Dog Licenece?

Opinions on compulsary licences people


Personally I believe everybody shold have a licence for a dog and you have to carry it on you when you walk your dog. you can be randomly stopped by authorities and you have to show your dog licence, just as you do for a car. if its not in your possesion a 7 day performa.
Taking a card out with me on my walks isnt to much of an inconvenience, espeicially when i know that it will protect breeds and the integrity of the Staffordshire Bull Terrior.
Because its the Owners that get penalised not the pets. in my eyes theres not a bad Staffy there is just bad owners. if people had to have a licence but DONT abide by the rules of looking after the general public and your dogs or other dogs welfare then they have to surrender their licence.
Clearly this would come at a cost but if it was a small administrative fee and a donation to a dog charity then id be happy enough

would anybody here vote for a licence?

It won't work. Never has & never will.

The only people that will get a licence are the responsible people. The irresponsible people won't bother & there won't be enough enforcers to make it work.

no i wouldn't it's not going to solve the problem we have.

Those who badly breed for profit, own 'banned' dogs will never pay for a licence and so those of us who are already responsible owners are penalised again.

In principle it is a great idea Xx

I like the idea. It would be hard to enforce and the penalties probally wouln't be too severe so not much of a deterent

I took out a licence for a dog just before they became dropped, many years ago, can't remember when now ('70s?). It wasn't the first dog licence I bought either, but it was still the same price - 37.5p (7s 6d in old money). It didn't mean A THING - conveyed no rights or obligations. Just a tax.

But I remember many years ago when a dog licence of 7s 6d was a lot of money, and many people abandoned their dogs because they couldn't afford that 7s 6d. And even then, that dog licence didn't mean A THING, conveyed no rights or obligations, just a tax, except that the dog owner could be prosecuted for not having one.

If a dog licence was re-introduced, what good would it serve? It would have to be quite expensive to cover administration costs alone. And then there would be the people who wouldn't or couldn't pay for a licence - more money spent on tracking them down, and fining the owners. The licence would obviously be MUCH more than it was stuck at at 37.5p for a great many years - what would it be today? To cover the cost of administration alone? It could be that hard-pressed old-age pensioners, families, and even dare we say it down-on-their-luck people whose only companion is their dog might find that a dog licence fee is the straw that broke the camel's back, and get rid of their dog - whether to the already over-pressed rescue centre or the nearest pond.

And after covering the administration costs, to what good use would any surplus funds from the dog licence be put?

The dog licence was found to be unworkable 40 years ago - why try to resurrect it?

It works in theory, but not in actuality. Like buying guns or having a license to carry guns on you in America; you can go about things the legal way and that's all great, but most of the time, the ones up to no good aren't going to go about things the legal route.

Until they introduce controlled breedeing they cant introduce anything else as you will always have the private seller who does not give a damn who theyre selling the dog to!

I, personally would vote for a dog licence every timeStokester but it is a conversation we have had many many times on here . The sentiments are extremely good as it is a possible way of , as you put , protecting the breed and discouraging bad owners but as you can see there are also a lot of people that feel it wouldn't work and also the point that it penalizes good owners. Truth is we have knocked ideas about left right and center, with a view to the UK problems and not really come up with something that the majority believe in , hence when the majority aren't behind it then most things would be difficult to implement

How do plan to have each dog ''breed identified''?
Would there be dog inspection stations where you take your dog to have it's breed verified?

Mark me down for a no, i think it's a silly idea.

ergo wrote:How do plan to have each dog ''breed identified''?
Would there be dog inspection stations where you take your dog to have it's breed verified?

Mark me down for a no, i think it's a silly idea.

Where here does anybody state "to have each dog "breed identified" " this is not the point of the post it is whether or not people think a licence is a good idea and whether they will vote for it. Why would the breed type be relevant ??

Personally, i think it could work with the right set up. It needs to be enforcable, as a previous attept years ago didnt work. I do belive things will change, as you can read in another topic i've posted.

