Category: Dogs and the Law

Potions, Pills and Prosecutable?

Posted on by

bodybuilder Research published by More Th>n insurers yesterday of a survey of 1,000 pet owners has revealed horrific results.

1.4 million owners admitted to (illegally) administering potentially toxic human medicines to cats and dogs. As the Royal Veterinary College state “It is illegal, in terms of the Veterinary Surgeons Act 1966, for non-veterinary surgeons, however qualified in the human field, to treat animals.” More than one third of those surveyed were trying to avoid paying veterinary fees. Medications administered without veterinary dierction included anti-histamines (36%), paracetamol (28%), antiseptic creams, ibuprofen (17%) and aspirin (14%) for complaints ranging from injured paws to cuts and stings. 21% decided that the injury or ailment did not warrant a trip to the vets, 33% decided that their pet was suffering and needed immediate pain relief and 27% stated that they believed that over the counter human medications are safe to self-administer to pets.

As if that weren’t bad enough, 5% of the owners surveyed (that’s at least 50 animals) had been forced to consume protein shakes and bars, diet pills, vitamins or exercise supplements. 21% of owners said that they wanted to improved their pet’s fitness and stamina,
40% were aiming for rapid weight loss and 35% believed that it would make their pet more healthy. 6% of those owners confessed that they did it “so my pet would look more impressive in public”. Yes, really.

Should we just write these people off as misguided or should we consider prosecution?

Owning a pet is a responsibility and, unless we use existing legislation to combat the actions of people who take their obligations lightly, dogs will consider to suffer.

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

Posted on by

deed not breedPolice have made another appalling canine welfare blunder as it has been revealed that the Devon and Cornwall section ordered a bull breed bitch detained under the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 to be left in a 3ft x 9ft kennel for two years without exercise. Kennel assistants were told not to enter the kennel of or handle any dogs held under the Act in blatant contradiction of DEFRA’s welfare guidelines which state “The welfare of any dog seized is also a factor the police need to consider and they should note their duty to ensure the welfare of animals under their control (s9 of the Animal Welfare Act 2006)”.

The dog’s owner has made 11 court appearances in an attempt to reprieve his dog but a court has now ordered that she be destroyed. Her owner stated that she had not shown any signs of aggression before being seized because of her breed. Video evidence of her behaviour was shown in court but this was of behaviour exhibited following her long confinement. She was kept in private facilities and no explanation was given as to why she could not have had free access to a secure run without the need for staff to place themselves in danger.

The BBC obtained data via a Freedom of Information request revealing that over a five year period, police seized 7,000 dogs and spent £650 on average per dog. Each police authority is recommended to employ a Dog Legislation Officer. The Metropolitan Police have 25 DLOs, mostly employed as dog handers rather than to handle dangerous dogs.
Their spending on seized dogs has risen from £405,000 in 2006 to £2.72M in 2011.

We must review the knee-jerk legislation such as that which has resulted in the Dangerous Dogs Act and make it a statutory obligation for local authorities to emply a 24 hour, 7 day a week dog warden service. We should continue to press for the compulsory education of all dog owners and take action against anyone who breaches animal welfare legislation, including the police.

Stop Press: There has been an update to the case of Stella the “pit bull”. Her owner has launched a late appeal against the destruction order and she will remain in kennels until the outcome of the appeal is known. A charity in Connecticut, USA has offered to pay all costs of relocation if she cannot be returned to her owner.

There is a now ray of hope for this dog after two years of suffering but how many more will have to suffer similar and worse fates until we control breeding, insist on compulsory education for dog owners and punish the deed not the breed.

End BackStreet Breeding Campaign

Posted on by

licensed Battersea Dogs & Cats Home established an End Backstreet Breeding campaign in 2015 aimed at lowering the licensing threshold to two litters in stead of five as at present and closing loopholes to stop the sale of dogs below eight weeks of age to pet shops and dealers.

