# Microchips in the U.S. a false sense of security?



## Gwenhwyfair (Jul 27, 2010)

My new little girl hails from Europe and has a full duplex ISO chip made by Bayer.

Took her to the vet for last round of booster shots and asked the vet to scan for the chip. NO chip found! My vet explains to me that chips are not standardized in the U.S. Chip makers have (and some continue to) make chips 'properitary', so that only the chip manufacturers scanner can read the chip.

So I did the research and found that petlink and a couple of others make a 'black label' scanner which reads multiple varities of chips. Off I go to Banfield because they have a scanner which can pick up the ISO chips, have her chip scanned, it reads O.K. with the correct ID number. 

So the next problem, some of the chip manufacturers in the U.S. also have proprietary databases, so if your dog's chip is scanned (which is not a guarantee) you still may not be able to find the company with which the chip is registered.

In my research I found that dogs which had been microchipped had been euthanised at shelters because of this.

I gather that there are some efforts to centeralize all of this, but some manufacturers are really dragging their feet (don't want to loose _their_ market share, it's o.k. if a few dogs die....I guess...:crazy: )

<vent> WHY are we so behind Europe on standardizing microchips! This defeats the purpose of putting microchips in dogs, shelters and vets can't afford to buy 4, 5 or 6 different scanners....for crying out loud, then having to search multiple data bases.... </end vent>

*Question:* I'm registered with petlink's database, it seems to cross reference on the net with most of the other registries. Any suggestions of other registries which will accept the new 15 digit ISO chips?

Warning: Research the chips and technology before putting one in your dog!

Here's and informative link about this topic at wiki: 

Microchip implant (animal) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## Jessiewessie99 (Mar 6, 2009)

I think alot of it depends on what micochip company you use. Where I am most shelters, rescues and vet offices use Home Again, which I have in both of my dogs.

Also wiki isn't a very good source IMO.


----------



## Gwenhwyfair (Jul 27, 2010)

Jessiewessie99 said:


> I think alot of it depends on what micochip company you use. Where I am most shelters, rescues and vet offices use Home Again, which I have in both of my dogs.
> 
> Also wiki isn't a very good source IMO.


 
wiki isn't the best source for some things, but my first source was the my vet, the second vet confirmed and my additional research as well.

Just be warned that if your dog gets lost and winds up at shelter with a scanner that does not read the homeagain chip....for all practical purposes your dog is not chipped.

Please do take a moment look at the wiki link as it has a cross-compatibility table at the bottom


----------



## Jessiewessie99 (Mar 6, 2009)

Gwenhwyfair said:


> wiki isn't the best source for some things, but my first source was the my vet, the second vet confirmed and my additional resereach as well.
> 
> Just be warned that if you dog gets lost and winds up at shelter with a scanner that does not read the homeagain chip....for all practical purposes your dog is not chipped.
> 
> Please do take a moment look at the wiki link as it has a cross-compatibility table at the bottom



Like I said, in my area, most of the shelters, rescues, and vet offices use the same chip company we use. So they have the scanner.It was out vets suggestion of getting the chip for Molly, and the shelter already implanted the chip in Tanner

And plus neither of my dogs go far, Tanner may run to the end of the block, but thats it. Molly refuses to leave the front yard. My city is rather small, almost everyone knows what my dogs look like and who they belong to.

I think it depends on the area in which you live and which company you use and company shelters, rescues, and vet offices use.. I see the warning you sending, but for me it doesn't mean much.


----------



## Montana Scout (Sep 27, 2010)

when my pup had a vet visit i asked them if they would scan him... didn't look like a fancy device and i don't know the brand, but it read the chip just fine.... might have to take him to the pound to see if it reads there just in case


----------



## Gwenhwyfair (Jul 27, 2010)

O.k. but sheesh, I was really surprised that there isn't a standard! Dogs have died because of this and it meant something to their owners. Some day you may have to travel with your pets. 

It's just not right and it's because of greed.



Jessiewessie99 said:


> Like I said, in my area, most of the shelters, rescues, and vet offices use the same chip company we use. So they have the scanner.It was out vets suggestion of getting the chip for Molly, and the shelter already implanted the chip in Tanner
> 
> And plus neither of my dogs go far, Tanner may run to the end of the block, but thats it. Molly refuses to leave the front yard. My city is rather small, almost everyone knows what my dogs look like and who they belong to.
> 
> I think it depends on the area in which you live and which company you use and company shelters, rescues, and vet offices use.. I see the warning you sending, but for me it doesn't mean much.


----------



## Montana Scout (Sep 27, 2010)

Gwenhwyfair said:


> O.k. but sheesh, I was really surprised that there isn't a standard! Dogs have died because of this and it meant something to their owners. Some day you may have to travel with your pets.
> 
> It's just not right and it's because of greed.


well if your too awfully worried about it, you could get him tattoo'ed


----------



## Gwenhwyfair (Jul 27, 2010)

Montana Scout said:


> when my pup had a vet visit i asked them if they would scan him... didn't look like a fancy device and i don't know the brand, but it read the chip just fine.... might have to take him to the pound to see if it reads there just in case


You may also want to contact the manufacturer of the chip and find out what kind it is first...then you'll have a better idea of what kind/brand of scanner will read it.

Another comment about this in general: A lot of people, I am finding, don't know that there is a cross compatibility problem between chips and scanners. That is misleading when a company like homeagain sells all these 'warm and fuzzies' knowing that many companies don't read each other's chips. Some went so far to encrypt the chips!


----------



## Liesje (Mar 4, 2007)

It has been this way for a while. When I got my first pets chipped I picked what seemed to be the most common chip for my area. So far I've never had a problem with it being read.

When one of my pets was lost recently (she got away from the people taking care of her and it spooked her being chased), she was returned to me because of the ID plate on her collar. If having a pet returned is the main concern, I would definitely get good ID plates for collars. Even if a pet has a chip that can be read and is up to date, it's amazing how many people aren't aware they exist or are too lazy to take the animal to get scanned. Even in threads on this forum people have found dogs and didn't take the animal to be scanned first thing.


----------



## Gwenhwyfair (Jul 27, 2010)

Montana Scout said:


> well if your too awfully worried about it, you could get him tattoo'ed


I was thinking about that...

What gets me is the principle of this. It's just wrong to take money from people and then make the chips manufacturer specific and if dog gets put down...oh well? yeah I'm must say I'm angry.


----------



## Jessiewessie99 (Mar 6, 2009)

Tattooes are an option, and I don't travel much. If I do travel somewhere out of the state I may or may not bring my dogs. If I am just going to another city in my state I leave my dogs at home and have my neighbors watch them. 

Not all chip companies are bad. You just have to see what companies are being used in your area.

Also I have tags for my dog's collars, not just chips. My shelter will take in dogs and keep them for the owner(chipped or not).


----------



## Montana Scout (Sep 27, 2010)

Gwenhwyfair said:


> I was thinking about that...
> 
> What gets me is the principle of this. It's just wrong to take money from people and then make the chips manufacturer specific and if dog gets put down...oh well? yeah I'm must say I'm angry.


completely agree... i know my vet can read it so im gonna go to the pound and make sure they can read it


----------



## Gwenhwyfair (Jul 27, 2010)

Not me, I got my puppers scanned and right off the bat the vets AVID scanner did not find the chip. Have id tags on her collar too.

I agree one shouldn't depend soley on microchips, even if we had a standardized system. 

Still what the U.S. microchip companies are doing is wrong on a lot of levels.




Liesje said:


> It has been this way for a while. When I got my first pets chipped I picked what seemed to be the most common chip for my area. So far I've never had a problem with it being read.
> 
> When one of my pets was lost recently (she got away from the people taking care of her and it spooked her being chased), she was returned to me because of the ID plate on her collar. If having a pet returned is the main concern, I would definitely get good ID plates for collars. Even if a pet has a chip that can be read and is up to date, it's amazing how many people aren't aware they exist or are too lazy to take the animal to get scanned. Even in threads on this forum people have found dogs and didn't take the animal to be scanned first thing.


----------



## Jessiewessie99 (Mar 6, 2009)

Its sad that the dogs get put down. I think that rescues and shelters(that have websites) need to have something on their website that lists all the dogs they have that are lost and have no microchips, so an owner can look online and see if their dog is listed and go get their dog.


----------



## GSDElsa (Jul 22, 2009)

I guess I don't get why you think this is just a US problem? 

And as far as standardizing...they are not a legal requirement. I don't think the world over you will ever have standarization of the product.


----------



## Gwenhwyfair (Jul 27, 2010)

I have to respectfully disagree with you, the U.S. chip companies stink! Some of the same companies make ISO chips in Europe why the heck aren't they doing it here? Money money money trumps saving pets.

