cycas Posted March 13, 2008 Report Share Posted March 13, 2008 The current situation (without wishing to express any disrespect towards the individuals involved or the excellent work they do in difficult circumstances) is woefully inadequate. I think we can all agree on that. Just because there is no political will to change stuff right now I don't think should be a reason to stop campaigning, but all the people who have said the proposal needs to be really well thought out and the funding issues resolved are spot on, to my mind. The problem is it's so easy to make new dogs. Car tax is a great model, but quite apart from the whole 'do we really want to demand a £140 a year dog licence' thing, people generally aren't going to be making 6 new cars a year in a shed in their garden... And you can't put the tax on petrol for your dog, cos dogs run quite well on leftovers... ...so I think that ends up with responsible owners paying to deal with the problems caused by bad owners. Which I suppose is better than nobody dealing with the problems at all, but you might as well fund it out of general taxation then, and that's going to go down like a lead balloon... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rumpole Posted March 13, 2008 Report Share Posted March 13, 2008 unfortunately though the police are being relieved of their responsibilities to dogs, which will put even more strain on the dog warden service which is already overworked in what they currently do which will be worse once the official handover takes place. Also as far as these proposals go it seems that the ndwa proposals (which i personally think are very good) would be put forward as a new law running in conjunction with the owner suitability test if that was also run by the dog wardens they would drown under the sheer amount of work involved. im not sure how the ndwa would feel about your idea to use their proposals and then cut them out of the equation and give them to a special unit in the police tho The main problem i feel with a suitability test is that like others say just because you can memorise something doesnt mean that you put it into practice later and that although many responsible and involved owners wouldnt mind taking the test what about the masses of people who just have a dog would they back it because they would need to before it would be accepted by the government, they will agree to nothing that may affect their majority. Although as it stands of all the proposals available i am most impressed with the ndwa one i will be interested to see the consultations on all available and i do feel that everyone has something to add to this especially those at the sharp end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cenydd Posted March 13, 2008 Report Share Posted March 13, 2008 (edited) Although this is a different discussion to an extent, to clarify my previous comment about having a special section of the police to deal with animal issues, I would see this as based partially on dog wardens themselves - in other words, the dog wardens and other agencies which currently look after animal issues would be amalgamated to form one overall operation, properly centrally funded and controlled (i.e. not run and funded by councils or 'charities' and controlled according to their individual political and financial agendas), and working within the police force structure to give them both statutary powers and potential back up if required. Obviously within that there should be specialists in dealing with certain issues, as there are within the police, and I would see dog wardens forming the bulk of the 'dog issues' expertise. Of course, such a set up would still be subject to political and financial agendas, as the police are now, but at least it would be a unified and uniform (and uniformed!) sevice. That seems to me the logical approach to dealing with animal issues, it being quite a large area that needs to be policed using a certain amount of expertise. It would, of course, require funding, which is a big issue to be resolved! Edited March 13, 2008 by cenydd Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terrier Posted August 13, 2008 Report Share Posted August 13, 2008 Similar test? You will have to direct me. I know of no similar test to the one I am proposing. Does anybody have any information about similar schemes in other countries (Germany or otherwise)? What did their schemes propose? Did they get off the ground? Why? If yes, what was the effect? Why? If there is information about a precedent for the DOT, that would be very useful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Melp Posted August 13, 2008 Report Share Posted August 13, 2008 I beleive theres a dog ownership test in Switzerland [not sure how similar it is to the oe proposed by Ryan] http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-56...ng-courses.html http://www.dogmagazine.net/archives/371/sw...dog-regulation/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blackmagic Posted August 13, 2008 Report Share Posted August 13, 2008 Switzerland http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-56...ng-courses.html Switzerland http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-56...ng-courses.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
krusewalker Posted August 13, 2008 Report Share Posted August 13, 2008 is the NDWA proposal the one recommending dog insurance? if so, that would work much better than a DOT. public liability dog ins works brilliantly in DK. but that is Dk, whereby on the whole, society is a lot more responsible and sensible and the average standard of dog ownership, care, and training is far superior than the average in the UK. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cenydd Posted August 14, 2008 Report Share Posted August 14, 2008 is the NDWA proposal the one recommending dog insurance?if so, that would work much better than a DOT. public liability dog ins works brilliantly in DK. but that is Dk, whereby on the whole, society is a lot more responsible and sensible and the average standard of dog ownership, care, and training is far superior than the average in the UK. For info, the second draft of the DOT proposal also includes compulsory 3rd party liability insurance for dogs as part of the proposal (along with owner education, supplier licensing, etc.): "6) All dogs to be covered by compulsory 3rd party insurance." The scheme's aims and objectives are as follows (my underlining for emphasis re insurance): "The Dog Owner Suitability Test, hereto referred to as D.O.T is a proposal designed to achieve the following objectives: To place a far greater emphasis on the prevention of dog attacks, dog neglect and environmental nuisance To improve the general level of canine awareness amongst all UK dog owners To bring about radical change in the standards of those involved in the supply of dogs to the public To ensure greater comprehension amongst all UK dog owners of the various laws affecting domestic dogs To provide a workable alternative to the failed aspects of the 1991 Dangerous Dogs Act To place full legal accountability upon dog owners for the actions and welfare of their dogs To repeal breed specific legislation which has failed to save human lives and is practically impossible to implement fairly" (Quoted from Ryan's DOT proposals, 2nd draft: http://www.dogownershiptest.co.uk/the-proposal/ ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts