Log In

Reset Password

Vet concerns unfounded claims Arthur Hodgson

Concerns that recent changes to the Dogs Act came without input from vets were unfounded, Environment Minister Arthur Hodgson told the House of Assembly yesterday.

And he said that was because the amendment passed last month dealt with administrative issues like the licensing programme, punishment for offences and breeding control -- rather than health and disease treatment and prevention.

Mr. Hodgson made the statement to respond to "complaints and concerns'' that Government failed to consult widely enough when considering the amendment.

He said that if the amendment had dealt with dog health issues, Government "would have consulted much more closely with the veterinary fraternity''.

The Report of the Animal Control Committee, which was produced in the 1990s, found the Dogs Act had been "successful'' in reducing dog-related complaints.

But the committee cited stool in public parks, guard dogs, loose dogs and dog fighting as areas of concern, Mr. Hodgson said.

The Minister and his technical officers felt that dog stool in parks was dealt with under the Parks Act and that guard dogs were not an issue.

Dog fighting, while difficult to control, was already subject to legislation and was therefore an enforcement issue, he continued.

The problem of loose dogs was addressed in the amendment with the requirement that dogs be placed on a leash in any public place and wear an identification tag at all times.

And to monitor animals that are allowed to roam frequently, Dog Wardens can put permanent identification on any dog which comes through their offices.

Mr. Hodgson said muzzling loose dogs was a "difficult issue'', but added that the "vast majority'' of dog attacks occurred on private property.

Another point against muzzling was that it would make responsible dog owners suffer for the actions of a "very small minority'' -- who might not comply with the legislation anyway.

But Mr. Hodgson concluded: "I would like to stress that if any member of the public feels that additional legislation is required in any area pertaining to dogs, they are more than welcome to send in their submissions for consideration.''