The Welfare of Dogs (Scotland) Bill
Christine Grahame MSP (SNP)’s Welfare of Dogs (Scotland) Bill was published this summer and sets out provision for formalised regulation of the buying and selling of dogs. It deals with prospective acquirers and suppliers of dogs, outside of rescue shelter scenarios, educating the public about how to take a responsible and informed approach to dog ownership.
In summary, the Bill would make Scottish Ministers set out a Code of Practice for acquirers and suppliers of dogs which would include factors such as:
the dog’s age, as well as registration if less than 12 months
checks and questions to ask of the dog supplier
the suitability of the dog for its prospective owner’s living conditions and lifestyle (breed and associated behaviour/health traits, space required, exercise required, costs required etc.)
the prospective owner’s long-term commitment to care for the dog throughout its life
Satisfactory compliance with this code would then be summarised in a certificate, to be signed by both supplier and acquirer, which can be presented upon request by the authorities.
You can read the full Bill, as introduced, here.
We wholeheartedly support the publication of this new Bill and encourage you to do the same by responding to the public consultation launched by the Scottish Government as part of its Stage 1 proceedings.
There are two ways to do this. Either, you can fill in the short questionnaire to provide your opinions in each aspect of the Bill.
Or you can respond to the longer, more in-depth call for views. You can choose whichever of the two methods you prefer, and note you do not have to respond to all parts of the consultation.
The deadline for submissions at this stage has now passed but we will email our supporters should there be further public consultation.
Our response to the long version call for views:
Question 1 - Do you agree there is a need for additional regulation to support a responsible and informed approach to acquiring and owning a dog?
Yes
While many dog owners are responsible and caring people, there have been too many instances where inadequate knowledge, lack of resources and irresponsible behaviour have led to negative consequences for both dogs and society at large. This Bill would help address some of these issues and promote a more responsible and informed approach to the acquisition and ownership of a canine family member.
Dogs are beloved creatures with complex physical and emotional needs. Irresponsible ownership, neglect, abuse or even lack of proper care can lead to severe suffering for these animals. Ensuring that potential dog owners are educated about the needs and responsibilities of ownership could have very positive long-term impact on improved dog welfare.
A lack of understanding that dog behaviour, inadequate training, or breeding practices may encourage problematic, even aggressive reactions, could result in dangerous situations for both people and other animals. Additional regulation could help address these issues and minimise the risks associated with irresponsible dog ownership.
Irresponsible breeding and uncontrolled dog ownership can contribute to overpopulation of puppies needing homes. Concurrently we have seen a trend of owners having to give away their dogs because they have realised they are not actually able to commit to the long-term care and expense of owning one. Both these factors can lead to an increased burden on rescue centres and shelters whose resources become overstrained.
Proper dog ownership includes regular veterinary care, vaccinations and responsible handling of health issues. Uninformed owners might neglect these essential aspects of pet care, leading to potential health risks for the dogs and, in some cases, humans too.
Different dog breeds have unique temperaments, energy levels and care requirements. Without proper knowledge, potential owners may choose a dog that doesn’t match their lifestyle or capabilities, resulting in an unsuitable home for the dog.
These are just some reasons why increased regulation around how to acquire/own a dog in a responsible way is vital.
Question 2 - Do you agree with the section 1 proposal to require Scottish Ministers to make a code of practice?
Yes
The creation of a code of practice by Scottish Ministers, in consultation with stakeholders in dog welfare, could have very positive impacts on both dogs and the wider community for all the reasons mentioned above, as well as promoting responsible breeding practice.
Problems such as overbreeding, breeding without health screening, lack of socialisation and training, breeding for appearance alone, puppy farms and inbreeding could all be curbed with a robust code or practice for breeders involving careful selection of pairs based on health, temperament and adhered to set standards, where dog wellbeing is prioritised above all else.
A publicly available code of practice would also facilitate greater transparency and accountability against a set of approved guidelines.
Given that dog welfare should be at the heart of this code of practice, it would be vital for Ministers to work with experts in this field - animal welfare organisations and charities such as the SSPCA, Dogs Trust etc. for their essential expertise and insight.
Question 3 - How would the proposed code of practice work alongside the existing code of practice for the welfare of dogs, made under the Animal Health and Welfare (Scotland) Act 2006 and which came into force in 2010?
Yes
The proposed code of practice could complement and reinforce what is in the Animal Health and Welfare (Scotland) Act 2006, working together to provide a comprehensive framework for promoting responsible dog ownership. The code in this Bill should be drafted to take into account the principles and guidelines set out in the AHW Act but could drill down into the specifics of responsible acquisition and rehoming practice in consultation with stakeholders, including animal welfare organisations, veterinarians, breeders and the public.