There are currently 895 licensed dog breeders using an estimated 13,425 breeding bitches (assuming that each bitch has one litter per year) in 379 Local Authorities areas in England, Wales and Scotland; an increase of 32% since 2010. 40% are located in 6% of the local authorities, clustering in mid and west Wales, Lincolnshire, East Anglia and some rural areas of Scotland. The law in Wales changed in April 2015, licensing all breeders at the third litter and bringing a further 500 breeders into the scope of licensing. The costs of inspection can be reclaimed through the application fee. One third of Local Authorities do not license any breeders and fewer than 12% of puppies born in Great Britain are bred by licensed breeders in any given year. Effective enforcement of regulations varies markedly from one area to another. Licensed dog breeders produce an estimated 67,125 puppies annually, some using 10 or fewer breeding bitches but five with more than 100 breeding bitches and the largest with 200. Just 5 licences were refused in 2014 for failing to provide adequate accommodation or levels of supervision. 88% of puppies are bred outside of the licensing regulations.

Although the average number of bitches used for breeding in any one establishment is 10, large establishments are responsible for 75% of breeding. Staff in councils where few licences are issued may not have much expertise or training in dealing with dogs. The C.A.R.I.A.D campaign for instance, is well aware of puppy farms that are repeatedly given licences in spite of appalling breeding practices and conditions. This was also highlighted in the recent BBC TV documentary The Dog Factory. In addition to large variations in the fee structure between local authorities, new applications may be required to pay additional vet fees costing between £100 and £300. Basic fees vary between £23 in Glasgow to £741 in the London Borough of Lambeth, in spite of the fact that local authorities are prohibited from making a profit from the licence fee, setting a high fee as a deterrent or setting a fee low to attract businesses to their area.

Reducing the legal requirement to obtain a licence to two litters a year is not likely to improve the situation. Although this campaign should be supported, it does not go far enough. Anyone breeding a dog should be licensed and resources need to be put into enforcement as fees are collected to pay for it. There should be a massive public information campaign and breeders should be traced through online advertisements and the remaining pet shops that still sell dogs.

45% Of Dogs Are Not Microchipped

Posted on by

A survey of 3,000 UK-based dog owners carried out by OnePoll on behalf of the Dogs Trust reveals that one in five dog owners are not prepared for the changes to the microchipping law that will come into force in England, Wales and Scotland in April 2016. 45% of existing owners have not chipped their dogs.
microchip45

Approximately half of dogs that currently find their way into rescue shelters cannot be rehomed either because they are not chipped or because the chip details have not been kept up to date. From April 6th, 2016 all dogs must be microchipped and registered to an approved database by the time they are 8 weeks old.

Microchips are not proof of ownership but the person to whom the chip is registered is regarded for legal purposes as the keeper of the animal. The keeper can be served with a notice requiring microchipping within 21 days. Details, including changes of telephone number must be kept up to date on the register.

Failure to chip or to keep details updated can be subject to a £500 fine.

Only trained implanters can microchip animals. Vets will microchip your dog for a fee but there are several local authority-run free microchipping events and it is often offered at dog shows and similar events. The Dogs Trust runs free sessions around the country as do local authorities and rescue orgnisations.

Don’t be one of the 45% – get your dog microchipped now!

Free Microchipping West London

Posted on by

Hounslow Dog Warden services and the DogsTrust are offering free microchipping, health checks and vouchers for neutering, vaccinations, fleas and worming at Edensor Gardens in Chiswick, London W4 2RF on November 18th, 2015 between 11.00 hrs and 15.00 hrs.

Remember, all dogs will be required to be microchipped by April 2016 and it is owner’s responsiblity to keep their details up to date on the database.

Routine health care helps all dogs in the community stay well by providing ‘herd immunity’ and preventing the build up of worms such as toxicara canis.

Eighth Day Dogs

Posted on by

wanted-poster
The Dogs Trust has just released the results of its latest Stray Dogs Survey. The figures make disheartening reading.

Local authorities have a statutory duty to look after stray dogs for seven days (five days in Ireland). “Eighth Day Dogs” can be rehomed, passed to a welfare organisation or euthanased. Some local authorities have their own kennels, others tender kennelling to private companies or charities.

102,363 stray and abandoned dogs were handled by Local Authorities between 2014 – 2015 (an 8% decrease from last year). That represents an average of 1 stray for every 617 people (actual numbers vary by region).
47,000 owners abandoned their dogs

75% were seized – 1% under the Dangerous Dogs Act
1% were brought in by police
Fewer than 1% were transferred from vets, the RSPCA and dog wardens etc
16% were brought in by members of the public

Between April 1st 2014 and March 31st 2015:
An estimated 50% of stray dogs were reunited with their owners by being reclaimed during the statutory local authority kennelling period (36%) or returned directly to their owner without entering a kennel (18%)
9% were re-homed by local authorities
22% were passed on to welfare organisations or dog kennels after the statutory period
5% were euthanased (4,880 dogs)
Approximately 5,142 dogs were euthanased across the UK between April 1st 2014 and March 31st 2015
1,367 dogs were euthanased due to behavioural problems or aggression (390 under the Dangerous Dogs Act) and 717 due to ill health

1% were still in the local authority kennels after March 31st 2015
134 strays were retained by the finders
21 dogs were either dead when found or died in kennels

17,789 (20%) of the dogs taken in were already microchipped – a 4% global increase on the previous year, although it varies by region
8,833 of these dogs were reunited when the owner contacted the local authority or pound directly
Microchips alone accounted for 9,430 reunions; ID disks for 1,018 reunions and a combination of the two for 1,066 reunions
817 dogs were reunited due to already being known to the dog warden
Facebook was used to reunite 173 dogs and owners
Local/council registration schemes to reunite 98 dogs and owners
1,380 (3%) dogs taken in had no identification

306 authorities responded to the questions about dog warden services.
283 had services that were operational during working hours on Monday to Friday and 85 during working hours on Saturdays and Sundays
127 authorities had a dog warden service which worked on-call out of working hours on Monday to Friday and 119 authorities operated an on-call service out of hours on weekends

345 authorities in Great Britain reported 18,535 ‘status dogs’ (bull breeds including Staffies and Mastiffs, Rottweilers, Akitas or crosses of these) representing 21% of all strays handled.
1,023 of these (6%) were euthanased due to aggressive behaviour.

If we do not find solutions to irresponsible breeding, purchasing, selling and ownership, the year on year figures will continue to spell misery for the vast numbers of unfortunate dogs that they represent.

From the Sublime to the Horrific

Posted on by

CariadJust back from Clicker Expo – wow! The opportunity to learn from people at the top of their game was invaluable – and fun.

Then back from the sublime learning environment to the real world reading last night’s London Evening Standard. They did an excellent job in a quite a long feature explaining in detail why people shouldn’t purchase dogs online and how to purchase responsibly.

Unfortunately they then featured a woman, suggesting that she was a “victim” of the puppy farming trade, who had done exactly that and who then went on TO BREED FROM THE DOG. Both dam and singleton pup died subsequently.

It is highly unlikely that it will be possible or effective in banning online sales of dogs or regulating purchasing. There is likely to be some redress under the Consumer Rights Act 2015 (replaced the Sale of Goods Act 1979) in that a puppy that is sickly and/or that dies shortly after purchase or that is sold as coming from a local breeder or that is not the dog as represented in the online advertising etc is being sold in breach of the law. However, this is both a potential solution in the immediate term and the problem.

Just because dogs are regarded in law as being commodities, they should not be regarded by potential owners as such, to be bought and sold like the latest online fashion. We can’t ban online sales or, in practice, purchases, and we can campaign until we are blue in the face to educate people on responsible puppy purchasing.

We need the additional stick of regulating and, if necessary, prosecuting all breeders, regardless of whether they breed one dog or dozens of litters. The regulations should impose educational conditions on all people seeking to breed who should, at the very least, have a basic knowledge of genetics, undergo compulsory testing of dam and sire under guidance from the latest information, undertake puppy socialisation training and have legal and other guidance with regard to selling.

People who buy from puppy farmers are not victims. They are perpetrators. The real victims are the dogs. Lets us never forget that.

Insurance – Safeguard or Gamble?

Posted on by

gambling Do you know exactly what you are getting when you take out insurance? In a sense, all insurance is a gamble and many people probably do not bother to read the small print, so get caught out by promises of wonderful deals only to find that conditions are not covered for life or a dog with an accidental injury will not be covered should a clinical condition affect the same part of the body.

Since Petplan was launched in 1976 creating the first opportunity in the UK for owners to insure pets, pet insurance has been a double edged sword. While on the one hand it enables pets who otherwise would be euthanised to go on to live full lives by making complex veterinary interventions possible, it also means that premiums remain unaffordable in practice for many in order to support the cost of bigger claims and still ensure returns for shareholders. Some owners put money into an interest account instead, but it is often not enough to cover a really large vet bill and may not be easy to release in the event of an emergency.

