Wow. I hesitate to ask vets, on top of their myriad other duties, to act as mandatory reporters of non-matching chips. Especially so because I imagine that most of the time there's a non-matching chip, it's for a perfectly innocent reason. On the other hand, I can understand the impulse to ask.

Don't chips get "lost" fairly often? I take all my dogs in for an annual check-up. Reading this, it occurs to me that I should ask for them to be scanned at each checkup to make sure their chip is in working order. Or is it such a rare occurrence that one shouldn't bother?

Always ask to check the chip! It's a great way to make sure it hasn't migrated under the skin or that your dog has become too fat for it to be properly detected.

I believe that the animals should be checked for discks I am not a vet but have had many , especially dogs whom have had spesial needs. I woried the 1 time my shorty had gotten lose for a week and didn't come home. I was pulling my hair out and getting no sleep with all the rest i had to take care of.BY the grace of God I bumed into a friend and Shorty was in her yard. Any way there are many pet owners who would feel as i did that week. Y es i truly believe in scanin pets when they come in for a visit if no proof of owner ship is shown or is not already known with these owners.Scincerely Doreen

I work in the medical field and whenever we give a medication or treatment, we look at the patient's hospital bracelet and then ask him or her to tell us their name and date of birth before proceeding. This helps prevent med errors. A similar thing could be done with pets when they are brought in to the vet, providing they have been microchipped. The chip number should be on the pet's chart. Scan the chip, and ask the owner to give you the pet's name and identify himself or herself. I know there are considerations, such as if a person has to give up his or her pet, but a responsible pet owner would be glad to go through proper paperwork to transfer guardianship to the new pet parent.

The problem here, as in the regular checking of microchips, is that microchip usage is still spotty. At least where I live. One more thing to ask. One more box to check. Perhaps we should be kore proactive about including microchip numbers into all our patients' medical records at an easy to access location. We don't do that hut I'm starting to think we should.

Ack! Typos! Sorry.

I'm going to talk to my veterinarian this week about this... I want to know what HIS stance is on the subject!!

Thanks for bringing it to my attention.

My vet always scans for a chip each and every time a new animal is brought in for anything - even existing clients bringing in a new pet. New clients have to show an ID, complete with address and any chip information is verified against this info.

I have four dogs of my own and working in rescue, even a foster is always scanned. I've been a client for over 20 years and I appreciate the vigilance of my vet office staff. I also have my dogs chips checked every year to assure they're readable with the correct info.

While I agree with the intention of scanning pets in case they are lost, how many instances would there be of registries that simply haven't been updated with the new owners information?

What would a vet be required to do if the pet's chip information didn't match the person bring them to the clinic? How many instances would there be of someone being falsely accused?

On the other side of the coin, my critters are all chipped and registry information is current. Should something terrible happen, I'd surely hope that my critter was found, scanned and returned.

What's the answer? I'll be curious to read further comments on this.

I don't know about you, Dr. K, but whenever we have someone bring in a dog they found to be scanned and we find a chip, it is really darn onerous to get that information. We often wind up being turfed between 2-3 different services trying to find the place where the chip is registered, resulting in 15-30 minutes on the phone depending on how much hold time there is. We scan new pets to get the number in the chart and generally ask the owner if they are aware the dog was microchipped. We typically only pursue finding the owner information if the client then tells us that they found the dog or some other circumstance that makes us suspicious. Many is the shelter dog or breeder-purchased dog that is chipped without the new owner realizing it (usually because they don't pay attention to the instructions to change the registration). Between hold times and then calling the people listed and sorting out all those owners who just never bothered to update a chip, I'd anticipate an additional 30 minutes on average if we scanned and verified every chip.

It all comes back to making the companies play nice in the sandbox and creating a centralized registry that is easily computer searchable for vets and easily updated for owners. Even then, I anticipate a lot of hassle with those people who never bothered to update their information. Maybe we could also make it easy to flag the file with a "LOST" or "STOLEN" tag so that it doesnt suddenly become incumbent on vets to spend more than a few minutes verifying. Then we can do our real jobs of keeping these guys healthy rather than playing pet police.

For your consideration, one of our clients found a dog a little over a year ago that was chipped. We spent a month calling the phone numbers, leaving messages, and sending a certified letter and the registered owner on the chip never responded. As far as I'm concerned, this is now my client's dog, but the chip will forever read with the old information. Should she ever move, if the new vet is verifying chips, she would have the police called on her! It's rightly difficult to have a chip registration changed without the prior owner's permission, but where does that leave the people who FIND these dogs with lapsed registration and care for them for the rest of their lives?

Do auto shops call the DMV every time they get in a car to verify that the VIN is registered to the person bringing it in? Not judging by how often my husband (whose name I did not take so appears completely unrelated to me) brings my car in for service. I don't think they typically card me, either, to verify that I'm the registered owner. I don't have any kids, but I suspect it's the same with pediatricians. I'm willing to bet they don't make you bring in the birth certificate with ID and cross-reference the kid's footprint from the hospital to make sure this is the kid that you're supposed to be bringing in.

In the end, yes it would be nice if microchips helped you find your stolen pet, but that's not what they're designed to do. They're designed to help you find your LOST pet. If your pet is stolen you may be out of luck unless the thief is pretty dumb, but at the very least if you manage to locate him you will have a much easier time providing identity and ownership if he is chipped. The flyer Dr. K received is a good idea if you suspect your dog is stolen, and I think your best bet for recovery of the dog: inform vets in the area to look out for a dog of this description and scan. I'd be more than happy to act in this capacity, but to verify each and every chip? More headaches lie in this direction than it's worth, for everyone involved. Far more innocent owners would deal with the hassle of being accused of theft than truly stolen dogs would be saved.

