I know that most good breeders will either chip or have chipped their pups in a humane way, however there are many unscrupulous breeders who will try to save money by doing the chipping themselves with absolutely no training at all. This will lead to mental distress and possibly physical damage to many pups, I dread to even think about this.
I would always prefer to buy an unchipped pup and to have this done at around 6 months by my vet when the pup is old enough to handle the process better, before this age I doubt that my pup would ever be off lead in public places.
I wonder if the powers that be have considered the possible damage that could be caused to many byb pups, or are they only considering the pups bred and owned by good breeders and loving owners.

My thoughts are, again it's the good, decent breeders that are going to suffer from this.  I'm another that won't microchip till later(never done my own bitch till she went for her annual booster) but I am going to be one of the first that will have to do this and allready I have a stomach full of dread.  I will, of course, get it done if the law states that I need too but it goes against everything I believe in to do so much, so young.  And, this isn't going to bother the bad puppy breeders.  They'll get their wad of cash regardless.  Then in 2 years time when the idiot get's thier dog taken away and destroyed for not being chipped, the bad breeder will sell him another!! I have no idea how the government will get around the status dog thing? Even if they try banning the breed idea again, the idiots would just find another breed as they sometimes do.  They'll move to mals or rotties or some other poor breed.  It's the idiots we need to take off the streets.  Bring back national service, I say.  Teach them their is more to life than gangs and drugs.  If they are gone, they can't keep their status dogs and it'll help bring some of our real heros home.
God, me for president, I say!!lol. Could fix the world.

>I know that most good breeders will either chip or have chipped their pups in a humane way, however there are many unscrupulous breeders who will try to save money by doing the chipping themselves with absolutely no training at all.

I don't think you can buy chips without having had training.

>I would always prefer to buy an unchipped pup and to have this done at around 6 months by my vet when the pup is old enough to handle the process better, before this age I doubt that my pup would ever be off lead in public places.

Mine always go offlead from as soon as they're vaccinated; it's so much easier to teach a good recall at that age than when they're older and more confident and want to explore!

at first i thought this was a fab idea but now i can see there is so many holes , maybe tattooing would be better as you can see the numbers to check the correct pup has the correct papers at time of sale? i dont see how its going to be enforcable or put off the bad breeders :/

Mine always go offlead from as soon as they're vaccinated; it's so much easier to teach a good recall at that age than when they're older and more confident and want to explore!

Completely agree with this JG, except I do my puppy training off lead in our own fields, where there are lots of distractions ( free range chickens, ducks etc) so if/when we achieve a recall pup is really doing well, and shows she is concentrating on me. I wouldn't dream of letting the pup off lead in a public place until I was sure of the recall. I am not usually confident with this until at least 6 months, and until then pup will be on lead in public areas.

>  before this age I doubt that my pup would ever be off lead in public places.

My younger dog escaped from my garden at 5 months by jumping a high gate after hearing a loud firework (I had put her out in the garden while still daylight before, I thought, the start of fireworks). Fortunately she only ran to the fields next door where we walked and we managed to catch her eventually. She had been chipped as soon as we had her - just as well :) My OH was in the process of building a higher gate, but we had assumed that at 5 months she was too young/small to jump the existing gate :(

You can't buy chips unless you have a qualified micro-chipper number.  I'm doing my training on 1st May, the trainer comes to your house for the training.  ALL my pups are chipped before they leave me anyway, so at about 7 weeks, and to be honest I think a 7 week old pup complains less than a 3-4 month old pup.

> Here in Spain all dogs have to be micro chipped and we are issued with a card the size of a credit card with the dogs name, breed, sex, colour, dob, micro chip number, my name address and the name of the vet we are registered with.  As my dogs are classed as dangerous dogs I am supposed to carry this, proof of rabies jab and proof that I have libability insurance to the value of 175,000 euros as well as the dog being registered with the police.  Dangerous dogs here are also supposed to be muzzled at all times when in public places.

That's interesting.  How do you find compliance to be in general?

> to be honest I think a 7 week old pup complains less than a 3-4 month old pup.

That does not necessarily mean it is suffering less.
I have to say the trainer coming to the house sound rather like a "show you" job. 
Are these courses accredited by another agency, the BVA for example and is there any external examination going on.

