Manditory chipping of dogs

[mnp13]

I'm not sure if it's RFID or microchips but many states are looking into making chipping dogs law.

What do you think? Personally, I am totally for it.

[a-bull]

agreed

[msvette2u]

Best thing that ever happened.

[babyreba]

I personally have no problem with it at all, but I'm certain privacy-rights people and conspiracy-theorists will freak the F out over it.

So will people who simply hate the government and being told what to do with their property.

[mnp13]

I just called the NY assemblyman who is sponsoring the bill. The woman was amazed that someone was calling in support.

What people aren't thinking about is all of that information is ALREADY in the government's hands. NYS has licensing laws, so they have everything in a database already. this way, the dog has id no matter what. I like knowing that even if the dog's collar is lost they can still figure out who it is.

I'm not as big on the microchips because they are inconsistant, not always readable, and you have to pay for the registration.

[dogcrazyjen]

In theory it is a great idea. May give the cops another tool to grab dogs in bad situations.

Problem is that responsible owners will get it done, the rest won't. They don't bother licensing here half the time, I doubt they would bother micro chipping. Hell, Tess lived right across the street from the town hall, tied up every day, and she didn't even have a rabies shot, let alone spay or licensing.

I would not be against it at all, I just question much good it would do. It might help the SPCAs and shelters keep track of their dogs. Who knows.

[mnp13]

Well, licensing is currently law. Even if only responsible owners do it, it will help because even the most responsible owner can make a mistake and have their dog get out.

[a-bull]

Where I am it's mandatory to license your dog---is it in most places?

It's not like they're asking for your ss #. They're just trying to ensure that dogs are returned to their owners if lost, to cut down on population problems.

[cheekymunkee]

Where I am it's mandatory to license your dog---is it in most places?

It's not like they're asking for your ss #. They're just trying to ensure that dogs are returned to their owners if lost, to cut down on population problems.

It is here, in most cities I have lived in it has been

[dogcrazyjen]

It is manitory here too. I am saying that people NOW do not follow the law and license their dogs-so those same people will not be likely to microchip either.

Maybe the law will do good. I just worry that since little reinforcing of the licensing laws are done here, then less will be done for a new law. I was thinking the microchipping was to keep track of abuse cases, fighting dogs, illegal selling, stolen dogs, etc.

Responsible owners rarely lose their dogs for good-they call all the shelters and leave discriptions. Our shelter here does not have the reader for microchipping anyways, and individuals who find dogs don't either. Although if it is manditory maybe all shelters will be provided with one. A good set of tags is probably a more reliable way to go for lost dogs. Although for stolen dogs tags could be removed, so a tattoo or chip would be a benifit.


Again, I am not against this, it may indeed do some good, especially in the cities. I was just voicing a concern. We were asked for our opinions.

[luvmyangels]

There is a proposal by NYS Assemblymember Peralta regarding mandatory microchip/dog database which was reported "held for consideration" on June 6th.

Although I find there are pros to this I find alot of cons to it too. One of the main cons is the idea of a database not being secure with everyone's information. Which leaves the door wide open for everyone to have the the responsible dog owners information and it could lead to discrimination.

Every town/city has a licensing law but how many people actually license their dogs? I know my three dogs are licensed. But it is not enforced unless something happens. How are they possibly going to get everyone in NY State to comply? Enforcement of such a proposal will be nearly impossible and will only waste tax payers monies.

That is my thoughts on the subject.

[luvmyangels]

I was thinking the microchipping was to keep track of abuse cases, fighting dogs, illegal selling, stolen dogs, etc.

The people you mention are going to be the one's that are going to be difficult to comply.

[dogcrazyjen]

I know, that is what I meant.

This seems to me one of those city rules that just doesn't work in the rural areas. Maybe it needs to be adopted on a city level, not a state level.

If people don't want to lose their pets, keep a close eye on them and choose to microchip if you want.



*********My idea********

If they want to do some good regulating something, I like the idea of all people breeding dogs MUST register them with the state. There is a modest fee to be paid per litter, and all puppies must be registered and buyers recorded as well, so all puppies will be licensed. If you are caught with an intact adult dog and no license, to breed or stud, then you will be stifly fined, and either must speuter or breed-license the dog, or lose it.

If you are convicted of any sort of animal abuse or neglect, you lose your license perminantly, and your name will go out on a list to be made available to breeders and buyers alike. If a non-breeder is convicted, their name is also put on a list to help breeders screen their buyers.

