I wish the microchip had gps tracking but alas they havnt come out with that yet. They do have this GPS Trakker. Has anyone used it? Do you think it is overkill or just overly cautious?  http://www.pettracker.com/pet-products/pet-gps-tracker

I think anything that allows any one you don't know to be able to track your whereabouts is creepy. If your dog is with you, THEY know where YOU are and where you've been. Like a bunch of rats an overcrowded cage......an individual's life is not their own, it's part of the mass (as in tumor).

BTw, I think that putting tracking devices in dogs is only to break the idea to you gently...get every one accustomed to it in dogs first, then kids, then compulsory for the world population.......don't fall for it.

I agree whole heartedly with Joanro.

GPS tracking would have made it a lot easier on these "AUTHORITIES" to confiscate family dogs.  

DECEMBER 06, 2012

Sikeston MO begins pit bull roundup

Several years ago, Sikeston, MO passed a law that automatically made 'pit bull type' dogs automatically declared dangerous. In order for people to keep their dogs, owners had to license their dogs (which included taking multiple pictures of the dogs from various angles), keep them leashed and muzzled, and  post 'beware of dog signs in their yards.

However, apparently that wasn't enough for the authorities in Sikeston -- and yesterday, they began rounding up 'pit bulls' out of people's homes to take to the shelter. Most will likely be killed there. It doesn't matter that these dogs were family pets. It doesn't matter that owners did everything to comply with the law. It doesn't seem to matter that the dogs had no history of aggression or complaints about them. It only seems to matter that they look like pit bulls, and the city authorities want them dead.  All of them.

This isn't happening in a 3rd world country. Or some science fiction novel. It's happening in the United States. In 2012. And this isn't the only place it's happened.

Several years ago, a similar incident happened in Denver, when authorities began going around and rounding up 'pit bull' type dogs, leading to a massive pile of dead pit bulls in the city (note, the picture at the link may be disturbing). And this is even different than the killing of homeless animals in our shelters (which is its own travesty), this is the purposeful rounding up and killing of people's family pets that HAVE loving homes.

People in Sikeston, Mo should be upset that this is happening. In fact, people everywhere should be upset this is happening. And if you are, sign the petition at Best Friends. And if you're in Sikeston, change all of your city leaders today. This is a tremendous waste of taxpayer funds that could be used to solve many of the city's other major problems.

For those not familiar with Sikeston, MO, here's a bit of the rundown. Sikeston is a community of about 16,000 people in rural Southeast Missouri. It's a poor community, with 35% of the population living below the poverty line. Crime in the city is high, with a crime index in 2010 of 632 (nearly double the national average of 319, and of the poverty level of Sikeston in 2002) -- in spite of the city employing nearly double the police officers per 1000 people (4) than the national average (2.5). So, there are much better places the city could be spending this money.

And if dog bites really are a huge issue in Sikeston, The Fox News report also does a great job of showing the failure of the city officials -- as they captured multiple video shots of dogs roaming at large through the neighborhoods of Sikeston. When one person who's dogs were taken by authorities mentioned the loose dogs, the police told her that "they couldn't catch them".  Excellent.

This is the type of thing you get when cities focus on hysterics instead of intelligence in creating their animal control (or any other) ordinances. This is what breed-specific legislation is. And this is why it needs to end.

I do want to tip my hat to the Sikeston Humane Society -- who in an effort to deal with the issue, transferred 35 dogs up to the St. Louis area in order to make room for the incoming animals in order to avoid having to kill for space. They seem to be making a strong effort in spite of a crappy situation created by their city leader

KC DOG BLOG

Unofficial Watchdog on Animal Welfare Issues

"I think anything that allows any one you don't know to be able to track your whereabouts is creepy."

It's a little late to start worrying about it now.  They can track your cell phone and virtually all newer cars and if you have neither, more and more police vehicles are being outfitted with scanners that can scan and log there whereabouts of thousands of license plates per hour.  Cameras are everywhere and the BMV is now very strict about how they take your picture so that it is compliant with facial recognition software.  Lexis Nexis is also tracking everything about you from when you go to the doctor and for what to which magazines you subscribe to what you buy at the store.  There really is no such thing as privacy anymore.

All true, Keith. But they don't know when you're siting in the woods listening to the birds, yet. GPS in your dog would remove that last bit of sanctity.

Hunting dogs are commonly outfitted with GSP, if they catch the scent of a deer, rabbit or other and take off, their owners can find them. Other than that, I don't see a reason for them.

Though Trixx wishes Teddy had one on when he took off after the bitch in heat.

So what is wrong with putting a GPS tracking collar on your dog? I have one and use it all the time when I take my dog to the woods. I bet the police dept in northern Mich wished they had one on their dog when searching in the woods and a deer ran in front of them and dog took off after the deer never to be seen again. The Garmin GPS tracking system is a great tool and I never let my dog loose in the woods without it. If I was you I would re-think about what this feature can do. Not only will it tell you where the dog is but also where it has been. And no not everyone can track your dog without knowing the collars code. Not to mention they have to have a receiver capable of doing it and be in the "range" of the collar.

This topic is about IMPLANTED GPS, as in Microchip with gps capability. Putting a collar on your dog with GPS is innocuous. IMPLANTING GPS is not. I refer you to the second and third posts on this thread. I should have made it more clear and said, "IMPLANTING tracking devices in dogs..." instead of "...putting tracking devices in dogs..."