Plans for a crackdown on dog owners who let their animals run dangerously out of control have met with a positive response, according to the MSP behind them.
SNP backbencher Alex Neil received about 100 responses to his proposed Control of Dogs (Scotland) Bill, which is calling for a new approach to the issue.
"Overall, the reaction to my proposals has been very positive," Mr Neil said today.
Under the proposals owners could be liable to pay up to £5,000 in compensation for injury or damage.
In the most serious cases they could face an unlimited fine and up to two years in jail.
He said the law would operate on a preventative basis, enabling control orders - "ASBOs for dogs" - to be issued to owners of dangerous animals.
The orders could require measures like muzzling, re-homing, and owners attending mandatory dog-training courses.
Most responses to the consultation, which ended yesterday, came from a variety of animal welfare organisations, dog wardens, local authorities and members of the public.
Mr Neil said a few technicalities had been brought to his attention with suggestions for minor improvements.
But he said the current legislation - which focuses on a few specific breeds - has not made the public safer.
"My approach aims to shift focus from the dogs on to the owners, as they should always be responsible for ensuring their dog does not endanger public safety," he said.
"There is a minority of dog owners out there who are simply not responsible with their dogs, and we need ways to act against them."
It was also "baffling" that laws do not make attacks on private property a criminal offence, according to Mr Neil who said his proposals will change this.
The previous First Minister Jack McConnell last year told Mr Neil in Parliament there were no plans to review dangerous dogs legislation in the wake of a fatal pit bull attack on a child in England.
Ellie Lawrenson, five, died of severe head and neck injuries after being mauled at her grandmother's house in St Helens.
The responses to Mr Neil's consultation will now be analysed, before a proposed Bill is framed.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article