English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

I just don't agree with the idea of my dog have a chip planted under his skin....

2007-08-05 19:52:30 · 21 answers · asked by Anonymous in Pets Dogs

21 answers

Not as inhumane as dressing your dog, or the gentle leader for life or feeding table treats. I would rather have that added security that if I am separated from my dogs they have a better chance of finding me. Its their way of talking to someone that helps them in their time of need.

I certainly would not want one of my babies to have the same fate as albert becuase microchipping is considered "inhumane"

http://www.spotsociety.org/fatedog.html

2007-08-06 01:28:49 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2 0

I believe you probably are the only one that thinks a micro chip is inhumane. If you ever lost your dog and it broke your heart I think you might change your mind. There are lots of bad people out there that might not be nice to your dog, or turn it over to a testing place for a fee. A chip might save him from this miserable fate.

2007-08-06 03:32:07 · answer #2 · answered by thinkerbelle1 3 · 1 0

I don't find it inhumane.

It is in the dog's best interest should he or she get lost or stolen. It's a form of identification that can't be lost or tampered with, unlike the commonly used identification tag on a collar.

If you find the sting the dog experiences inhumane, think of it this way: Parents give their children vaccines to prevent them from getting sick. Sure it hurts their child when the needle goes in, and they cry, but in the end they care only for what is good for them.

Micro chips are the same. Sure, it may sting for a moment, but the fact that it could bring your dog back home to you is a pricless thing.

EDIT:

In reply to "squeaks706":

You compare microchipping your dog to microchipping your child. The difference in that is that your child can talk and give the police officers information if he is lost, even if it is tidbits. Your dog cannot speak for himself, so another means of I.D. is required.

If we treated dogs exactly the same as humans, then we would also have collars and ID tags on our small kids, which is not the case.

2007-08-06 03:00:10 · answer #3 · answered by The Samurai Lullaby 4 · 8 0

All our pets are mnicrochipped, I beleive its essential in order to reduce the number of unclaimed strays being destroyed at rescue centres. Collars can fall off, be removed or lost but a chip is permanent.

Its not inhumane. One of my dogs cried a little when it was inserted (the insertion must hurt like an injection) but as long as its done by a skilled hand it won't cause any long term problems or discomfort and the reassurance that if our pet ever got lost (and we have a Collie X who loves escaping and wandering off!) we could reclaim them is well worth it.

2007-08-06 03:02:46 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

I totally agree with you, and almost didn't get a dog from my local shelter because of it. I found out, while at the shelter, that the puppy i wanted was not microchipped (they don't do it until they are adopted). The shelter doesn't not sedate or even numb the area they are about to chip. I witnessed two dogs being chipped, and both yelped. One even bled a good bit. To make matters worse, I offered to take the puppy to my own vet to chip, but because he was of age and weight, the lady at the shelter said she couldn't let me do that. Yeah, it may hurt for a split second, but still... isn't being in a shelter enough?

I have two dogs, one is chipped, the other is tattooed. I think tattooing is better, because everyone can see it, plus, the animal has to be sedated for it. However, i have no problem with the chip, providing the animal is sedated and/or isn't being harmed. I don't see why shelters can't get animals tatooed when they are being "altered".... thats how my vet does it.

2007-08-06 07:44:42 · answer #5 · answered by lilpadiddle 2 · 0 2

In my own opinion I actually think the microchip idea is really good for our pets. Micro chipping is recognized as the most effective and secure way of permanently identifying a pet.
Being under the skin, it is safe from weather, erosion, alternation and theft and cannot be seen by human eye. It has no battery. So the microchip can help us get our pets back of ever lost.

2007-08-06 03:02:18 · answer #6 · answered by Whatsername 2 · 4 0

I'm sure it does hurt a bit when it is put in and if there were no payoff for the animal I would agree with you. But it increases the chance of your pet getting home if they get away from you. My cat acts rather feral (wild) around strangers. If he ever got out of the house, that chip would be the only thing that would save him from being put down by animal control. I've done my best to socialize him, but he's too old to change much. So, I think it is worth putting him through a few minutes of hurt if it could save his life.

2007-08-06 03:31:05 · answer #7 · answered by sassy sarah 4 · 1 0

It's not inhumane at all.I wish I had had one put in my dog,who got out of our fenced yard in June and was never found.She had tags but if she had lost her collar,they would be of no use,so I wish I would have had her microchipped.It doesn't hurt the dog,other than making the injection site a little sore after.If it's inhumane,then tail docking and ear cropping are pure torture ( these procedures should be banned.) And what about people who get their babies' ears pierced? Do you think the baby enjoys it? I think that should be against the law for kids under 6 years old.

As If,I gave you a thumbs up.That happens to me,too.

2007-08-06 03:18:30 · answer #8 · answered by Dances With Woofs! 7 · 1 0

its not inhumane. it will help you track your dog if it ever gets lost. you wouldnt want that would u? its worth the money especially if you live out in the farm where a dog could get lost for miles until someone finds it. my dog has one just below his neck and although its a little painful when its implanted, its long term effects are remarkable.
so yes, you are the only person to find it inhumane.

2007-08-06 04:06:31 · answer #9 · answered by My Name Is Trip 4 · 1 0

First off, "inhumane" for a dog is the wrong word to use. Second, I find it no more cruel than not doing it. Because when your dog gets out and has to go the pound because there is no tag because he's lost, it will be putting him through a needlessly tramatizing ordeal. Not to mention if they don't know who you are he gets put up for adoption along with all the other people's dog's who don't agree with microchipping. Then because there are so many dogs, they don't have room for them so they have to euthanize your dog. That's what I call cruel. Please, get your dog microchipped.

2007-08-06 03:04:14 · answer #10 · answered by Kristi 3 · 2 0

fedest.com, questions and answers