Dog licences

In your recent article, Time to Renew Dog Licences, you state:

"And this year the Regional District is encouraging dog owners that haven’t yet purchased a licence to do so, joining those responsible dog owners who have and are renewing their licence for 2013 before the end of February."

I take exception to the use of the word "responsible".  My dog has a custom tag on her collar with our cell phone number, she has been tattoed on the inside of her ear for identification purposes, she is current on all her shots and immunizations, she has a current letter from our vet for the purposes of travel internationally, she is fed a healthy diet and exercised daily, she is loved unconditionally by her family, her bodily wastes are picked up religiously. 

Whether we choose to license our dog or not does not define us as responsible or irresponsible.  The licensing of dogs by the Regional District amounts to nothing more than a tax grab. 

There is no justifiable reason for the licensing of our pet over and above the reasons and resultant measures that I have already implemented as has been previously confirmed to me by a Regional District employee.

To infer that the owner of a non-licensed dog is irresponsible is coersive, not necessarily true, and borders on bullying behaviour.

Respectfully Submitted, 

Neil Wong