Should the vet be the one who registers a microchipped pet?

Pumpkinseeds

Each of our 3 cats has been microchipped, all on different occassions. Now our vet gave us the registration pack and explained that we would need to register the microchip with Fido.ie and that was fine, all very straightforward and we registered each of them the day they were microchipped.

But lately I've seen a lot of pets that have been found with unregistered microchips and it's got me wondering why. Obviously not registering the microchip and thus not providing your contact details defeats the purpose of getting your pet microchipped.

I don't know what the statistics for Ireland are but watching My Cat from Hell recently I learned that an un-microchipped cat that is taken in to a kill-shelter in America has a less than 2% chance of making it out alive, whereas a microchipped cat has a 53% chance of being reunited with their owner.

Given that so many people aren't registering their pets details I wonder if it's a matter of people presuming that once the chip is implanted, that the pet is registered. So I'm wondering if the registration should be done by the vet and on the day the pet is microchipped.

muddypaws

My vet registers the chips because they found that owners wouldn't always do it, so if they do it on the day of implantation, they know its been done.

honerbright

I was actually wondering something similar myself recently! I've seen a lot of pets on rescues where it's stated the animal is microchipped, but not registered.

I wonder if they should implement it so that you have to fill out the form right there, on the spot at the vets (rather than doing it at home or online) and just give the card to the receptionist or vet and they send out a batch of registration forms out at the end of each week.

I know this is also a really bad example, but these days so many stores are giving out second receipts with your purchase with competitions for 'tell us how we did online and win money!' and I wonder if taking away the microchip registration to do yourself at home is much like that.. all good intentions and promises to the vet that you will, but it just ends up crumbled at the bottom of a handbag and forgotten about.

mymo

I know when I got both dogs the first thing the vet did was check the chip and made it clear I should register ASAP, he also said feel free to add his contact number just in case I change numbers or forget to update details. He also said he usually fills out the form and tells people to pop it in the post office across the road when they leave, just to make sure it's done.
I think it would be a good idea to make it part of the chipping process, I've spoken to people that haven't a clue how it works and assume once the dogs chipped it can be traced to them, even when they haven't given their details.

muddypaws

I have even heard of people that think the chip is in the tag for the collar that says the dog is microchipped!

Pumpkinseeds

There just seems to be so much confusion over the whole thing and if we go ahead with manditory microchipping of dogs it'll be pointless if the owners details aren't registered. Not everybody uses Facebook or is even aware of various rescues in their own county etc, so they might never know that their pet had been found. It just seems like an awful shame not to have it done at the vets and save the confusion.

Aru

Part of the problem is that most of the pedigree puppies are chipped before sale so the owners details are not always available and registering them to the breeder isn't ideal either......

mel.b

Aru wrote: »

Part of the problem is that most of the pedigree puppies are chipped before sale so the owners details are not always available and registering them to the breeder isn't ideal either......

I presume you can change the details though? My pup is already chipped, but i'm not bringing him home till next week. I thought it would be straightforward to change over details

fiounnalbe

I don't think it should be up to the vet. It would be time consuming for them to have to register each and every puppy that comes in everyday and if they accidentally put in a wrong digit in a number they could be held responsible if anything happened that dog should it go missing.

I've never come across a vet who hasn't emphasised the importance of registering the shop ASAP and given all the necessary info about how to do it, if you have decided to get a dog then surely you should be responsible enough to register the chip, it's not difficult.

Inexile

mel.b wrote: »

I presume you can change the details though? My pup is already chipped, but i'm not bringing him home till next week. I thought it would be straightforward to change over details

I think it is relatively straightforward to change the details but there may be an admin fee which puts people off.

Pumpkinseeds

fiounnalbe wrote: »

I don't think it should be up to the vet. It would be time consuming for them to have to register each and every puppy that comes in everyday and if they accidentally put in a wrong digit in a number they could be held responsible if anything happened that dog should it go missing.

I've never come across a vet who hasn't emphasised the importance of registering the shop ASAP and given all the necessary info about how to do it, if you have decided to get a dog then surely you should be responsible enough to register the chip, it's not difficult.

I found it very straight forward to do online and as I said my vet made it very clear that I would need to register the details myself. The problem is that there are so many lost/found pets who are chipped but not registered. It can't all be down to forgetfullness on the owners part. I genuinely think that people just assume that the pets details are already registered and that is the problem.

Quite often when someone finds a stray pet they will take it to a vet to be scanned for a chip. I can appreciate that it could be time consuming for some vets but the registration form is very straightforward and the personal details could even be completed by the owner in the waiting room while waiting to get the chip done and then it could be posted or registered by the vet. There are very few details to be completed by the vet. The details would be available for the owner to view online to check that the contact details are correct.

Pumpkinseeds

mel.b wrote: »

I presume you can change the details though? My pup is already chipped, but i'm not bringing him home till next week. I thought it would be straightforward to change over details

I had a look on the Fido.ie site and they offer the change of ownership for free online. The section shows the transfer from the current owner to the new owner so maybe the person you're getting the dog from should change the details before you take the dog home.

mymo

My two dogs came registered to the breeder, on the card they gave me there was a pin code to access their details, I just typed in chip number and pin from the reg card and put in my details.
The breeder of first dog even offered to do it for me and text to ask if I did it.

