Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee Written evidence submitted by Jaqi Bunn
In response to the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee inquiry into the measures on Tackling Irresponsible Dog Ownership announced for consultation by DEFRA on 23 April and the response by Government and dog breeders to Professor Bateson’s Independent Enquiry into Dog Breeding I submit the following comments:
1. Whether the Government’s proposed approaches will deliver the right legal framework, enforcement regime and educational support to reduce irresponsible dog ownership and tackle out of control dogs?
1.1 While credit is due for tackling the issue, the proposed measures do not go far enough. The correct system is already in place with the Driver and Vehicle Licensing agency. If this framework is applied to dog ownership (with all dogs having a unique identifiable DNA fingerprint and associated microchip before they leave the breeder) and owners identified by local authorities as requiring a licence to own a dog (by local authorities who have received complaints or have past history about the owner’s irresponsible dog ownership) then the system could be extremely effective.
1.2 “Dog Ownership” courses such as “Driver Awareness” courses currently in place now could be a cost effective way of providing education to those that need it, while not impacting on the already responsible dog owner.
1.3 Suggestions for instructors could be members of the Kennel Club Accreditation Scheme for Instructors in Dog Training and Behaviour working to a national curriculum of canine-related education and responsible dog ownership.
2. Is there a need for a more fundamental overhaul of dog legislation, and its enforcement, including that relating to dog attacks on people, livestock and pets?
2.1 The current legislation is ineffective, with the little-known Dogs Act 1871 and the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 being extremely confusing for the average dog-owner to understand. Pulling together the all the current legislation into one Act would be easier for the public to understand and for enforcement.
3. Is sufficient action being taken on pets raised as status dogs to ensure their welfare and reduce their impact on communities?
3.1 No, currently there is an issue with the rehabilitation and rehoming of dogs that have been seized in that the level of care in many private kennelling establishments is in violation of the Animal Welfare Act 2008. The recent publication “A good practice guide for enforcement bodies—Meeting the welfare needs of seized dogs in kennel environment” written by the RSPCA in conjunction with police dog legislation officers, local authority dog wardens and animal welfare officers is a useful framework for eliminating this problem, but the main problem is that it is only a guide and not enforceable. Seized dogs residing in kennels MUST receive the same protection under the AWA as any other dog in kennels if they are to have a good chance of living a normal life.
3.2 The other option is for seized dogs to remain in the care of their owner, but this requires a thorough assessment and evaluation from a properly qualified canine behavioural assessor. There are currently no regulations in place for ensuring that behavioural assessors are adequately qualified and experienced.
4. Will compulsory microchipping of puppies improve dog welfare and help prevent dog attacks at an affordable cost to dog owners? Should a dog licensing scheme also be considered?
4.1 Please see my response above; paragraph 1.1. In essence, it is the OWNER that should be licensed; the dog only needs to be identifiable.
5. Should the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 be extended to include offences committed on private property?
5.1 The Act should be extended to protect people that require safe access to the front door of a property, ie in the garden or on the path leading to the home.
5.2 However, extending the Act into the home without also introducing adequate forensic behavioural assessment into dog bite incidents would be irresponsible. At the moment.
6. Are Defra’s proposals for wider community and educational approaches to support responsible dog ownership sufficiently ambitious?
6.1 Not quite. Education has been widely recognised as the key to responsible dog ownership and this should start by being part of the National Curriculum. There are currently many independent education schemes but these are not compulsory. The best way to educate about responsible dog ownership is through compulsory education in schools at all key stages.
6.2 In addition, education in the form of compulsory workshops for owners identified as being irresponsible dog owners should be introduced. Please see my suggestions above in paragraph 1.2.
7. Do local authorities, the police and animal welfare charities have the right roles in managing stray dogs under the current legislative regime?
7.1 Yes, but there are huge issues with local authorities not providing adequate out-of-hour facilities for dealing with stray dogs, and also not providing animal welfare officers with enough knowledge about canine behaviour and dealing with aggression in particular to effectively and HUMANELY deal with catching and housing stray dogs.
7.2 In addition, the practice of outsourcing not only the role of dog warden but the housing facilities for stray dogs is unacceptable. The conditions of many private kennelling establishments currently being used are in violation of the Animal Welfare Act 2006 and furthermore (and essentially more dangerous) is the fact that these kennels are often rehoming or selling unclaimed dogs with no adequate assessment or rehabilitation to the general public.
I am often called in by new owners to deal with extremely aggressive dogs that they have bought from a kennel facility (posing as an animal rescue) that is selling on formerly stray dogs that are unbalanced and pose a serious risk to the general public.
Professor Bateson’s Independent Enquiry into Dog Breeding
8. Has the response by dog breeders and the veterinary profession been effective?
8.1 Unfortunately not. Some light investigation into breed clubs on the internet uncovers a groundswell of opinion against the recommendations made by Professor Bateson. Some form of legislation should be in place to protect the health of dogs being bred, whether they are pedigree or not.
8.2 It must be acknowledged that the dog showing scene perpetuates the dog breeding industry and “successful” dog breeders and show-enthusiasts are generally displaying alarming cognitive dissonance towards the health issues surrounding pedigree dogs. I frequently see violations of The Animal Welfare Act 2006 at dog shows from both a conformational and behavioural point of view, but as far as I am aware no prosecutions have ever been made relating to violations during a dog show.
8.3 The veterinary profession do not seem to be helping matters. I regularly see young dogs and puppies that have been illegally docked by veterinary surgeons and know of vets who are sympathetic to breeders who will undertake invasive procedures without declaring it to the Kennel Club. Stricter regulation and harsher punishments within the veterinary profession are essential as they are essentially major stakeholders in the in the aim of improving dog health and welfare.
9. What actions should Government take to address these issues?
9.1 As mentioned in paragraph 8.3, the veterinary profession should be monitored and regulated by an independent Government body to ensure that they are supporting the cause to improve dog health and welfare.
9.2 Another independent, non-profit making Government body should take over the monitoring and regulation of dog showing and breeding.
10. Are further controls required on dog breeders, including puppy farms, and those selling or importing dogs to ensure the welfare of bitches and puppies?
10.1 Local authorities are clearly not adequately dealing with the issue of dog breeding, whether it is someone breeding puppies in their back yard or a massive puppy farming operation. Local authorities need to be given the support needed to ensure they fulfil their obligations in these areas effectively, but also need to be held accountable when they do not adequately fulfil these obligations, perhaps with funding caps for failing to successfully monitor and stamp out irresponsible dog breeding in their area.
I hope that the above is considered carefully within the inquiry.
June 2012