Hi all

Does anyone else have any similar feedback on the situation with our new Bedlington puppy?

The breeder's husband is a vet and before we brought little Crossley home from Norfolk he was given an Identichip Biotherm microchip. It is a chip that also allows temperature to be read without the use of a thermometer...if the vet has a special scanner!!! (probably good in theory but will the chips be trusted by vets and a thermometer be used anyway?). However, the microchip number should still be able to be read on any scanner.

When we visited our vet for a check-up we asked him to check the chip. He tried on three scanners but nothing would be read. We then made arrangements to go back to the vet in Norfolk to check the chip. But before we went we also tried a second vet in Essex and we took our other Bedlington. Crossley's failed but Abby's chip which was put in by our vet 3 years ago was fine which seems to indicate the scanner was working correctly but our chip may be faulty. However, when we went back to Norfolk, Crossley's chip was reading ok.

We now have to speak to our vet to see if he will put a second chip in (he was not keen previously in case the two chips affected each other)but in the meantime, Animalcare (who own Indentichip) will be speaking to both the Suffolk vet and our vet, and the vets will be speaking to each other. Initial indications are that Identichip expect the scanners are too old at our vets. However, our vets reckon they update regularly.

Could this same situation affect others? Hopefully most people get chips checked, but like us this is probably done by the vets who inserted the chip and whose scanners are known to work with the chips. How many of us have checked at different vets and in different parts of the country with different scanners? Probably not many because we expect them to be read by any scanner anywhere meeting the ISO standard!!! But the question is...Althought they are supposed to, do all scanners pick up all microchips?

Regards

Interesting -and worrying yes! I've never used these chips that records temperature as it seems a bit pointless to me what with them a) being a lot more expensive and b) needing a special scanner. Just to say one thing -two chips will NOT interfere with each other at all. I have tried this out several times, actually putting two chips side by side, so close they are touching. (I.e. outside an animal. This would of course be much closer than you could ever insert two.) The scanner will just read the closest chip, it will not muddle them up. So you should be perfectly safe to insert a second chip.

How strange my neice was talking about this the other day and that she had heard that microchips do not always work with different scanners, I thought it unlikely but since you have brought it up with a factual event............... (I shall have to tell her she was right:rolleyes:) and yes, it is a real worry now.

I think that tattoo's are the way to go for all of us then, no mistaking that is there? I think they are a much better idea.

Several of my dogs are tattooed but none can be read. :( That includes the new pup.

On my two red Boxers you could/can read them fine (they were done as adults).
On my brindle girl that was done as a puppy you can see she's tattoeed but
she's got a hairy ear so it would need to be shaved as the hair is the same colour
as the dye.

As long as you can see the ear has a tatto that is enough.  As you say the ear can then be clipped if it needed to be checked, though wetting with surgical spirit will usually allow it to be seen.

Have you contacted the NDTR about the illegible tattoos.

I had problems with one litter where they were done by a different person, and she no longer tattoos.  My tattooist said it is vital that they are done correctly.  the pups ear must be shaved even if it looks hairless (which is what didn't happen in the case of the litter I mentioned), and the ink must be massaged in sufficiently.

If you have tattoos that are poor they will re-do them free of charge (in the other ear) and cross reference the records.

All mine are done with black ink and all are very legible, (even to me with very poor eyesight), they are easiest to read if the ear is wiped with surgical spirit (or water).

I did find the two that were done with the old large callipers and green ink harder to read, but still decipherable, both these dogs are now dead.  The oldest of mine done with the small callipers is 9 1/2.

How old has a pup got to be to have tattoo done?
And being I have never had it done (my adult dogs are Microchipped with the temperature chip!) how do they actually do it?
Its not like when an human gets a tattoo is it! :D

>How old has a pup got to be to have tattoo done?

Mine were done at 6 weeks.

Depends on the breed.  With mine we have found that at 7 weeks even the neatest little ears are just right size for the tats.

I don't really see the point in having them re-done. I was a great believer in tattoos and the ones I had on dogs and rabbits in Sweden were fine but here, they've all been bad. I have an 11 year old Golden and a 12 year old cavalier done as adults by the same person. The Golden's is probably the best of the lot but still not readable unless you know what it is meant to say and don't have to guess. The Cavalier's you can't even see if you clip the fur inside the ear, you'd need a surgical clipper blade to shave it completely. Then I have a 3 year old Golden and a 15 week old Golden, done as pups by the same person. (I.e. tattooist number 2.) Neither has ever been readable. Then one 7 year old Malinois done by a third person as a pup and hers you could make out when she was younger if you knew what the numbers were supposed to be, but you can't now.I've had a further 2 Cavaliers and 2 Goldens with tattoos and again none were readable.

I don't know about the scanner but I asked my vet about those biotherm chips and they thing the readings are unreliable and always use a thermometer anyway.