British Government Euthanizes Over 800 War Dogs! - Page 1

This just makes me sick:   http://www.lifewithdogs.tv/2012/04/british-government-euthanizes-800-war-dogs/

What makes me sicker is innocent people who might be attacked by these dogs. If these dogs are truly this aggressive then maybe this is for the best, I guess the British could spend 100000s taking care of them for life but then some would scream this is a waste of money in tough times. Wars that never needed to be fought in the first place so it is what it is. You could always take them in or donate to take care of them for life. I wouldn't be liable if it was me for the damage a war dog might do to an innocent child. Hey, but that is me as much as I love dogs and all. Maybe they figure the liability is worse than the bad press. Look at the soldiers who freak out and kill innocent civilians and we are to try and figure out the mind of an animal.

BTW, there is an online petition you could sign to at least have your feelings heard.

What really makes me sick is the 100000s of innocent humans who lost there lives over these retarded wars.

Just my opinion and it is what it is.

I have to disagree though you are obviously entitled to your opinion). So many of these dogs are detection dogs and would be fine with any experienced handler (and be great in case of sudden land mines). A lot do stay with their handlers. The articles I have read about this made it sound like the dogs were not even assessed, this one says they are too dangerous but over here in the UK that can mean the dog gave someone a dirty look. Putting a dog to sleep for aggression is one thing but for old age? Didn't sound like they worked these dogs until they were 12. There is a fantastic adoption scheme for MWDs in the States with long waiting lists for these dogs. Why would you assume a MWD would bite a child? I would think they are trained like any working dog to a very high level of obedience. Not generally trained to bite small infidel children as far as I know. :D Should we euthanize retired police K9s as well because they have seen horrible things and are trained to bite? 

That said  know absolutely nothing about what MWDs do other than detection and getting deployed out of helicopters. :D l am not against euthanizing unsound animals on the other hand but this article didn't sound like that was the case and the government was simply pre empting anything bad happening. Better to kill 800 dogs than have one lawsuit. I agree that any bite would be tragic but that is why we rehome to people who know what they are doing. In the UK there is a very hypocritical we love all the doggies but kill all the evil looking monsters thing happening. Am surprised we can even own GSDs here.

I do agree with you about the wars themselves though, ugh.

There's something called "desensitization counterconditioning" for mwd's:  http://contemporarycondition.blogspot.com/2012/03/steven-johnston-neal.html

And, it can be successful:  http://theweek.com/article/index/222102/the-disturbing-effects-of-war-on-military-dogs

Guys I am not saying this is the right thing to do but there is something called liability and cost and you have to weigh that against all else. I don't agree with this but I can see why it is done. Whether these are detection dogs or not, war is hell and takes its toll on all involved, we should look at the leaders who take us into these useless/baseless wars.

Regards,
GSD

Governments are businesses GSD and I think we all understand that.  Doing business does involve liability and costs to be sure and minimizing those is important for a variety of reasons including public perception of how their tax dollars are being spent.

However, in some situations liabilities and costs have to be absorbed in the interests of protecting that same public perception.  Taking an animal like a dog or a horse, both of which have played a major part in human civilization throughout history, to war and utilizing it as a tool to carry out the war...  and then bringing it home and killing it becuase it doesn't fit in anymore will not fly well even with people who don't like dogs.  It just seems immoral and flies in the face of respecting life.  A weird statement when you consider the context of this discussion (ie. war).

I just don't see how the costs of keeping these 800 dogs alive would break the bank relatively speaking.  I'm not in the military, but on my last trip to Las Vegas I fired a machine gun that cost over $100k USD.  One gun.  How many zeros are attached to the cost of an F35 these days?

I'm sure someone somewhere put a fair amount of thought into the implementation of the decisions regarding these dogs.  Based on the dates and numbers of dogs provided in the article, I'm sure many were advanced in years and could have been euthanized for health reasons.  The headline is a bit misleading as it really initially makes on think they got them home, took them off a plane and gave them all a bullet to the back of the head or something.

I just don't agree with the one gov official who admitted that some were put down as they were too aggressive.  Ever heard of a dog trainer?

So, you could take a dog raised from a puppy to be anti-social and then expect it be be social and not have problems readjusting to family life? We don't know the training nor do we know how these dogs lived, the headline is written to elict emotion and it does with animal lovers(which I am) but I also see both sides.

We can sit here and debate it for a week and really we don't know for sure all the circumstances of what these dogs have been through.

So, again I will ask-if we train a puppy to be anti-social and then put them into a war zone as as an adult-a trainer will be able to 100% guarantee these dogs won't turn on a child or innocent person?

And be advised this is 807 dogs over 10 years about 80 dogs a year.

And again I would not do this but I can understand why a government may do it.

There are several petitions on the web and I would suggest people sign them and let the British government know how we feel, I did.

I agree GSD that the headline was written to elicit emotional responses, and without knowing the full story and details about it all it's very hard to comment.

I also agree as I said that it was 807 over 10 years.  That's a long time in a dogs life.

I'm certainly not in the military and have no experience with war dogs, but I can't believe these dogs are trained to be antisocial persay.  Any more than any dog that's trained for K9 services with the police.  I would expect they are trained to attack on command and protect their handler, but I don't think they go off at anything and everything that moves.  Their actions I would think would be trained to be precise and upon command.  Many police dogs go home at the end of the day with their partners who have children and live normal lives when not on duty.

The article is what it is.  Kind of short, kind of misleading, kind of shocking.....  and real, real sad.

According to the article, most of the euthanasia has occurred in the past decade.  Euthanasia should be the last resort.  There is a military veteran in my county who owns a large farm and adopts mwd's through the DoD that cannot be adopted out to families.   The dogs are given a peaceful place to live out the rest of thier lives.  This is a much more humane alternative.

The article doesn't really give enough info.  How many were taken by thier former handlers?  How many rehomed?  What the total number of dogs in service versus the 800 euthanized in 10 years time?

Also, why can't some be resold as surplus to countries that don't have sophisticated training methods for  training methodsdetection and/or security dogs?  Also, what about the kennels they came from?  Surely some would take the older dogs back.  I personally think the UK military just made the easiest policy descision each time and didn't really consider any alternatives (no matter how easy the alternatives may have been).