Report on Progress Toward Preventing Unwanted Animals in the Northern

Transcription

1 Report on Progress Toward Preventing Unwanted Animals in the Northern Territory Julia Hardaker, Executive Officer, AMRRIC Abstract This presentation will look at both urban and remote communities in terms of progress towards reducing the numbers of unwanted animals and also consider the differences between the implementation of the NT Animal Welfare Act in remote and urban areas, to date, due primarily, to the difficulties created by distance, logistics and funding priorities, resulting in remote communities currently falling outside the scope and practical application of some legislation. The planned 2008 amalgamation of Northern Territory communities into shires includes animal management as a core deliverable. There is a myriad of factors which effect animal control and numbers including cultural contexts, lack of infrastructure, distances and deficits in human and physical resources and education. Whilst there is an improvement in community dog health and welfare in some communities, and a stabilizing effect on numbers in others, on the whole there is little noticeable change in terms of reducing the overall numbers of dogs in communities in the Northern Territory. Introduction

2 The Northern Territory is a vast place. The social, economic and geographical contrasts between urban and remote areas are quite stark; the logistics of traveling and working are challenging as are the issues faced on a daily basis by those living and working there undertaking roles such as providing veterinary services for dog programs. The importance of companion animals in Indigenous communities is often seen very differently from a white perspective. The dog population is considered out of control by most non indigenous folk and some Indigenous people, as many dogs are visibly unhealthy, suffering severely from external and internal parasitism, reproducing without restraint and often starving. Most remote locations have no access to normal veterinary services, medications, information or education. The words progress and unwanted can take on new meaning in the remote Indigenous context as do by-laws and their implementation. This presentation explores the current progress towards preventing unwanted animals in the Northern Territory, presents the available data and particularly details the challenges of animal management in remote indigenous communities. To set the Territory Scene. Currently there are six municipalities, 32 community government councils, 30 incorporated 'association' councils and two special purpose towns (Jabiru and Nhulunbuy) in the Territory. The Northern Territory has a population of 197,590 of whom 24% identify as Aboriginal and covers an area of million square km. Less than 5%

3 of the land area of the Northern Territory is covered by Local Government, only 2% of the land area of the Northern Territory is rateable and 92% of the NT population lives within a local government area. Status in the Urban Areas.. Darwin City Council operates under the provisions of the Northern Territory Local Government Act The Act gives the Council certain powers and responsibilities within the municipality. These powers do not refer specifically to animal management, which come under By-laws. Under the Local Government Act each Council is empowered to make by-laws which regulate and control certain activities and functions within the municipality, for example, impounding strays and registering animals, and disposal of impounded animals undertaken in conjunction with the Darwin RSPCA. Darwin City Council has amended by laws currently before parliament that were to be passed last November; however they are not expected to be passed until the next financial year. The new by laws will facilitate compulsory micro- chipping of dogs and cats. They do not include issues such as Implanter training, accreditation and licensed chip Registers. Compulsory desexing is not on the agenda at this point. Alice Springs City Council (ASCC) operates under the Animal Welfare Act and Alice Springs (Animal Control) By-Laws. Alice Springs was the first Municipal Council in Australia to introduce microchip Identification integrated in to Municipal dog registration. Town Council Rangers make every effort to locate the owners of registered animals

4 rather than take dogs to the Pound. An infringement notice may still be issued for an animal at large if it is returned to the owner. Unclaimed or unwanted dogs and cats may be sold or euthanased if held at the Pound for longer than 48 hours. A Memorandum of Understanding between Tangentyere and Alice Springs Councils has been established under which animal management is paid for by Tangentyere. When complaints are made about town camp dogs, Tangentyere accompany ASCC to the camp, as otherwise it is without permission to enter and take action. ASCC believes that a pack mentality among the town camp dogs has emerged due to the Town Camp vet programs, as the programs have resulted in healthier dogs, leading to an increase in dog bites and attacks and ASSC claim that there are at least 6-12 dogs per house. Tennant Creek Town Council (TCTC) has introduced an additional rate of fifty dollars per year for each house owner to allow TCTC to implement local laws. A program named Local Laws includes running the local pound. Moving this program out of its previous portfolio into Community Services has enabled the development of some new approaches. Currently the TCTC is impounding approximately 120 dogs per month from the streets. Two or three of those dogs are being re-homed per month since building a program called Pet- Personals. The remainder of the dogs are being put down, i.e. being shot, without the services of a Vet. The TCTC pound can home 10 animals at a time. TCTC is planning to discuss dog health programs in the town camps. It hosted its first Doggie Day, including an education component and was supported by the RSPCA and Alice Springs Vet Clinic. This resulted in a marked increase in lifetime registration of dogs.

