Council voted earlier this year to make the registration fee for owning a desexed dog the same for residents living on blocks as for those in town … a decision which provoked heated criticism on social media when notices arrived in the mail

December 7, 2022

South Burnett councillors have admitted they failed to explain clearly to residents living on rural residential blocks why their dog registrations had risen.

Speaking at Council’s Liveability, Governance and Finance Standing Committee meeting on Wednesday, Cr Kathy Duff said she was concerned the rise – which brought fees for desexed dogs on rural blocks into line with fees paid in town areas – had caused “reputational damage” to Council.

The increase, voted on in June, was the first step of a planned move to equalise dog registration fees paid by town residents and those living on small acreages.

Cr Duff moved a motion that Council “revisit” dog registration fees, citing posts on Facebook as evidence of community outrage at Council “whacking up” the fee for rural residential dog owners from $10 per desexed dog a year to $33.

Cr Duff said people were struggling in the community, living in caravans with dogs as their only companions.

She urged the collection of fees – which has already begun – be put on hold until the charges were “revisited”.

Cr Jane Erkens said she believed that, from comments on Facebook, “a huge percentage” of residents living on small acreages would simply not register their dogs now, while others would struggle to pay the increased fee.

CEO Mark Pitt said Council staff at the front counter had unfairly worn the brunt of criticism.

“Some of the people who have come in have been quite abusive,” he said.

He said this was not acceptable and would never be tolerated.

However, in some cases the criticism had lessened when people realised there was a pensioner discount available.

In the past, there had been no pensioner discount on rural residential dog registration fees because the $10 charge was less than the pensioner fee.

When people realised the annual pensioner discount fee was $16.50 not $33.00, some of the issues at the front counter had been resolved.

“If you are a pensioner in these rural areas and have a dog, then bring your card in because we don’t necessarily have you on the system,” Mr Pitt said.

Cr Kirstie Schumacher said the current fee structure had been implemented after lengthy discussions about the operational cost to Council of running its dog management services, an increase in community expectations about a response to dog complaints, and the increased cost of paying the RSPCA to run the pound.

“This decision was a very difficult decision … but as part of our Budget discussions I am very happy to review every fee and charge,” Cr Schumacher said.

Cr Scott Henschen said some fees had actually decreased, for example in town areas, the fee for undesexed dogs went from $170 down to $131, and for desexed from $66 to $33.

Manager Peter O’May said registration fees only recouped about the quarter the cost of running the dog management service.

He said the rationale of the increase was trying to create “equity” between dog owners in town areas and in rural residential areas.

Mr O’May pointed out that registering entire dogs (ie. undesexed) was still half the cost in rural residential areas than in town areas.

He said the time to pay had also been extended until January 20 but admitted there had been no specific media communication about the increases.

Councillors voted to revisit the registration fee applying to dogs in rural residential areas through the provision of a special report encompassing comparative fee data, cost of service and an appropriate community consultation and communication strategy at the March 2023 Standing Committee meeting.

The communication strategy would occur as soon as possible.

In the meantime, however, residents will still have to pay their dog registration fees.

* * *

SBRC’s Dog Registration Fees

TOWN AREAS

  • Entire Dog – $131.00
  • Entire Dog – Pensioner – $65.50
  • Desexed Dog – $33.00
  • Desexed Dog – Pensioner – $16.50
  • Puppy (under 6 months) – $33.00
  • Puppy (under 6 months) – Pensioner – $16.50

RURAL RESIDENTIAL (ie. Small acreages)

  • Entire Dog – $65.50
  • Entire Dog – Pensioner – $32.75
  • Desexed Dog – $33.00
  • Desexed Dog – Pensioner – $16.50
  • Puppy (under 6 months) – $33.00
  • Puppy (under 6 months) – Pensioner – $16.50

NON-DEFINED AREA (ie. Farms)

  • Working Dog – Tag Cost Only – $10.00
  • Entire Dog – $28.00
  • Desexed Dog – $10.00
  • Pensioner – $10.00
  • Puppy (under 6 months)  – $10.00

OTHER

  • Assistance Dogs for the Blind / Deaf  /Companion – No Charge
  • Breeders and Show Dogs Permit – $295.00
  • Declared Restricted / Menacing / Dangerous Dog – $200.00

 

5 Responses to "Council To Review Dog Fees"

  1. Perhaps Council could just run a poll on Facebook on every issue and the officers implement the majority result? We could then do away with Councillors and put their salaries towards lowering dog rego fees.

  2. The highest fee should be paid for keeping undesexed dogs – particularly pigging dogs – in rural areas, both on farms and on blocks.

    These are the animals most likely to roam and breed with dingoes and kill wildlife and stock.

    The small, white furry pet in town isn’t likely to go on a rampage killing calves, goats and chickens.

    Council has it back to front, like a lot of things, I think.

  3. The Queensland council should adopt the same as NSW with dog registration, one-off payment for the life of the animal. Why is the council so money hungry here in Queensland? Think it’s time for a shake up of the council.

  4. Dog licence fees apparently only cover 25 to 30 per of the cost of running the pound and policing dangerous dogs so really, all ratepayers are paying whether they own pets or not.

  5. Good point Bill McIntyre – once again the council procrastinates over a decision & spends more time/money going over a decision already made because of Facebook opinions.

    As the article states there were ‘lengthy discussions’ but now they want to go back over the details again?

    Can we please find some people with the intestinal fortitude to make an informed decision, stick to it and move on to other matters?

    Perhaps we can rename this council “The PRC – Perpetual Review Committee”!?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.