I am 100% FOR permanent identification. BUT we should have a personal right to choose the method of ID for our own cats.
Here is a copy of a message I sent to one of my breeders groups recently about microchipping cats…
Here I go “off” again… This is another area where I feel very strongly. Please delete if not interested.
Firstly, I am 100% FOR permanent identification of all pets… BUT we should have a personal right to choose the method for our own animals. No-one should be able to force us to insert a transmitter inside our pets if we choose not to – for health reasons or any other reason. There ARE better options available.
Yes, lab animals in trials have developed cancer at the microchip spot. I believe that rate is around 1:100. I actually had a kitten buyer a couple of months ago who lost her dog from a cancer directly caused by a microchip. It was a pretty heart-wrenching story she had to tell me, with all that they went through and in the end they couldn’t save the dog. It really teared me up, because although there are a few people in my US email groups who have had pets develop microchip cancers, this was my first personal contact with someone who had actually gone through it themselves. It was so avoidable.
Yes, 1:100 is a relatively low rate in some peoples eyes, but if you are the one whose own pet is affected then it is one in a hundred too many.
It is also documented that around 30% of microchips either disappear somehow or simply malfunction.
I have also heard of microchips being cut out of stolen animals.
There is safer and more reliable method in permanent tattooing. I sent an email here a while back about a great little pet tattoo system in the USA, which is all set up with an international animal registry. There is absolutely no pain to the animal, it is similar to being written on with a ball point pen. The unit is small and easy to use, and would be a very cheap option for breeders too.
I bought one of their tattoo machines a couple of years ago, but I haven’t used it yet as I have not been able to convince any of the Animal Registry businesses in Australia to implement as Tattoo registry alongside their microchip registry (which would be incredibly easy)
Here is the website: http://tattoo-a-pet.com/ (you can watch a tattooing video at the bottom of this page)
See, to me, there are other considerations besides microchips not working or some microchips causing cancer. This is an electronic transmitter situated just a couple of inches from the animal’s organs and from their brain. I refuse to talk on my mobile phone for health reason to avoid any radiation close to my brain, it’s only used for texting. So, why should I be forced to insert a permanent frequency transmitter inside my cats?
Funny, I was “conversing” with the NZ importing agency, because they now require microchipping of all pets going into NZ. I was attempting to get a microchip waiver of some sort and have my cats tattooed before going home. I stated my reasons why I don’t want my cats microchipped when I go back, and that I wanted to have them permanently and visibly tattooed on their bellies instead. I explained the health studies, the risks, the drawbacks and wrote the benefits of tattooing. It was quite a few messages back and forth but the final answer was “It is the Law, they just have to be microchipped”.
But the idiotic thing was that their main reason other than legal, was that the vets could only read the microchip number. I replied that this made no sense at all. Because why would it be easier for a vet to get their electronic chip finder, turn it on, try to locate the chip and then read the little numbers (if the chip was working or still there)… than it would be for him to simply look on the cat’s belly for a large and obvious permanent number and read it directly. Duh?
Anyway many of you will think I am just being silly, and that is ok.
But my point here is that for whatever reason, people should be able to make these sort of decisions themselves, not have it forced onto them against their will. Especially when the alternative is a safer, and also more reliable method.
It is always the same thing … follow the money. If breeders owned these handy little tattoo pens themselves, where would that leave the microchip companies?
Here is the TATTOO-A-PET video of a dog getting his permanent tattoo: