Downloaded from http://veterinaryrecord.bmj.com/ on September 5, 2017 - Published by group.bmj.com
Viewpoint
Viewpoint
Feline lost: making microchipping compulsory for domestic cats The independent nature of cats means that they are more likely to become lost or injured than dogs. Maggie Roberts believes that microchipping of cats should be compulsory in the UK as is the case with dogs.
It is often said that no-one owns a cat. After all, dogs have masters and cats have servants. When you call a dog it comes to you; when you call a cat it says ‘leave a message and I’ll get back to you’. The independent nature of cats means that, although we may share our lives with them, we never have control over them in the way we do with a dog. Reflecting this, the legislation affecting pet cats is unsurprisingly sparse in comparison with dogs. In fact, in the eyes of the law, cats are chattels, the property of their owner. Owners do have responsibilities to ensure welfare under the Animal Welfare Acts, and licences are required for boarding catteries and pet shops, but that’s about the extent of it. There is currently no legislation specifically on the breeding of cats, something that Cats Protection would like to be rectified, especially in the form of (hopefully) Defraapproved best practice guidelines and a kitten checklist for potential owners. As cats are seen as chattels it means that if lost, stolen or rehomed without consent, the cat always belongs to the original owner and must be returned to them. This has led to challenging situations for rehoming centres; cats rehomed in good faith have to be returned to the original owner who may only have made themselves known several weeks or even months after the cat went missing. As local authorities have responsibilities for stray dogs, the law allows rehoming (or destruction) after seven days if an owner does not come forward. As they have no
M. Roberts, BVM&S, MRCVS, Director of Veterinary Services, Cats Protection, National Cat Centre, Chelwood Gate, Haywards Heath RH17 7TT e-mail: [email protected] 178 | Veterinary Record | August 13, 2016
such responsibility for cats, there hasn’t been a pressing need for a change in the law, and this is unlikely to be deemed a priority in the current political turmoil we find ourselves in. However, what would make life considerably better for cat owners, welfare organisations and, most importantly, for cats, would be the introduction of compulsory microchipping of owned cats. Since the introduction of compulsory microchipping of dogs earlier this year across England, Scotland and Wales
‘In the eyes of the law, cats are chattels, the property of their owner’ (Northern Ireland were already ahead of the game), more than 90 per cent of dogs are chipped, saving local authorities money and owners anguish. This has had a knock on effect on cats, with 62 per cent being microchipped according to the PDSA’s 2015 PAW report (PDSA 2015), and this figure seems to be increasing further in 2016. What are the benefits to cats and
their owners? As many cats in the UK are allowed to free roam, becoming lost or injured is inevitably a greater issue than with dogs, so aiding reunification with their owners is by far the biggest benefit. This ranges from the stray road traffic victim that needs treatment beyond the initial emergency care to the cat that mysteriously ends up at the other end of the country by hitch-hiking in the back of a van. Even those killed on the road can be traced by local authorities and their owners at least know what has happened to them. I have personal experience of this. My beloved cat Oscar was the first I ever chipped in 1989 and, after going missing 10 years later, he was located three years after that via his chip. He was living a life of luxury with a very kind old lady, so he spent the rest of his days there, but knowing he was OK was such a joy and relief. It is estimated that more than 150,000 cats go through rescue centres every year (Stavisky and others 2012), with a high proportion being strays, and the majority of centres are full most of the time, meaning many animals in need are turned away. If all cats were chipped it would mean that there was more capacity for genuinely unwanted cats and resources could be concentrated on these cats. Although microchipping is not absolute proof of ownership, it provides significant evidence and would eliminate the cases of rehomed cats having to be returned to their original home, often causing stress to both the cats and people involved. It would avoid owned cats accidently caught in traps set for feral cats being neutered against their owner’s wishes (of course, they always happen to be the most valuable breeding cats in these cases!). It also decreases the need for cats to wear collars, hence decreasing the number of horrific axillary and other collar-related injuries.
Downloaded from http://veterinaryrecord.bmj.com/ on September 5, 2017 - Published by group.bmj.com
Viewpoint also be helpful if information about pets entering the UK from abroad was stored on a central, readily accessible database that could be accessed should there be an outbreak of an exotic disease, or if strays with foreign microchips enter UK welfare organisations, which is an Compulsory microchipping of cats would make life better for cat increasingly owners, welfare organisations and, most importantly, for cats common phenomenon. We may never really ‘own’ a cat, Will it take a rabies outbreak for Defra to but we do have responsibilities for them see the benefit of this? By then it would be as owners and as a society, so perhaps too late. compulsory microchipping should be on Cats’ independent and enigmatic nature the agenda. is one of the reasons they are such popular
‘Overall, the welfare benefits of microchipping far outweigh the risks of significant adverse reactions’ pets but it also means that they are often misunderstood and not given as much care and protection as they need in our everchanging society. Vets play a huge part in educating owners about feline needs and the more the message about the benefits of microchipping is disseminated the better.
