Sep
Dogs Trust Stray Dog Figures Prompt Call for Change in Law
A staggering 107,228 stray and abandoned dogs were picked up by Local Authorities from UK streets in the last year, according to Dogs Trust’s 2009 Stray Dog Survey. This represents an unacceptable increase of 11% and is the highest increase recorded since records began in 1997.
Dogs Trust strongly believes that 2008’s change in stray dog law in England and Wales, whereby police no longer hold statutory responsibility for stray dogs, may explain this sudden increase. The charity also fears that the current financial crisis may have had an impact in some areas.
With over 9,000 unclaimed stray dogs put to sleep by Local Authorities, the charity is calling on the Government to introduce compulsory microchipping for all dogs in the UK. It hopes this will reduce the problem and help reunite owners with their lost pets and trace abandoned pets back to irresponsible owners.
In the last year, of those stray dogs that were returned to their owners, 31% were returned due to being microchipped[i] – with compulsory microchipping many more could be reunited.
The annual survey, conducted by GfK NOP on behalf of Dogs Trust, shows a startling increase from the previous year. Despite the sustained efforts of both animal welfare organisations and Local Authorities, on average 12 stray and abandoned dogs an hour are now handled by Local Authorities. Each hour:
* 5 are reunited with their owners
* 3 are taken to welfare organisations
* 1 is rehomed from the Local Authority kennels
* 2 are in kennels for their seven day holding period[ii]
* 1 dog is put to sleep[iii]
Dogs Trust Chief Executive Clarissa Baldwin says:
“This is the largest annual increase since our records began in 1997. Previously we had seen a steady decline, but the latest statistics show a huge jump in the number of stray dogs both handled and put to sleep by Local Authorities. Some dog wardens mentioned the recession could have been an attributing factor to the increase, while others cited the change in the stray dog law last April.
We believe that the time is right to review the Control of Dogs Order and are calling on the Government to introduce compulsory microchipping of all dogs in the UK. Microchipping is an essential part of being a responsible dog owner and has helped so many people become reunited with their beloved pets.”
Compulsory microchipping already has significant support in the UK. Over 90% of Local Authorities and veterinary surgeons and almost 90% of dog owners are in favour of its introduction according to Dogs Trust research. To date 45 MPs have signed a supportive Early Day Motion (EDM) for the campaign and the charity has received additional support regionally from local MPs from all three of the main parties.
The introduction of Compulsory Microchipping would:
* Enable lost or straying dogs to be reunited promptly with their owners – meaning fewer dogs will be put to sleep at council pounds
* Permanently identify a dog in such a way that is virtually impossible to alter or remove – a clear advantage for dogs that are stolen
* Enable clear identification of the dog’s owner when prosecution is being considered for dog thieves and antisocial behaviour
* Significantly decrease the workload of all those dealing with stray dogs
* Reduce kennelling costs for Local Authorities and save time
* Allow puppies bred illegally or inappropriately on puppy farms to be traced to their source
* Significantly increase the welfare of racing Greyhounds as they could be traced back to their owners whilst they are racing and once they retire
How inaccurate can this woman be? I am a Dog Warden Manager & have been for 15 years & I can honestly say that the few dogs that I have authorised for destruction have never had a microchip! I would welcome the intoduction of mandatory microchipping, it would certainly reduce the cost to my service of having to kennel strays for the 7 days and then having to find new homes.
I would suggest that the Dogs Trust should be engaging with the stautorily appointed persons (ie the Council Dog Wardens)to tackle the issue of rehoming these unfortunate strays, rather than alienating and criticising those who have a legislative mandate to act in the issue of stray dogs (after all they [Dogs Trust] are just a charity!!)
I annually complete the Dogs Trust survey, however I shall be reconsidering completion of it in future if this is how the information is going to be skewed, and used for their own partisan purposes of bashing dog wardens!!
Come on lets support our dog wardens, they are the most forgotten service in a Local Authority.
Alpha Bitch
As a person who is very interested in dog control in the UK I am aware that before the Dogs Trust and the RSPCA started duplicating (and wasting council officers time) the call for stray dog figures, the dog warden association had a mandate from the old MAFF (now DEFRA) to collate stray dog statistics.
These two organisations muscled in on the act and rode roughshod over the dog wardens who declined from asking for colleagues and members of their association from having to waste time in duplicating work when they are already busy enough.
If you look at the National Dog Warden Association website it shows that they have an RSPCA liaison officer, this is very good news for dogs and dog warden work and shows a commitment from the dog wardens and the RSPCA to work together.
