DOG IDENTIFICATION INFO H.B. 5278 (H-1): COMMITTEE SUMMARY
House Bill 5278 (Substitute H-1 as passed by the House)
Sponsor: Representative Steve Bieda
House Committee: Local Government and Urban Policy
Senate Committee: Local, Urban and State Affairs
Date Completed: 11-29-06
CONTENT
The bill would amend the Dog Law to require that dog owners be given information about microchip implantation and registration, and a statewide tattoo identification registry, when a dog license was issued.
Specifically, the bill would require a county, city, or township treasurer, a city clerk, or the authorized agent of a city or township treasurer, including a licensed veterinarian, an animal control shelter, or an animal protection shelter, when issuing a dog license, to give the dog owner information about both of the following:
-- The availability of microchip implantation and registration for dogs by a licensed veterinarian, an animal control shelter, or an animal protection shelter.
-- The availability of a statewide tattoo identification registry for dogs maintained by the Michigan Department of Agriculture (MDA).
"Animal control shelter" and "animal protection shelter" would mean those terms as defined in Public Act 287 of 1969 (which governs pet shops, dog pounds, and animal shelters) and would be facilities registered with the MDA under that Act.
(Public Act 287 defines "animal control shelter" as a facility operated by a municipality for the impoundment and care of animals that are found in the streets or at large, animals that are otherwise held due to the violation of a municipal ordinance or State law, or animals that are surrendered to the shelter. "Animal protection shelter" means a facility operated by a person, humane society, society for the prevention of cruelty to animals, or any other nonprofit organization for the care of homeless animals.)
Proposed MCL 287.274a Legislative Analyst: Suzanne Lowe
FISCAL IMPACT
The bill potentially would increase local unit expenses, depending on the cost of providing the information specified by the bill. The bill also could increase local unit revenue, to the extent that more individuals used microchip implantation as a result of the information required by the bill. The net effect of these changes is unknown.
The bill would have no fiscal impact on State government.
Fiscal Analyst: David Zin
Analysis was prepared by nonpartisan Senate staff for use by the Senate in its deliberations and does not constitute an official statement of legislative intent. hb5278/0506