References
PDSA (2015) PDSA Animal Wellbeing report 2015. www.pdsa.org.uk/get-involved/our-current-campaigns/ pdsa-animal-wellbeing-report. Accessed August 8, 2016 Stavisky, J., BrennaN, M. L., Downes, M. & Dean, R. (2012) Demographics and economic burden of un-owned cats and dogs in the UK: results of a 2010 census. BMC Veterinary Research 8, 163 Veterinary Medicines Directorate (2016) Microchip adverse event reporting scheme: Review April 2014 to December 2015. www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/ file/527763/951335-Microchip_report_2015.pdf. Accessed August 8, 2016
doi: 10.1136/vr.i4361
August 13, 2016 | Veterinary Record | 179
Photograph: Cats Protection
There is little point in microchipping feral cats as it is impossible to scan them without sedation, but if all owned cats were chipped then welfare organisations could neuter unchipped cats without fear of prosecution for criminal damage. What are the perceived negatives of compulsory microchipping? The cost (£20 to £30 on average) is one, but realistically it is a drop in the ocean compared to the lifetime cost of owning a cat, and charities like Cats Protection may be able to give assistance to those on very low incomes. There is some concern about microchips being associated with feline injection-site sarcomas (FISS) but there is little evidence that they are a significant cause. Most adverse reactions to microchips, even in cats, are migration and failure according to a review of adverse reactions from April 2014 to December 2015 by the Veterinary Medicines Directive (VMD 2016). A tiny number of these involved a swelling but none of the cases discussed in the report was confirmed as FISS. Overall, the welfare benefits of microchipping far outweigh the risks of significant adverse reactions. There is the issue of enforcement. Being realistic, this is challenging: the veterinary profession is not expected to police microchips in dogs and likewise with cats. But as with dogs the numbers of chipped cats would significantly increase if microchipping were compulsory and that in itself would be beneficial. Like the legislation for dogs, it is imperative that the owners’ details are kept up-to-date on a UK database. It would
Downloaded from http://veterinaryrecord.bmj.com/ on September 5, 2017 - Published by group.bmj.com
Feline lost: making microchipping compulsory for domestic cats M. Roberts Veterinary Record 2016 179: 178-179
doi: 10.1136/vr.i4361 Updated information and services can be found at: http://veterinaryrecord.bmj.com/content/179/7/178
These include:
References Email alerting service
This article cites 1 articles, 0 of which you can access for free at: http://veterinaryrecord.bmj.com/content/179/7/178#BIBL 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/
Viewpoint
Viewpoint
Feline lost: making microchipping compulsory for domestic cats The independent nature of cats means that they are more likely to become lost or injured than dogs. Maggie Roberts believes that microchipping of cats should be compulsory in the UK as is the case with dogs.
It is often said that no-one owns a cat. After all, dogs have masters and cats have servants. When you call a dog it comes to you; when you call a cat it says ‘leave a message and I’ll get back to you’. The independent nature of cats means that, although we may share our lives with them, we never have control over them in the way we do with a dog. Reflecting this, the legislation affecting pet cats is unsurprisingly sparse in comparison with dogs. In fact, in the eyes of the law, cats are chattels, the property of their owner. Owners do have responsibilities to ensure welfare under the Animal Welfare Acts, and licences are required for boarding catteries and pet shops, but that’s about the extent of it. There is currently no legislation specifically on the breeding of cats, something that Cats Protection would like to be rectified, especially in the form of (hopefully) Defraapproved best practice guidelines and a kitten checklist for potential owners. As cats are seen as chattels it means that if lost, stolen or rehomed without consent, the cat always belongs to the original owner and must be returned to them. This has led to challenging situations for rehoming centres; cats rehomed in good faith have to be returned to the original owner who may only have made themselves known several weeks or even months after the cat went missing. As local authorities have responsibilities for stray dogs, the law allows rehoming (or destruction) after seven days if an owner does not come forward. As they have no
M. Roberts, BVM&S, MRCVS, Director of Veterinary Services, Cats Protection, National Cat Centre, Chelwood Gate, Haywards Heath RH17 7TT e-mail: [email protected] 178 | Veterinary Record | August 13, 2016
such responsibility for cats, there hasn’t been a pressing need for a change in the law, and this is unlikely to be deemed a priority in the current political turmoil we find ourselves in. However, what would make life considerably better for cat owners, welfare organisations and, most importantly, for cats, would be the introduction of compulsory microchipping of owned cats. Since the introduction of compulsory microchipping of dogs earlier this year across England, Scotland and Wales
‘In the eyes of the law, cats are chattels, the property of their owner’ (Northern Ireland were already ahead of the game), more than 90 per cent of dogs are chipped, saving local authorities money and owners anguish. This has had a knock on effect on cats, with 62 per cent being microchipped according to the PDSA’s 2015 PAW report (PDSA 2015), and this figure seems to be increasing further in 2016. What are the benefits to cats and
their owners? As many cats in the UK are allowed to free roam, becoming lost or injured is inevitably a greater issue than with dogs, so aiding reunification with their owners is by far the biggest benefit. This ranges from the stray road traffic victim that needs treatment beyond the initial emergency care to the cat that mysteriously ends up at the other end of the country by hitch-hiking in the back of a van. Even those killed on the road can be traced by local authorities and their owners at least know what has happened to them. I have personal experience of this. My beloved cat Oscar was the first I ever chipped in 1989 and, after going missing 10 years later, he was located three years after that via his chip. He was living a life of luxury with a very kind old lady, so he spent the rest of his days there, but knowing he was OK was such a joy and relief. It is estimated that more than 150,000 cats go through rescue centres every year (Stavisky and others 2012), with a high proportion being strays, and the majority of centres are full most of the time, meaning many animals in need are turned away. If all cats were chipped it would mean that there was more capacity for genuinely unwanted cats and resources could be concentrated on these cats. Although microchipping is not absolute proof of ownership, it provides significant evidence and would eliminate the cases of rehomed cats having to be returned to their original home, often causing stress to both the cats and people involved. It would avoid owned cats accidently caught in traps set for feral cats being neutered against their owner’s wishes (of course, they always happen to be the most valuable breeding cats in these cases!). It also decreases the need for cats to wear collars, hence decreasing the number of horrific axillary and other collar-related injuries.
