So microchipping puppies is to be compulsory from 2016; and it's to be free. That won't please any of the people who derive some of their income from microchipping.

So how is that being funded ? I certainly don't want to help puppy farmers if it is out of our taxes .

> and it's to be free.

They are just discussing this on Radio 4.  They mentioned the Dogs Trusts will do it for free but it was not clear that everyone would be entitled to that nor was it clear that they would continue to do so into the future.  I am not sure that would apply litters either.

I've only heard the brief headline on the radio news; I'm looking forward to reading the details when they're published.

Can't see anyone making a lot on chipping -that's why I stopped doing it for other people, it was not worth it. But I wouldn't want to take litters to the vet to be chipped, that's for sure. I want to do them at home as usual.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-21345730

Must say I am all AGAINST owners of dogs that attack people on private property being able to be prosecuted. For a start it will punish the innocent once again, and secondly it won't stop any dog attacks.

Anything about the age limit? I wouldn't be happy having my toy breed done at a very young age, though all my own dogs do get microchipped.

I've done Papillons at 4 weeks, way smaller than Cavaliers. One of them who was done at that age only weighs 2 kgs now as a 3 year old. No problems. :)

Well the one I exported was done at 10 weeks with no trouble, but Cavaliers are such babies with the slightest hint of any pain I usually leave it till they are a bit older. :-)

In my experience anything painful/unpleasant is tolerated better when younger than older.

After all puppies bite each other and get rolled roughly sometimes by adults.

I have found my pups don't appear to notice their first vaccination, hardly bother about their ear tattooing at 7 weeks beyond objecting to the restraint, but yell their heads off with second vaccination or chipping at 12 weeks.

I would still want the choice of permanent ID, though to be fair I encourage new owners to chip their pups in addition to me tattooing for a belt and braces approach.

A friend in Scotland found the vets had got the owner and address details in a right mess with a pup she was exporting, so would prefer that the paperwork side for things was left to the breeder, but the breeder details should have to be given. 

Surely it is not beyond the wit of man to have a section for breeder details on microchip databases, so this can be updated as well as the owner details.

If all pups had to be chipped by the breeder then as the kennel club are doing now any breeder chipping a fifth litter could be asked to supply details of their breeder license, and if they haven't;'t one reported to the LA, to endure they got one.

How is it to be enforced and by who ? If a 'new' dog goes into a vet will he routinely check for a chip and what does he do if he can't find one ??

The article I posted says the owner is given a chance to have their dog chipped if found not to be done and if they still don't they are fined £500.

The KC have just issued a press release saying they are going to gift microchip scanners to every local authority in England and Wales.

> says the owner is given a chance to have their dog chipped

So the vet would offer to chip the dog then report the owner if they refused ?

No different to a TV license really. Shops will not sell you a TV unless you fill in a license application form.

Local radio has a discussion at the moment on this, someone from local 'strays' kennels said 'if its the law people will have to get it done'
Local paper ALWAYS has lists of people getting done for 'no TV licence' and 'no road tax' both of which have been compulsory for a lot of years!!!  What deluded person thinks that they can enforce chipping!!
I rang in and the presenter - who has a dog- - had never heard of tattooing

> What deluded person thinks that they can enforce chipping!!
>

Like you say, the local paper is full of people getting "done" for no TV licence so clearly enforcement does happen there and therefore, quite possibly, will happen here.  In fact probably rather more easily as we tend to go out in public places with our dogs but not with our televisions :)

Forgive me if I am a bit sceptically, one of my dogs was done at the time of his second injection, about 13 weeks, and my vet can never find it and they did it - only when I insist that he is chipped will they persevere and then eventually find it, last time it was just below the elbow but we could not tell if it were heading down the leg or across the chest. My point being that may not cause a problem if a/ the owner is there and b/ is believed but will not help at all if a dog is picked up as a stray or is too aggressive or nervous to put up with an extended search. 

Not this topic BUT will someone please tell me how to start a new post/topic, I am feeling very "blonde" today !!

Click on Board Index, then click on the heading breeding health etc, and you will have 'add topic', click give it a title that will catch attention/describe it, and then write your Post..

OK thank you I will try that :)

The KC have just issued a press release saying they are going to gift microchip scanners to every local authority in England and Wales.

Gosh, that is going to cost a pretty penny, er hum, what about Scotland and Ireland?

I wonder if they will take a percent of the fines or from the chip companies?

> er hum, what about Scotland and Ireland?

Does this new law extend to there?
Surprised that the KC have come up with this generous offer but it is a private club so up to them really :)

Gosh, that is going to cost a pretty penny, er hum, what about Scotland and Ireland?