Knine

Aru wrote: »

Part of the problem is that most of the pedigree puppies are chipped before sale so the owners details are not always available and registering them to the breeder isn't ideal either......

The easiest way around that is to delay microchipping until the transfer of ownership. So before the IKC accepts the transfer of ownership, the new owner has to supply the microchip details registered in their name.

boomerang

fiounnalbe wrote: »

I don't think it should be up to the vet. It would be time consuming for them to have to register each and every puppy that comes in everyday and if they accidentally put in a wrong digit in a number they could be held responsible if anything happened that dog should it go missing.

It's not really time consuming, honest! Not many dogs/cats come in for microchipping in one day, and all the vet or nurse has to do is confirm the owner's contact details, fill out the card, have the owner sign it to confirm they are happy the contact information is correct, and off it goes in the post to FIDO at the end of the week in a batch with all the others. Vets also have the option to register the chips online. We don't do that, but it is just as handy. I'd prefer to have the chip registered before the client walks out the door, for my own peace of mind!

boomerang

mymo wrote: »

My two dogs came registered to the breeder, on the card they gave me there was a pin code to access their details, I just typed in chip number and pin from the reg card and put in my details.
The breeder of first dog even offered to do it for me and text to ask if I did it.

That's a good breeder!

muddypaws

Knine wrote: »

The easiest way around that is to delay microchipping until the transfer of ownership. So before the IKC accepts the transfer of ownership, the new owner has to supply the microchip details registered in their name.

As far as i'm aware the IKC won't register a pup unless it has been microchipped.

Knine

muddypaws wrote: »

As far as i'm aware the IKC won't register a pup unless it has been microchipped.

Yes that is the case but the system is not working as far too many have chips with incorrect details.

muddypaws

Knine wrote: »

Yes that is the case but the system is not working as far too many have chips with incorrect details.

sorry, my point was, that you can't wait until transfer of ownership, as the pups would already be chipped, so that is the system that is in place, whether it is working or not, there is no other option with IKC registered pups. I don't understand what point you're making. Probably just cos its late at night and I'm tired.

jimf

Inexile wrote: »

I think it is relatively straightforward to change the details but there may be an admin fee which puts people off.

when you collect your pup from the breeder they will give you the reg papers all that needs to be done is change of owner details on the back needs to be signed by breeder and new owner and returned to ikc fee is/was 13euro

Knine

muddypaws wrote: »

sorry, my point was, that you can't wait until transfer of ownership, as the pups would already be chipped, so that is the system that is in place, whether it is working or not, there is no other option with IKC registered pups. I don't understand what point you're making. Probably just cos its late at night and I'm tired.

The point I'm making is that the system needs to change especially if it becomes mandatory that all dogs are microchipped. A chip is only as good as the details recorded.

New owners should be required to change chip details into their name as part of the ownership transfer.

I know exactly how the IKC process works as I show & breed dogs. I always have a record of new owners & chips but unfortunately irresponsible breeders don't bother.

muddypaws

Knine wrote: »

The point I'm making is that the system needs to change especially if it becomes mandatory that all dogs are microchipped. A chip is only as good as the details recorded.

New owners should be required to change chip details into their name as part of the ownership transfer.

I know exactly how the IKC process works as I show & breed dogs. I always have a record of new owners & chips but unfortunately irresponsible breeders don't bother.

I think one of the main issues is the bybs that register the pups, but have no interest in them, so don't keep a record of who has bought their dogs. I'm sure that you would have the owners details, so that if a dog did end up being scanned and your details showed up, you could contact the new owners, in the case of them not changing the details.

fiounnalbe

boomerang wrote: »

It's not really time consuming, honest! Not many dogs/cats come in for microchipping in one day, and all the vet or nurse has to do is confirm the owner's contact details, fill out the card, have the owner sign it to confirm they are happy the contact information is correct, and off it goes in the post to FIDO at the end of the week in a batch with all the others. Vets also have the option to register the chips online. We don't do that, but it is just as handy. I'd prefer to have the chip registered before the client walks out the door, for my own peace of mind!

Fine it may not take hours, but I still don't think it's the vets responsibility, they are there to place the microchip and all follow up paper work should be up to the owner, it's not their job, they have a million other things to be doing each day.

I think owners need to step up and take responsibility for their pets, if you can't even be bothered to post a piece of paper for them, what hope have they.

Pumpkinseeds

fiounnalbe wrote: »

Fine it may not take hours, but I still don't think it's the vets responsibility, they are there to place the microchip and all follow up paper work should be up to the owner, it's not their job, they have a million other things to be doing each day.

I think owners need to step up and take responsibility for their pets, if you can't even be bothered to post a piece of paper for them, what hope have they.

I don't think that its always a case of people not being bothered to register the microchips. From reading other posters experiences with vets the standard of vet seems to vary dramatically. We are very fortunate to have an excellent veterninary practice to take our cats to, but that isn't always the case. For me what is paramount is the best interests of the animal and I really don't think that most practices are so overwhelmingly busy that they wouldn't have the time to fill out and post or register online. Ours and I think most modern vet practices have our contact details on computer.