You bring up some great points about problems with the microchip system. There are multiple chips, multiple readers and no plans AFAIK to come up with one reader for different chips. Many shelters use microchips, but when their ACME scanner fails to pick up the chip from another manufacturer, they sometimes assume that the dog is not microchipped.
No one microchips pets out here in rural Kansas, my vet said not enough people would use it, and he doesn't want the added expense. Itr's an added layer of protection I would love to have for my animals, but another one of those things that I'll have to wait for, I guess.
Considering the amount of cattle and horses stolen out here, we should be looking into microchipping them!

Actually, there IS a scanner that will read all types of microchips. When I co-founded a non-profit rescue some years back, we were given one by the manufacturer. (We even notified the local shelters, and they each got one free.) The scanner has successfully read every type of chip. I don't recall the manufacturer, but if you're interested, contact me and I'll see if I can get that information for you. You can find my contact info on my website. Just do a search for Angel Pet Sitters.

Cattle and horses are also being microchipped these days. It's not as common as with household pets, but it is done, and is gaining popularity.

Yes, I'd be surprised if the livestock (esp any valuable ones) are not microchipped. Many farmers order their own microchips and put them in themselves - not something I'd recommend but you might be able to purchase a chip from AVID and bring it to your vet. Or, contact a local horse vet and see if they'd chip your dog.

Auto shops - poor analogy - in my county the police distribute a list of the VIN numbers of stolen cars to auto shops and the mechanics are supposed to check the VIN numbers against cars brought in in suspicious circumstances. The police also distribute license plate info and descriptions of cars involved in hit and run situations to mechanics. We had an instance where a boy was killed by a hit and run driver driving a Mercedes and the car description was distributed to body shops and the dentist who had fled the scene was arrested when he turned his car in for a repair. The child's tennis shoe was jammed under his front bumper.

Fair enough, but that is more akin to what Dr. K's colleague is doing by distributing the information to local vets, which I am all for. Sure, look for matching descriptions an then check those. It's not the same as running every chip for every pet to make sure they're brought in by the right owner.

I'd LOVE a centralized database of stolen and lost pets. We do scan each pet, we just don't verify ownership.

I would think that everyone that owns a dog or cat has a paper trail of records. If a new patient comes in and the owner is vague about what shots the pet has had then that would send a red flag up for me that something is up. Before my Mom passed away I was pretty much living in two places and felt the need on several occasions to use the vet in her area. On the one time I forgot her papers the receptionist called my regular office to confirm information. Not sure if it is common everywhere but our vet now provides bar code tags with photo for my key tag that contains her information. If that were tied in to the chip with a GPS then maybe thieves would think twice before taking our prescious pets. I think technology will win if we demand it. Honest pet owners won't mind being challenged. We have ID and the pet ID must match. Thanks for giving your excellent review of a very important issue.

Scanning for a microchip should be part of the procedure, just like putting the pet on the scale when they walk through the door. It could not only locate lost or stolen pets, but could alert an owner to the fact that their microchip has moved or popped out (rare, but not known). Yes, there will be instances where the chip was never registered and that is a signal that the person who previously owned the dog doesn’t have all that much interest in getting it back, or could alert the owner that they need to take that next step and register the chip, or take the steps necessary to change it to their name. The AAHA provides a website that will identify the last registry where the chip information was updated. http://www.petmicrochiplookup.org/Default.aspx

If you've ever watched CSI, Law & Order or any cops 'n' robbers reality show, you've seen how frustrated the police become when they find fingerprints or DNA at a crime scene with no match in the databases. Same situation here, with the additional handicap of no easily accessible database to search.

Why not on new patients ? Good way to sell the Chip, IF THEY DO NOT HAVE ONE. When a pup or cat is found hurt, Some careing Person brings them in, I would Think it the best way to get paid....WHAT is the cost, to scan a Chip ? I would think it would make Pet-Parents feel, like, my Pet-Doctor really cares.

I am a Dog Control Officer. I've discovered the best use for microchips is for when your dog is impounded, or injured while it is roaming. This enables the officer / or staff member to locate an owner. But only if the owner keeps the information up to date.
I've come across two situations where a microchipped dog has been reported stolen to me. I've learned that the law enforcment isn't really interested unless the owner can prove that it isn't a civil matter (which was the situation in both my cases) Then you're on your own.
If a dog has a dog license, and a microchip - the microchip shows that the dog was stolen, the case turns out to be one of those "civil matters", the dog will be released to the person who the license is registered to. The rest will be dealt with in court between the two parties.
While we believe placing all this identification on/in our pets protects them and guarantees we'll get them back - I say it depends on the whole situation.

By virtue of the fact that Veterinarians are selling and installing the microchip product, isn't it implied that the system in place includes that the Veterinarians participation that pets are scanned and the product works for identification?

After all, why bother purchasing the product if the liability ends right after installation? I was also under the impression that Animal Control Officers, shelters, and most, if not all Vet clinics were provided with "universal scanners".

If this is mostly untrue, why should the typical pet-owner purchase this product at all? "Breeders" are using this system in lieu of the permanent tattoo, but for an entirely different reason than "lost or stolen" per AKC regulations.

YES. Vets sell chips, so why not support the process they are selling?

Have the office staff scan and record the chip # and registry of each patient. Vets might post a large message on a bulletin board suggesting a flyer with photo of a lost animal with the chip # and registry be distributed to shelters and vets if the pet is lost.

The lost pet flyer could be posted where only staff would see it. Staff could be trained to always watch for these pets. Many vets take photos of each patient, and that photo appears on all invoices, so comparing this photo with the flyer could be an easy task. The registry could then be contacted via a phone not visible to the person who brought the animal in to check ownership and alert rightful owner.

Perhaps there is an issue of revealing the name, address, and phone # of the individual(s) who brought the animal in... Perhaps the person/people could be detained in an exam room waiting for the vet while the registry contacts the animal's owner to see if they could come identify their pet. Perhaps the vet could ask the person/people where they got their pet as a matter of routine questions..... If they say they found it, perhaps a discussion about what they would do if the rightful owner could be located.....

