IDENTIFICATION DEVICES

An effective registration system depends on each dog being identified and linked to its owner. It is obvious that the link has to be some kind of readable code that is unique for each dog and its owner.

Over the years animals have been identified by all kinds of devices including symbol and number brands, different shaped earmarks, tattoos, coloured stickers, numbered leg bands, coloured and numbered ear tags, powered transmitters, fin photographs, collar tags, microchips or some combination of these. Different devices have different merit in different circumstances. It depends on what species and what management practice are involved.

For an ID device to provide an effective link from dogs to their owners:

ï the device should be as attachable as possible (obvious, though essential requirement)

ï the device should be as readable as possible (the easier and further away, the better)

ï the device should link to information that is as accurate as possible (the more current the registration database, the better)

ï if possible there should be some method of signalling that the ID information is current for this year

ï the device should be as cost-effective as possible

ï the device should be issued from a reliable source

The motor car paradigm has proven consistently useful in MPM. It might help to consider here what devices are most commonly used to identify vehicles and to signal compliance with annual registration requirements. All vehicles carry two things:

ï a registration plate which has the vehicle number in numerals big enough to seen from a distance

ï a registration window sticker which is also able to be seen from a distance and is colour coded to indicate currency.

The registration plate comes with the vehicle and stays with the vehicle, while a new sticker gets attached each year when the registration is renewed. Itís a system that has worked well for a long time.

It is tempting to think of microchips as the number plate, and annual registration tags as the window sticker. Microchipping and tagging as a combination would be a very sweet way of keeping track of dog registrations. It would mean having one device (unique and permanently implanted) for life and another (visible and colour coded) that could be cheaply renewed annually to indicate that the chip is there and to ensure the linked information is kept current.

However, there are still many people in MPM who feel quite satisfied that tags alone are enough for dogs. (See: Brennan on tags versus chips)¹

If you donít have full registration it doesnít matter if your ID device can be tracked by satellite and read from the moon, it still wonít help. Even at compliance levels of 80% registration, the dogs (and owners) causing the bulk of your problems are unidentified.

Tags and chips? Tags or chips? These are matters of only secondary concern. They hardly matter at all compared with the main concern: getting every dog recorded on the registration system.

1. Brennan J. 1992. Dog identification for urban animal management: microchip or tag? In: Murray RW, editor. Urban Animal Management: proceedings of the First National Conference on Urban Animal Management in Australia (Brisbane, 1992). Mackay QLD: Chiron Media: 93-103.