Alyosha Posted October 3, 2013 Share Posted October 3, 2013 No-one has called you a liar, Alison03. I just get a little tired of the stories that begin "someone I know". There are always two sides to a story and in the retelling of one, often many points are left out or added along the way. I was pointing out that the vet could read the microchip, has access to the registry and that the dog would not need to be taken to the RSPCA at all. I don't like to see people or organisations put down because of second hand stories, no matter who they are. Not all vets have access to the registries. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dame Aussie Posted October 3, 2013 Share Posted October 3, 2013 No-one has called you a liar, Alison03. I just get a little tired of the stories that begin "someone I know". There are always two sides to a story and in the retelling of one, often many points are left out or added along the way. I was pointing out that the vet could read the microchip, has access to the registry and that the dog would not need to be taken to the RSPCA at all. I don't like to see people or organisations put down because of second hand stories, no matter who they are. Well how exactly would you like me to relay the story, they are people I know and I was telling it how I heard it. I fully realize the pounds/RSPCA have a tough job but sometimes things go pear shaped and someone loses a dog, apparently it's not unusual. I don't know why the vet told my cousin he could only read the microchip number, he said something about different types of chips are implanted, different brands and his scanner couldn't read all of them. Does that ring true? This could be the case, yes. Some scanners don't pick up certain chips. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tdierikx Posted October 3, 2013 Share Posted October 3, 2013 No-one has called you a liar, Alison03. I just get a little tired of the stories that begin "someone I know". There are always two sides to a story and in the retelling of one, often many points are left out or added along the way. I was pointing out that the vet could read the microchip, has access to the registry and that the dog would not need to be taken to the RSPCA at all. I don't like to see people or organisations put down because of second hand stories, no matter who they are. Not all vets have access to the registries. This... Not all vets in all states have access levels to the various chip registries which allow them to see the owner's name, address, or phone numbers. But the local councils DO have this level of access, and if you have the chip number they can contact the owner on your behalf and appeal to them to allow the transfer of ownership to happen - and the councils can usually also alter the registry details on the spot. I can see why the RSPCA (if tasked with companion animal management) would seize the dog from someone who is not the registered owner... how would any of us feel if someone had one of our dogs and tried to pass it off as their own - and that the people who had the power to reunite us with our dog just simply transferred ownership on that person's say so? I'm not a fan of the RSPCA temperament tests - so I won't comment on that part of the story. T. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alison03 Posted October 3, 2013 Share Posted October 3, 2013 Thanks Alyosha and Aussie3, I thought that might be the case, I read an article on it once ages ago, of course I can't find it now when I want it. Anyway it was some vets saying the microchip scheme wasn't as straight forward as it should be. Thanks for confirming that. : ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alison03 Posted October 3, 2013 Share Posted October 3, 2013 No-one has called you a liar, Alison03. I just get a little tired of the stories that begin "someone I know". There are always two sides to a story and in the retelling of one, often many points are left out or added along the way. I was pointing out that the vet could read the microchip, has access to the registry and that the dog would not need to be taken to the RSPCA at all. I don't like to see people or organisations put down because of second hand stories, no matter who they are. Not all vets have access to the registries. This... Not all vets in all states have access levels to the various chip registries which allow them to see the owner's name, address, or phone numbers. But the local councils DO have this level of access, and if you have the chip number they can contact the owner on your behalf and appeal to them to allow the transfer of ownership to happen - and the councils can usually also alter the registry details on the spot. I can see why the RSPCA (if tasked with companion animal management) would seize the dog from someone who is not the registered owner... how would any of us feel if someone had one of our dogs and tried to pass it off as their own - and that the people who had the power to reunite us with our dog just simply transferred ownership on that person's say so? I'm not a fan of the RSPCA temperament tests - so I won't comment on that part of the story. T. I feel the same way, if my dog got stolen I wouldn't want her to be transferred to someone else so easily either. It looks like what the vet told my cousin was correct, he couldn't find the owners name just the number and only the pound/RSPCA can access that information, probably something to do with the privacy act or something like that. No one seems to be a fan of the temperament tests, I don't know what they entail so I can't comment on that either. Thanks for giving me the info. : ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tdierikx Posted October 3, 2013 Share Posted October 3, 2013 I have a copy of the RSPCA temperament assessment checklist... but it's in MS Excel format. If you want a copy of it Alison03, you'll have to email me for it, OK? T. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cavNrott Posted October 3, 2013 Share Posted October 3, 2013 The microchip registry has the details of the chip, not the vet. As far as I'm aware the owners name and details are not available to vets when they scan the chip. I may stand to be corrected there. If a dog is lost or is stolen then surely the first thing an owner would do is notify the microchip registry to post an alert against the chip. This is why we chip our dogs. When the chip is scanned the alert should be evident. I recently picked up a little Poodle I found wandering in traffic. I took him to the vet who scanned him and then phoned the microchip registry. The registry gave the vet the dog owners details. The vet called the owner and advised them that the dog had been found. This was at 5.30pm on a Saturday so definitely after normal business hours. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alison03 Posted October 3, 2013 Share Posted October 3, 2013 I have a copy of the RSPCA temperament assessment checklist... but it's in MS Excel format. If you want a copy of it Alison03, you'll have to email me for it, OK? T. I just sent you a message. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alison03 Posted October 3, 2013 Share Posted October 3, 2013 The microchip registry has the details of the chip, not the vet. As far as I'm aware the owners name and details are not available to vets when they scan the chip. I may stand to be corrected there. If a dog is lost or is stolen then surely the first thing an owner would do is notify the microchip registry to post an alert against the chip. This is why we chip our dogs. When the chip is scanned the alert should be evident. I recently picked up a little Poodle I found wandering in traffic. I took him to the vet who scanned him and then phoned the microchip registry. The registry gave the vet the dog owners details. The vet called the owner and advised them that the dog had been found. This was at 5.30pm on a Saturday so definitely after normal business hours. I'm glad it worked so quickly for the poodle, I was beginning to wonder if my dog got out if the chip would be of any use if she was taken to a vet. I don't want her to ever go to the pound. : ( Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tdierikx Posted October 3, 2013 Share Posted October 3, 2013 If you are in Sydney Alison03, most of the pounds are really good at contacting owners via chip details - just make sure your little one's details are up to date, and you shouldn't have any issues if she ever ends up lost. T. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rosetta Posted October 3, 2013 Share Posted October 3, 2013 When I picked up a little stray and took it to the vet to be scanned they were able to access the owner's details through contacting the registry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tdierikx Posted October 3, 2013 Share Posted October 3, 2013 Funny how the RSPCA pounds don't temp test pets that are being picked up by their rightful owners though, isn't it? Food for thought there... T. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_PL_ Posted October 3, 2013 Share Posted October 3, 2013 The microchip registry has the details of the chip, not the vet. As far as I'm aware the owners name and details are not available to vets when they scan the chip. I may stand to be corrected there. If a dog is lost or is stolen then surely the first thing an owner would do is notify the microchip registry to post an alert against the chip. This is why we chip our dogs. When the chip is scanned the alert should be evident. I recently picked up a little Poodle I found wandering in traffic. I took him to the vet who scanned him and then phoned the microchip registry. The registry gave the vet the dog owners details. The vet called the owner and advised them that the dog had been found. This was at 5.30pm on a Saturday so definitely after normal business hours. You would think so but I'm still meeting people who hadn't thought that you actually need to update your details on the chip if they ever change or if the dog is sold. There's also nothing in the Act that differentiates between dogs flagged as stolen/lost or those that aren't. Any animal found has to be impounded within 72hrs if the owner cannot be found. Chip or no chip. (NSW) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alison03 Posted October 3, 2013 Share Posted October 3, 2013 If you are in Sydney Alison03, most of the pounds are really good at contacting owners via chip details - just make sure your little one's details are up to date, and you shouldn't have any issues if she ever ends up lost. T. That's good to know, her details are still the same. Thanks : ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alison03 Posted October 3, 2013 Share Posted October 3, 2013 Funny how the RSPCA pounds don't temp test pets that are being picked up by their rightful owners though, isn't it? Food for thought there... T. Can you imagine the uproar if they did, it would be on every front page. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
