Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee Written evidence submitted by the Minister for Agriculture and Rural Development Northern Ireland

Background

The issue of public safety and dog control is a key priority for my Department.

The control of dogs here is legislated for by the Dogs Order 1983, which also provides for the licensing of dogs by Councils and other related enforcement matters. The Dogs Order 1983 is enforced by local Councils who are statutorily obliged to supply the Department with information regarding their enforcement of the Order.

The Dangerous Dogs Order 1991 amended the Dogs Order 1983 to designate certain types of dogs that it is an offence to breed from, sell or exchange and (except in exceptional circumstances) to possess.

The Dogs (Amendment) Act 2011 amended the Dogs Order 1983 to include a number of provisions including: increasing the dog licence fee (with concessions for certain classes of owner) and the level of fixed penalties; introducing compulsory microchipping of dogs; introducing an offence of allowing a dog to attack and injure another person’s pet; and empowering Council dog wardens to impose control conditions on an owner’s dog licence where a breach of the 1983 Dogs Order has occurred.

The Dogs Order 1983 (as amended) also includes provisions on dog attacks, straying and livestock worrying, and designates certain types of dogs such as the pit bull terrier, Japanese tosa, Dogo Argentino and Fila Braziliero which it is an offence to possess, except under certain very strict conditions.

Therefore, the legislation relating to pit bulls and other dogs bred specifically for fighting is, in effect, the same as it is in England under the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991. The only difference is that, as the Dangerous Dogs Order 1991, which applies here, is simply an amendment to the Dogs Order 1983, which includes annual licensing, there is no need for the separate index of exempted dogs.

The dog licensing system serves dog owners and the wider public by providing a dog identification function and provides a crucial source of funding for the Dog Warden service. It also provides an annual point of contact between dog owners and enforcers.

Although the Dogs Order 1983 provided a useful framework for dog control in the north of Ireland, it clearly had not dealt with all the problems caused by irresponsible owners. More needed to be done to deal with the serious concerns that we face with stray dogs and dog attacks.

Tackling those issues has been a priority for me, and I firmly believe that the amendments introduced by the Dogs (Amendment) Act 2011 will ensure that dog control legislation here now fully reflects and addresses today’s problems.

The Act essentially seeks to:

(i) protect the public;

(ii) promote responsible dog ownership and penalises irresponsible owners;

(iii) reduce the number of stray dogs by making it easier for dog wardens to identify stray dogs; and

(iv) allow dog wardens to respond more flexibly to problems with a dog’s behaviour.

From 9 April 2012 dogs are required to be microchipped in order to obtain a valid dog licence. I strongly believe that this new requirement puts the north of Ireland at the forefront of dog control in these islands.

From this date, a dog licence will not be issued for a dog that has not been microchipped, unless that dog is exempt on health grounds. If, in a veterinary surgeon’s professional opinion, microchipping would have a detrimental impact on a dog’s health the veterinarian should provide the dog owner with a signed certificate to that effect.

On production of that certificate the local Council will license the dog without the need for a microchip.

It is an offence for anyone to own an unlicensed dog, unless the dog is specifically exempted under the legislation, puppies under six months old bred by the owner, assistance dogs, police dogs and dogs kept in licensed petshops.

A Council Dog Warden has the power to require the production of a dog licence for examination. Powers exist in the Order to either prosecute or issue a fixed penalty to the owner of any unlicensed dog. A person found guilty of an offence shall be liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding £1,000. These provisions apply equally to sheep dogs and farm dogs.

The introduction of microchipping will make it quicker and easier to identify lost or straying dogs and return them to their owners, reducing the number of unidentified dogs that need to be destroyed.

The Act addresses the concerns that the public have raised during the review of the dog control legislation.

The Act also and empowers Council Dog Wardens to attach control conditions to the licence of a dog whose behaviour has led to a breach of the Dogs Order 1983.

As I said, microchipping will help to reduce straying and will reduce the number of unwanted dogs that are destroyed. It will also ensure that irresponsible owners are held accountable. Importantly, the Act will improve the ability of Council Dog Wardens to enforce dog control legislation by increasing to a more realistic level the licence fee and for the first time, Councils are allowed to retain the proceeds from fixed penalties to support their Dog Warden service.

The Act will reinforce the licensing system and make it easier to identify problem dogs. It will also make it easier to trace stolen dogs.

The Act also makes it an offence to own a dog that attacks and injures any domestic animal owned by another person.

Licensing System

Prior to 1983, the dog licence fee was seen as being too small to act as a deterrent to casual dog ownership, or to encourage government to take proceedings against evaders.

The licence fee was also disproportionately costly to collect. Therefore, the Dogs Order 1983 established a new licensing system in the north of Ireland and provided that the proceeds of which were used by Councils to establish and maintain statutory Dog Warden Services.

The fee was further reviewed and increased in 2011 from £5 to £12.50, with reductions available for owners of neutered dogs; and for those in receipt of income related benefits.

The licensing system here therefore differs in fundamental ways from that abolished in Britain during the 1980s: most crucially, the income is ring-fenced and therefore helps support a network of Dog Wardens across the north.

The Dogs Amendment Act 2011 introduced a number of key changes including: compulsory microchipping of dogs, linked to the existing dog licensing system, which makes it more likely that problem dogs and their owners can be identified and dealt with.

Local Councils provide my Department with statistics relating to enforcement of the Dogs Order 1983 on a quarterly basis. These statistics have shown a steady rise in the number of dog licences issued here each year. In 2005 over 95,000 licences were issued. This has increased every year with almost 135,000 licences issued in 2011.

With an increase in resources for enforcement from the higher licence fee, coupled with the introduction of microchipping and the increased deterrent as a result of the higher fixed penalties, I would expect these figures to increase further.

Microchipping of dogs became compulsory here from 9 April 2012 and is a condition of the dog licence. Dogs Trust has been hosting free microchipping for dog owners here and announced on 20 March this year that they will extend their free microchipping campaign until the end of 2012, having microchipped over 54,600 dogs here in the last 10 months.

In 2010, 34% of stray dogs impounded were reclaimed by their owners. In 2009 and 2008 this figure was 31%. This would be expected to rise further with compulsory microchipping, meaning fewer dogs will be destroyed needlessly, while ensuring irresponsible owners can be identified and be held accountable.

Licence fee payers benefit from the existing Dog Warden system. Stray dogs are a nuisance to responsible owners and the work wardens do in collecting and re-homing strays, part-funded through the licence fee, therefore protects responsible owners as well as the general public. The legislation seeks to strike a balance between dog owners bearing the costs of dog control and the benefits to all local ratepayers of having safe and well controlled dogs in their community.

Control Conditions

The Act also provides scope for Council Dog Wardens to attach conditions to a dog licence when a dog’s behaviour has led to a breach of the Dogs Order. This means that a problem dog can only be kept under certain conditions—for instance, always leashed when in public, or kept away from specified places. Wardens could require that a dog or its owner undergo training, or even, in extreme cases, that an aggressive dog be neutered.

A breach of a control condition is an offence punishable by a fine of up to £2,500.

The Act also made it an offence to keep a dog that attacks and injures another person’s pet animal in order to further deter and penalise irresponsible ownership. The offence created by the Act is committed where an owner has controlled his or her dog so poorly that it has attacked and injured any animal owned by another person.

The availability of control conditions shifts the focus on to the behaviour and management of individual problem dogs, whatever their breed. These measures are important in tackling the minority of irresponsible owners who undermine everything that is good and positive about dog ownership.

They are also important because they send out the message that casual and careless dog ownership is not acceptable in our society.

Control conditions will allow Council Dog Wardens to intervene early by putting controls on individual problem dogs. An attack on another person’s pet now constitutes an offence. That recognises, for the first time, the grave pain and distress that such attacks can cause, and it will, again, ensure that irresponsible owners are held to account.

