF was to earn more funds than needed, excess funds can be carried forward to cover costs for the following year.
The biosecurity risk screening levy 2006 will not come into effect until 1 October 2006 in order to align with New Zealand Customs Service's monthly billing cycle to importers. In the intervening period, the import documentation fee of $28.70 (GST inclusive) will apply.
You should lodge your container information and quarantine declaration with MAF prior to the vessel arriving in New Zealand. This is to allow the necessary risk analysis to be done on your container before arrival, to minimize delays in New Zealand. To lodge the information electronically prior to making your import entry, you should use the dedicated Customs ECI report option (see Question 5). You will either receive a message back allowing your container to be taken to a MAF-approved transitional facility (see Question 6) or a message requiring you to contact MAF to make arrangements for a container inspection (see Questions 7, 8, 11). You may also make a manual application to MAF if you prefer.
At some ports with documented, MAF-approved equivalent biosecurity systems in place, otherwise low-risk containers may be transported from the wharf to an inland facility prior to presentation of the quarantine declaration. But you should still plan to lodge all information with MAF as early as possible, to avoid delays between unloading and transport from the wharf.
You should lodge your container information, including the quarantine declaration, with MAF prior to the vessel arriving in New Zealand. This is to allow the necessary risk analysis to be done on your container before arrival, to minimize delays in New Zealand. If you plan to lodge your Customs import entry late (e.g. after arrival of the vessel), you must still lodge details of the container with MAF (use the dedicated Customs ECI report, or make a manual application) before it is moved from the wharf.
A small proportion of containers will be selected for an audit on a random basis. Such containers will be identified by the words "MAF AUDIT" in the message you receive from Customs. Fax a copy of the container Quarantine Declaration to your local MAF office immediately, but in all cases within 12 hours of receiving this message. Many audit containers will also require external and internal inspection by MAF as part of the audit. You should contact your local MAF office with an Application for a BACC accompanied by consignment information (Bill of Lading and invoice), ideally when you fax your container Quarantine Declaration, to make arrangements for inspection. You should have your Customs Client Reference number or ECI number on your application so MAF can look up your container. Once these arrangements have been made, and any external requirements taken care of, MAF will issue a BACC allowing your container to move to an approved transitional facility.