Microchipping & Issues With Ownership And Returning Lost Pets

[shmoo]

Can anybody point me in the direction of evidence of issues in

Identifying ownership and returning lost pets (primarily dogs and cats).

I am talking about issues such as:

Lack of policing (low council priority in tracking animals and/or owners, not difficult to forge paperwork)

Paperwork dilemmas (paperwork missing, lost in mail/transit, completed incorrectly, logged incorrectly, delays in logging, never completed at all)

Cost of microchips and implantation

Chip useless without information being put into the system

Databases: Too many, not Australia wide (only state but many animals move interstate)

Does anybody know of somewhere complaining or trying to change things regarding these issues? For example a certain council, or pound, RSPCA, the public.

Putting aside PIAA's changes to be made come Oct 2012 regarding pet stores.

Thanks :)

Edited March 9, 2012 by shmoo

[vicdrg]

We are preparing a submission on microchips and registration. It's all haywire in victoria.

[mita]

Databases: Too many, not Australia wide (only state but many animals move interstate)

Does anybody know of somewhere complaining or trying to change things regarding these issues? For example a certain council, or pound, RSPCA, the public.

Amen, amen to the huge problems with the various microchipping data bases. And you're right, it presents problems with dogs moving interstate.

First time a dog came up to us in Qld from NSW, I sent in change of microchip details & thought that was it.

Months later, on a whim, I asked vet nurse to scan her microchip. Found she wasn't on the data base. Vet nurse was fantastic....she did detective work & found out something neither of us knew at that time. NSW has its own data base & she was on that. I'd sent off the change of details to a national data base. Other people told me that the data bases are 'connected', but I saw no evidence for that.

I'd imagine that the Australian Veterinary Association would dearly love a standardised data-base, because vets so often are brought lost dogs for scanning. Also the national RSPCA for the same reason. And even the ANKC because show dogs are moved around the country all the time.

[Leema]

I think these are big issues.

My big problem is that there appears to be no legislation regarding contacting owners of chipped animals (i.e. what is reasonable contact process - is making one phone call once, to one number, sufficient?), and there seems to be no legislation against chipping a dog twice or more. [ETA: At least in South Australia.]

There is a group called Woof's Law on FB that was started after a South Aussie had their chipped dog sold by the Animal Welfare League because the numbers on the chip was disconnected. She is campaigning for all details on a chip be used to find an owner - phone numbers, addresses, and even using the electoral roll to find the current contact details for owners.

Here's the FB links for Woof's Law:

http://www.facebook.com/groups/295007950530431/

Edited March 12, 2012 by Leema

[shmoo]

Thanks for the replies so far. Scary isn't it to think that the microchip is almost pointless

[Sheridan]

I think these are big issues.

My big problem is that there appears to be no legislation regarding contacting owners of chipped animals (i.e. what is reasonable contact process - is making one phone call once, to one number, sufficient?), and there seems to be no legislation against chipping a dog twice or more. [ETA: At least in South Australia.]

There is a group called Woof's Law on FB that was started after a South Aussie had their chipped dog sold by the Animal Welfare League because the numbers on the chip was disconnected. She is campaigning for all details on a chip be used to find an owner - phone numbers, addresses, and even using the electoral roll to find the current contact details for owners.

Here's the FB links for Woof's Law:

http://www.facebook.com/groups/295007950530431/

It does behoove the owner to make an effort to update details although admittedly, some do make it hard. It's easy with CAR. You just update online. The NSW one on the other hand has no online database nor it seems any forms for an owner to update details. Same with the ACT for updating details.

[Crisovar]

The biggest problem I have come across is owners not updating their details.

Anyone can use Pet Address

to find which data base an animal is registered on. It is usually the first port of call for ACOs and Vets here if the animal is not wearing a tag with a microchip registry number.

[JaneyA]

I think these are big issues.

My big problem is that there appears to be no legislation regarding contacting owners of chipped animals (i.e. what is reasonable contact process - is making one phone call once, to one number, sufficient?), and there seems to be no legislation against chipping a dog twice or more. [ETA: At least in South Australia.]

There is a group called Woof's Law on FB that was started after a South Aussie had their chipped dog sold by the Animal Welfare League because the numbers on the chip was disconnected. She is campaigning for all details on a chip be used to find an owner - phone numbers, addresses, and even using the electoral roll to find the current contact details for owners.

Here's the FB links for Woof's Law:

http://www.facebook....95007950530431/

It does behoove the owner to make an effort to update details although admittedly, some do make it hard. It's easy with CAR. You just update online. The NSW one on the other hand has no online database nor it seems any forms for an owner to update details. Same with the ACT for updating details.

In NSW, the owner can get Form C3A from any Council to update their details. The NSW registration database is restricted to "Approved Persons" (councils, RSPCA, AWL and veterinarians who have applied to be an "Approved Person" and nobody else can access the database because pet ownership details are deemed "personal information".

[yellowgirl]

The biggest problem I have come across is owners not updating their details.

Anyone can use Pet Address

to find which data base an animal is registered on. It is usually the first port of call for ACOs and Vets here if the animal is not wearing a tag with a microchip registry number.

