In Australia dog licences are handled by your local Council.  Cats are also licenced.  You pay less for desexed or microchipped dogs, there are limits to how many you can keep unless you are registered as a breeder.   As with everything else, it doesn't make those who are determined not to register get a licence.   However, it does mean the local Ranger can issue a fine if they find a dog is not registered.

> I can remember going to the Post Office, I was about 9, and paying 7/6( that's 37.5 pence for any youngsters

When you were 9????
You weren't allowed to have a dog licence in your own name until you were over 18. My parents steadfastly refused to buy one, as by then it seemed so irrelevant, but to join my local training class I had to have one! I have a copy here of the licence I bought for our family dog, it is dated two weeks after my 18th birthday and in my name, and yes it cost 37.5p!

I find it very interesting that nowadays with no dog licence, people under the age of 18 are allowed to do anything they like with dogs, yet back then the licence holder who had to be over 18, was the one held responsible. In some ways I do have a little support for dog licences if it does make people responsible in the same was as it did before. We have children as young as 7 or 8 taking out powerful dogs for a walk on their own who would be mentally & physically unable to cope if an incident occurred - we need something to determine who is responsible for that in law and that used to be covered by the licence. So bring in a law saying under 16's can't be out on their own with a dog, or make it very clear who is responsible for anything if they do.

PS: my local dog warden was the first person I met who said there should be something about under-16's taking dogs out on their own. She sees the fallout of that loophole on a daily basis - not saying that under 16's are all owning weapon dogs but anyone under 16 in charge of a dog which may be attacked, doesn't have the full protection in law that an adult does.

> When you were 9???? <IMG alt=eek src="/images/eek.gif">
>

That is why it was so useless... I can not remember all the details and it would have been in Mums name... but I do remember getting 6d for sweets for my trouble !

The RSPCA survey interviewed people by telephone between the ages of 16 and 64. Surely they should have asked adults? My kids would never have taken part in a survey that young and if I discovered they had been surveyed with out my permission I'd have been straight onto a solicitor!

How many were kids they interviewed? I imagine if I had given a talk at a school about the nasty dog owners and told these impressionable folk that a license would sort the problems out, and I then telephoned them I expect they would say yes....

>I imagine if I had given a talk at a school about the nasty dog owners and told these impressionable folk that a license would sort the problems out, and I then telephoned them I expect they would say yes....

That's why I asked you if you knew the context in which the question was asked. I'd be very interested to look at their full market research material

Do you know who actually conducted the survey - did the RSPCA appoint a telemarketing company?

Either way, who paid for it?  Telephone surveys are not cheap

In Australia, there is dog registration with your local council, not licences as such.

For example on the Gold Coast, you will receive a reduction for a desexed dog (which you must have proof of).  The dog must already be microchipped.
You then have the choice of registering for just one year, or three.
Cost for one dog for one year $48, a desexed dog $24
Cost for one dog for three years $192, a desexed dog $95
Pensioners receive discounts, as do CCCQ members (Canine Control Council of Queensland).

Each council has their own charges.
As an example Newcastle in NSW charges $150 for an entire dog.  A desexed dog is $40, or if owned by a pensioner $15.

Costs can vary wildly.

With regard to how many dogs you can keep heddwyn, that actually varies by council too.  You are allowed to keep more than 2 dogs, but you have to apply for permission, you don't have to register as a breeder.
I have two dogs and the proviso for that is that our land size must be over 600m2.

Recent news for the Gold Coast stated that there were going to be door to door visits to check that people who have dogs have registered the animals with the council.  Been very quiet since.
It certainly has not stopped unregistered dogs from roaming the streets.  Those who don't want to pay won't, simple as that.

Having just read all this thread, I have to say when the dog licence was in, I used to get 1 every year Pete at our local post office (now gone nearest 1 a car ride away) used to say 1 was the only 1 who ever bought one.
I am against it for the simple reason I look after my dogs (like the rest on here) they are not alloud to roam, my gate is locked at all times so that they cannot get out, they have there jabs and are socalised, go to training ect.
Why should i have to pay again for looking after and doing the right thing with my dogs when the local thugs won't.

I don't trust the RSPCA and would not want them in control.

If there is a going to be a dog licence lots multi dog households will not be able to afford hugh licence bills on top of the other every day expences we have.
All my dogs are micro chipped & DNA profiled, so are the puppies that leave here, I am also an accredited breeder, for what thats worth,but we live in hopes.
I have 2 intact bitches of breeding age neither have had a litter and a pup of just 6 months my older girls are spayed, 1 had 1 litter the other 2,
my 4 boys are not done, 2 have been used 1 is almost 11, the other 2 are 2 & 4 never been used.
so in what catagory would i go, my last litter of pups are 2 yrs old, all went to there new homes micro chipped and DNA profiled, 1 is a ch, 1 is on 2 cc, 1 is spayed and the other did well as a pup, but has not been shown in adult due to other commitments.
I could not afford upwards of £1000 plus a year for a licence to keep someone in a job.

> Either way, who paid for it?&nbsp; Telephone surveys are not cheap

I would assume the RSPCA used some of the funds donated to it to conduct the survey.... Money which IMO would have been better spent on the dogs either in rescue centres or attemptng to stop dog fighting by funding more anti-dog fighting units... but maybe I have my priorities wrong? Why go after dog fighters when you can persue responsible owners?

>I would assume the RSPCA used some of the funds donated to it to conduct the survey.... Money which IMO >would have been better spent on the dogs either in rescue centres

Like every other RSPCA branch in England and Wales, the Stourbridge and District Branch is a separate registered charity to the National RSPCA.

http://www.rspca-stourbridgeanddistrict.org.uk/

Branches of the RSPCA pay the National RSPCA for their use of the name

the RSPCA are and always have been a political organisation calling themselves a charity

I would have more respect for their statement that "the British public support dog licensing" if the research had been openly and independantly conducted and verified.   As has happened several times recently, there is an increasing tendancy by Government and other large oraganisations to conduct their own research and get the results they have already decided on - ignoring and discounting anything that doesn't agree, then push through legislation, this is not research, not democracy - it is a tyranny.  

If you tell a lie often enough it becomes believable to many, it still isn't the truth.  This though is what seems to be the order of the day.

"Make the lie big, make it simple, keep saying it, and eventually they will believe it"  - Adolf Hitler

"All propaganda has to be popular and has to accommodate itself to the comprehension of the least intelligent of those whom it seeks to reach."  Guess who?

Umm someone phoned me from the RSPCA a couple of months ago, when I said I didn't support the RSPCA or many of their actions the caller hung up and didn't ask me any questions at all.  Wonder if it was to do with this and I wonder how many people had the same thing happen to them?

Well there you go then, Since you didn't specifically say you were against a dog licence you were probably put down as being in favour!

TT, I didn't actually specify how many dogs one could keep, because I knew it varies state to state in Australia.   I lived in various parts of Victoria, in comparison the Councils seem to be more consistent that Qld or NSW, the current year the cost was $28 both in a Melbourne Council area and a rural one for desexed, VCA registered or microchipped dogs.

I don't think I'd want the RSPCA in either country being responsible for any animal licencing.

My preference is for microchipping, mainly because both my dogs are chipped. They were done anyway, but it was a requirement for bringing them to the UK as well.  I get them checked for 'travel' when they get their annual shots.   I don't like the idea of tattooing, no idea where it's put and how it stays clear of hair.  Are shelters or councils any more likely to look for a tattoo than they are a chip?

> I don't like the idea of tattooing, no idea where it's put and how it stays clear of hair.&nbsp;

In the UK the NDTR tattoo in the ear,a nd you only need to see part of it to know it is there and if need be clip a bit of hair, if ears are hairy.

Any examination of a dog by a vet is likely to include basic checks like ears and teeth, so should not be missed, even if tattoo becomes a little unclear.

The beauty of the tattoo compared to a chip is only eyes are needed and even a partial number is likely, with a bit of detective work by the NDTR, to find the dogs details.

> TT, I didn't actually specify how many dogs one could keep, because I knew it varies state to state in Australia.

No you didn't, but you did say that you were limited to how many you could keep unless a registered breeder.
I was simply pointing out that that wasn't necessarily the case where I am is all

> I don't think I'd want the RSPCA in either country being responsible for any animal licencing

Would have to agree with that!

I have had several conversations with people who thought it was a good idea and would have agreed with it in an RSPCA survey had they been asked. However after I have pointed out the many reasons why I think its a waste of time they have all changed their minds.

The RSPCA's claim re the stats is so much hog wash.

I wish they would do something here in the UK.

Someone I know has 35 Toy Breeds in her home-lives in a residential area with neighbours either side of them.

Do not think a resgistered breeder, but not 100% sure.

Although a quiet breed it is still a lot of dogs to live next door to.

The council should put in place some specification of numbers due to other people's feelings and also what if they are unable to sell their property due to the neighbour next door having that amount of dogs.

Why, is the person causing a nuisance with their dogs?  You said they are a quiet breed, so assuming no nuisance being caused.

If not and they are well cared for, whose business is it how many dogs the person wants to keep. 

You can't put an arbitrary figure. the number one person can manage, is not the same as two people or a family can cope with, dependent on their health and abilities. 

The size, nature, age and training of the individual dogs will make a huge difference on how many can easily be managed, as well as other commitments the owners have.

For that matter how many Rabbits guinea pigs etc.

Aviaries can be a problem as a large aviary can cause an awful lot of noise, but generally people keep as may as they like as long s neighbours don't complain.

Just because we may choose not to live a certain way, we have no right to say others should not.  I don't have the dogs in the bedrooms, my choice, others like to sleep with their dog, even in their own beds.

Most of us probably have our dogs at least some of the time in our kitchens (for mien it is their main living area), tends to be the place with a washable floor.  Some people would e horrified that we keep animals where we prepare our food.

I'd rather share with the dogs than the kids when I prepare food.

The only place our two do not go is the bedrooms, Im not sharing my bed with dog hair!!

The RSPCA will get their dog licence through, because the Conservatives have to give the Lib Dems something to do, which will allow them to think they are in Government and have power!

I got this from a friend who lived in Australia util recently.

Nothing new ... to me at least. I used to pay $28, appox 14 quid per
dog, and it went up each year. That was for chipped, desexed, Kennel
Club registered or dog over 10 years, it was more like 25-30 quid per
dog if none of those. Cats also registered, at the same price. If they
bring it in for dogs, cats need to be done too.... they are the ones
constantly wandering the streets etc.

That said how is it going to help?  Will those irresponsible owners
register their dogs, of course not!  Will Councils have to employ more
staff to monitor registration and a ranger to be out on the road picking
up dogs - yes.  Nothing will change. It hasn't stopped dog attacks in
Victoria, if anything there are more of them.  Even the DADS (Dumb As
Dog Sh*t) owner has the nouse to deny ownership or knowledge of the dog.

The RSPCA survey interviewed people by telephone between the ages of 16 and 64. Surely they should have asked adults? My kids would never have taken part in a survey that young and if I discovered they had been surveyed with out my permission I'd have been straight onto a solicitor!

How many were kids they interviewed? I imagine if I had given a talk at a school about the nasty dog owners and told these impressionable folk that a license would sort the problems out, and I then telephoned them I expect they would say yes....

Polly, if you did your research you would know that the RSPCA survey was done by TNS which is a reputable company and would have abided by any rules. If you are so convinced of agenda/bias, why don't you ask the RSPCA what the questions were and how they were phrased rather than just assume from the stance of your own anti-RSPCA agenda that they skewed it in their favour?

Jemima

I pay enough taxes without having to pay a dog tax.  The dogs stuff is taxed too.