AIBU about dog ownership/responsibility/accountability

[Abigail69]

We don't own a dog and would not as we do not have the time or spce to look after a dog as we would want to IE like a member of the family.

At least once a week there is a story bout a horrific attack by a dog on often someone that is known to them and less frequently on a stranger.

I've been to many clients' homes where their dog is looked after as it should be, IE'm cared for like a member of the family and treated very well.

I've also visited other clients' homes where the dog is not treated as it should be and the house is often unkempt/etc. Often two scenarios for the aforementioned, first is the owner is frail/etc and does not have the capacity to look after their dog properly but they still love the dog and dog is nice/friend/y and the owner is good at identifying who is comfy with their dog and who is not. Then you get the second lot that could look after the dog and the house but for whatever reason doesn't do it well and often their dog is very lively and some of these people use the dog a trophy/etc.

Re dog attacks, I've never blamed a dog, i always feel the owner has let the dog dog but there must be causes for whatever reason dog is cared for really well and the dog is starlted etc, so genuine mistakes can happen

How do we in the UK try to ensure a safer environment for the dogs and the public is the question?

IMO, a 'fit for the purpose, ie responsibility of dog ownership' should become mandatory for all new owners ie when they get a dog or another dog. This licence like a driving test has a theory test EG, what is good, not so good/wrong when looking after a dog. A check on the potential owner's police record for use of possibly drugs/weapons/anti-social behaviour etc etc, I don't really know but something that goes towards making them appear fit to keep a dog. Licen is reviewed ever 12 months and or when they get a new dog. And no more than two dogs per property over the age of lets say one year old.

The above would exempt for the time being those already with a dog and task new dog owners or new dogs to licence test ect, fees paid for by those needing to take a test

The above can be tweaked and the licence fee of 200/approx is not unreasonable as dogs cost loads of money and looking after them a lot more.

Then enforcement ie those not having a licence where one is required or breaching term sof licence EG, letting dog off leash where not allowed etc, warning/dog removed etc depending on the number and seriousness of offence

The above is just an idea but something needs to be done to safeguard the public and the dogs.

FYI, I'd love a dog as I've seen how loving they are, more so than people in many cases but some kind of control will help the pet/dogs and the public as long as whatever brought in is enforced. (A simple thing most of us encounter daily when taking kids/grandkids to school, especially in winter, leaves damp leaves on pavements hiding dog mess that has not been cleared up. Yes, the vast majority of owners clean up and as always it is the minority that let all down and a licence would help if owners are caught not cleaning up lets say more than once, fines and the possibility of dog being removed. etc - just an idea that can be tweaked.

AIBU to hope for a licence of the above type? (They are just thoughts and I'm sure they could be tweaked to ensure the licence does do what it is intended to do, IE reduce the number of irresponsible dog owners and easier to track/etc via a licence/passoprt/id kind of thing - just ideas)

(I am very aware the vast majority of owners are responsible owners)

I'm not sure if any EU country has control like this and if so, does it work?

Licences are pointless: the law abiding people who do the right thing will abide by it, those who don’t, won’t. Same as passporting horses, you can still buy one which doesn’t have one despite it being against the law. Same as having to have insurance and an MOT for a car.

Ok, re horses I was not aware of that. However, surely there needs to be something that will improve the situation. Just like using a hand held mobile phone when driving, there will always be some ignoring the rules but some wil get caught because of the law and a proportion of these may never offend again. Therefore, something is needed.

Getting a dog licence should be like getting a driving licence instead of like getting a TV licence. You should have to pass a test with practical and theory elements. Theory stuff like what to feed them and practical stuff like subduing a large vicious dog with just your voice. This would put a lot of people off owning dogs.

The single biggest improvement though would be to ban dogs from public areas. Just as you can't carry a knife in public, you shouldn't be able to take a dog out in public. You can exercise your dog/play with knives on your own private land away from the public gaze but would have to do so in a way that posed no threat to the public.

I don't have a big issue with dogs attacking their owners but the real problem to me is when they attack innocent people.

The actual numbers from deaths from dog attacks are tiny. It seems much larger because the press love them - they make great stories! There are far more efficient ways to improve safety.

