Downloaded from http://veterinaryrecord.bmj.com/ on November 18, 2015 - Published by group.bmj.com
Letters all authorities, including police forces country-wide, have universal scanners, the cooperation between the various database providers to ensure correct identification of dogs will be irrelevant. With regard to compulsory microchipping and its potential capacity to prevent dog bites, there is an immediate need for a national database in which to record details of all dog bite incidents of any severity, from all sources that will encounter them (eg, GP/vet surgeries, accident and emergency departments, dog wardens, police dog units, concerned owners). The most fruitful and realistic way for microchipping to directly contribute to dog bite prevention would be to have the ability to record and link details on the context of any future dog bite incident to a dog’s microchip number. Co-occurrent factors in such incidents could therefore be collated, analysed and used to inform muchneeded future educational and preventive interventions. Kendal Shepherd, 48a High Street, Woodford, Northamptonshire NN14 4HF e-mail: [email protected] doi: 10.1136/vr.h2399
THE microchipping of all dogs has been advocated by many institutions as a way forward in promoting responsible dog ownership and, in turn, the prevention of dog bites. The success of this advocacy has resulted in the permanent identification of dogs by microchip implantation becoming compulsory, with the presumed assumption that a microchipped dog will have responsible owners and that their microchipped dog will never bite. Setting the fallacies of such assumptions aside, the system also assumes that whatever authority might have reason to scan a dog would have universally competent equipment. In my capacity as a behavioural assessor of dogs seized under the Dangerous Dogs Act, I know this not to be true. Until May 9, 2015 | Veterinary Record | 499
Downloaded from http://veterinaryrecord.bmj.com/ on November 18, 2015 - Published by group.bmj.com
Getting ready for compulsory microchipping Kendal Shepherd Veterinary Record 2015 176: 499
doi: 10.1136/vr.h2399 Updated information and services can be found at: http://veterinaryrecord.bmj.com/content/176/19/499.1
These include:
Email alerting service
Receive free email alerts when new articles cite this article. Sign up in the box at the top right corner of the online article.
Notes
To request permissions go to: http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions To order reprints go to: http://journals.bmj.com/cgi/reprintform To subscribe to BMJ go to: http://group.bmj.com/subscribe/
Letters all authorities, including police forces country-wide, have universal scanners, the cooperation between the various database providers to ensure correct identification of dogs will be irrelevant. With regard to compulsory microchipping and its potential capacity to prevent dog bites, there is an immediate need for a national database in which to record details of all dog bite incidents of any severity, from all sources that will encounter them (eg, GP/vet surgeries, accident and emergency departments, dog wardens, police dog units, concerned owners). The most fruitful and realistic way for microchipping to directly contribute to dog bite prevention would be to have the ability to record and link details on the context of any future dog bite incident to a dog’s microchip number. Co-occurrent factors in such incidents could therefore be collated, analysed and used to inform muchneeded future educational and preventive interventions. Kendal Shepherd, 48a High Street, Woodford, Northamptonshire NN14 4HF e-mail: [email protected] doi: 10.1136/vr.h2399
THE microchipping of all dogs has been advocated by many institutions as a way forward in promoting responsible dog ownership and, in turn, the prevention of dog bites. The success of this advocacy has resulted in the permanent identification of dogs by microchip implantation becoming compulsory, with the presumed assumption that a microchipped dog will have responsible owners and that their microchipped dog will never bite. Setting the fallacies of such assumptions aside, the system also assumes that whatever authority might have reason to scan a dog would have universally competent equipment. In my capacity as a behavioural assessor of dogs seized under the Dangerous Dogs Act, I know this not to be true. Until May 9, 2015 | Veterinary Record | 499
Downloaded from http://veterinaryrecord.bmj.com/ on November 18, 2015 - Published by group.bmj.com
Getting ready for compulsory microchipping Kendal Shepherd Veterinary Record 2015 176: 499
doi: 10.1136/vr.h2399 Updated information and services can be found at: http://veterinaryrecord.bmj.com/content/176/19/499.1
These include:
Email alerting service
Receive free email alerts when new articles cite this article. Sign up in the box at the top right corner of the online article.
Notes
To request permissions go to: http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions To order reprints go to: http://journals.bmj.com/cgi/reprintform To subscribe to BMJ go to: http://group.bmj.com/subscribe/