There must be enough brain cells here to figure out a way to get this animal back to its rightful owner.

If a vet is not willing to participate in the process of getting a pet back to its rightful owner/family, they should not dupe their clients by selling them just for the income.

That said, let me tell a story of how a chip worked! YEAH. I went to Home Depot early on a Sunday morning only to realize I was an hour early as the open later on Sundays. There was one other customer in the parking lot (who, apparently, made the same mistake) and a dog running around. We both got out of our cars and called the dog. The dog was wearing a collar with an ID tag with a disconnected phone # and an AVID chip tag. I took the dog home, called AVID, and within a hour, a 10 year old girl and her Dad were at my doorstep to retrieve their dog. They had moved and hadn't gotten a new ID tag yet, but had changed their info with AVID. It felt wonderful to see the joy on this little girl's face to get her dog back!

There are very legitimate reasons why the information on a dog's microchip wouldn't match the owner. Some breeders and rescues get the dog chipped with their information, especially if they have clauses to get the dogs back for various reasons.

As someone posted above, the fact that it's a bureaucratic nightmare to sort through this when you call the companies is terrible.

As a shelter worker, i would love to hear that local vets are scanning new clients for chips. I feel it could be a really easy part of the first visit:

Vet asks client where they got the pet
Vet Scans pet
If chip comes up, vet asks client if they knew the pet was microchipped

I feel that the answers to the above questions can help the clinic determine how to proceed. Such as, if they found the pet stray, well, better call on that chip. But if they got the pet from a rescue or a person (and the chip info matches), then probably ok to proceed

Honestly, if vets just scanned new clients that the owner found stray, i'd be happy with that.

It has been years back. We were visiting Family in Texas, Someone, did not close the gate, our 16 year old Pet-kid. Got out we were sick, sending out search parties out. I went into the house to call Vets. Shelters you name it.Our Doc was calling to tell me were to go get Suki. God Bless Doc. and this Lady, She saw our old Baby going down a 4 way highway and stop, took Suki to her Pet-Doctor. On Suki Tag was our Pet-Doctors Clinic name and phone number.....Yep we have the chips now, But we have lost a lot of our careing People. Folks this is so sad.

Dr. Khuly, First, let me thank you for writing an article regarding the e-mail I sent you. And, please, don't feel that you were curt in your reply. The fact that you read and considered what I had to say makes a difference. The fact that you brought this to the attention of your readers (even though you'd written about this previously), is commendable. I feel that this is an important issue, since I've been involved in rescue in the past and because I am a professional pet sitter who cares a great deal for the pets my company cares for.

I understand that vets already have quite a few things to be responsible for when providing care for the pets that are taken in for treatment, and none of us would want that care to be given any less attention. But, at the same time, as a previous commenter or two has suggested, vets promote the use of microchips and sell them, so I feel that they should incorporate the scanning of all pets as part of their service--particularly since many of the pets they care for have microchips that they (the vet) implanted.

I realize that providing this extra service involves additional man hours. I wouldn't advocate holding a pet owner in order to check the microchip registration. I would, however, humbly suggest that the microchip number be written down in the client/patient's file and a clerk later look up the registration information. If there is a discrepancy, the matter can be dealt with later, since you'll no doubt have the client's name, address, and other contact information, should you need to contact them.

I feel that the microchip registration services should be the ones to do the necessary research to find a pet's owner. We all know that pet owners don't always remember to change the microchip registration when they move, or if they find a new home for their pet. But, someone has to be responsible for keeping up with this information, if microchips are going to be the beneficial tools that manufacturers have touted them to be.

Granted, even with the best of intentions on the part of manufacturer/registration service, pet owner, and vet (or shelter), there will be instances when the pet's original owner simply cannot be traced. This could be due to the owner having been deceased, moved away, suffered a tragedy, etc. In those cases, it is important to be able to communicate with the microchip registration service to explain the situation, possibly fill out a waiver of some sort, and have the pet re-registered with the NEW owner's information. (This provided due diligence has been done on the part of everyone involved, to find the original owner.)

Microchips are a wonderful means of identification. All of my pets are microchipped. But, what earthly good is there in microchipping pets, if only shelters are scanning them? If one of my pets (heaven forbid) were to be stolen, what hope would I have of her being returned, knowing the only instance she *might* be found and identified is if she were taken to a shelter (where it is required that they scan ALL animals--at least, in the area I live in). There's no use spending good money on an identification system if it's not monitored. I might as well just hope that my dogs' collars stay on them, so that someone might read their tags. Collars and tags are a lot less expensive than microchips, and lot more effective, if no one is scanning the microchips.

Finally, I don't mean to put this responsibility on vets alone. If someone should find a pet, PLEASE take the pet to a shelter or vet and ask to have the pet scanned before you decide to make him/her your own. Someone could be searching frantically for their beloved pet. Since I brought this up to Dr. Khuly, I've made a decision to require all of my clients to provide me with their pets' microchip registration information (something I didn't require previously). I'm also going to send out quarterly notices to clients, reminding the to check their pets' microchip registration information and UPDATE it if they've moved or if any of their contact information has changed. We can ALL have a hand in ensuring that pets can be returned to their homes if they are lost or stolen...

I'm all for scanning for a chip at the vets office. All my dogs and cats are chipped, and every year when they have their annual check up, I ask for the chipped to be checked.
BUT, if there's not a national registry that can be easily accessed for ALL manufacturers chips, I can can see this being onerous to check rightful ownership.
I think it's important to note that this probably doesn't need to take the doctor's time, but can be done by support staff.

Last but not least, I am surprised how many people are happy that shelter pets get chipped before adoption, but never change the registration! Personally, I'd like a GPS on my dog!

