I was in Germany for a show last weekend, I travelled with 4 friends and a pile of dogs. When the vet came to the showground Saturday evening to worm the dogs and stamp their passports one of the dogs chips couldn't be found. We hoped it was the vets ageing scanner but decided to get to Hoek early to have her chip checked there. A friends dog was refused entry to the UK 2 months ago when his chip failed so before this trip we had all had our dogs checked before leaving, all chips were working. We got the ferry terminal and they tried every scanner they had but although the rest of the dogs were fine this one pup had no chip to be found.

Lucky for us we have lovely friends in the same breed that live in the Hague and were willing to collect and look after the pup while she has another chip put in, repeats her rabies vaccination and then waits 3 weeks.

The lady at the port said that from 8600 pets travelling this year only 2 had failed, what are the chances that the 2 failed chips are silken windhounds, a numerically small breed with 55 in the UK and less than 200 on the continent! The chips that failed have no connection, one was a dutch chip in a 6 year old dog and one a UK chip in a 9 month old pup.

It's certainly going to make me think very seriously about travelling with the dogs, even if I check their chips before I leave home there is no guarantee that one won't fail at some point while we're away meaning I'd have to leave them behind for weeks :(   I've no idea what the answer is, could we have dual identification - tattoo and chip just in case?

The trip was well worth it from my point of view with my youngster winning Best in Show and the first points towards his title, but for the owner of the puppy left behind it was a nightmare.

Something for anyone who travels overseas to shows to consider and have a contingency plan for just in case?

What a nightmare for your friend. That's one of the things that puts me off the idea othe PP

This is what's always worried me about chips.    There is no way of knowing the chip has failed until the crucial moment,  and then it's too late as you have found.

At least with tattoos,  if they do fade,  it can be noticed and rectified.    Any fading takes a long time so not going to fade overnight either.

This is why I would always campaign for a tattoo to be a supplementary ID.  In fact tattoos were/are valid in EU countries up to a certain date (though not under the old rules we had for UK).

http://ahvla.defra.gov.uk/documents/ov/EU-PETS-guidance-notes.pdf
"Tattoo number and date of tattooing
Tattoos are not acceptable as a means of identification unless administered before 3rd July 2011. If an inspection of the animal reveals a tattoo number, this can be entered in this section. The date of tattooing can be entered on the basis of veterinary records or a certificate/record of tattooing."

This rule might help the 6 year old dog if he is tattooed?

I think the simplest answer is to never, ever travel without your OWN scanner. It's a very small price to pay. I have never taken (or bought) a dog abroad without having my own scanner with me, so I can double and triple check at all relevant points.

pups owner had her own scanner posted over, the chip had failed sometime between Thursday and Saturday, having your own scanner doesn't stop that happening.

Nightmare situation :-(

No having your own scanner doesn't stop the chip from failing, but if you are able to scan the dog the moment BEFORE you go through the channel tunnel for instance (as it is never checked the UK side), you do at least have some extra security. If the chip isn't found then, you don't go. No need to only find out when an official scans the chip -do it yourself before you let the official do it. It does at least save any last minute unexpected panic. :)

Don't see how as you then have to find somewhere for the dog to stay until passport compliant or put it into UK quarantine until PP compliant. 

So another chip, another Rabies shot, and 21 days wait and Quarantine charges.

I certainly won't be buying my own scanner for the rare overseas journey.

Brainless if you find the chip has failed the minute BEFORE you leave the UK, you don't go. Without a scanner you won't know. With scanners available for less then £50 these days, it's hardly a big outlay.

the chip was checked Thursday before we left, about 3 hours before we got on the ferry, it failed sometime between then and Saturday afternoon, carrying your own scanner would not have stopped the problem, just pinpointed the exact moment the chip failed - should you want to know and should you be checking constantly :-)

I have always had the chip checked just before my trip as vet does the health certificate (needed for flights).

Well my friend coming over via France had 2 chips out of the 3 dogs coming over fail. It was the third trip for these dogs. When she got home she found out the chips were from a faulty batch and the company failed to let her know. In the end replica chips had to be made because of the PP.

