General Chat

Top tip - using the Genes Reunited community

Welcome to the Genes Reunited community boards!

  • The Genes Reunited community is made up of millions of people with similar interests. Discover your family history and make life long friends along the way.
  • You will find a close knit but welcoming group of keen genealogists all prepared to offer advice and help to new members.
  • And it's not all serious business. The boards are often a place to relax and be entertained by all kinds of subjects.
  • The Genes community will go out of their way to help you, so don’t be shy about asking for help.

Quick Search

Single word search

Gift subscriptions

Genes Reunited gift subscription

Do you know someone interested in discovering their family history?

You can now buy a gift subscription to Genes Reunited so they can research their family tree.

Buy gift or redeem gift

Icons

  • New posts
  • No new posts
  • Thread closed
  • Stickied, new posts
  • Stickied, no new posts

Compulsory Dog Micro chipping....

Page 0 + 1 of 2

  1. 1
  2. 2
  3. »
ProfilePosted byOptionsPost Date

Patricia

Patricia Report 7 Feb 2013 04:25

I'm in favour but with a few conditions.

1, All chips must 'prove' ownership. As of now it doesn't, a friend has been fighting to get her dog back after it had been rehomed by the RSPCA. The courts say it is not proof of ownership, and won't/can't get the RSPCA to say why they didn't scan her.

2, What happens if/when the chips fail? I have had three chips fail so far on 4 dogs! I get them scanned each time I go to the vets now. All the old nunbers are cross referenced to the new one.
And chips have been known to move despite what you read in the articles.

3, ALL dog wardens and rescues [whether national or local] must be made to scan.

4, And who should get the pups chipped the breeder or the owner? Change of ownership and/or address cost me £20 each last time I had to do it 10 years ago not funny when you have more than one dog.

5, and what happens to the dog if it bites someone breaking in? Up to now it has always been regarded by insurance companies that if you have a beware of the dog sign and it bites and that person makes a claim then you knew you had a nasty dog!

On the whole I am all for it, but am concerned about just how this will be inforced.

LollyWithSprinklez

LollyWithSprinklez Report 6 Feb 2013 17:35

All in favour of micochipping.

My girl was always in sight, so little chance of her running off but on occasions were approached by youths offering to "walk or hold her lead" She wouldn't have left me but her chip did give me some peace of mind.

A friend has his Staffie taken and even after discovering it's whereabouts was not able to prove the dog was his as not chipped.

The only concern I have is for dogs not being taken for treatment by owners who have failed to have their dogs chipped for fear of repercussions (fines) etc

I do not believe that it will be the answer to the problem of irresponsible owners nor easily enforceable (how many drivers still have mobiles clasped to their ears without any comeback) but as said before in favour for own identity purposes.

AnninGlos

AnninGlos Report 6 Feb 2013 16:56

Yes, I agree with it but I am unsure how they are going to force those who live outside of the law to get their status symbols chipped. I think Judes idea is a good one too.

On the news there was a Staffie that had been found, I believe it was chipped which is how they traced the owners. When spoken to they said they couldn't afford to keep it any more. I don't know if I missed anything but I wasn't sure if that meant they had just let it go or had taken it to be rehomed. Not the former I hope.

There was a dog in Gloucester belonged to a homeless man, when it was sick somebody came forward to pay its vets bill.

eRRolSheep

eRRolSheep Report 6 Feb 2013 16:32

I think this is great news and is legislation that should have been passed aeons ago. There are a great many benefits

~~ Jules in Wiltshire~~

~~ Jules in Wiltshire~~ Report 6 Feb 2013 14:51

I think it is good, I have my dog chipped and my cats when they were alive..My dog is also castrated and so were my cats as I don't like the thought of them being bred..There are so many animals in need of good homes and it makes me mad when you see puppy farms and people breeding just for the money...

Jules x

~`*`Jude`*`~

~`*`Jude`*`~ Report 6 Feb 2013 13:15

l agree with compulsory chipping 100%......perhaps all vets need to check for chip each time a dogs comes in, if it does'nt have one, the owner is fined on the spot the cost of chipping and its done then and there....if the owners are caring enough to take the dog to the vets and able to pay the bills, then they should have animal chipped:))

jude

:-)

ChrisofWessex

ChrisofWessex Report 6 Feb 2013 13:09

In N. Ireland the Dogs Trust offered free chipping to pensioners and those on low incomes - and a reduced price of around £9 to rest of dog owners up to a certain date.

Now dogs there cannot be registered unless their micro details are available.

Dog registration has been compulsory there since early eighties.

Vintagefinemaid

Vintagefinemaid Report 6 Feb 2013 12:59

Our current dog came from a rescue centre, our vet estimated she was between 6 and 9 months when we got her.
She had arrived at the rescue centre with no collar or tag, no micro chip and her tail had at some time been docked. The rescue centre only keeps strays for a week before rehoming them. The first thing the vet did was to scan her. It seems he has come across numerous rescued dogs that have been rehomed without apparently being scanned!!!
I was told that had the owners tried to reclaim her they would have faced a fine for her not having a collar and tag, a charge for kennelling costs and an enquiry into why the tail had been docked. It seems that if a vet docks a tail the animal has to be chipped?
I often wonder why she was not claimed, possibly the family would not have been able to afford to claim her
She is now chipped, and the vet has checked the chip each time we have visited.

