Marines ask ASPCA for advice on evaluating dogs as individuals
By Christie Keith
September 28, 2009
In an effort to prevent a number of armed forces families from having to give up their pets, the United States Marine Corps has asked the ASPCA for help in evaluating a number of dogs owned by service families for potential aggression:
By using the SAFER assessment, safe dogs will be given the opportunity for a waiver so they can remain on the base until 2012. The ASPCA is opposed to breed bans — laws that ban specific breeds of dogs or unfairly discriminate against responsible dog guardians based solely on their choice of breed. Such laws also fail to achieve the desired goal of stopping illegal activities such as dog fighting, and breeding and/or training dogs to be aggressive. The ASPCA believes that strict enforcement of laws that ban animal fighting, and breeding and/or training animals to fight, is the proper means to address the problem.
“We’re very excited about the ASPCA coming to Parris Island,” said Army Capt. Jenifer Gustafson, the Officer in Charge of the veterinary clinic on Parris Island. “There was a chance that some pet parents would be forced to give up their dogs or leave housing on the base, so this is a great
The media release from the ASPCA is here.
First, can I have the pup in the pic?!
Second, what’s with the 2012 date?
3rd, SO glad folks are starting to take individual dogs into consideration instead of “mass assumption”.
Comment by straybaby — September 28, 2009 @ 10:07 pm
A hearty “HUAAHHH” for the USMC. Let this be contagious through out the DoD!
eli
Comment by eli — September 29, 2009 @ 5:08 am
While I’m glad the marines are taking steps to base these very important decisions on more than just breed or type, I have to say I’m not a fan of the SAFER test. Specifically the part where a fake hand is used to assess resource aggression.
I’m absolutely certain that dogs know the difference between a real hand and a fake one - and many of them are more willing to bite a rubber hand than a real one.
IMO there are better ways to test for resource and touch-related aggression safely.
Comment by Janeen — September 29, 2009 @ 11:37 am
Here’s an article I found outlining some of the various “temperament tests” being used by shelters and discussing the inherent quandaries in the overall topic:
http://www.nokillnow.com/Tempe.....atures.htm
Comment by The OTHER Pat — September 29, 2009 @ 1:32 pm
certainly the original version of that test was mainly used (or so it seemed) to decide what dogs to kill (OMG!!! food aggression in a hungry stray!!!!) , as opposed to assessing what training a dog needed. But I think the ASPCA guidelines are a little more humane.
Comment by EmilyS — September 29, 2009 @ 1:41 pm
Comment by EmilyS — September 29, 2009 @ 1:41 pm
The ASPCA does use the test as a guide, not a device to thin out the shelter population. I volunteered in the Behav dept a few yrs back and at the same time, at the city shelter. Talk about a night and day comparison as to how the test was used back then.
Comment by straybaby — September 29, 2009 @ 3:07 pm
What about this group? http://www.atts.org/testdesc.html
This is confusing. I would probably go with the tests used on the Vick dogs, that turned out well, didn’t it?
Comment by Erich Riesenberg — September 29, 2009 @ 4:26 pm
Our dog training group, Kindred Spirits, is working with the Marines on Camp Pendleton. Unfortunately, this whole ‘dog screening/testing thing’ was put into place too quickly without enough research. They are using the SAFER program on Perris Island but are using the CGC elsewhere.
And nothing so far is working well! They need to step back and rethink this because right now the local shelters are over flowing!
Comment by Liz Palika — September 30, 2009 @ 8:37 am
Liz, what do you mean by “nothing is working”?
Comment by EmilyS — September 30, 2009 @ 10:00 am
There is very poor communication between the powers that be and the Marines living in base housing, and the Marines are afraid they will lose that housing. So far too many dogs are being given up far too soon. The local shelters and rescue groups are over whelmed.
Comment by Liz Palika — September 30, 2009 @ 9:21 pm