>>someone has to be responsible for keeping up with this information, if microchips are going to be the beneficial tools that manufacturers have touted them to be.>>

Yes. That someone is the owner.

I think it's reasonable for owners who elect to have their veterinarian microchip a pet to be walked through the registration process, and be educated re: maintaining updated information with the database. I think it's reasonable for veterinarians to scan all new patients for a microchip and record the number in the medical record. I think it's a great idea to scan every chipped animal on a regular basis, to ensure the chip hasn't migrated. I also think it's a great idea to educate the owner at this time: has the owner checked recently with the microchip company, to ensure the information is up-to-date?

But it is NOT reasonable to expect the veterinarian or a "clerk" to chase down every unknown chip, in the absence of a lost dog alert such as the one Dr. Khuly described. Wikith described the procedure above at his/her very conscientious practice; most of the "unknowns" are still registered to the breeder or pet store.

I don't call the Jockey Club every time I see a new (tattooed) Thoroughbred. I do have the contact information for the Jockey Club available, though.

Equine DVM, do you have to compare the tattoo against any kind of database as a matter of course, or do you just assume the horse rightfully belongs to the owner?

If a Thoroughbred is on the farm, I assume it belongs to the owner, same as any random, non-Thoroughbred riding horse with no tattoo. I always check for a tattoo and note it in the medical record; the first letter denotes the DOB. Most tattoos are legible, but a few are impossible to decipher, even with the horse's papers in hand. The quality of the tattoo is affected by its age, the horse's pigment, and the skill of the official tattoo technician (not a veterinarian).

If a Thoroughbred is at the racetrack, an official racetrack employee (the identifier) checks each horse's tattoo vs. the daily official list of tattoos. Additionally, it's the trainer's responsibility to present the correct horse for treatment (with Lasix, for example) or pre-race examination by the commission veterinarians (who also carry a daily tattoo list). Horse theft on modern U.S. racetracks is virtually unknown, unless a horse leaves the racetrack.

If I were a horse rustler, I'd choose a horse without tattoos or brands. There are plenty of those.

Thank you for that very thorough explanation, I appreciate it.

Years ago a large and arguably "scary" looking dog wandered into my front yard on more than a couple of days; he had no collar at all and was thirsty and dirty. The third time it happened I took him in, bathed him and fed him and took him to my vet the next day. He had two bad ear infections and to me looked neglected. He had a chip, but my vet agreed with me that we would not try to find the owner since the owner appeared neglectful (or worse). I have had that dog for almost 12 years now and he probably has the best disposition (with people and other pets) of any dog I've ever had. I shudder to think what would have happened to him had the vet pursued the microchip!

I understand the reasoning, but you still technically stole someone's pet. It is easy to pass judgment and think he was neglected, but you don't know the whole story. I've had 2 cats that got out due to my husband, and if they were outside for a long time, they could have got into all kinds of situations that would have made them look "neglected" I had them both chipped and would have appreciated if someone found them and tried to contact me. But I'll never know what happened to them. :(

I was trying to be brief. I stole nothing; i rescued a life. I left out, to be brief, the fact that a few of my neighbors knew the owners (from several blocks away) and the owners could not or would not take secure their dog. my neighbors had seen the dog out repeatedly. And there is no justification whatsoever for the ear infections. If animal services had take this dog, it would have been destroyed in all likelihood. And why was there no collar (ever) and no tag on any occasion when I or anyone else saw the dog?

You seem to be contradicting yourself here...if your neighbors knew the owners, then your vet didn't need to scan the dog for a microchip, so why even bring it up? I really get the impression that you're simply trying to justify what you did, and your last comment was just a means to do that. There is no justifiable excuse for not attempting to find the dog's original owner. For all you know, the "neighbor down the street" from whom you say the dog kept escaping, was not even the original owner. That could have been why the dog was trying to escape. By not scanning the microchip to find out for sure, you may have actually taken someone else's dog.

Having worked in rescue, I cannot tell you how many times I've haard folks claim that they "rescued" a dog, when in truth, they took/stole a dog. Well-meaning or not, they had no right. If a dog is being neglected and one thinks they know the owner, why not approach the owner with an offer to give the dog a better home? That would be the ethical way to handle the situation. It's cowardly to simply take someone's pet and then proclaim that you'd done the "right thing".

talk about reading what you want to into a few posts!! This is why my sympathies are with Dr. Khuly. I don'teed to respond but i found out that some neighbors knew the owner later. the owner (ok purported owner) never put up signs around the neighborhood. This dog more likely than not would have met a sad end but for my and my vet's actions--be real. one wonders wether the people so upset about my so horrible actions don't have their own particular set of guilt feelings....

I hope I'm misreading things.

Are you seriously going so far as to accuse those who question the ethics of the manner in which you handled things of abusing animals?

yes, of course, you are misreading....

This obviously will vary from local to local. In my county if you take in a dog that is a stray by law you turn it into Animal Control so the legal owners have a chance to reclaim it in 5 days. However if you want to own the dog then you fill out paperwork to reclaim it if the owners do not bother to pick it up. Then at the end of the reclaim period you go and pay a modest $5 a day boarding fee on the dog and Animal Control gives it to you and because it has been processed through a agency of the county government the dog is legally yours. Even if the former owners discovered you had the dog at a later date they would have no right to reclaim it.

So in a circumstance such as you describe it is worth while checking into your local laws.

Also it may well be that the chip was from a shelter or a rescue and that if that was the case the rescue's policy could be one where the dog would become yours if you showed neglect (letting a dog run loose can be argued to be neglect in many circumstances) on the part of the former owner.