The frequency and format of ALL chips and scanners should be standardized as they are in Europe. 

A lot of people, including myself, travel with my pets. If I am to pay for extra protection, if my dog is scanned, it darn well should work no matter where I am in the U.S.

It's also not fair that vets, shelters and rescues have to pick and choose and pay for different scanners. Banfield had a total of three but they are a big chain.



Jessiewessie99 said:


> Tattooes are an option, and I don't travel much. If I do travel somewhere out of the state I may or may not bring my dogs. If I am just going to another city in my state I leave my dogs at home and have my neighbors watch them.
> 
> Not all chip companies are bad. You just have to see what companies are being used in your area.
> 
> Also I have tags for my dog's collars, not just chips. My shelter will take in dogs and keep them for the owner(chipped or not).


----------



## Dainerra (Nov 14, 2003)

not all shelters bother to scan anyway. Last I talked to my local AC, they only scan if you call that your dog is lost and tell them that you have a chip. It's like birth control, I never rely on just one method since nothing is 100%


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

tattoos -- well, there is no centralization for tatoos either, and they sometimes wear, not everyone looks for them. Sometimes in the ear, sometimes on the thigh. At best, not a sure thing. 

Tattoos are good if you have several dogs and need a way to identify them to an AKC inspector. They are good if you want to identify your own dog. I certainly would not trust a shelter to do anything with a tattoo.

Collars are ok if your dog wears them 24/7 and they do not break away. Of course, they can kill the dog too. Not a sure thing either.

Chips are only as good as the ability of the scanners and the willingness of the people to scan them. Certainly not a sure thing either.

Of course ANY time your dog is loose and not under control, they may be run over or shot or taken or attacked. So the best thing to do is to protect your dog by keeping them safe.


----------



## Gwenhwyfair (Jul 27, 2010)

There still are some areas that aren't fully on board. If you are traveling to an EU country or from one EU contry to another it's mandatory to have a 15 digit ISO chip (or your own scanner, I must add). Therefore dogs imported from EU (and other ISO compliant countries) into the U.S. will have the 15 digit ISO chip. 

A person who implants a chip in their dog in Germany and travels from Kiel to Munich and the pet gets lost can be assured if the pet is scanned the chip will be read. That's not the case in the U.S. even if you travel from one end of your city to the other.

What I'm talking about is, within the U.S. it should be mandatory, should a consumer decide to implant a microchip in their pet, that it be universal so it can be read by any scanner. Anything less defeats the true purpose of putting a microchip in your pet.

(btw- I don't expect third world places to get on board, so world over no, the U.S. why not?)




GSDElsa said:


> I guess I don't get why you think this is just a US problem?
> 
> And as far as standardizing...they are not a legal requirement. I don't think the world over you will ever have standarization of the product.


----------



## GSDElsa (Jul 22, 2009)

What exactly do you mean by "ISO" chips? Are you talking about the standards organization? You realize that all "ISO" things are not exactly "standardized" in the literal sense, right? ISO sets minimum standards and criteria for a variety of things, but they do not have to all be the same. For instance, my lab is "ISO accredited," and we have to meet MINIMUM standards and follow our lab's policies and procedures, but those policies and procedures might be different at the next lab. Just because all chips in Europe are under ISO standards doesn't mean they are all the same--just like all the devices my husbands medical device company makes are meeting certain ISO standards...but the next company will be making a completely different product on the end line.


----------



## Liesje (Mar 4, 2007)

Maybe I missed something but what dogs got put down b/c of their chips?


----------



## Gwenhwyfair (Jul 27, 2010)

Again, the point here is, if you're paying money to add another layer of protection the companies should at least advise you that they have built in limitations!



selzer said:


> tattoos -- well, there is no centralization for tatoos either, and they sometimes wear, not everyone looks for them. Sometimes in the ear, sometimes on the thigh. At best, not a sure thing.
> 
> Tattoos are good if you have several dogs and need a way to identify them to an AKC inspector. They are good if you want to identify your own dog. I certainly would not trust a shelter to do anything with a tattoo.
> 
> ...


----------



## Akk578 (Sep 30, 2010)

Gwenhwyfair said:


> So the next problem, some of the chip manufacturers in the U.S. also have proprietary databases, so if your dog's chip is scanned (which is not a guarantee) you still may not be able to find the company with which the chip is registered.
> 
> In my research I found that dogs which had been micro chipped had been euthanized at shelters because of this.
> 
> I gather that there are some efforts to centralize all of this, but some manufacturers are really dragging their feet (don't want to loose _their_ market share, it's o.k. if a few dogs die....I guess...:crazy: )


 Bandit has 24 hour pet watch for a chip. They register any brand of micro chip. The problem lie with this though which I found out from the company is..... exactly what is state above! If they are micro chipped with lets say for example a home again chip and you register it with 24 hour pet watch unless your pet is wearing a tag that says his chip is registered with 24 hour pet watch who ever found your pet will not be able to reach you through your dogs micro chip. I was very upset to find this out!! Because I almost registered Morgen like this. I got Bandits chip at a animal society event, however there are none going on at this time in my area or surrounding areas so I called the animal clinic to ask if they had 24 hour pet watch micro chips because I like there profile they give you for your pet and the free registry. But they didn't have their chips they had a different brand. I called 24 hour pet watch and got more information on registering a micro chip through them that wasn't there and they told me what was stated above!! What is really upsetting is one of there advertising benefits is you can register any microchip for free through them! Yet if you didn't know any better and your pet wasn't wearing one of their tags their your dogs micro chip is no good. Not to mention if a scanner doesn't pick it up! We get these chips to bring our pets home safely... An they are expensive you think they would set up a better system.


----------



## BlackPuppy (Mar 29, 2007)

I have 2 dogs from Europe with the European ISO chips. My vet has a homeagain reader and it registers that the dogs have a microchip, just that it's from another company. Someplace I read that all new scanners are supposed to at least have this ability,but I can't recall where I read that. 

There isn't a central database, but the scanner will identify the database and you contact the appropriate company. I also have my microchip numbers registered with the AKC pet retrieval database.

I just found this online, but I never heard of it before. 

"As of September 2009, there are two Internet-based search engines that allow users to enter a microchip code. The American Animal Hospital Association's Universal Pet Microchip Lookup Tool (www.petmicrochiplookup.org) provides a listing of the manufacturer with which the microchip's code is associated as well as if the chip information is found in participating registries. Chloe Standard's database (www.checkthechip.com) displays the manufacturer of that microchip. Neither database provides owner information for the microchip – the user must then contact the manufacturer/database associated with that microchip."


----------



## Dainerra (Nov 14, 2003)

I see it a bit differently. I believe that it is my job, as the consumer, to research the limitations of safety equipment. When I got Rayden chipped, I checked with my vet as to which chip they recommended as well as with the local AC/Humane Societies to see which scanners they had. 
The chip manufacturers exist to sell their product.


----------



## Gwenhwyfair (Jul 27, 2010)

Liesje said:


> Maybe I missed something but what dogs got put down b/c of their chips?


 
WebCite query result

Of course it would be impossible to quantify exactly how many dogs have been needlessly euthanised, the animals owners couldn't be found, the dog was a stray....and that's the end of it. 

Yet deductively I think we can all agree that A) it has happened, b)the lack of standardization will allow it to continue to happen and C)that the number of pets euthanised specifically because of a chip/scanner incompatibility doesn't have to be very high to be unacceptable.


----------



## Gwenhwyfair (Jul 27, 2010)

The chip manufacterers exist to save pets or make money? It so happens that two can be and have been mutually exclusive.




Dainerra said:


> I see it a bit differently. I believe that it is my job, as the consumer, to research the limitations of safety equipment. When I got Rayden chipped, I checked with my vet as to which chip they recommended as well as with the local AC/Humane Societies to see which scanners they had.
> The chip manufacturers exist to sell their product.


----------



## Liesje (Mar 4, 2007)

I'm with Dainerra. I have chipped 8 pets in the past 8 years and have never felt the chip company would be legally responsible for me losing my pet and it being euthanized. I looked into the chip options and went with the one that all our area shelters use and all the shelters and vets can scan for. Our shelters are required to hold stray/lost animals for 10 days. The one time I had a pet lost we were calling and visiting all area shelters daily. There's no way my animal would be euthanized even without a microchip. In the end the tag on her collar got her back to me safe and sound.