If it is that easy why do the Dogs Trust not have a similar arrangement? Instead they seem to go off to non representative groups such as the infamous Animal Wardens Ltd operated by Mr Paul Dunne and hold some kind of joint seminar in Greater Manchester, do the Dogs Trust not realise they are literally opening a pandora’s box of catastrophe and disaster if they have anything to do with that muppet (if proof be needed, check out the article on this website regarding the sale of a stray dog that the owner had reported lost to this company). Go to Pet Owner Parliament and there are literally 500-600 posts about the poor service provided by this company in relaton to animal handling and stray dog provision.
On the plus side I have seen the advert for the forthcoming NDWA conference in Birmingham in October 2009 and I was pleased to see a speaker from Dogs Trust and the Kennel Club were attending, a step forward surely!
Ms Baldwin, please stop hitting the dog wardens, the problem is a lack of funding for services, as the Alpha Bitch writes they are the most neglected service in councils but when there is a newsworthy story they are top of the heap for five minutes. Instead of attacking dog wardens why not work with them?
Same old attack by the Dogs Trust on dog wardens, blame the councillors for their policies and not the people who actually do a very good job in trying conditions.
If only local authorities had the access to funding that the Dogs Trust gets from donations!
Instead of compulsory microchipping which the Dogs Trust seems to think will cure all ills re stray dogs, why not just have a licensing scheme with the money going directly to councils so they can operate improved services for dogs and other animals?
Whats the matter Ms Clarissa Baldwin, too radical an idea for the Dogs Trust, you are a charity after all so you could not get involved with any enforcement could you!
As the other posts say, leave the dog wardens alone and concentrate on their bosses the councillors!
The last thing Dogs Trust wants our annual Stray Dog Survey to do is ‘bash dog wardens’. Far from alienating dog wardens, we want to use the survey results as a means to deliver change and improve welfare conditions. We know dog wardens provide an invaluable service and don’t enter the profession to put dogs to sleep. With more stray and abandoned dogs putting pressure on cash strapped Local Authorities we understand the difficulties they face and believe that compulsory microchipping would help alleviate some of their workload. We understand that these disappointing numbers come despite the efforts of both local authorities and charities.
We use the Stray Dog Survey research to strengthen our messaging to Government. By presenting politicians with the stark facts about stray dogs and explaining the need for responsible dog ownership including compulsory microchipping, we hope to influence their animal welfare manifestos.
Dogs Trust staff work with dog wardens throughout the country and value the close relationships that have been developed. We want to ensure this continues and we’ll be listening and responding to all feedback from Local Authorities about this year’s survey.
Health Issues and Microchips
In studies carried out on Rats and Mice and Dogs have shown that on average (An average over all the studies) 2% of animals micro chipped developed cancer, often at the sight of the chip insertion and in some cases right around the chip. I will list the peer reviewed and professional evidence at the end of my answer.
The studies used to justify chipping are relatively small sample studies and the argument that so many million animals have been chipped without incident are irrelevant because cancer may occur and may or may not be treated in these cases there is no way to quantify this. Just because a dog is alive does not mean it doesn’t have cancer and these chipped animals have not been observed and information has not been collected so this kind of social proof is invalid without large sample lifetime studies. I do not want my dog to be used as a testing ground for this. At the very least this requires more testing before any law is passed making it compulsory because there are risks here.
Many will say that vets say they are safe so they must be safe. This is not strictly true many people (including qualified vets) now challenge the long held beliefs that yearly vaccination of animals is good health practice. Many vets will argue rightly in my view that it promotes health because it gets dogs in where vets can screen for conditions on a yearly basis, but the actual idea of vaccinating dog yearly without immunity tests is a disputed point amongst vets and may cuase over vaccination which actually cause health problems for some dogs.
Veterinarian Shawn Messonnier recommends vaccinations once every three years and claims that thinking on vaccinations has changed. I see no evidence of this change in thinking when I visit UK vets. Could self interest be coming before animal welfare? If this information is not filtering down could the micro chipping debate be held back for commercial reasons? Does this mean I should blindly trust what I am told when studies show otherwise?
Health Studies:
Le Calvez 2006, Studied Species – Mice, Sample 1,260, Length of Implant Exposure 2 years, Developed Cancer 4.1 per cent.
Vascellari 2006, Studied Species – Dog, Sample – N/A Vets Journal Article, Length of Implant Exposure 7 months (at age 9), dog got cancer from implant.
Vascellari 2004, dog, 18 months (at age 11), study by a vet of one dog, dog got cancer from implant.