Anyone considering purchasing pet insurance needs to negotiate a minefield of exclusions, pre-existing condition definitions, variations in types of cover and the postcode lottery of excess charges. Now there is news that pet insurance companies under the RSA Group umbrella are piloting the placing of restrictions on which referral practices owners and vets can use. The pilot is being undertaken in the Midlands and North West and affects pets insured by More Than, John Lewis, Tesco, Argos, Homebase and Marks and Spencer. Owners will be required, with the exception of emergency referrals, to contact their insurance company before a referral is made to confirm which practice can be used. Owners that do not comply with the insurer’s choice of practice are likely to find their claim disallowed.

It seems a pointless restriction given that policies are usually limited to a fixed amount per annum or per condition. If the owner chooses to spend the whole allowance on one referral because the vet considers it the best option, then that surely is their perogative?

Furthermore, owners who have made provision for fixed cages when travelling may find that their vehicle insurance is invalid if they did not make the insurance company aware of what is considered to be a modification. I wonder how many owners are aware that, by complying with the law and considering the welfare of their dogs, they may be breaking another law by invalidating their insurance cover. Presumably, insurance companies may feel entitled to raise premiums in such “modified” vehicles. This, in conjunction with the Kennel Club’s bizarre ban on leaving show dogs in suitably fitted out, ventilated vehicles, can only further reduce the number of people participating in the pedigree show ring.

Breakdown cover can be a nightmare when travelling with dogs as most companies do not always send a vehicle out that is suitable for transporting dog cages or may make owners wait a considerable amount of time or leave it to the “discretion” (ie personal predilicitions) of the driver when choosing whether to transport dogs or not.

Whatever the personal decisions made about insurance, it always pays to consider all options and go into it with eyes wide open.

Firework Season is Already Upon Us

Posted on by

fireworks It is not even October and last night I heard fireworks. I am one of the lucky owners with a bomb-proof dog – I jump more than he does – but I have lived with a gun-shy dog and it is miserable for all concerned.

A petition to the government resulted in the banning of fireworks for sale to the public being debated by the 2010–2015 Conservative/Liberal Democrat coalition, the conclusion being that a ban was not justified because of current legislative measures. It is obvious that current legislation is not enforced as to location and timing of fireworks let off by members of the public. It is probably not even possible to provide sufficient resources to police displays at expected times, let alone random events such as that which I witnessed last night. In any case, this was within current legislation – no help if I had had a terrified dog at my side.

Is it time to campaign again for a ban?

Post Scriptum: I have just heard from the Sounds Scary team that, sadly, they are no longer in business. However, they have teamed up with the Dogs Trust to offer free downloads of their sound effects. Sound effects should be played at gradually increasing volumes until the toleration level of the actual noise is achieved. An information booklet is also available as a download.

Chinese City Threatens To Club Pet Dogs to Death

Posted on by

Chinese flag Dayang New District in the city of Jinan has imposed draconion laws in an attempt to rid the area of dogs following alleged complaints. Notices have appeared stating:

“No person is permitted to keep a dog of any kind. Deal with it on your own or else the committee will organise people to enter your home and club the dog to death right there.”

The order cites further the maintenance of environmental hygiene and “everyone’s normal lives” as reasons.

Where does one begin? Cultural differences in eating dogs is one thing; at least there it is possible to campaign for the dogs to be kept in reasonable conditions and slaughtered humanely. This order interferes with something much more fundamental.

Some argue that one of the areas of origin of the domestic dog was China. Proto-dog/human burials have been discovered that are 12,000 years old so what could be more ‘normal’ than living with a dog? It may not be everyones’ choice and, of course irresponsible dog owners mar the environment for dogs and people. Culls may be necessary during rabies outbreaks, something that dog smugglers and puppy farmers are risking here in the UK. However culling pet dogs just for being pet dogs and that in a brutal, inhumane fashion beggars belief and is likely a legacy of Mao’s horrendous Cultural Revoltion.

It certainly puts recent council restrictions on access and attempts to criminalise dog owners for minor misdemeanours in the shade and it should make the World Dog Show have a re-think about locating in China in 2019.