Annual fee for dogs is simply barking
SORRY council, you’re barking up the wrong tree.
Apparently we’re in the midst of an epidemic of unregistered dogs – almost one in three is not properly certified – and as a consequence, council is set to punish recalcitrant owners by doubling fines for noncompliance to $267.
It’s certainly true that unregistered dogs pose a public safety risk, particularly in cases of attacks or nuisance concerns – after all, city officers need to first know the location of the animal in order to investigate and resolve issues. Worryingly, complaints of dog attacks and aggression have increased by about 12 per cent since 2013.
Besides, on a positive note, knowing where the city’s 106,778 dogs live means our city knows where to best provide dog parks and exercise areas.
The reasons for registering dogs make perfect sense … but how we do it does not.
In fact, council is making it ruff to be a responsible dog owner.
If safety is the paramount concern, why don’t we simply have a lifetime registration for each animal? One fee, one time.
Update your details as you and your dog move, just as you have to do now, but otherwise – it’s once and done.
I hate to say it, but we should really be following the lead of NSW.
The state is top dog when it comes to simplifying the process to make it not only easy for owners, but safer for the community.
The rule is simply that your dog must be microchipped and registered on the NSW Pet Registry by the time it’s six months old. Registration is done once, at a cost of $58 for a desexed dog, and is valid for the lifetime of the pet.
If the dog changes owners, there is no need to register the pet again or pay an additional registration fee. You simply change the ownership by “claiming the pet” and updating its registration details on the NSW Pet Registry.
Compare that to dog ownership on the Gold Coast. We pay $45.75 for registration of a desexed dog, $91.50 if not desexed … every single year.
No wonder so many don’t pay. Indeed, operational intelligence to council suggests that many owners of unregistered dogs are facing financial problems.
Personally, it’s not even the fee that perturbs me – but the headache of remembering it’s time to pay. When it comes to unregistered dogs, it’s not just financial hardship but sheer forgetfulness that are the most likely reasons for noncompliance.
In both cases, adopting lifetime registration makes an easy fix that would guarantee increased public safety. More sense, less cents.
It’s something that Southport councillor Dawn Crichlow has long proposed, but it’s yet to gain traction.
I understand that council would be hesitant to remove a revenue-raiser – even if it is missing out on a third of it anyway – but surely safety comes first.
Besides, it’s far easier and more cost-effective to introduce a simple and affordable lifetime registration, rather than hounding each and every noncompliant resident.
Indeed, City of Gold Coast lifestyle and community committee chair Hermann Vorster, who sparked the review of animal management laws, has hinted at just such a labour-intensive policy.
“There used to be a program of doorknocking (in the previous term of council). If there was a historical suggestion that a dog was at a property and the registration had lapsed there was a program of knocking on the door to make sure that the dog at that property was registered,” Cr Vorster said.
“The anecdotal suggestion put to me is that a winding back of that program has led to a decline in overall registrations.”
I’m guessing there’s a reason it was cancelled – and that would be the budget.
Forget about the extra registration fees earned, what about the manpower cost? Talk about working like a dog.
Look, kudos to the council for investigating this problem … I certainly don’t mean to send it to the doghouse.
But when it comes to this annual revenue-raising registration system – which is not only ineffective but ultimately compromises our safety – well, that dog has had its day.
Read Ann Wason Moore every Tuesday and Saturday in the