Dogs

ip485

Well-Known Member
Joined
13 Feb 2013
Messages
1,614
Visit site
As I understand matters you can freely take a dog or cat between the UK mainland and the CIs, Northern Island and the Isle of Man. You cant do the same between the UK and France. I guess from France to the CIs and then the UK is also not permitted? I refer of course by private vessel as opposed to approved transport company.

Should we all petition the Government and get the RYA on side to change this rather ridiculous state of affairs. Of course the dog or cat should meet the requirements in terms of passport etc and offer itself for inspection but otherwise this is unreasonably restrictive and hardly in the spirit of the scheme in so far as enacted by almost every other country?
 
Not sure about UK boats to/from Jersey, but as a Jersey boat if we take a dog to France say Granville it can only come back to Jersey via a specific carrier such as Condorferries from St Malo. So taking the pet with the family to France for the weekend is not possible. This has pretty much scuppered the plans of adding a dog to the family for me and the kids.....
 
What is this we patter? I take it you mean other pet owners. If you wish to start a petition do it then on your own I won’t support it, hate the damn things. Anyway I am sure your pet will enjoy some time away from you if you go to France. I believe the rule may be based around animals bringing disease into this island nation of ours, which makes a lot of sense. Things that are restrictive are tight Y-fronts, very restrictive, but not being able to take your dog/cat to France. I’m sure they will understand and get over it.
 
What is this we patter? I take it you mean other pet owners. If you wish to start a petition do it then on your own I won’t support it, hate the damn things. Anyway I am sure your pet will enjoy some time away from you if you go to France. I believe the rule may be based around animals bringing disease into this island nation of ours, which makes a lot of sense. Things that are restrictive are tight Y-fronts, very restrictive, but not being able to take your dog/cat to France. I’m sure they will understand and get over it.

Bit grumpy. Someone kick your kennel? Our 'island nation' is over prescriptive and restrictive in lots of ways. Inoculated dogs, with valid passports, checked by vets etc, pose no risk to the health of our island. Petty legislation and over regulation to justify jobs for the boys. We have a vast civil service, far in excess of our needs. Relic of our empire I read somewhere.
 
I thought the rules were that you had to bring an animal in so its chip can be read - otherwise there's no point having a chip. This means coming through a commercial port. I suppose having been rabies free for many many years is a good thing...?
 
It also needs to be treated for worm and parasites, the rabies jabs need to be up to date. Carriage back to Uk needs to arrive at a port that has the staff to check that the procedures are correct. hardly possible with us phoning in to some voice in Dover when we return.
And I am a dog owner who takes his dog to CIs with no problem. Not interested in having him consort with those foreigners and their bad health/ manners.
 
In some ways it is becoming a farce. The dogs have to treated for worm and parasites within a time window that coincides with the ferry or tunnel time. So you have to calculated backwards from your crossing time.

When I was in France the vet, down in the South of France just asked me what date and time would be suitable and filled in the documents accordingly.

Last year, when I helped my son transport his dog and car back from Naples we realised that we would arrive at the Channel Tunnel about 12 hours early, as we had a good run back. They just accepted the documents without question.
 
Bit grumpy. Someone kick your kennel? Our 'island nation' is over prescriptive and restrictive in lots of ways. Inoculated dogs, with valid passports, checked by vets etc, pose no risk to the health of our island. Petty legislation and over regulation to justify jobs for the boys. We have a vast civil service, far in excess of our needs. Relic of our empire I read somewhere.

Our 'island nation' is over prescriptive for a very good reason. There are individuals who will flaunt the rules, the irresponsible dog owners who feel they don’t need to abide by any rules. So it’s one size fits all, a ban and everyone complies and that way the risk to our health will not be compromised. Individuals who believe that “pose no risk to the health of our island” may be in that irresponsible petty group.
 
Sorry but legislation mainly impacts the law abiding. Think of gun laws. People,still get shot. Dangerous dogs act? Kids still get killed. I repeat my earlier point that a dog that is vaccinated against rabies, treated for lice, ticks and other nasties poses no public health risk. Your point that 'everyone complies' is wrong. The honest and law abiding comply, others don't give a stuff and go ahead.

I do not usually get involved in forum spats but your comments are simply wrong and I felt I had to respond. I am out.
 
I thought the rules were that you had to bring an animal in so its chip can be read - otherwise there's no point having a chip. This means coming through a commercial port. I suppose having been rabies free for many many years is a good thing...?

Rabies free?
In the last decade there have been more cases of rabies in Britain than in France.

From BBC news:

The rabies virus is present in the saliva of an infected animal and is usually transmitted to humans by a bite. The symptoms can take two to three weeks to appear.

It can be fatal if not treated, but there has been no case of rabies being contracted by humans in mainland France since 1923.