Chipping all dogs will only be of any use if dog wardens, rescue centres etc can be relied on to check for chips

A guy who came to sort out our TV surprised me by saying that when he had his dog chipped he expected the chip to be a tracking device !! So if his dog went missing it could be traced!!!

Porkie_Pie

Porkie_Pie Report 6 Feb 2013 12:47

Sometimes you have to be cruel to be kind?

I have not doubt this will initially leave some dogs homeless but hopefully once people no they cannot own a dog without having it chipped and being held responcible for it then they will continue to own and ill treat them so over all it should reduce the amount of irresponsible owners,

BUT as i said before if it's going to work then the agencies involved must have the powers to remove these dogs and to prosecute offenders

I think all dog lovers should support this with action such as taking on another Dog if this led to a massive increase in the amount of dogs having to be destroyed

I myself have room for one more

Roy

Rambling Rose

Rambling Rose Report 6 Feb 2013 12:18

The dogs I have seen with the homeless are often better looked after than the ones who live in houses, their welfare comes first, because they are the homeless person's 'best friend and companion' when no one else cares.

I believe some vets will treat free, plus the PDSA.

There will I imagine be free chipping available to those in financial need, as there is neutering and speying ( vouchers given).

Sue

Sue Report 6 Feb 2013 12:09

Roy,
Agree with all you say, but am just concerned what the appropriate authority would then do with (what i imagine will be a huge amount of unchipped dogs.)

I am not against chipping. I personally know where my own dog is at all times, but not everyone is.

The real problem as i see it is some people regard dog ownership very lightly, and have no regard to cost of vets fees etc., For instance, i think there is a dog allowance for the homeless. What if their dog b ecomes ill. and who is going to pay for it.?

Those poor dogs are out in all weathers in the freezing cold, while the owners sit begging. Not good.

Sue :-)

Porkie_Pie

Porkie_Pie Report 6 Feb 2013 11:39

Sue, every time i take my dog to the vet he scans and checks the chip with the data base as a matter of course,

retaining the dog and handing it over to the correct authority would not be to difficult, If you can afford to buy and keep a dog with the cost of it's routine injections plus worming and the cost of unforeseen ailments then you should be able to afford to have it chipped

I'm sure when driving test was first introduced and the MOT for cars and drivers they saw it as just another tax,

Roy

Sue

Sue Report 6 Feb 2013 11:30

Not sure how this is going to be policed. Same old thing, responsible owners will probably comply, and the rest wont bother.

Porkie Pies suggestion that vets scan the dogs, and retain them. What then is going to happen to those animals? This is just another tax on responsible people.

Sue

aivlyS

aivlyS Report 6 Feb 2013 10:59

I also would like to see tougher sentencing on animal cruelty .,if people cannot afford vet bills don't have animals, too many don't even bother to have their animals neutered and wormed which is basic care

+++DetEcTive+++

+++DetEcTive+++ Report 6 Feb 2013 10:54

Good idea in theory, but the cost may deter the the less well-off. Its a more up to date version of the dog licence and collar with contact details.

Rambling Rose

Rambling Rose Report 6 Feb 2013 10:53

yes and no, but not as the only measure.

I would like first to see much MUCH tougher sentencing on animal cruelty ( as an example of what will happen if you neglect or abuse).


I do fear that compulsory microchipping will lead to a lot of abandonments, people who have a 'status' dog, who will dump it if they fear they may be connected to it if it bites, or is reported for behaviour....I don't have a very high opinion of people I guess, thinking about that owner who chopped the racing greyhound's ears off to avoid being identified by the ear tags. :-(

I don't have an answer really, lol I can bat the argument back and forth in my brain all day on this one...it's humans that are the problem and you can't effectively legislate against stupidity ( or nastiness) no matter how hard you try.

*Disillusioned of Shrops' :-(

JoyBoroAngel

JoyBoroAngel Report 6 Feb 2013 10:53

most dog wardens dont scan strays nor road kill to
i find that shocking

Porkie_Pie

Porkie_Pie Report 6 Feb 2013 10:47

Bobtanian, Responsible Dog breeders would never let a stranger take a puppy under those circumstances,


Chips will not on their own solve the problem, I would also want all dog wardens and vets to compulsory scan every animal they tend to And if they are not chipped then they should have the power to detain the dog,

just as the police can cease my car if i don't have the relevant papers eg insurance

Roy

JoyBoroAngel

JoyBoroAngel Report 6 Feb 2013 10:36

all my pets are chipped
and i am so for compulsary chipping


my friend runs a cat rescue and it would save her so much time and money
if cats were chipped to:-( :-(

Bobtanian

Bobtanian Report 6 Feb 2013 10:30

bit like the handgun ban..........they will only know who the responsible owners are.....the crims wont bother!!

guesss the breeders will have the outlay...........a mate of mine, his dog had 10 pups.......got caught out on one though, the buyer took one to show his missis.........never saw him again........