I don't condone making the assumption that the owner of the dog you found was "neglectful". You have no idea where the dog had been prior to your finding him. He might have escaped the owner's fenced yard and become lost, fending for himself for a long period of time (hence his condition). It's never right to assume things--best to confirm. If you had contacted the original owner and found that the dog had truly been neglected, then the owner would likely have simply granted you permission to keep the dog--neglectful owners aren't normally the type to fight for ownership of a pet. But, what if the dog came from a loving family and had simply suffered a mishap? What if he had been stolen, then abandoned? What if the family who owned him suffered a hardship and were somehow separated from their pet, as many owners were during Katrina? It was not your choice to make the decision to keep the dog without at least attempting to contact the owner, and I find it hard to believe that a vet would agree with you.

Put yourself in the position of the owner of the dog you took in. What if something horrible happened to one of your pets and he/she disappeared? How would you feel if he/she suffered through months of torment, not having a home, surviving on scraps, enduring the weather, not being groomed? What if at that point in time someone found your pet and decided you were obviously a terrible pet owner, because they found your pet in horrendous condition? What if they kept your pet, without giving you a chance to explain the situation? I always try to consider how I would want someone to behave in a situation before I make the decision to act. I hope you never lose a pet and have someone assume you aren't a responsible pet owner, and thus decide to keep your pet.

you are indeed presumptuous. I have in the last 3 years alone take in no less than 4 lost dogs and bent over backwards to find their owners--each time with success. I know a victim of neglect (or worse) from a stray. And don't assume the owner who neglects his dog or abuses it will willingly give it up...

I didn't say that the person who neglects their dog will absolutely agree to give him/her up. But, in 8 out of 10 times that I've approached someone with a pet that wasn't being cared for properly, the owner was agreeable to allowing the pet to be placed. It's not always an easy decision, of course. Some may simply not have the funds to care for their pets properly. But, *most* neglectful owners (I've found, from experience) fall into one of two groups: a) the owner who really doesn't want to ahve the pet anyway, or b) the owner who loves the pet and wants to care for the pet properly, but doesn't have the means. For owners falling in category "b", the first course of action is to try to help them find a way to provide the care their pet needs, because they obviously love the pet and aren't being purposely neglectful. But, in the case of the category "a" owners, a pet is just another mouth to feed, an expense, and they'd just as soon not be burdened.

I agree amirek: Pets can wander aimlessly for month's surviving on their own resources getting pretty bedraggled in the process.A co-worker "lost" her cat in her apartment complex for nearly 6 mos. before she finally was "found" skinny and loaded with fleas, burrs, etc. She immediately got her vet attention and made provisions to prevent future escape via apartment balcony.

Also, some pet-owners are pretty lax with grooming, doing a semi-annual shave-down, yet are oblivious but do care about their pets and even may seek treatment for "years" for chronic ear infections.

Just another viewpoint.

"If you had contacted the original owner and found that the dog had truly been neglected, then the owner would likely have simply granted you permission to keep the dog--neglectful owners aren't normally the type to fight for ownership of a pet."

........Been on both sides of the fence on this issue As for the above comment, I disagree. Lots of owners who give not two toots about their pets will suddenly not want to give them up if you show any interest. Still don't care about them, but they're mine mine mine.

I am glad you described it this way, Cathy. This particular thread of the conversation reminded me of a story I read a couple of weeks ago about a dog in Georgia: Help needed for dog in the box in Georgia

A rescue organization tried to step in to get the dog placed in a better place, but with no luck. Even with petitions and a huge outpouring of concern, medical tests that have shown that Alice (the dog) has heartworms, no treatment has been given, and the owner shows no concern for her health - nor do the authorities who could change Alice's conditions.

Under these circumstances - the owners clearly refuse to give the dog up, which some might see as them "wanting" the dog - wouldn't "stealing" the dog be a forgivable offense?

Just my three-cents.

If it shows up on my property repeatedly without collars, tags, or a microchip, especially if it's intact...I'm calling it a stray, and I'm pretty sure the law will back me up.

If I feel so inclined, I will attempt to find the owner (animals that are tagged, collared, or microchipped obviously will go back to the owner if I can locate them, or to the shelter if I can't, which is where most owners would start looking for a lost pet).

If the animal has no ID whatsoever and I don't feel like spending my time looking for an owner, and for whatever reason decide against taking it to the shelter, then I'll spay/neuter it, screen it for disesase, vaccinate it, and adopt it out.

Maybe some consider that "stealing" a pet. I don't, and I feel no guilt whatsoever.

I am a dog breeder and a serious fancier and I am the local rescue contact for my dog breed in our dog breed club. Microchips are useful for individual identification of dogs, especially in breeds where dogs are very similar in appearance. Provided one has a scanner that reads the chips, scanning is much easier than trying to roll a dog that does not know you over in order to look for a tattoo.

Never the less we have a couple of major problems with micro-chips. The first one is that different manufactures make chips that cannot be read by other manufacturer's scanners. This is not a problem in European countries where there are national rules governing the chipping of animals for identification and encrypted chips are not recognized as legitimate for identification. However in the US we rarely have state wide or national regulations to standardize chips and chip readers. In my county in Maryland our local animal control records chip numbers for licensed pets at the time of licensure or adoption. Each truck carries a chip reader and if a dog is picked up by animal control reading of the chip is attempted and if the dog is not too far from its home the animal control officer goes to the dog's home and will return the dog along with a ticket which is the fine for the dog being loose. This saves the county a lot of money as the impoundment of an accidental stray is expensive.

However there are currently 7 trucks in our fleet and each one has to have a chip reader and only Avid has provided free chip readers to the county. They read the Avid chip (which is encrypted), the Avid Eurochip (which is not encrypted) and the Home Again Chip (which is not encrypted).

Unfortunately a number of veterinary practices in our country and adjacent counties are selling chips such as the AKC's Trovan chip which are invisible to the Avid chip readers. The vets do not know that the county shelters cannot detect these chips.

