P.A.W.S.S

In the news this week, it has been expressed by the government( to get control over owners and dogs) they want dog owners to insure themselves for third party. And microchipping..I am concerned at this new law they wish to pass for the following reasons;

Surely  it will increase the claims for dog bites and increase the manipulation of some to agrivate a dog to get bitten?

it doesn't actually prevent a dog from biting...as is often the case a dog will bite due to being scared, or through behaviour.

The actual Dangerous Dog Act is still not working and even with amendments does not work or is not enforced.

Who would actually enforce the new law and how? as for microchipping...this is already something that councils attempt to have done..and most geniune owners already do microchip..again how would you enforce this?

We need to have more control from breeding of dogs and buying of them before they are sold...and then registering of the new owner..to local authorites...too many people are just breeding and them selling without much thought as to the longterm life of that dog

Your points of view welcome

The sort of people this new law is aimed at are the same sort of people who do not tax, insure or MOT their cars. Often they take/sell drugs and get involved in thefts. The new law is aimed at those who have status dogs to use as weapons (Staffies and Pitties usually).

And the government thinks that they can make these owners pay out insurance? It won't happen, the only people who will pay out are those responsible owners, and for the responsible owners who cannot afford such insurance will have to go through the heartbreak of having their dog taken away. Really, we are the ones who will be punished. Those with status dogs won't care if their dogs are taken away, they will simply go and get another one (it is easy via the internet).

I am in favour of mandatory microchipping however. How it can be enforced, I'm not sure unless by law, a breeder has to be licensed and have it done prior to selling their puppies. Same goes for rescues as not all will Microchip. In addition there would have to be some regulation as to who can Microchip pets, because at present, anyone can take a course and gain a certificate in microchipping.

I also agree that there needs to be some regulation on breeding of dogs. Breeders should be licensed and breeding must not be permitted to those without a license (accidental litters could be reported to relevent authorities) There are so many Staffies looking for new homes in rescue and yet at the same time there are tonnes of litters being born all over the country... I remember a time when it used to be Border Collies who filled up rescue centres!

A further awareness and promotion of spaying and neutering might go some way lowering the numbers of accidental litters. It is amazing how many people I see these days not bothering to neuter their dogs.

More awareness of the importance of basic obediance training and puppy socialisation is also important.

The banned breed list is pointless and obviously not working. Instead why not do some sort of competence test / assessment for people wishing to own so called 'dangerous breeds'? All breeds of dog have the potential to be dangerous. It's just that the media aren't interested unless the biting dog is a bull-type, Alsation or Rottie.  On the other hand at least the local news program I watched the other night gave both sides of the debate.

I feel very strongly about this and could throw out suggestions all day. But the problem is that there's an election coming soon and clearly they have resorted to clutching at straws... Unfortunately their new proposals are aimed at the right people, however will serve to punish the wrong people.

Linda