Omg ott! DNA for dogs - Page 6

Less · 19-03-2012, 21:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by jaysay

Ya can't research Trout Rustling in Tinker Brook on Wiki Less

If it ain't on wiki it hasn't happened yet.
Or maybe it's under a different heading? 'families poisoned by river stinks mutant sticklebacks'.

Stevie R · 19-03-2012, 22:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by Less

If it ain't on wiki it hasn't happened yet.
Or maybe it's under a different heading? 'families poisoned by river stinks mutant sticklebacks'.

Try ten trout tickled at Tinker today.

jaysay · 20-03-2012, 09:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stevie R

Try ten trout tickled at Tinker today.

Just like to say how tickled I am

kestrelx · 21-03-2012, 14:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by MargaretR

This is a second incident of misreporting/overinflating facts by the Observer.

Could a strongly worded solicitors letter deter them from doing it yet again?

Well in some parts of the country they have wardens looking for dog walkers who let their dogs foul! They take photos and issue them with on spot fines. So why not have dog turd samplers and a DNA data base!

Neil · 21-03-2012, 18:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by kestrelx

Well in some parts of the country they have wardens looking for dog walkers who let their dogs foul! They take photos and issue them with on spot fines. So why not have dog turd samplers and a DNA data base!

Like I said before, I think it would need a change of law or a court order to force dog owners to give a DNS sample from their dogs

jaysay · 21-03-2012, 18:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by Neil

Like I said before, I think it would need a change of law or a court order to force dog owners to give a DNS sample from their dogs

Not to mention the cost Neil

accyman · 21-03-2012, 19:38

i think its about time dna samples were taken from cats so cat owners can be fined.Cat owners are way worse offenders than dog owners for letting their pets poop where they sholdnt and iv yet to see 1 cat owner clean up after its moggy where as at least most dog owners clear up after their dogs.

if its what dogs do wont wash with the law then why shoudl its what cats do wash with the law?

Neil · 21-03-2012, 20:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by jaysay

Not to mention the cost Neil

What does it cost to clean up the mess?
You need to know the cost of both before you can dismiss the idea on cost alone.

jaysay · 22-03-2012, 10:06

Quote:

Originally Posted by Neil

What does it cost to clean up the mess?
You need to know the cost of both before you can dismiss the idea on cost alone.

The cost of DNA testing would be exorbitant and would way down the list, I would imagine you wouldn't have much change out of £200 a pop for the testing, but at £50 a time it wouldn't be feasible, how many dogs are there in Hyndburn and for the scheme to be effective all dogs would need to be on that list, something else that wouldn't happen

Less · 22-03-2012, 10:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by jaysay

I would imagine you wouldn't have much change out of £200 a pop for the testing, but at £50 a time it wouldn't be feasible, how many dogs are there in Hyndburn and for the scheme to be effective all dogs would need to be on that list, something else that wouldn't happen

And so would every dog turd, they won't be tested for free!

jaysay · 22-03-2012, 10:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by Less

And so would every dog turd, they won't be tested for free!

Exactly Less, its a complete load of nonsense, the thing is for every dog to be tested for their DNA, it could be done on a whim from HBC, it would take government legislation, the council couldn't compel dog owners to have their dogs tested, so the all exercise is a none starter

Neil · 22-03-2012, 12:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by jaysay

Exactly Less, its a complete load of nonsense, the thing is for every dog to be tested for their DNA, it could be done on a whim from HBC, it would take government legislation, the council couldn't compel dog owners to have their dogs tested, so the all exercise is a none starter

That is what I said and why it would need government involved.

I still think if you have a dog you should pay a license fee, it should be chipped and dna tested. Any dogs found not licensed, chipped and tested should be confiscated and destroyed after 14 days if not collected with the legals completed.

Lets see who moans about that first.

Less · 22-03-2012, 12:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by Neil

Lets see who moans about that first.

Well it won't be me, anyone that wants an animal should be responsible enough to obey all laws concerning it.

davemac · 22-03-2012, 13:11

Lets not stick to dogs, lets expand it to cats as has been previously stated, then lets look at horses, they may not be as numerous, but they leave a lump that you can trip over.
Then we should expand it to birds, lets start with pidgeons they make a mess on cars and public buildings, then lets expand it to seagulls, they fly in flocks from the tip just letting rip at will........I think I may have overstated it a bit, but it is just as daft as the original idea

Neil · 22-03-2012, 13:21

Quote:

Originally Posted by Less

Well it won't be me, anyone that wants an animal should be responsible enough to obey all laws concerning it.

I agree with you Less. Before we got our dog I tried to find out the legal responsibilities for dog owners. You would expect that to be a simple thing like looking at the dog warden section on Hyndburns website. They tell you nothing at all. Even so called good dog forums don't help out owners by stating legal responsibilities so its not surprising many people are unaware of the current dog laws.