In Australia, too, all states except South Australia have mandatory microchipping of pets. As early as 1976 for Western Australia and as recently as 2008 for Queensland. In spite of that, we have never microchipped any of our cats or dogs. Our reasoning is that once they've introduced it for pets they will introduce it for humans. We keep control over our dogs. They are always in an enclosed yard and when they are walked outside the property they are on leads. In our minds, it is just another form of control, which we don't need, whether or not it is free.  

In Australia, too, all states except South Australia have mandatory microchipping of pets. As early as 1976 for Western Australia and as recently as 2008 for Queensland. In spite of that, we have never microchipped any of our cats or dogs. Our reasoning is that once they've introduced it for pets they will introduce it for humans. We keep control over our dogs. They are always in an enclosed yard and when they are walked outside the property they are on leads. In our minds, it is just another form of control, which we don't need, whether or not it is free.  

As you probably know, there is no fault or sin in not obeying that mandatory law, as it is a punitive law. One may get fined, but that would be the only consequence.

Yes. It's a bit like asking permission of your local council for permission to cut down a tree on your own land.

Or asking the state may you please educate your own children. We broke the law on that count too!

After all the state does not own us, unless we hand ourselves (and our children) over to it.

What are your thoughts on the issue of microchipping?

Those are all good examples.

In addition it would be like driving slowly on a deserted road with no one around for miles and coming up to a stop sign. You can keep driving without stopping, and commit no fault. But if a cop in a police airplane saw you, he could radio signal to pull you over down the road, and punitively fine you $75.

I recall a scrupulous soul I once knew who was almost putting himself and myself in danger. I recall him driving his car all nervous...with his neck contorted. I finally said: "What are you doing?" He told me he thought it was a sin to go 1 mile over the speed limit. (We were in a safe area with no harm that could be caused to other motorists.)

He got even more flustered when I said there was no problem in driving over the speed limit, if he was not reckless and no others could be harmed. He could not reason it through and got angry, as he was straining at his speedometer. I shut up then, thinking he might crash the car.

My views on microchipping?

After re-reading the post I thought more on that National Database that is kept on file. For the chip to "work", you need to have completely current human I.D. info... otherwise they can't match the dog with the owner.

That kind of "up to the minute" in accuracy database, would be a goldmine for certain folks.
   

There's more than one registry (depends on the chip).

Registering the microchip means your contact information are linked to your dog's chip. So when an animal control officer runs a scanner over your dog, they are able to track you down so you can quickly reclaim your family pet before the wait hold is over and your dog is legally adopted by somebody else.

Currently there are no GPS abilities for microchips. They'd have to be quite a bit bigger for that to work. Right now, they are injected into your puppy's neck with a syringe.

In order for a microchip to work, your dog has to be caught and taken to a vet or shelter to be scanned. There are no GPS abilities. Nobody is going to be scanning your pet to steal your identity. The kind of information on the chip is about the same information that is recorded somewhere when you purchase a license tag for your dogs. Difference though is if your dog slips his collar, there's still a strong possibility that he will be identified by the chip and returned. :)

There are concerned pet owners who put GPS collars on their dogs... it's actually pretty common for hunting dogs....

I can see you have a great love and concern for dogs which is commendable.

If the "intrusive folks" want access to a database(s) they get it. I can't see how they would not gobble this up, as it certainly contains millions of current cell #'s, which are not in the public domain.  

Your comment about people, "scanning your pet to steal your identity" was something I never considered. I don't think the threat of that happening, although not too great, should be discounted. The elderly would be at a greater risk for this.

Now the personal GPS collar you mentioned sounds great, if you do all the monitoring yourself. I am guessing the product would be quite expensive.

Doesn't microchiping pets also expose them to the risk of cancer?

The Major Risk of Microchips

    The major concern any time you implant a foreign body into your pet, whether that’s a microchip, a metal plate for a fracture or any other material, there’s the potential for your pet’s body to reject the substance.

    There have been two docuмented cases in veterinary medicine where sarcoma or fibrosarcoma, two types of soft tissue tumors, occurred at the site of the injection.

    While two cases are not very many, I believe there are likely many more cases that have not been docuмented. Research shows that between 1996 and 2006, up to 10 percent of laboratory animals had some type of reaction to being microchipped, ranging from a localized inflammatory response to tumor formation at the site of the injection.

    Needless to say, it’s important to realize that implanting any foreign material into your pet’s body is a risk.

http://healthypets.mercola.com/sites/healthypets/archive/2009/11/14/how-safe-are-pet-microchips.aspx#!

Three points:

1. This article does mention that there are four types of microchips available, so that not every type can be read. In other words, there is no universal reader at the time of writing (2009).

2. In addition, microchipping pets is painful because of the large diameter needle (12 gauge) required, but many pets are not given any anesthesia. Therefore, the owner must request the administration of anesthesia.

3. And finally, the chip can migrate into an area of the body that an inexperienced scanner may miss.

Doesn't microchiping pets also expose them to the risk of cancer?

Quote

The Major Risk of Microchips

    The major concern any time you implant a foreign body into your pet, whether that’s a microchip, a metal plate for a fracture or any other material, there’s the potential for your pet’s body to reject the substance.

    There have been two docuмented cases in veterinary medicine where sarcoma or fibrosarcoma, two types of soft tissue tumors, occurred at the site of the injection.

    While two cases are not very many, I believe there are likely many more cases that have not been docuмented. Research shows that between 1996 and 2006, up to 10 percent of laboratory animals had some type of reaction to being microchipped, ranging from a localized inflammatory response to tumor formation at the site of the injection.

    Needless to say, it’s important to realize that implanting any foreign material into your pet’s body is a risk.

http://healthypets.mercola.com/sites/healthypets/archive/2009/11/14/how-safe-are-pet-microchips.aspx#!

Three points:

1. This article does mention that there are four types of microchips available, so that not every type can be read. In other words, there is no universal reader at the time of writing (2009).

2. In addition, microchipping pets is painful because of the large diameter needle (12 gauge) required, but many pets are not given any anesthesia. Therefore, the owner must request the administration of anesthesia.

3. And finally, the chip can migrate into an area of the body that an inexperienced scanner may miss.

There are universal type readers - which shelters and vets use. They don't read all chips, but generally the more common ones are picked up when scanned.

My dogs are scanned every year when we do the yearly physical and heartworm test...

When I do clearances with my dogs (certain breeds are better off having certain clearances done, this is information which the breeders use + it's important to identify health concerns very early) - some clearances are done only once in a dog's life, others are done yearly - the chips are scanned at that time as well.


Bottom line from what I've experienced - the chips don't move. Or if they do, it's just a little. Most vets and shelters will keep scanning all over to find the chip. They aren't just checking one spot and giving up.

It's very rare for the chips to cause benign or malignant tumors. I believe I vaguely remember cats were more prone to issues like that. Dogs generally don't. But keep in mind though - benign tumors are benign. Not cancerous (and a lot of breeds have tumors anyway once they get into old age).

If they cause malignant tumors - it's actually the most curable form of cancer.

Microchipping is not painful from I've observed - not any more painful than getting a rabies vaccination. I've heard people talking about waiting until the dog is being put under anesthesia or something, and I suspect they have a misunderstanding of what all is involved. It's just a shot and the dogs don't even feel it. Mine were chipped as 12 week old puppies... generally they are too busy wiggling around and trying to lick the tech to notice a quick shot.

My vet found a chip that travelled to the dogs foot and another dog had one travel to between its eye and ear.  That's just one vet.  How many more?
 :scratchchin:

ouch!