My pups are chipped, scanned and put back down to play, they continue playing without discomfort, I think 'if' they suffered they would show it in some way, not continue playing and running around my living room.

The company is Peddymark http://www.peddymark.com/  it's not a 'show me' job, you have to have dogs waiting to be chipped, they show you, then you have to chip dogs in front of them, which is exactly the way most people learn to micro-chip even if done in a local hall.  Peddymark quote as saying:  We are members of BSAVA 's Microchip Advisory Group and conform to its code of conduct

> it's not a 'show me' job, you have to have dogs waiting to be chipped, they show you, then you have to chip dogs in front of them,

That sounds all too much like a "show me" job to me.  I was rather hoping you would say there was some study of the anatomical features of the area before anyone got near that needle.

>which is exactly the way most people learn to micro-chip

I don't doubt it but it does worry me that a lot of very small puppies, with consequently greater risk due to the inevitable danger of being very close to other parts of their anatomy, are going to done in this way and our choice regarding having them done so small may be taken away.
Do you think they ever fail anyone?

>I was rather hoping you would say there was some study of the anatomical features of the area before anyone got near that needle.

You only need to be told that there are blood vessels in the area of the shoulderblades to learn that the pup/dog might squeal and bleed when chipped - you don't need a detailed anatomical lecture!

The lighter-coloured the dog the more blood you'll see; well-known veterinary fact. Samoyed owners have been known to faint!

My breed are terrible to have done at 7 weeks if they must have them they are far better done when fully grown.

> You only need to be told that there are blood vessels in the area of the shoulderblades

Well that would be a start :) but would it not be reassuring to know people were examined on their understanding of just exactly where that is.  Indeed, that the trainers had been externally examined.
When we learn venepuncture we learn where all the vessels and nerves are in the area, how the muscles lie and therefore, how these features may present themselves.  I don't think this procedure is any less invasive.
It is true to say that this will be a procedure that is always done "blind" but I am sure there is more they can do to minimise risk.  We have had posts where people have commented that their dog has bled quite profusely, clearly a vessel had been involved.  Not too much of a problem in a well grown on pup or dog but it is these much smaller specimens that worry me.

Stooge, I take it you're not in favour of micro-chipping? 

They are hopefully bringing in a rule that breeders have to have their pups chipped BEFORE leaving, so it looks like people won't get the choice anyway.  http://news.sky.com/home/uk-news/article/16213312

>but would it not be reassuring to know people were examined on their understanding of just exactly where that is.

Even fully-qualified vets with many years experience wouldn't be able to tell you exactly where they are! Even shaving off the hair and dampening the skin, it can be very difficult to find the jugular vein to take a blood sample, so on a fully-haired dog you just have to hope for the best.

The margin for puncturing a vessel is very much smaller than avoiding so I bet he could do that much better :)
I would just feel a lot more confident about this if the courses were better accredited, particularly if the numbers greatly increase in a very short time.

>The margin for puncturing a vessel is very much smaller than avoiding so I bet he could do that much better

My Harry was chipped as an adult at Crufts, by a very experienced chipper. Thank goodness he'd already been in the ring, because he bled like crazy!

Honestly, each dog is slightly different, and no amount of experience will guarantee missing a blood vessel.

Experience is only as good as the initial understanding allows but you could be right bleeding may be inevitable in which case I am still not sure this is what we should be doing to such young puppies. 
I do feel for the purposes of this legislation six months old would be adequate.

But what about the different chip companies? Some chips travel and some don't register with some machines? How are they going to solve that? Make everyone use one type of chip?  Because I know it differs from our vets to local PAH.

I agree 6 months would seem to make sense unfortunately I suspect this will be even more difficult to regulate! :-)
It is indeed a tricky one!

> I would argue that our process isn't actually particularly democratic when the commons can push through any legislation they like, whether or not the people want it, or professional bodies for that matter.

I totally agree, there is too much influence being exerted by private individuals, corporations and so called charities where the government is concerned.

