Options

compulsory dog muzzling

2

Comments

  • Options
    bluebladeblueblade Posts: 88,859
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    CSJB wrote: »
    While some dogs do chase cats I have never owned one that does.
    I have had two dogs attacked by over territorial Tom cats though.

    Would you be in favour of cats wearing muzzles too ?
    just think of all the small animals that would be saved as well.

    I've never yet heard of a small domestic cat attacking a passer by, and never killing a child or a dog.

    So no.
  • Options
    Serial LurkerSerial Lurker Posts: 10,763
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Nat28 wrote: »
    A study showed if you keep your cat in at night it will cut down on the native wildlife getting killed. Some cat owners dont seem to want to do this though

    Don't need a study to know that. Cats decimate garden bird populations.
  • Options
    benjaminibenjamini Posts: 32,066
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Nat28 wrote: »
    A study showed if you keep your cat in at night it will cut down on the native wildlife getting killed. Some cat owners dont seem to want to do this though

    was that the study in New Zealand? cut down cat deaths and the deaths of native birds dramatically.
  • Options
    Nat28Nat28 Posts: 2,949
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    300 million deaths of wildlife a year caused by cats. Read it on bbc nature page
  • Options
    bluebladeblueblade Posts: 88,859
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Don't need a study to know that. Cats decimate garden bird populations.

    Actually most bird deaths are a result of predation by other birds.

    Cats obviously catch some birds, usually baby ones in the Spring. But as they can't fly, they mainly predate small ground based mammals such as mice and shrew.

    Anyway this isn't about cats, it's about dogs which are a potential nuisance to people.
  • Options
    Nat28Nat28 Posts: 2,949
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Keeping cats in at night, neutering at an early age and putting a bell on the cats collar canhelp save many declining native species
  • Options
    CSJBCSJB Posts: 6,188
    Forum Member
    Nat28 wrote: »
    A study showed if you keep your cat in at night it will cut down on the native wildlife getting killed. Some cat owners dont seem to want to do this though

    Some cat owners are so selfish. :(
    I let mine out at night, but she is not a hunter so its ok.
    She has to go out at night because she is a bit shy and doesn't like to be watched while she poos in next doors garden.
  • Options
    Nat28Nat28 Posts: 2,949
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    blueblade wrote: »
    Actually most bird deaths are a result of predation by other birds.

    Cats obviously catch some birds, usually baby ones in the Spring. But as they can't fly, they mainly predate small ground based mammals such as mice and shrew.

    From bbc page ' unfortunately many of the casualties are garden birds whos numbers are already diminishing '
  • Options
    Nat28Nat28 Posts: 2,949
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    CSJB wrote: »
    Some cat owners are so selfish. :(
    I let mine out at night, but she is not a hunter so its ok.
    She has to go out at night because she is a bit shy and doesn't like to be watched while she poos in next doors garden.

    I dont like to get watched while I poo either :D
  • Options
    bluebladeblueblade Posts: 88,859
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Nat28 wrote: »
    From bbc page ' unfortunately many of the casualties are garden birds whos numbers are already diminishing '

    Read and learn
    It is likely that most of the birds killed by cats would have died anyway from other causes before the next breeding season, so cats are unlikely to have a major impact on populations. If their predation was additional to these other causes of mortality, this might have a serious impact on bird populations.

    Those bird species that have undergone the most serious population declines in the UK (such as skylarks, tree sparrows and corn buntings) rarely encounter cats, so cats cannot be causing their declines. Research shows that these declines are usually caused by habitat change or loss, particularly on farmland.
  • Options
    Serial LurkerSerial Lurker Posts: 10,763
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    blueblade wrote: »
    Cats obviously catch some birds, usually baby ones in the Spring. But as they can't fly, they mainly predate small ground based mammals such as mice and shrew.