I like the idea in principle but dont think it would work.

It is a good idea in principle, however I dont think it could ever be enforced.

When I was a kid at 14 years old I had a dog and I remember walking down to our local post office to buy a license for her. This was back in the mid 1980's and I just wanted to be a responsible dog owner. There are though all too many who would never bother so I dont think it would be implemented again.

I think i get what you are saying. say your staffy is KC reg, you have a small KC credit card type thing with your dogs ID on it, to say its staffy not type. also works for rescues, they would have "THIS is a rescue dog thats been tested" type thing. to protect your dog from the police basically.

however licensing is still enforced here, and it doesnt work. the people who have them are responsible owners or owners that have had bother with the police and have been forced to get one.

ergo wrote:

Dave wrote:

ergo wrote:How do plan to have each dog ''breed identified''?
Would there be dog inspection stations where you take your dog to have it's breed verified?

Mark me down for a no, i think it's a silly idea.

Where here does anybody state "to have each dog "breed identified" " this is not the point of the post it is whether or not people think a licence is a good idea and whether they will vote for it. Why would the breed type be relevant ??

Here dave,
did you miss this bit?

Taking a card out with me on my walks isnt to much of an inconvenience, espeicially when i know that it will protect breeds and the integrity of the Staffordshire Bull Terrior.


sigh

Ergo , no I didn't miss this bit , and "this bit" does not state that it is a card identifying a breed, since the subject was about a Dog Licence not a Breed Identification Scheme. It may possibly have been what Stokester meant by the comment but I don't get into the habit of reading between the lines, if you choose to then that is up to you and maybe possibly something you shouldn't do and then go make arsey comments about without clear facts.

Remember I posted an advisory to you about derogatory comments. Well I'm going to read something between the lines now and I interpret your comment "sigh" as derogatory to me so you know the rules and I have already posted them to you , that's 1 bar down. Now see if you can engage your brain before your mouth next time and keep this user name until the end of the week , that's my challenge to you , and If anyone fancies a bet then my money is on NO

And lets be 100% clear , this is not a staff member picking on you over a post , this is a staff member that has already warned you of your sarcastic , obnoxious wind up behaviour carrying out exactly what was promised if it continued , your post was 100% fine right up until the "sigh"

Dave wrote:

ergo wrote:

Dave wrote:

ergo wrote:How do plan to have each dog ''breed identified''?
Would there be dog inspection stations where you take your dog to have it's breed verified?

Mark me down for a no, i think it's a silly idea.

Where here does anybody state "to have each dog "breed identified" " this is not the point of the post it is whether or not people think a licence is a good idea and whether they will vote for it. Why would the breed type be relevant ??

Here dave,
did you miss this bit?

Taking a card out with me on my walks isnt to much of an inconvenience, espeicially when i know that it will protect breeds and the integrity of the Staffordshire Bull Terrior.


sigh

Ergo , no I didn't miss this bit , and "this bit" does not state that it is a card identifying a breed, since the subject was about a Dog Licence not a Breed Identification Scheme. It may possibly have been what Stokester meant by the comment but I don't get into the habit of reading between the lines, if you choose to then that is up to you and maybe possibly something you shouldn't do and then go make arsey comments about without clear facts.

Remember I posted an advisory to you about derogatory comments. Well I'm going to read something between the lines now and I interpret your comment "sigh" as derogatory to me so you know the rules and I have already posted them to you , that's 1 bar down. Now see if you can engage your brain before your mouth next time and keep this user name until the end of the week , that's my challenge to you , and If anyone fancies a bet then my money is on NO

And lets be 100% clear , this is not a staff member picking on you over a post , this is a staff member that has already warned you of your sarcastic , obnoxious wind up behaviour carrying out exactly what was promised if it continued , your post was 100% fine right up until the "sigh"