5 NT organizations currently managing stray and abandoned animals (pounds, refuges, rescue groups, desexing organizations).. Urban council pounds in Darwin (Palmerston), Nhulumbuy, Alice Springs and Katherine are mostly run in conjunction with the RSPCA. Alice Springs RSPCA is an independent charity and is neither part of the national RSPCA nor linked to the Darwin branch. The Palmerston Animal Welfare Shelter (PAWS) is a 5 kennel shelter only and is a service of the Ark Animal Hospitals. PAWS are not funded or set up for strays or abandoned animals and re home only. They do not euthanize animals. There are a number of other backyard re-homers who are non-affiliated or formalized. TABLE 1 Stray and abandoned animals, numbers re-homed and euthanased in pounds and shelters in the NT Town/City No of dogs impounded No of dogs Euthanased re- Numbers homed Darwin Council Nov Jan 2006 Nov Jan July1-June 07 (60.7% returned, 15.4% 941 handed to Darwin RSPCA, 23.9% euthanased (Stats from DCC) PAWS- currently Katherine per week Alice Springs Jan July 07 Town Dogs 472 Jan-July Camp Dogs Removed to 134 RSPCA Nil available numbers

6 The situation in remote areas is starkly different. Community councils or other incorporated bodies who are funded to provide animal management programs employ Environmental Health Workers (EHW s), Animal Management Officers (AMOs), or contract vets to provide services. Many CEO s in communities either do not prioritize funds towards animal management and control or decide (mostly without any community consultation) what needs to be undertaken to control numbers of animals they deem unwanted. These decisions may result in white decisions to mass cull animals in communities or to employ vet services on an ad hoc basis, resulting in ongoing over population and the burden of disease and most importantly the destruction of relationships with communities resulting in resistance to future veterinary visits and dog programs. Many smaller communities or outstations do not have governance or funds to deal with animal control, disease and overpopulation problems. Some communities have never had a veterinary service or animal program, no pounds, no vehicles with cages, animal handling infrastructure or staff. TABLE 2-). Alice Springs Area Communities, numbers of Dogs Euthanased or sold in conjunction with Alice Springs RSPCA (Stats supplied by Alice Springs RSPCA) Community Euthanased Sold Amata - 1 Amoonguna 3 1 Dalgo 5 Kintore 1 Laramba 1

7 Lilla 4 Mutijulu 1 Papunya 2 1 Pitlands 1 5 Pitjinjara 8 Utopia 17 3 WA Community 4 Yuendemu Other 1 Remote area statistics are, on the whole, complicated by a lack of veterinary services, data documentation and cultural differences. Dog control in some communities, is not a pretty picture and has often and even recently involved council workers or others hired (or volunteered) to cull dogs with firearms. These scenarios create understandable community resistance to future animal control programs and long lasting mistrust and damage. Most communities only have, at best, ad hoc veterinary services, severely limiting opportunities for surgical or chemical desexing. Euthanasia opportunities are limited, and when veterinary services are not present can often only occur via the local constabulary, guns, crocodiles, or poisoning (Bradbury and Corlette, 2006). Past and Present Dog Health Programs in Remote NT.. The Dog Health Program in Maningrida, Arnhem Land, has been provided by Dr Ted Donelan, Vice President of Animal Management in Rural and Remote Indigenous Communities (AMRRIC), since He works with the local Community Council to provide animal health services involving parasite treatment, population control (surgical

8 sterilization, hormonal control), pet care education and a facility for humane euthanasia of severely sick or injured animals upon request from the owner of the animal. Human overcrowding exacerbates dog population problems. Whilst the total number of dogs per capita is not above the Australian average of 20 dogs per 100 people, there are typically 17 or 18 people living in each house who have, on average, more than six dogs per house (Donelan 2005). In Maningrida population numbers in 2005 had not declined greatly (20% of the dogs had been sterilized), as better health has resulted in increased fertility. As the overall health and life expectancy of the animals has improved, the animals are seen in a more positive light and requests for euthanasia of animals that were diseased or had behavioral problems increased (Donelan 2005). A more recent interview with Dr Ted Donelan confirmed the positive changes occuring. He noted that over the years he has conducted the Maningrida program the level of awareness of animal care has increased and many more people approach him to attend to a variety of animal problems. Dog numbers, he commented, often depend on how many a community want to feed. Mass culling doesn t work, we have to continue to provide a means of population control for those that want it and even then we haven t met the need for how many they want desexed. Attitudes can only change through dialogue and education. Dr Steve Cutter, AMRRIC, has been undertaking dog (and other animal) programs in the Tiwi Islands His dog population control program includes surgical and chemical sterilization and education. Castration, he notes, reduces wandering, fighting with other dogs, prostate diseases, and dominance aggression. Spaying reduces

