There’s something about the partnership with pets that I love, when the animal is put first, as they should be, it can be wonderful for them and the people who look after them. It feels like a relationship with parts of nature that humanity can continue to explore over the coming millennia. But when pets aren’t looked after properly, they can cause problems, such as untrained dogs hurting people, a disrespect for nature where roaming cats aren’t controlled in important wildlife spots or when meadows for horses aren’t managed correctly.
In reality, most pet owners will be responsible and aware of these impacts. Keeping cats in at night and putting bells on to minimise hunting, putting dogs on leads on moors during ground nesting bird season. How then, to manage the minority who cause problems, whether unwittingly or because they simply don’t care? Or the people who don’t look after their animals?
When I was growing up in the 1980s, we used to have dog licences. These were abolished in 1987 to be replaced by various laws to protect animal welfare and people, but this relies on proactive reporting and although people can be stopped from owning pets, it’s not very well controlled, especially nature protections.
A better method would be to introduce a new version of pet licence, this would go a long way to solving all of the problems associated with pets. If anyone wants to own any kind of pet, it feels sensible that they should go on record as owning that pet. In today’s world of databases and modern tech, it would be extremely easy to manage such a large database. If someone doesn’t stick to the rules, they could be fined and have their licence revoked never to own pets again.
The management and policing could be paid for by a small fee for the licence and from fines. Though there would have to be provision to help people on low incomes to own pets too – the cost of pets has been rising too high in recent years.
Pet licences would go a long way to solving people’s concerns about animal welfare and also, impact on nature from pets. For instance, it would be possible and very easy to say no licences can be given for outdoor cats in certain wildlife sensitive areas, or at least, limit the number. This would allow for cat welfare while also helping the most sensitive nature. Anyone who lets their dog chase protected ground nesting birds, or to harm sheep could have their licence revoked etc.
This seems like such a simple and obvious step to sensible pet ownership and would increase pet welfare. It protects nature without the extreme blanket ban of pets that some people have called for. Pet licences in a world with modern technology allows for a better, more bespoke and specific strategy for future pet ownership.
Follow me on BlueSky / Join my newsletter
Questions
Why is it so easy to bring back pet licences?
With modern database technology, it would literally be a database of licences with data against them of pets owned and when. Easy to include categories of different pets. Any wrong doing against the pet could be marked on the system. Fines could automatically be sent, with a small team overseeing them first, which could escalate if they are unpaid or more rules against the pet are broken.
How would this help conservation?
Databases would allow for conservationists to flag postcodes or areas as more sensitive allowing for some restrictions or blocks on pet ownership in those areas. For instance, if there is a particularly sensitive reserve for conservation, it may collectively be decided that new licences won’t be given for free roaming pets in that area, or limit it to an acceptable number.
Who will pay for it?
The main cost is a database and a small team to oversee it, as well as a cost to enforcement, though this will be similar to what exists already with current law. Work out the cost, divide it by pet owners less the expected income from fines and that gives the overall cost of the licence. I’d expect any responsible pet owner to be happy with paying a small licence cost to cover such protections for people, pets and wildlife. There are lots of existing examples of this system, from driving licences, which is the best example, to drinks licences and the small Information Commissioner’s Office data protection fee for any person or company handling data. If we care about these things, we should care enough to do the same for our pets and wildlife.
How will it be enforced?
Modern automated databases, overseen by a small team of people checking first, would make it easy to send out information, notices, warnings, fines, escalating fines and information that unpaid fines would be escalated to the police or courts etc. Most people would adhere to the rules, as we see with driving licences, so the enforcement would likely be for a small number of people and not that different to what we see today with current law.
If it’s similar to current law, what’s the point?
Having a single database of all pets and owners makes everything much easier to oversee and efficient for enforcement, such as for the police when dog attacks happen, it also gives conservationists a better amount of control over the impact of sensitive areas. Making it easy to restrict certain licences in sensitive areas, or ban certain people from obtaining a licence to own a new pet if they mistreated them in the past.