Regarding the micro-chips:
It has long been known that the RSPCA would like to have dog registration and they want to run it, they want to control who can breed dogs and what breeds can be bred. The KC has been aware of this for a long time. When they began the ABS DEFRA gave them a set time to get breeders on board with the scheme and said if enough breeders will not join it will take things out of the hands of the KC and give that to other bodies who will implement dog breeding and ownership controls.

Can you see the RSPCA looking kindly on peke breeders? Bulldog breeders? Or for that matter working gundog owners and breeders? I can't.

Another point to be raised is, what happens if your dog is allergic to the chip? It does happen and I have proof of this, I have pictures of dogs with tumours on their shoulders, and I have to back this up correspondence between the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons and owners of affected dogs, in which the RCVS says it does happen that some dogs cannot safely be chipped. Will these dogs have to be destroyed to comply with the law? Will there otherwise law abiding owners be forced to break the law? (I will send pictures and a copy of the letter to anyone who wishes to see them pm me please).

Now if a any organisation other than the KC gets to run these micro-chip registers, how will they fund the setting up of these registers? The KC has the registers in place already, and so there would be little if any extra cost.

A registration document like a car has where the seller and the buyer fill in a part to register a car would have to be employed. Changes of address would need to chased if people fail to do it themselves. As happens with TV licences and unpaid bills. All of this coasts money, so who will be funding it? Will this mean that we will be expected to pay an annual registration fee, to fund the organisation in charge to find these errant owners? So an annual charge... A DOG TAX on all responsible owners! And just like road tax it will keep going up and up and up! Will we be paying VAT at 20% for the pleasure of keeping our own pets?

I have spoken to a lot of micro-chippers and all say they do not like chipping tiny pups as the chips are more likely to move. So on their advice I had my dogs done when they were over 12 months, but I am not happy I had to have it done at all especially as all my dogs are DNA profiled. If a forward looking business was to invest to find a way of processing DNA testing quickly I am sure they would make a fortune! However some organisations and businesses like the quick fix, which as we all know never works in the end.

>> and that it's more about being able to FIND all the people who keep animals.
>>
> Why are we worried about that?  The Government has a database on where to find all the people that own road vehicles.

There was a year or two back a case of dogs being stolen in East Anglia nearly all working gundogs anyway investigations eventually found that somebody working with a council and animal charity liason was informing thieves where they could find these dogs.

> But what about the different chip companies? Some chips travel and some don't register with some machines?

And some migrate out of the dog completely as has been shown by examing dogs at Battersea Dogs home.

I also know of a young dobe puppy chipped young and it traveled in the lose skin and attached to a nerve that paralysed it. By the looks of it though it isn't going to be pushed through of yet

I know from what I have been told by people who are 'in the know' that the RSPCA want this and want it now and want to run the registers so they can control all dog ownership and breeding and can levy fees to support that work!

We should all be writing to our MPs and explaining why this won't work.

http://www.writetothem.com/

I totally agree, we should write to our MPs & perhaps send them this medical link

http://vet.sagepub.com/content/43/4/545.full

i totally agree with the DNA profilling, we need a noninvasive way to identify dogs, why would i want to risk my loved dogs to this!

Consultation and links:

http://www.defra.gov.uk/consult/2012/04/23/dangerous-dogs-1204/

In response to Stooge

Its like any thing you will always have people who dont bother and the Spanish are the worse.  If you take your dog to the vets they seem to automatically chip, jab etc.  You will possibily get away with it unless the dog is involved in an accident, attack etc.  My dogs are chipped and have their rabies jabs and I have the liability insurance but they are not registered with the police (very complicated forms in Spanish only) and as I dont want to muzzle them I dont take them to public places, also Im not supposed to walk two and the lead is supposed to be a certain length etc etc but I often see the police driving round when Im out with the dogs and in over two years have never been stopped. 

Im amazed that some people think puppy farmers wouldnt be able to get hold of chips and forms.
These people can get fully qualified vet surgeons to certify that their dogs are healthy and should be granted a license!!

Money greases all wheels in this world.

> xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">puppy litters get a deal usually .<br />

Had three ups chipped in my last litter and not discount at £42 a head plus the consultaion fee.

This was a vets that used to do cut price vaccs,but not anymore, they were actually more expensive this time than usual vet.