    Oh, maybe they're the cause of kestrel decline instead then.
  • Options
    darkislanddarkisland Posts: 3,178
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Couldn't we also neuter those who own dogs as geezer style status symbols ?
    A simple 'do you own or have you ever owned a baseball cap' test would surely be enough to identify most of them..:D
  • Options
    CravenHavenCravenHaven Posts: 13,953
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Nat28 wrote: »
    Dont tar every dog with the same brush
    Yes, it's ever so hard to comb out to get them ready for Crufts.
  • Options
    LeeahLeeah Posts: 20,239
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Wouldn't mind, then I can walk through the park peacefully without having to worry about some lunatic dog biting/jumping up on me or even following me... all which they do now minus the biting but never know >:( then the owners never call them back too. >:( I'm kind of okay if I know the dog, it's not so bad it's the ones I don't know I'm wary next too! Hearing far too much stories lately about dog mauling too :(
  • Options
    Serial LurkerSerial Lurker Posts: 10,763
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Leeah wrote: »
    Wouldn't mind, then I can walk through the park peacefully without having to worry about some lunatic dog biting/jumping up on me or even following me... all which they do now minus the biting but never know >:( then the owners never call them back too. >:( I'm kind of okay if I know the dog, it's not so bad it's the ones I don't know I'm wary next too! Hearing far too much stories lately about dog mauling too :(

    What you doing hanging around parks all the time anyway?
  • Options
    flower 2flower 2 Posts: 13,585
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    What you doing hanging around parks all the time anyway?

    Enjoying Man Made freedom.
  • Options
    Si_CreweSi_Crewe Posts: 40,202
    Forum Member
    blueblade wrote: »
    If they're muzzled when out, then they can't hurt anybody, including cats chased by them.

    Must say, I struggle to really summon up much concern for cats.

    Cat owners seem to make a big fuss about them being classed as "wild animals" when it comes to avoiding responsibility for damage and inconvenience they cause but you can't have it both ways.
    You can't claim they're wild when they're busy clawing holes in the roof of somebody's convertible car but then bleat that they're a treasured pet when they get squidged by a car or chased by a dog.

    I mean, if I kicked my dogs out of the house in the morning and then complained when I discovered that one of them had been kicked to death by a horse, I doubt much sympathy would be forthcoming.

    If you want to keep your cat safe (or any other animal) then you must be prepared to take full-time responsibility for it, as dog owners do.
  • Options
    DinkyDoobieDinkyDoobie Posts: 17,786
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    My dogs are already chipped and a licence wouldn't bother me but i'm not putting a muzzle on them because they don't need one.
  • Options
    Si_CreweSi_Crewe Posts: 40,202
    Forum Member
    My dogs are already chipped and a licence wouldn't bother me but i'm not putting a muzzle on them because they don't need one.

    But it makes people who're scared of dogs feel better.

    Perhaps there should be a similar scheme to force black people to wear handcuffs in public to appease those who're afraid of them? :D
  • Options
    NilremNilrem Posts: 6,940
    Forum Member
    The stupid thing about this idea, as with most kneejerk ideas is simple.

    It won't do a thing to stop the idiots and clueless pillocks who are the cause of the problem.

    Responsible owners already muzzle their dog if they know it can't be trusted under some conditions, for example I muzzle our mutt before he goes in to see the vet (quite literally just before as the muzzle goes on when we're called, and off when we come out of the exam room) as he dislikes the vets intensely - but the rest of the time he's fine*.

    Responsible owners will have their pet chipped as well, indeed many vets either do it cheap or as part of a deal when you get them inoculated.

    Responsible "breeders" don't churn out loads of puppies because they value their animals health too much, and in many cases don't want too many puppies out their with their genetic line (it devalues them).

    The problem tends to come from:
    People who want a vicious dog - and often they're already breaking the law.
    Breeders who are there purely to make money - and they're often already braking the law in various ways.
    People who don't care about the fact their dog is not neutered and around other dogs (and pregnant again).
    People who don't have a clue that their dog shouldn't really be left unattended with small children.

    Sensible and law abiding owners will probably find that such laws will either be things they're already doing, or a useless hassle (are dogs meant to be muzzled 24/7? as most of the deaths related to them seem to be in private homes/premises).

    The clueless and don't give a damn about the law owners will just ignore them, as they already do.