I have called the AKC Companion Animal Recovery people to see if I could get them to donate 7 of the universal readers they sell to Animal Control. Their readers read the Avid chips, the Home Again Chips, the Trovans and other of the higher frequency chips (such as Crystal Tag) that are needed for international identification of shipped pets.

Then there is the problem of conflicting registries for chips. AKC CAR will register anything that is used to ID an animal - chip or tattoo regardless of manufacturer. The AKC also provides a one time charge at the time you send in your application papers for AKC registry to register this ID number. So when I sell a puppy or adult I have the new buyer add this charge and information as part of the registration process.

Avid sells the chips in bulk registered to the bulk buyer. So in theory contacting Avid about a chip will give you the contact info for the shelter that implanted the chip in a dog or cat or the breeder who bought bulk chips or the vet who bought bulk chips or the individual who registered the dog/cat after acquiring it.

Home Again has an additional service should the owner care to pay annually for it where there is an insurance policy attached to the chip and if the dog is found and taken to a vet - any vet expenses are paid out of that policy for the care of the dog until it is returned to the owner.

The second big problem with chips is that they do migrate (the Home Agains less than some of the others) and they do get lost out of the dog. So a routine part of a vet exam on pets known to be chipped should be confirmation that the chip is still present.

As to the labor of reading chips. Well many of the veterinary practices I know of charge a substantial fee over the cost of the chip to insert it, some of them collect the registration fee at the time of insertion and actually send the fee to the registry maintained by the manufacturer.

The some of the high quality chip readers can be hooked up to a computer via USB cable and can dump the chip number into the computer and if a client has paid to have the dog chipped the chip number should certainly be in the dog's computerized record and decent record maintaining software should allow the dog to be looked up via the chip number so that searching one's database for the chip should not be an onerous task for a vet practice that is actively promoting chips.

Another rapid way of making a quick record for later use of the chip number is to use one's cell phone to take a picture of the result of the chip reader's scan. Photo capable cell phones can be used as instant note books for a lot of different things. The plate number on a car that hit yours, a product label, a dog tag on a dog you just found, etc. Later on you can transcribe the information.

As far as the serious pet owner is concerned - microchips can be registered online with a credit card. I suggest to my puppy buyers that they register with AKC CAR and then if the pet is lost/stolen call or go on line for the other chip registries and register the pet's chip ID.

I am going to do a part II of this essay and put together contact info for the national chip registries as it should be a useful reference.

Vet's should remember that many people searching for a lost pet are offering often substantial rewards so that time spent on chip ID for a stray may result in payment for labor. If you only help recover one dog with a $1000 reward that can still help pay for labor on the dogs that turn out not to have owners searching for them. In addition there is the Home Again insurance policy payout if it is Home Again and annually registered.

Finally as to this matter of not searching for an owner because the finder judges the dog to be in a "neglected state". A lot of times a strayed dog will have been on its own for quite a while and of course it will be neglected. It may be a long way from home, either because it was stolen, transported and later escaped, or because it traveled a long distance. I have helped return stolen dogs that were found as much as a year later and 500 miles from home.

We had a case here that went to court and was found in favor of the owner where a local vet who heavily promotes chipping his clients was presented with a dog that was actually one of his clients. But the dog was brought in by a rescue group for castration as a homeless stray. The dog was a show dog that had been taken from its owner a month before and apparently got away and then went way down in condition while being a stray. The owner had been broadcasting his reward and actively advertising for the return of the dog, including to the dog's vet.

The vet did not scan the dog for a chip. The vet castrated the dog and gave it back to the rescue. The rescue placed the dog. The new owner's vet discovered the chip and the former owner was contacted. The former owner found out that the dog had been present at his vet's and no attempt to scan the chip had been made. The vet claimed that HEPA privacy laws in relation to the person presenting the dog for treatment would have prevented him from contacting the former owner about the do so that was why he did not scan dogs brought in by rescues.

It went to court. HEPA privacy laws DO NOT apply to veterinary practices nationally. In Maryland vets are agents of the state in relation to things such as reporting the status of rabies in a client dog so they cannot refuse to reveal health related matter about client pets when these matters may impact on third parties.

I have a personal friend who was the lawyer representing the rescue. The case was complicated and parts of it were found in favor of the original owner. Maryland law mandates a maximum damage of $5000 in relation to injury or death of a pet and nothing for "mental suffering". The dog in question was an import from country of origin and cost the owner a lot more than $5000.

So these things are complicated.

Before people become to eager to blame the owner for allowing a pet to get loose it is necessary to remember that even the most paranoid owners are really only a severe windstorm or a careless visitor away from having pets get loose.

I have automatic door closers on all my doors that do not open into a fenced yard and I have padlocked chains on my gates that could be accidentally opened by a visitor and we had the utility company install the kind of meters that can be read remotely without the meter reader having to come into the yard. But a lot of people do not think of those things and people who have children going in and out of their homes and yards are quite likely to have doors and gates left open occasionally.

Much to think about here. I would only add that it's the HIPAA laws that apply to human medical information, and you are right that they clearly do not apply to veterinary practices:
http://www.hhs.gov/ocr/privacy/hipaa/understanding/coveredentities/index.html

Whether veterinary practices in particular states are bound by state privacy laws, I do not know.

As another commentator mentioned:

There is a more or less "universal" microchip lookup site which is maintained by the American Animal Hospital Association:

http://www.petmicrochiplookup.org/Default.aspx

I went there and entered the chip number for one of my recently registered with the AKC CAR dogs and came up with an "unregistered chip" report. So I went to the AKC CAR site:

http://www.akccar.org/

and called the non-emergency 800 number. I was speaking to a real person within 1 minute and she entered my chip number in her db. It did not come up so I gave the AKC registration number for my dog and we discovered that a typo had been made in entering the chip number HB5... instead of 4B5... so that was corrected in her db and almost immediately the chip number came up with contact AKC CAR when I revisited the AAHA chip lookup site. I was also told that if I had tried to look the chip up with Home Again and the chip was not registered with them - then Home Again would have searched the AKC CAR registry also.

So one task I have is to check my microchips on line and make sure that they are in the databases correctly.

Also Fido Finder (http://www.fidofinder.com) is a good resource for trying to return a lost pet. The Norwegian Elkhound I returned to its owner in Connecticut was advertised on Dog Detective dot com which has become Fido Finder dot com.

www.petmicrochiplookup.org does not recognize Avid microchips. Just fyi. I confirmed this with Avid, too.

Here is a list of websites relating to microchip identification and microchip technologies I have put together.

http://www.jeteye.com/jetpak/f3a37800-d751-47df-8bee-ed93c7917dee/

JetEye is a useful tool for accumulating online references

Thanks so much, this is great! Also, thanks for the tip on JetEye, too!

AVID maintains a "Hot List" of animals that are missing.

When a foster dog fled from my neighbors' excessive discharge of ordnance last year, I called AVID and gave them his number.

They correctly matched the unregistered number to the county where he had been seized in a cruelty case, and added it to the "Hot List" of missing dogs, adding my contact info. They didn't give me any snark about the chip not being registered (which it wasn't because the dog was in transition.)

So if you have an AVID chip in your animal, call them if the animal is missing and make sure they have the most up-to-date contact info. You can add an additional cell phone number or whatever is relevant as you search for your animal.

If you have a different chip, find out if the chip maker maintains a hot list, and if not, why not.

I think vets should just routinely scan each new patient. Sometimes owners who adopt from a shelter or buy from a puppymill outlet don't even know about the chip. (Hunte et. al. use the chips as SKU numbers to track merchandise, natch. I've traced a found beagle from wholesaler to pet store to owner via his implanted SKU) If the vet records it in the animal's health record, then they have the ability to provide that number if the pet is ever lost.

And if there is anything at all fishy about the client/pet/story, just check the chip. It takes a few minutes for a tech or receptionist to call it in.

A vet in a nearby town ended up in trouble. Apparently there is a law allowing a vet to euthanize an old dog turned in as a stray when it is diseased. The vet does not have to turn the dog in to animal control.

Bad law. Anyway, a woman brought a dog to the vet saying it was in her yard and was a stray. The dog had been operated on and was obviously a very old Golden. The vet took the dog and euthanized it. Then reported the matter to animal control.

A man came home from work and went to get his dog from the back yard and it was missing. He called animal control describing the dog and said the dog had recently been operated on, the dog was an elderly Golden Retriever missing from his fenced yard. Animal Control retrieved the dog's body from the vet and scanned the dog. It had the correct microchip. They IDed the dog as belonging to the man. The vet said she scanned the dog and could not find a microchip.

Apparently the neighbor hated dogs. She lived down the street from the dog. She turned the dog in as a stray. The vet scanned the dog and did not find a chip. Animal Control found the chip. And there was trouble for the vet and the person turning in the dog. Also the claim against the vet was the dog was apparently loved or an owner would not have had surgery on the dog. The dog was diseased but the disease was cared for.

...And this is why some veterinarians refuse to euthanize animals for non-clients.

There have been cases of wives asking veterinarians to euthanize husbands' pets (and vice versa), too. Not nice.

I took in a dog whose owner had died, and when I took him to my vet and said he was a dog from the neighborhood, the vet immediately asked if he should scan for a microchip and possible owner. I explained that I knew the previous owner, so the vet was satisfied - but he also knew me and treats my other pets. On the other hand, my cat was missing, and it turned out a neighbor had taken him in, thinking he was stray. The neighbor even took him to her vet and if her vet had only scanned the cat, he would have come home to me sooner.

I don't know if vets should be held responsible for determining if a pet is stolen, but I think they should scan any pet that the owner says they found or recently adopted, and if one is found, at least ask whether they know the pet is microchipped. People are so quick to assume a loose or stray pet has no owner, or was dumped on purpose. How many times have I seen emails that say "I found this wonderful dog last night and I'm going to find him a good home!"

People may also assume that only fancy purebred dogs or dogs in affluent areas will be microchipped. This is not true - shelters routinely chip pets before they are adopted, and they go to families in every neighborhood and economic bracket.

Our three dogs and two horses are chipped. They are as important to us as our children. If someone kidnaps our human child and takes her to a doctor for treatment, I expect the doctor's office to ascertain this is, indeed the person they are told she is.

Our dogs and horses are well known to our vets' and office personnel. If one is stolen and taken to a vet's office, I expect the dog to be scanned, and the rightful owner ascertained. So it takes some time for the office staff to call the chip company? It's vital, to me, that this is done.

Did we spend the money to chip our animals, so nobody - most importantly a vet - would ignore scanning? Do I expect my animals perhaps end up at a kill shelter and nobody takes the time to scan for the chip?

The thought that an animal could be lost or stolen, end up in a vet's office, kill shelter, etc., and not be scanned?

Disgusting!

Re: your horses - I don't chip horses, I don't own any type of scanner, and thus I never scan horses. Neither do any of the equine veterinarians in my region. If your horses are ever in an area where microchipping of horses is uncommon, it's not a reliable form of identification (which is why I don't promote microchipping for horses). I guarantee the kill buyers don't scan horses.

Tricky situation Dr. Khuly. If I were a vet I think I would try to do whatever seemed best for the animal I was treating. If the animal was brought in by a client you know loves animals and acts in their best interest and can give the animal a healthy, happy, loving home then I would talk with the client about scanning for a chip and if one is found, give that information to the client for he or she to then decide whether or not to contact the former owner. If the client is a stranger or someone you don't know very well and whose intentions toward the animal or ability to care for the animal long term you're not sure about, then I would scan for a chip and contact the former owner myself. You may be opening yourself up to litigation if you go to this route so you would need to determine the legalities involved. I think what it comes down to is that there probably is no steadfast rule for this. You just need to decide things like this on a case by case basis.

