We've been holding onto this topic for months, not sure when or how or if it would ever surface...
Recently, police and humane investigators revealed an infiltration strategy that is loaded with ethical stomach upset. That is, they've confessed to using dogs to infiltrate fighting operations, even going so far as staging them in impromptu rolls as well as big money dog fights in the ring. Their reason for putting their own dogs in harm's way is explained by Terry Mills, veteran Missouri State Highway Patrol officer:.
"We would have never been invited — never gotten anywhere close to them," Mills says. "Especially after Michael Vick, they went from being 'Let's have everybody over and have a good time' to 'If you don't have a dog in the fight, you don't have any business here.'"
We were actually pretty surprised to see the confession in this eight page article in the New Times. We've known about investigation dogs and have provided asylum for our share of the battered survivors, and the atmosphere surrounding their existence has been very hush-hush. This topic has been especially hard for us. Yes - the investigators need a way in to the fights so they can gather the evidence needed to bring the f*ckers down, but when you turn into one of the f*ckers yourself in the meantime? It's been really hard to reconcile.
To add to the sadness, many of the dogs used in this manner end up in terrible condition when they finish their "work" and most have lasting health and behavior problems related to their care and abuse that hinder them for life -- if they get a second chance, that is. In many cases, we've had to euthanize dogs from these situations after giving them compassion holds. They were that bad off.
I can't for the life of me figure out why the investigators have decided to share a video of themselves doing the deed on youtube. It takes this practice out of the realm of the abstract and the dogs' suffering is suddenly presented before our very eyes.
Change.org is feeling the same way we are about this use of dogs and recently ran an article about the practice with a poll that asks for public opinion. Change.org
Tell us what you think. Does saving 500 some dogs from ongoing abuse justify the torture of forty? Is there really no other way? It's one of the more difficult dilemmas of our moment and you can bet the discussion isn't going to get pushed under the carpet. Please tell us what you think. And yes, investigators, we would like to hear from you too.