"Taking a card out with me on my walks isnt to much of an inconvenience, espeicially when i know that it will protect breeds and the integrity of the Staffordshire Bull Terrior."
When mentioning the breed of Staffordshire Bull Terrior I wasnt implying that dogs should be breed checked. i just used a Staffy as an example as it hits home more as were all lovers of the breed.
A licence would protect dogs in general of what ever breed, but mostly Staffys because we have bad press because of idiotic owners, I dont know anything about the previous dog licencing attempts tbh. I Like the Theory of having a point system and making it harder for idiots to own a staffy or any other dog.
If Idiots can be monitored and banned from owning dogs/staffys then the breed will recieve less bad press and protect the Staffordshire Bull Terrior breed

Thanks for clearing that one up Dan , maybe is a very good point that not just anyone should be allowed to own a staffy but this is more down to the judgement of good breeders and the correct vetting by rescues to handle or we end up in a massive row over people being accused being doggist (made up but I like it ) Think the banning / control of private sites such as gumtree , pets 4 homes, facebook etc allowing pet sales would take care largely of the suitability problem though

Dave wrote:Thanks for clearing that one up Dan , maybe is a very good point that not just anyone should be allowed to own a staffy but this is more down to the judgement of good breeders and the correct vetting by rescues to handle or we end up in a massive row over people being accused being doggist (made up but I like it ) Think the banning / control of private sites such as gumtree , pets 4 homes, facebook etc allowing pet sales would take care largely of the suitability problem though

No probs Dave,
non of us on here are Doggist so dont worry
With Reference to gumtree,pets4homes,facebook ect its a catch22.
on one side of the argument is that anybody can get a dog of any of them and not all people are responsible or have the right intentions.
But on the Other side if sites like that didnt exist then there would be amassive surge of dogs been abandoned. bitches will have puppys unintentionally from time to time. The owner might not to be able get them all gone or afford or have the time to take them on and it leads with owners abandoning there pups because they dont know how to get rid of them.
Id like ot think that most dogs that go onto pet websites go to good owners, me and my lady got our Gary of pets4homes and i like to think that were good owners so its not always doom and gloomy.

Dog Licenece IMO wouldn't work because it wouldn't be enforce you would need a dog warden on ever street in the UK you would only punish good owner the bad owner will just carry on as normal like they do now with everything else.

here what the forum has come up which may help our problems

https://staffy-bull-terrier.niceboard.com/t17908-list-of-things-to-help-homeless-and-problem-dogs

ergo wrote:How do plan to have each dog ''breed identified''?
Would there be dog inspection stations where you take your dog to have it's breed verified?

Mark me down for a no, i think it's a silly idea.

Dave wrote:Where here does anybody state "to have each dog "breed identified" " this is not the point of the post it is whether or not people think a licence is a good idea and whether they will vote for it. Why would the breed type be relevant ??

Ergo wrote:Here dave,
did you miss this bit?

Taking a card out with me on my walks isnt to much of an inconvenience, espeicially when i know that it will protect breeds and the integrity of the Staffordshire Bull Terrior.


sigh

Stokester wrote:

"Taking a card out with me on my walks isnt to much of an inconvenience, espeicially when i know that it will protect breeds and the integrity of the Staffordshire Bull Terrior."
When mentioning the breed of Staffordshire Bull Terrior I wasnt implying that dogs should be breed checked. i just used a Staffy as an example as it hits home more as were all lovers of the breed.
A licence would protect dogs in general of what ever breed, but mostly Staffys because we have bad press because of idiotic owners, I dont know anything about the previous dog licencing attempts tbh. I Like the Theory of having a point system and making it harder for idiots to own a staffy or any other dog.
If Idiots can be monitored and banned from owning dogs/staffys then the breed will recieve less bad press and protect the Staffordshire Bull Terrior breed

Dave wrote:Thanks for clearing that one up Dan , maybe is a very good point that not just anyone should be allowed to own a staffy but this is more down to the judgement of good breeders and the correct vetting by rescues to handle or we end up in a massive row over people being accused being doggist (made up but I like it ) Think the banning / control of private sites such as gumtree , pets 4 homes, facebook etc allowing pet sales would take care largely of the suitability problem though

Ergo wrote:
dave,
tell how how this bit isn't a reference to a breed listed license?
reading between the lines is not necessary, it is there in b&w.