----------



## Gwenhwyfair (Jul 27, 2010)

BlackPuppy said:


> I have 2 dogs from Europe with the European ISO chips. My vet has a homeagain reader and it registers that the dogs have a microchip, just that it's from another company. Someplace I read that all new scanners are supposed to at least have this ability,but I can't recall where I read that.
> 
> There isn't a central database, but the scanner will identify the database and you contact the appropriate company. I also have my microchip numbers registered with the AKC pet retrieval database.
> 
> ...


That's another thing, you buy a dog from Europe and there is no verifed way of transferring owner of record on the chip from the breeder/owner in Europe to the customer in the states. 

New scanners are getting better but there are still some proprietary baloney going on.

My vet had AVID and it didn't read the chip, we tried several times, banfield confirmed the chip worked and was accurate. The chip came up with the phone number of the company which made the scanner, petlink. Petlink seems to have a more open format and cross referencing.

Chloes did not find my dogs registered chip tho...

Also, check out petmaxx.com for online look ups...


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

I think that with a chip, if you find your stolen dog yourself -- don't expect the police to be too fussed about your missing dog -- and you claim that the dog is yours, a microchip might be a good way to prove that the dog is yours. 

Other than that, it qualifies as permanent identification for OFA ratings. That is why they are in my dogs. To protect them in the event that they are lost and then found, well, that would be a bonus if it happened and worked.


----------



## Gwenhwyfair (Jul 27, 2010)

I'm not into law suits, but if it could be verified my dog was euthanised due to a scanner/chip proprietary issue I'd go to town.

It's like buying extra insurance only to not have the insurance be there when you need it.

The story I posted, the dog slipped it's collar. We try to be careful but things happens, that's what microchips are there for, the 'what if' moment that can happen to any of us. 




Liesje said:


> I'm with Dainerra. I have chipped 8 pets in the past 8 years and have never felt the chip company would be legally responsible for me losing my pet and it being euthanized. I looked into the chip options and went with the one that all our area shelters use and all the shelters and vets can scan for. Our shelters are required to hold stray/lost animals for 10 days. The one time I had a pet lost we were calling and visiting all area shelters daily. There's no way my animal would be euthanized even without a microchip. In the end the tag on her collar got her back to me safe and sound.


----------



## Dainerra (Nov 14, 2003)

there are a million different ways that the chip might not be picked up by the scanner. It could be as simple as the chip had migrated or that the person who was supposed to scan the dog when it came in didn't do their job. Or maybe did it half-heartedly. The majority of readers will at least tell you that a chip is there, even if propitiatory rights mean that it can't read the info


----------



## Gwenhwyfair (Jul 27, 2010)

In red, below, here's the irony, that bonus is less expensive in EU countries with far higher chances of actually working!




selzer said:


> I think that with a chip, if you find your stolen dog yourself -- don't expect the police to be too fussed about your missing dog -- and you claim that the dog is yours, a microchip might be a good way to prove that the dog is yours.
> 
> Other than that, it qualifies as permanent identification for OFA ratings. That is why they are in my dogs. To protect them in the event that they are lost and then found, well, that would be a bonus if it happened and worked.


----------



## Gwenhwyfair (Jul 27, 2010)

That's why I use the words proprietary and scanner/chip compatibility.

Understand here that some companies have even intentionally ENCRYPTED their chips.



Dainerra said:


> there are a million different ways that the chip might not be picked up by the scanner. It could be as simple as the chip had migrated or that the person who was supposed to scan the dog when it came in didn't do their job. Or maybe did it half-heartedly. The majority of readers will at least tell you that a chip is there, even if propitiatory rights mean that it can't read the info


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

Well, why don't you go to Europe and live there, and get your dog chipped there, and you will be happy then.


----------



## Dainerra (Nov 14, 2003)

the problem is, it doesn't matter if all the chips can be read by all scanners if the shelter doesn't bother to scan! Sadly, that is too often the case around here


----------



## Cassidy's Mom (Mar 30, 2003)

Liesje said:


> The one time I had a pet lost we were calling and visiting all area shelters daily. There's no way my animal would be euthanized even without a microchip.


Unfortunately, that's not always enough. Sorry, this is a convoluted story, I know someone (a member of this board in fact) who had a family member lose a dog recently. The dog was found by someone else and brought to a local shelter. There was a microchip but the dog was adopted from a shelter out of the area with the microchip already in place, and there was a mixup in transferring the microchip to the new owner. Instead, they were listed as secondary contacts, and the prior owner as primary. When the shelter contacted the prior owner she said she hadn't had the dog for 9 years, which was true, and that was as far as it went. 

When the owner went by the shelter he was told that his dog was not there, and he was allowed to look in the public areas to confirm this, but was not allowed access to the areas that were not open to the public. He had pictures, they looked at the pictures and claimed that she was not there. They originally said that the person who had found her and brought her in had left with her, but they either didn't have a record of that person or would not give it to him to followup on. 

When his wife went by the shelter a few days later to check again she was told that the dog had been there when her husband went by :angryfire: but had been since euthanized. They were devastated.


----------



## Liesje (Mar 4, 2007)

Why don't we sue vets, rescues, and shelters because they don't have the right scanners? Actually, many of them do. Our shelter has multiple scanners so they can read any chip. A friend of mine has a dog with the European ISO chip and when we enter dog shows and Schutzhund trials since her dog is not tattoo'd it has to be checked for the chip and the owner must provide the scanner. Our shelter lets her borrow one of their European frequency scanners for these events (she writes them a check and then they void it when she returns the scanner).


----------



## Gwenhwyfair (Jul 27, 2010)

pfft...yeah really let's not make things better here....



selzer said:


> Well, why don't you go to Europe and live there, and get your dog chipped there, and you will be happy then.


----------



## Gwenhwyfair (Jul 27, 2010)

No don't sue the shelters, that would be silly. They did not create the problem and those law suits would probably kicked out of the court.

The problem lies with the design and manufacture of the chips, therefore the logical parties to sue would be said manufacturers.







Liesje said:


> Why don't we sue vets, rescues, and shelters because they don't have the right scanners? Actually, many of them do. Our shelter has multiple scanners so they can read any chip. A friend of mine has a dog with the European ISO chip and when we enter dog shows and Schutzhund trials since her dog is not tattoo'd it has to be checked for the chip and the owner must provide the scanner. Our shelter lets her borrow one of their European frequency scanners for these events (she writes them a check and then they void it when she returns the scanner).


----------



## Liesje (Mar 4, 2007)

Also as Debbie points out the chip is only as good as the information its associated with.


----------



## Stosh (Jun 26, 2010)

What she said...


----------



## Liesje (Mar 4, 2007)

Gwenhwyfair said:


> The problem lies with the design and manufacture of the chips, therefore the logical parties to sue would be said manufacturers.


But those frequencies are not a secret. Pet owners can readily find that information before deciding which chip to use, and you CAN get the European chips here if that's what you want. I guess I don't see how you can sue over a chip that has a frequency you didn't want and/or was encrypted but that information is published.

I'm not disagreeing with the idea that there should be a standard. I mean, we should use Celsius and the metric system too....


----------



## Gwenhwyfair (Jul 27, 2010)

That's not good (is that because of training, lack of staff?)

I understand that not all failures of the chip/scanner are due to the brands.....but the things that can be fixed and controlled, why not?



Dainerra said:


> the problem is, it doesn't matter if all the chips can be read by all scanners if the shelter doesn't bother to scan! Sadly, that is too often the case around here


----------



## Gwenhwyfair (Jul 27, 2010)

Ya know I have to admit I assumed that the chips were standardized because honestly it defies logic that they aren't....when the main purpose is to save pets.

You are correct about the chips, the problem is you have no control of where your lost dog ends up and which scanner is used.....



Liesje said:


> But those frequencies are not a secret. Pet owners can readily find that information before deciding which chip to use, and you CAN get the European chips here if that's what you want. I guess I don't see how you can sue over a chip that has a frequency you didn't want and/or was encrypted but that information is published.
> 
> I'm not disagreeing with the idea that there should be a standard. I mean, we should use Celsius and the metric system too....


----------



## Dainerra (Nov 14, 2003)

But is it the companies fault? I don't think so. A company is in business to make money. That is what they do. Their product does exactly as it is advertised to do - ID your pet. Sure not all products are compatible with scanners bought from another company. The majority of scanners WILL read that a chip is there, even if the info can't be accessed. 
What responsibility does the owner have to research the product that they buy? I think that they are wholly responsible as long as the company didn't misrepresent themselves.

I believe that the shelter is responsible in most cases - purely from negligence. I know from first-hand conversation with shelter staff here that they DON'T scan for microchips. Only if an owner contacts them and says "My GSD is lost and he has a chip" Then, if a GSD comes in, they will do a quick once over with the scanner. Unfortunately, a quick once over will often miss a chip that IS there


----------



## Gwenhwyfair (Jul 27, 2010)

Liesje said:


> Also as Debbie points out the chip is only as good as the information its associated with.