Dogs Bred for Fighting—Exemption Scheme

The Dogs (Amendment) Act 2001 amended the Dogs Order to make the Exemption Scheme available again where specific dogs are deemed by a Court to pose no danger to the public. This means that the owner of any dog which is of a type specifically bred for fighting and for which a destruction order has been issued can avail of the Exemption Scheme.

Exemptions are only available where a Magistrate has been persuaded that a dog, if kept under exemption conditions, will pose no danger to the public. There is no automatic right to an exemption, even where an owner commits to meeting the exemption conditions. The exemption conditions include:

That the dog is neutered;

That the dog is kept leashed and muzzled when in a public place;

That when not in a public place, that the dog is in sufficiently secure conditions;

That the dog is made available to an authorised officer for inspection;

That the Council is notified of any change of address of the dog, or of the death or export of the dog; and

That third party insurance policy is in force in respect of the dog.

In these circumstances the dog owner has two months to demonstrate that the exemption conditions have been met. If the exemption conditions are met the Council will issue a certificate of exemption and a licence for that dog can be issued.

The Dogs (Amendment) Act 2011 also amended the Dogs Order to, amongst other things, clarify the status of exempted dogs ensuring that Councils license dogs once they have been exempted.

The new provisions contained within the Dogs (Amendment) Act 2011, clarify that a dog may be exempted if the owner can meet the terms of an exemption scheme whether the owner has been prosecuted or not. This is dependent upon the District Judge being satisfied that the dog is not a danger to the public. The relevant provisions of the 2011 Act were commenced by the Dogs (Amendment) (2011 Act) (Commencement Order No. 1) Order 2011, which was made on 21 July 2011 and came into operation from 28 July 2011.

Increase in Fines and Penalties

Certain fines and penalties were increased, and the legislation diverted the receipts from fixed penalty payments to Councils to use for the enforcement of dog control legislation.

As the changes introduced by the Dogs (Amendment) Act 2011 have only been commenced over the last 12 months, they have not yet bedded in order to demonstrate how successful they have been.

However, the changes were widely welcomed during the consultation period and scrutiny by the Assembly. At that time the Minister for Justice stated that the penalties were entirely appropriate and that he fully supported them. A copy of the Department’s response to the consultation which took place in 2009–10 is attached.

Dog Welfare

A new Welfare of Animals Act was brought forward in 2011.

From 2 April 2012, Councils here, for the first time, have lead responsibility for the enforcement of animal welfare for other animals, including domestic pets and horses.

Local Councils have adopted a collaborative regional approach to the new legislation and have appointed and trained Animal Welfare Inspectors to enforce animal welfare in respect of domestic pets and horses across the north of Ireland. Councils have decided to review these arrangements at the end of the year.

I have been very encouraged by the positive approach taken by Councils to their new responsibilities and by the close and effective partnership working between Councils and Departmental officials in putting the necessary arrangements in place for implementing these new powers in respect of both domestic pets and horses.

I believe that the Welfare of Animals Act will transform animal welfare across the north. I look forward to seeing its full implementation and delivery on the ground.

Dog Breeding

Prior to the introduction of the Welfare of Animals Act being introduced to the Assembly in June 2010 there were calls from both elected representatives and members of the public to bring forward new legislation to stop so called “puppy farming”.

In addition, during the passage of the Bill through the Assembly there were calls from a number of MLAs to stop “puppy farming” and to specify the welfare standards for dog breeding establishments on the face of the Bill. However, the level of detail which would have been required to do that was considered excessive for primary legislation.

The previous DARD Minister, my Party colleague, Michelle Gildernew MP MLA, therefore gave an assurance to the Assembly that one of the first pieces of subordinate legislation to be made under the new Welfare of Animals Act (NI) 2011 would be in respect of dog breeding establishments. The draft Welfare of Animals (Dog Breeding Establishments) Regulations which my officials are currently bringing forward honours that commitment.

The Current Legislation for Dog Breeding Establishments

The current regulations dealing with dog breeding establishments are the Dogs (Breeding Establishments and Guard Dog Kennels) Regulations 1983. These Regulations were made under the 1983 Dogs Order and not under animal welfare legislation.

