Newsvine
  • Welcome
  • Help
  • Report Bug
  • Conversation Tracker
  • Your Column
  • Replies
  • Friends
Type Comments Since You Last CheckedArticle Source Last Checked Stop Tracking All Clear Tracking All
Advertise | AdChoices
Log In | Register
Close the Login Panel
Existing users log in below. New users please register for a free account.

New Users:

Existing Users:

E-Mail:
Password:
Forgot Password?
Please enter the e-mail address or domain name you registered with:
E-Mail/Domain:
Back to Login
Log Out
  • Top News
  • Local News
  • World
  • U.S.
  • Sports
  • Politics
  • Tech
  • Entertainment
  • Science
  • Business
  • Health
  • Odd News
  • More
    • Arts
    • Education
    • Environment
    • Fashion
    • History
    • Home & Garden
    • Not News
    • Religion
    • Travel
What is Newsvine?

Updated continuously by citizens like you, Newsvine is an instant reflection of what the world is talking about at any given moment.

Get a Free Account
Help
Fun Stuff
  • Your Clippings
  • Leaderboard
  • E-Mail Alerts
  • Top of the Vine
  • Newsvine Live
  • Newsvine Archives
  • The Greenhouse
  • Recommended Articles
  • Wall of Vineness
Put a Seed Newsvine link on your own site

Mandatory insurance proposed for UK dogs

Tue Mar 9, 2010 9:35 AM EST
world-news, technology, eu, britain, dogs, microchipped
Raphael G. Satter, Associated Press
< PreviousNext >
showing 1 of 5 photos
<p>A dog walks past a landscape of central London, on Hampstead Heath in London, Tuesday, March 9, 2010. The British government have launched a new proposal which requires that all new dog owners fit their pets with microchips and that canine insurance is made compulsory. (AP Photo/Matt Dunham)</p>

A dog walks past a landscape of central London, on Hampstead Heath in London, Tuesday, March 9, 2010. The British government have launched a new proposal which requires that all new dog owners fit their pets with microchips and that canine insurance is made compulsory. (AP Photo/Matt Dunham)

Advertise | AdChoices

LONDON — A chip for Spot? In a country where guns are tightly controlled and even carrying a kitchen knife can bring prison time, some thugs use dogs to menace their victims. Now the British government is proposing that dog owners be forced to get microchips and take out insurance for their pets.

Postal workers were delighted by the proposal announced Tuesday. But opponents complained it would impose a financial penalty on innocent pet owners — while criminals with violent animals would simply shirk the law.

The plan risks "penalizing millions of law-abiding dog owners with the blunt instrument of a dog tax," warned opposition lawmaker Nick Herbert.

Home Office Secretary Alan Johnson said there was "no doubt that some people breed and keep dogs for the sole purpose of intimidating others."

"It is this sort of behavior that we are determined to stop," he told reporters. Use of microchips would help trace the owners of dogs involved in attacks, while insurance would mean that victims of dog attacks are compensated for their injuries, he said.

Hospital admissions and court cases involving dangerous dogs have been on the rise in Britain, a nation whose canine population numbers 8 million. In London, court cases have climbed, from 35 in 2002-2003 to 719 in 2008-2009, according to the Metropolitan Police.

Dog fighting complaints have also soared tenfold since 2004, according to the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, which reported 284 cases in 2008. Some 6,000 postal workers are bitten each year.

Dog attacks that have killed at least five children since 2006 have also kept the issue in the headlines. Last year, a 4-year-old was mauled to death by a pit bull at his grandmother's house in northern England and a 3-month-old was killed by a Staffordshire bull terrier and a Jack Russell at his grandmother's home in South Wales.

Ryan O'Meara, chief editor of K9 Magazine, said the government's plan would not solve the problem of dangerous dogs attacking humans.

"There is nothing in this that is preventative," he said. "If you put a chip in a dangerous dog, the bite will hurt you just as much."

"The focus should be on education, and stopping this at the source — the breeders who supply dangerous dogs," he said.

Training for owners is essential, said O'Meara, noting that Switzerland requires prospective dog owners to pass a test. "The country says, if you want to own an animal, we will force you to be responsible," he said.

