Microchipping

[Gallien Jacks]

lol yes boss lmao, I know I worry too much hehe, I just wanted to be able to know that my pups are always with the correct people

 

[yuckaduck]

lol yes boss lmao, I know I worry too much hehe, I just wanted to be able to know that my pups are always with the correct people

I know that is a concern for me too, but I really think it might be out of reach. Contracts might help but even still the cost to get dogs returned if people chose not to can be enormous.

 

[AmberwayGSD]

She is not allowed to get stolen.I am paying too much for that to happen.I dont leave my dogs unattended outside for this reason.If someone is stupid enough to try and break into the house to get her,they will be met by Sasha the watchdog.Sasha is microchipped.I do like both in combination though.

 

[yuckaduck]

She is not allowed to get stolen.I am paying too much for that to happen.I dont leave my dogs unattended outside for this reason.If someone is stupid enough to try and break into the house to get her,they will be met by Sasha the watchdog.Sasha is microchipped.I do like both in combination though.

Yeah it is good.

I kinda find it funny when people come to the door, espically at night. Hope is first to greet them and Yukon is at the beginning of the hall waiting. If they get past Hope, Yucky is alot more determined then her to protect his family if need be but he is not agressive about it.

Yukon stays with me all the time now, and Hope will go to the kids. Yukon protects me and Hope the kids. No one goes near the kids unless I tell Hope to go and lay down, then she will go and watch what is going on.

 

[taratippy]

I know that is a concern for me too, but I really think it might be out of reach. Contracts might help but even still the cost to get dogs returned if people chose not to can be enormous.

Sorry but I disagree with what your saying here, IMO as a breeder you are responsible for that dog for life regardless of the cost and if breeders are not prepared to do whatever it takes to get the dog back they shouldnt really breed.

 

[showpug]

When you or your vet microchips a dog, they have to fill out a registration form and send it in to the chip company. This form has the owners information and phone # on it etc. and it registers that specific chip # to the specific dog it was given to. If you take a litter of puppies in when they are still owned by you, you have the option of having your information put on each and every one of them. The only way this can change is by your release and signature and an information change fee. This means, if you leave the pup registered under your name, YOU are the one that is contacted if the pup ever gets lost or ends up in the shelter. This way the microchip is a benefit to you and a way for you to protect your pups, not just a benefit to the new owner. Does that make sense?

 

[yuckaduck]

Sorry but I disagree with what your saying here, IMO as a breeder you are responsible for that dog for life regardless of the cost and if breeders are not prepared to do whatever it takes to get the dog back they shouldnt really breed.

I agree with what you are saying but the law and privacy issues are that information on a microchipped dog can only be shared with the registered owner. That is the law not my choice. Personally I think in the perfect world all unwanted dogs or puppies would be returned to the original breeder and therefore rescues and shelters would no longer be needed. If I sell a dog, I cannot track it down later and find out where it is, it is a privacy issue whether I like or not that is the way it is. Has nothing to do with the breeder being responsible or not.

So a signed contract indicting that the pup is to be returned should be the only solution, then it is up to the breeder if they wish to pursue the owner if it rehomes a dog without the knowledge of the breeder. I had this happen with a rescue dog and I did get the dog back eventually but it was along fought battle.

 

[yuckaduck]

When you or your vet microchips a dog, they have to fill out a registration form and send it in to the chip company. This form has the owners information and phone # on it etc. and it registers that specific chip # to the specific dog it was given to. If you take a litter of puppies in when they are still owned by you, you have the option of having your information put on each and every one of them. The only way this can change is by your release and signature and an information change fee. This means, if you leave the pup registered under your name, YOU are the one that is contacted if the pup ever gets lost or ends up in the shelter. This way the microchip is a benefit to you and a way for you to protect your pups, not just a benefit to the new owner. Does that make sense?

Makes sense but here in Canada the owner of the dog must have the microchip in their name and there is no fee to transferr it. So as a breeder unless you keep the dog forever you would lose that information when the dog was sold.

 

[showpug]

Makes sense but here in Canada the owner of the dog must have the microchip in their name and there is no fee to transferr it. So as a breeder unless you keep the dog forever you would lose that information when the dog was sold.

How would they know the dog was sold? Couldn't you write up a contract in which you were co-owner on all your puppies for life and therefor could remain as the owner on the chip?

 

[yuckaduck]

How would they know the dog was sold? Couldn't you write up a contract in which you were co-owner on all your puppies for life and therefor could remain as the owner on the chip?

I guess if you want to co own the dog for life you could!

 

[showpug]

I guess if you want to co own the dog for life you could!

I will co-own all my pups just for these reasons. Co-ownership does not usually interfere with the pup's new adoptive family, it just helps ensure that you still have a say in the welfare of the pups beyond contract alone. Your name stays on their papers and in this case, on their microchip. Something all responsible breeders should do. I have known of a few breeders who have gotten their pups back years later because of a microchip being scanned when one of their pups was dumped in a shelter.