I wonder if they will take a percent of the fines or from the chip companies?

Presumably it is because the new law will only apply to England and Wales -microchipping is already compulsory in Northern Ireland I believe, no idea about southern but of course that is IKC territory not KC. And I would  have thought as the wording is The Kennel Club has today pledged to gift microchip scanners to every local authority in England and Wales in support of the government's decision to introduce compulsory microchipping for all dogs. they will not expect anything in return, as  you don't with a gift. :) Besides, with £12 million to spare from the building, they can afford it!!

> what about Scotland

Scotland is going to be a separate country in 2016 ........... :) :) :) I assume that they will create their own KC ?? :) :) :)

> Scotland is going to be a separate country in 2016 ...........

Wow! Daisy, what do you know that I don't.  Better get my passport sorted :)

>Scotland is going to be a separate country in 2016 ........

Let's have the referendum before we announce the result ... ;-) :-D

> Wow! Daisy, what do you know that I don't

A timetable has been drawn up - Scotland will be independent from March 2016 !!!!!!!!! (Of course it will depend on Alex Salmond winning the referendum and currently most are against it ............................ )

> Let's have the referendum before we announce the result

I'm trying to give Alex Salmond a few moments of glory :) :) :)

> Scotland is going to be a separate country in 2016 ...........

Wow! Daisy, what do you know that I don't.  Better get my passport sorted

Lol, as yet The People's Republic of Scotia, has no plans to adopt the scheme but Wee Eck and co are keeping an eye on how things pan out.

May be missing something here. A close relative does not chip her dogs she is alternative medicine and apparently there is small possiblilty of tumours occuring around the chip site ( I am not asking for comments on that) She has two adult dogs atm who rarley attend the vet as again if any health poroblems occur she uses alternative medicine first. As a for instance how is that going toi be policed. I know unless they get lost it is unlikely to be noticed but there are so many variables here.
Good idea in principle but just wondering how practical it is going to be.

I doubt they will allow exemptions.
I expect it will be policed as many of these things are ie when a dog comes to the attention of the authorities is some other way, such as lost, off lead where not allowed, involved in an incident etc.

On the two occasions that I have found a lost dog and attempted to reunite it with its owners, I could have done so easily if the dog had been wearing a collar and identity tag. Neither was, and much work, worry and stress ensued in consequence. We took the second dog to a local vet, who scanned the dog and couldn't find a chip. She was then take to the local kennels, who scanned again, found a chip and eventually the bitch was reunited with her owner.

My point is, it has I believe always been illegal for a dog to be without a collar and identiy tag in public - but is this ever enforced? An invisible chip will be even more problematic, surely?

Thank you for answering my question on Scotland and Ireland, glad I asked. :-)

Well, let's just hope that when they get those scanners they will actually use them, I guess they will be used by dog wardens, but will they be brave enough to go on the estates and in the parks where un-sociables are and the most likely to have un-chipped dogs?

I do wonder though what will they actually do, I get the part with ok scan done, no chip, but now what? Without  a chip they have no proof of their name, address, breed so anyone caught can just lie about who they are, they're not going to get the £500 fine it will fly into the mist.

The only thing I can think of where it will work is with strays and escaped dogs who may get picked up, but then again if their dog is not chipped, some are not going to come forward to get their dog knowing there is a £500 fine for no chip, just more dogs in rescue IMO.

There is no mention of vet checking, but the types who won't chip probably wouldn't visit much.

I've just talked myself out of this, what is the actual benefit, or am I missing something??????

I had my new rescue dog microchipped at the Dogs Trust today - he isn't a DT dog - and it was done for free. I gave them a donation in exchange for the chip  but there was no expectation of that at all.

Very good, especially as he did not come from them, another tick in the box for Dogs Trust. :-)

Don't forget Dogs Trust still has a huge black mark against them since PDE and Crufts 2010! I will not give them a penny.

> I've just talked myself out of this, what is the actual benefit, or am I missing something??????

It will stop dangerous dog attacks. The government said so.

Such a pointless piece of legislation.  As long as chips do not prove ownership it's a waste of time; and there is no provision for those dogs who CANNOT be chipped (I know one, her chip nearly killed her and physically she is not in any state to ever be chipped again).

If they were proof of ownership and an alternative was offered (such as tattooing) it'd be a start, but for the moment, woefully inadequate.

As pointed out elsewhere (and possibly here, I haven't read every post, sorry) - if the current law regarding dogs being required to wear ID tags can't be enforced, when they are easily visible, then how on earth do the government expect something like microchips to be enforced?  And will all the relevant people be trained in proper scanning?  Having had a dog whose chip was some way down her left foreleg, and the vet nurse missed it until I told them to scan further afield than just her scruff, I can see problems ahead just with this aspect.

