So this dog chipping law that'll be coming in next year, how will it work with rescues who insist the dog must stay chipped to them?(27 Posts)
DDog1 is one of these, he's chipped to the rescue as that's their policy. But dogs have to be chipped to the owner or 'keeper', which of course, is me. Not the rescue. Is there some kind of clause in this law about rescues that do this or could I get into trouble for my dog not being chipped to me?
following, as we'll be in this situation too
I don't know how it will work but this is one of the things that has put me off getting a dog from certain rescues.
I am responsible for my dog, not someone else and I want them registered to me.
My understanding of the English Regs (not the Welsh ones) is that they provide a very clear definition of keeper. For most pet dogs (there are exemptions for assistance dogs and additional requirements for breeders) it is "the person with whom it normally resides". Since most dogs post-adoption don't live with a rescue, that seems pretty clear. I've not seen a definitive answer on this - and I haven't attended a DogLaw seminar yet which takes account of the new laws. I would be very interested to hear how a rescue could argue otherwise.
Just spoke to the chair of the rescue my dog came from and he said the following - We have secured dual registration with all the microchip companies except Petlog, who are the biggest and who 90% of greyhounds are with and we are still awaiting further correspondence from them. It means that we have the back up so if an owner moves, changes contact info etc and can't be traced we know they will then contact us and the dog will be guaranteed safe rather than put on a 7 day list.
That's a good plan I think. I'm pleased with that answer.
So they're just waiting for petlog to get back in touch with them and when they do I should be able to add myself onto DDogs chip
We are in this situation too. Our collie is a rescue and her chip is registered to us, we adopted our spaniel from a different charity this year and his was a charity that insisted on keeping the registration on the chip register as their details so following with interest.
It is Scuttle. I think it's a good idea, maybe all rescues should consider doing this.
I think dual registration makes good sense. If anything ever happened that meant we could no longer care for our dogs then their respective rescues would be our first port of call but I guess some people would just put them out on the streets. With dual registration dogs would hopefully always have someone who would take them in in the event they were found as strays.
So these rescues don't trust the new owners to be responsible for their own dogs.
Bit irresponsible of the rescues then to place a possibly vulnerable dog with people they have such little trust and faith in. How very odd.
I'm the only person registered on my dog's chip, and have been since it was put in when she was a puppy.
I don't need a second person or organisation overseeing my responsibilities in regards to my dog because I'm a grownup; why would that become a necessity if I had rehomed her from a rescue rather than bought her from a breeder.
Dual registration makes sense. Either with a rescue or a vet.
People move house and forget to change the details on the chip. Or they die and cannot be contacted.
Rescues dont sell you the dog. You take it on loan and they continue to own it. They have seen enough well meaning people screw up to make the policy seem like good insurance to them.
Pigs that is not the rescues motive at all.
Rescues will offer life time protection for the dogs they rescue and rehome ( a very good point for getting a rescue!) so if and a big if anything happens to the new owners or the dog is lost the rescue will sort it appropriately for the dog.
The dog does belong 100% to the new owner BUT the rescue will always be there to support the dog if needed.
Okay, it's probably not a bad thing to have a back up but it just seems a bit untrusting and patronising on the part of the rescue.
Surely if you take on a dog you make damn sure that if you move house the dog's details are correct and up to date - I've moved house twice since I've had my dog and each time changing the tracer details has been one of the very first things I've done, that and registering with a new vet.
If your dog gets lost how does the tracing company having the rescue's details help find the dog? Obviously, if the rescue is going to help with advertising and putting up poster in your area that would be of enormous help, in which case I would agree, it would be good to have them on your side.
Having said that however, if I rehomed a dog from a rescue that insisted that their name was the one on the chip I'd never feel that the dog was really mine.
i hadn't realised this, but it sounds like a ddogs guarantee of protection for life, which is what an abandoned or cruely treated ddog needs, after all, many do go from home to home sadly before finding their forever home, and i guess the policy has come about from that experience. Its the same with the blanket neutering policy and chipping, its about the ddog and never the owner, the ddog comes first.
We have the same with a dcat, and i hadn't quite realised but yes i do remember that being said when we took in a rescue, just feels like she has more people on her side, although she's very much ours!loved and pampered! and never to leave!
Legally a rescue can't stop you registering an adopted pet in your own name. Indeed that is the norm. You have to pay the chip company a small fee to change details. The whole compulsory thing is a bit of a farce though since it's not actually going to be enforced, pretty much like every law relating to animal welfare.
If anything happens to my family it's always been the case that my sister will take our dog, the same for her dogs. I would be really upset if a rescue insisted on taking a dog back and re homing it.
I know that's not the case with everyone but it has put me off looking at rescues who insist on the dog being returned to them in the event of an owner dying.
You are all worrying over nothing here and making an issues when there is not one. The rescues will not insist on taking back any dog - they do not own the dog you do. However the rescue will give life time back up to that dog if required.
Believe me how ever vigorously the rescue checks the new owners there are always some dogs that need to be rehomed again. May be due to death, illness, marriage breakup, allergic kids, emigrating etc.
Do not let this put you off getting a rescue just the opposite - if anything happens to you, or you find yourself in difficulties (and hopefully this will never happen) the rescue will be there to support you with your dog. It my be temporary foster, it may be behavioral advice but your dogs welfare will always be important to the rescue. See it as a type of insurance no more and no less only there if needed.
The rescue does NOT have ownership of your dog. I think of them as godparents to my dogs . Ironically I have more restrictions on one of my pedigree dogs from the breeder than I do my rescue dogs!
Okay, I think I'm changing my mind and can see this as a positive thing in certain circumstances.
What would happen to my dog if I die suddenly is certainly something that I have concerns about and I've told both my DDs that if neither of them wants to keep her they must not advertise her for sale but must try to rehome her to a breed specific rescue or somewhere like Battersea.
So yes, in those circumstances I can definitely see the benefit of having a rescue willing to take my dog in without hesitation.
Don't rehome to Battersea. Officially it is a pound not a rescue and pts a large number of dogs each year. Research a no kill rescue carefully.
was gonna say the same about Battersea, but also a ddogs life in a rehoming centre is no life either VERY stressful place to be after being separated from their loved family. I have seen real bad stress changes in very laid back ddogs from just weeks in one. All the high tension and continual barking, its awful, very little human contact, bizarre environment.
Many rescues now try to have foster homes rather than keep all the dogs in kennels. A much nicer environment and it is easier to assess the requirements of the dogs. If you do your research you should be able to find one that operates in this way. Hopefully for most owners this is not an issue though.
In an 'ideal' world 'Mary' - sadly there are nowhere near enough Fosterers to do this, with any of the rescuers. It is done only after a ddog has been in kennels for months, for some brief respite, IF they have anyone free to do it.
Shriek it is not done after months. The rescues I am involved in only foster dogs no kennelling at all. All dogs out on foster at the moment.
i'm glad there are rescues that only foster. Thats a good thing, its certainly nowhere near always the case which is what you were saying before.
Join the discussion
Please login first.