Dogs (Protection of Livestock) Act 1953
Write the words of this act the way you think they should read. Solon shows your change as a redline against the published text and pins it to that exact text, so it can never be applied to wording you did not see.
Change 1
1 Offence where dog attacks or worries livestock
(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, if a dog attacks or worries livestock on any agricultural land or on a road or path, the owner of the dog, and, if it is in the charge of a person other than its owner, that person also, shall be guilty of an offence under this Act. (2) For the purposes of this Act worrying livestock means— (a) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (b) chasing livestock in such a way as may reasonably be expected to cause injury or suffering to the livestock or, in the case of females, abortion, or loss of or diminution in their produce; or (c) being at large (that is to say not on a lead or otherwise under close control) in a field or enclosure in which there are sheep (2A) Subsection (2)(c) of this section shall not apply in relation to— (a) a dog owned by, or in the charge of, the occupier of the field or enclosure or the owner of the sheep or a person authorised by either of those persons; or (b) a police dog, a guide dog, trained sheep dog, a working gun dog or a pack of hounds. (3) A person shall not be guilty of an offence under this Act by reason of anything done by a dog on any agricultural land, if at the material time the livestock are trespassing on the land in question and the dog is owned by, or in the charge of, the occupier of that land or a person authorised by him, except in a case where the said person causes the dog to attack the livestock. (3A) A person is not guilty of an offence under this Act by reason of anything done by a dog on a road or path if at the material time the livestock are on the road or path as a result of straying from where they are kept, unless the person causes the dog to attack the livestock. (4) The owner of a dog shall not be convicted of an offence under this Act in respect of the attacking or worrying of livestock by the dog if the owner proves that at the time when the dog attacked or worried the livestock it was in the charge of some other person and that— (a) the owner reasonably believed that other person to be a fit and proper person to be in charge of the dog, or (b) the owner did not consent to the dog’s being in the charge of that other person. (5) Where the Minister is satisfied that it is inexpedient that subsection (1) of this section should apply to land in any particular area, being an area appearing to him to consist wholly or mainly of mountain, hill, moor, heath or down land, he may by order direct that that subsection shall not apply to land in that area. (6) A person who commits an offence under this section is liable on summary conviction to a fine. (7) Where— (a) a person is convicted of an offence under this section which was committed on or after this subsection comes into force, and (b) the dog in respect of which the offence was committed was seized and detained in connection with the offence in accordance with section 2(8) and (9) (dogs posing continuing threat), the court may order the person to pay whatever sum the court determines to be the reasonable expenses incurred by reason of the dog’s seizure and detention. (8) A court may make an order under subsection (7) whether or not it deals with the person in any other way for the offence. (9) A sum required to be paid by an order under subsection (7) is treated for the purposes of enforcement as if it were compensation payable under a compensation order (as defined in section 133 of the Sentencing Code).
1 Offence where dog attacks or worries livestock
(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, if a dog attacks or worries livestock on any agricultural land or on a road or path, the owner of the dog, and, if it is in the charge of a person other than its owner, that person also, shall be guilty of an offence under this Act. (2) For the purposes of this Act worrying livestock means— (a) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (b) chasing livestock in such a way as may reasonably be expected to cause injury or suffering to the livestock or, in the case of females, abortion, or loss of or diminution in their produce; or (c) being at large (that is to say not on a lead or otherwise under close control) in a field or enclosure in which there are sheep (2A) Subsection (2)(c) of this section shall not apply in relation to— (a) a dog owned by, or in the charge of, the occupier of the field or enclosure or the owner of the sheep or a person authorised by either of those persons; or (b) a police dog, a guide dog, trained sheep dog, a working gun dog or a pack of hounds. (3) A person shall not be guilty of an offence under this Act by reason of anything done by a dog on any agricultural land, if at the material time the livestock are trespassing on the land in question and the dog is owned by, or in the charge of, the occupier of that land or a person authorised by him, except in a case where the said person causes the dog to attack the livestock. (3A) A person is not guilty of an offence under this Act by reason of anything done by a dog on a road or path if at the material time the livestock are on the road or path as a result of straying from where they are kept, unless the person causes the dog to attack the livestock. (4) The owner of a dog shall not be convicted of an offence under this Act in respect of the attacking or worrying of livestock by the dog if the owner proves that at the time when the dog attacked or worried the livestock it was in the charge of some other person and that— (a) the owner reasonably believed that other person to be a fit and proper person to be in charge of the dog, or (b) the owner did not consent to the dog’s being in the charge of that other person. (5) Where the Minister is satisfied that it is inexpedient that subsection (1) of this section should apply to land in any particular area, being an area appearing to him to consist wholly or mainly of mountain, hill, moor, heath or down land, he may by order direct that that subsection shall not apply to land in that area. (6) A person who commits an offence under this section is liable on summary conviction to a fine. (7) Where— (a) a person is convicted of an offence under this section which was committed on or after this subsection comes into force, and (b) the dog in respect of which the offence was committed was seized and detained in connection with the offence in accordance with section 2(8) and (9) (dogs posing continuing threat), the court may order the person to pay whatever sum the court determines to be the reasonable expenses incurred by reason of the dog’s seizure and detention. (8) A court may make an order under subsection (7) whether or not it deals with the person in any other way for the offence. (9) A sum required to be paid by an order under subsection (7) is treated for the purposes of enforcement as if it were compensation payable under a compensation order (as defined in section 133 of the Sentencing Code).
One line that says what changes, such as "Halve the dog tax".
Who it helps, what it costs, what it fixes. It is what persuades people to support it.
A proposal here is not law. Support on Solon is evidence that people want the change; the official route says what it takes to make it law.
Sign in to file your proposal. What you have written stays on this page.
Sign in to file itThink it through
Ask what your change would do, who would gain and who would bear a cost, and where something like it is already law. The assistant reads your draft as it stands, cites the law and the studies it finds, and takes no side. What you file stays yours.