What a great resource Crisovar! Tracking down chip numbers is a pain in the butt, especially interstate ones. I just did a search on one of my foster's chips and she's registered with FIVE different places!!

[Sheridan]

I think these are big issues.

My big problem is that there appears to be no legislation regarding contacting owners of chipped animals (i.e. what is reasonable contact process - is making one phone call once, to one number, sufficient?), and there seems to be no legislation against chipping a dog twice or more. [ETA: At least in South Australia.]

There is a group called Woof's Law on FB that was started after a South Aussie had their chipped dog sold by the Animal Welfare League because the numbers on the chip was disconnected. She is campaigning for all details on a chip be used to find an owner - phone numbers, addresses, and even using the electoral roll to find the current contact details for owners.

Here's the FB links for Woof's Law:

http://www.facebook....95007950530431/

It does behoove the owner to make an effort to update details although admittedly, some do make it hard. It's easy with CAR. You just update online. The NSW one on the other hand has no online database nor it seems any forms for an owner to update details. Same with the ACT for updating details.

In NSW, the owner can get Form C3A from any Council to update their details. The NSW registration database is restricted to "Approved Persons" (councils, RSPCA, AWL and veterinarians who have applied to be an "Approved Person" and nobody else can access the database because pet ownership details are deemed "personal information".

Which is jolly good for those lIving in NSW but for those living outside NSW with a dog on the NSW register, it's not so convenient. I can make a trip to Queanbeyan and get a copy of the form however for anyone who isn't quite so close to NSW then it's not quite so convenient. There should be something online for people to update their details.

[mita]

Which is jolly good for those lIving in NSW but for those living outside NSW with a dog on the NSW register,

Yes, and numbers of people outside NSW don't even know there's a NSW-only register.

People shouldn't have to be detectives & Philadelphian lawyers to get their dogs accurately microchipped & details kept up to date.

I also found a Catch 22 with getting a dog both microchipped & council-registered, for the first time, in Brisbane.

The form for microchipping required that I give the dog's council registration number.

The council registration form required that I give the microchip number.

Edited March 13, 2012 by mita

[Crisovar]

The registry with the NSW Dept of Local Government is useless if you reside outside of NSW I registered my NSW bred boy with CAR then contacted the NSW registry and they deactivated him, living in QLD there was no need for him to be registered with them.

Its is important for any NSW residents who travel outside of NSW with their dog/s to register their animals chip on another database beside the Local Government one so that you can be contacted if you lose your pet out of the state.

[Leema]

There is a group called Woof's Law on FB that was started after a South Aussie had their chipped dog sold by the Animal Welfare League because the numbers on the chip was disconnected. She is campaigning for all details on a chip be used to find an owner - phone numbers, addresses, and even using the electoral roll to find the current contact details for owners.

It does behoove the owner to make an effort to update details although admittedly, some do make it hard.

I agree, it is up to owners to change the details on their chip. However, knowing people are a bit slack (and some databases are a bit hard), it would be nice if all details were used on the chip. (In the instance of Woof, the postal address was still correct and, if a registered letter was sent to the address, the dog would've been spared rehoming.)

[Sheridan]

The registry with the NSW Dept of Local Government is useless if you reside outside of NSW I registered my NSW bred boy with CAR then contacted the NSW registry and they deactivated him, living in QLD there was no need for him to be registered with them.

Its is important for any NSW residents who travel outside of NSW with their dog/s to register their animals chip on another database beside the Local Government one so that you can be contacted if you lose your pet out of the state.

I didn't even know I could do this. I thought she had to remain on the NSW register because that's where she was registered.

[~Anne~]

Thanks for the replies so far. Scary isn't it to think that the microchip is almost pointless

No, not pointless. It just needs refinement. The concept is solid, it's the lack of uniformity, enforcement and strategic planning that is letting it down.

[shmoo]

Thanks for the replies so far. Scary isn't it to think that the microchip is almost pointless

No, not pointless. It just needs refinement. The concept is solid, it's the lack of uniformity, enforcement and strategic planning that is letting it down.

Yes you are right.

[shmoo]

There is a group called Woof's Law on FB that was started after a South Aussie had their chipped dog sold by the Animal Welfare League because the numbers on the chip was disconnected. She is campaigning for all details on a chip be used to find an owner - phone numbers, addresses, and even using the electoral roll to find the current contact details for owners.

It does behoove the owner to make an effort to update details although admittedly, some do make it hard.

I agree, it is up to owners to change the details on their chip. However, knowing people are a bit slack (and some databases are a bit hard), it would be nice if all details were used on the chip. (In the instance of Woof, the postal address was still correct and, if a registered letter was sent to the address, the dog would've been spared rehoming.)

I thought that ALL efforts were made to reach an owner if the animal is impounded. That includes calling all the numbers and mailing a letter by registered post. Also, if the animal has a name tag with a number, that number is phoned too.

[Leema]

Is 'all efforts' legislated and how is it defined? I don't think legislation to this effect is in SA, at least.