>Well my friend coming over via France had 2 chips out of the 3 dogs coming over fail. It was the third trip for these dogs. When she got home she found out the chips were from a faulty batch and the company failed to let her know. In the end replica chips had to be made because of the PP.

Oh that's interesting Wolfie, do you happen to know what make they were?

Here's the DW article about poor Socks extended holiday

http://www.dogworld.co.uk/product.php/125141/34/silken_windhound_must_stay_in_germany_after_chip_fails/a8ed674b78cf70d3692fe96150ffc558

A friend has suggested having all our dogs chipped again, in a slightly different place, and having a second passport with the new chip number and then asking the vet to fill out all the same vaccination/worming records on two passports. That way if one fails then just scan the other chip and present the other passport.

I'm really liking this idea and can't see why it wouldn't be allowed, thoughts anyone?

Your vet should be able to ring the DEFRA helpline and find out if it's possible. They're very helpful. :-) The dogs would need to have another rabies vaccination, of course.

Thanks Jan :-) I'v emailed DEFRA, I don't think they'd need another rabies jag if existing chip still working, so you can identify that dog has it's vaccination and put another chip in. If the chip fails of course they need the whole thing done again as Socks is doing now. I've had an automated response from Defra saying they aim to reply within 15 working days, good job the show season is over :-)

>I don't think they'd need another rabies jag if existing chip still working, so you can identify that dog has it's vaccination and put another chip in

I'm pretty sure that the passport can only be issued when a rabies jab is given, just as when a replacement one is issued when the original one is full. But I could well be wrong, because we were surprised to be told by them that it's okay for an owner to alter the breed that's written in the passport! Anything's possible. :-)

>because we were surprised to be told by them that it's okay for an owner to alter the breed that's written in the passport!

As long as the chip matches the passport I cant see that it matters what the breed is listed as.

Some breeds are banned in some countries ...

>Some breeds are banned in some countries ...

That is a separate issue though. The passport is only meant to ensure the dog has been vaccinated for rabies. It is not designed as a legal proof of breed.

www.gov.uk/pet-travel-information-for-pet-owners#microchips

Not sure if it will help, but here is the guidance for what to do about chips including if they fail and the serial numbers of the ones that have had a recall.

>we were surprised to be told by them that it's okay for an owner to alter the breed

I can't think of a good reason why someone would want to alter the breed, I can think of a couple of underhand reasons, but not a good one!

>Not sure if it will help, but here is the guidance for what to do about chips including if they fail and the serial numbers of the ones that have had a recall.

Thanks Alfieshmalfie, this doesn't apply to either of my friends failed chips, they had already checked. It seems they can all fail occasionally.

However on reading down the page you linked to I found this paragraph...

"What to do if the microchip has not failed
We recommend that  a new chip is inserted in case the existing chip fails at some point in the future. The following procedure must be carried out in order to maintain a pet's compliance:

The original microchip, implanted prior to the initial rabies vaccination, must be scanned and a reading made.
Having gained a reading, a new microchip may then be inserted.
'Section XI. OTHERS' of the EU pet passport may then be annotated by your vet to read (or similar): "On (date), I scanned and read microchip number (original microchip number). Upon gaining this reading, I inserted microchip number (new microchip number) on the same day, in accordance with Defra requirements."
This statement does not need to be exactly as shown, but the dates of chip readings and the numbers of the chips must be stated and this statement should be signed and stamped by the OV.

Provided this procedure is carried out as stated above, the pet will remain fully compliant with UK entry requirements under EU pet movement rules."

So it seems you can insert a second chip even if the first is working, I'll wait for clarification from DEFRA and then all mine are off to have 2nd chips, don't want to ever have to leave anyone behind :-)

>It seems they can all fail occasionally. <br />

Which is why Tattoos should be allowed as a back up ID if a chip fails.  You can record both on the Pet Passport if applicable, and they previously were used by other countries and s8icne the rules changed actually even now apply to us in UK if the dog was tattooed prior to 2011..

Really don't fancy having two chips in my dogs just in case one fails, though I suppose there is a precedent we do have two kidneys two eyes, two ears, so we can make do with one if one fails.

>Which is why Tattoos should be allowed as a back up ID if a chip fails

Agreed :-) But they aren't so 2 chips it is.