Downloaded from http://veterinaryrecord.bmj.com/ on September 5, 2017 - Published by group.bmj.com
Viewpoint also be helpful if information about pets entering the UK from abroad was stored on a central, readily accessible database that could be accessed should there be an outbreak of an exotic disease, or if strays with foreign microchips enter UK welfare organisations, which is an Compulsory microchipping of cats would make life better for cat increasingly owners, welfare organisations and, most importantly, for cats common phenomenon. We may never really ‘own’ a cat, Will it take a rabies outbreak for Defra to but we do have responsibilities for them see the benefit of this? By then it would be as owners and as a society, so perhaps too late. compulsory microchipping should be on Cats’ independent and enigmatic nature the agenda. is one of the reasons they are such popular
‘Overall, the welfare benefits of microchipping far outweigh the risks of significant adverse reactions’ pets but it also means that they are often misunderstood and not given as much care and protection as they need in our everchanging society. Vets play a huge part in educating owners about feline needs and the more the message about the benefits of microchipping is disseminated the better.
References
PDSA (2015) PDSA Animal Wellbeing report 2015. www.pdsa.org.uk/get-involved/our-current-campaigns/ pdsa-animal-wellbeing-report. Accessed August 8, 2016 Stavisky, J., BrennaN, M. L., Downes, M. & Dean, R. (2012) Demographics and economic burden of un-owned cats and dogs in the UK: results of a 2010 census. BMC Veterinary Research 8, 163 Veterinary Medicines Directorate (2016) Microchip adverse event reporting scheme: Review April 2014 to December 2015. www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/ file/527763/951335-Microchip_report_2015.pdf. Accessed August 8, 2016
doi: 10.1136/vr.i4361
August 13, 2016 | Veterinary Record | 179
Photograph: Cats Protection
There is little point in microchipping feral cats as it is impossible to scan them without sedation, but if all owned cats were chipped then welfare organisations could neuter unchipped cats without fear of prosecution for criminal damage. What are the perceived negatives of compulsory microchipping? The cost (£20 to £30 on average) is one, but realistically it is a drop in the ocean compared to the lifetime cost of owning a cat, and charities like Cats Protection may be able to give assistance to those on very low incomes. There is some concern about microchips being associated with feline injection-site sarcomas (FISS) but there is little evidence that they are a significant cause. Most adverse reactions to microchips, even in cats, are migration and failure according to a review of adverse reactions from April 2014 to December 2015 by the Veterinary Medicines Directive (VMD 2016). A tiny number of these involved a swelling but none of the cases discussed in the report was confirmed as FISS. Overall, the welfare benefits of microchipping far outweigh the risks of significant adverse reactions. There is the issue of enforcement. Being realistic, this is challenging: the veterinary profession is not expected to police microchips in dogs and likewise with cats. But as with dogs the numbers of chipped cats would significantly increase if microchipping were compulsory and that in itself would be beneficial. Like the legislation for dogs, it is imperative that the owners’ details are kept up-to-date on a UK database. It would
Downloaded from http://veterinaryrecord.bmj.com/ on September 5, 2017 - Published by group.bmj.com
Feline lost: making microchipping compulsory for domestic cats M. Roberts Veterinary Record 2016 179: 178-179
doi: 10.1136/vr.i4361 Updated information and services can be found at: http://veterinaryrecord.bmj.com/content/179/7/178
These include:
References Email alerting service
This article cites 1 articles, 0 of which you can access for free at: http://veterinaryrecord.bmj.com/content/179/7/178#BIBL 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/