Still, Britain's proposal was largely welcomed by animal welfare groups. The RSPCA said it has long supported microchips — primarily as a means of reuniting lost pets with their owners. The devices, about the size of a grain of rice, are painlessly inserted between a dog's shoulder blades and details about the owner are easily readable by scanners.

While microchips run between $15 (10 pounds) and $52 (35 pounds), insurance is far pricier — and could cost pet owners hundreds of dollars a year, especially for high-risk breeds.

Most pet insurers offer third-party liability insurance wrapped into larger plans that also cover vet fees and emergency care. Petplan, Britain's largest pet insurer, said that for a Labrador in southeast England, coverage costs $34 (23 pounds) a month and would be pricier in London.

Sanctions imposed on those who refuse to comply weren't spelled out. It was also unclear when, or even if, the proposed legislation would become law. It must undergo a consultation period — typically 12 weeks — which means it is unlikely to reach Parliament before Britain's general election, which must be called by June 3.

A host of European countries — including Switzerland, Austria, Norway, Croatia, Italy and Portugal — have introduced mandatory microchips in recent years. Mandatory dog insurance is in place in parts of Switzerland and Germany.

Many Londoners supported the idea of microchips for their pets.

"You can find them easier if they get lost," said Claire Stringer, 35, a professional dog-walker looking after miniature schnauzer Bibi, who has a microchip.

She also supported making people take out insurance against dogs attacking people or other animals.

"I've heard too many dog horror stories where some poor dog has been savaged by a pit bull or a Staff — dogs that don't like other dogs."

Fiona Terry, an actor and interior designer carrying bichon frise Pico, also supported microchips.

"Why not? It doesn't hurt them and it means you can find them if they get lost or stolen," she said. "If you care about your dog, you want to know where they are."

She said the problem wasn't with certain breeds of "dangerous" dog, but with the way the animals were raised.

Still, even fluffy Pico could be a threat, she said.

"I always tell people, don't touch him, because his first instinct is to protect me. He looks cute, but he is still a dog."

___

Associated Press writers Gregory Katz, Jill Lawless and Sylvia Hui in London contributed to this report.

© 2010 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
  • Enjoy this article? Help vote it up the 'Vine.

Back To Top | Front Page

Published to:

  • Raphael G. Satter's Column, All of Newsvine
  • Groups: Reigning Cats & Dogs
  • Regions: London
  • Public Discussion (32)
Zoolopolis

Geez, there's already police cameras everywhere like in 1984, now they're even bugging the dogs.

    Reply#1 - Tue Mar 9, 2010 10:59 AM EST
    Miss Ann Thropy

    The UK is the ultimate nanny state. Suffocating it's fear conditioned subjects into submission. A little Big Brother lovin'. Nice.

    • 1 vote
    Reply#2 - Tue Mar 9, 2010 11:07 AM EST
    Upstater-900919

    Big Brother can shove it, as far as I'm concerned. The English should draw the line on their Liberal Goverment or they ar going to not be much of anything soon.

      #2.1 - Tue Mar 9, 2010 2:22 PM EST
      Chasing

      There are places in the US that also force microchipping; in Texas, even. I don't now of any place that enforces insurance, though? In the US I mean...

      • 1 vote
      #2.2 - Tue Mar 9, 2010 6:20 PM EST
      Reply
      Ben Josephs

      These laws don't help the problem, the Dangerous Dogs Act of 1991, meant to combat dog bites, banned four breeds of dog. After 14 years of being in place, Britain didn't see the incidences of dog bites decrease, they increased.

      It seems a little asinine to insure and chip every dog kept in the country, especially when a small number of dogs account for the majority of bites and really, dog bites aren't really a big enough problem to require something like this. Aren't there more important things to legislate? The media over-dramatization of "pit" attacks gets people in a tizzy and the politicians feel they can score some brownie points by enacting a few laws to combat the "problem". Pathetic.

      • 2 votes
      Reply#3 - Tue Mar 9, 2010 11:11 AM EST
      Chasing

      Yeah, in theory, I think it's not necessarily a bad idea to insure and microchip; but I haven't seen any data that suggests enforcing it is really useful. Like forced spay/neuter, it seems to try to pass off looking like your doing something as doing something.

