Mandatory Microchipping...
...Parents Against Canine Killers
Microchipping is fast, easy and allows an animal to be permanently identified. Through donations to p-a-c-k.org, we would like to be able to offer microchipping for around 20 or 25 dollars per dog. A tiny microchip is injected under the skin with about the same ease as giving the dog a vaccine. Once microchipped, a scanning device over the chip reveals the dog and owner’s identity. If lost, a dog’s owner is located and the dog will not be accidentally euthanized as a stray that nobody has claimed within the increasingly short wait period allowed at shelters. It also could be used so that there could be a way to call and report a potentially dangerous dog, and a tracking system could be in place to monitor potentially dangerous dogs when there has been an incident.
MICROCHIPPING AND REDUCING STRAYS EUTHANIZED AT THE SHELTER
Microchipping would reduce the number of strays euthanized at shelters annually. Firstly, by reuniting dogs that were lost with their owners, and secondly the rate of abandonment is likely to decrease. If a person is aware that they will be identified and located if they abandon their dog, they will be less likely to do so. They would be more likely to relocate the dog to another home or request that a rescue society take their dog.
Because of the benefit of micro chipping, the owner of a lost or abandoned dog would be found. This would prevent the heartache of finding that your dog has just been euthanized as a stray, and also would decrease the burden on animal shelters. Rescue agencies could continue to be funded by donations as well as by adoption fees from the dog’s rightful owner as he responsibly relocates the dog, knowing that dumping him far from home will likely carry repercussions. Impulse puppy buying might be tempered with the knowledge that the person is responsible for the dog’s well being, or for transferring that responsibility, for its entire life.
Abandonment is: “out of sight, out of mind.” They don’t have to know if the dog came to a bad end, and probably don’t want to. It is less likely that the dog will be euthanized if that has to be a conscious decision of the owner.
MICROCHIPPING AND RESPONSIBLE CONTAINMENT OF ATTACK DOGS
Microchipping would promote responsible, secure containment of dogs with attack propensities. Often the owner of the dog is known, as in attacks by the family’s own dog or that of a neighbor. However, some attacks involve a dog where no owner can be found, or ownership is in dispute once the dog has attacked. Microchipping would provide identity of the rightful owner. And knowledge that they will be held accountable for the actions of their dog would encourage an attack dog’s owner to take necessary precautions.
If the dog is relocated, the new owner’s identity can be transferred to the dog’s chip. Transfer of ownership via microchip could provide the new owner with the dog’s history, the breeder’s history, and insures that the owner will be aware if he is introducing a dog with a history of multiple attacks and/or an attack breeding history into a family with small children.
MICROCHIPPING AND REDUCING PUPPY ABUSE
Microchipping would encourage responsible treatment and placement of puppies intended as guard dogs. If puppies were micro chipped and registered at the level of the responsible breeder, the identity of each puppy would be linked to the breeder, as well as to future owners.
Breeders have the puppies during an extremely critical period of socialization. Some breeders are deliberately cruel to the puppies to promote vicious behavior, prized in the guard/attack or fighting dog. Dogs advertised as super killers are then placed with anyone who can pay the money. Linking the dog to the breeder could be important if vicious attack dogs are repeatedly linked to the same breeder. A stray dog found linked to the same breeder would not likely be a candidate for placement in a family with small children.
Inversely, a breeder that consistently properly socializes and places the puppies in loving homes will be rewarded by increased business as a result of the trust and credibility earned, recorded and referred to, in choosing a family pet.
WHICH DOGS SHOULD BE MICROCHIPPED?
Should it be only dogs of the current known dangerous breeds and mixes thereof? Or should it be any dog large enough to be a substantial, larger than BB gun equivalent, potentially lethal weapon?
Because there are countless breeds and breed mixes that would replace the current dogs labeled most dangerous, it is questionable that mandatory microchipping should be restricted to just the top few breeds currently held responsible for the worst maulings. Any dog large enough to be a substantial threat, if that is the owner’s intent, should require mandatory microchipping.
There are a limitless number of substitutes for the current dangerous breeds present in the United States today, and a great likelihood that new breeds and mixes of dangerous breeds would constantly crop up. Mandatory microchipping of dogs of known dangerous breeds only, denies the problem that any large breed of dog can be made to be a vicious and potentially lethal weapon through training and/or cruel treatment. It is necessary that MANDATORY MICROCHIPPING involve any dog of sufficient size.
