Full Breakdown
Tauranga Resident Ordered to Fit Anti-Barking Collars After Community Complaints
7/7/2026, 4:20:33 AM
Council Order Requires 24/7 Anti-Barking Collars
On 5 June 2024 Tauranga City Council served Shontelle Castledine, a 27-year-old Tauranga resident, with an abatement notice obligating her dogs, Zeus and Karma, to wear functioning anti-barking collars. Non-compliance could attract fines of $300–$1,500 and removal. Castledine filed an objection the same day; a regulatory hearings panel will hear the case on 20 July.
Background: Complaints and Survey
The abatement notice followed a neighbourhood barking survey on 25 May 2024, where Animal Services officers recorded three of 15 residents reporting “loud and persistent barking” from Zeus and Karma. Castledine said she had received complaint letters and phone calls, leading her to block part of her deck, tether the dogs, and ask neighbours for input.
Timeline
- 25 May 2024 – Survey records three complaints.
- 5 June 2024 – Abatement notice issued under Section 55 of the Dog Control Act.
- 5 June 2024 – Owner files objection and purchases two collars.
- 20 July 2024 – Hearing scheduled.
Data & Statistics
The survey sampled 15 residents; three (20 %) identified the dogs as a nuisance. Council fines range $300–$1,500 per violation. The council’s collar model provides vibration when the dog barks.
Official Statements & Council Response
Council regulatory and community services general manager Sarah Omundsen said the notice only requires a “functioning anti-bark collar,” not a specific type, and that the collar vibrates to curb “ongoing excessive barking rather than the odd bark.” She noted independent complaints and that Animal Services had attempted cooperation before issuing the notice.
Criticism & Opposition
The Animal Welfare Code, administered by the Ministry of Primary Industries, classifies electronic collars as “punishment-based devices” and recommends them only after other training fails, warning against pain and unsupervised use. The SPCA and the New Zealand Veterinary Association oppose anti-bark collars, preferring non-electric options such as citronella spray.
Conflicting Reports & Gaps
The notice does not specify collar type, while the code restricts electronic collars to “last-resort” use and favours non-electric devices. Castledine’s claim that Zeus “nearly died of asphyxiation due to a collar freak incident” involves a different device than the council’s vibration-only model, raising safety concerns. The code allows bark-activated collars only on a dog’s own territory, but the notice does not clarify whether the yard meets that condition.
Verbatim Quotes
- “I have continuously lost sleep over this whole saga,” — Shontelle Castledine, Tauranga resident
- “I witnessed Zeus before my eyes very nearly choke to death due to having a collar on and [being] hooked in play time.” — Shontelle Castledine
- “The anti-bark collar sold by council includes a vibration function and is bark-activated.” — Sarah Omundsen, Tauranga City Council regulatory and community services general manager
- “Electronic training devices can be harmful if misused, but used carefully they can be very effective against unwanted behaviours.” — Animal Welfare Code, Ministry of Primary Industries
What’s Next
The hearing on 20 July will decide whether the collar requirement stands. If upheld, Zeus and Karma must remain collared; further complaints could trigger removal. A reversal would require the council to consider alternatives such as indoor confinement, behavioural training, or non-electronic deterrents.