*kirty* Posted October 3, 2013 Share Posted October 3, 2013 In Victoria it is illegal for vets to reuinte lost pets with their owners. They must call the council if an animal is brought in. This has been the law for a long time but only very recently has it been enforced. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alison03 Posted October 3, 2013 Share Posted October 3, 2013 In Victoria it is illegal for vets to reuinte lost pets with their owners. They must call the council if an animal is brought in. This has been the law for a long time but only very recently has it been enforced. I found an article yesterday about this subject, I hope the link works. The Vic gov are not pet friendly at all. : ( http://m.heraldsun.com.au/leader/south-east/vets-told-to-hand-stray-dogs-into-council-or-risk-700-fines/story-fngnvmhm-1226598367365 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
*kirty* Posted October 3, 2013 Share Posted October 3, 2013 Nope. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alyosha Posted October 4, 2013 Share Posted October 4, 2013 Link worked for me, story copied below: Vets told to hand stray dogs into council or risk $700 fines READERS are backing Victoria's vets and criticising councils and the State Government for using a little-known law to raise revenue from stray dogs. The law enacted at least a decade ago requires all stray animals to be sent to the council pound, but vets normally scan any pets handed into their practices for microchips and call the owner to pick them up. On February 25 the Department of Primary Industries told vets via email they would be fined up to $700 unless they contacted councils to pick up strays. HAVE YOUR SAY: Should vets be allowed to reunite lost dogs with their owners? Tell us below or email [email protected] Danielle Herrera said targetting vets was "disgusting and ridiculous''. "First of all, it is another way for councils to make money. Secondly a lot of dogs that are not claimed go to the lost dogs home where they will be more than likely put down,'' she said. Alison Telford also said she was disgusted to hear of the threat from the department. "Honestly the government want community groups to do more, while the government do less. However when it affects revenue raising, they step in and demand the opposite,'' she said. Graham of Hoppers Crossing was "100 per cent'' in favour of the vets. "Too many animals are put down by pounds.'' he said. "The system has to change. Too many decisions made in ivory towers by bureaucrats with no idea of the real world.'' The department is also cracking down on vets rehousing cats for a fee and running puppy schools unless they register as domestic animal businesses. Most vets locate owners as a free or low-fee community service by scanning stray dogs for microchips and keeping them overnight if needed until the owner can pick them up. Casey Council charges a $143 release fee and can impose a fine up to $282. Neil Harding from the Berwick Springs Veterinary Hospital believed it was revenue raising and said in over 15 years as a vet he hadn't heard of anything like it. "To me, it's just ridiculous,'' Mr Harding said. "This is something that most vets have done as a service to the community and now we'll be fined for something we've done pretty much forever. "There's going to be a lot of resentment because we'll have to say to people who do hand in strays, 'we're just going to have to call up the pound'." In most cases, Dr Harding said dogs only escaped once and often it was because of noisy events such as council-funded firework displays. Vets can accept the dogs if they have a s84Y agreement with their local council but the Victorian branch of the Australian Veterinary Association confirmed very few if any of its members did. Australian Veterinary Association Victoria branch president Trish Stewart said vets dealt with stray pets every day and was hopeful her discussions with the department would end in a resolution shortly. In its email, the department justified it's warning by saying if councils were not made aware of stray animals, "they cannot take action to help owners prevent this from happening in the future". But DPI spokesman Alan Everett said the legislation had been in place for about 10 years. "Vets are being advised of their legal obligations," Mr Everett said. "The Bureau of Animal Welfare recently implemented a new system of engaging vets following a survey asking them what information needs they would like from the Department. "They responded that they needed more information on the Domestic Animals Act and other legislation relevant to their practices." Casey Council manager of community safety Caroline Bell endorsed the department's actions. She said since 1994 the law had stipulated any stray dog must be handed over to an authorised officer of council as soon as practicable. Ms Bell said the council could cope with the extra demand on it services. She said revenue raised through the council release fee would pay for the safe keeping of dogs at the pound. The law requiring strays to be sent to the pound was enacted in 1994. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackJaq Posted October 4, 2013 Share Posted October 4, 2013 Yep, the Vic gov hates pets methinks, except where they can make money from them Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now