Though size is the main parameter, phenotype may also need to be considered, to preclude abusive starving down of a fighting type dog so that he weighs in just under the weight limit.
The weight of the dog can be used as the main determining factor. The size of the jaw is directly linked to bite strength. Video: Dog bite strength as related to head size and body size. The size of the dog’s jaw is difficult and impractical to measure. However, it is directly related to the size of the dog, which is easy to measure. Body weight is a very repeatable parameter for determining the size of the dog. Moreover, the size of the dog is directly related to jaw size and bite strength. A larger dog has a larger jaw and stronger bite strength. Notable exceptions exist. A small animal veterinarian is an expert in animal behavior, so a certificate of veterinary exclusion could be used to provide exemption where size of the dog as reflected in body weight is in error. For example: A very obese small dog breed of dog.
With small dogs, as with bb guns, the emphasis of safety should be placed on education and parental supervision of the children.
Why only large dogs? A Chihuahua can be made into the equivalent of a bb gun, but a large dog can be made into a potentially lethal hand gun.
Though some breed mixes bear more comparable resemblance to a rifle. And, as licensing of bb guns is not necessary, but rather more an issue of parental supervision; so is the matter of micro chipping and licensing very small dogs.
It is too late to wait until the large dog has had his first recorded offense before linking the identity to his owner. The first offense that is actually reported and recorded is often a severe mauling. Identifying the dog owner needs to be done up front. You don’t wait until multiple people have been shot before registering a gun. If it has the capability of causing lethal injury, that’s enough.
MICROCHIPPING PROTECTS INNOCENT DOGS OF A SUSPECTED BREED
Dog owners and dogs of suspect breeds could be protected from false accusation if the dog is properly identified. My brother Bob had a beloved dog that was great with the kids and grandkids. A neighbor accused the dog of attacking her. Bob’s insurance company told him he could not keep the dog, so he had the dog euthanized. A few weeks later the same lady came to the door and told them their dog had bitten her again. When they protested that it was just not possible, she said she was sure that it was the same dog.
It obviously wasn’t, since their dog was now dead
MICROCHIPPING: LIABILITY AND OWNER RESPONSIBILITY
The person behind the dog has a great impact on the potential dangerousness of the dog. In the event that a vicious attack dog is allowed to roam at large, the irresponsible dog owner needs to know that he will be held accountable. To do this he must know that he will be identified as the owner of the dog. As with hand gun licensing, this will necessitate the identification of responsible parties as well.
Just providing a means of identification of dogs that have already been labeled “potentially dangerous” because they have already attacked is like saying “it’s okay to drive drunk as long as you haven’t seriously injured someone yet; even though other drivers are screaming at you and calling the police because you are obviously under the influence.”
The solution needs to be preemptive. The dog owner should know that he will be held accountable. He can’t just develop an acute case of ownership amnesia when his dog’s gone bad. Read More: 71 year old Naples woman left to die in ditch, dog owner abandons dog near Lake Okechobee hoping they will find a good home.
MICROCHIPPING AND IDENTIFICATION OF THE POTENTIALLY DANGEROUS DOG
Animal control officers need to be more active in discovering and labeling dogs that are “potentially dangerous.”
This distinction “POTENTIALLY DANGEROUS” doesn’t refer to all large dogs, but only to individuals who have earned the label through their own behavior and the irresponsible behavior of their owner.
What happens when a dog has been labeled potentially dangerous?
Currently, nothing really in particular…it boils down to a nebulous sort of “monitoring.”
This label should result in a chain of events that remove the dog as a threat to society in one way or another. Such as: the dog owner being required to neuter the dog and contain him in a secure manner. Other restrictions, educational classes, and training for the dog may be warranted. The dog should be visited regularly by animal services, or perhaps an agency that is clearer about who they are protecting, to ensure enforcement of restrictions placed on the dog and dog owner. Licensing and penalties from offenders could offset costs.
- Has the dog been castrated as requested? (Castration, and the removal of male hormonal dominance significantly decreases the likelihood of bites and attacks. Read more: Why dogs attack, male hormonal aggression.)
- Is the containment adequate?