 

[yuckaduck]

I will co-own all my pups just for these reasons. Co-ownership does not usually interfere with the pup's new adoptive family, it just helps ensure that you still have a say in the welfare of the pups beyond contract alone. Your name stays on their papers and in this case, on their microchip. Something all responsible breeders should do. I have known of a few breeders who have gotten their pups back years later because of a microchip being scanned when one of their pups was dumped in a shelter.

Sounds good to me, like I said if you want to co owner the pups for their life and I see no reason not too. As long as the dog is cared for and looked after then no need to interferr. It allows abit more protection to those of us who want to make darn sure the dogs are where they are suppose to be and being cared for.

 

[Gallien Jacks]

thansk show Pug it does make sence, this is what i will be doing in the future, i have had my others microchipped but because the vet fills in all the details I didnt really think about it, blond moment I know lol, so I guess if anyone had a problem with the dog still being in my name then they can bog off and they will not be allowed one of my pups, but what do you think about me contacting the owners of the already sold pups and offering to pay for microchipping? the onle thing that i think is unfare here is breeders cant chip your own dogs, and with a dog like a Jack you dont get a lot for them they sell for £100- £150 here, and microchipping here is £25 per dog, i think that if you are having a lot of dogs chipped at the same time then you should get some off,

 

[taratippy]

£25 seems rather expensive, I would shop around if I was you.

 

[RedyreRottweilers]

One thing to consider is liability when co-owning certain breeds. In my breed, prosecutors have attempted to assign liability to Co-owners, and even BREEDERS who were NOT co-owners when an incident involving injury or death has occurred.

Just one more thing to consider re: co-ownership. It's certainly a double edged sword in certain circumstances.

I think the best options are to screen puppy buyers VERY carefully, make SURE you have an excellent and legal contract, place on limited registration and require spay/neuter of all animals not intended for Breed competition, and keep in touch with owners on a regular basis.

I co-own anything that is to be left intact for show purposes until the dog is titled and health tested, but after that I do sign off.

 

[showpug]

One thing to consider is liability when co-owning certain breeds. In my breed, prosecutors have attempted to assign liability to Co-owners, and even BREEDERS who were NOT co-owners when an incident involving injury or death has occurred.

Just one more thing to consider re: co-ownership. It's certainly a double edged sword in certain circumstances.

I think the best options are to screen puppy buyers VERY carefully, make SURE you have an excellent and legal contract, place on limited registration and require spay/neuter of all animals not intended for Breed competition, and keep in touch with owners on a regular basis.

I co-own anything that is to be left intact for show purposes until the dog is titled and health tested, but after that I do sign off.

In this case, wouldn't it be possible to write into the legal contract that you are not to be held liable in any way for any accidents/injuries/deaths that should happen while the dog is in the care of it's placement home?

I have never heard of what you are describing, but I deal with pugs LOL! I don't doubt what you say is true though! Sad world we live in!

 

[RedyreRottweilers]

Yes it is, and altho my contract is VERY specific about my responsibilities and liabilities ending with the signing of the contract, it can be a dicey situation when you are an actual co-owner on a dog that is involved in a bite incident.

 

[showpug]

Yes it is, and altho my contract is VERY specific about my responsibilities and liabilities ending with the signing of the contract, it can be a dicey situation when you are an actual co-owner on a dog that is involved in a bite incident.

I can only imagine.... Doesn't sound like fun at all and I know how good lawyers are at twisting things around. Guess it all comes back to really knowing who you are selling a pup to. I have a friendship and ongoing relationship with the breeder of my last pup, and that is what I hope to have with anyone who gets one of my pups down the road.

 

[RedyreRottweilers]

Very true, SP, but it's been proven that accidents, terrible accidents, can happen even to very responsible owners.

We hope these things do not ever happen, we screen, and we educate our puppy buyers as best we can, and plan to become longtime friends with each of them. Sometimes unforeseen situations can crop up, although thankfully, bite incidents with Rotties are on the decline because of the recent precipitous (thank you *od) drop in Rottweiler registrations.

At one point in the mid 90s there were over 10,000 (yes, ten THOUSAND) Rottweiler puppies being registered every MONTH with the AKC. When you have these sorts of STAGGERING numbers being produced, you are statistically going to see every option that genetic profile can offer you, good and bad.

We hope numbers keep falling, I would love to see us out of the top 20 in the next 5 years.

 

[Gallien Jacks]

yes I understand where you are comming from, its a hard thing to decide, all my pups go with a spay and neuter contract, because here spayed dogs can still be shown which I think is great, so only the girls I am keeping will stay un altered untill i decide wether I am going to breed from them