Premium
Comments on the dilemma in the September issue: ‘Irresponsible dog ownership’
Author(s) -
Stevenson Michael
Publication year - 2011
Publication title -
in practice
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.211
H-Index - 25
eISSN - 2042-7689
pISSN - 0263-841X
DOI - 10.1136/inp.d5674
Subject(s) - animal welfare , dilemma , welfare , code of practice , pet therapy , companion animal , hubzero , medicine , law , veterinary medicine , business , political science , engineering , ecology , philosophy , epistemology , engineering ethics , biology
The dilemma in the September issue concerned neighbours who owned two beagles and housed them in a purpose‐built compound (In Practice, September 2011, volume 33, page 422). The owners worked long days and were often away at weekends. A paid dog walker exercised the dogs for 50 minutes a day during the week, but after being walked the dogs bayed periodically throughout the day. The dogs were not walked at the weekend but were allowed to run around a terraced garage roof. Paul Roger commented that this problem exemplified the lack of forethought and planning taken by many people when they decided to become dog owners. Rather than choosing a dog based on aesthetics, potential owners needed to think about breed characteristics and whether they would be able to provide the five freedoms in their home environment. In this case, the dogs had limited exercise and might also have experienced fear and discomfort when confined within the compound. These conditions contravened guidelines published by the Companion Animal Welfare Council in its Code of Practice for the Welfare of Dogs. While a breach in these provisions was not a legal offence in itself, it could be used to demonstrate failure to comply with the current regulations listed under Section 9 of the Animal Welfare Act 2006. Complaints made to the appropriate authorities could result in an investigation by the police or an appropriately appointed inspector, who might choose to involve a local veterinary surgeon. The RSPCA might also investigate complaints in a private capacity. A person suspected of failing to comply with the Act would be handed an improvement notice; failure to comply with this would result in prosecution and could lead to seizure and rehoming of the animals.