      • 3 votes
      #3.1 - Tue Mar 9, 2010 6:23 PM EST
      Reply
      ralphie-1671209Deleted
      Kshark

      Wait what precisely type of microchipping is this, lojack, gps chipping or something.

      Microchips are generally the size of a grain of rice, all they do is include a single number (found when an electronic scanner runs over the embedded chip) to where one has to call the registrar and report the number to get the owners information, if by chance the animal is lost or was stolen. Generally only shelters and vet hospitals are equipped with scanners for chips.

      If that is the type of chipping they are referring to, frankly I am not opposed to microchipping, as so many animals are lost or stolen and the owners are heart broken.

      My animals are microchipped.

      As for insurance, that is a tough one as not everyone can afford it.

      Anyway, I can see the argument by both sides, but herein really lays the complete problem, it is the owners that make the dangerous dogs, more or less, the dogs are not entirely born this way.

      I have owned Dobermans, lovely lovely dogs that had been beaten and abused as they were rescue dogs, and my mom and myself we had to retrain the dogs to not be afraid of us, to show we would not ever hurt them nothing. Friends own pitbulls, mastiffs, bull terriers, Rotties, German Shepherds, all the dogs on the list of dangers and frankly I have been bitten by the so called nonharmful dogs, from the cockers, to the schnauzers, to the chihuahuas.

      The animals are really not to blame, it is the owners. And unfortunately for the owners stupidity the animals suffer. So well problem is, this will really not change or get rid of aggressive dogs, given the owners for the most part make them that way. There are some animals that are simply born with their heads wired wrong, but that is not all that common.

      • 3 votes
      Reply#5 - Tue Mar 9, 2010 12:33 PM EST
      dcstone01

      I have a 'mixed breed pit bull' and we got her from the 'pound'...she was 'chipped'. It is automatically done on all dogs in our city that go through the pound...and any dogs that are sold through 'reputable dealers/stores'...

      Our dog, poor thing, was abused as a puppy and then was adopted and returned to the pound before we got her...She took a long time to 'trust' us but is a most devoted dog...and very protective of her family...Even though people see her and are instantly fearful, she is a sweetie when they get to know her, they love her to pieces...

      She is very protective of her family and friends, even the neighbors...lol, including our cats...we had a repair person her last week and when he was petting our little noisy cat (she just has to see what anyone is doing) our dog went straight to the guy and placed herself between the repair guy and our cat so as to say, 'she is mine and be nice'...I remarked to the guy to that effect and since he is an animal owner he understood it...

      But, not everyone would and it is that 'automatic' fear that needs to be addressed in the 'media'...not all breeds of all dogs are 'mean'...it is the owners that make them so...

      • 3 votes
      #5.1 - Tue Mar 9, 2010 1:18 PM EST
      Ben Josephs

      Home Again Microchips

      • 1 vote
      #5.2 - Tue Mar 9, 2010 2:03 PM EST
      dcstone01

      Yes, that is one of the uses of this 'chipping'...

      • 1 vote
      #5.3 - Tue Mar 9, 2010 2:08 PM EST
      Kshark

      Ben Josephs--

      Yup those chips and that reason. It is a lot easier to cut off a pet collar and toss it than it is to get a chip out of an animal.

      • 2 votes
      #5.4 - Tue Mar 9, 2010 2:47 PM EST
      TheJonesGirl

      I have owned Dobermans, lovely lovely dogs that had been beaten and abused as they were rescue dogs, and my mom and myself we had to retrain the dogs to not be afraid of us, to show we would not ever hurt them nothing. Friends own pitbulls, mastiffs, bull terriers, Rotties, German Shepherds, all the dogs on the list of dangers and frankly I have been bitten by the so called nonharmful dogs, from the cockers, to the schnauzers, to the chihuahuas.

      The animals are really not to blame, it is the owners. And unfortunately for the owners stupidity the animals suffer. So well problem is, this will really not change or get rid of aggressive dogs, given the owners for the most part make them that way. There are some animals that are simply born with their heads wired wrong, but that is not all that common.

