Would you be willing to pay for a licence? Discussions

I would pay for a licence quite happily.
I think the licencing should be for the owner. That a fee is payable which goes back into funding staff etc.
Before getting a licence you have a test proving that you understand the responsibility of looking after a dog and also of the legal requirements. When you pass, then you can get a licence and keep a dog. A national database should be set up with all dogs listed to the owner. Money raised from the licences could pay for wardens and checkers in regional areas. I know i'm only dreaming, but I would love it to happen. Any thing that would produce better dog ownership and put off others from having a dog, I would support and pay out for.

What about the millions of others who wouldn`t buy one, so it`d end up with the people who could afford it if it were as most of us believe it`d be (expensive) complying
& those that couldn`t afford it being criminalised. You would then have those who don`t care what the law states who wouldn`t buy it even if it were only £10. You`d have pensioners who couldn`t afford it as well, criminalising them. Putting that aside I don`t believe any Labour government would consider peoples ability to pay for this so they`d make it expensive whilst creaming off their 17%, they`d believe that they could make a killing off this so it wouldn`t be cheap. They`d take the money quiet happily off the people who would pay but wouldn`t pursue those who didn`t, because they wouldn`t give the resources to pursue the non payers. The Police would only pursue people about dog licences when it was to the benefit of themselves i.e. after someone had been attacked by a dog
or felt threatened by a dog out of control, which is how they operate anyway.
The Police don`t have the resources to implement a dog licence (even though we have more officers than ever before), so how would it be policed ?
If I remember we used to have one & the government of the day got rid of this, why ?
A good idea on paper, yes! But would it be the answer to the problems that we see with morons with dogs out of control, no! I for one would believe it`s a good idea, but I believe no government would think this through properly & it`d end up with a bureacratic mess that would be terribly administered for purely monetary gain & to grab the headlines in the red tops, hence doing it for for votes & to be seen doing something.

A licence needn't be expensive say £20 per owner as a one off fee. If someone couldn't afford that then in my opinion how on earth could they afford to keep a dog for 10-15 years of it's life, with vets, food, bedding etc?
I don't see why the police should actually run it either. It worries me already that police who have no knowledge of dogs or breeds are making decisions and confiscating dogs.
The whole thing could be privately run. Maybe a good thing, maybe a bad thing. Or a side committee made up of people who are experienced in various areas of the canine world. It is something that would have to be thought through very carefully. Any money raised should go back into canine interests and education.

yes , i'd get one. but they abolished dog licences years ago cos it was never policed properly. i can just imagine the police forces all over UK checking up dog licences, i think they've enough on their plate at the moment.

I agree 100 per cent.

Somebody would have to adminster and police it, otherwise there is absolutely no point in introducing it. Whoever it was, police, local council, seperate dog licence body whatever they would need to collect considerably more from the responsible dog owner than £20 to make it viable due the inevitable difficulties of dealing with the people will not be paying it. I doubt there would ever be the question of left over funds for rescue etc.

I think a dog licence is a good idea if it was higher than £20 though or else anyone will be able to just go and get one and not think twice.
And hopefully it would stop these morons who have dogs and don't look after, hurt and dump them.
They could have licences for all animals and it could help to stop cruelty.
Good idea some of the money could be given to rescues.

Erm, I didn't say that noone should police it, I said it didn't neccessarily have to be the police themselves.
As for the amount, whose to say how much it would be as a full survey on how many dog owners there are in the country has not yet been done.
As for excess money going to rescues. Why are you disagreeing with my comments when this afterall is just a theoretical discussion on licencing. I'm posting my opinion of what I would like to see happen.

Personally agree with you but as someone posted earlier. What if the cost was too high for some people to afford such as OAP's etc. (I still would like to see lincences only issued on people that have passed some sort of test). Guess it's finding the right balance. I would be happy paying an annual fee as long as all the money was ploughed back in to the canine society in one way or another, not profit making for others.

I didn't say that you didn't say someone had to police it.

I think it is the number of owners that will willingly pay it that is more relevent and although that would be impossible to quantify ahead of any scheme my guess is that will be pretty low certainly if the previous scheme is any indication.

I can only appologise for disagreeing with your opinion on that one but, like you say, this is a theoretical discussion and I am posting my opinion, which is I think it will be an extremely expensive operation to adminster and police and any fee set within the capabilities of the average person to pay is unlikely to leave any excess. Of course if my understanding of the economics is way off and there is excess then of course I would be happy to see it go to good causes :smt001

I'm old enough to remember the previous system of dog licencing. It was 7/6d or 37and 1/2 new pence.

I seem to remember that it was more costly to administer than the revenue it created. In addition there were alot of people that didn't buy a licence, so clearly it was impossible to police.

I'd be happy to pay for licences for my mob, but not at £300 as suggested with 7 dogs that alot of money.

Dawn R.

Megan 57 Collies you said about £20 for a dog license, sounds fair to you as a one off payment, buuuuuuuuttttttttttt....... I don`t believe the government would only charge about £20 as a one off payment, call me cynical, it`d be an annual thing & damned expensive I also don`t believe the government would plough the cash back into the welfare of dogs or administeering the license either.
Like I said before call me cynical, but I wouldn`t trust this shambolic government to be able to bring this in in a fair, cheap cohesive manner with very little hassle & administration. They definately wouldn`t Police it very fairly
if at all, so what would be the point, they can`t even get people to cough for car tax, car insurance & get there motors MOT`d. They struggle to collect fines from those people who receive fines through the courts, they often don`t bother to make people do there community service if they don`t turn up, so why do you think a dog license would work, it didn`t last time when our country was a lot more law abiding & respectful of government & law & order.
There are enough laws to stop poor dog ownership if they`re administered in the correct way every time somebody breaks the law. Unfortunately they`re seldom used because individual Police & Local Authority officers can`t be bothered to follow the letter of the law & because the citizens who complain feel they`re going to be pilloried by the people who`s dog they`re complaining about
because the Police don`t have the man power, the will or the inclination to do ought about problem owners & animals.
The problems within our society where dogs are concerned
are to complex to be dealt with by a license & quiet often (although definately not all the time) there are usually other underlying problems with the people who own dangerous or out of control dogs, no license will prevent this.
We only have to look at the case in Liverpool where the little girl was killed by an illegally held pitbull. The dogs owner is / was a drug dealer who used to let the dog run around the waste ground near his home terrorising the locals who felt they couldn`t go to the Police due to feeling threatened by this man. He would laugh at his dog scaring people, would a licence have changed this, I doubt it. Granted, I read this in a paper & we shouldn`t believe everything they say, but maybe just maybe they were being honest.
Would a license have prevented this ? I don`t think so, the dog was an illegally owned pitbull type (I personally don`t believe they should be banned) but the ban didn`t prevent this moron owning one, would a license.
This is the only reason I can see for justifying a dog license but as I have written I think it would be unworkable.
How would it be administered ?
Who would administer it ?
How much would it cost to administer ?
How much would it cost the dog owner to have a license?
Would the owner be licensed or the dog/s ?
Would it be for an household e.g. family or the main wage earner ?
How much would the government cream off for their pet projects?
What benefits would it give to the dog owner ?
What benefits would it have for the wider community ?
What restrictions would it place on the dog owner ?
Each of these questions could easily end up with other questions needing addressing.

I made the following statement in the thread called: Should there be age limits on owning/walking SBTs & other bull breeds?

Fair points Colin but you & me wont be draughting the rules & regs that would be part of the reason for a dog license. Most of the points made on this forum wouldn`t be included in any draught brought in by our illustrious government. If you haven`t already noticed by my previous posts on this & other threads on this forum I`m not exactly enamoured with the effectiveness of our government to implement anything without it being a form of taxation or a way of winning votes.
The dog license didn`t work before, why would it work now when the fabric of our society is breaking down. Back before when we had one our society was a lot more at ease with itself & possibly more law abiding & it still didn`t work. People didn`t pay then & in todays society it`s unlikely to be paid anymore know.
My step daughter & son quiet happily walk our Staffy bitch & Bullterrier dog albeit only when my Bullterrier is tired out on his way back from his walk & is relaxed & tired. They only walk them when we are there & never alone & always it`s a case of my way or the highway, do it right or get off the leash & give it to me. A license wont teach responsibility, government wont reinforce responsibility but they`ll take your money.

I think you are missing my point. When the dog license was abolished in 1984 we didn't have such things as implanted microchips which held all of the dogs and the owners information.

Now if each year we had to get a dog license, which was in the form of a biometric tag that was put on the dogs collar containing all of the dogs.

Now if the law was reverted so that everyone had have a dog licence then those who don't have the required licence would once caught, and get either an on the spot fine or taken to court.

The whole idea is make people more responsible for owning a dog and the only people who have anything to fear are those that break the law. It's the same with everything.

If you have got a licence then what's the problem, and it could also be in the form of a little biometric tag as well that fits on the dog’s collar, that once scanned by a dog warden gives all the information about the dog, so if it get stolen or lost then it is of no use to anyone else.