Agreed....and that is made more difficult by the fact thatsometimes you have to keep up with multiple databases. It is however, the dog owners responsibility to make sure of it.


----------



## Liesje (Mar 4, 2007)

Gwenhwyfair said:


> You are correct about the chips, the problem is you have no control of where your lost dog ends up and which scanner is used.....


Which is my problem and not anyone else's.

Bottom line is, the chips generate profit. Is saving pets really the main purpose? To us pet owners, yes, but not really.


----------



## Dainerra (Nov 14, 2003)

Gwenhwyfair said:


> That's not good (is that because of training, lack of staff?)



It's just their policy. The directors believe it would be too time consuming to scan every animal that is brought in.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

You want to pay for it? How? Which company should HAVE to change their chips or scanners??? Should ALL scanners be able to read any chip however many digits they have, including European chips?

Should every tiny rural shelter and vet clinic be provided the universal scanners free of charge. 

Gwenhwyfair, if you are a multi-millionaire, maybe you can do this with all that dough you have nothing better to do with. 

You go!

BTW, some of my dogs have homeagain, some have avid. 

Using the government's time to mess around with dog chips is simply not on my list of priorties for government.


----------



## Dainerra (Nov 14, 2003)

My vet told me that not all chips/readers are compatible when I first asked. I said "what is the difference between chips A, B, and C" and he told me that each company has their own database and scanners and (at that time) many wouldn't even recognize that a different brand chip is present. Now the majority of scanners will at least pop up an error "unreadable" message. He and I discussed what is the most common chip in the US and what is most likely to be readable where ever I may travel. So, on his advice, I picked HomeAgain.


----------



## Gwenhwyfair (Jul 27, 2010)

It depends on what goes wrong. Unfortunately since the microchipping system in the U.S. is not standardized it is not easy to track and maintain. 

Here's the problem with the 'company is in business to make money' logic is they are making money selling 'safety'. At the same time they are intentionally building in parameters which limit positive safe results of their product. This is the dilemma, the paradox, you cannot make a product telling consumers your pet will come "homeagain" and then INTENTIONALLY limit the potential of the product delivering on it's promise. In the case of scanner incompatibility it is NOT the owners responsbility because they don't have control of which shelter a lost dog ends up in nor the brand of scanner the shelter has. 

The shelter staff, having equipment and then not using is another line of discussion entirely because it's doesn't relate to the ability of the product to work if properly used. It is surprising (and sad) to read what you write about shelters. The rescues and shelters I've worked used the scanners.





Dainerra said:


> But is it the companies fault? I don't think so. A company is in business to make money. That is what they do. Their product does exactly as it is advertised to do - ID your pet. Sure not all products are compatible with scanners bought from another company. The majority of scanners WILL read that a chip is there, even if the info can't be accessed.
> What responsibility does the owner have to research the product that they buy? I think that they are wholly responsible as long as the company didn't misrepresent themselves.
> 
> I believe that the shelter is responsible in most cases - purely from negligence. I know from first-hand conversation with shelter staff here that they DON'T scan for microchips. Only if an owner contacts them and says "My GSD is lost and he has a chip" Then, if a GSD comes in, they will do a quick once over with the scanner. Unfortunately, a quick once over will often miss a chip that IS there


----------



## Dainerra (Nov 14, 2003)

But, therein lies the difference in opinion. The chips work EXACTLY as the company says that they will.

ETA: the reason I brought up the lack of proper scanner use in shelters is because we have no way of knowing WHY those chipped dogs were euthanized. Was it because the scanner didn't read the chip? Was it lack of training in use? Did it even get used? All we know is that some dogs were euthanized, even though they were chipped. 

As I said, most scanners will tell you that a chip is there, even if it cannot read it


----------



## Montana Scout (Sep 27, 2010)

from what i read, if a dog is chipped it can not be euthenized until last resort... but i do believe most of us at least have the chip registered at the AKC


----------



## Gwenhwyfair (Jul 27, 2010)

Actually, how forthright are the various manufacturers about the limitations. AVID got in some trouble over this back in '04 I think it was.

It boils down to liesje said in her last post.....

Agree with you about pin pointing the problem at the shelters, it's not aleays going to be black and white. The AVID scanner my vet had did not read the ISO chip at all...the wiki link I posted in my OP has a compatibility table.

Ya know I hope if anything comes from this thread at least some people will learn and understand about the limitations of these microchips. If it encourages one person to research and helps....that'll be good too. 



Dainerra said:


> But, therein lies the difference in opinion. The chips work EXACTLY as the company says that they will.
> 
> ETA: the reason I brought up the lack of proper scanner use in shelters is because we have no way of knowing WHY those chipped dogs were euthanized. Was it because the scanner didn't read the chip? Was it lack of training in use? Did it even get used? All we know is that some dogs were euthanized, even though they were chipped.
> 
> As I said, most scanners will tell you that a chip is there, even if it cannot read it


----------



## Cassidy's Mom (Mar 30, 2003)

I had some problems with Keefer's microchip. He was born in August 2005 and came home at the end of October. I had him chipped with a Home Again chip at his first vet appointment, which was a day or two later. At the time there was only one registry, the AKC CAR program. All chips, regardless of the manufacturer, were registered with the AKC but you had to do it through the chip company, so although I signed up through Home Again and paid them the fee, he was registered with the AKC. At some point after Keefer's microchip Home Again split off and formed their own registry. 

I wasn't aware of this until we got Halo. The breeder had a Home Again chip put in and sent us the paperwork to register the chip. She recommended using AKC CAR rather than Home Again because you can pay a onetime fee to register the chip and Home Again added all these additional services for an annual fee. That sounded fine to me, especially since Keef was already registered through AKC CAR.

Or so I thought. I registered her chip online, and it had an option to link other pets to the same account. I tried entering his number (right off his AKC CAR collar tag), and the system couldn't find him. I tried looking him up on Home Again's website, but I couldn't get it work so I called them. They confirmed that he was in their registry. I questioned how that could have happened - since he was originally registered by the AKC wouldn't he still be there, and only newer customers that registered with Home Again after the split be in their system? They claimed that the split occurred in early 2005, months before he was chipped and registered, in fact months before he was even born. Great, then why was I sent an AKC collar tag in November 2005 if he was indeed registered with Home Again and not AKC?

They assured me that if he were lost and someone checked with one registry and he wasn't in their system they'd be referred to the other company, so it wasn't necessary to pay a second time to re-register his chip with AKC. Yeah, right - not taking a chance on that! I told them that I was looking at his AKC collar tag showing the number that they (Home Again) had in their system but AKC did not, and I was concerned that his tag did not match the registry he was in. Neither company seemed think this was a big problem and they kept shifting the blame to each other. I was NOT HAPPY! 

I sent both of them nasty emails and we went back and forth a few times before it was finally resolved. I wanted either AKC to enter him in their registry since I had already paid for that, so if someone called the number on his tag and gave them the chip number or scanned him, he would be in the system, OR I wanted Home Again to send me a collar tag with _their_ phone number on it to match the registry he was actually in. I was prepared to pay for one or the other if I didn't make any headway, but I didn't think I should have to. Home Again finally did send me another collar tag to use.


----------



## Gwenhwyfair (Jul 27, 2010)

Yup, that's another problem, the complication of seperate databases.

Thanks for sharing your story and thanks all for your inputs....time to sign off. Good evening to all!




Cassidy's Mom said:


> I had some problems with Keefer's microchip. He was born in August 2005 and came home at the end of October. I had him chipped with a Home Again chip at his first vet appointment, which was a day or two later. At the time there was only one registry, the AKC CAR program. All chips, regardless of the manufacturer, were registered with the AKC but you had to do it through the chip company, so although I signed up through Home Again and paid them the fee, he was registered with the AKC. At some point after Keefer's microchip Home Again split off and formed their own registry.
> 
> <snipped>.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

Mine are not registered through the CAR system. My last few dogs are signed up through that, but their chips are only registered with the chip companies, Avid or HomeAgain.


----------



## Chicagocanine (Aug 7, 2008)

Jessiewessie99 said:


> I think it depends on the area in which you live and which company you use and company shelters, rescues, and vet offices use.. I see the warning you sending, but for me it doesn't mean much.


