RE: Charities divided over dog licence proposal

Jon Bray — Sun, 04 Apr 2010 00:07:36 GMT

I don't see why the license necessarially has to be expensive - although it should ideally cover the cost of enforcing it. Rather like a driving license, it should cost little year upon year but should be revokable (I think I would actually use a points system) - and if revoked it should be difficult to restore.

To make this useful, there would have to be a means of identifying whether any other members of the household had had licenses revoked.

Enforcement is potentially simpler than people make out. If police/wardens have the authority to scan dogs, the chip should be pretty obvious. In cases where there is no chip detectable but the owner insists that a chip is present a conscious xray will quickly reveal the truth. Unchipped dogs could be dealt with by fining the owner and chipping the dog or by confiscation of the animal.

I find it perplexing enough when people try to use "the principle of the thing" to argue against increased security - it is at least their own security that they are jeopardising. I think truly responsible animal owners would try to see the bigger picture and recognise that, while their own animal may indeed not be at risk of wandering etc, if everybody is able to use that excuse some animals will suffer as a result.

</rant>