Licence rule has its drawbacks
Metro, 25 Oct 2005

I AGREE with Joey Sze that “Dog License Ruling Has Its Drawbacks” (StarMetro, Oct 5). 

Any attempt to force-train dogs as a pre-requisite for licenses is ludicrous and clearly a half-baked plan. 

As a dog-trainer myself, I have several reasons for saying this, including:  

1. Not all dogs can be trained. Dogs that will not respond well to training include old dogs (as in Joey's case), puppies, animals in heat, infirm and canines traumatized from having been abused by previous owners or trainers.  

2. Dog training is not a one-time exercise but rather a lifelong process.  

3. Even the best-trained dog has the potential to bite back as a natural mode of self-defense, especially when teased .  

4. There are many forms of training methods and each dog responds differently to each style.  

5. To my knowledge, nowhere in the world is there a law that requires all dogs to be forcefully trained as a rule to be kept as pets.  

6. The Good Canine Citizen course that MKA plans on using has its copyright in the US and Australia. Those who intend to conduct such courses, I understand, must go through the programme themselves   with     an    expert

overseas trainer. MKA must prove that it has the credentials to do so.  

7. Forced training could very well increase cases of cruelty to animals as owners who feel pressured may resort to using harsh methods such as hitting and hurting their animals that do not respond to a particular exercise.  

8. It could also result in more pet owners not wanting to register their pets with the local authorities which would clearly be counter productive to any of the good intentions of the organization.  

Perhaps the most important question that we must all ask is what happens to dogs that fail a test?      Will      they      be

confiscated or put down just because they happen to be not in the best form on test day?  

There are plans that the MKA is to be given the right to test all the animals. Why should one organisation be given such a right to decide the future of our pets? 

Thus, rather than training, I suggest that MPSJ make visiting the vet at least once a year as a requirement to own pet dogs.  

That would simply make more sense and much kinder on everyone.  

HEALTHY DOG,  
Petaling Jaya.