Once labeled dangerous, the dog needs to stay on the radar screen. If the dog mysteriously disappears after sanctions have been placed on the dog, the dog owner should receive a substantial fine. This would discourage abandonment or unauthorized relocation the dog into the unwitting public when it has become an inconvenience for the dog owner. The mandatory micro chipping of the dog prior to the point where the dog is deemed “potentially dangerous” is important in keeping the dog on the radar screen.
Transfer of ownership of a “potentially dangerous" dog would require the new owner to present identification to register the dog under his name. Appropriate precautionary measures could be outlined for the new owner at this time. The new owner would then be aware of the animal’s status and the responsibilities that accompany ownership of a dog labeled “potentially dangerous.”
Where are the potentially dangerous dogs located?
The address where potentially dangerous dogs are kept should be listed on publicly accessible website (as are human sexual predators listed on a website). A person can then make an informed decision as to whether to travel in proximity to that dog. As it stands today, potentially dangerous dogs are a secret between Animal Control Services and the dog’s owner.
The public should have access to the information and the information should reflect the actual dangerous propensity of the dog. If the Animal Control officer is not trained, qualified, or willing to make the determination, a small animal veterinarian should be consulted to make the determination. Again, we don’t wait for a drunk driver to mow down 2 or 3 people before we hold a hearing to determine whether there may be a problem. This is the current practice with dangerous dogs.
A goal of p-a-c-k.org is to provide affordable and convenient microchipping. Through donations, we hope to be able to provide microchipping acessible in a simple, convenient and affordable manner. If it only cost $20-25, and was done in an easy access location, would that be enough for the general population to participate?
Incentives may also be necessary. We need to solicit coupons for free pet products, pet food and services to give to the participants. This may provide the necessary encouragement to overcome the inconvenience of bringing the dog for micro chipping. It would be ideal if supporters could donate enough incentive to outweigh the inconvenience by a margin. Participating dog food and supply stores, groomers, veterinarians, trainers and boarding service providers and vendors would receive advertising through the p-a-c-k.org website and materials distributed to the population regarding dog safety.
While it may be inconvenient to enforce and submit to mandatory microchipping of all large dogs, the chance to save a child or elderly person from the horror and pain of a severe dog mauling, coupled with incentives that we need to create, may be enough to overcome the inconvenience. (AVMA report - A Community Approach to Dog Bite Prevention)
Many family pets are already microchipped to avoid the nightmare of having their beloved pet destroyed at the animal shelter because the owner could not be located in time. Encouraging this already present incentive through advertising and making the microchipping procedure easy, accessible, and convenient will greatly promote the process.
Unfortunately, it is likely that the most resistant owners would be the ones who are irresponsible in other ways as well. We need incentives for the inconvenienced and enforcement for the violators. One possible scenario: If the Animal Control officer locates a violator, he can offer the dog owner the option of following the dog owner to the veterinary clinic for an emergency microchipping, or impounding the dog, issuing a fine, and delivering the dog to the veterinary clinic of their choice for microchipping. If the owner does not appear at the veterinary clinic to finish microchipping and licensing procedures in x amount of time, the dog is relinquished to animal control. Ideally, we could offer microchipping on wheels.
Once located, the dog must be immediately microchipped or relinquished, to avoid the dog from disappearing mysteriously, abandoned or hidden, at that point.
Too many times, the fighting type dog is allowed to roam or is abandoned when it has become an inconvenience or problem for its primary owner. Some dog rescue societies are able to temperament test and place some of the abandoned dogs in foster or “forever homes.” But many have to be destroyed due to the overabundance of abandoned dogs of that type.
The rescue societies request spaying and neutering of these dogs to reduce the oversupply of rescue candidates, necessitating the euthanasia of many. Identification of the primary owner through microchipping would relieve the rescue societies from the tragic oversupply of rescue animals, as abandonment wouldn’t be so easy. The good hearted rescuers would not have to suffer the loss of so many dogs to destruction, since the rate of abandonment would be reduced. There would be plenty of dogs still available for adoption, only the euthanasia rate would decrease.
MICROCHIPPING AND PREVENTING CRUELTY TO FIGHTING TYPE DOGS
Dog owner identification through microchipping would reduce abuse to the fighting breeds.