>Really don't fancy having two chips in my dogs just in case one fails

Neither do I really, but I also don't fancy having to leave any of my dogs behind for 3 weeks if one does fail. From the 40 silkens at the show 2 had failed chips, although 1 had failed a couple of months ago, they didn't happen at the same time but still 2 out of 40 dogs, 5% not an insignificant number.

There was a story on Facebook this week about 4 Lhasa Apso pups coming from Russia to the UK (all legit, one parent was the Crufts BOB winner, and they were all booked by show people in the UK) and they could not find the chip for one of the pups at Calais. They tried 3 different scanners and no chip was located.  Until somebody on FB drove down there with their own scanner, scanned the pup and there it was, chip found and pup allowed through. So it took 4 scanners.

>So it took 4 scanners.

And only one pair of eyes, or one eye, or even a dodgy pair of eyes to read a Tattoo.

Typical of governemnt departments bowing to BIG BUSINESS rather than the most efficient way of doing something!

>The passport is only meant to ensure the dog has been vaccinated for rabies. It is not designed as a legal proof of breed.

However if the passport says that the dog is of a banned breed then there is a strong likelihood that it will be denied entry.

Thats an appaling situation to end up with, an older dog with SA would fare very badly in that crazy situation..

Brainless
This is why I would always campaign for a tattoo to be a supplementary ID.  In fact tattoos were/are valid in EU countries up to a certain date (though not under the old rules we had for UK).

Its been in europe for Dobes almost for as long as the breed, I dont about other breeds & I dont know if the Dobe clubs mandatory tattoo changed since micropchips became compulsory in most Euro Dobe breed clubs these days, I doubt it but i need to check that out, what crazy worrying situation for the OP
.

    >So it took 4 scanners.

And only one pair of eyes, or one eye, or even a dodgy pair of eyes to read a Tattoo.

Disagree. :) I have only ever once had a dog whose tattoo I could read, and that was my Swedish dog back in the early 80s. After him I had 4 Golden Retrievers, 3 Cavaliers and one Malinois all tattooed in the UK and I could not read any of those tattoos. I still have one of the dogs.

and yet I can read al my own dogs tattoos, al done by same  tattooist now, though the three that have died were done by two others. 

Only the two oldest done using the large older style calipers and green ink were hard to read, but s5till legible but not by me, with my poor sight.

All the ones since 1997 done with small callipers using black ink have remained legible, with oldest now 15.

Sorry I don't know Chamsung, the dogs are Dutch.

Same here,  the bitch who died last year was over 13 and her tattoo was really clear.

The younger two aged 10 and 6 can also be read clearly.     The only time I've seen a tattoo not clear,  was when the pups had sucked all the ink off each other before the owner noticed LOL    They had to be redone.   But at least it was immediately apparent the tattoos weren't there.   No nasty suprises at a crucial time.

>Which is why Tattoos should be allowed as a back up ID if a chip fails.

I dont feel a tattoo is as safe as a chip. It would be easy for an unscrupulous dog owner to copy a tattoo onto a different dog, thereby being able to import an unvaccinated dog. A microchip is much harder to fake.

What bothers me about tattoos more than anything else is the fact that of the 8 dogs with unreadable tattoos that I have had, they were tattooed by 3 different people. So it wasn't just one person not being good at it. 6 of them were done by the NDTR for free for my ex husband to write an article on tattoos in one of the dog magazines or papers (can't remember), and the whole point was to show how good they were.  Yes they looked great for the first year or so, just a shame the article wasn't done a couple of years down the line......

My current (last) tattooed dog has just turned 11 so definitely done past 1997.

Have you seen how dogs are tattooed ? If puppies are tattooed the tattoo grows with the puppy & the equipment used isn't cheap(over £200) it's done using the same calipers I use to tattoo my show goats. I think the dog tattooists have a code for each tattooist & so to copy the tattoo the owner would need the full equipment & a full range of the letters in addition to the 60 numbers & at £5 a pop that's an outlay of over £300 to fake 1 tattoo ! I think not

Yes all the tattoos done one mine have been done as pups with the new calipers, so the little tattoo has grown into a bigger tattoo that is easy to read. 