    *The only time he's ever bitten (in over a decade) was when I tried forcing a tablet down him when he was really ill, and that just broke the skin slightly on my hand (the one I'd been trying to get the tablet into his mouth with). That was very much my own fault..
  • Options
    [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 36,630
    Forum Member
    Nat28 wrote: »
    Aww god. I was warned about the same thing when I put up a thread about vegetarism and that came true.

    This thread is far fairer than your vegetarianism thread, which I am afraid right from your OP was confrontational.

    You haven't started this one with a dig at dog owners, where as you started that one with an obvious dig at meat eaters.

    For what it's worth, on this topic I agree with you. :D
  • Options
    annette kurtenannette kurten Posts: 39,543
    Forum Member
    compulsory muzzling is going too far, they should be kept on a leash when out though, in my opinion, apart from in specific dog walking places.
  • Options
    bluebladeblueblade Posts: 88,859
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Si_Crewe wrote: »
    Must say, I struggle to really summon up much concern for cats.

    Cat owners seem to make a big fuss about them being classed as "wild animals" when it comes to avoiding responsibility for damage and inconvenience they cause but you can't have it both ways.
    You can't claim they're wild when they're busy clawing holes in the roof of somebody's convertible car but then bleat that they're a treasured pet when they get squidged by a car or chased by a dog.

    I mean, if I kicked my dogs out of the house in the morning and then complained when I discovered that one of them had been kicked to death by a horse, I doubt much sympathy would be forthcoming.

    If you want to keep your cat safe (or any other animal) then you must be prepared to take full-time responsibility for it, as dog owners do.

    Well that's you. There are millions of cat owners who disagree.

    In law small domestic cats are classed as "free spirits" and as such are entitled to roam freely. That is the law irrespective of how much some may dislike it.

    Moreover, small domestic cats don't attack and kill children.

    Dogs do sometimes attack people, and off the lead can be a nuisance to passers by. If they are muzzled then they're not generally going to be a danger to people or cats. Although they could easily knock over a small child and still worry farm livestock.

    controlling your dog in public
    If your dog has strayed, attacked a person, livestock or someone else’s pet, or been out of control on certain specified roads or on land where there is livestock, a dog warden may issue a notice requiring you to keep your dog:

    muzzled when in a public place
    under control (which means on a lead held by someone strong enough to restrain the dog) when in a public place
    securely confined in a building, yard or other enclosure when not under control
    away from any specified place or any type of place
    neutered (if male) within 30 days of the date on which the notice comes into effect
    The notice may also require you to undergo a course of specified training within a six month timescale.

    If you fail to observe any of these conditions and do not take all reasonable steps to make sure that that the condition is fulfilled, you commit an offence punishable by a fine of up to £2,500.

    No such legislation applies to small domestic cats. There is a reason for that.
  • Options
    KathrynhaKathrynha Posts: 642
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    As someone who has a phobia of dogs part of me thinks yes muzzle them all, but even I don't really think that is the solution.

    My solution would be:
    - Mandatory microchipping
    - Licensing of breeders, with all dogs not owned by breeders have mandatory neutering (I would do the same with cats too)
    - Mandatory dog license, and to get the license you would have to do a training course of looking after and training dogs.
    - All dogs to be on leads (set length ones, not the extending ones) at all times except designated areas (money from licenses used to pay for the creation of these areas
    - Maximum weight of dogs being walked would have to be less than a third/half (not quite sure of the amount, but basically person should be strong enough to control the dog) of the weight of the walker - so an adult could walk a number of small dogs at once, but a child couldn't be responsible for a massive dog.
    - The owner of a dog should be punished for the actions of a dog, to the same level as a human doing it, even on private property. ie. dog bite is GBH, dog killing a person is murder, however dog biting an intruder is self defense.
    - Failure to follow the above would result in a fine for first offense (money going to creating dog parks), and dog removed from the owner for a second offence with a set length ban from owning a dog. The set length ban would increase if they reoffend, eventually leading to a lifetime ban from dog ownership.
  • Options
    LeeahLeeah Posts: 20,239
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    What you doing hanging around parks all the time anyway?

    Who says I am always there? To get go a few places it's much quicker cutting through the park....
Sign In or Register to comment.