SCAD is a Member Society of
MICROCHIPS WITH EVERYTHING
Are chips the solution to Bangkok's stray dog problem?
Story by Chompoo Trakullertsathien
Some people believe that, though the BMA's microchip scheme will be useful to identify dogs and their owners, it won't prevent dogs from being abandoned.
As the BMA continues its now well over 10-year mission to register and microchip pet dogs in a bid to reduce Bangkok's population of stray dogs, questions and doubts have begun to emerge over the effectiveness and readiness of the scheme.
Some dog owners are willing to follow the new regulations by having their dogs registered, as the BMA is offering to microchip the first 50,000 dogs for free at its eight clinics. Some owners believe that microchipping will help them find their dogs should they run away. Others have learned of the registration drive but will not take their dogs to be chipped, saying they don't believe microchipping will curb the number of homeless dogs when the BMA does not have a plan in place to neuter them.
Most significantly, many people who keep dogs, in particular the people who rescue stray dogs, can't afford the high cost of microchipping. The situation is aggravated by irresponsible dog owners dumping their dogs rather than having them microchipped in order to avoid the penalties that will be enforced once the deadline for having pet dogs chipped has passed. It seems that the problem of stray dogs and dog dumping is more complicated than it appears, since one problem leads to the other.
In an attempt to find the right solution, groups including vets, dog rescuers, dog lovers and owners and people who care for strays are expressing their views on the BMA's latest efforts to cope with Bangkok's stray dogs and irresponsible dog owners.
Here are some views and suggestions of people affected by the BMA's plans.
Dr Chisanu Piyacharoensri, vice-president of the Wild Animal Rescue Foundation of Thailand
"I don't think that microchipping is suitable for our country. Although microchips are an internationally accepted method of canine ID, we should start with visible ID, such as ear tattoos or simple collars with engraved tags carrying the dog's name and the owner's address and phone number. This is a simpler method, more suitable for our community. In the US, each community makes its own decision when it comes to dog IDs. When the local database here is complete, the entire system will be successful, but what the BMA is doing is jumping ahead to a big structure, instead of piecing together each communities' database and then expanding to a national canine register. I'm not against the BMA's campaign, but I think if we start with a good foundation the crusade will last longer.
"If the BMA wants to register pet dogs, it should be well prepared. What it has to do first is to set up a database recording details of dogs and their owners. But what the BMA has now is hand-written document kept at its office. We must start the microchip implantation programme after such a database is complete, to avoid missing data. What will happen if we come across one lost dog and we take it to the BMA and the authority can't find the paper record of the dog and its owner? Who is going to be responsible for that dog?
"For long-term success, the BMA should launch other projects, like neutering and vaccinating stray dogs against communicable diseases, in order to control the population of strays and bolster public safety. Registration alone can't help reduce the number of homeless dogs. So far, I haven't seen a clear-cut plan from the BMA."
Dr Siraya Chunekamrai, president of the the Veterinary Practitioners Association of Thailand
"I think the BMA's microchip scheme is just one of the measures needed to achieve humane dog population control. It's not the whole answer to stray animal control, but only part of it. The rest should include sterilisation programmes, the regulation of sales of animals in pet shops and education - especially about responsible pet ownership. I think there should be more effort to educate and enroll pet owners to join this programme - not the programme to chip dogs, but the crusade to end animal cruelty, abandonment and inhumane measures to control the stray population.
"Microchipping is only to identify and register owned animals. If it's not affordable or convenient, or people don't understand the rationale behind it, owners might even abandon their animals, and that will compound the problem of strays as has already happened in some countries. It might also be a good idea to have some incentives behind this process, such as making it very cheap to register neutered animals. The giving away of 50,000 free microchips is okay, but it might be better to put that money into an incentive programme and subsidise the cost of microchips for sterilised animals.
"Identification and registration without other humane animal control measures will achieve very little in the long run. So if we take a step back and make the effort to educate people and campaign for a common cause, we could find strong support from owners who want to take part in the scheme voluntarily.
"What do we want to achieve in the end? We want fewer stray animals, but that's not a very inspiring aim. What we actually want might be to do away with animal suffering, and this appeals to the naturally compassionate side of most pet owners. So if we campaign for people to join together to end animal suffering by being committed to taking responsibility for their animals, we could start to develop a stronger, more responsible society."
