 |
The image of the stray dog has changed over the years. Right up to the first years of the twentieth century strays were just part of the scene – scroungers, along with tramps and vagabonds. People were wary of them and either threw them bits of food or chased them away. The populace at large was not particularly concerned about their fate. Farmers could and did shoot them. They were a definable entity almost with their own precarious niche. With the growth of the pet food industry and improved practices for preserving meat, the distinction between pet dog and stray became more defined. It had been acceptable to throw rotten meat to a stray, but buying it pet food was not. Preserving the image of the pet dog soon became commercially important and unfavourable attributes such as biting, sheep worrying and rabies were ‘shifted sideways’ and associated with strays. Only relatively recently has it become recognised that dogs causing death and injury to sheep mostly have owners in the vicinity. In the more horrific cases of dog attacks on children the owner is usually known. Now that the pet passports scheme is fully operative it has become apparent that the dogs most likely to be carrying disease are the well-travelled and well-pampered ones. No one simply feeds a strange dog on the doorstep. They ring the council.
The average dog owner is viewed as a model citizen. Those who offend are dismissed as an irresponsible minority. It is claimed that dog owners cannot afford a few pounds for a licence if that should ever become mandatory, yet huge amounts are spent on dog-related products, and the organisations that represent them are wealthy.
|
