Working dog desexing given the snip

Dog and Cat Management Board chairperson Felicity-ann Lewis said the board heard advice from farmers that dogs herding, droving, protecting, tending or working stock generally performed better if they remained entire.

She said the board was working with the SA Yard Dog Association, the SA Working Sheepdog Association and Livestock SA to determine how the exemptions would work in practice.

Under the Dog and Cat Management (Miscellaneous) Amendment Bill - expected to be put before parliament early in the New Year - puppies and kittens would be required to be desexed and microchipped at or prior to the point of sale. Compulsory desexing for the existing population of dogs and cats has been ruled out.

Environment, Sustainability and Conservation Minister Ian Hunter said a change was needed to reduce the number of animals being abandoned or allowed to breed out of control, with 10,000 unwanted animals put down in SA last year.

"This is essentially to cut down on puppy farms and to reduce the number of dogs and cats that are euthanised every year (after being) surrendered to the animal welfare agencies," he said.

"There's something wrong on the supply side. There are too many animals that can't be re-homed, so we need to do something about it."

Mandatory desexing was recommended by a citizens' jury created to explore ways to reduce the number of unwanted pets.

"Mandatory microchipping was part of the original proposition we were putting into our legislation, and that's essentially to help councils identify animals more readily and rehome them quickly," Mr Hunter said.

SA Health chief medical officer Paddy Phillips said mandatory desexing could result in a drop in dog bites of up to 40 per cent.

"Desexing dogs is known to be an important modifiable risk factor for dog attacks as it usually makes dogs less aggressive and less likely to attack," Professor Phillips said.

In addition to working dog clauses, further exemptions will apply to those living in SA's most remote areas.

"It would be illogical to insist people in very remote areas comply with legislation because they just won't have access, for example, to vets," Mr Hunter said. "For people in more settled areas, like the South East of the state, where there's no problem getting access to a vet, it's reasonable to expect them to be held to legislation like someone in a town or city would be."

While breeders will need to be registered, those breeding the occasional litter of puppies for their own use or to give away will not have the same requirements.

"Anyone who sells or profits from the sale of breeding will need to be registered as a breeder," he said. "If you giveaway the litter, then you won't be impacted.

"Our objective is that everybody who becomes an owner can trace back where that pet came from so they can be satisfied it wasn't from a puppy farm, for example, but it came from a reputable breeder.

"That transparency is a very important part of the legislation."

Mr Hunter said penalties for those caught breaking the law could not be set until stakeholder consultation had concluded.

"We'll try to look at penalties and see if they're accurate and make them commensurate because we don't want any untoward penalties - they'll need to stand against all the other penalties that are in legislation," he said.