@Cherrysoup

thqts nonsense. License with good enforcement and punishment.

Great post, thanks.

In parks, inc a large royal park near my sibling's house - dogs off leash and allowed run up to people like us that are scared of others dogs and some of these dogs are very, very strong/big dogs.

I agree with your post 100%

Banning dogs from all public spaces just won't work. How could anyone have a day out for example, you can't leave a dog all day on its own. That's just one example.

I do think picking up after your dog is the biggest issue, it just seems to get worse.

So the solution to a pretty small issue is to create a costly layer of bureaucracy, even though legislative mechanisms and local bylaws are already in place to remedy the problem.

Seems entirely proportional.

It's not a small issue. There are the direct dog incidents, eg where people are injured and killed by dogs. But what everyone forgets is all the indirect incidents, dogs tripping people up, causing people to fall off their bikes etc. It all creates work for the NHS and could be avoided if people would keep their pets on short leads and ensure they weren't causing a danger to others.

And while it's not realistic to ban dogs from all public spaces, they do need to be under control, and many are not. If you want a pet you have to accept that you have a responsibility to the public - your dog isn't our pet, so you look after it and don't let it inconvenience others. Also, if you keep it on a lead it won't run off. The number of lost dog posts in my local Facebook group is ridiculous!

As for local bylaws councils have got rid of dog wardens so there is nobody to deal with dog incidents. Charging a licence fee might provide the funds to reinstate them.

At least keeping them on a leash would be a start.
Too many times we've had dog approach us, jump at us and at times when with an owner and leash but less so.

Applying and passing for a licence will teach people common sense skills, EG, not everyone wants a dog to lick them go to the pram with bay in etc etc as some people just dont think.
more of a reason to have a licence, and education enforced by actioning licence T&C's and fining those that breach it and banning and taking the dog away from the serious and or repeat offenders.

As I've said all along, just like other rules and laws some will just ignore them but if you don't have a license and pulled up, and this happens again as the person has not applied for a licence or can't pass the test, then dog is taken away.

We do need something in place as many are fed up with the dog mess not being cleared up in roads, on pavements, outside schools and in parks and playing fields where children play and people walk etc.. I'm guess that there me be a small that leave their mess behind and dogs off leash running up to strangers, the frail, children etc but we do need some type of rules/regulations/licence etc

Came here to say exactly this.

Poor dog ownership is a symptom of a neglectful, harmful or dangerous person rather than the problem to solve as it were. Same as people who neglect children I guess - often they have their own issues causing it.

This would be very tricky to solve without network wide and systemic change.

Of course there are also the owners who care but are underskilled to manage and train their dog. A licence wouldn't help but perhaps mandatory training classes, good support networks.

Good post.
But it is what I said before. Just because its hard to enforce just like the examples you gave, they do have rules where as dog owners appear to have none.

These days unlike 20 or more years ago, the people with large/strong dogs the same people that can hardly look after their responsibilities take on dogs like this.

Some kind of licence etc is needed. It wont be perfect but nothing is it does not mean we give up.

Are you going to make them apply for a license to have a child too?

You comparing children with dogs, seriously?

I’m a dog owner and I’d happily go through more hoops to get/keep a dog as I agree there’s plenty of irresponsible and/or unprepared owners out there which is unfair on their animals. However, for this to become a legal requirement the government would first have to properly regulate the dog breeding and training industry, which would be an enormous task. People don’t seem to realise is no ‘approved’ school of dog training thought, anyone can call themselves a dog trainer. Until that’s regulated you can’t set official tests in dog care & training… so I think it’s far too logistically complicated to ever happen I’m afraid!

Thanks
True but many things are like that and IMO, unless a very high profile person is attacked, sadly we may not see any action re dog licences etc

Even the dog fouling laws are rarely enforced.

I hear you and by all accounts you are a credit to your dog.

Isn't this the same argument Americans use against gun control, despite plentiful real-world evidence to the contrary?

Shall we do away with driving licenses too, given that only law abiding folk get them anyway?

Absolutely outrageous to compare gun ownership to having a licence to own a dog. Bloody hell! The two are not at all relatable.

