http://vet.sagepub.com/content/43/4/545.full

I wrote to Defra about the dog licence awhile ago and was told that when it was last operated, only 44% of people bought one, so they were not considering its revival. The RSPCA however, would make it compulsory and decide that if the law abiding didn’t have one, they’d lose their dog. It’s just another stick to beat us with. It will do nothing whatsoever to curb backstreet breeding or dog fighting.
The licence issue is all about control and revenue for the RSPCA.

MAG (Microchip Advisory Group) member Pet Detect’s website quoted 200% to 400% profit on each chip, which is a high margin. They removed this kind of copy from their pages, but Google kept the cache. You have to love Google.

http://www.talk-big.com/text_from_website_removed_but_google_cache_kept_a_copy.jpg – Copied and kept in the public interest!

Chris Laurence’s group memberships include:

1. The Pets Advisory Committee advising Parliament. http://www.petadvisory.org.uk/
2. MAG as Chairperson. MAG lists major manufacturers, distributors and implanters of microchips who promote and sell microchips as members. These companies are: Allflex, Fearing International (Stock Aids) Ltd, Animalcare Limited, Jecta Limited, Bayer PLC, CoreRFID Ltd, Datamars S.A., The Pet Microchip Company Ltd, PET-ID Ltd, Petcode, and the Kennel Club http://www.bsava.com/Advice/MicrochipAdvice/tabid/154/Default.aspx
3. The links group – http://www.thelinksgroup.org.uk/UnderstandingTheLinks.htm

So no one at Dogs Trust saw any problem campaigning for compulsory microchipping while the chair of MAG was their Veterinary Director.

Here is a list of credible scientific journals that display links between microchip implants and STS soft tissue sarcomas.

http://scholar.google.co.uk/scholar?hl=en&q=%22soft+tissue+sarcomas%22%2B%22microchip+implants%22&btnG=Search&as_sdt=2000&as_ylo=&as_vis=0

The Dogs Trust were a major force in calling for the government to transfer responsibility for stray dogs away from the police and leave it solely for councils to deal with. Has there been any improvement in the level of service provision, far from it, the standards have slipped even more and a lot of councils are as is the norm, cutting back on the easy target that is a local authority dog warden service during hard times.

How the Dogs Trust can mither on about dog licensing in Northern Ireland and point out how poor the take up has been and that 34% of dogs are put to sleep completely misses the socio-economic, sectarian make up of the province of Ulster where you can be ‘put to sleep’ merely on account of your religion or the fact that you are a police officer by some people over there of whatever religious belief. A total lack of respect for any kind of authority from some quarters must make it extremely difficult to get more dogs registered.

The RSPCA has raised the issue of dog licences which is a fair point as something does need to be done but the RSPCA’s Mr Bowles is (pardon the pun) quite literally barking up the wrong tree if he thinks that making any money for dog licensing ‘ring fenced’ is going to work.

When section 68 of the clean neighbourhoods & environment act 2005 was enacted on 6th april 2008, where did all the ‘ring fenced’ money for the paltry amount of money doled out to each council go………..straight into most councils general funds!

Those councils who provide a text book out of hours dog warden service must surely only run into ’10′s’ and not hundred’s in England as many have followed the DEFRA guidance to the letter of the law and stated that it is NOT practicable for them to have ab out of hours service running, nice one DEFRA your get out of prison card works against you!

Who would enforce any dog licence, DO NOT think for one minute that council dog warden services can do so, many are now being ‘dual roled’ into having to do pest control work, or they are making pest control officers start to deal with dogs. The police would not as they are cutting back on serving some types of fixed penalties and they are facing hard times like the rest of us.

As the pest controllers can bring in income to councils, you can bet that any stray dogs are going to be far down the food chain when it comes to calling a pest control officer away from a wasp nest or other treatment that rakes in money for the council.

Dogs are not the pests, irresponsible dog owners are the pests and therefore dog control should not be given to those who apart from not being very up to date on dog related issues may not even want to deal with dogs.

Something does need to be done to address the problem of dog control in England but it needs to be dealt with by those who know what they are doing and not by sound bite hungry ‘charities’ who have already been responsible for the introduction of some appalling legislation over the years who can simply walk away onto the next sound-bite and leave others to deal with poor legislation.

The call for compulsory microchipping sounds like it is little more than a money making opportunity for charities and the microchip companies. Is not a senior person from the Dogs Trust in charge of the microchip advisory group.

The Kennel Club also seem to be against dog licences but as they run Petlog they would be in favour of compulsory microchipping, look at all those millions of changes of ownership and address that could be charged to dog owners if they were to have the sole data-base in the UK.

Truly it is a dog eat dog world at the moment in the world of dog related organisations. Instead of all the in fighting, they should meet and carve up the areas of concern that they can lead on rather than the present one upmanship that does not really address a serious issue such as is dog control in England in 2010.

In my opinion, we should have a national database, a doggy DVLA as some people called it.
All potential dog owners should have to pass a test to prove they are cable of looking after one. Once they’ve passed the must register each dog they buy or adopted, with a description of the dog, the breed/mix, the date of birth, the micro chip/tattoo number and their address. Once they done that, they should receive a register tag (not a small disc tag, something large and noticeable) to prove the dogs been registered. That way its easy to tell what dogs aren’t registered and to target them.

If the dog has or gets a control order on it, the register tag should be a colour that shows what restriction that the have on it. Example red, for dogs that must be muzzled and leased in public, neutered or orange for dogs that have to be on a lead and so forth.

All dog breeders should be registered, whether they have 5 dogs (that’s what I would make the legal maximum a breeder can have) or 1. Each dog they want to breed from should have to pass genetic testing and a temperament test. Once they’ve passed they should be registered on a breeding register and each dog should have a unique register number. When puppies are born each puppy should be registered with the register number of both the mother and the father on their details. At 8 weeks, just before being transferred to their news owners, they should be micro chipped or tattooed (at the new owners choice), the number of the micro chip/tattoo should be given to the register along with the names and addresses of the buyers. After sale the new owners should have to confirm the sale and the details of their new dog.

If someone tries to register a new puppy that hasn’t got the register number of the parents than a dog warden should be sent to collect a statement about the breeder, their address, wear the puppies were advertised, so the breeder can be tract down and punished for breaking the law. As for the people that brought the puppy, the puppy should be registered; the owners should be advised about the breeding laws so they don’t get ripped off again.

If the dog has come form a shelter or aboard, the owner could provide the adoption/import details to prove the dog hasn’t come from an illegal breeder.

There is no way backstreet breeders and puppy farmers will either chip or licence, so in that respect it doesn’t matter which is adopted. HOWEVER, a dog that is chipped, and gets lost or stolen has a better chance of being found and returned than a dog whose owner just has a bit of paper to say the dog is his!

Why are the RSPCA suddenly so keen to have the licence, will they be getting the revenue from it? Or is it to exert more pressure on the councils? Please remember they are a charity, like the Dogs Trust, they’re not any kind of enforcement agency, no matter what they’d like us to believe.