Originally Posted by Stuart
The bad owners will always be bad owners, and will not submit to a test unless they have to,... thats fine by me.
I think that the test should be done on a vollunteer basis, and without cost to us, then when we pass, we are given some sort of licence, ...if at some time in the future say after 6 months of the test being introduced, an owner does something wrong,..allows his dog to foul the path without lifting it,..or walking a dog on the road without a lead,..allowing the dog to annoy /attack other people or dogs, then the Police [ for instance ] can ask the owner to show his test certificate/licence.
If he cant produce it, he is then asked to sit the test within a certain time period at a cost, this way the responsible owners dont pay for the irisponsible ones.
Who tests us?, not sure, but there must be someone capable,.the test should not be about obiedence, it doesnt matter if the dog doesnt know a lot, its the person who should be tested not the dog,..so the test would be about, feeding, housing, exercising, can you walk the dog on lead... what do you do if????? this then doesnt discrimiate against people with learning difficulties.
Of course there would then be a big influx of dogs into rescues,.. I certainly wouldnt want that, but every changes brings with it upset, the upset wouldnt last forever, in the end we may just have a far better type of person looking after the dogs in this country
The problems with the dogs is not with the dogs
Stuart
|
08-04-10, 06:29 AM
Linear Mode
