There is an enforcement agency; it's basically the animal warden and, in welfare cases, the RSPCA and police. However, the animal warden is overwhelmed dealing with the most serious cases and it is not unknown for the police, RSPCA and animal warden to refer to each other so that one gets stuck in a circle with no one agency taking responsibility. The RSPCA pledged in 2021 to undertake fewer private prosecutions and are now passing many to the CPS (quite rightly in my opinion). The RSPCA itself is hardly above reproach, and has been involved in several welfare controversies in recent years.There were probably as many irresponsible dog owners in the past as now. It is only in 1996 that obligation was imposed to pick up after dogs, and it was common for dogs to be let loose to wander the streets when owners were at work with obvious implications for fouling and incidentsWhat has changed is the number of dog owners: 8% of the population owned a dog in 1970; now it is approximately one third of the population. Many are first time owners who bought dogs during lockdown; they are ignorant of basic laws, and frankly, etiquette and have grown up in a much more individualistic culture than owners of longer standing. A 2024 Dogs Trust survey found that just 7% of owners undertake formal training (and not always with qualified, professional trainers) and 6% think that training is unnecessary. However, licensing just becomes a tax on responsible owners. Those who have no intention of complying with the law (and that includes large numbers of people whose dogs are off lead as they walk the streets, whose dogs are running loose in the park without collars and the huge number of people without a legal tag) will no doubt continue to defy the law.A £50,000 fine is totally disproportionate given that most animal-related offences have maximum fines of £5,000. Any fine becomes expensive to enforce if paid in tiny increments or not at all. It is estimated that as many as 40% of fines levied for all offences are unpaid. Likewise, compulsory insurance is possibly unreasonable at a time when canine-related expenses are experiencing an inflation rate of between 30% and 60% and would price many responsible owners out of ownership. Third party insurance is available via the Dogs Trust for just £25 per annum (£12.50 for over 60s) which I would recommend. Licences are already a requirement for some exotic companion animals.If animals are removed from irresponsible owners, what then happens to them? Who pays for the cost of kennelling and re-homing? With kennels already full of unwanted animals or those kennelled due to police investigations, is it reasonable or ethical to condemn even more animals to this process which could, in itself, result in the development of behavioural problems? Currently, rescue kennels are unregulated and there is already a welfare problem in some of them.Who would pay for a "pet court" with the legal system already in crisis and even serious cases taking years to be tried? What I believe would work, is a "domestic passport" similar to that required for horses. The passport should oblige owners to verify the origin of their dog (thus assist with new import legislation which is currently being debated and hopefully if rescues are regulated) and would be a place to record existing obligations such as microchip details (including owner address). It could even oblige an owner to include a photograph showing that the dog is wearing a legal tag and photographs could be included of th go at various life stages to assist in the event of theft. It should also serve as a record of prophylactic treatments (vaccines and parasite treatment with a vet stamp) and of any breaches of regulations or the law or requirements made under the DDA for instance. Just as with a horse passport or car log book, the passport should "travel" with the dog and be amended with new owner or temporary keeper details as required. Horse passports cost about £30 (the price varies with the issuing authority) which is a reasonable amount. A requirement to produce the passport by a relevant enforcement officer could work in a similar manner to that required of a driver to produce a licence on request.There will always be the risk of forgeries, but if the requirement is to produce a high quality passport with hologram or similar protection, then this could be mitigated, even if it meant that the passport was a little more expensive.
Charlotte Kasner ● 6d