I believe that dog owners should have to have a liscence to own a dog, to obtain the liscence they should have to attend a course or sit an exam on the correct care for a dog, they should have to know about the breed, excercise, food, first aid, responsibility and understand that no matter how much you trust your beloved dog that first and foremost it is an animal, and therefore unpredictable. All dogs can turn at anytime and no responsible dog owner or parent should allow a dog to be a risk to child or other adult.

Sally, Lebowski (jack russell) and Archie (cairn)

In this country anyone can own or breed dogs there is no controls or stipulations that limit owning or breeding, there are no measures to ensure responsible ownership and breeding of dogs. Most dogs aren’t bred for the love of the dog or to improve upon the breed – (although some “breed improving” isn’t an improvement it is a health risk for instance look what breed improvements have done for the British Bulldog, its made the bulldog a very unhealthy breed with a high mortality rate, constantly changing breed standards to produce show dogs is ruining some breeds and surely lessons should have been learned by now but a lot of the blame there falls at the feet of the Kennel Club and similar organisations in other countries, as they set the breed standards. If you follow a breeds history and the changes that have been made to the standards over there history have all these changes been to improve its health or simply to make them look better in the show ring) – they are bred for money, there can be great profit in breeding dogs for the non-responsible and non-ethical breeders, especially puppy farms who produce hundreds of dogs without any regard or concern given to the health of the pups or the dogs used in the mating, they are an expendable commodity. This country and I’m sure there are many other countries too facing the same issues, is littered with bad breeders, from puppy farms down to back yard breeders (people who breed with very little knowledge of dogs or breeding who breed dogs at their homes).

The government needs to step in and stop this, there needs a systematic overhaul and rethink about policies in this country about dog ownership and breeding – there is no point in banning breeds its people that should be punished and dealt with not breeds.

Why legislate dogs when its people that are the problem?

Legislation needs to be created and implemented to control dog ownership and breeding – dog owners and breeders need to be licensed. Now this isn’t a new idea, we used to have licenses but they wasn’t worth the paper they was wrote on, I’m talking about licensing in a more in depth way.





The present Labour government proposed this when they was the opposition party when the Tory party was in power and the DDA (Dangerous Dog Act) was introduced.

Quoted from Research Paper 98/6 dated 2nd January 1998

In its Manifesto for Animals6 Labour in Opposition promised to introduce a dog registration scheme;

Dogs are highly valued in our society, yet there are problems- including many attacks, difficulties with strays and the nuisance of dog dirt. Each year in Britain many thousands of healthy dogs are destroyed

Indiscriminate breeding, unthinking acquisition and inadequate care are to blame. The
Conservative Government has refused to act. Yet the key is simple: registration.

Labour will introduce a compulsory registration scheme that will provide the money for a dog warden service…

The former Government’s view was given during the DoE/Home Office consultations which had been prompted by public concern over straying and dangerous dogs. Action on Dogs7 stated that


Some people argue that a national registration scheme would have a role to play, in particular as a long-term means of encouraging a more responsible attitude to ownership of a dog.

The Government however believes that local action is necessary to deal with what is essentially a local issue
.…the Government takes the view that a local tax on dog owners, whether or not part of a national registration scheme, is not the most appropriate means of funding dog control measures.

The national dog licensing system, which was abolished in 1987, did nothing to contain the problems caused by irresponsible dog ownership since it had long ceased to command any public respect

Less than 50% of owners bothered to register. As a result, there is no evidence that the number of strays is higher since the abolition of dog licensing


http://www.parliament.uk/commons/lib/research/rp98/rp98-006.pdf







So what happened to this licensing then?

A forgotten promise?

It’s clear to see what the Conservative party view was about dog licensing;

1. It was too expensive although the scheme would be paid for by dog owners
2. It would be hard to enforce

Well we had an issue in this country where vehicle drivers were flaunting the law and driving vehicles illegally with no adequate training to drive a vehicle, did the government decide it would be expensive and hard to enforce to try to eradicate illegal drivers, well no they put a plan into action and cracked down on these drivers, new rules were passed that made it harder for illegal drives to flaunt the law, new measures were implemented to improve the standard of drivers on our countries roads, with more stringent tests, ensuring that people were adequately capable and prepared with the necessary skills to be a responsible and safe driver.

The point of discussion in the report was about licensing to help prevent strays but what if they had back then in the early 1990’s had implemented a licensing system…

Could that not of grown over the past 15 plus years and been developed to help address the issues in this country with irresponsible breeding and ownership of dogs as well as strays.

Also what happened to Labours manifesto promise of introducing licensing?

A forgotten promise?

It appears so…

Ok a scenario for consideration – in the early 1990’s a licensing system was reintroduced to help combat the stray dog issue in this country and that grew and developed over the years. That developed into checking and verifying dog owners as suitable owners and this then developed into licensing for breeders, to check they are responsible too.

The licensing scheme could then have developed to include training for dog owners just as car drivers are trained. Those prospective dog owners would have to attend primarily a theory session with an expert in the field of dog training would conduct to prepare these people for the job ahead of them, so that they would have an understanding of what dog ownership entails. Then on attending and completing the theory session they would be issued a provisional licence to purchase or obtain a dog.

This licence would have to be shown to a breeder who is a registered and approved ethical and responsible breeder before that breeder (or rescue centre). Then a dog warden contacted to do a home check on the prospective dog owner to ensure there home is suitable for a dog and also for the breed they have chosen and if there were any measures they felt needed rectifying that they would have to rectify before they are able to bring a dog home. The dog should also micro chipped before the dog leaves the breeder (micro chipping would have been a later addition to the scheme upon its creation).