Though some friends have had their adults done and I could read theirs but the one done as a pup with the big ones the dots were quite far apart so the spreading made the numbers less obvious.

At least with the tattoo even a partial read can be married up with a dogs record, with the chip it either reads or it doesn't.

It would seem no method is perfect therefore having more than one would be wise and should be acceptable as supplementary in the case of a failure.

>Have you seen how dogs are tattooed ? If puppies are tattooed the tattoo grows with the puppy & the equipment used isn't cheap(over £200)

If someone wanted to fake a tattoo for any reason then I am sure they could find a tattooist willing to do it. Are the people at the ports really that expert that they know the subtleties of how a tattoo ages? As long as the characters match the passport  I am sure that would be enough.

It would be next to impossible to fake the tattoo without it being noticeable because of the method of application. 

There would be no way to overlay the calliper so exactly, and of course if the dog had grown si9cne the original tattoo? 

Your also implying that a Dog Tattooist working within the organisation would do such a thing.

If any time a tattoo becomes illegible they will redo in the other ear.  It is easy to see if the tattoo is legible before a trip, it won't suddenly cease to be readable like the failing chips.

>If someone wanted to fake a tattoo for any reason then I am sure they could find a tattooist willing to do it. Are the people at the ports really that expert that they know the subtleties of how a tattoo ages? As long as the characters match the passport  I am sure that would be enough.

For a tattooist to be able to "fake" a dog tattoo they cannot use tattoo equipment used for human tattoos, the dies are so designed that it is impossible for them to be duplicated unless the same equipment as the original equipment & in Europe the tattooist are "licensed" by the clubs/societies that run the database. These are not people who would get involved with "faking" It's not just a case of buying the equipment & being able to tattoo.

There is far more likelihood of faking being involved in the goat world than dogs, as there is much more money involved believe me.

As for the chip being more secure I have to laugh as it is easier to get a duplicate chip produced that people think !

>There would be no way to overlay the calliper so exactly, and of course if the dog had grown si9cne the original tattoo?

I am pleased to hear that it is apparently so difficult to fake a tattoo. I had always felt it was not a very secure method of identification. However as growing is mentioned does that mean only puppies can be tatooed?

Also are the people at the ports given instruction on how to recognise a correct tattoo. how would they know  if I hadnt just got a tattooist friend to tattoo the numbers and symbols from a legitimately tattooed dog to a different one?

>Yes they looked great for the first year or so, just a shame the article wasn't done a couple of years down the line......

I remember several years ago when this topic came up I sent you a picture of my dog's tattoo, which must have been about 10 years old then, which I can still read okay (he's just turned 15) and yet you couldn't make out any of it.

>However as growing is mentioned does that mean only puppies can be tatooed?

No, adults can be tattooed as well.

I remember several years ago when this topic came up I sent you a picture of my dog's tattoo, which must have been about 10 years old then, which I can still read okay (he's just turned 15) and yet you couldn't make out any of it.

Exactly, and since then my eyes have got really bad -I can't see a thing without glasses. Back then I had good eyesight. I very much doubt I'm the only person who cannot read tattoos, I'm not that unique. :)

To check if it was just my eyes not coping with tattoos, we just did a little experiment here with Simba the 11 year old Golden Retriever. Each of us here today had a look in his ear and wrote down what we thought it said. This is the result:

Benjamin: 4440417
Brandon: 444017
Melanie: 3440417
Me and John both: R440417

Then we looked up the paperwork to see what it actually is meant to be: R4N4017

So out of 5 people of different ages not one of us was right despite getting 4 different results.

Well as they could probably trace your dog on just the last two numbers with it's breed you'd still be fine. 

With the tattoos the first two digits on adults are letters and on puppies a combination of letters and a number.

Did you moisten the ear, best done with surgical spirit?

Did you moisten the ear, best done with surgical spirit?

No -but if I didn't know to do that, would a dog warden, anyone checking a pets passport or similar, know? It's a pale ear with not much fur inside at all.

I think if something is hard to see it would be logical to try to clean it to see if it made it clearer. And as Brainless says, you don't need to be able to read the whole number - just part of it, along with the breed, is fine.