The 1983 Regulations set out the information which must be supplied to a Council for the registration of dog breeding establishments and for guard dog kennels, and they specify the conditions under which such establishments must be constructed and operated.

Whilst these Regulations provide basic welfare accommodation standards, they contain no specific welfare controls for bitches or pups. There is currently no fee to register with the Council as a breeding establishment.

Purpose of these New Regulations

The purpose of the new Draft Dog Breeding Establishments Regulations is to regulate the commercial breeding of dogs in order to ensure the welfare of the dogs.

Commercial dog breeding, irrespective of whether it is on a large or small scale, is a legitimate business, and these draft Regulations will not place any legal limitation on the size of any breeding establishment or the number of breeding bitches which can be held there.

They aim to provide commercial breeders with clear minimum standards which must be met and maintained to ensure the welfare of all breeding bitches, stud dogs and pups in the establishment.

The Regulations also provide enforcement officers with clear standards and strong powers to enforce these requirements.

The Draft Dog Breeding Establishments Regulations were subject to a 12 week consultation period. Overall the proposed Regulations were welcomed by the vast majority of the respondents. However, some stakeholders questioned the need for the new Regulations and raised concerns about the draft guidance with a call to keep the current 1983 Regulations, which are made under the Dogs Order 1983, with the suggestion to build upon them as opposed to making new Regulations under the Welfare of Animals Act 2011.

On 3 July 2012, my officials appraised the Agriculture and Rural Development Committee of stakeholder comments and our proposals to revise both the draft Regulations and the Guidance for Enforcement Officers.

Following the agreement of the Committee the Regulations will be made under the Affirmative Resolution procedure of the Assembly towards the end of the year.

Whilst some Members of the Legislative Assembly and the general public have called for stronger legislation to stop “puppy farming” it is important to define what “puppy farming” is. I see “puppy farming” as the breeding of dogs for financial gain at the detriment of their health and welfare—the size of the breeding establishment is irrelevant as is whether the breeder is registered or not.

I appreciate that these Regulations alone will not stop so called “puppy farming”. This will take a concerted effort by members of the general public, future dog owners, good breeders and enforcement agencies to work together to identify breeders, licensed or unlicensed, who put financial gain before the welfare needs of their dogs and pups.

However these Regulations will clearly set out the welfare standards with which commercial breeders must comply and they provide the powers to allow action to be taken where a breeder does not meet these standards.

Tail Docking

The Welfare of Animals Act 2011 banned the routine cosmetic docking of dogs’ tails and provides an exemption for certified working dogs.

The Draft Welfare of Animals (Docking of Working Dogs’ Tails and Miscellaneous Amendments) Regulations (NI) 2012 were subject to consultation earlier this year.

Stakeholder comments have been considered and the revised draft Regulations were presented to the Agriculture and Rural Development Committee for scrutiny on 12 June 2012.

Following the Committee’s consideration of the Draft Regulations, in September after the Summer Recess, they will be debated under the Affirmative Resolution Procedure in the Assembly.

Subject to the Assembly’s approval the Regulations will be introduced before the end of the year.

Welfare Code of Practice for Dogs

My Department has produced a Welfare Code of Practice for Dogs.

The purpose of the Code is to provide practical guidance to help comply with the provisions of Section 9 of the Welfare of Animals Act.

A breach of a provision of this Code is not an offence in itself but, if proceedings are brought for an offence under Section 9 of the Act, the Court will look at whether or not the Code has been complied with in establishing liability.