The last case of rabies in the UK was reported in May 2012.

The legislation is petty.
But why waste a good bureaucracy?
 
Rabies free?
In the last decade there have been more cases of rabies in Britain than in France.

Your statement needs clarification.

Are you saying that there have been no cases of rabies in animals in France since 1923?

Are you saying that there was a case of rabies in a human in UK in May 2012?

Otherwise, your point does not really count for much.
 
Your statement needs clarification.

Are you saying that there have been no cases of rabies in animals in France since 1923?

Are you saying that there was a case of rabies in a human in UK in May 2012?

Otherwise, your point does not really count for much.


No case of a human contracting rabies in France since 1923

Last case of a human contracting rabies in the UK was in May 2012.
 
Your statement needs clarification.

Are you saying that there have been no cases of rabies in animals in France since 1923?

Are you saying that there was a case of rabies in a human in UK in May 2012?

Otherwise, your point does not really count for much.

I took OR4751 to be saying that there have been more recent cases of rabies in humans in the UK than in France, by some 89 years. Which is indicative that the rabies laws in the UK are both over-proscriptive and ineffective.

Boo2
 
No case of a human contracting rabies in France since 1923

Last case of a human contracting rabies in the UK was in May 2012.


Are you referring to this?

'Since 1946, twenty-five cases have been reported in the United Kingdom, all imported. Until the case reported in May 2012, only 4 cases had occurred since 2000. Two unconnected cases occurred in 2001, imported from the Philippines and Nigeria (CDR Weekly 11 May 2001 , CDR Weekly 14 June 2001 ). A case in 2005 followed a dog-bite in Goa (Eurosurveillance, 28 July 2005 ), and a case in December 2008 followed a dog bite in South Africa (Health Protection Report, 19 December 2008). The most recent case was in 2012, and was acquired in India.'

Can't find any references to rabid dogs in the UK biting humans and passing on their rabies.
 
Are you referring to this?

'Since 1946, twenty-five cases have been reported in the United Kingdom, all imported. Until the case reported in May 2012, only 4 cases had occurred since 2000. Two unconnected cases occurred in 2001, imported from the Philippines and Nigeria (CDR Weekly 11 May 2001 , CDR Weekly 14 June 2001 ). A case in 2005 followed a dog-bite in Goa (Eurosurveillance, 28 July 2005 ), and a case in December 2008 followed a dog bite in South Africa (Health Protection Report, 19 December 2008). The most recent case was in 2012, and was acquired in India.'

Can't find any references to rabid dogs in the UK biting humans and passing on their rabies.

The information in the BBC article I got my info from was was not as detailed, but your quote may very well be correct (looks like your info came from Wikipedia).

Also from the very same Wikipedia page:

Rabies-free jurisdictions

Europe: Austria, Belgium, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, Gibraltar, Greece, Iceland, Ireland, Isle of Man, Luxemburg, Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Spain (except Ceuta and Melilla), Sweden, Switzerland, and United Kingdom

From the HPA web page

Rabies in France, update 5 November 2013


Authorities in France have reported that a kitten has been diagnosed and confirmed with rabies (1). The kitten was found on 25th October in the town of Argenteuil, Val d’Oise, a suburb to the northwest of Paris. It died on 28th October. The kitten was about two months old, and white, black and tan in colour.

Subsequent investigations revealed that it had been imported from Morocco on October 13th.

France has been rabies free since 2010, when it regained this status following an incident where rabies was transmitted from an imported dog. A rabid puppy was also imported in 2011, but this did not lead to any secondary transmissions.

It would seem that the most recent cases in France and the UK were imported - none of them have resulted in human fatalities.
I would like to argue that the current practise is overly restrictive and only serves to annoy the travelling public and to keep a superfluous bureaucracy alive.
 
.I would like to argue that the current practise is overly restrictive and only serves to annoy the travelling public and to keep a superfluous bureaucracy alive.

I apologise. I thought you were arguing the contrary.

One annoyance to me is having to pay an additional £15.00 for my JRT on Eurotunnel from UK to France. I can understand it from France to UK where the chip and Pet Passport must be checked but there are no checks whatsoever (because they are not necessary) on departing the UK side.
 
I apologise. I thought you were arguing the contrary.

One annoyance to me is having to pay an additional £15.00 for my JRT on Eurotunnel from UK to France. I can understand it from France to UK where the chip and Pet Passport must be checked but there are no checks whatsoever (because they are not necessary) on departing the UK side.

The fact that you have to pay an extra £15 for the UK->FR transit is a fairly recent change (last year or so).
Up till then the charge was £30 for the FR->UK transit and nothing for the UK->FR transit.
I'm sure there is a commercial reason for the change.
 
Top