9 mammary tumors and infections of the reproductive tract (which are often fatal), maternal aggression and the risk of female dogs dying. As part of its research charter, AMRRIC is a community partner in the major Australian Research Council (ARC) Linkage grant program Healthy Dogs, Healthy Communities: Education to Improve Dog Health and Welfare and Human Health and Welfare, a multifaceted 3 year research program to be conducted from the University of Sydney. The program, being undertaken by Dr Sophie Constable in Ti Tree NT, will develop educational models, employment programs and opportunities in Indigenous communities in conjunction with animal management programs. In this model a curriculum is generated by the needs and interests of the participants as the program progresses. It works on the basis that all the participants, be they elders, vets, dog owners or educators are of equal status and everyone s knowledge is valued (Constable 2007). Bradbury and Corlette undertook a dog program in 2006 in Numbulwar, a relatively isolated indigenous community on the coast of east Arnhem Land, Northern Territory. A dog health program, funded by the community council, was conducted in January 2004 by environmental health staff and was run in conjunction with the programs in three neighbouring communities: Milyakburra, Angurugu and Umbakumba. Their work highlighted that regional approaches to dog programs have a number of benefits, given the fact that family members who share bonds, family ties and obligations frequently move between neighbouring communities providing a renewable source of dogs. Longterm sustainable and preventive efforts can be more financially viable and effective,

10 given the immense costs of travel in remote areas, if veterinary visits are well coordinated. All treatments and procedures were undertaken only with the owner s permission. After a 2 year (every 3 month) surgical desexing + covinan program in a community of dogs: 67 males had been surgically desexed, 56 females had been surgically desexed, 46 dogs had been euthanased. With around 30% of the population desexed, Dog numbers appear to be stable (Bradbury and Corlette 2006). Dr Graeme Brown has undertaken extensive research into the links between dog health and human health in Yuendumu (North West of Alice Springs) over a period of nine years, developing relationships, treating dogs and providing valuable information about dog health. As part of his research which commenced in 1998, he undertook a census one night and found 817 people actually living in the community and the dogs numbered 390. In 1999 there were 721 people there and 403 dogs. In the year 2000 there were 901 people and the dog numbers were up to 466. He stated that on the whole the numbers are staying much the same. With a dog health program that included euthanasia and Covinan, dog numbers hovered at around 500. Most of the dogs adding to the population were puppies with most dying around weaning. In Table 2 the disproportionate number of Yuendumu pups euthanized at the Alice Springs RSPCA this year is due to their having been taken to Alice Springs by a woman who works in the community who has been trying to clean up the dogs. The overall effect of the Yuendumu dog health program and the number of pups being removed to Alice Springs has not resulted in a reduction of dog numbers.

11 Brown emphasized, as does AMRRIC, that the establishment and nurturance of relationships is crucial to sustainable programs and vitally important in how the community accesses veterinary services (Brown 2006). Debbie Osborne of the Alice Springs Veterinary Clinic has been undertaking dog programs in the Alice and Southern Barkly Region for the past 20 years. In Hermansburg, where she has worked since 1999, 45% animals have been desexed. People don t ask for euthanasia and she tends to see a core group who keep coming to the program. In Canteen Creek the clinic visits every 6-12 months, seeing 120 dogs per visit and undertakes 8-10 desexings. The percentage desexed currently remains at a constant 34% indicating the need for more visits. Engawala has approximately 120 dogs of which 70 have been desexed so far. The clinic has recently commenced in Larambawhere on the first visit they saw 147 dogs and desexed 11. The program is undertaken by a clinic vet and a vet nurse. Dr Rob Irving has undertaken dog programs in the NT for many years, as Dr Trembath and other vets from Katherine have also done. Dr Honey Nelson currently undertakes dog programs in the Alice Springs town camps and a number of other communities including her fly in program in Arnhem Land communities. She is soon to commence programs in Mutijulu and Yuendumu. Implementing the Animal Welfare Act in remote situations As Animal Welfare Officers veterinarians have a range of powers. In their work environments they come across a number of issues concerning animal welfare due to a lack of veterinary service provision, cruelty or neglect. In Indigenous communities

