Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Violet Donohoe

GET UPDATES FROM Violet Donohoe
 

Compulsory Microchipping: Don't Pop the Corks Just Yet...

Posted: 06/02/2013 23:00

Finally, after the first public consultation two and a half years ago and 22 years since the knee-jerk and ineffective Dangerous Dogs Act was rushed through Parliament, yesterday saw the government announcement its proposals aimed at tackling welfare and irresponsible dog ownership.

The package of measures include, among other things, compulsory microchipping of all dogs, extending the law to cover private property, and seizure of suspected prohibited breeds. But was it worth the wait?

While we welcome some of the measures including extending the laws on dog attacks to cover private property and compulsory microchipping for all dogs, we're not getting the champagne out of the chiller just yet....

2013-02-06-Princess1.JPG

This was the government's opportunity to finally tackle the big issues, but instead we believe they have merely tinkered with the existing legislation rather than make the comprehensive reform of dog laws that is so desperately needed. With no preventative measures and our animal centres filled to bursting with abandoned and abused dogs, we simply can't wait another 22 years.

The government seems to think that compulsory microchipping is a silver bullet which will solve the problems irresponsible ownership brings. If only it were that simple. Many of the abused and abandoned animals that the RSPCA rescues already have microchips, but inadequate and out of date records mean owners are unreachable or can simply claim that they 'gave the dog away years ago'. Just this week I spoke with an RSPCA inspector who told me that she had been involved with a case where the emaciated body of a microchipped greyhound had been dumped in a bin. However, when she traced the registered owners they claimed they had given the dog away. Unable to prove ownership, the people who subjected that dog to such cruelty remain unaccountable for their actions.

It remains unclear if owner details registered on the database will be regarded as legal proof of ownership of a dog, or if it will be made an offence to fail to keep a dog's microchip up to date. Without such conditions, dogs will continue to suffer and cruel and irresponsible owners will remain unaccountable.

Extending the law to cover private property might allow those injured by dogs to claim recompense but we wonder how this will actually protect people from being bitten in the first place. Preventing dog bites can not be resolved through legislation alone and is reliant upon education to ensure people can interact safely with dogs.

The measures also worryingly suggest that Breed Specific Legislation is here to stay. The RSPCA along with the police, local authorities and others support the abolition or phasing out of breed specific legislation. Any dog, regardless of their breed or type, can be dangerous... in the wrong hands. The law punishes dogs for the way they look with no regard for the individual dog's temperament. To reinforce the myth that people will be afforded better protection by continuing breed specific legislation which labels some dogs as inherently 'dangerous' is wrong and focuses the attention at the wrong end of the lead.

Moves by the government to give police forces greater discretion when dealing with prohibited types of dogs (e.g pit bull terriers) are cautiously welcomed but may only impact on a very small sub-set of dogs. Some dogs spend years in kennels while their fate is being decided through the courts and sadly, these measures do nothing to tackle the plight of those animals. Enforcement bodies should be given greater discretion on the need to seize any dogs in the first place and where dogs must be seized, deadlines on behavioral assessments should be set to reduce the welfare impact of kennelling on dogs.

After 22 years of the RSPCA having to deal with the reality of inadequate legislation some of which fails to hold cruel and irresponsible owners accountable for their actions and some which punishes certain dogs unjustly, we're hoping that these measures through effective enforcement, will have some real bite. However it is far from what the RSPCA has been calling for and as with all these things, the devil is in the detail. Watch this space...