Moreover, two codes could enhance awareness and education efforts related to responsible ownership of dogs and set a higher standard for the acquisition process.
Question 4 - Do you agree with the section 2 proposals about the content of the code relating to the sale or transfer of a dog of any age?
Yes
The questions for a prospective acquirer of a dog of any age are good and useful prompts to enable them to appropriately consider the level of commitment involved. It is also beneficial for the prospective acquirer and supplier to meet in person before any sale or transfer between the two is agreed.
Question 5 - Do you agree with the section 3 proposals about the content of the code relating to the sale or transfer of a young dog by the first owner?
Yes
Waiting until the puppy is at least 8 weeks old allows sufficient time for weaning, benefiting from their mother’s care and guidance and also allows the supplier time to organise vaccinations, start toilet training and socialisation. It is vital that the acquirer see the dog with its mother. In the present Bill, subsection (3) of section 3 states this “unless this is not practicable”. There is potential for suppliers to exploit this loophole, therefore provision needs to be made to ensure that if not practicable, proof should be provided as to why not. Placing an incentive on prospective owners to familiarise themselves with circumstances in which a licence or registration of a dog aged less than 12 months will also have positive implications for puppy welfare.
Question 6 - Do you agree with the section 4 proposals about the content of the code requiring a certificate?
Yes
A certificate to confirm adherence to the code of practice is a useful tool and incentive for compliance. Signatures and contact details of both supplier and acquirer should be included, as suggested in the Bill. Consideration needs to be given to the enforcement of this beyond presentation upon request. Both acquirer and supplier must take it upon themselves to complete the certificate - but in the event of ignorance, thought must be given as to who will prompt them to do so.
Question 7 - Do you agree with the section 5 proposals relating to the revision of the code of practice?
Yes
The code should be revised in the way described in section 5 and every effort should be made to ensure there are not too many versions of the code that have been republished to avoid confusion.
Question 8 - Do you agree with the section 6 proposals relating to the effect of the code?
Yes
The Bill as introduced is predominantly for educational, rather than punitive purposes and therefore failure to comply with the code of practice should not be tantamount to an offence in and of itself. However, it will be a useful indicator of liability should an offence be committed under the Animal Health and Welfare (Scotland) Act 2006.
Question 9 - Do you agree with the section 7 proposal relating to a public awareness raising campaign for the code of practice and projected costs for this set out in the financial memorandum?
Yes
This code of practice could be a ground-breaking educational tool for responsible pet ownership and dog welfare in Scotland. It can only achieve this if every potential dog acquirer or supplier knows about it. Therefore, no expense should be spared in the marketing of the code using any and all channels available to the Scottish Government via animal welfare organisations and mainstream media.
Question 10 - Do you agree with the section 8 power for Scottish Ministers to make regulations to establish a register of litters?
Yes
Establishing a register of litters for puppies under 12 months old could have several benefits for responsible pet ownership and animal welfare. It would encourage responsible breeding practices, with breeders having to adhere to certain ethical standards. It would also allow for the tracking of a puppy’s lineage and pedigree - information valuable for potential owners who will want to know about the dog’s genetic history, health records and temperament. This knowledge would feed directly into the code of practice when considering which dog is best suited for the potential acquirer’s lifestyle and needs. A register would also complement other animal protection laws and regulations like microchipping. However, the effectiveness of the register will depend on proper implementation, enforcement and public awareness. In the Bill as introduced, subsection (4) lists various provision which Scottish Ministers could make, but these will need to be standardised in consultation with stakeholders as soon as possible to ensure the register serves its intended purpose.
Question 11 - Do you agree with the proposal that local authorities enforce a register of litters and the projected costs for this set out in the financial memorandum?
Yes
Local division of powers to enforce the operation of a register of litters seems to be the most effective system provided that local authorities are equipped and resourced to do so.
Question 12 - Do you agree with the section 10 power for Scottish Ministers to make regulations to secure compliance with a register of litters?
Yes
The provision for enforcement and creation of an offence if regulations are breached is a very important allowance that needs to be made in this Bill. Although this is legislation designed to educate, there must be at least the provision for a base level of criminal consequence should these regulations be broken, which should extend to the entry, search, inspection and seizure as stated in subsection (2(e)). There must be mechanism for forced shutdown of an operation which grossly contravenes the code of practice in the interest of dog protection. A possible amendment could be the provision of not just a maximum penalty of imprisonment and/or fine, but also a minimum.
Question 13 - Do you agree with the section 11 proposal relating to a public awareness raising campaign for a register of litters and the projected costs for this set out in the financial memorandum?
Yes
Similar to section 7, it will be vital for there to be the utmost level of public awareness about this regulatory regime in order to help ensure uptake. Any funding necessary should be made available to ensure that registration of puppies under 12 months old is public knowledge.