Sorry, really deviating here from the subject but:

Re: The Dogs Trust,

Just my opinion and the way I see things but at the time Goldmali it was horrific when the RSPCA, Dogs Trust and PDSA withdrew from Crufts, they should have waited but it was an enormous backlash from a one sided show and The GP were horrified. I don't hold it against them, all the charities still do a lot of good and if it had affected their donations still backing Crufts a lot of dogs would have suffered, they had to show themselves to be doing the 'right' thing.

We ourselves also disagree with the breeders who bred from genetically damaged lines and some of the over exaggerations in some breeds, we are all strongly upset that we were all tarred with the same brush and the programme was so one sided...... and did not show the efforts made by so many breeders and breed clubs, or show the thousands of healthy and beautiful dogs of the same breeds in their right context, but you cannot blame these charities for the PDE show being flawed, (immensely) it was a knee jerk reaction to an horrendous outcry.

We'll all do as we feel, but I don't hold it against them. :-)

They have to look after themselves and unfortunately we are small fry when it comes to donations, it's the outer population who keep them all going.

It will stop dangerous dog attacks. The government said so.

Well, if the government say so. :-D

How......... will the scanner crew be like superman and when an attack is happening they will just suddenly be able to appear with scanner in hand and know who the dog belongs to........... or will they turn up 3hrs later, dog gone, person gone and no clue? :-D

I doubt it will stop dangerous dog attacks and not sure that the Government have ever said so :) but I do think it can be a tool to assist in helping prevent them by introducing some further degree of accountability (as per previous discussion :)) 
Agree with your post re Dog's Trust by the way, Carrington.

I thought the first idea was to reduce the number of strays well at least find out who their owners are/were
I still think it is good in principle but not really thought out the gp will probably think it will work as you say our governemt say so :) love some of your comments people.

Just my opinion and the way I see things but at the time Goldmali it was horrific when the RSPCA, Dogs Trust and PDSA withdrew from Crufts, they should have waited but it was an enormous backlash from a one sided show and The GP were horrified. I don't hold it against them, all the charities still do a lot of good and if it had affected their donations still backing Crufts a lot of dogs would have suffered, they had to show themselves to be doing the 'right' thing.

But it wasn't just Crufts, Carrington. It's gone now, but both DT and RSPCA stated on their websites that they withdrew from Crufts because they disagreed with dog shows, pedigree dogs etc etc -and we know just how much damage this has done. Increasing the designer crosses for one.

stated on their websites that they withdrew from Crufts because they disagreed with dog shows, pedigree dogs etc etc

I don't dispute that it was there and has now been removed, talk about hypocritical though, if they were there to start with they must have agreed. :-D :-D

Still, it was DT's opinion (although slanted) at the time, doesn't take away the work they do for dogs and tbh I for one don't care who is for or against Crufts it is still as popular as ever, sure this year will be amazing! :-)

And that will bring them all back with their tails between their legs.

Just for fun ...

:-D :-D :-D Love it!

I would like to know how since it was introduced to NI how effective it has been .

I remain in the camp that thinks it will make no difference at all but fines or local authority release fees  will increase.

Interesting to read this thread alongside Pedlee's (http://www.champdogsforum.co.uk/board/topic/139992.html), concerning a dog microchipped as a pup by his breeder, now 8 years old & picked up as a stray, which was traced by the microchip to the breeder. 

It seems to me that there needs to be serious work done as to how ownership is defined, is it to be the person named on the microchip register? the person the dog has lived with for n years but who has never changed the microchip details? or who?  Should there be a historical element, so that all the previous owners can be identified?

Others have already pointed out the difficulties of identifying a microchipped dog - this, too, needs to be thought through and defined.  Maybe along with the implantation of the chip should be a large (easily visible) tag to be hung on the dog's collar, perhaps with an annual check of details and issue of a new tag colour.  As ever, though, consistency and enforcement is key and if lacking no amount of micro-chipping will make the least bit of difference. 

Will it be an offence to remove a micro-chip from a dog (e.g. a stolen dog or one about to be dumped)?  Will puppy farms have to microchip their animals, and what effect would such traceability have on the dogs and their puppies?

(What I really disliked in the BBC's (radio 4) reporting of this matter was the use of the phrase "owners will be forced to microchip" - why so confrontational a verb? mini-rant-ette over.)

> I would like to know how since it was introduced to NI how effective it has been .
>

Well, according to the Irish Dog Warden they had on the news today it has had some effect although he gave no detail at all.