Unfortunately that's not always so easy. I've had my pets chipped at a few vets and they all used different chips! Even when I had more than one pet chipped at the same vet (different times) the vet had switched and was using a different brand when I got the second pet done. I am pretty sure the many many shelters and rescues in my area also use different brands and probably have different brands of scanners too. I've had two pets chipped at shelter clinics that used AVID as does the county's mobile microchip clinic. My vet opened a new clinic and she only has the scanner that she got from the company who makes the chip variety she uses (ResQ.) So some of my pets have Home Again, some have AVID, some have ResQ... Most of them I also registered with 24PetWatch because they had free registration, and Bianca's chip is also registered with UKC and with AKC CAR. Bianca's tattoo is registered with them also but her tattoo could also possibly be registered somewhere under someone else's name since her kennel club registration had the wrong name/tattoo number listed(so her paperwork may have been given to someone who owns one of her littermates.)

Even just in one area there is not necessarily one "standard" or common brand of chip being used... I also travel with my dogs so even if one type of chip was common here, it might not be wherever we ago on trips.


----------



## Jessiewessie99 (Mar 6, 2009)

Chicagocanine said:


> Unfortunately that's not always so easy. I've had my pets chipped at a few vets and they all used different chips! Even when I had more than one pet chipped at the same vet (different times) the vet had switched and was using a different brand when I got the second pet done. I am pretty sure the many many shelters and rescues in my area also use different brands and probably have different brands of scanners too. I've had two pets chipped at shelter clinics that used AVID as does the county's mobile microchip clinic. My vet opened a new clinic and she only has the scanner that she got from the company who makes the chip variety she uses (ResQ.) So some of my pets have Home Again, some have AVID, some have ResQ... Most of them I also registered with 24PetWatch because they had free registration, and Bianca's chip is also registered with UKC and with AKC CAR. Bianca's tattoo is registered with them also but her tattoo could also possibly be registered somewhere under someone else's name since her kennel club registration had the wrong name/tattoo number listed(so her paperwork may have been given to someone who owns one of her littermates.)
> 
> Even just in one area there is not necessarily one "standard" or common brand of chip being used... I also travel with my dogs so even if one type of chip was common here, it might not be wherever we ago on trips.



My family and I go to one vet. We asked the shelter what chip they use, and they told us Home Again. We already had Molly chipped by our vet that we take both dogs too. My family and I don't travel very often(haven't in a long time) and when we go we stay in California, and my sister stays home with the dogs. 

We also know how to keep our dogs safe and secure in our home, plus they never want to leave home. We also have tags for them. If we ever did travel with our dogs, my parents would take extra precautions to make sure our dogs stay safe and secure.


----------



## Chicagocanine (Aug 7, 2008)

BlackPuppy said:


> "As of September 2009, there are two Internet-based search engines that allow users to enter a microchip code. The American Animal Hospital Association's Universal Pet Microchip Lookup Tool (www.petmicrochiplookup.org) provides a listing of the manufacturer with which the microchip's code is associated as well as if the chip information is found in participating registries. Chloe Standard's database (www.checkthechip.com) displays the manufacturer of that microchip. Neither database provides owner information for the microchip – the user must then contact the manufacturer/database associated with that microchip."


I wish they had something like that for tattoos!


----------



## GSDElsa (Jul 22, 2009)

I am baffled that there is actually talk of lawsuits in this thread and it's horrifying, quite frankly. I'm sorry, but it's quite common knowledge in my opinion that chips aren't read equally by all scanners. You can find the information out with a little internet research. Yet you are saying if your dog is put down because the chip wasn't read you have the right to sue the manufacturer? For a completely voluntary product that you and/or your breeder made the choice to implant in your dog? WOW.

So who do you sue if the chip migrates so it doesn't show up? Who do you sue if the shelter doesn't bother to scan at all? 

I mean, really, saying that the chip manufacturers should be sued on one hand but that the shelters not even bothering to scan most dogs shouhldn't be sued? OK. Wow again.


----------



## Gwenhwyfair (Jul 27, 2010)

Wow, I did not expect this to turn into a SUCH debate.

I actually enjoy debating, if it doesn't get personal.

BE HORRIFIED, VERY Horrified......fer crying out loud.

You're twisting everything out of proportion or not reading all the posts. I've clearly explained my position that a microchips performance should not fail due to INTENTIONALLY BUILT IN PROPRIETARY LIMITATIONS.

I've also been reasonable in acknowledging and agreeing that A) I don't expect microchips to be the end all be all of returning a pet home B) There certainly can be other circumstances, outside the performance of the chip, which would cause the system to fail such as human error. 

My assertion is VERY reasonable, if someone VOLUNTARILY, purchases a microchip it should be able to be universally read by ALL scanners regardless of the chip/scanner manufacturer. The consumer is purchasing an ADDED layer of protection and it is *reasonable to expect* that the performance of that chip should NOT be limited BY DESIGN! I repeat the problem is the manufacturers are INTENTIONALLY, WITH FORETHOUGHT AND BY DESIGN LIMITING WHAT CHIPS CAN BE READ BY WHAT SCANNERS AND THAT'S WRONG.

This stupid system we have now is a burden to vets, shelters AND the pet owners who CHOOSE to implant a microchip. 

I did not broach the problems that may occur in shelters because it is an entirely different topic with different parameters and conditions. It is a concern as well and if you want to start a thread about it, it can be discussed. 

The question in my thread is WHY, WHY add another layer of complexity INTENTIONALLY to a system that is intended and SOLD as a system which is supposed to make it EASIER to help your pet be 'home again'. It defies logic pure and simple, frankly it's beyond me that we consumers tolerate this!

So, just to be clear, your stance is that standardization of microchips would be a bad idea? If so can you present a logical argument as to why and how that would benefit consumers and their pets. 

*Ad hominem attacks = fail.*





GSDElsa said:


> I am baffled that there is actually talk of lawsuits in this thread and it's horrifying, quite frankly. I'm sorry, but it's quite common knowledge in my opinion that chips aren't read equally by all scanners. You can find the information out with a little internet research. Yet you are saying if your dog is put down because the chip wasn't read you have the right to sue the manufacturer? For a completely voluntary product that you and/or your breeder made the choice to implant in your dog? WOW.
> 
> So who do you sue if the chip migrates so it doesn't show up? Who do you sue if the shelter doesn't bother to scan at all?
> 
> I mean, really, saying that the chip manufacturers should be sued on one hand but that the shelters not even bothering to scan most dogs shouhldn't be sued? OK. Wow again.


----------



## Rosa (Sep 18, 2010)

It seams to be a bit different here in Ireland, all full bred dogs legally have to be micro-chipped before papers are handed over. There is then only one database used with all the information of every pet mircochip is stored. 

The fact is it is very different in the USA, it seams more like a money making scheme rather than a product there to actually help the dog and the owner.


----------



## GSDElsa (Jul 22, 2009)

No, I don't think it's a bad idea. But companies develop products--in ALL ASPECTS OF BUSINESS to their chosen standards. Company A feels THEIR product and what they offer is best. Company B feels THEIR product and what they offer is best. A microchip is not a requirement across the board. It is not government regulated. It is a product that companies ON THEIR OWN...to BENEFIT us developed. A microchip with it's flaws is still better than no microchip at all. We can't even get companies to share product information with things like electronic thermometers. Why would they do it on microchips?

Yes, there are problems. They are known problems and it's not perfect. But that's not the point. Aside from finding a chip in a pet that's lost--it also is there for things like proving ownership or proving a dog is who it is claimed to be. A chip for a lost dog in a shelter is just one more thing to add to the list. 

This really has nothing to do with what would or would not be a good idea. I mean, I could come up with a list a mile long of what I want changed or standardized. But, in my opinion, it's completely unreasonable to expect companies to share product designs with one another when they have desinged different products. 

In my opinion this "problem" is as simple of a fix as a 3rd party company designing a universal scanner that works and can provide information no matter what. So, why not push for that to happen. Or design your own? Companies are ultimately in business and product development for profit margins. You aren't going to change this.


----------



## GSDElsa (Jul 22, 2009)

Rosa said:


> It seams to be a bit different here in Ireland, all full bred dogs legally have to be micro-chipped before papers are handed over. There is then only one database used with all the information of every pet mircochip is stored.
> 
> The fact is it is very different in the USA, it seams more like a money making scheme rather than a product there to actually help the dog and the owner.


 
OK. Now let's consider for a moment the sheer difference in dog population between the countries. The United States is #1 with between 60-80 MILLION dogs (depending on year). Ireland is not in the top 10. And the #10 spot is Thailand with only SIX (6!).9 million dogs. There are only 2 EU countries in the top 10--France and Italy that only total about 17 million dogs combined. 

Want to know the dog population in Ireland? 650,000. 

Let's not compare apples to oranges.