Trying to stop e-mails. Not having luck.

Every veterinary hospital I have worked at, did/does not have a protocol on scanning every pet. As a tech, I feel like it should be done on every pet just as weighing them should be done.

Every practice I have worked at has used HomeAgain chips and the new scanners are touted as being able to pickup other chips.

What one does with the info? Record it in the record at least. Yes, many clients fail to register their chip and one practice I worked at, we did it for the client.

Many also fail to update their info too, rendering the info useless. Another problem I remember reading about somewhere is that say a person finds a pet that is chipped and they call in and say it's their pet now and can they update the info, what does HomeAgain etc do in that instance?

All my cats are chipped and I know to go in and change any of their info, I have to have my own ID and password. I also chip all my kittens and leave them in my name under my account, but put the new owners info in the space that says 'Other Pet Medical Information'. That way, I am contacted first and I follow through and contact the owners.

I think the vet's office, while checking insurance and verification of payment, should check the pet's Microchip info. This would really help the pet theft problem and bring pets back to their loving owners.

The elephant in the room is how easy it is to clone RFID and implant it.

The Hitag 2048 glass implantable tag can easily emulate any of the factory programmed number tags.

The easiest way to explain this is to look at the video RFID Animal Implant Cloned. I cloned a normal microchip on to a cow ear tag. I could, as easily, put that number on a rewritable glass implantable tag. Source: www.youtube.com/watch?v=rD6vAlJyjY4&feature=channel_video_title

Also the number structure of tags themselves leaves them wide open to number invention. I cover this in RFID Microchip Animal Implant Number Structure. Source: www.youtube.com/watch?v=tGqmEDPoHxY&feature=relmfu .

These are boring videos; I did them because Sinn Fein Minister Michelle Gildernew of DardNI did not believe RFID cloning was possible or probable if she made microchip implants compulsory.

Like many Michelle believed the technology to be impregnable. Data protection issues aside. Microchip Implants are not a feature of criminal cases because faking them is easy. Authorities do not want the public to know they trust an insecure system with everything from banking details to pets.

So have a look at the videos, they leave little doubt about the reasoning behind the inadmissibility of microchips as evidence of ownership. They are simply too easy to fake.

I hope this helps explain.

Im a pet owner and my take on this is i belive every vet should scan there paitents.. I owned 2 pits one red brendle and a terrier pit... i was out of town and my partner was watchin them thay were locked up and someone backed up into my yard and stole them its been a year and my babys are still gone... my partner got me sum new kids but its not the same.. the new ones have chips and STAY inside.... i wish thay had a pet gps chip.... it would be so much easer to find them ..

About. GPS Chips

Firstly, Sorry you lost your dogs.

GPS chips will never happen; the frequency GPS broadcasts on doesn’t pass through water well. Your dog’s body has a high percentage of water in it so won’t ever work.

For GPS chips to work a pigtail antenna attached to the chip would sit outside the body. That sounds cruel and painful to me. When they did it in reptiles, they died afterwards.

So overreaction to what is the small problem of dog theft is as dangerous and cruel for dogs as the theft itself. As for microchips, they do nothing more to combat dog theft than a collar with the name and address written on the opposite side. Both are covert, often unchecked methods of identification. Both need close proximity to the dog to be effective. Removal is possible with collars; malfunction is possible with microchip implants.

The “moral panic” around animal welfare occurs during recessions and has more to do with owner psychology than dog safety.

Probably the worst example of disproportionate response is the links group which causes child welfare as well as animal welfare problems. Heather Piper a senior research fellow at Manchester Metropolitan University wrote a good article about this issue. http://www.spiked-online.com/index.php?/site/article/3894/

Worth noting the pioneers of animal welfare legislation were the Nazi party. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_welfare_in_Nazi_Germany

That most Animal Welfare groups are full of white middle-class people today is a cause for concern and internal discussion. Where I live in the UK microchips are now compulsory. Yet in the rest of the UK they are not. But then the campaign predicated on our innate inability to look after our dogs was subtle sectarianism.

Not so long ago signs in shops and boarding houses in England read No Irish, No Blacks, No Dogs. Now it is more insidious and covert. Seemly the message is no Irish or Blacks should own dogs. Racism and sectarianism take many forms but we mostly fear in others what we fear in ourselves.
So perhaps we should be mindful of unintended outcomes when legislating.

Am I against animal welfare? No.

Am I against it as a stick to beat certain groups in society with? Yes I am.

Intrusive tracking legislation targets certain groups for scrutiny. It rarely applies across the board. I hope people think carefully before recommending intrusive tracking measures.

Sometimes the cure can be worse than the disease.

Last summer I moved across the country with my many animals. About 2 months after arriving, my then 4 month old kitten escaped. She was wearing a collar and was chipped. I did everything to find her, but a month passed without a single clue.

Then a family member noticed a cat sitting in the window of one of my neighbors. She thought it looked a lot like the cat I had lost. I went over, knocked on the door and asked if they had found a cat. Seconds later my cat ran down the hall and we were reunited. They said they never noticed the many posters or saw the notice I placed in all the area mailboxes.

She had been taken to a vet for a wellness check and vaccines by the people who found her. They claim that they told the vet that they found her as a stray. So why wasn't my cat scanned?

As a vet I once saw a client drop off the wrong cat for major surgery. She picked up the first black cat that showed up on her porch in the morning. She meant to drop off her male, but instead left her neighbor's female at the office. During the pre anesthetic exam the mistake was discovered, the cat scanned and a disaster averted.

I am of the opinion that pets are not scanned enough at vet offices or shelters.