This micro chip code would be passed onto the dog warden with proof from the vet that this particular dog has that micro chip and the new owner upon receiving the dog and registering with a vet would produce their licence for verification and the micro chip code cross referenced with the dog warden. Microchipping of all puppies before leaving a breeder would in turn help combat dogs being dumped on the streets as the dog could be traced back to the owner helping to result in a prosecution for animal embandonment.

Then under the terms of the licence the owner would have had to attend dog training classes to learn how to responsibly handle their dog and upon completing a certified training scheme then their provisional licence would then be transferred to a full licence.

Any failure to comply with these measures would mean the provisional license either not being issued or being revoked……

Well that’s just a few things that COULD have happened if licences had been reintroduced, what’s that your saying, that would be expensive, well yeah it probably would be but if you was serious about being a responsible owner, a responsible owner of a living creatures life surely it would be worth it.

Ok I can hear some people saying but I wouldn’t be able to afford it why should I be penalised because my financial status wouldn’t be good enough to afford them sort of costs, well we’ve borrowed 1 licensing system for ideas already so lets borrow another, televisions licences, you can pay for a television license in full, monthly direct debit or on a weekly payment scheme so how bout if that was adopted by dog licensing to help people who are responsible to be able to afford a dog licence.

Ok now the government will shout this can’t be done, it would be too expensive, the infrastructure and implementation of the scheme would be hard work, well yes it would but does that mean it shouldn’t be done, wasn’t it hard work to do it with vehicle drivers but did that stop it being done. Yes people would flaunt the law but is that also a reason not to do it, if the law abiding people of this country was to take up this scheme and abide by it that would only leave a small percentage of people flaunting the laws and that’s where another measure under the legislation would come into place – prosecution.

Prosecution for not abiding by the law, as it is with any law, you break a law and are caught doing so you face prosecution for doing so and lets not deal with this law breaking trivially as it is at the moment who commit offences involving animals. The punishments for animal abuse are pitiful and the government should hang its head in shame, a slap on the wrist and a fine and a couple year bans for abusing animals. Even people involved in the very financially lucrative dog fighting circles are handed out pitiful punishments for acts they are involved in, dogs are seriously hurt and killed in dog fights and sometimes culled by there owners if they do not perform to expectations or dumped on the streets adding to the amount of strays and dogs in rescue centres. What sort of deterrent is a couple hundred pounds fine or possibly a couple weeks or at top months in prison to someone who could make easily £20,000 on a single dog fight.

Should this country continue to allow irresponsible dog owners, breeders and dog fighters ruin this nation of dog lovers? Shall we continue to allow our children to be hurt by irresponsibly owned, poorly socialised and badly trained dogs or allow dog after dog to end up in rescue centres day in day out around this country many dogs end up at a rescue centre via dog wardens, police, owners giving them up.

Hasn’t this country had enough of bad people owning and breeding dogs?

The government has the power to change this, you know that current legislation, or lack of it doesn't work, DDA hasn’t worked; BSL doesn’t work so something needs to be done about it. Let’s change it for a scheme that does work, that does help to prevent bad owners and breeders and not only protects people but protects dogs which can't protect themselves they need people who have the power to protect them on their behalf.

• Introduce a licensing scheme
• Create cross organisation co-operation i.e. the government, police, dog wardens, RSPCA & rescue centres, vetinary surgeons, breed clubs, the Kennel Club, dog trainers,
• Create a sub division of the Kennel Club for non-KC dogs to be registered and there breeding monitored
• Monitor dog owners and breeders
• Crack down on back yard breeders and puppy farms
• Stop dogs being sold via the internet, in newspapers, adverts in shop windows – only allow dogs to be sold through breeder clubs
• Revaluate the punishments given for offences against dogs

All these points would help keep strays off the streets and dogs out of rescue centres.... and help prevent badly owned and badly treated dogs.

Labour proposed a reintroduction of dog licensing whilst they were the opposition party, whilst the Conservatives were still in power yet nothing happened, nothing has changed except there are STILL strays, there are STILL rescue centres full of dogs, there are STILL bad owners, there are STILL bad breeders.........

Doesnt take a genius to work out that not enough is being done...........



Something needs to change in this country and the way the structure is the change needs to come from the top, there are many petitions about and groups/organisations lobbying for these changes and they are being heard but not taken notice of as in the grand scheme of things these matters are small matters to the powers that be but with 7.5 million households owning at least 1 dog and thousands more in rescue centres and thousands bred per year the government needs to take notice before radical measures are introduced before the culling of strays begins, in some councils this is already being proposed, 1 inparticular is Worcester Council with the following statement concerning Staffordshire Bull Terriers -

"A COUNCIL struggling to cope with a rise in stray Staffordshire Bull Terriers has said it may have to put them to sleep rather than try to find new homes.
Worcester City Council, which has picked up 25 Staffords in the last three months, believes they may have been bred for fighting as some had scar tissue on them.
It is proving hard to find the dogs new owners; two who were adopted are said to have bitten the families’ other pets.

This week the authority, which usually tries to rehome all dogs who have not been claimed within a week, said any more stray Staffords might be put down ‘as a matter of procedure’. It has put six to sleep since January."

This just isn’t acceptable when there are measures that could be in place and should have been put in place at least15 years ago to combat this and it lays at the feet of the government to do this rather than standing fast with the DDA, a clearly flawed and failed measure that doesnt combat the real issue with dog in this country - the owners and breeders!!

My suggestion is actually not originated by me but one that I have heard and tend to agree with. With the growth of several dog lost and found websites, it would be a great development if there was a way to share this information in the form of a centralised interface which could be used by dog wardens, rescue centres etc so they could see ALL the dogs which have been reported missing rather than having to worry about searching all the different ones. The technology must exist to make this achievable.