It can be a painful proceedure even in larger dogs so undoubtedly would cause a degree of pain in young puppies. Potentially this could trigger a fear response during the critical development period, resulting in a phobia of vets or being on the table.

Sorry but that's utter rubbish. Vaccinations hurt a LOT more because the vaccine stings. The microchip needle is too sharp to hurt. (As I know from when I accidentally chipped myself.) In that case we shouldn't vaccinate pups either then, in case they develop a fear of the vet....In an ideal world yes, but it's not as simple as that.  My toy pups don't even flinch when I chip them at home, they scream the place down when vaccinated at the vet's and they continue for hours afterwards, trying to kick at the spot, clearly showing it is what went IN that bothers them. I've chipped hundreds of puppies and kittens and none have ever shown any discomfort afterwards.

Had three ups chipped in my last litter and not discount at £42 a head plus the consultaion fee.

Blimey that's ridiculous! :( I took a kitten to the vet last week to be chipped and have a pets passport issued. (Long story but she does not need rabies vacc for the PP, just the microchip, and as such I felt it was better that the vet did it so it was all as official as possible.) I was charged £13 for the chip and £25 for the passport. That included a thorough check of heart and temperature and everything else too.

I have spoken to a lot of micro-chippers and all say they do not like chipping tiny pups as the chips are more likely to move

Not true. The chips I've had move were in large breeds or adult cats. I have done toy pups at 4 weeks and their chips haven't moved at all.

however there are many unscrupulous breeders who will try to save money by doing the chipping themselves with absolutely no training at all. This will lead to mental distress and possibly physical damage to many pups, I dread to even think about this.

They'd have to go quite some distance to be able to do this. You cannot buy chips unless you can supply your ID number proving you are either a vet, a vet nurse or have taken the course.  Sure you could get somebody that HAS a number to do it for you, but why bother when it's so cheap and easy to take the course and get the number? As the course fee includes 3 animals to be chipped it's not much money lost at all.

I think different dogs react differently my one girl suffers dreadfully after a vaccine for a few days after squealing if you touch her but also all I've had chipped at varying ages have all felt alot of discomfort being chipped but not lasting discomfort like with the vaccine.

Edited to add, I think the breeds it's likely to move in are fleshy sorts.

our local council has for years been offering free mirco chiping to dogs and cats,, they have at least 3 events a year where you can go to our local park take part in a fun dog show and get your dog chipped all for free,,, All 3 of my dogs where chipped at these events, i  googled and seeked out where and when these events where and we popped along to get our dogs chipped,,

why not if their offering it for free,, :-)

their is really No reason not to have it done in these areas like mine, yet of course the young thugs who walk round with their dangerous dogs really dont give a toss about microchipping free or not,,,

so i cant really see what difference its going to make,, as far as im concerned if you are going to buy a dog from a proper breeder then your more likely to be the sort of owner who would microchip as stranded  anyway,, i mean how many of you breeders on here have sold your pups to a hooded thug lately??,,,

The more I think about this the more frustrated I get. Not that long ago we had the proposal put forward that dog licences be re-introduced which was shelved for much the same reasons I think this legislation won't work. So how much money has been wasted by proposing this new legislation which has many of the same flaws?
I thought we were trying to save money? Although I suppose they could have used the tippex and replaced the word "licence" with "microchip"!

Apologies if this has already been mentioned but it would be interesting to know what percentage of dogs involved in attacks have been strays whose owners could not be identified.  The high profile cases generally involve family/neighbour dogs - and, in the case of attacks on postmen, establishing ownership shouldn't be too much of a problem !
I just can't see how microchipping will prevent dog attacks.

> The more I think about this the more frustrated I get. Not that long ago we had the proposal put forward that dog licences be re-introduced which was shelved for much the same reasons I think this legislation won't work. So how much money has been wasted by proposing this new legislation which has many of the same flaws?
> I thought we were trying to save money? Although I suppose they could have used the tippex and replaced the word "licence" with "microchip"!

Agree Jeff, and it is only the good dog owners who will be getting stung for the £77 DOG TAX they re planning to impose. I filled in the form and told them we did not need a new register, we have the KC who are a professional register organisation and they manage to run it for £12 to register and £12 for a transfer not £77's. I even suggested they should contact the KC to find out exactly how a professional register organisation runs details registers. For me with three dogs that would be £231 each renewal date! Currently they are looking at one to three years for each renewal date.