      I agree 100%--and have also lived with a Doberman and a pit mix. The Dobie was the most goofy, sweet dog, though she cleared the sidewalk when we would walk her! The pit mix was found at my mom's school, she brought her home. We had to be careful around her, putting your face at her level panicked her and she would snap/bite, but she ended up a good, loyal pet for years and years.

      Not every person is temperamentally suited for every dog breed. My mom also rescued a Plott Hound from her school site and after 2 years, she and my dad surrendered her to the SPCA (the dog was beyond a handful and leaped the 7' fence and went through a window screen a dozen times), with a note to call them if it came down to euthanizing the dog.

      Two weeks later, my mom opens the paper to see that the "Dog of the Week" for the SPCA was the Plottie they gave up. There were well over 50 calls to take her in. If you don't have boundless energy and time to train/groom/etc, certain breeds aren't for you, simple as that. If you are a well-versed, experienced dog owner, then a pit, a Doberman, a Shepherd, a Mastiff, etc. might be for you.

      But far too often people pick their pet based on cuteness or a movie or a holiday (like those who purchased Dalmatians after 101 came out, bunnies at Easter, etc.). A tragedy for all, most of all the dogs.

      Having been raised with countless pets and having 2 kitties of my own that I have had since kittenhood (they are now 10), I am a strong believer in respecting the animal and doing the research. If you don't/can't make a commitment to the pet for its lifespan and to train appropriately, don't take it in. And yes, to me that meant taking apartments that weren't quite as nice to keep them with me, but it has been worth it!

      • 3 votes
      #5.5 - Tue Mar 9, 2010 3:29 PM EST
      Reply
      Ruel RaphaelDeleted
      Ferrari5k

      Britain is just about ripe for a good and violent time. The Gov't is broke and proposing to cut all gov't department bugets by 20%, raise the tax on a bottle of Booze another $20 apiece. They've proposed to push the nation's retirement age out to 70. That's 100% of the population. They've already outlawed all hunting.

      Well at least the've decided to raise everyone's rent by only 3% instead of the normal 6%. These people are getting more and more angry at Brussels and Parliment. I can't wait!

        Reply#7 - Tue Mar 9, 2010 1:00 PM EST
        Little Sure Shot

        "Why don't you just shove a *$&&(# leash up my as*!!!" (Demolition Man) If you saw the movie, you will get my inference.

          Reply#8 - Tue Mar 9, 2010 1:37 PM EST
          Upstater-900919

          Good Point

            #8.1 - Tue Mar 9, 2010 2:14 PM EST
            Reply
            JoMan

            Good idea. You can't walk anywhere - city or country with out a dog running at you. I love dogs, but mine are controlled and I would like the same respect.

              Reply#9 - Tue Mar 9, 2010 1:42 PM EST
              Ben Josephs

              The only thing that I can see positive of having all pets microchipped is when one is running loose, the owner can be found and held accountable. I get the insurance bit for dangerous dogs, but it's not like every dog is a liability like driving a vehicle is.

              The article doesn't even explain how the microchipping will help solve the problem. If they indeed intend on using it to find the owners of stray, aggressive dogs, what are the repercussions? How do they intend on enforcing it? The people who own the dangerous dogs don't typically even register their pets with the city. If they're not willing to register the dog, they're not going to get a microchip. Those who would comply aren't the ones with the problem dogs and any proper enforcement would be a waste of money in a time when everyone is broke.

              • 2 votes
              #9.1 - Tue Mar 9, 2010 2:23 PM EST
              Reply
              fr33d0m_m0nk3y

              Jolly olde Britain is going to be forcing their population to live in the Oceania province of Airstrip One any day now...

              Orwell's 1984.

                Reply#10 - Tue Mar 9, 2010 1:51 PM EST
                Upstater-900919

                Australia, at least has guts and fortitude still. As a American I admire the attitude I see from Australians. God Bless Australia, may they succeed where others are falling.

