Petition to save dog

[Guest guest]

Robin Murphy wrote:

 

> Senator Voinovich can be reached at

> senator_voinovich

 

Let's all send Mr. Voinovich a little letter.

 

I wrote him the following message:

 

PLEASE SAVE ROBBY AND STOP THE USELESS KILLING OF RETIRED

MILITARY ANIMALS.

 

These animals have worked hard to protect humans, we should honor them by

retiring them to a good home, not sentencing them to death.

 

Robby has someone who wants to adopt him, please be kind and let this person

adopt Robby. It is the right thing to do.

 

Thanks,

Tiffany Trader

San Diego, CA 92103

 

 

 

> This website has a variety of contacts at the Marine Corps, but I couln't

> find a Capt. Fitzharris? Maybe we could send to someone else?

[Guest guest]

I turned up the contact name for the marine in charge of the Marine K-9

unit, Master Gunnery Sergeant William Childress @ 703-614-4177. The webmaster

of the Marine website, Gy Foster, sent me this information upon request.

Unfortunately, it is a phone number rather than an email. If someone in the

local area were to phone and get Childress's email, than we could all contact

him. Anyone?

I agree with you about each of us personally sending Senator Voinovich a

letter, Tiffany. I did so too. I think individual letters tend to have more

impact than everyone just signing a petition anyway.

I also did some research on K-9 units. I talked to some K-9 trainers and

handlers. They said that K-9 officers are considered a security risk in

retirement, because the dog's skills can be used for the purposes of crime once

the dog is not busy in the line of duty, if the dog were to fall into the

" wrong " hands. I think personally, that this is a shallow concern because if

the handler has been trusted to work the dog and be with him essentially 24

hours per day for the past 11 years, I figure he can probably be trusted to do

what is needed to protect the dog and keep it under control in retirement.

The one K-9 handler I talked to about this said that he knew that the

American military policy of killing working dogs when they retire, but he said

that they are the only institution that does so. He said that all other

services (policy, security services, etc) that use K-9 officers retire the dogs

into the care of their life-long handlers. I figure the military can do

whatever these other services do to ensure security with retired dogs and their

handlers.

On the other hand, he pointed out that that particular breed of dog probably

only has about 3 years of life left, and probably less than that in good health.

He was of the opinion that it is a kindness to the dog to kill him before he has

to suffer the humiliations and incapacities of physical degeneration such as

lose of control of the bowels and/or bladder, blindness, arthritis, etc., not to

mention not being able to be with the handler 24/7 in the line of duty. He said

that he thinks it is being sentimental to the point of cruelty to allow a dog to

continue when it is in chronic pain and unable to perform his activities as he

always did.

This is a point that I feel some conflict about personally. Personally, I

favour allowing an animal, human or otherwise, to live out their natural life no

matter what their health. I see it as just all part of their experience. I

think much of what older animals (including humans) suffer is because of a life

time of unhealthy feeding habits. Dogs typically suffer the same ill health as

humans in their senior years who have lived on animal products all their lives.

Getting people to feed their dogs vegetarian when they won't even feed

themselves vegetarian can be a challenge, but it is do-able. With the right

approach to the humans though, it can happen. I understand this is what the

dogs need to enjoy a long life of good health, with a very short and minimally

uncomfortable decline at the end. I have had my own dog on vegetarian kibble for

years. He is looking pretty old now, but still has all the alertness, energy

and good humour of his puppy years.

Deborah in BC, Canada

 

> Senator Voinovich can be reached at

> senator_voinovich

 

Let's all send Mr. Voinovich a little letter.

 

I wrote him the following message:

 

PLEASE SAVE ROBBY AND STOP THE USELESS KILLING OF RETIRED

MILITARY ANIMALS.

 

These animals have worked hard to protect humans, we should honor them by

retiring them to a good home, not sentencing them to death.

 

Robby has someone who wants to adopt him, please be kind and let this person

adopt Robby. It is the right thing to do.

 

Thanks,

Tiffany Trader

San Diego, CA 92103

 

 

 

> This website has a variety of contacts at the Marine Corps, but I couln't

> find a Capt. Fitzharris? Maybe we could send to someone else?

 

 

----------

 

 

 

----------

Post message:

Subscribe: -

Un: -

List owner: -owner

 

Shortcut URL to this page:

/community/

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

When I asked, the webmaster sent me the email address for Master Gunnery

Sergeant Willian Childress childresswc So, if anyone hears back

from either Childress or the Senator, please let us know what they have to say.

 

 

I turned up the contact name for the marine in charge of the Marine K-9

unit, Master Gunnery Sergeant William Childress @ 703-614-4177. The webmaster

of the Marine website, Gy Foster, sent me this information upon request.

Unfortunately, it is a phone number rather than an email. If someone in the

local area were to phone and get Childress's email, than we could all contact

him. Anyone?

I agree with you about each of us personally sending Senator Voinovich a

letter, Tiffany. I did so too. I think individual letters tend to have more

impact than everyone just signing a petition anyway.

I also did some research on K-9 units. I talked to some K-9 trainers

and handlers. They said that K-9 officers are considered a security risk in

retirement, because the dog's skills can be used for the purposes of crime once

the dog is not busy in the line of duty, if the dog were to fall into the

" wrong " hands. I think personally, that this is a shallow concern because if

the handler has been trusted to work the dog and be with him essentially 24

hours per day for the past 11 years, I figure he can probably be trusted to do

what is needed to protect the dog and keep it under control in retirement.

The one K-9 handler I talked to about this said that he knew that the

American military policy of killing working dogs when they retire, but he said

that they are the only institution that does so. He said that all other

services (policy, security services, etc) that use K-9 officers retire the dogs

into the care of their life-long handlers. I figure the military can do

whatever these other services do to ensure security with retired dogs and their

handlers.

On the other hand, he pointed out that that particular breed of dog

probably only has about 3 years of life left, and probably less than that in

good health. He was of the opinion that it is a kindness to the dog to kill him

before he has to suffer the humiliations and incapacities of physical

degeneration such as lose of control of the bowels and/or bladder, blindness,

arthritis, etc., not to mention not being able to be with the handler 24/7 in

the line of duty. He said that he thinks it is being sentimental to the point

of cruelty to allow a dog to continue when it is in chronic pain and unable to

perform his activities as he always did.

This is a point that I feel some conflict about personally. Personally,

I favour allowing an animal, human or otherwise, to live out their natural life

no matter what their health. I see it as just all part of their experience. I

think much of what older animals (including humans) suffer is because of a life

time of unhealthy feeding habits. Dogs typically suffer the same ill health as

humans in their senior years who have lived on animal products all their lives.

Getting people to feed their dogs vegetarian when they won't even feed

themselves vegetarian can be a challenge, but it is do-able. With the right

approach to the humans though, it can happen. I understand this is what the

dogs need to enjoy a long life of good health, with a very short and minimally

uncomfortable decline at the end. I have had my own dog on vegetarian kibble for

years. He is looking pretty old now, but still has all the alertness, energy

and good humour of his puppy years.

Deborah in BC, Canada

 

> Senator Voinovich can be reached at

> senator_voinovich

 

Let's all send Mr. Voinovich a little letter.

 

I wrote him the following message:

 

PLEASE SAVE ROBBY AND STOP THE USELESS KILLING OF RETIRED

MILITARY ANIMALS.

 

These animals have worked hard to protect humans, we should honor them

by

retiring them to a good home, not sentencing them to death.

 

Robby has someone who wants to adopt him, please be kind and let this

person

adopt Robby. It is the right thing to do.

 

Thanks,

Tiffany Trader

San Diego, CA 92103

 

 

 

> This website has a variety of contacts at the Marine Corps, but I

couln't

> find a Capt. Fitzharris? Maybe we could send to someone else?

 

 

----------

 

 

 

----------

Post message:

Subscribe: -

Un: -

List owner: -owner

 

Shortcut URL to this page:

/community/

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Hi all;

I got the following response to my email to the Marine Corp about Robby, the

retiring K-9 officer. It seems like a valid and reliable response to me. It

reminds me of how important it can be to check out the details of a claim before

acting upon it. So many things reported in the paper, the source of the

original story, are exaggerated or simply plain wrong, as it seems was the case

with this story. In any case, I think it was good to follow up on it, and make

our feelings known.

 

Deborah

 

 

Thank you all for your concerns about, Robby, the Military Working Dog at

Quantico. The article in the Dayton Daily News and the inpouring of e-mails

was of some surprise to us here. To find the answers to your concerns, we

contacted Lackland, Air Force Base where the Department of Defense policies

on Military Working Dogs are formulated and practiced. Lackland AFB also

houses the training facility for all MWD's and their handlers. Below, I

have attached the response from the Department of Defense personnel at

Lackland AFB. I'd like to emphasize that in all cases, regardless of

whether at home station or after relocation to Lackland AFB, MWDs are not

euthanized unless

it is the ONLY alternative to ending pain and suffering.

 

Again, thank you for your concerns.

 

Captain Tracey Poirier

Community Relations Officer

 

Dear Concerned Citizen:

 

This responds to your inquiry on behalf of the " Save Robby "

campaign.

 

Military Working Dogs (MWD) have always made a significant contribution to

the Department of Defense (DoD) and will continue to play a vital role in

our day-to-day military operations. Within the DoD, MWDs are not

euthanized solely because of age or the fact they can no longer meet

operational requirements. Instead they are reassigned to Lackland AFB

(341st MWD Training Squadron) and are used to assist in the training of new

handlers. These dogs live out the rest of their lives in a quality

environment with the same care received at their unit of assignment.

 

Although the DoD MWD program is somewhat similar to law enforcement canine

programs, there are unique military requirements which differ significantly.

A notable difference is that all MWDs are centrally kenneled at each

installation and lack " socialization " qualities of canines that live with

their handlers. In addition, all MWDs remain under constant handler

supervision when not kenneled. As a result of these differences and in an

effort to ensure public safety, DoD has a long-standing policy of not

allowing handlers to adopt MWDs trained in aggression. It is, however,

policy to allow MWD handlers, who can show the ability to provide humane

treatment and proper long term care, to adopt canine veterans not trained in

aggression.

 

The MWD in question, Robby W005, is an eight-year-old

" patrol/detector " dog. The " patrol " identifies that Robby is trained in

aggression. Robby is currently being treated for arthritis by the attending

veterinarian and is on limited duty utilizing strictly his detection

capabilities. Robby will be worked in this capacity until all measures to

resolve his condition have been exhausted, at which time the feasibility of

reassigning him to assist in training handlers at Lackland AFB will be

considered.

 

We trust you will find this information helpful.