Your data on MRCVSonline
The nature of the services provided by Vision Media means that we might obtain certain information about you.
Please read our Data Protection and Privacy Policy for details.

In addition, (with your consent) some parts of our website may store a 'cookie' in your browser for the purposes of
functionality or performance monitoring.
Click here to manage your settings.
If you would like to forward this story on to a friend, simply fill in the form below and click send.

Your friend's email:
Your email:
Your name:
 
 
Send Cancel
Pet Care Trust Responds to Consultation
The Pet Care Trust has welcomed the Consultation on Dangerous Dogs published by Defra but is concerned that the proposals for compulsory microchipping and insurance will create unnecessary burdens on the vast majority of pet owners who do behave responsibly.

Commenting on the consultation, Janet Nunn, chief executive of the Pet Care Trust said:  “There are merits in insuring and microchipping your dog, but making this compulsory would have the effect of penalising responsible pet owners – and potentially criminalising those who are financially vulnerable. The costs involved could be devastating for those in low income households, meaning that some would have to consider giving their pets up or having them put to sleep. Why should the behaviour of a small irresponsible minority mean that an older person living alone with just their harmless pet for companionship has to foot a bill for microchipping and insurance – or risk losing their pet? Many dog owners will comply with the proposed legislation whilst the irresponsible few will not and will thus avoid the costs involved. There has to be a better way of tackling the problem.

“Whilst the Trust supports microchipping (as stated in our submission to the Bateson inquiry) and believes it is the best way of identifying a dog, we do not believe that it should be made mandatory for all. The present legal requirement for dogs in public to wear a collar and tag showing the owner’s name and address is perfectly serviceable for the vast majority of dogs and their owners. Whilst microchipping is desirable, it would be disproportionate to criminalise those who cannot afford to comply. We also fail to see the necessity of annual checks on microchipped dogs, which would make this even more costly for the pet owner.

“As for pet insurance, most responsible owners insure, but we shouldn’t criminalise those who choose not to. Every dog owner has a duty of care to their animal and a responsibility to society, but it would be wrong to allow a few bad elements to hinder the benefits that 8 million dog owners in the UK enjoy. Dogs are good for your health: research shows dog owners (especially pensioners) make fewer visits to the doctor, experience lower levels of stress and have lower blood pressure and cholesterol levels than non pet owners. There is also evidence to suggest that young people particularly benefit physically, emotionally and socially from living with dogs and learning about responsible pet ownership. These benefits to society (and the NHS) should not be overlooked.”

Become a member or log in to add this story to your CPD history

Practices urged to audit neutering data

News Story 1
 RCVS Knowledge has called on vet practices to audit their post-operative neutering outcomes.

It follows the release of the 2024 NASAN benchmarking report, which collates data from neutering procedures performed on dogs, cats and rabbits.

The benchmarking report enables practices in the UK and Ireland to compare their post-operative outcomes to the national average. This includes the rate of patients lost to follow-up, which in 2024 increased to 23 per cent.

Anyone from the practice can submit the data using a free template. The deadline for next report is February 2026.

Visit the RCVS Knowledge website to complete an audit. 

Click here for more...
News Shorts
UK's BSE risk status downgraded

The WOAH has downgraded the UK's international risk status for BSE to 'negligible'.

Defra says that the UK's improved risk status recognises the reputation for having the highest standards for biosecurity. It adds that it demonstrates decades of rigorous animal control.

Outbreaks of Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy, also known as mad cow disease, have previously resulted in bans on Britain's beef exports.

The UK's new status could lead to expanded trade and better confidence in British beef.

Christine Middlemiss, the UK's chief veterinary officer, said: "WOAH's recognition of the UK as negligible risk for BSE is a significant milestone and is a testament to the UK's strong biosecurity measures and the hard work and vigilance of farmers and livestock keepers across the country who have all played their part in managing the spread of this disease.