So in Ruby’s case it could state something along the lines of:

Dogs Name: Ruby.
Address: ?? What ever it is Road, Brighton.
Breed: Dobermann.
Sex: Female.
Age: 3 years old.
Colour: Blank and Tan.
Microchip Number: ??????????.
Vaccination date: ??/??/??.

Colin

I`ve no problem with the theory of this but in practice I don`t believe it`s workable. I remember reading that there is approxiamately 5 - 7 million dogs in this country.
Bearing that in mind it would be unworkable because it would be impossible to police, especially in this country with the way a lot of people hold the law in contempt. Whenever have you seen a dog warden in your area ? if you have you`ve seen them more than I have in my area. The Police would be unable to cope with taking thousands of people to court to make them cough up for a license & it`d end up going the same way as the old dog license.
My sentiment on this (being a law abiding citizen) is why should I have to pay for a license to own a dog when others can flout the law without fear of retribution. Since when would a license promote responsible ownership anyway, we only have to look at the some of the morons on our roads who invariably have driving licenses but drive without due care & attention or as if the roads are a race
track. Like I said I`m cynical & nobody will convince me that licenseing is the right way to go.

So from your reply I assume that you don't have a TV licence or put car tax on your vehicles, because both of them are flaunted by allot of people around the country.

You’ve heard the saying that two wrongs do not make a right.

Providing it could be enforced so that EVERYONE who owns a dog pays,(don't know how this would be done) then I have no problem with dog licences, I'd pay as I love my dogs and wouldn't be without one

Like I said Colin I`m a law abiding citizen, my car is insured, taxed & MOT`d, my TV license is also paid but these have been around for ever. Like I said, I`m cynical about governments ability to enforce a new rule / law especially this. I for one believe we`d be paying through the nose for a license for our dogs. I have insurance for both my dogs & would do the same for any dog that I may own in the future. I believe that this law would be totally impractical/impossible to enforce & only the law abiding like myself would end up paying this. The way the ID card saga has escalated in cost gives me no faith in the governments will or ability to keep any theoretical cost of a dog license down & like I said before in theory it is a good idea (but only in theory).
I begrudge having to pay more on my car insurance for the failings of the government to make sure that everyone has this, likewise with any type of payment of this sort. It seems to me that certain people believe they can get away without paying for this & it`d be the same for a dog license as well. How would the government be able to enforce this, they can`t even do it for car insurance. Would they send people to prison for none payment, I doubt it when they don`t do it for none payment of car insurance, MOT`s etc.
They`re currently letting people out of prison due to the prisons being overcrowded so thats one way that isn`t feasible to enforce this. I believe that some where in the region of 50% (I don`t have the exact figures) of fines go unpaid so thats basically a waste of time.
If somebody decided not to pay would they take there dogs from them? Where would they keep them? Would they destroy them ? Also why would someone have to pay for a dog license to own a dog when they already own a dog & a license couldn`t change that.
The only way I`d agree to this is if it was classed as part of an insurance premium towards my animals wellbeing then I`d be getting some benefit out of it & not just the government or local authority. If I remember correctly I get benefits from car insurance & the TV license so why can`t or shouldn`t I get some benefit from a dog license. In that format it would make little financial difference to me & would encourage more people to pay up.

Well the benefits that could be gained by us all having to buy a licence for each dog we own could be two fold.

1, It could provide more dog wardens, which among other duties could be used to go around schools to educate children about the correct way to look after a dog.

2, Any extra monies gained could be used to fund national dog rescue centres and biometric tags.

Look at it this way, their are thousand of dogs in this country that are in need of a new home, plus a few thousand that are on a waiting list to go into a rescue centre and each and everyone of these dogs is in this situation through no fault of its own.

Ok say the licence cost each of us £10.00 per dog and for arguments sake there are only 30,000 dogs in this country that equates to £300,000 per year.

Now if £2.00 out of each licence went towards a national dog rescue centre, then thats £60,000 per year, which I know would do a great deal of good.

£3.00 of it goes towards extra dog wardens, now that’s got to employ an extra tcouple wardens and the remaining fiver covers the cost of the biometric tag.

I would love to know what benefits you think you get from your car insurance & the TV license.

I think the TV licence is a total rip off. I haven’t even got an aerial on my roof, as I only watch Sky and pay a monthly subscription to Sky, but I still have to have a TV licence, as I own a TV.

Ok so there is always going to be people who will try not to pay for something, but you have got to think about the greater good for the dogs.