 

Follow Violet Donohoe on Twitter: www.twitter.com/@VioletRSPCA

FOLLOW UK POLITICS
 
 
  • Comments
  • 21
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
05:07 AM on 02/09/2013
agree with most comments posted on here , I think the laws on dogs should be [1] all dogs microchipped and any change of ownership or change of address or death of dog must be registered within 7 days . {to ensure accurate details & statistics} [2] unless a breeders licence has been obtained all dogs neutered / speyed . { this will drastically reduce the numbers in kennels } [3] breeders / sellers obliged to ensure buyers have a suitable property and basic knowledge of dog care and training . The law reguarding attacks on private property needs to be carefully drafted to distinguish between legitimate visitors and intruders were a dog is defending its owner & / or owners property . The laws should NOT be breed based . I have owned dogs all my adult life over the years I have owned a German Shepard - a Labrador- a Collie , at present I have 2 staffies which I hesitantly took on { due to bad press on pitbulls} as 2 month old pups , their 2yrs old now and they've been a pleasure & great fun to own , of all the breeds I've owned the are the most demanding but most loving and friendly .
12:41 PM on 02/08/2013
All dogs to be microchipped by 2016 - this is not the answer.

If that was not bad enough, the consultation itself was flawed from the outset, as it failed to address a crucial factor in determining a vital element in the problems surrounding dangerous dogs and the UK dog population that currently exist - THE SOURCE. Instead their focus was on micro-chipping as a panacea for dangerous dogs. Naturewatch believes that micro-chipping alone will have little impact on the existing cruelty to dogs by irresponsible owners. Nor will it satisfactorily address the issue of dog bites. We believe also that it will do little to address the overpopulation crisis in rehoming centres.
http://naturewatch.org/press/article/microchipping-is-not-the-answer-government-get-out
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Sven Storm
Edit your micro-biology.
09:19 AM on 02/08/2013
How can this be taking so long?!
11:58 AM on 02/07/2013
It should be illegal to breed or sell dogs unless you have a license. Any dog sold should be neutered, and only breeders should be allowed to own un-neutered dogs. Perhaps all dogs should have to wear ownership tags, with the owners name and address on.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
03:16 PM on 02/07/2013
Ownership tags are already a legal requirement.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Sven Storm
Edit your micro-biology.
09:20 AM on 02/08/2013
not very strictly enforced by the look of things! I guess these new laws will be just as useless.
photo
25sammy25
We just wanna be togever !!!!
04:48 PM on 02/07/2013
Approveds - All breeders cannot be trusted as I rescued a little Yorkie, who was impounded along with his brothers and sisters, from a breeder.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Sue Harvey
11:40 AM on 02/07/2013
They might as well give the dog an ASBO for all the good it will do. It will make money for some, of course. What about muzzles for all dogs over a certain size when out in public?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
03:15 PM on 02/07/2013
Although any poorly trained dog is a potential danger, yorkshire terriers have worse tempers than german shepherds
photo
25sammy25
We just wanna be togever !!!!
04:47 PM on 02/07/2013
trevthesparky - Please don't tar all Yorkies the same. I have a little Yorkie and he is the most mild tempered little pet I could have + another dog.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Thismortalcoil
Science is the poetry of reality
06:12 PM on 02/07/2013
trev, I agree that small dogs can be very badly behaved - though I'm sure yours isn't sammy!

The problem is not the breed, but that some people with small dogs mistakenly think their cute dog doesn't need training.

I've had small terriers try to bite my large German Shepherd and luckily she is sensible enough not to bite back because we socialised her from the first day we had her.

I think ALL dog owners should have a license and they should have to do training in order to get the license, just as you do with cars.

This would stop people getting dogs on impulse - after all you're committing yourself to over a decade of an hour's walk a day, vet's fees, insurance, food bills etc.

The license should be considerably cheaper for rescued dogs too.
10:38 PM on 02/07/2013
I own an Irish wolfhound he is the gentliest dog you could ever get. He has had small snappy dogs trying to rip his face off. Don't assume that all big dogs are wired like the ones you read about.
11:20 AM on 02/07/2013
Micro chipping won't solve any thing. It will only be the responsible owners doing it. The owners that take their pets to the vets for vacinations, treatment etc.
Any one can breed dogs and sell them on. I have brought our dogs from responsible breeders with very good names.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Sven Storm
Edit your micro-biology.
09:23 AM on 02/08/2013
Breeders of aggressive dogs for sale are off the radar, they won't stop that.
09:37 AM on 02/08/2013
Exactly Sven.