Codes of Practices for Dogs, Cats, Horses, Rabbits and non-human Primates have been prepared under powers in the Act and can be accessed at http://www.dardni.gov.uk/codes-of-practice-for-non-farmed-animals

ACTS, ORDERS AND REGULATIONS IN FORCE IN THE NORTH OF IRELAND TO CONTROL DOGS AND PROMOTE DOG WELFARE

Primary legislation	Main Provisions
The Dogs (NI) Order 1983. (S.I. 1983/764 N.I.8)	Established a network of local authority dog wardens in the north Ireland, to be funded by the dog licence; and tasked the wardens with enforcing the Order’s rules on straying, attacks, livestock worrying etc. The Order also regulated breeding establishments and guard dog kennels.
The Dangerous Dogs (NI) Order 1991. (S.I. 1991/2292 N.I.21)	Designated certain breeds or types of dogs that it is an offence to possess (except under strict conditions), breed from, sell or exchange. The designated types are the pit bull terrier, the Japanese tosa. The Dangerous Dogs (Designated Types) Order (NI) 1991 (1991 No. 467) designated the Dogo Argentino and the Fila Braziliero as banned types.
The Dogs (Amendment) Act (NI) 2001. (2001 c 1)	Re-introduced an exemption (under strict, court-ordered conditions) to the ban on possession of dogs otherwise prohibited by the Dangerous Dogs (NI) Order 1991.
The Dogs (Amendment) Act (NI) 2011. (2011 c 9)	Introduced compulsory microchipping (from spring 2012), a system of control conditions, increased licence fees and fixed penalties under the Dogs Order (from autumn 2011) and an offence of a dog attacking other animals, such as pets.
The Fines and Penalties (NI) Order 1984 (1984 No. 703 (N.I. 3))	Moved the fines and penalties in the Order to the standard scale. The Criminal Justice (NI) Order 1994 (No. 2795 (N.I. 15)) increased the standard scale to the monetary values referred to in the Departments guidance.

Secondary legislation	Main effects
The Dogs (Fixed Penalty) Regulations (NI) 2011	Details the increased level of fixed penalties to be paid for certain offences under the Dogs Order, and allows for local authorities to set fixed penalties at a different level and reduce fixed penalty levels for prompt payment.
The Dogs (Licensing and Identification) Regulations (NI) 2011	Sets out the various forms to be used for licences, licence applications and so on, and prescribes the information to be held on registers of licences kept by local authorities. Also provides a description of the collar identification to be worn by dogs. Updated in 2012 to deal with technical aspects of compulsory microchipping.
The Dangerous Dogs Compensation and Exemption Schemes Order (NI) 1991. (S.R. 1991 No. 466)	Regulates the circumstances in which a person may keep a dog of a type otherwise prohibited by the Dangerous Dogs (NI) Order 1991
The Dogs (Breeding Establishment and Guard Dog Kennels) Regulations (NI) 1983. (S.R. 1983 No. 380)	Set out standards for the construction and operation of breeding establishments and guard dog kennels, and details to be included in an application for registration.
The Guard Dogs (Specified Places) Order (NI) 1983. (S.R. 1983 No. 381)	Lists the type of places by reference to which a dog may be defined as a guard dog.
The Guard Dogs (Control) Order (NI) 1985. (S.R. 1985 No. 174)	Prohibits the use of a guard dog under certain conditions.
Dogs (Block Licence) (Registering Organisations) Order (NI) 1983. (S.R. 1983 No 379)	Extends the organisations that three dogs can be registered with for premises to be eligible for a block licence. Was Amended by the Dogs (Block Licence) (Registering Organisations) (Amendment) Order (NI) 1985 (SR 1985 No. 296) to include the International Sheep Dog Society.
The Welfare of Animals Act (NI) 2011	Overall purpose of the Act is to prevent unnecessary suffering to any vertebrate animal, it also sets out obligations on people to promote the welfare of animals, including domestic pets, for which they are responsible. It provides powers to allow action to be taken to prevent animals from suffering as opposed to, having to wait until they actually suffer before action can be taken. Enforcement powers contain within the Act provide for the issue of improvement notices, for which a person must comply, to improve the welfare of their animals. The Department’s Veterinary Service have responsibility for farmed animals; District Councils have responsibility for non-farmed animals (ie domestic pets and horses); and the PSNI have responsibility for animal fighting and other criminal activities. The regulation powers within the Act enable possible activities to be considered for licensing or registration these include — dog breeding establishments; — dog pounds; — circuses; — animal sanctuaries; — pet wholesalers; and — pet fairs.

August 2012