Dogs In England Must Be Microchipped From 2016

[Dunc]

Every dog owner in England will have to microchip their animal by April 2016 under plans aimed at cutting the growing number of strays.

The government says owners who refuse to comply with changes to the Animal Welfare Act face fines of up to £500.

Rice-sized microchips with a code containing the contact details of owners will be fitted to dogs.

A legal loophole could also be closed, meaning owners could face prosecution if their dog attacked on private land.

Relieve the burden

Government figures reveal that more than 100,000 dogs are dumped or lost each year, at a cost of £57m to the taxpayer and welfare charities.

It hopes the change in the law will help "reunite owners with lost or stolen pets", thus relieving some of the burden on animal charities and local authorities.

The change in the law will be effective from 6 April 2016. Any owner whose dog is found without a chip and can be traced by local authorities will have a short period of time to have the dog microchipped.

Fines of up to £500 will be levied by the police against owners who refuse to comply.

Currently some animal charities such as the Dogs Trust, Blue Cross and Battersea Dogs and Cats home offer a free microchipping service to owners.

The procedure - which involves inserting a sterile chip between a dog's shoulder blades - costs about £20-£30 at a private veterinary clinic.

Free microchips, donated by the Dogs Trust, will be circulated to veterinary clinics, although it is currently unclear whether vets will charge for the service.

Compulsory microchipping was introduced in Northern Ireland in April 2012.

Similar plans were considered in Wales in 2012, although no formal policy announcement has yet been made.

The Scottish government has said that, while it recognised the benefits of microchipping, there was "no evidence compulsory microchipping would effectively tackle welfare issues".

Fatal attacks

A spokesman added that Holyrood would watch developments in the rest of the UK and "may consider the matter further in future".

Laws governing dog attacks will also be extended to cover private property, closing a loophole which has meant that dog owners whose animals have attacked people on private property are immune from prosecution.

Eight children and six adults have been killed in dog attacks since 2005, with many of these incidents taking place in the home, figures from the Department for Environment and Rural Affairs have shown.

In the past 12 months, more than 3,000 postal workers were attacked by out-of-control dogs, with 70% of these attacks happening on private property.

Householders will however be protected from prosecution if their dog attacks a burglar or trespasser on their land.

[Keeonah]

IMHO about time. It's a pity it wasn't done sooner.

 

Gary.

[Stormy]

This is good!! Both mine are chipped.

[Dave]

This is good but IMO they should go further, sooner.

 

I'm of the opinion that dogs should be treated like cars (bear with me lol)

 

Every dog is microchiped, which is on a database... each dog should then have a kind of V5 registration document that corresponds with the chip number

 

Although this would add a lot of work for the breeder applying for the forms etc. it would be a good thing I think.

 

Then the document gets completed, like a V5, when the pup is purchased

[Dunc]

This is good but IMO they should go further, sooner.

 

I'm of the opinion that dogs should be treated like cars (bear with me lol)

 

Every dog is microchiped, which is on a database... each dog should then have a kind of V5 registration document that corresponds with the chip number

 

Although this would add a lot of work for the breeder applying for the forms etc. it would be a good thing I think.

 

Then the document gets completed, like a V5, when the pup is purchased

I agree with you Dave but then stupid ones would not be able to have dogs and please think of our member count 

[Storm Angel n Auroras Mum]

I dont get it, chips arent legal proof of ownership. So how will this help? they should have made chips proof of ownership too.

[jim_tinmois]

I thought that you had to prove ownership when you applied to have the chip updated. I know with Avid , you have to show either adoption papers or proof or ownership if you want to change details. Presumambly when a pup is sold, then the new owner would have to do this.

Cue a new piece of kit in Police cars. - microchip reader !!

[Storm Angel n Auroras Mum]

I thought that you had to prove ownership when you applied to have the chip updated. I know with Avid , you have to show either adoption papers or proof or ownership if you want to change details. Presumambly when a pup is sold, then the new owner would have to do this.

Cue a new piece of kit in Police cars. - microchip reader !!

nope. you ring them and give the chip number and they send you a form and you have to send that and a cheque for either £10 or £15 i cant remember.

[jim_tinmois]

This is good but IMO they should go further, sooner.

 

I'm of the opinion that dogs should be treated like cars (bear with me lol)

 

Every dog is microchiped, which is on a database... each dog should then have a kind of V5 registration document that corresponds with the chip number

 

Although this would add a lot of work for the breeder applying for the forms etc. it would be a good thing I think.

 

Then the document gets completed, like a V5, when the pup is purchased

I quite agree with this, and would go even further than this, by saying all breeders should be licenced - as they are in other countries i.e. New Zealand, where a friend of mine states that is the case.

[jim_tinmois]

nope. you ring them and give the chip number and they send you a form and you have to send that and a cheque for either £10 or £15 i cant remember.

No - in fact they do state that they require proof of ownership. I don't know about other chips though

[Storm Angel n Auroras Mum]

No - in fact they do state that they require proof of ownership. I don't know about other chips though

the other ones dont. cant remember off my head who angel is with but her details hadnt been changed by the rescue. In fact they were still on the original owner and her name on it was crystal. I had to change her name too.

[jim_tinmois]

the other ones dont. cant remember off my head who angel is with but her details hadnt been changed by the rescue. In fact they were still on the original owner and her name on it was crystal. I had to change her name too.

O.k. I accept what you say about other chips. I can only speak for Avid (pettrac). So a part of the legislataion should state that these details are required, when a chip is updated

[Povodny]

I see how this will help reunite people with lost dogs, but not how it will prevent dogs being given up to rescue. Plus the sensible responsible people already chip their dogs. And do their research about the breed they're considering taking on. And are less likely to give up at the first hurdle when things become problematic.

[robke]

This is good but IMO they should go further, sooner.

 

I'm of the opinion that dogs should be treated like cars (bear with me lol)

 

Every dog is microchiped, which is on a database... each dog should then have a kind of V5 registration document that corresponds with the chip number

 

Although this would add a lot of work for the breeder applying for the forms etc. it would be a good thing I think.

 

Then the document gets completed, like a V5, when the pup is purchased

We have something like this called a passport and the vet has to put all the shots in it and when we cross the border to Germany we can be asked to produce this at any time by officials....

[valkyries]

i also think we should get yearly licences for our dogs, if we are true dog lovers we wont mind paying for it an it would put fools off

[Marc]

About time . and I also think they should have to be licenced and the money from it should go into enforcing those controls.

[Elyse]

i also think we should get yearly licences for our dogs, if we are true dog lovers we wont mind paying for it an it would put fools off

 

We have yearly licenses over here. I think its $50 a year for a fixed dog, and $100 or $150 for an unfixed dog. The difference in fees certainly helps to encourage people to fix their pets.

 

Oh, crap...that just reminded me...I completely forgot to renew Suka's license! Gah!