In a bid to make dangerous dog owners accountable, the government has announced plans to microchip all new-born puppies in the UK, resulting in huge criticism from the public.
While responsible dog owners feel they are being penalised, the new system could very well be a step in the right direction for the health, welfare, and management of pets in the UK. Numerous reports however, have expressed a less-than-impressed attitude over what could be a positive move for enforcing responsible pet ownership in the country.
Animal groups condemned the government for failing to acknowledge that tougher laws are required for dog control and that the task of microchipping new-born puppies is simply not good enough. The microchip proposal will not prevent dog attacks in the future but surely it is an integral part of a plan to enforce greater restrictions on the prevalence of dangerous dogs in the community and the subsequent breeding of animals with behaviour problems?
Reporters have gone on to say that the plans to microchip puppies will have no benefit as many dog attacks occur in the home. While this may be true, there are a number that occur in the park or on the street and with no microchip plan in place there will never be someone to hold accountable in these instances. Certainly a disconcerting fact for the victims of dog attacks.
The underlying problem with the government's new proposal is that it has been targeted at dangerous dogs. Unfortunately, this term has been used to label specific breeds such as staffordshire bull terriers and pit-bulls. While there is no denying that some breeds are prone to aggressive behaviour, this is by no means an exclusive list and any breed of dog can be aggressive as a result of its environment and up-bringing.
The government's plan is not a solution and microchipping an animal does not prevent aggressive behaviour. The point is, all dogs should be microchipped as puppies, and a national legislation must be put in place to register the animal. By doing so, animals may be monitored in their local area by breed and their breeding status.
The focus of this proposal should be that it helps to pave the way for a broader plan which includes a restriction on the number of breeding dogs in a local area. With the help of a UK-wide de-sexing programme, aggression in dogs can be very easily prevented, along with the huge number of unwanted puppies born each year. An entire dog is also at a far greater risk of serious illness such as cancer, particularly if they are not being used for breeding purposes.
Aggressive dogs aside, the microchip plan should be viewed as a positive initiative by pet owners on pure safety and legal grounds. Many owners experience animals escaping or running away and veterinary surgeries will more often than not be able to tell positive stories of animals reunited with their families if the animal has a microchip. The notion that owners feel 'penalised' for spending a mere £35 in a one-off payment for their pet's safety proves the sheer laziness in attitude towards their responsibility as a pet owner.
The microchip proposal may seem like a feeble attempt by the government to appear to be proactive in a much broader issue, but there is no denying that it is a very positive step in raising awareness of responsible dog ownership, and it should be backed by the public. These simple steps will ensure that future generations of dog owners will be aware of their responsibilities along with the health and well-being of their pet.