A Bill to make provision changing the law about the offence of livestock worrying, including changes to what constitutes an offence and increased powers for investigation of suspected offences; and for connected purposes.
The information below was generated through an automated process and is for information purposes only.
This is not the latest version of the Bill
Available Versions
| Date | Debate |
|---|---|
| Wednesday 21st May 2025 | Committee stage |
Relevant Documents
Your selections will update the bill and amendment list to show only amendments matching your chosen criteria.
This glossary explains the colour coding used to indicate the type of amendment.
| Type | Description |
|---|---|
| Black center indicates Government or Bill Sponsor amendment | |
| Front Bench Amendment from any Opposition Party indicated by party colour | |
| Back Bench Amendment from any MP - Outline Colour indicates party |
Page 1
Source Bill 062 EN 2024-25
8 This clause gives effect to the Schedule, which sets out amendments to the 1953 Act. The amendments in the Schedule include increasing the maximum penalty for an offence under section 1 of the 1953 Act, extending the landscape covered to include roads and paths and including camelids in the definition of livestock. More details are set out below.
Source Bill 062 EN 2024-25
9 Subsection (1) of this clause replaces section 2 of the 1953 Act. This clause sets out the circumstances, described in new section 2(1) and (8), in which a constable may seize and detain a dog in relation to the offence of attacking or worrying livestock.
10 The limited scope of the existing power prevents the police from seizing a dog for prolonged periods of time. It is common for a dog alleged to have worried livestock, whose owner is awaiting trial for an offence under the 1953 Act, to commit further attacks in the interim period between the incident and the court case which can be a relatively long period (e.g., between four and twelve months). The measure aims to help prevent dogs from repeatedly worrying or attacking livestock.
11 New section 2(2) of the 1953 Act provides that a constable who seizes a dog in the circumstances described in subsection (1) may detain the dog until the owner has claimed the dog and paid all expenses incurred by reason of its seizure and detention.
12 New section 2(3) makes provision about what can be done to any dog seized under subsection (1) if they are not claimed after seven days.
13 New section 2(4) provides that if a person takes possession of a seized dog in good faith, that person becomes the owner of the dog.
14 New section 2(5) and (6) sets out requirements in relation to the keeping of a register of all dogs seized under subsection (1) by the chief officer of police for each police area.
15 New section 2(7) includes a definition of "disposing of" a dog for the purposes of this section.
16 New section 2(8) and (9) empowers the police to seize and detain a dog where they have reasonable grounds to believe that the dog poses a risk of attacking or worrying livestock again, if not detained.
17 Subsection (2) of this clause makes consequential provision to repeal section 3 of the Dogs Act 1906 so far as it is still in force by virtue of section 68(2) of the Clean Neighbourhoods and Environment Act 2005.
Page 2
Page 3
Source Bill 062 EN 2024-25
18 This clause inserts a new section 2ZA. Subsections (1) to (4) of new section 2ZA enable a constable to take samples or impressions from a dog or livestock where this might provide evidence of an offence being committed under section 1 of the 1953 Act and seize and detain a dog for that purpose. As livestock attacks take place in rural areas, there is a lack of CCTV coverage and eyewitnesses, and limited house to house enquiry or Crime Scene Investigation (CSI) opportunities. Therefore, information derived from a sample or impressions to link a dog to an incident could be a key enabling factor to increase the rate of successful prosecutions.
19 Subsection (5) provides that if the act of taking a sample or impression would amount to an act of veterinary surgery, it must be done by a veterinary surgeon.
20 Subsection (6) makes provision about how long samples and impressions taken under this section may be retained.
21 Subsection (7) defines “sample”, “veterinary surgeon”, and “veterinary surgery" for the purpose of this section.
Page 4
Source Bill 062 EN 2024-25
22 This clause replaces section 2A of the 1953 Act. It enables a warrant to be issued by a justice of the peace authorising the entry and search of premises by a constable in order to identify a dog in respect of which an offence under section 1 has been committed, seize and detain the dog under section 2, take a sample or impression from the dog under section 2ZA or to seize any evidence of an offence under section 1 that may be found. Examples of items of evidence could include a bloody dog collar or towel.
23 Subsections (1) and (3) of new section 2A provide that the justice of the peace who issues a warrant under this clause must be satisfied that there are reasonable grounds to believe that an offence under section 1 has been committed.
24 Subsection (5) provides that a warrant under this clause may authorise the constable to use reasonable force if necessary.
Source Bill 062 EN 2024-25
25 Subsection (1) of this clause sets out the territorial extent of this Bill as England and Wales.
26 Subsection (2) sets out when this Bill will come into force. The Bill will come into force at the end of the period of three months beginning with the day on which this Act is passed.
27 Subsection (3) clarifies that the powers conferred by clauses 2, 3 and 4 are available in connection with any worrying or attacking of livestock which took place (or is alleged to have taken place) before the Bill comes into force.
28 Subsection (4) provides that the short title of the legislation is the Dogs (Protection of Livestock) (Amendment) Act 2024.
Page 5
Source Bill 062 EN 2024-25
29 This Schedule makes amendments to the 1953 Act.
30 Paragraphs 1(2)(b), 1 (4) and 1(5) amend section 1 of the 1953 Act to bring roads and paths within scope of the offence. Animals might be herded along a road or path when moving to another field, or dairy cattle might be moved from a field to a milking parlour, for example. During these moves they may be vulnerable to dog attacks.
31 Paragraph 1(2)(a), (3), (6)(a) and (c) and (8) update the terminology used in the 1953 Act so that attacking livestock is dealt with separately from worrying livestock. The purpose of the amendment is to recognise the violent nature of those offences.
32 Paragraph 1(6)(d) amends section 1(4) of the 1953 Act so as to exempt a dog owner from liability for an offence where the dog is in the charge of another person without the owner's consent.
33 Paragraph 1(7) replaces section 1(6) of the 1953 Act, which sets out the penalty for an offence under section 1 of the 1953 Act. A person who commits an offence under section 1 is currently liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding level 3 on the standard scale (i.e. £1000). This amendment increases the penalty on summary conviction to an unlimited fine.
34 Paragraph 1(7) also inserts new section 1(7) to (9) into the 1953 Act. This amendment allows a court to make an order requiring a person convicted of an offence under section 1 of the 1953 Act to pay expenses incurred in the seizure and detention of the dog in respect of which the offence was committed under section 2(8) and (9).
35 Paragraph 2 amends section 3(1) of the 1953 Act 1953 to include camelids in the definition of "livestock".
Amendments to the
Page 6
No amendments available.