If you turn in an unregistered litter/breeder and a fine results, you get half the proceeds. It would be self-policing!

There, see, if I ran the world we would all be better off

(that was a joke,btw)

[Romanwild]

The arguement that only responsible owners will do it doesn't hold up. If your local aco doesn't do their job then that's your local governments fault.

My local aco is county wide and we are mostly rural. They go door to door and look for dogs. So far they have 65% of the estimated dogs licensed. They are continuing their efforts.

A microchip will not cause your identity to be stolen. It is just a high tech "tag".

There might be a way to have breeders permanently listed on the microchip. That could be used for accountabililty purposes.

[a-bull]

The arguement that only responsible owners will do it doesn't hold up. If your local aco doesn't do their job then that's your local governments fault.

My local aco is county wide and we are mostly rural. They go door to door and look for dogs. So far they have 65% of the estimated dogs licensed. They are continuing their efforts.

A microchip will not cause your identity to be stolen. It is just a high tech "tag".

There might be a way to have breeders permanently listed on the microchip. That could be used for accountabililty purposes.

I agree.

You can't not implement such a good program because only responsible owners will do it---we've got to start somewhere . . .

[cheekymunkee]

The arguement that only responsible owners will do it doesn't hold up. If your local aco doesn't do their job then that's your local governments fault.

My local aco is county wide and we are mostly rural. They go door to door and look for dogs. So far they have 65% of the estimated dogs licensed. They are continuing their efforts.

A microchip will not cause your identity to be stolen. It is just a high tech "tag".

There might be a way to have breeders permanently listed on the microchip. That could be used for accountabililty purposes.

I agree.

You can't not implement such a good program because only responsible owners will do it---we've got to start somewhere . . .

Exactly!! It is not that different from licensing, only responsible people do THAT & it is law in most places.

[mnp13]

even if only responsible owners do it, they are ahead of the game. it is the reponsible owners who will be desparate to get their dogs back and if that dog is gone because it slipped its collar the chip will be essential.

dogs are also known to get lost on vacations, so that will help as well.

[dogcrazyjen]

That should be choice. Mandating another level when the proir level is not policed is just stretching the few officers and monies they have now. I would say put the millions of dollars that this would cost into enforcing the laws that are already in place.

[luvmyangels]

The arguement that only responsible owners will do it doesn't hold up. If your local aco doesn't do their job then that's your local governments fault.

My local aco is county wide and we are mostly rural. They go door to door and look for dogs. So far they have 65% of the estimated dogs licensed. They are continuing their efforts.

A microchip will not cause your identity to be stolen. It is just a high tech "tag".

There might be a way to have breeders permanently listed on the microchip. That could be used for accountabililty purposes.

You have an aco that is above the norm. Unfortunately there are many people that do not have their dogs licensed in my area. The only way they try and enforce it is by sending letters only if you had your dog licensed at one point or another. Or if you had adopted a dog from the local shelter. The sad part of my local government is that everything is still handwritten and not in an actual database.

If it could be proven that there is going to be a database that is not going to be available for everyone to see than I wouldn't have a problem.

I still do not see how this could be enforced.

[Romanwild]

That should be choice. Mandating another level when the proir level is not policed is just stretching the few officers and monies they have now. I would say put the millions of dollars that this would cost into enforcing the laws that are already in place.

You don't need millions, just start enforcing.

If this was passed it wouldn't effect your local aco at all because they don't/can't do their job now.

*********My idea********

If they want to do some good regulating something, I like the idea of all people breeding dogs MUST register them with the state. There is a modest fee to be paid per litter, and all puppies must be registered and buyers recorded as well, so all puppies will be licensed. If you are caught with an intact adult dog and no license, to breed or stud, then you will be stifly fined, and either must speuter or breed-license the dog, or lose it.

If you are convicted of any sort of animal abuse or neglect, you lose your license perminantly, and your name will go out on a list to be made available to breeders and buyers alike. If a non-breeder is convicted, their name is also put on a list to help breeders screen their buyers.

If you turn in an unregistered litter/breeder and a fine results, you get half the proceeds. It would be self-policing!

There, see, if I ran the world we would all be better off

(that was a joke,btw)

But this wouldn't cost much and I'm sure your aco could add it to his daily routine.

If you turn in an unregistered litter/breeder and a fine results, you get half the proceeds. It would be self-policing!

Why couldn't you do this with licensing/chipping?