For whatever reason many people don't seem to realise that the chip has to be registered and the easiest way of doing that seems to be via the vet. People who can't be bothered to register the pet wouldn't bother having the pet microchipped to begin with.

Knine

The pet is often microchipped before they get it. However I'm sure there are many individuals who don't want the chip registered to them. The same individuals who open the hall door, let the dog out and don't care what it gets up to.

There are certainly plenty of them where I live.

Pumpkinseeds

Knine wrote: »

The pet is often microchipped before they get it. However I'm sure there are many individuals who don't want the chip registered to them. The same individuals who open the hall door, let the dog out and don't care what it gets up to.

There are certainly plenty of them where I live.

I know what you mean about that kind of dog owner, there are plenty of them in my town as well. The thing is if the pet is registered by the vet when the pet is chipped the owners (previous/current) contact details on there. I know it seems mad to say people don't understand the process of registering the pets details but there seems to be a lot of confusion over the whole thing. Which defeats the purpose entirely.

For some reason I don't think people actually realise that the chip isn't actually active until it's registered. Maybe they just assume the vet does it I really don't know. I just don't get why someone would pay to have their pet chipped but not register.

Knine

In most cases though the pet is already chipped though so they don't pay. If the original chipping is done with Fido.ie, the new owner gets a pin number and can change details for free. Otherwise they have to pay for a Fido pack so they can add their own information.

Responsible owners will generally make the effort as they would be devastated if their pet went missing.

reeta

For some reason I don't think people actually realise that the chip isn't actually active until it's registered. Maybe they just assume the vet does it I really don't know. I just don't get why someone would pay to have their pet chipped but not register.[/QUOTE]

When I got my dog, now 3 years, i brought him to the vet to be microchipped, along with a full medical, and the vet never once mentioned registering her. It was only after I joined boards (for animal and pet issues) that I realised it had to be done, which I obviously did as soon as I was aware....

ABajaninCork

I really do not understand why the confusion.

I've chipped my dog and the cat before him. In both cases, the vet made it clear (and I read the information pack) that I would have to register the details myself as soon as possible. Which I've done.

My niece's IKC-reg Shih Tzu was chipped before she bought him. All she had to do was change the details on the chip and the IKC papers. Simple

It's not rocket science.

Pumpkinseeds

ABajaninCork wrote: »

I really do not understand why the confusion.

I've chipped my dog and the cat before him. In both cases, the vet made it clear (and I read the information pack) that I would have to register the details myself as soon as possible. Which I've done.

My niece's IKC-reg Shih Tzu was chipped before she bought him. All she had to do was change the details on the chip and the IKC papers. Simple

It's not rocket science.

This just highlights what I said earlier, there are variations in the quality of information that people get from their vets. Some vets are very clear on the need for the owner to register the details, but some aren't and clearly as one poster said, they weren't told anything. I think it just makes sense to have the vet register the details. Most vets would ask for basic owner contact details when the pet is brought in to the practice anyway so there really shouldn't be many mistakes with the vet registering the owners details.

I'm also thinking of the trouble that lies ahead when compulsory chipping of dogs comes into effect. People who are determined not to bother walking their dogs and who insist on letting them roam the streets alone are hardly going to bother registering their dogs details themselves. So many rescues have roaming dogs handed in who aren't actually lost and are just family pets that are allowed to roam. Those dogs then have to be housed and fed until the owner comes forward to claim them.

So if the vet doesn't register the chips when compulsory chipping becomes law there won't be any point in having introducing the law in the first place.

ABajaninCork

Pumpkinseeds wrote: »

This just highlights what I said earlier, there are variations in the quality of information that people get from their vets. Some vets are very clear on the need for the owner to register the details, but some aren't and clearly as one poster said, they weren't told anything. I think it just makes sense to have the vet register the details. Most vets would ask for basic owner contact details when the pet is brought in to the practice anyway so there really shouldn't be many mistakes with the vet registering the owners details.

I'm also thinking of the trouble that lies ahead when compulsory chipping of dogs comes into effect. People who are determined not to bother walking their dogs and who insist on letting them roam the streets alone are hardly going to bother registering their dogs details themselves. So many rescues have roaming dogs handed in who aren't actually lost and are just family pets that are allowed to roam. Those dogs then have to be housed and fed until the owner comes forward to claim them.

So if the vet doesn't register the chips when compulsory chipping becomes law there won't be any point in having introducing the law in the first place.

Whilst I see what you're saying, I cannot agree. Vets are busy enough without having to mollycoddle the owners as well. My cat was chipped in London. AFAIK NO vet in London will register details on a database for you. You have to do it yourself. This is made clear to the owner at the start. Now, with the new law coming in the UK, I'm not sure that's still the case - I need to check that.

I chipped my dog here in Cork. Same thing. All I did was to input the details as soon as I got home. Quick and easy and takes 2 minutes. Even if the vet did input the details on the database, I would still check it for myself to ensure the details were correct. Why on earth would you pay for something and not get the full benefit? Makes absolutely no sense to me.