Jump to content

Dog Licences


Marmora Man

Recommended Posts

It has been reported that DEFRA is considering requiring all dog owners to complete a "dog owner's competency" test and registration - that would include compulsory microchipping of the dog, registration of owner's address, knowledge of how to control the dog, dog diet and more. The aim being to ensure more responsible dog ownership.


Estimated cost ?60.00 in the planning stages.


To me this seems totally unnecessary, bureaucratic and, to add insult, almost certainly completely unworkable.


Can anyone persuade me otherwise?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nope. I can?t see how it could be enforced.


Forcing entry into every home in the country to check if they have a dog?


Unless they could prove that it would eliminate the problem of strays and will be cheaper to the tax payer than the current cost of dealing with the problem.


I doubt that they could do either of those.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would imagine it would work much like a driving license.


There is nothing to stop you buying or even driving a car without one but it is illegal.


If someone were not to have a dog-license and the police/PCSO noted their dog mis-behaving it could be taken away from the owner (but not sent to the crusher in case anyone was still on the car analogy).


As PGC says, they were common in the past and the number of irresponsible dog owners is high. I question what else could be done?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's a bit like the apparent 'fact' that 10% of drivers of cars on the roads in London have no licence or MOT or some such. How can you tell unless they are in an accident or you spot check (and there were LOADS caught on the Vauxhall Bridge Road Sunday that I saw). People will continue to walk their dogs and just hope they don't get caught.


I think it is unreasonable and another example of how a few people abuse a system and we all have to pay.


Elderly folks living on their pensions and little else can't afford - and nor is it necessary to - chip their dog and have a licence for it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A further thought - the gov't is proposing licensing people to own a dog, checking that will be competent pet owners. No one has proposed licensing people to have children, but arguably more harm is wrought by irresponsible parents (Victori Climbie, Baby P, and literally thousands of other cases). However, this would certainly be seen as improper gov't interference.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The money from the Dog licences could provide proper Dog wardens and trainers for a start. My dog has passed her Kennel Club bronze good citizen thingy, she got bored at training and gave up, otherwise we would have gone on to pass silver and gold, of that I have no doubt :))
Link to comment
Share on other sites

MM wrote :- arguably more harm is wrought by irresponsible parents Victori Climbie, Baby P,


Often the people who beat the children are not the parent but a local rent-a-thug boyfriend, and given how many children are around very few end up in this situation.


The dangerous dog problem is very much on the increase and is a much greater danger to the general public.

Anyway of stemming the tide of these macho bruiser dog owners is fine by me.

They are a completely different species to the normal 'pet dog' owner, who actually cares for and protects their animals as a member of their family, rather than pitting it to the death against a rival in an illegal fight where money is to be made.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Where is WoofMarkTheDog when yu need him on a subject ?


also


I was in wandsworth over the weekend, and they have a compulsary 'Dog chipping' policy for residents, which begs teh questions of

1) How do they know if you are a resident or a visitor ?

2) what happens if you visit, and your dog isn't chipped ?

3_ hopw will they check, some sort of doggy scanner like the new heathrow body scanners, positioned at every park gate ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Spartacus wrote:- will they check, some sort of doggy scanner like the new heathrow body scanners, positioned at every park gate ?



I doubt that, but they will have to go more underground with their 'killer pets' in the foreseeable future.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Spartacus Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------


> I was in wandsworth over the weekend, and they

> have a compulsary 'Dog chipping' policy for

> residents, which begs teh questions of

> 1) How do they know if you are a resident or a

> visitor ?

> 2) what happens if you visit, and your dog isn't

> chipped ?

> 3_ hopw will they check, some sort of doggy

> scanner like the new heathrow body scanners,

> positioned at every park gate ?


The new chipping scheme only applies to council tenants and leaseholders, not visitors to the borough. They must get their animals chipped and registered on a borough-wide database. Any failure to do so means they will be in breach of their tenancy and lease agreements and in an extreme case they could be evicted from their homes if they do not comply.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

SteveT Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> MM wrote :- arguably more harm is wrought by > irresponsible parents Victori Climbie, Baby P,

>

> Often the people who beat the children are not the

> parent but a local rent-a-thug boyfriend, and

> given how many children are around very few end up

> in this situation.


(Wandering off-topic) Actually Steve, according to the NSPCC, the person responsible for physical violence during childhood was 'most often the mother (49%) or father (40%)'. Violence was reported as being carried out by some stepfathers (5%) or stepmothers (3%), grandparents (3%), and other relatives (1%).


Don't believe everything The Guardian prints...


And, sadly, the NSPCC also reports that 7% of children experienced serious physical abuse at the hands of their parents or carers during childhood.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Huguenot wrote:- Short hand to say it would become a self-funding commercial endeavour, rather than a public service against thugs.




I agree absolutely,


but we hope the by-product is that the 'thug and mutt' are discouraged out of the public parks and off the streets.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • It doesn't work as a commercial venture.  Bit churlish to say I told you so.  I told you so.  I'll send less greetings cards.  What pees me off is international postage where you can no longer send light letters at 10 grammes, normal ones up to 20g, now all at the much more expensive 100 g  Didn't we vote to take back control and price everything according to irrational units like ounces? That's some obscure humour btw   
    • Available from Monday April 8th 2024, 2on2Walkies take pride in doggie care and only walk 2 furry friends at a time. I make sure that they get plenty of doggie interaction and socialisation in the park as well as making friends. Back home happy and tired I always check that the water bowl has fresh water and always make sure the doggie is left comfortable before I leave. I'm fully insured and have a couple of slots available for local walks to either Peckham Rye Park or Dulwich Park.  Thank you!  
    • Why would they only send them recorded delivery? I used the signed for option yesterday.
    • > however I know I will have to prove it and provide a receipt,  both I can't provide. So what leads you to say that the dustmen have done damage to it? 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...