Also...another apples to oranges comparison in general is this idea that the EU is doing the microchip "standarization" because of saving dogs lives. NO...the standarization of these things likely is to ease the travel of dogs from country to country. EU members have a right to travel among other EU countries with ease and seamless borders. By standarizing microchipping of dogs, it allows dogs to travel among EU countries without the normal quarantine periods that would otherwise be required for dogs to travel between countries roughly the same size or smaller than most US states. Do not, for one second, think that the EU controlling the microchips in EU countries is so owners can find their lost pets.

I guess that above is why this whole thread rubs me the wrong way...it's the assumption that the way European countries to things (with much smaller pet populations and for completely political reasons) is somehow transferrable to the US.


----------



## Rosa (Sep 18, 2010)

Maybe you took me up wrong but I wasn't comparing countries and I wasn't intending on participating in any debate as I clearly would not have a great knowledge of how the US is run.

A company wants to make money thats fine but a little thought for the consumer wouldn't hurt that much in my opinion.


----------



## GSDElsa (Jul 22, 2009)

Rosa said:


> Maybe you took me up wrong but I wasn't comparing countries and I wasn't intending on participating in any debate as I clearly would not have a great knowledge of how the US is run.
> 
> A company wants to make money thats fine but a little thought for the consumer wouldn't hurt that much in my opinion.


And my rant wasn't necessarily directed directly at you. I'm just trying to point out the logistics of "managing" 650,000 dogs versues 60-80,000,000.

Also, throughout a lot of this thread the word "Europe" is being thrown around. And trust me when I say there might be standarization within the EU (and why I only referred to the EU), but there most definitely is NOT in Europe as a whole.


----------



## Liesje (Mar 4, 2007)

It's not a bad idea Rosa, but compare the number of people, pets, and space. There's more Irish people living in New York City alone than all of Ireland. It would be more like all of Europe and beyond having a centralized system and single database.


----------



## Gwenhwyfair (Jul 27, 2010)

Hi Rosa,

I agree with the others that making microchips mandatory in the U.S. would be logistically, for practical purposes, impossible.

However, there is no reason why the consumers in the U.S. shouldn't get the same standard and level of performance when they choose to implant micro chips in their dog.

You last sentence is an accurate description of the issue.



Rosa said:


> It seams to be a bit different here in Ireland, all full bred dogs legally have to be micro-chipped before papers are handed over. There is then only one database used with all the information of every pet mircochip is stored.
> 
> The fact is it is very different in the USA, it seams more like a money making scheme rather than a product there to actually help the dog and the owner.


----------



## Gwenhwyfair (Jul 27, 2010)

In red below, I agree with the basic premise that business have the right to produce patent and have proprietary rights to their products.

The problem arises when the products are supposed to support well being, safety and even life, the standards are different and the playing field should be managed differently. Were aren't talking about choosing between Dunkin' Donuts or Starbucks for the best coffee.....

Firstly, the microchip companies advertise 'home again' and 'safe watch' for your pets and then they intentionally block others from reading/scanning competitors chips. That's disengious at best and misleading at the worst.

Secondly, the microchip companies also produce chips/scanners in the EU and manage to stay in business and make a profit there, why can't they do that here? I'll answer my own question, because they view the U.S. as a cash cow. Apparently it's not if they can make a profit but if they can make a HUGE profit at the expense of performance and safe return of pets. That is wrong.

As to your solution below, there is already progress in that area with the 'black label' scanners but some companies encrypt their chips or use different frequencies. (btw encryption means they use secret methods to intentionally block 'unauthorized' access to the chip's information.

What it boils down to is, in this country, the chip manufacturers are choosing to_ increase_ their profit margins by reducing effectiveness in an effort to hold prisoner their market share. Unfortunately the reality is everything comes at a cost, in this case the cost _could _be the life of your dog. 

It can be changed and to be fair, in my research I've noticed there is a trend and push to standardize. Consumers being aware would be a big help in this direction. Choosing a company with open registration, using ISO chips and open databases for cross searching is a place to vote with our dollars.

btw- if there weren't such greediness this could be done without gov't intervention....it's the greed which causes the need for referees...sadly. 





GSDElsa said:


> No, I don't think it's a bad idea. But companies develop products--in ALL ASPECTS OF BUSINESS to their chosen standards. Company A feels THEIR product and what they offer is best. Company B feels THEIR product and what they offer is best. A microchip is not a requirement across the board. It is not government regulated. It is a product that companies ON THEIR OWN...to BENEFIT us developed. A microchip with it's flaws is still better than no microchip at all. We can't even get companies to share product information with things like electronic thermometers. Why would they do it on microchips?
> 
> Yes, there are problems. They are known problems and it's not perfect. But that's not the point. Aside from finding a chip in a pet that's lost--it also is there for things like proving ownership or proving a dog is who it is claimed to be. A chip for a lost dog in a shelter is just one more thing to add to the list.
> 
> ...


----------



## GSDElsa (Jul 22, 2009)

But again...you're missing the link here. They are standardized BECAUSE they are required of dogs in the EU. NOT BECAUSE they want to see dogs retured to their owners. You're talking "government" regulation being reasoning behind the chip standarization. Not because they are thinking of you and me (you and me as in the residents of the EU).

ETA: The irony in this whole thing is that from the research I've done, a lot of the problems with scanners and dogs allegedly being euthanized because of them is that the problems have arisen from those nasty ISO chips being distributed in the US without the disclaimer that they would not work with most scanners in this country. So, I guess the majority of the blame goes to those nice companies in Europe not trying to increase their profit margins, right?

ETA#2: I also hope that everyone realizes the amount of money that a company pours into a product in R&D for something of this medical classifaction (ie a medical device that is A. not only implanted in the body but B. emits a frequency) is astronomical. Again, why would a company who designed a product based on X number of years of sales generating X number of dollars have any desire to put it to waste?


----------



## Gwenhwyfair (Jul 27, 2010)

I'm not sure at what level microchipping is mandatory in the EU countries. Our friend from Ireland mentioned pure bred dogs only (btw aren't DNA tests mandatory for AKC registration here?) I did learn that more dogs (_percentage_ wise) are microchipped in Europe because the system is affordable and more effective. 

I also know that the chips can be and are used for lost dogs to be reunited with their owners in addition to crossing various countries borders. 

Here in the U.S. it is spefically marketed (but necessarily designed) for the added protection of helping a lost pet come home to it's owners. 

That's where the trouble begins......the intent vs the actual effectiveness.

Think of it this way. You go to your local tire dealer for a new set of tires on your car. You tell the dealer what kind of car you have and you ask for the appropriate size and type, maybe even brand suggestions.

You select the tires, they are installed and off you go.

A week later you are driving on the highway and a tire blows for no apparent reason causing a wreck and injury.

You investigate with the tire company that made the tire finding out that tire you purchased was not safe to use on all roads or ate normal posted highway speeds.

Are you at fault for not researching the various manufacturers, their indepth ratings and even the types of materials used to ensure the tire would work under all normal driving conditions?

OR would it be reasonable to assume that if you drive a car that you will encounter a variety of roads and different speeds and therefore when you ask for an appropriate tire for your car you can expect it will perform safely under normal driving conditions.










GSDElsa said:


> But again...you're missing the link here. They are standardized BECAUSE they are required of dogs in the EU. NOT BECAUSE they want to see dogs retured to their owners. You're talking "government" regulation being reasoning behind the chip standarization. Not because they are thinking of you and me (you and me as in the residents of the EU).


----------



## Gwenhwyfair (Jul 27, 2010)

There is a disconnect on the dogs coming in from Europe, but as you said it's for quanrantine and tracking purposes in those particular instances. So how 'nasty' the companies are I don't know, but it would be logical to have a streamlined coordination when transferring the chip info from the seller to the new owner in the U.S.

Second point, microchips are not rocket science tech. They've been around for 20 years, at this point far more money is 'poured into' marketing campaigns.

(be warned, I'm debating and may well be able to provide salient counterpoints to all your comments, that does not equal attacking)





GSDElsa said:


> <snipped>
> 
> ETA: The irony in this whole thing is that from the research I've done, a lot of the problems with scanners and dogs allegedly being euthanized because of them is that the problems have arisen from those nasty ISO chips being distributed in the US without the disclaimer that they would not work with most scanners in this country. So, I guess the majority of the blame goes to those nice companies in Europe not trying to increase their profit margins, right?
> 
> ETA#2: I also hope that everyone realizes the amount of money that a company pours into a product in R&D for something of this medical classifaction (ie a medical device that is A. not only implanted in the body but B. emits a frequency) is astronomical. Again, why would a company who designed a product based on X number of years of sales generating X number of dollars have any desire to put it to waste?


