What is your opinion on a breeder that micro-chips their puppies but requires said micro-chips stays in their name?
Ahhh but here is the problem that I have been told, rescues/shelters are only obligated to contact the initial person on the micro-chip and not the secondary. From my friend who did work in a shelter, their policy was to scan for the chip, if the first name on the chip was the person surrending then it never went any further than that.
I also think that the micro-chip is a way to keep breeders accountable for the dogs they have. If someone were to dump one of my dogs, but they were the registered owner on the micro-chip then I would be none the wiser should they not bother to contact the second name on the chip. This bothers me and it is something I am mulling over before my next litter.
Then the policy needs to be changed. All registered owners should be consulted before a dog can be surrendered. I understand that most shelters have staffing shortages but not contacting everyone on a microchip seems counterproductive to their goal of making sure all animals have a home.
Interesting thread.
Quite separately ... I know someone who is absolutely convinced that microchips cause cancer. They say they've had two animals develop cancer in the area of the chip (they say the low-frequency does something to the muscles / bones). Has anyone experienced anything like this?