View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
mark occomore
Joined: 07 Dec 2006 Posts: 9955 Location: UK
|
Posted: Wed Feb 06, 2013 10:43 am Post subject: Dogs Must Be Micro-chipped By 2016 |
|
|
I think this is a move in the right direction. I didn't realise we have many stray dogs as reported.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-21345730 |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
R2Icon
Joined: 10 Sep 2009 Posts: 1444
|
Posted: Wed Feb 06, 2013 12:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The problem with this is, how do you make sure that a dog is micro chipped? How?
You need a special machine to read the chip , even then it just gives you a number,, you then have to contact the microchip organisation and for a fee they'll tell you who the dog belongs to. All sounds good. Our Hooby is microchipped but by far and away the most useful identification device he has, is his tag with his name, our name and address and phone number on there. It means, as happened recently when Hooby got out of our garden, that a neighbour or passer-by can look at the tag and say , oh he's called Hooby and he lives just there. A microchip involves having to phone a dog rescue centre, the police or local authority to collect the dog, have the chip read, then contact the owner and then charge an enormous fee to return your dog. The police don't charge you a fee for returning your wallet if it's found, so why a dog? Anyway if you dig deep enough, you'll discover that the people behind the legislation are the people most likely to benefit from it. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
becky sharp

Joined: 01 Dec 2008 Posts: 6792
|
Posted: Wed Feb 06, 2013 1:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
R2Icon wrote: | or passer-by can look at the tag . |
There is no way I would try to look at a tag on a stray (as far as I am concerned) dog ...how is anybody to know it hasn't got a snappy streak in him/her and might not be keen on strangers..I always tell any children I am with never to even stroke dogs unless they are with their owner and are told it is quite safe to do so.
Last edited by becky sharp on Wed Feb 06, 2013 2:05 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
mark occomore
Joined: 07 Dec 2006 Posts: 9955 Location: UK
|
Posted: Wed Feb 06, 2013 1:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Now we need dog licences introduced, and people prosecuted for dog fouling. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
R2Icon
Joined: 10 Sep 2009 Posts: 1444
|
Posted: Wed Feb 06, 2013 2:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
becky sharp wrote: | R2Icon wrote: | or passer-by can look at the tag . |
There is no way I would try to look at a tag on a stray (as far as I am concerned) dog ...how is anybody to know it hasn't got a snappy streak in him/her and might not be keen on strangers..I always tell any children I am with never to even stroke dogs unless they are with their owner and are told it is quite safe to do so. |
With some dogs it's obvious if they're friendly , other dogs I wouldn't go near at all, even if they are with their owners. Having a dog means you come into contact with lots of other dogs and dog owners, I've lost count of the times I've been attacked ( caught in the crossfire) when another dog takes a dislike to Hooby, so maybe just not getting involved with a stray dog is the right thing. Not all dogs are like Hooby. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
R2Icon
Joined: 10 Sep 2009 Posts: 1444
|
Posted: Wed Feb 06, 2013 2:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
mark occomore wrote: | Now we need dog licences introduced, and people prosecuted for dog fouling. |
We've just got rid of dog licences, you can and lots of people do get fined if their dog is caught fouling in a no fouling area. Some councils make a mint from it.
I sometimes wonder if dog poo was like cow poo would people be so keen on having one. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
becky sharp

Joined: 01 Dec 2008 Posts: 6792
|
Posted: Wed Feb 06, 2013 2:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
R2Icon wrote: |
With some dogs it's obvious if they're friendly . |
Appearances can be deceptive ....better safe than sorry. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
R2Icon
Joined: 10 Sep 2009 Posts: 1444
|
Posted: Wed Feb 06, 2013 2:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I should point out that under normal circumstances we wouldn't have a dog but Hooby was due to be terminated in a dog rescue centre because he'd been there for a year and no one wanted him. He was trained to be a sniffer dog but failed the course apparently: Auntie Joan wanted him but already has several dogs, she begged us to have him because, well she didn't want to see him die so young, and we have a huge garden and we live in the country so win win for Hooby. I wouldn't be without him now but we won't have another dog after Hooby is no more.
How could they just kill him because no one wanted him. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
R2Icon
Joined: 10 Sep 2009 Posts: 1444
|
Posted: Wed Feb 06, 2013 2:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
becky sharp wrote: | R2Icon wrote: |
With some dogs it's obvious if they're friendly . |
Appearances can be deceptive ....better safe than sorry. |
yes I was agreeing with you! |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
ruddlescat
Joined: 16 Sep 2010 Posts: 18010 Location: Near Chester
|
Posted: Wed Feb 06, 2013 9:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I completely agree Rach
i'm not really a 'dog' person but when I came across a greyhound back in 1998 who was about to be shot in the head I actually gave the bastard who owned her money to take the dog off his hands
Although throughout her whole life one could see in her behaviour the damage from that short period with her former owner she made a wonderful pet and was absolutely fantastic with the cats - most unusual for a dog of her breed
Sadly she died just over a year ago and like you I have no intention of getting another dog - but if history ever repeated itself and I came across another animal under sentence of death I reckon I'd then probably do the same as the first time round  _________________ Are you ready for a Ruddles? |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
RockitRon

Joined: 07 Dec 2006 Posts: 7646
|
Posted: Wed Feb 06, 2013 10:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
R2Icon wrote: | I should point out that under normal circumstances we wouldn't have a dog but Hooby was due to be terminated in a dog rescue centre because he'd been there for a year and no one wanted him. He was trained to be a sniffer dog but failed the course apparently: Auntie Joan wanted him but already has several dogs, she begged us to have him because, well she didn't want to see him die so young, and we have a huge garden and we live in the country so win win for Hooby. I wouldn't be without him now but we won't have another dog after Hooby is no more.
How could they just kill him because no one wanted him. |
I know that they are very demanding, energetic (and intelligent) dogs, and therefore not usually suitable for the average family with 2.4 children, but I can scarcely believe he was left, unwanted, for a year - I mean, look at him!
(Border collie as sniffer dog? That's a new one!) _________________ Ron |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
ruddlescat
Joined: 16 Sep 2010 Posts: 18010 Location: Near Chester
|
Posted: Wed Feb 06, 2013 10:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
It could have been worse - they might have trained him to be a guide dog  _________________ Are you ready for a Ruddles? |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
R2Icon
Joined: 10 Sep 2009 Posts: 1444
|
Posted: Thu Feb 07, 2013 9:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
He's deffo been trained to sniff things out, Ron, when entering a room for the first time, he makes a systematic search of the floor area , then he's up on the sofa, satisfied that there are no bombs in the room that might disturb his sleep. He's the only dog I know that can open a tin of Quality Street. Most of all though he likes to round things up... let's call it seven he says perspicasiously. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
|