"..................that it will protect breeds and the integrity of the Staffordshire Bull Terrior......."

the sigh was sign of exasperation of every thing i post being challenged in one way or another, & always by a ''staff'' member.
so your actual reading between the lines was off the mark.

& the more i question the veracity of challenges the faster my gauge drops.
are there some egos in play here dave?

So as you can see with the bold text Stokester (Dan) has clearly stated he was not implying a Breed registration scheme. Dave 1 Ergo 0

Now can you please back down and accept that on occasions you may be wrong. I have turned a cheek to your other comments , can we start afresh.

As stated by others if this attitude of yours didn't get in the way then you could be a very helpful member , however, you are still grasping at other people's comments (only staff members and only certain staff members at that) and trying to continuously provoke a reaction.

The dropping of your warning bar as already stated is the action you were warned of (after being posted the forum rules and choosing to ignore them in preference to trying to create yet another ruck ) and BTW I only dropped you once and don't have time to got through the posts this morning but can only assume you have been derogatory with someone else as well.

Please take a few deep breaths and stop jumping in the deep end, enjoy your time on the forum and we will all be happy

The old licences didnt work but its a good idea with changes made to it maybe, I would carry a card around no problem, and pay a fee yearly if I could see that more checks were being put in place and jobs created for more dog wardens with the revenue then definatly yes I think its a pleasure and a privalege to own a dog Id do anything to support its welfare

so people who are poor & single are not allow to have dogs?

but the local druggy or drug who doesn't care about the law is ok?

Dog Licenece would only punish good owners

it would be a good idea if it could work for everyone. Wasnt there licenses for dogs a while back?

Many of you are saying 'The old licences never worked' , but they did, it cost 7/6 when they were introduced in 1878, this was an enormous amount, many working people did not earn that in a week! (Dread to think how many poor dogs were left to fend for themselves) Lets say todays lower paid workers get £150.00 per week, that would be an enormous amount of money to fork out. The value of money has eroded more sharply since WW2, and licences became more costly to regulate. Having said this I still agree in principle to licences.

Steve wrote:so people who are poor & single are not allow to have dogs?

but the local druggy or drug who doesn't care about the law is ok?

Dog Licenece would only punish good owners

and in n.i. it continues to do so! although over 65 its free, but under its £12 and for what? a little bit of plastic that means diddly squat.

again good owner who are struggling for money shouldn't be allow a dogs then?

i cant believe i am entering in this debate again, we have 1000s single & lonly who are struggling to find ends meat and yet another bill will mean they wont have a pet dog in their life and very likely fall into a depression.. i think it's pretty sad we even talking about bring a dog liceneces when it wont even fix our problem because the people who making the problem WONT care about a Dog Licenece anyway don't matter how many dogs have been took off them or fines they get they still get a dog if they want.

Agreed.

i agree with them would it be practical though in todays climate and all the irresponsible owners

I propose that knowing how to spell the breed of your dog is the only license you need. Oh oh.
What's the point of creating even more unenforceable laws? Random license-check operations in parks? Knocking on people's doors asking for their dog license?

The old licences only worked for those who were responsible enough to buy them! Back in the late 60s, early 70s, we paid our 7s 6p regular as clockwork, but we knew a lot of people who didn't. They were never challenged about it, so they just didn't see the need to pay.

I'm sure that those on a low income would either be denied the pleasure of a dog, or they just wouldn't bother with th licence. You'd never be able to have enough wardens to check every single dog owner in the country.