----------



## GSDElsa (Jul 22, 2009)

"The *ISO Conformant Full Duplex* type is the pet chip type with the most international acceptance, being common in many countries including those of Europe since the late 1990s, and now widely adopted in Canada. It is one of two chip protocol types (along with the "Half Duplex" type sometimes used in farm and ranch animals) which conform to International Organization for Standardization, or ISO, standards 11784 and 11785. To support international/multivendor application, each of these chips contains either a manufacturer code[6] (99 manufacturer codes from 900 to 998 are supported.) or a country code (Values below 900 are assigned as country codes.) along with its main identifying serial number.[Note 1] *In the U.S., the distributing organizations that introduced this type of pet chip have faced controversy. When 24PetWatch.com in 2003 and more famously **Banfield Pet Hospitals** in 2004 began distributing them, many shelter scanners in use couldn't read them.* (Some still can't; asking local shelters about this may be a good idea even today.) *At least one of the Banfield-chipped pets was discovered to have been needlessly euthanized,[7] *and Americans debated the cause. Specifically, did this happen because "foreign" chips were sold to unsuspecting pet owners, or because scanners which were passed off as a Shelter-Grade product couldn't cope with "internationally standardized" chips? Or maybe both?"

Granted, that is a wikipedia source (I'm really not going to put too much time into going to the primary sources in this instance), but as you see..the ISO chips were indeed distributed and implanted into dogs in the US without prior warning.

And the chip companies do indeed have to pour a good deal of money into a MEDICAL DEVICE that is going into the body. My husband is in regulatory controls/compliance to standards at a medical device company. Dogs and humans may be different, but yes, a significant amount of money goes into developing a new product that has that medical classification...whether or not the technology existeted previously or not.





Gwenhwyfair said:


> There is a disconnect on the dogs coming in from Europe, but as you said it's for quanrantine and tracking purposes in those particular instances. So how 'nasty' the companies are I don't know, but it would be logical to have a streamlined coordination when transferring the chip info from the seller to the new owner in the U.S.
> 
> Second point, microchips are not rocket science tech. They've been around for 20 years, at this point far more money is 'poured into' marketing campaigns.
> 
> (be warned, I'm debating and may well be able to provide salient counterpoints to all your comments, that does not equal attacking)


----------



## GSDElsa (Jul 22, 2009)

Gwenhwyfair said:


> I'm not sure at what level microchipping is mandatory in the EU countries. Our friend from Ireland mentioned pure bred dogs only (btw aren't DNA tests mandatory for AKC registration here?) I did learn that more dogs (_percentage_ wise) are microchipped in Europe because the system is affordable and more effective.


I'm sure more dogs are microchipped there because as of 2011 any dogs traveling to the EU or within the EU boundaries must be microchipped. No other documentation will suffice, including tattoos.


----------



## Gwenhwyfair (Jul 27, 2010)

Yes, I am aware of what you note, I linked in my OP to the same wiki article.

I, myself, have run into the problem with my imported dog which is what kicked off this thread. 

Having said that, the problem is further compounded by the competing and seperate companies in the U.S. which is not as big a problem in the EU. It's up to us to catch up because they won't regress to seperate and less efficient systems.

I went ahead and registered my dog with petlink because it seems to be the most open registry and cross referenced with the most databases, not all though. Other links have been provided in this thread which I will check into as well.

I agree that R&D is a high cost, but it's an upfront cost. I used to work for a satellite communications company, develop, implement and maintance of systems. The upfront development cost is high, after that the costs go down significantly. 

Microchips have been around for over 20 years, it's old tech that is being refined and tweaked therefore the R&D simply cannot be as high (at this point in time) as you indicate.

I also own my own business, marketing usually ends up being one of my biggest expenses.....

btw: I've got to run (taking the puppers for a walk and then to a park) but I've appreciated the discussion, keeps one on their toes and the mind sharp to be able to converse like this. You have a good day 





GSDElsa said:


> "The *ISO Conformant Full Duplex* type is the pet chip type with the most international acceptance, being common in many countries including those of Europe since the late 1990s, and now widely adopted in Canada. It is one of two chip protocol types (along with the "Half Duplex" type sometimes used in farm and ranch animals) which conform to International Organization for Standardization, or ISO, standards 11784 and 11785. To support international/multivendor application, each of these chips contains either a manufacturer code[6] (99 manufacturer codes from 900 to 998 are supported.) or a country code (Values below 900 are assigned as country codes.) along with its main identifying serial number.[Note 1] *In the U.S., the distributing organizations that introduced this type of pet chip have faced controversy. When 24PetWatch.com in 2003 and more famously **Banfield Pet Hospitals** in 2004 began distributing them, many shelter scanners in use couldn't read them.* (Some still can't; asking local shelters about this may be a good idea even today.) *At least one of the Banfield-chipped pets was discovered to have been needlessly euthanized,[7] *and Americans debated the cause. Specifically, did this happen because "foreign" chips were sold to unsuspecting pet owners, or because scanners which were passed off as a Shelter-Grade product couldn't cope with "internationally standardized" chips? Or maybe both?"
> 
> Granted, that is a wikipedia source (I'm really not going to put too much time into going to the primary sources in this instance), but as you see..the ISO chips were indeed distributed and implanted into dogs in the US without prior warning.
> 
> And the chip companies do indeed have to pour a good deal of money into a MEDICAL DEVICE that is going into the body. My husband is in regulatory controls/compliance to standards at a medical device company. Dogs and humans may be different, but yes, a significant amount of money goes into developing a new product that has that medical classification...whether or not the technology existeted previously or not.


----------



## Chicagocanine (Aug 7, 2008)

There are cities/states in the US that have laws or have tried to pass legislation requiring microchips to be mandatory for dogs (or in some cases for certain breeds of dogs.)

Examples:
Wichita City Council OKs changes in pit bull law | Local Government | Wichita Eagle
American Kennel Club - Mandatory Microchipping and Fees Proposed in Indiana
American Kennel Club - Riverside County Releases Details of Mandatory Spay/Neuter and Mandatory Microchip Ordinances
American Kennel Club - Indianapolis to Consider Mandatory Spay/Neuter and Mandatory Microchipping


----------



## Jessiewessie99 (Mar 6, 2009)

Would DNA tests be that accurate if they were mandatory? Maybe blood tests, but otherwise I don't see the use for DNA tests.


----------



## Montana Scout (Sep 27, 2010)

i called my animal control station and they told me they have a "universal" scanner that will scan every type of chip out there, even the european versions... ?? maybe she didn't know what she was talking about? or maybe there is an expensive scanner that will scan all the chips??


----------



## Jessiewessie99 (Mar 6, 2009)

My shelter won't put a dog or cat to sleep just because they can't find a chip. Chipped or not they will keep the dog for 10 days for the owner to come pick up. If the owner doesn't come within the 10 days, they will take the dog and evaluate it, give a good health check, and see if the dog can be adopted out. If the dog passes the assessment and health check up with flying colors the dog can go up for adoption. I believe my shelter also has a universal scanner so in case the dog has some other types of chips, they also check for tats and tags.

If the dog has some behavioral issues, or a medical issue, then they take care of it. They save euthanization as the last resort. But putting a dog down because it doesn't have a chip sounds kind of odd to me.


----------



## BlackPuppy (Mar 29, 2007)

Gwenhwyfair said:


> I'm not sure at what level microchipping is mandatory in the EU countries.


All dogs in the EU have an EU "Pet Passport" which contains all the dog's vaccination and disease-related history. The dog and the passport are linked together via the microchip number. The passport is required to travel between countries, so all dogs require a microchip. 

People in the U.S. like capitalism, this is what happens. Companies will do what they can to maximize profits. (I hope this doesn't violate the rules.) 

I work with company pension plans. I deal with thousands of pages of government regulations that had to be designed and implemented over the decades so that companies wouldn't screw their employees out of a pension by firing them the day before they worked their 30 years. This is not a problem in Europe.


----------



## Dainerra (Nov 14, 2003)

I still say that it is the owner's responsibility to research which company that they go with. Most places have universal scanners that will at the least say that a chip is present.


----------



## Jessiewessie99 (Mar 6, 2009)

Dainerra said:


> I still say that it is the owner's responsibility to research which company that they go with. Most places have universal scanners that will at the least say that a chip is present.


I agree.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

People have a false sense of security with tags as well.

Co-workers of mine lost their dog and a neighbor told them that another neighbor took it to the pound. The pound never called them even though the dog had tags on. 

They went to the pound and confronted them about it. 