Possibly you’re just being contentious, but obviously I meant licences for dogs, not driving or anything else. It will be exactly as I mentioned re horse passports, some people just won’t bother, others will abide by the law. On the driving licence note, there are plenty of people driving while banned/without tax/MOT, plenty of fodder on those charming TV programmes.

In context, this is a strange argument - usually this comes from the premise that children are more "valuable" than dogs, but since licensing would [aim to] improve the welfare of the dog or child, surely that would be a good thing, especially where children are concerned. If children are more important than dogs, we should aim to prevent shit parenting before worrying about shit dog ownership. Or, alternatively, it's not as clever as you think it is to respond to any comparison between dogs and children with such faux horror...

You say there's legislation to protect children but dog owners have no rules - this simply isn't true. There are many rules enforcing good dog ownership - from the Dangerous Dogs Act (and others) to the local by laws about controlling dogs in public places. The problem isn't the absence of rules, but their poor enforcement.

If you want to change this, the best route would be to have a government willing to fund public services - the Police, dog wardens et al. Adding more bureaucracy without the means to fund or enforce it will only make the situation worse.

Thanks for all very interesting comments,
Most of us are aware the licence will not be 100% successful if it came to fruition but does that mean we do nothing? The simple answer is no, we must demand action

Licences are pointless: the law abiding people who do the right thing will abide by it, those who don’t, won’t.

rubbish. that's like saying driving licences are pointless because the police rarely check them. They do check them when something happens, and then if you don't have one you are deep in the poo.

Not sure about now, where i live a dog had to have a special, highly visible, tag on their collar to show the owners had a licence (and being where i am they all pretty much have insurace too)

I agree about the need to regulate the dog training industry (as do all the highly trained animal behaviourists that I know). At the moment there are lots of people out there offering training which is at best outdated and although it might seem to give fast results initially in the long term it can do more harm than good. I think this is actually perfectly possible and there is a growing call within the industry for this. Without regulation it's very difficult to know what sort of trainer you're getting unless you already know quite a bit about what to look for (which most owners looking for help don't). Also agree re the need for more regulation of breeders etc

I also think some form of mandatory training (plus periodic updates) for dog owners, starting before they buy a dog, would be a good idea. This is not going to stop irresponsible/neglectful dog owners but would help new owners to really understand their responsibilities, best practice, things that could go wrong, training needs etc.

I'd also really like to see more acceptance/understanding of dogs wearing muzzles. If the dog is properly muzzle trained and has a well fitting muzzle it can be an excellent tool in lots of circumstances. My nervous rescue dog wears one when we are in public because I don't trust that he wouldn't snap or bite if he was scared by someone. I have been told by numerous random strangers and some of my neighbours that this is cruel and I simply need to train him better (usually with a suggestion that watching Dogs Behaving Very Badly would sort it). Dog disagrees (he sees his muzzle as a magic hat that means lots of treats and adventures) as do out vet and behaviourist. Yet the same sort of people are currently up in arms and calling for the dog to be pts and the owner fined because a dog bit and injured another dog in our area.

What would a licence add to the current laws that aren't enforced? And why should money be spent on this, than eg, the NHS? (And dog owners live longer, healthier lives than non dog owners, so restricting dog ownership won't reduce NHS use)

I disagree with licensing.
why should I get one? I’m a qualified dog trainer (with a reputable modern +R organisation) and spent £thousands on my qualifications and time on CPD. My dogs are not a nuisance and have perfect recall. They do not approach other people or animals unless instructed/allowed.

Problem with licensing as others have said is enforcement. And those that will carry on regardless.

I’m not sure what the answer is.

playing devils advocate, how about a government approved educational course for the public on dog safety and what to do in certain scenarios?

Dogs can be a pleasure and bring so much joy and company to so many people. They can save lives. So much more. It isn’t the dogs, r lack of enforcement/licence , it’s that small minority who abuse dog ownership and etiquette in so many ways.

The dog licence was abolished 35 years ago because it was not being enforced so I don’t think your hopes will be realised.
And secondly would the costs of the licence provide enough money to set up a whole new company/department to run these checks and courses all over the country?