Unfortunatly this isn't always true, and too often. My puppies were properly chipped with the ISO chips that CKC requires. When Kira went to CO, her new owner registered her chip. When she went to have it read, the vet couldn't find it with his scanner. Kept looking and looking. So she went to another vet. The vet tried his scanner. Couldn't find the chip anywhere. Tried a different scanner. Couldn't find the chip. Tried his third and last scanner -- Found the chip, but couldn't read it. Useless. She had the dog re-chipped.Originally Posted by luvofallhorses
In Tandem's case, the vet clinic filled out the paperwork wrong, so I don't have his chip #, therefore it can't be reg'd. Useless waste of money.I have no perm. identification for him now.
My friend in Belgian rescue has taken in one terv and three malinois in the last 5 years -- they were all chipped, but the shelters never bothered to check. Two of the chips were unreadable.
I also have a friend who went through nightmares trying to register a litter after using the wrong chips, and then chipping a puppy after it had already gone to it's new home. Took her two years of fighting and paying fines to sort it out.
That's why I like tattoos -- they are universal. As long as you go to a vet who can tattoo well, they should always be read by plain sight. Visa is 8.5 and her's is still dark and legible.
If someone is microchipping, I would use whatever chip most vets in the area use, that is compatible with most scanners in the area. If they're doing alot of traveling, I wouldn't rely on a chip if the dog was to be lost somewhere far from home. There are too many factors to microchips, scanners, whoever takes them in, etc etc. If you must chip, I'd chip AND tattoo. Especially if it happening when they're being altered, no reason not to do both since tattooing is so inexpensive.
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks