I have heard stories of people receiving import dogs with their ears cut off (where the tattoos used to be). Meaning someone steals a dog removes the evidence basically and profits. Which in my opinion, is stupid cuz you really can't breed the dog and paper the litter.

Also I would assume that the tattoo would be seen in photos / headshots etc.

I have recently read on a website that a dog can be tattooed on the inside of their thigh, I think it was.

Does anyone have experience tattooing their dog anywhere else besides the ear?

And is it like the stamping of the ear tattoo, or more like a person tattoo?

Thanx

Not sure why a tattoo or not would keep you from registering a dog with AKC if that is what you mean by registering. You need pedigree papers to register not a tattoo. Although you can (And I did) put the tattoo number on the registration papers they are not a requirement. But yes, a cut off ear would be a good clue to the fact that the dog has been stolen & the 'papers' if there are any, are most likely false. You also do not need pictures to register a dog with AKC. At least I never submitted any with any of my dogs registrations. You do need DNA to register the male as the sire of a litter.
My dogs have all had their ears tattooed as very young pups, under 9 weeks old. I believe that if ears are tattooed it has to be before the pups reach a certain age so as not to damage the ear. Ed or Cindy may respond to this. I think that I remember Bob Scott mentioning that one of his dogs had their theigh tattooed. He may respond to this if he sees it. I would believe that it would be like a people tattoo, since the ear tattoo is done with a stamp that is kind of like a clamp with little teeth that are squeezed on the ear to make the holes for the letters & numbers. Look on this site for tattoo equipment & you can see what it looks like. I can't imagine how you could put a theigh between that.

I have a dog tattooed on the inside of the thigh. A tattoo can be any sort of identification form. Different organizations have different formats such as USA etc. I chose to put my dog's AKC registration number and the letters A.K.C. following it. Some people use their SSN but I was told not to use that for identity theft reasons.

For SchH though it is more problematic to show the tattoo when it is on the inner thigh rather than the ear. However, I believe I heard a rumor that FCI is moving towards utilizing microchip identification over the tattoo. Have no real information on that though.

Anne,
My dog is AKC registered(11mnths old). He is just not tattoed yet. I'm just trying to see what my options are. I'd rather not have his ear tattoed, it may show in close up pictures or what not. I am aware of the stamping mechanism/technique for the ear tattoos.

Ingrid,
Did the vet do the tattoo? Is sedation is required?

My dogs (years ago) were tattoed without sedation. Just muscle power from a couple of us holding them down. Not too painful or tramatizing it seemed.

It depends on how dark your dogs ears are as to how much it shows up.
Mine are tattooed and when you can see it in a picture (which isn't often) - just makes them look like a working gsd (which they are).

Here's a pic of my male - you can just about make out a green blur. http://i148.photobucket.com/albums/s6/tanithwheeler/DSC00382-3.jpg

Here's the new pup - recent black ink tattoo (it's actually clearer now than when photo was taken), once she gets hair in her ears it will be a little less visable.
http://tinypic.com/m/4qojl0/1

It doesn't detract from appearance in any case.

In most cases of ear tattoos... they are put down lower in the ear just for the reason that someone stealing the dog & trying to rid it of the tattoo, as a means of identity, would really have to just about cut the ear off entirely rather then just clip the upper part of the ear which could look like the dog just had an ear injury. My female (a Leerburg bitch) has hers way down in her ear. My male's is a smaller tattoo, but is still lower in the ear. I don't know of any older dogs that had their (other then very young pups) that have had their ears tattooed. Just don't know if it just isn't done or if there is a medical etc reason for it not being done on anything other than a young pup. As far as the tattoos showing up in pics...They fade over time & can only be read if you looke VERY closely in the ear. Only as pups could you see the green dye that is used to mark the tattoo.

Just a note on the AKC requiring photos. They do require photos of foreign dogs along with the papers to register them with the AKC. So no, a dog born here does not need to have photos for registration, but a dog born elsewhere will. A front shot as well as one from the side.

DNA is only required on some dogs, not all. http://www.akc.org/dna/

And yes, the type of tattoo gun used on thighs is more like a human style- not a clamp. Pen style.

So far as all these ear-less dogs... Well, I have yet to see one, but have heard the same argument made by people who are pro thigh tattoo. My room mate runs an animal shelter. We hardly ever see dogs that are tattooed or chipped, but the ear tattoos are much easier to see. Getting a strange dog to flip over and show you his belly isn't exactly easy or even something most people would think to do. No matter where you put your tattoo, it needs to be easily read and traceable back to you, otherwise it is useless.

I stand corrected about the photos. My 3 yr old male's father was the 2005 BSA winner out of a Belgium imported female & I know that the man that imported the already bred female had to get DNA on the male & had to chase the dog down, due to the fact that he had been moved from Germany to another country after the litter was whelped. It took a while to get all the paperwork & DNA done. I didn't remember him mentioning needing photos. I thought that all the litter sires needed to be DNA'd. My mistake.