A recent example: Several young men had a pit bull tied to the back of a “gator”, which is a small farm tractor type vehicle, not far from where we live. The dog was bloody over most of his body and was being forced to run repeatedly up a steep hill, or be dragged behind the gator, a practice sometimes used to condition fighting dogs while promoting aggressive behavior in the dog by treating him cruelly.
A client of ours saw this and called the animal control officials. When Animal control arrived, none of the men seemed to know who the owner of the dog was. Though they had been working him in this manner for several hours, they claimed to have just found him and were taking him to the shelter.
MICROCHIPPING AND PREVENTING A FAMILY WITH SMALL CHULDREN FROM ADOPTING A DOG WITH A VICIOUS ATTACK HISTORY
Read More: 6 year old girl bitten at shelter by dog with unknown history that had passed shelter temperament testing, injuries to little girl required ambulance to hospital, June 15, 2008, Alameda County Animal Shelter, CA, border collie-laborador mix.
Read More: 6 year old girl bitten at shelter by dog with unknown history that had passed shelter temperament testing, injuries to little girl required ambulance to hospital , June 15, 2008, Alameda County Animal Shelter, CA , border collie- laborador mix
The rest of the story...
Animal control services took the dog mentioned in the previous paragraph to the shelter. The woman went along to see that the dog was indeed taken to the shelter. There she saw many pit-bull strays that had been picked up from the area with: unknown parentage, unknown socialization, unknown training and life experience and no micro chipping. And...all available for purchase from animal control, recycling unknown and problem dogs back into the community.
Should there not be a warning on these dogs? Should a pit bull rescue organization be involved in determining suitability of these dogs for re-adoption? Should they be re-circulated into the public without reliable, repeatable temperament testing and identification? When a child in the next family is mauled, does it give a bad name to all dogs of the breed? Do they deserve it? Strong sentiment revolves around the issue. Read this (Article - Written by president of PETA)
SHOULD MICROCHIPPING SHOULD BE LINKED TO PET LIABILITY INSURANCE?
Tragically, combined with the physical and emotional trauma of a dog mauling, the victim often is also saddled with huge medical bills.
The dog owner frequently does not have insurance or the financial means to pay the bills, sometimes boasting out loud: they can’t do anything to me, I have no money.
It is suggested, but not required or enforced, that animal control identifies potentially dangerous dogs and require the owners to insure the dogs against potential damages. The dogs that attacked me however had multiple attacks in their history, multiple calls to animal control, 2 attacks reported and yet the dogs had not even been deemed potentially dangerous. The owner had no insurance on the dogs due to their attack history, and apparently became abruptly impoverished the moment I entered the hospital, leaving us with the responsibility for immense financial losses on top of the tremendous emotional and physical pain. The worst of it…we are by no means alone.
Insurance should be required on large dogs due to the catastrophic damages that occur. Animal control cannot be relied upon to find the dogs that should be insured. They are overtaxed with work and are not responsible or accountable for locating the dangerous dogs. In fact, they are not required by law to deem a dog potentially dangerous even after multiple reported attacks.
Since it is not mandatory that even owners of large, dangerous dogs, that have already demonstrated predatory and attack propensities, carry insurance, it is typical that they do not. As a result, the dog attack victim quite often has to pay for their own medical bills incurred as a result of someone else’s dog, even while they are disabled, distraught and in pain as a result of the dog attack.
INSURANCE RATES ON GUARD AND ATTACK DOGS COULD REDUCE DOG ATTACKS
The need to purchase insurance could prove to be a deterrent to the purchase of multiple attack dogs.
There are dogs whose aggressive tendencies have been deliberately and cruelly exacerbated for the purpose of providing a cheap security system for the dog owner. If it’s not such a cheap security system, perhaps alternatives will be sought to the often cruel use of a dog as a weapon.
Use technology. Care for dogs.
Multiple guard dogs kept together are much more dangerous than a single dog. (Read more: Why dogs attack and Pack Hunting Instincts) If the dog owner has to purchase insurance for each large dog, he is less likely to keep multiple attacks and guard dogs. This would greatly reduce the danger to the surrounding community.
It only makes sense that the responsible pet owner could get insurance at greatly reduced rates for:
- Attendance at obedience classes. (Not attack training classes!)
- Obtaining the pup from a breeder that is recognized as a “family pet” breeder by track record or proven intent.
- Proving in some way that the dog was selected, socialized, trained and kept as a pet only, and not as a guard or attack dog.