[kwflatbed]

OAKDALE, Calif. --
Budget cuts are forcing the retirement of a pair of police dogs in Oakdale.
Oakdale police Chief Marty West said he had to lay off two K-9 officers, and that his priority is keeping sworn human officers on the street.
K-9 officers find drugs and help out in dangerous situations, but the department could not justify the costs.
"A well-trained canine working with an officer has been selected for the position. Ordinarily, it costs anywhere from $12-to $15,000 dollars depending on the provider that you select to do the training. Then you've got the ongoing costs of food and veterinarian expenses," West said.
West said the dogs' presence and their barking has a psychological effect on people who try to elude authorities, and that their absence will be a loss to the department.
Ceeto, one of the K-9 officers, will be going home with his handler, Sgt. Joe Carillo.
"He's great with the family, great with the kids. He knows when he's at work and he knows when he's at home, and he's able to turn that off and on," Carillo said.
Another K-9 officer, Shadow, is elderly and will be retired with a family.
The department is cutting more than $300,000 from the annual budget by laying off support staff and freezing some positions.

Story From: kcra.com

 

[bleeps]

So all they are saving is the food and vet bill? That just doesn't seem worth it when you think of what you lose.

For that matter, while I firmly believe in work paying for work related stuff, I think if I were a k9 officer and push came to shove, I'd pick up the tab for dog chow and check-ups. I think it would be worth it to keep a four-footed partner out on the street with me.

 

[lawdog671]

The state, the cities, and the towns need to foot those expenses. In this day and age for police departments to cut $300,000 from a budget when there are guys like you bleeps, or agencies like Sheriffs here in MA whose budgets swell while the people who are the professionals lose out are EXACTLY why cops are not happy with SO deputies. Not the correctional officers, the deputies. WHEN this starts in MA, some like me would say it already has, you're going to see experienced police getting phased out by someone's cousin who made a donation taking their place. Then these politicians will get the policing they want to pay for.

 

[bleeps]

Guys like me? I already stated that I thought the city should be paying the cost. AND I said that I thought that the city losing two K9's just to avoid paying for dog chow and rabies shots was a bad idea.

In this case, though, the 'retired' dog is going home with his handler...so who do you think is paying the food and vet bill from now on? So if you're going to be stuck with the bill either way, I would think it would be better to have that big set of teeth next to me on the street. There are plenty of departments that require you to purchase your own firearm...I wouldn't not carry one just so that I could save some money or prove a point.

I'm fairly new to Mass, but after reading the threads on here, I can understand why cops aren't happy with deputies that make a donation and then are out on the street pulling cars over. This story happened involved police, not sheriffs, and happened in California, where the sheriffs dept isn't run as a corporation or political machine. I understand and appreciate what you are saying, but the city of Oakdale didn't make the decision to stop paying for two dogs because a special deputy in Mass has a dog.