Mr. Joe Boland:

I submitted a PowerPoint presentation but, in the interests of time, I will not necessarily go through every bullet point. This is still a significant issue. According to our records, there were 1,603 seizures of equines in 2017. It is a resource intensive activity, requiring significant manpower, equipment and holding facilities in the form of pounds. There are health and safety issues, significant cost implications and animal welfare concerns. Most of the animals that are seized have welfare issues. While legislation has been strengthened recently, there is little evidence of compliance with regard to horses that are seized. All that said, there is good co-operation between the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine, local authorities, the Garda and other entities. With regard to cost, up until recently, much of the cost fell on the local authority. That may change with the new national tendering but much of the cost will still fall to local authorities. The benefit of national tendering still has to be fully assessed.

There are significant challenges since there are not many impounding contractors on the market, so the market is not strong. There is a culture of carelessness on the part of some horse owners. Most horses that are seized are in poor condition. Few are microchipped. There is also the issue of stray horses on undeveloped zoned land, and the issue of adverse possession could be mentioned in that context. Few horses are rehomed, and I think the figure for euthanasia in 2017 was 75%. There is evidence from the past of local authorities being used as an expensive disposal service for unwanted horses. It is a particular problem in urban areas, especially cities. The merits of keeping a horse in an urban area are questionable on welfare grounds. There are problems with seizing horses in urban areas since significant costs and health and safety issues can be involved. Some 1,600 horses were seized in 2017.

The problem has abated somewhat but it has not gone away. I would emphasise the need to deal with the root causes rather than the symptoms, and to examine why we have so many stray and unwanted horses. The issue of animal welfare is to be emphasised although the legal position is that welfare is a matter for the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine. Our role in respect of welfare is incidental to our control role.

Moving on to point 8 on the slide, we agree that local initiatives involving animal charities are part of the solution. The Dunsink project has been hailed as a particularly good example in that regard. In terms of moving forward, I would emphasise the importance of a multi-agency approach involving all the stakeholders: the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine, ourselves, the local authorities, the Garda, animal welfare groups, representatives of horse owners, and the farming community. I would also emphasise the need for collaborative enforcement, especially around equine ID. By-laws and exclusion zones are part of the solution. There are examples where that approach has worked well. We advocate the move to full traceability of all horses through effective enforcement, similar to cattle. It is more complex if we are dealing with outside-the-gate issues, as it were. All owners should be fully accountable. A review of the Control of Horses Act is urgently required in the view of the local authority sector. The emphasis should be on a multi-agency approach dealing with the causes rather than the symptoms. Much of what we do tends to be reactive. A greater emphasis on dealing with the causes would be a better approach.