Pol Capt Dr Araya Phonsuwan, from Vet4 Polyclinic Animal Hospital
"I agree with the BMA's microchip plans as a way to help identify owned dogs. Besides, it's the most acceptable method implemented worldwide. It's not painful compared to other methods, like tattooing, which can fade in the long term ... collars can slip off, but microchipping is a more durable solution. Although it's beneficial both to the animal and owner, many dog keepers are not willing to participate. They see it as a bother and a huge expense. That's why the BMA has to issue penalties to those who refuse to have their dogs chipped. First of all, I think we should adjust our attitudes, otherwise the BMA scheme can't be successful. I help campaign for the project by providing a free service for registering dogs at the BMA at the owner's convenience. I believe that more and more owners will join the campaign if they learn that this process is painless and time-saving.
"Microchipping can yield many benefits, both on a personal level and a national level. It's high time to get rid of image of Bangkok as a city overrun by stray dogs. Domestic dogs that are allowed to roam freely are the cause of many problems, including like the spread of contagious diseases, environmental pollution ... excrement, barking and howling ... and the loss of the pedigree dogs.
"But microchipping can't directly help solve the stray dog problem. In fact, there are three things to do to help control the population of homeless dogs. Firstly, pet owners must neuter their dogs. Secondly, food for strays should be controlled by not allowing good Samaritans to feed strays, since this can increase the stray population. If they want to feed them they have to be responsible for other things like neutering or vaccinating them. And lastly, owners must not release their dogs outside without close supervision."
Chantra Patarawetsakul, rescuer of strays and owner of around 20, mostly old and handicapped, dogs
"I support the registering scheme because then dogs will become 'legal citizens', but what I have learned is that the BMA's database is incomplete. So I'm afraid that the microchipping will be pointless. It's easy to implant microchips, but it's difficult to collect data about dogs and their owners. The main problem with BMA's scheme is not about implanting microchips, but about the systematic gathering of data. If the BMA can implant microchips in 50,000 dogs, there must be 50,000 documents - not including copies of house registrations and copies of ID cards. How will the authorities keep this information and be able to search it?
"But what I am against is that I see no relation between microchipping and the stopping dogs from being abandoned. Irresponsible owners are not willing to microchip their dogs, so there is no guarantee that they won't dump their dogs. How many pet dogs will be dumped before the deadline?
"It's useless to campaign that microchipping can help prevent dogs from being abandoned.
"I asked someone senior at the BMA what I would have to do if I picked up a lost dog. Would I have to take it to the BMA to have its microchip read? Can I bring the dog to any clinic near where I live for scanning to find the owner? I couldn't get an answer to my question. I was simply told me that it takes time. But how long? And how can we differentiate a microchipped dog from a stray dog?
"Do we have to scan every stray dog to find one lost dog?
"My dogs have not been microchipped yet because the cost is huge. It's not convenient for me to use the BMA's free service, and I can't wait in a long queue. I would like to see how the BMA can help support me and other dog rescuers because we have our own costs to pay for our dogs' monthly upkeep. I'd like to know what I will get if I have my dogs microchipped. Do I get a tax break? However, at the end of the day, I will have to obey the law."
Jaroenjit Tapanatorn, nurse and keeper of stray dogs
"I support the BMA's microchip scheme, but it should be implemented in the kennels where the dogs are bred, since some of the homeless dogs come from such places.
"I have seen many Alsatians abandoned when they have medical problems, and I have to pick them up and take care of them. Puppies that are not cute often end up on the street and at temples. I would like to tell all pet lovers to keep their dogs and treat them with loving kindness. If you keep a dog because of love, you'll leave it someday when you feel bored of it. But you will keep it with you forever if you feel loving compassion towards it.
"The BMA shouldn't force us to microchip the dogs we take in because we have adopted many stray dogs. I can't afford the cost, since I have to pay for their vaccinations, special diets, medicines and neutering. I recently attended a seminar on microchipping, and the authorities told me that the BMA will start with dogs kept as pets, so I told them that when I went back home I would release all of my dogs outside ... and some of my neighbours will do the same. I also told them that all the dogs living in my house are handicapped, and I wouldn't dump them since I'm the one who took them in. So it's not necessary for me to microchip my dogs.