12 people frequently choose to let a sick or injured animal go naturally rather than euthanase. Situations such as these are often challenging and require careful negotiation. The owners of the animals are informed of the animal s prognosis and any action taken should be based only on what the vets are given permission to undertake. Coercion is recognised for what it is and is not appreciated. Acting without true and informed consent from the animal owner creates distrust and jeopardises the program into the future (Phelan 2007). One vet informed the author that sometimes an individual animal has to suffer to enable you to get to the rest of the dogs. To enforce the act would ruin the opportunity to get to the rest of the dogs for further work. When vets are undertaking work in communities they are entering Aboriginal Land where two systems of law, Traditional and European exist. Their permit to enter is their passport to a different country. When travelling internationally, it is wise to respect different laws, so it is in the case of legislation relating to animal welfare (Phelan 2007). The current legislation and government policies that support a reduction in unwanted animals include.. The Animal Welfare Act of Northern Territory, as in force at 8 March 2007, key objectives include; (a) to ensure that animals are treated humanely; (b) to prevent cruelty to animals; and (c) to promote community awareness about the welfare of animals.

13 The Local Government Act recognises community governments as full and equal partners in the third sphere of government in Australia, with the same (or more) powers and functions available. Those powers are available but not necessarily enforced or enacted, because NT laws apply to Aboriginal land to the extent that they are consistent with the rights and obligations conferred by the Aboriginal Land Rights Act (Gray 2006). Currently there are no bylaws for Litchfield or Katherine, no registration system and a huge wild dog problem. The Dangerous Dog legislation has been driven predominantly by the Non Indigenous population. Minister Elliot McAdam then brought in the legislation which is currently being written. Last year Minister McAdam stated that Councils have the powers to enact by-laws, and these might include more stringent approaches to fencing and other safety measures. Most remote communities have inadequate, or no fencing, to restrict the movement of dangerous or nuisance dogs making the implementation of the law irrelevant. The difficulties created by distance and logistics means that remote communities can fall outside the scope of some legislation (Gray 2006). A new look territory?

14 Since the Inaugural Summit in June 2006 the Northern Territory Local Government Amendment Act 2007 has been implemented and due to be fully operational by June The act will see the amalgamation of the current community councils into 9 Shires. Currently there is no overarching legislation for animal control across the NT. It is being developed as part of the new Local Government Package where animal management will form part of the core deliverables. AMRRIC s work will become even more crucial following the planned 2008 amalgamation of Northern Territory communities. AMRRIC has been approached to work with Local Government and has been acting, to date, in a consultative manner advising on key performance indicators, such as humane education, for service frameworks. Implementation strategies to improve the legislation s effectiveness will be undertaken as part of those negotiations.. It is hoped that AMRRIC s work with NT Local Government will provide implementation strategies to improve the legislation s effectiveness. State-wide educational initiatives aimed at preventing unwanted animals Dr Sophie Constable s work with the ARC, AMRRIC, Humane Society International (HSI) Grant Healthy Dogs, Healthy Communities: Education to Improve Dog Health

15 and Welfare and Human Health and Welfare, includes developing educational models, employment programs and opportunities on Indigenous communities in conjunction with animal management programs. AMRRIC is hopeful that Dr Constable s model will become a statewide initiative. The promotion of responsible pet ownership has found its way into some urban schools, however as yet not to most remote indigenous schools. The Australian Animal Welfare Strategy (AAWS) is developing a targeted indigenous communication strategy to address the unique needs of that target audience and will use a variety of methods that are appropriate such as the media, Indigenous radio, face to face briefings and community consultations working closely with AMRRIC. A beautiful painting by artist Julie Paige whose tribal land is southwest Pederman near Kata-Juta- Uluru National Park, commissioned by Phil Donohue is an example of how nonindigenous people might engage with members of Indigenous communities. The painting tells the story of Aboriginal and non-aboriginal people meeting to talk about Aboriginal people and their connection with their dogs. The artist states; We have always seen dogs as part of the family, providing warmth, protection and hunting skills. We are keen to share our stories about these important animals and in turn, learn new approaches and educate others in this area. The lines are all people coming together as one and planning future programs. A number of Territory initiatives have occurred or are planned to occur, however none of these have been state-wide initiatives. They include; World Animal Day Happy Tails Day 2007 held in October, as part of the annual national RSPCA Awareness Week; the

16 Puppy Love program during Youth Week; the Darwin Million Paws walk. A number of pet pep school visits have taken place in the Darwin region regarding responsible pet ownership, which also informs people about what to do when confronted by an aggressive dog. Upon receipt of a new registration, Darwin City Council send Animal Education Kits to new pet owners along with a covering letter and copies of the Pet Owners Handbook, a registration reminder fridge magnet and a colourful "Avoid Dog Complaints " leaflet. Organisations that are introducing new and effective strategies AMRRIC is the only organisation of its type in the Northern Territory. AMRRIC veterinarians are providing programs and education to move animal management from shooting dogs to desexing, chemical population control, and/or humane euthanasia. The general theme of AMRRIC s work is "Healthy dogs for healthy communities" and the aim is to work closely with local communities to; improve the health and welfare of dogs and cats in the community, provide a means of managing the large, uncontrolled dog population, and to reduce the associated problems of noise, scavenging and attacks on humans, contribute to an improvement in human health by reduction in the transmission of diseases from animals to people, and by education about parasites and diseases in companion animals to help people learn more about their own health and disease prevention. provide the knowledge, training and resources to enable communities to take responsibility for their own dog programs so they can be sustainable in the longer term.

17 Through education and advocacy the program empowers aboriginal communities to achieve animal health and welfare standards comparable to those acceptable in the wider Australian community. Essential to developing sustainable programs is consultation and culturally sensitive communication with significant community figures including elected council members, traditional land owners and "dog dreaming people" (the elders who have a particular spiritual connection with dogs and who are entrusted with the responsibility for caring for dog related traditional law, cultural matters and ceremonial rituals) (Donelan 2005). Building rapport and mutual trust and respect is crucial to fostering community engagement and commitment and needs to be given time, through repeated visits, to establish. AMRRIC believes community engagement and empowerment of communities only occurs when community members are free to take ownership and control of their own programs and futures. Without this, communities tend not to support the program and follow through will not eventuate in the veterinarian s absence. A recent donation to AMRRIC from the National Desexing Network (NDN) will enable the purchase of a second anaesthetic unit for the Maningrida area (Arnhem Land) program which will have a direct positive impact on reducing dog numbers in the area. We know that we need continued and extended dog health programs in the NT. The general consensus from Vets the author spoke with is that on the whole a status quo situation exists concerning dog numbers and condition in remote communities. To date there has been little proven effect in reducing the overall numbers of dogs which is consistent with the challenges of remote Australia, the availability of financial resources, the availability of veterinary services, the lack of infrastructure and the deficits in human

18 and physical resources and education. There are many and varying opinions on methods of controlling dog numbers from the barbaric to the humane. It is clear however that dogs are important to Indigenous culture, as best described by Alison Hunt s when describing the spiritual significance and the role of dogs to her people; So dogs are friends, ceremonies, totems. They re keeping people warm and acting as security to wake people up, [for] old people sleeping, [watch out for] drunks. It s a friend and a sacred animal...i said to Nana, Nana, where am I going to camp? She said you got to camp in that humpy. The dogs will keep you warm. So I had 10 dogs over me to keep me warm (Hunt 2000). Her words challenge us to work in a respectful manner in terms of education, treatment and progress toward preventing unwanted animals.

19 References Alice Springs City Council, website, accessed Bradbury L and Corlette S 2006 Dog Health Program in Numbulwar, a remote Aboriginal community in east Arnhem Land AVJ 84: Brown G 2006 Dogs Dwellings and Diseases: investigating links between dog health and human health in a remote Aboriginal community Dog People Ammric International Conference July Darwin Constable Sophie, 2007, The role of education in caring for animals in Indigenous communities, paper for AMRRIC. Darwin City Council Annual report accessed online on 7 Sept Donelan T 2005 To Kill or Control--Humane Animal Management in a Remote Indigenous Australian Community 30th World Congress of the World Small Animal Veterinary Association 11-14th May Mexico City, Mexico, accessed on 6 April 2007 at eneric

20 Gray N 2006 Can Public Health Legislation improve the health of Indigenous Australians? Dog People AMMRIC International Conference July Darwin Hunt Alison, ATSIC, Alice Springs, A better dog s life: itches to be scratched, Darwin Katherine City Council Annual Report05-06 accessed online on 7 Sept port.pdf Local Government Association of the Northern Territory accessed online Phelan S. (2007) Conducting Dog Health Programs in Indigenous Communities: A Veterinary Guide, Animal Management in Rural and Remote Communities (AMRRIC), AMRRIC website accessed online Sept 07,