                  #10.1 - Tue Mar 9, 2010 2:13 PM EST
                  Reply
                  Upstater-900919

                  Wow, That's messed up. They could spy on you with those chips by tracking your movements when you walk your dogs. Even a website like this can be used to find people by governments and keep tabs on the population. I think we (I mean as the Human Race) need to start saying that technology is getting ridiculous and tell our politicains to go take a flying leep. If feel bad for the law abiding citizens of the UK. Criminals don't care and it's a misconception to think they will. Plus, there are so many laws in the UK like in the USA that I'm sure the police and whomever can't enforce them all. They took your Guns away in the UK and now they are going to control your lives. I people that can't defend themselves or rise against tyranical Leaders are hosed.

                    Reply#11 - Tue Mar 9, 2010 2:04 PM EST
                    Kshark

                    They could spy on you with those chips by tracking your movements when you walk your dogs. Even a website like this can be used to find people by governments and keep tabs on the population.

                    Er are you being sarcastic? Just curious as the microchips are not lojack or GPS systems. The chip can only be scanned at a vet hospital or shelter and all the chip normally does is produce a long number which is in the registration center where the owners details are located. When a pet is brought in that is lost or was stolen and someone is trying to pass it off as their own, but are caught, the vet or shelter person scans with a hand held scanner for a chip and number. They take that number call the registration for the owners details, the owner who willingly sent in their info so if their pet is recovered they are called and the pet is returned.

                    It is not a matter of GPS tracking, or Onstar or Lojack.

                    • 2 votes
                    #11.1 - Wed Mar 10, 2010 3:12 PM EST
                    Reply
                    Alan G

                    As someone who still has scars on his calf resulting from a dog bite last May I agree that dog owners need to carry insurance, that dogs wear visual identity and are chipped and are muzzled at all times whilst out in public areas- prevention is better than cure. My action via the police was to request that the area dog warden try and persude the dog walker to ensure all her dogs remain muzzled whilst in public. It was an unfortunate illustration that humans are not as competant at controlling dogs as they like to believe, that dogs are unprdictable and can inflict serious injury in two seconds.

                    • 1 vote
                    Reply#12 - Wed Mar 10, 2010 8:11 AM EST
                    Ben Josephs

                    Are you suggesting that all dogs be muzzled while in public? That's an emotionally charged, one-sided view to hold. Assuming that all dogs are inherently dangerous is a little silly considering we bred them into exactly what we wanted over the centuries.

                    Consider the view of a well-informed dog owner.

                    Dogs are not unpredictable and don't bite without warning, unless something is mentally/physically wrong. While I agree animals proven to pose a danger to others should be muzzled while in public and carry insurance, I know that most dog bites are the fault of the human.

                    It's absolutely asinine to suggest they all be muzzled. We may as rid ourselves of the wretched creatures once and for all if it comes to that.

                    Most people get bitten because they can't read when a dog warns that a particular action is irritating. If the warning is not heeded and the dog is compelled to protective itself more assertively, it's going to use the only tool he has, the mouth.

                    The misreading of dog language falls to sheer ignorance. Those owners who belong to this category are the real problem, unintentionally creating monsters through their negligence. (For god sakes, who the hell adds a creature to the household without knowing anything about taking care of it properly.)

                    I have a easy solution for this ignorance: Education. Pure and simple education. It's the solution to most of our problems.

                    • 4 votes
                    #12.1 - Wed Mar 10, 2010 2:39 PM EST
                    Reply
                    Leave a Comment:
                    You're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead.
                    You're in XHTML Mode. If you prefer, you can use Easy Mode instead.
                    (XHTML tags allowed - a,b,blockquote,br,code,dd,dl,dt,del,em,h2,h3,h4,i,ins,li,ol,p,pre,q,strong,ul)
                    Newsvine Privacy Statement
                    As a new user, you may notice a few temporary content restrictions. Click here for more info.
                    FUN STUFF:
                    • Leaderboard |
                    • E-Mail Alerts |
                    • Top of the Vine |
                    • Newsvine Live |
                    • Newsvine Archives |
                    • The Greenhouse
                    COMPANY STUFF:
                    • Code of Honor |
                    • Company Info |
                    • Contact Us |
                    • Jobs |
                    • User Agreement |
                    • Privacy Policy |
                    • About our ads
                    LEGAL STUFF:
                    • © 2005-2012 Newsvine, Inc. |
                    • Newsvine® is a registered trademark of Newsvine, Inc. |
                    • Newsvine is a property of msnbc.com