Australian horse owners have spoken on how they want to be charged a horse levy.
 Australian horse owners have listed their preferences over being charged a levy. |
In a process akin to outlining preferred options for having their teeth pulled, equestrians have listed their desired methods for being charged a levy in the event of a horse disease incursion in Australia.
The Australian government has given horse owners until December 1 to agree a framework under which the industry would become a signatory to the Emergency Animal Disease Response Agreement (EADRA).
This involves having an agreed structure in place to allow the government to charge horse owners a levy to recover the costs of fighting any disease incursion.
It says it will not be in a position to mount another response like that which eradicated equine influenza in 2007 unless the horse industry signs up.
Animal Health Australia, which acts as the caretaker of the agreement for all livestock sectors, said the consultation process had delivered a list of levy options, following feedback from about 400 associations and individuals.
The Horse Levy Working Group said it evaluated the proposals against a number of measures, assessing, among other things, how equitable it would be, the cost of collection and the horse community's attitude to each levy option.
"Some levy options had strong support by some sectors and very negative responses from others," the working group said.
"This didn't eliminate an option from the list because we have to evaluate the positive and negative aspects of every levy option. The only reason why options were eliminated was because they are not legal options for a levy."
The levy options, in order of preference by the horse community, are:
- Horse wormers. The working group said respondents considered this option covered all sectors of the community, even though the usage varied between horse owners.
- Manufactured horse feed.
- Registration. Its definition has not been finalised but would include sectors with mandatory registration of horses or members.
- Horse shoes.
- Events. There is no agreed definition on what constitutes a "unit" to be levied, the working group said.
- Microchips.
- Slaughtered horses. The working group noted these horses were already levied at $A5 an animal for chemical residue testing.
- Horse gear.
The working group said two further options were suggested - a levy on wagering and on imported horses - but, on advice, both were not considered as legal options.
Feedback on the proposals as they now stand is sought by August 13.
Horse SA, which works with the horse sector in South Australia, has called on all horse owners, state and national, to respond to the preferred levy options.
"Our enemy is indifference," said its executive officer, Julie Fiedler.
Horse owners and organisations needed to act quickly, she said.
"Have your say now so that a measured and considered approach can be taken for our future."
Pony Club Australia president Greg Bailey, said: "It should be noted that more than a third of the 65 diseases presently listed in the EADRA could affect horses.
"When an outbreak occurs, a management group consisting of representatives of all parties to the agreement will decide whether to respond or not, based on which option will be the least cost to the horse community.
"It is estimated that the cost to the horse community if equine influenza became endemic would be 10 to 20 times more than the cost of its eradication."
Animal Health Australia's chief executive Mike Bond said there was considerable flexibility over the method used to collect a levy.
"The Australian government has some guidelines that must be followed, including a requirement for simplicity and ease of collection.
"While such collection mechanisms should be as fair and equitable as possible, it is generally accepted that whatever the methods used, it will never be possible to 'capture' 100 per cent of horse owners."
Facebook
Twitter
HOME SITES 
