The reasons the report given for the new database are that it will curb the trade in stolen dogs, prevent the use of animals in anti-social or violent incidents and reduce the "record number" of stray dogs being found on British streets.
All dogs in Britain will be fitted with microchips which contain their owner’s details, under cross party plans designed to track family pets.
Owners will be forced to install the microchip containing a barcode that can store their pet's name, breed, age and health along with their own address and phone number.
The barcode's details would then be stored on a national database which local councils could access in a bid to easily identify an owner’s pet ...
If an owner failed to insert a chip, at an estimated cost of about £10, they could be fined or face the possibility of having their pet taken away.
Monday, September 28, 2009
Support a new government database or the puppy gets it
This morning's Daily Telegraph carried new of yet another government database:
But unless you have a pedigree dog, having it stolen is not a concern - the Telegraph cites the experience of Bruce Forsyth's daughter who "had her Yorkshire terriers snatched from the back of her BMW while she went shopping".
And however great the problem of dogs being used in violent incidents, their ownership being uncertain is surely not the problem.
So we are left with stray dogs. I am sure it is a good idea for people to have their dogs chipped, but is it such an issue in most areas that we need yet another compulsory national database to deal with it? I think not.
It would be wrong to finish without noticing a piece of sloppy journalism in the Telegraph report. We are told that experts say that being chipped is "relatively painless" for dogs.
Relative to what?