I can't help but think this will be another thing for people who don't know any better to jump on the back of (Like the neuter/spay brigade) and insist on. I would like to see Vets trained on the issues surrounding this as well as police officers so that it could be properly enforced.

I cannot imagine it helping at all as I do feel it is something that the responsible dog owners are doing anyway! I feel like I would quite like to train as an implanter, though.

> Agree Jeff, and it is only the good dog owners who will be getting stung for the £77 DOG TAX they re planning to impose.

This is for Exempted Dogs only.

I feel if they made it easier for owners of banned breeds to voluntarily put their dogs on the exempted register then that surely would save many from being seized and impounded, at great cost to the taxpayer and greater emotional and financial cost to the owner (not to mention the negative impact on the dog's physical and emotional well-being after being kept in solitary confinement for at 6 months or more).

> I feel like I would quite like to train as an implanter, though.

Same here, as I thought a few months ago when rumours of the proposed chip law first aired.
But perhaps not at the moment as I don't drive, and round here most clients would be gundog, terrier or sheepdog breeders on farms. I can see it wouldn't be very lucrative for me, but might be something I would enjoy doing (as I'd get to meet a lot of puppies and other dogs, and probably cats & kittens too!) and would gladly waive the fee occasionally for those who might not be able to afford it for their one or two pets (pensioners, etc), or for rescues.

And probably the biggest obstacle is that you need to have some animals to be chipped when you're trained - all mine are already done!

....Reminds me of something I heard on Radio4 not long ago - a real sign seen in a pet shop, apparently - DOG/CAT MICROCHIP £15. PENSIONERS £5 :)

I don't wish to sound selfish or a money grabber, but it would be the perfect part time job for me. I'm a student and I need flexible hours and so this sort of thing would be ideal for me. I have always wanted my own business and I suppose I'd have to start somewhere! What sort of insurance would be needed?

> I have always wanted my own business and I suppose I'd have to start somewhere! What sort of insurance would be needed?

Before you get too excited, have a look around locally who is offering chipping services and what they charge. We've already heard from a chipper who says the chips cost £7 each. Going back 15 years or more, I paid £25 to get my cat chipped by my vet, but that was when chipping was new-ish and there were not many people offering the service. My sister had her GSD pup chipped at about the same time  (rural Somerset)and apparently it was the first dog to be chipped in her area. I suspect my cat was also a bit of a first too (Inner London).

5 years ago I had my dog chipped by the local dog warden who was offering it for £11. About 3 years ago I had a litter of moggie kittens who I wanted chipped before they left me, and I was quoted £5 per kitten, mobile chipper, coming to my house.

I don't think there is any money in it at all - and I still can't see where the tabloids have found the quoted £35 from - if anyone wanted to charge me that much it would be a rip off.... as you can see I paid less than that for one of the first cats in my area to be done and the price has come down.

As to insurance... well there is a specialist insurance company which covers dog walkers and the like, but if you have had proper chip training by one of the reputable implanters [NOT the ones that offer a distance course!!!] and have been granted an official implanters ID number upon completion, I would think they are your insurance as part of completing the course to their satisfaction.... If they get regular reports of poor service then they could probably rescind your status and refuse to supply more chips.

I don't want to see the price of chipping to become inflated if a law is brought in, by people cashing in on it. Being someone who has voluntarily chipped in the past, for the long term good and wellbeing of my animals, I hope that low cost chipping will continue, and if I did become a chipper I'd be doing it as a service with, as I already said, appropriate concessions where needed.

Josh, wanted to add this to my last post - if compulsory chipping becomes law then don't think about cashing in, there will be more charity initiatives than before. Should have said my dog was chipped for £11 by local dog warden.

Just tagging on the end here. I think they would be much better introducing a law to castrate, Microchip and muzzle the yobs who own the status dogs. That would stop far more problems.

lilyowen; I think that is a BRILLIANT idea, let's have that one made compulrory !

I paid £17 for Nando to be chipped and I think that is on the expensive side.