The pound told them that they ONLY honor licenses. If the dog is not wearing a license, then they do not bother to call any numbers on any other tags. 

I guess that isn't in their job description, you know, to get a lost dog back to its owner. 

NEVER NEVER NEVER think your dog is safe. 

DO NOT CALL the pound and ask if they picked up or anyone brought in and German Shepherds. They tell you no, and then you walk back where the dogs are, and there are 2 or 3 sheps that weren't there two days ago.

Do not blame microchip companies for not keeping your dog safe. That is your job.


----------



## Olivers mama (Oct 13, 2010)

selzer - same thing happened to me years ago when I had 2 Irish Setters. Both with Rabies tags, ID tags & licenses. I returned from work & they were gone. I called 2 dog pounds & was told by both that there were no setters there. After a couple of days, I went to them. And there they were. How in he!! can you miss TWO big RED dogs?! And they still had their collars on...(this was in the days prior to microchips). Course, they sure got a lot more fees, too!

I (kind of) understand the whole my-vet-had-no-reason to chart the growling or tell the rescue people. On the other hand, NOT charting a menace growl puts the rest of us vet techs in potential harm's way. Many owners will ALWAYS find an excuse or reason why their dog growls. But a growl - in most cases - is a warning & the staff knows to be careful. As far as telling the rescue people, it probably was more the fact the dog hasn't been neutered yet. Since your vet believes your pup's "aggression" could be lessened by neutering, your vet won't give you a clean bill until the neutering has been done. But don't just blame the vet - the rescue people dropped the ball, too - they should've followed up with a personal visit.

And just because someone calls themselves a "behaviorist", doesn't mean they know anything more than the average vet. I know - we paid almost $3000 for 2 of these idiots for their "knowledge" & guess what - 1 had the auDACity to tell me our young GSD just "can't be trained". There's not a GSD alive that can't be trained & this woman is darn lucky I didn't belt her one...

OK - I'm done now!


----------



## Olivers mama (Oct 13, 2010)

I just realized the 2nd half of this message was meant for another post.

That's what I get for sneaking this in while at work & not wanting to get caught...


----------



## Chicagocanine (Aug 7, 2008)

selzer said:


> Co-workers of mine lost their dog and a neighbor told them that another neighbor took it to the pound. The pound never called them even though the dog had tags on.
> 
> They went to the pound and confronted them about it.
> 
> The pound told them that they ONLY honor licenses. If the dog is not wearing a license, then they do not bother to call any numbers on any other tags.


I know the pound here is like that too or at least they used to be... My family's dog when I was a kid was missing and ended up at the pound/animal control. She had ID, several old licenses and rabies tags on her collar but they never called us because her license was not up to date. We were calling around to all the shelters and we found out she had been taken there (the next step would have been driving around to all the shelters.)


----------



## Gwenhwyfair (Jul 27, 2010)

There are 'universal' scanners out there, often called 'black label' scanners.

Hopefully more shelters (and vets) will be getting them. 

In the meantime there is no scanner that reads 100% of the chips because some chips were designed, using encryption technology or use different frequencies and cannot be detected except by a very specific scanner. 






Montana Scout said:


> i called my animal control station and they told me they have a "universal" scanner that will scan every type of chip out there, even the european versions... ?? maybe she didn't know what she was talking about? or maybe there is an expensive scanner that will scan all the chips??


----------



## Gwenhwyfair (Jul 27, 2010)

Yup, my puppers has her passport. I also noted, while reading up on this topic that the chips are advertised and used for locating lost animals in the EU too.

In red, I've been sort of dancing around that too.....

btw: ISO compliance is kind of a pain, I had to deal with in the sat com company I worked for, when it comes to documentation. When it came to tech specs it actually is pretty handy and can streamline and help companies save money. So standardization, isn't a complete loss to profit margins...but attitudes often interfere with actual improvement...hence the reason I an now my own boss! 



BlackPuppy said:


> All dogs in the EU have an EU "Pet Passport" which contains all the dog's vaccination and disease-related history. The dog and the passport are linked together via the microchip number. The passport is required to travel between countries, so all dogs require a microchip.
> 
> People in the U.S. like capitalism, this is what happens. Companies will do what they can to maximize profits. (I hope this doesn't violate the rules.)
> 
> I work with company pension plans. I deal with thousands of pages of government regulations that had to be designed and implemented over the decades so that companies wouldn't screw their employees out of a pension by firing them the day before they worked their 30 years. This is not a problem in Europe.


----------



## Gwenhwyfair (Jul 27, 2010)

Dainerra said:


> I still say that it is the owner's responsibility to research which company that they go with. Most places have universal scanners that will at the least say that a chip is present.


I thought about how your director commented on the time it took to scan animals...I can see his point, especially if there is a mish-mash of chips/scanners and compatibility.

Agree that universal scanners are becoming more common, which is a good thing (and the shelters need to be using them.)

From reading the posts here and my own past experience most people get their info about chips from their vets. We often rely on vets to keep us informed, but remember the vets may not know or be invested in giving a broad range of options/info. It's like how the sell science diet, they get a cut, same with the microchips.

My problem (silly me :crazy: ) it's logical that microchips, in order to be as effective as possible be readable by any scanner. I applied this line of thought because the purpose of the microchip is to help lost pets be reunited with their owners not to gain the hugest amount of market share thereby creating a microchip monopoly FIRST. 

Unfortunately, you are correct, people need to research. We are living in an ever increasing 'consumer beware' society where the burden of proving a product will be safe or do what it is designed to do is being pushed on the purchaser (just look at all the problems with dog food the last few years for another example). Not a good trend.


----------



## Gwenhwyfair (Jul 27, 2010)

After all this (which has been interesting and I've learned some new info too  ) my plan of action is as follows-

Since my pup came with the chip I'm going to do what I _reasonably_ can to maximize it's effectiveness. Who knows, it may help someday. I never expected it to be the end all be all of her safety should she get lost or stolen so I will keep being the paranoid pet parent I am and never letting her out of my sight. Between that, her tags, her chip that's all one can do.

I am fortunate because I'm in the pet care business, work with some rescues, to have a platform with which to educate pet owners. I'm going to use the platform to warn people and help them research. 

As I've mentioned there a couple of companies who have wisely seen the benefit of what I would call 'open chip' technology. I'll research them some more to make sure and then should someone ask for a recommendation they can choose to reward the companies which have a healthier balance between saving pets and profit.

O.k. I feel better now (and I hope this thread has helped others too!). 

(p.s. mandatory chipping has been discussed, I don't know about that....whole 'nuther kettle of fish right there!)


----------



## Jessiewessie99 (Mar 6, 2009)

My previous 2 dogs got out on Xmas Eve night once and ended up at a Wal Mart in Paramount(pretty far for two 13 year old dogs.) Well, someone called the police about 2 "wild wolfish" looking dogs, my dogs were far from wild looking and were super sweet. So the cops came and saw that my dogs had tags, called SEACCA and they came and picked up the dogs. SEACCA called us the next morning and told us we could come pick up our dogs.

SEACCA is the animal control I mostly see driving around, and sometimes I see my shelter's animal control too. They patrol most of the cities around here. I guess we are just lucky.:shrug:


----------



## GSDElsa (Jul 22, 2009)

Gwenhwyfair said:


> There are 'universal' scanners out there, often called 'black label' scanners.
> 
> Hopefully more shelters (and vets) will be getting them.
> 
> In the meantime there is no scanner that reads 100% of the chips because some chips were designed, using encryption technology or use different frequencies and cannot be detected except by a very specific scanner.


Yet these ISO chips can be encrypted as well.

Pet Microchips ISO 15 digit for pets traveling to Europe dogs cats horses.


----------



## Montana Scout (Sep 27, 2010)

screw it... im gonna go and inject my dog with every chip known to man then get him tattoo'ed


----------



## Gwenhwyfair (Jul 27, 2010)

GSDElsa said:


> Yet these ISO chips can be encrypted as well.
> 
> Pet Microchips ISO 15 digit for pets traveling to Europe dogs cats horses.


That's interesting, but reading the link it's encrypted to be compatible?

from your link:

"made by Datamars of Switzerland, is a fifteen digit 134.2 kHz encrypted microchip that meets this ISO standard. As of new regulations promulgated in 2006, the ISO microchip became the standard for all of Europe. In addition, more than 20 other countries also require that your pet carry a microchip that meets the ISO standards, and this number is growing. "


----------



## Gwenhwyfair (Jul 27, 2010)

Montana Scout said:


> screw it... im gonna go and inject my dog with every chip known to man then get him tattoo'ed


hehehe.... 

(p.s. Think lo-jack for dogs!....)


----------

