Howling over dogs’ double fee

The Mercury, Tasmania, Oct 3 2011

TO chip or not to chip is no longer the question for dog owners. It’s the law.

Legislation passed in July made it compulsory for dog owners to micro-chip their canine friends.

However, despite the new legislation, confusion still reigns over exactly what micro-chipping provides and why dogs must be both micro-chipped and council registered.

Hobart Dogs’ Home manager Alan Norris said many dog owners were confused as to why they had to register their dog with the local council and pay a further fee, which can be as much as $80.

“Registering your dog or pet with the local council is an annual cost for keeping a domestic animal on your premises,” he said.

“Micro-chipping is a one-off cost for linking your pet directly to your home address and contact details.”

Owners who refuse or forget to comply with registration, may receive a hefty fine from their council.

A first-time fine can mean a cost of $130 and repeated failure to comply with the council legislation can result in a court appearance and a fine of $650.

Dogs can be micro-chipped at Dogs’ Homes of Tasmania, your vet or the RSPCA.

Micro-chipping is the method of matching your dog with your personal details for a one-off fee of $45.

Every chip contains a unique code that links to a national database containing the owners details. It can be accessed instantly by entering a personal password assigned to the owner at the time the dog is micro-chipped.

Registration forms are available from your local council or can be downloaded from your council website.

Writer Mellissa Lucas is a journalism student at Griffith University.

Advertisements

1 Comment

Filed under Tasmania

One response to “Howling over dogs’ double fee

  1. Geoff Birkbeck

    A couple of matters need to be addressed here.

    1. Dog registrations are state legislated and the authortiy to manage this is given to local government.
    2. For most of the time, the most acrute data bases are the dog resistrations.
    3. Dog owners who do not comly with the law are unlikely to mocrochip their dogs.
    4. Records at LG level are privacy act protected, microchip databases are not.
    5. Most owners do not undate the details with the microchip authority.I am guilty of that too.
    6. Vets at times do not send details of the dog chipped to the registry.
    7. It is not an offence to have a non microchipped dog however it is not to register your dog
    8 Shire databases show the history of dogs owned in residences within that shire.
    9. The microchip can fail and some scanners dont pick it up
    Microchipping is a wonderful idea, however, the dog registristation system at local and state level must be maintained

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s