IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

4 Pages V  1 2 3 > »   
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Compulsory Microchipping To Be Announced Monday, for Pups
ramsey
post 21st Apr 2012, 8:43 am
Post #1


Member
****

Group: Member
Posts: 3542
Joined: 18 Apr 05
From: New Forest / Christchurch
Member No.: 13821



LINK

Just seen the above link.
I really dont see it helping the issue with dangerous dogs but surely it must go some way to realising and eventually regulating the number of puppies being bred in the UK?

Its saying that every new born puppy will have to be microchipped but it seems like that will be required by the owner and not the breeder (have they missed a trick here?)
And ive still no idea how they are going to regulate this, will they be getting vets onboard to do compulsory checks on new pups?

Ill be interested to see how they plan to tackle this but I have to say I am all for compulsory microchipping, every one of my lot are chipped.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
soooz
post 21st Apr 2012, 9:09 am
Post #2


Member
****

Group: Member
Posts: 1467
Joined: 26 Aug 02
From: UK
Member No.: 2644



Hi,
I read this too & on the surface it sounds great, but I can't help wondering just how they are going to regulate this.....

Just my opinion, but my first thoughts are that surely the majority of us who love & care for our dogs will comply, BUT what about the back yard breeders & folks who constantly breed their "pets" purely for financial gain????

Would love to hear other peoples views on this...
.X.
Soooz.

(Edited to add...... mine are all chipped too!)

This post has been edited by soooz: 21st Apr 2012, 9:10 am
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
griff
post 21st Apr 2012, 9:35 am
Post #3


Member
****

Group: Member
Posts: 2832
Joined: 18 Feb 05
Member No.: 12698



i agree, for the vast majority of us it won't make any difference at all. i too don't understand how they think they can police it, i guess most responsible breeders would get them done at the time of their first jabs and vet check but what about the people who don't bother doing that err.gif also what happens if you don't get it done? will they seize the puppy or impose a fine..... also what stops you giving false details (just thinking from the dodgy dog owner point of veiw)
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Dalsmum
post 21st Apr 2012, 9:59 am
Post #4


Member
****

Group: Member
Posts: 12145
Joined: 17 Oct 04
From: far north of Scotland
Member No.: 10491



A slightly different slant in the Telegraph

However, Coalition sources said the Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs [Defra] will announce a consultation on rules that will ensure all dogs are eventually microchipped.
One option is for all puppies to be chipped shortly after birth. Another is for chipping to be compulsory before a dog can be sold.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/family/pets/921...erous-dogs.html
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Bunter1
post 21st Apr 2012, 10:06 am
Post #5


Member
****

Group: Member
Posts: 20259
Joined: 14 Oct 07
Member No.: 34100



Whatever the decision is, I see it being the same as car tax/insurance/MOT/driving license.

Those who are law-abiding will continue to be so and those who are not will also continue to be so.

There will need to be some big changes wrt a central database too, unlike now, plus anyone selling/giving away a dog will need to change to chip details - like selling a car err.gif
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
woofgang
post 21st Apr 2012, 10:32 am
Post #6


Member
Group Icon

Group: Sponsor Member
Posts: 9702
Joined: 31 Jan 11
Member No.: 51601



I really do not see how this will help with aggressive dogs or dog dumping. It seems to me that unless you can scan the dog at the point of attack it wont add to the evidence/knowledge base of which dog did it and who owns it. If vets aren't required to report litters then how will it be policed? byb's still wont give a toss and may even avoid getting a vet involved in order to keep the breeder out of the official eye. Folk who dump animals will still be able to claim that they sold it to the bloke in the pub and if there is a charge for changing chip details this will deter them even more. If the chip can be felt (or the owner thinks it can be felt) I could even envisage chips being cut out of dogs.

...and all the while the responsible owners and breeders will continue to do what they always did.
...sorry, I just cannot see a good side to this.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Holy_Smoke
post 21st Apr 2012, 10:39 am
Post #7


Member
****

Group: Member
Posts: 379
Joined: 29 Sep 07
Member No.: 33716



QUOTE(woofgang @ 21st Apr 2012, 11:32 am) *

If vets aren't required to report litters then how will it be policed? byb's still wont give a toss and may even avoid getting a vet involved in order to keep the breeder out of the official eye.



There are still vets out there docking tails illegally or questionably legally, there'll probably be a few who'll be happy to turn a blind eye to this as well.

Its a nice idea but I have to agree with the rest of you that practically it'll make no difference. I wonder how much money it'll waste that could have been better spent in other areas of animal welfare?
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
GSDSian
post 21st Apr 2012, 10:50 am
Post #8


Member
Group Icon

Group: Sponsor Member
Posts: 16256
Joined: 12 Dec 05
Member No.: 18077



Who legislates the litters of pups that are never seen by a vet and sold privately to people who may never take their dog to a vet unless its desperately ill.