Elcock 2001 Studied Species rats Sample 1,040 Length of Implant Exposure 2 years Developed Cancer 0.8%
Blanchard 1999 Studied Species mice Sample 177 Length of Implant Exposure 6 months Developed Cancer 10.2%.
Palmer 1998 Studied Species mice Sample 800 Length of Implant Exposure 2 years Developed Cancer 2.0%
Tillmann 1997 Studied Species mice Sample 4,279 Length of Implant lifespan Cancer 0.8%
Johnson 1996 Studied Species mice Sample 2,000 Length of Implant Exposure 2 years Cancer ~1.0%
Studies in which micro chip induced cancer was not found:
Murasugi 2003, Species dog, Sample size 9, No cancer
Ball 1991, Species rats, Sample 50, No cancer
Rao & Edmondson 1990, Sample 133, No cancer
Note: No study thus far has been a wide ranging, large subject group lifetime study. These chips have not been tested enough period.
Security and RFID Microchips
In addition to the health implications there are privacy implications I will outline below (I am electronics savvy and it took me ten minutes searching the Internet to figure out how to do this):
I can buy an RFID reader of the internet for $25 Hong Kong dollars. I can with the right antenna and a laptop sit in a car and scan people for names and addresses as they walk by. This means that for about £50 I can read peoples addresses as they walk out of the car park with their dogs. As these chips are not even encrypted anyone could currently do this. The strongest encryption can be broken by script kiddies (hacker with the desire but not the knowledge to hack) using the powerful new computers and since the signal can be grabbed and worked on later this provides the tools for sophisticated targeting of individuals using this technology. Imagine someone grabbing the signal of hundreds of people along with photo and then being able to know exactly where that person lives, with a picture to confirm their identity, it is that dangerous. Robbery would become highly lucratvie one crook sitting in the park with the scanner the other visiting scanned dog houses knowing owners are not home.
Of course, I could just buy a Brother RL700S RFID Label Maker Machine RL-700S and clone someone’s tag and put it under my dog’s collar that way my dog would scan as if licensed and if anyone did track it would be to the wrong house. So it isn’t like the tech is foolproof anyway.
I see a new business idea cloned dog tags, a £700 printer and a new cottage industry is born, Fake dog micro chips. Some guy will be selling them for £5 a go all they need do is sell 140 and they have paid for the printer. Good year on year funding that endears the criminal to his surrounding community. Ironically the very people you are trying to protect will suffer because this service will appeal to anti social elements living in vulnerable disenfranchised communities that are hard to access by the police. Since there won’t be a way to detect that the chip is under the skin without really intrusive detection (annoying the community) you are back where you started with ordinary tags except this time you have the illusion of security and a chip company and vets have made a fortune off the backs of ordinary people.
I am not a thief, criminal, murderer, or even a good hacker and I would never use this information but I have already got a good idea how to get round this system and use it to find out about others. Imagine what really dangerous people could do with this on demand information retrieval system. They will run wild with it.
Sources:
Google search: Search String “hacking rfid”
Results:
1. Wired.com – The RFID Hacking Underground Issue 14.05 – May 2006
2. tv.boingboing.net – How to hack RFID-enabled credit cards for $8 – A video tutorial if you please!
3. computerworld.com – How they hacked it: The MiFare RFID crack explained
4. ebay.co.uk – Brother RL700S RFID Label Maker Machine RL-700S
5. ebay.co.uk – Bluetooth RFID and Barcode (1D or 2D) Hand Scanner
6. ebay.co.uk – 125Khz RFID EM4100 Proximity ID EM Card USB Reader,ID
Cost of development: Self funding via dog owners with the potential to overrun massively if the National ID database is anything to go by.
Lastly there is the cost, the cost of developing this scheme would be in theory funded by the micro chipping fee, but as more dogs need chipped there would be more data warehousing and programming requirements. As with the national identity scheme we would be trying to store and unprecedented levels of information and since this would be being done by private enterprise it would have to be profitable. The national ID card scheme is a good case in point, the ID card scheme is usually said to cost £5bn, although the London School of Economics has said the true cost will be between £10bn and £20bn. So expect a £15 billion pound overrun and how will this be paid for. Leveraging more money from contract is a well worn path by many of the outsourcing companies and with politicians having already committed public funds this ransom is always paid or the Government looks like it is wasting money and doing U turns.
The current school of thought in Stormont (Northern Ireland where I live)is that dog owners pay for their own hobby. So it is logical to assume that a massive increase in the license fee for dog owners will be on the cards if there are budget overruns. This will probably leave the fee at about £40 to £50 per dog for the privilage of giving 2% of the nation’s animals cancer.
People really should try and stop this going through!