Problems arose (with horses) that when the chip was read it often didn't match the passport. Just having a chip number doesn't mean you could trace the horse as there isn't an international database.

Therefore any old horse could be imported over here and sold by dealers - this is a common practise.

My point is that if every dog were to be micro chipped there would have to be an international database for it to succeed. At present I think there are several in this country alone.

But, yes, I do agree that this would be a step forward if you could get the Government to enforce a one stop data base.

All we need is traceability and accountability.

Leadstaffs - I agree with this. All foals have to microchipped now and have a passport supporting this. Problems do arise though when animals are imported - very often their passport does not match the animal (its microchip) and unfortunately the traceability ends there!


Dobermann: to pick up on some of your questions - no I certainly do not think that someone needs to have a certain level of income to own a dog.

I can see you are wholeheartedly upset about the recession - aren't we all, it effects each and everyone of us (particularly fuel prices)it has affected many to the point of no longer having a job to tax a car, never mind using fuel so to add another bill on to people in recession - this is only the start - is not going to help anyone but do you not think that the recession is leading to more dogs being rehomed?
yep, and adding a transfer fee for a license to rescues would mean even less money to spend on looking after the dogs, plus all those who are deeply affected by the recession have yet another bill to pay

Maybe if some system was in place at grass routes level this might be lessened?

I worked in the police force for 11 yrs - just before I left there was a drive to put a Wildlife Crime officer in each district. And although they obviously didn't prioritise pet dog problems - they did deal with sheep attacks etc so maybe with a bit of strong persuasion they could encompass pet animals too?
In an ideal world yes, it would help, but of course there will never be funding for this, heck, the funding is cut whilst crime can be on an increase so I really dont see it ever happening
And to whoever said about self elected charity enforcing officers - I agree. Maybe this area should be looked at by the Government, but all the while the RSPCA are doing the job at no cost to them - I find it unlikely
I agree, hence it goes 'unregulated' too

Back to Dobermann - could you please list the current legislation that is in place but not being enforced?
the legislation/laws that the RSPCA and SSPCA are currently using to prosecute and seize dogs etc, as well as the usual DDA etc but I also think that if the police are going to enforce this more training should be given....
From my own personal point of view I cannot think of any legislation whatsoever that would make me think for one second about buying another dog, breeding from dogs, walking them loose over the moors, taking them riding with me (obviously loose) along a public road/right of way etc.
but those things in themselves, depending in circumstance are not actually the problem
If someone came to my house and one of my dogs bit them they wouldn't have any rights to sue me - only if my dog left the boundry of my own property and threatened another person or animal or caused an accident. Thats the only legislation I can think of. Other than byelaws about picking up dog mess or byelaws of prohibitive dog areas.
again, not being enforced so there is no way the government will put funding into 'bigger' legislation regardless of yet again another tax added on...
Oh - and the Dangerous Dog Act of course

I agree the microchip is the start. It should be made against the law to sell or buy a dog without a microchip. Note I have stressed or buy. There will always be the rogue trying to sell a dog with no chip, no papers etc if you are liable if you buy it as you would be if you bought stolen goods, it may make people think twice.
If we go down the line of licences then I think it needs to be the person who has the licence.
I would be prepared to pay for a licence, I used to have one when they were 7 shillings & 6 pence but like my driving licence which covers me for driving a car or multiple cars I'd want it to cover me for having a dog or multiple dogs. I occassionally foster for the charity I work for but I couldn't aford it if I had to buy a licence for each one I fostered for a month or more. Whats more the charity couldn't afford it either.

Why should I have to have my dogs microchipped after all they are all tattooed ?

Why should I have to license my dogs when dog licensing doesn't work if the owners get nothing back from the fee. It doesn't work in Northern Ireland were there is compulsory licensing & the number of strays per head of population is far higher than any other of the countries in the United Kingdom.

License the owners before they can obtain a dog & anyone who is in charge of a dog should also have to be licensed-so no licence no dogs out in public.......Ah we have that we cars & motorbikes etc don't we & people still drive without them !!

In Germany there is a yearly Dog Tax, but they do get land provided for training clubs & trained qualified dogs are licensed at a lower rate. You rarely see stray dogs in Germany I wonder why ??