"The BMA's penalties are a bit harsh. It prompts dog owners to be more uncompassionate. I know one lady who keeps 12 strays, and I see that now she lets her dogs stay in front [rather than inside] of her house because she doesn't want to pay for the microchipping. If the BMA wants to solve the problem it should not create more problems."
Tharinee Wipuchanin, founder of Pic-A-Pet-4-Home, who owns about 100 stray dogs
"I don't totally agree with the BMA's microchip project, but I'm willing to cooperate. I don't think that the scheme will be successful. I wonder how the BMA will punish all those who violate the regulations. What they are going to do with dogs that are not microchipped? If they catch them and put them in a shelter, does the BMA have the budget to take care of them for their whole lives? While I do appreciate the BMA's good intentions in trying to solve the problem, I don't think that microchipping will help reduce the number of strays. The best way to do that is to neuter all the strays and raise awareness among owners to have their pets sterilised. The BMA has to exert more effort to launch a continuous neutering project in each community. And the BMA has to educate children to be responsible if they want to keep the animals. Through ways like these I believe that people will stop abandoning dogs.
"But if the BMA is determined to register all pet dogs, it has to establish as many centres as possible to provide a free service, since those with lower incomes can't afford the expense and don't have time to wait in a long queue. Most people who look after strays are poor people. The BMA should have separate measures to deal with this group of owners since what they have done is help lessen the burden of the BMA by taking in stray dogs.
Of my 100 dogs, only one has been microchipped. When the time comes, I will have them all microchipped. I simply don't want to break the law. That's all."
Sherry Conisbee, president of SCAD, a Bangkok-based animal welfare organisation
"Registration and microchipping is a sound principle to encourage responsible pet ownership. Such a system needs excellent resources, both human and financial, a computerised system and a concerted public awareness campaign to advertise the regulations, their objectives and the benefits to the public.
"In sharp contrast to this, Bangkok's introduction of a registration/microchipping scheme has been protracted and half-hearted, the true objectives are cloudy and little enthusiasm or resources have been thrown into creating a sound policy and infrastructure that people can place trust in. Harsh penalties are highlighted, making lower income owners fearful and apprehensive from the outset, especially as the enforcement system is known to have flaws and may be open to abuse.
"If, as many people are being led to believe, the objective of the scheme is to reduce the stray population, then it has little hope of success. High penalties and lack of knowledge of the regulations by both the public and district enforcers will actively promote the dumping of owned dogs. Abandonment is already commonplace in Thailand; next year we can expect to see more dogs dumped than ever before, adding to stray animal numbers, noise pollution, traffic accidents and animal suffering - and an increase in government spending to remove or cull the dogs dumped because of people's inability or unwillingness to pay the fees.
"I believe there are other cost-effective and workable solutions to encourage responsible ownership and curb the number of homeless animals that could be introduced now, either to replace or supplement the current microchipping regulations.
These include:
- Government-led public awareness campaigns about responsible pet ownership. Actively promote neutering of owned pets and discourage pet abandonment by way of a city-wide awareness campaign.
- The introduction of low-cost neutering schemes for owned pets by encouraging and offering incentives for local vets to take part in a city-wide scheme. Provide incentives for the opening of neutering clinics to provide sterilisation of pets at low cost to those who can't afford high fees.
- The introduction of breeder licencing (with suitably high fees) and regulations to make breeders more responsible for the litters they produce to ensure they don't end up as strays.
- Licence and control pet shops - make them responsible for providing appropriate information to buyers about responsible pet care.
- The introduction of fee differentials for licencing of animals: Licences for neutered animals should be cheap, licences for un-neutered animals should be expensive.
- The introduction of animal welfare into the school curriculum. Encourage youngsters to become responsible adult pet owners.
- Put weight behind the proposed introduction of legislation to protect animals. There would then be no need for the BMA's eight new laws that are hard to enforce.
- Insist that all imported dogs are sterilised, unless they are to be used for breeding (in which case high-priced licences should be required)."