PasoVoice.Com :: European Union to Require Microchipping of Foals

caliber · Site Admin

European Union to Require Microchipping of Foals
by: Edited Press Release
March 10 2008, Article # 11464

Member states of the European Union have reached an agreement on a new regulation that will revise existing equine identification legislation. The main new requirement is the compulsory microchipping of foals born after July 1, 2009.

The requirement will not be retroactive for older horses and the regulation does allow for member states to approve alternative methods to the microchip.

Microchips provide a link between a horse and its passport and strengthen existing horse identification requirements. Such unique identification of equidae could also prove useful for disease control and surveillance purposes and for the recovery of lost or stolen horses.

In the U.K., the Department of Environment, Food, and Rural Affairs will be consulting with the horse industry over the implementation of the new requirements.

grif

Big brother has arrived. Won't be long before we are all lojacked. rant

caliber · Site Admin

I have a question, why would it be a bad thing? just asking popcorn

grif

It would not be a bad thing if people chose to do it. It would be a good thing. What is, to me and many others who prefer freedom over safety, a bad thing is the government overinvolvement in private affairs either of a business or a personal nature. The fact that the government would force everyone who owns a horse to implant a foreign object under their skin whether they wanted to or not is a bit scary when you think about individual freedoms. Now if you are of the mindset that life for all is better if the government has more control of the populace, there is nothing wrong with this. And there are plenty of countries that operate in this manner. I am just not a fan of this type of thinking as I prefer the freedom to take responsibility for my own life and livelyhood and for that of my livestock. If I want to implant, I will. If I don't I won't. Freedom, choice, personal responsibility.

cristy

well said Cindy.

britzlove

I'm the exact opposite, I'm all for forced microchipping.

I understand the need to feel you have personal freedom, but the horse should count for more. I see it as a step to make horses closer to a higher end commodity, I mean you think nothing of having to follow regulations on cars, boats, guns right? Well, guns maybe.

The good that would come is important to me. It would be the death of the horse trader. It might eventually be easier to ship overseas. All these people going to court and saying they didn't starve the horses, they got them that way, would have an electronic transfer to prove one way or the other. Tax fraud would be harder.

It would have to be affordable though. I still haven't seen a plan that was yet, but I think if it was a 25$ chip like pets, and you had to maybe pay $100 a year for tracking service registration, I think that it is an affordable step any potential horse owner should take.

For disease though, I feel a little differently. I could take a EIA positive horse anywhere I wanted. Just like even with DNA testing, you can still take a grade horse into a class with false papers. How sure is anybody that a piece of paper, flimsy paper at that, proves that a horse doesn't have a disease? So it would be a very hard thing to regulate, and only satellite tracking would help.

All the bad things that come about because of advanced technology, this is a positive thing I think. If you have to have every foal produced chipped, then the transfer of that foal has an electronic signature, and if that horse is ever tested positive it has an electronic report, and any further sales also come with an electronic signature, I just think this is a great idea.

However, I don't think it would ever happen. And I'd be interested to learn more about how the EU intends to enforce and regulate the use of chips.

And doesn't CONTEFEPASO require chips? Aren't they scanned at shows? I mean, small price to pay IMO, you want to show your horse, you get it chipped. So it's a small step to consider it a small price to pay for me to own horses. If I want to own a horse and I am required to be accountable for it by chipping and registering electronically, small price for the good things IMO.

Britz

grif

Yes, there is nothing wrong with requiring a chip to show. Just like there is nothing wrong with requiring a vehicle tag to drive on public streets. But it is not right to require me to buy a tag for a vehicle that never leaves my property nor is it right to require me to chip all of my horses. See the difference?

britzlove

Yes, there is nothing wrong with requiring a chip to show. Just like there is nothing wrong with requiring a vehicle tag to drive on public streets. But it is not right to require me to buy a tag for a vehicle that never leaves my property nor is it right to require me to chip all of my horses. See the difference?

Well, technically, you are supposed to register any vehicle on your property whether driving or not. I know, people don't tag it because why would you, but technically, you are supposed to keep the renewals up on the registrations. And I'm OK with that too, because I don't want someone to kidnap my daughter in an untraceable vehicle. Now, I realize lawbreakers are lawbreakers, I'm just trying to show what I mean. If you own a piece o crud pickup like my wood truck, you still have to renew registration, which we do, and it's only like I dunno,cheap though. We have farm tags on it, again, cheaper.

For the privilage to own a dog, many places require not only registration, but dog tax. Rabies shots are required, nearly everywhere, and rabies tags. Now, you only have to do it if you think there's a remote possibility your dog may get off your property, or the assessor will visit when you aren't there, essentially it's hard to get caught not doing it, but it is a regulation you are required to follow.

Guns must be registered. If you want it to be used, you have to have a permit. Regardless of whether you use it, you are required to register it or face a misdemeanor if you are caught with an unregistered weapon.

Ooh I just thought of another one on the dog thought, home insurance requires you to report the breed and type of dog now, or you may pay a higher premium, or be dropped or go uninsured if you chose to have certain dogs. While that's not the government, it's a company safeguarded by the government.

Now I know plenty of people that are against gun registration, and dog tax etc and resent the governments controls...but I kind of like living in a governed society. And I hope to continue in a governed society and really don't mind giving them more power to control me, if it also helps them control the bad guys.

grif

Actually, most of those things that you mentioned are governed by the state so it depends on what state you live in as to what the laws are that govern those things. And you are more than happy to want more government involvement in your world. And it seems that our country is going in that direction these days. So if those of you who want more government control win, rather it is Constitutional or not, those of us who like our freedom and the free market economy will have to find another country. Oh, and, eventuallly, you guys will have to just throw the Constitution out the window as it will not be worth the paper it is printed on. Even though the paper is over 200 years old.