It happens a lot round here. err.gif
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
mrs phas
post 21st Apr 2012, 10:51 am
Post #9


Member
Group Icon

Group: Sponsor Member
Posts: 2053
Joined: 17 Jan 10
Member No.: 47938



would be nice if it was indelibly chipped to the breeder in the first instance, made any breeder responsible for their dog ending up in rescue, pay food bill, vet bill etc til rehomed

or
if it came into rescue unchipped, the same goes, so that the few unscrupulous rescues. who want take back. have the same applied if one of their dogs end up in another rescue

blue sky dreaming i know

my one worry is that more dogs will be seized and potentially pts due to being unchipped
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
FarleyMarley
post 21st Apr 2012, 10:57 am
Post #10


Member
Group Icon

Group: Sponsor Member
Posts: 1249
Joined: 19 Aug 09
Member No.: 46148



I saw the article this morning and several questions sprang to my mind as well.

So if the breeder gets the newborn pups microchipped, are they registered to the breeder or to the new owner? So what happens if they are registered to the breeder and the new owner doesnt re-register them in their name (especially if there is a charge, like there is with changing KC papers into the new owners name). At some point in the future the dog may do something, but it would be the breeders name still on the chip details.

If they are registered directly to the new owner at some point before they are actually collected (as pups might not be able to be collected on the day they are chipped) then what happens if minds are changed and that pup then goes to someone else?

If the pup is returned to the breeder at any point in their life (conscientious breeders we are talking about here) then how easy would it be for the breeder to return the chips details to their own. Seeing as in the past it has become increasingly difficult to change a rescue dog's existing chip details without written permission from the owner.

If the chip details are going to be directly linked to any agression by the dog, ie, whos name on the chip is the person responsible, how about those rescues that have the dog always chipped to the rescue. For example I seem to remember reading somewhere that Greyhound Gap has their dogs always registered to them so they can be first point of contact smile.gif (correct me if Im wrong on this) Does this mean that they will be legally responsible if one of their rehomes bites a child? (god forbid, but just an example).

I totally agree with something being done about deed not breed and applaud the microchipping, so that lost dogs can be reunited = less dogs in pounds who are unknown, however there are loads of questions and finer details that need to be answered I think.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
woofgang
post 21st Apr 2012, 11:22 am
Post #11


Member
Group Icon

Group: Sponsor Member
Posts: 9702
Joined: 31 Jan 11
Member No.: 51601



but dont we think that MOST folk who love their dogs and want them back get them chipped now?
Unless you can scan the dog at the attack how will it make a better link to the owner? In the case of most of the reported attacks now, the owner seems to be known and unless you can scan the actual dog at the point of attack, having the dog chipped wont prove that the dog did or didn't make the attack.
I really really could see the owner of an unchipped dog not taking it to the vet when the dog really needs it for fear of prosecution

This post has been edited by woofgang: 21st Apr 2012, 11:24 am
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Dalsmum
post 21st Apr 2012, 1:44 pm
Post #12


Member
****

Group: Member
Posts: 12145
Joined: 17 Oct 04
From: far north of Scotland
Member No.: 10491



Existing unchipped adult dogs will not have to be chipped, but ministers believe the effect of the new rules will be near-universal coverage of British dogs within little more than a decade.

Just like we have no pitbulls because they were banned more than 10 years ago.

What world do these people live in, because it ain't the one that I live in.

All dogs are required by law to wear a collar with a tag inscribed with the owners name and address. How many people do not comply with that- even people on this here?
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
woofgang
post 21st Apr 2012, 2:08 pm
Post #13


Member
Group Icon

Group: Sponsor Member
Posts: 9702
Joined: 31 Jan 11
Member No.: 51601



I am posting on another (non dog) forum where some folk believe that every dog gets taken to the vet regularly and all puppies get taken to the vet rolleyes.gif
also that only "bad breeds" are ever aggressive and that such "bad breeds" are easily identified even if the dog is a mongrel or a "bad breed" "good breed" cross.
I daresay that they also still believe in the tooth fairy.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Dalsmum
post 21st Apr 2012, 3:17 pm
Post #14


Member
****

Group: Member
Posts: 12145
Joined: 17 Oct 04
From: far north of Scotland
Member No.: 10491



This proposal only covers England.

NI has already introduced compulsory microchipping.

Wales is considering it.

And Scotland have no plans, at present, to introduce it.

So if somebody gets a pup from Wales or Scotland it won't have to be chipped. So much for

near-universal coverage of British dogs within little more than a decade.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
PureRose
post 21st Apr 2012, 8:03 pm
Post #15


Member
*

Group: Member
Posts: 18
Joined: 11 Jul 11
Member No.: 53105



In theory I think it's a good idea, from the point of view of lost/abandoned dogs.

We just got Tara microchipped this week. On the island, if your dog is picked up and it's not chipped it'll be taken to Dunoon and you'll have all the associated costs of getting it back. I wanted to do it for peace of mind and because it was the responsible thing to do.

In practice I think it would be tricky to regulate.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

4 Pages V  1 2 3 > » 
Reply to this topicStart new topic

 



Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 21st October 2017 - 1:10 am