Are dangerous dog law plans barking up the wrong tree?

Mar 13 2010 Huddersfield Daily Examiner

Are dangerous dog law plans barking up the wrong tree?

THIS week the Government announced plans to force dog owners to insure their animals against injuries to other people.

And Dog Behaviour Orders (Dogbos) could be in the pipeline forcing irresponsible owners to muzzle, leash or even neuter their pets.

These plans, designed to combat the growing problem of vicious animals being bred for use as weapons, sound sensible.

The number of people hospitalised by out-of-control dogs has increased by 70% in the last 12 years, according figures uncovered by the Conservatives.

Indeed, Huddersfield has been no stranger to horrific dog attacks in the last seven months – the latest of which has left a young mother with permanent facial damage.

PDSA, which provides free veterinary services for pets of needy owners, and the RSPCA welcomed the plans.

But both charities stressed the importance of targeting irresponsible dog owners rather than the dogs themselves.

So can the Government’s plans work? How would they implement them?

The cost of insuring a dog against vets’ bills and third party injury varies on where you live, the age and breed of the dog and if the animal has a history of aggression.

Unsurprisingly to insure a Rottweiler – a powerful breed often used for security – costs more than most other breeds.

Quotes for a year’s cover for an 18-month-old Rottweiler living in Huddersfield varied from £288 to £788 from three of Britain’s biggest insurers (RSPCA, Petplan and Asda).

By comparison a relatively harmless Yorkshire Terrier would cost between £102 and £419 to insure for 12 months.

But, interestingly, quotes for an Akita, a large Japanese hunting dog notorious for biting, varied from £221 to £433.

A few hundred pounds a year to cover your dog doesn’t sound so bad.