Veterans lose their military dogs in mass adoptions out

ROCKINGHAM — U.S. Rep. Richard Hudson’s amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act contained a request for a formal investigation into mismanaged adoptions of military working dogs from the now-defunct Tactical Explosive Detector Dog Program.

In late 2014, Hudson was instrumental in reuniting Army Spc. Brent Grommet with his retired military dog, Matty, who was adopted out to a South Carolina family despite Grommet’s plans to adopt him. Hudson investigated the matter and the family who adopted Matty happily returned him to Grommet.

“This problem came to my attention a year and a half ago when I helped reunite Specialist Brent Grommet and his military working dog Matty who were separated after being wounded overseas,” Hudson said in a statement. “Since then, I’ve heard from countless veterans who were unable to adopt their combat dogs because of broken promises and gross mismanagement of the adoption program by the Pentagon. These veterans deserve answers, which is why I am pursuing a formal investigation. I’ll continue to fight for our soldiers, veterans and military community so these heroes get the respect and care they deserve.”

Many of the military working dogs adopted out were trained at Southern Pines-based K2 Solutions, Inc. and were physically located at K2 during the adoption process. In a February letter to Hudson from K2, CEO Lane Kjellsen sought an immediate congressional inquiry of the adoptions. He cited negative attention from the media as a cause of damage to the company’s business.

“K2 welcomes your queries,” Kjellsen wrote. “And hopes that this letter inspires action on the part of our Congressional Representatives to undertake a full investigation of the matter, and to clear the name of a company that has made supporting our men and women in arms our sole purpose. K2 is a service-disabled veteran owned small business. We take pride not only in supporting our active duty military members, but also our veterans.”

Kjellsen, speaking to the Daily Journal, said the adoptions of military working dogs by the veterans who relied on them in battle can be “incredibly” complex and emotional.

“I can give you an example of that complexity,” he said. “One dog may serve three different handlers during war, but only one of those handlers can adopt that dog. That leaves two handlers without that dog.”

When asked about the sweeping adoptions facilitated by the armed forces, Kjellsen spoke reassuringly to fears that the highly trained dogs could fall into untrained, civilian hands — or situations that might place the dogs in contact with children.

“I would say that shouldn’t happen,” he said. “And I would say that the government has a good system of protocols to make sure adoptions happen properly. Does that mean that those protocols are always followed? No. But the protocols are there to prevent it.”

Hudson pointed out in another statement that the Office of the Provost Marshal General ran the adoptions, not K2. His amendment directs the Secretary of the Air Force to give a detailed report on the adoption application process to the Senate Committee on Armed Services and the House Committee on Armed Services.

“Our veterans selflessly put themselves in harm’s way with their military working dogs,” Hudson stated last week. “Yet too many of them are now separated because of hollow promises from our government. They deserve answers, and it’s for this reason that I am requesting the House Armed Services Committee to launch a formal inquiry into the adoptions of these combat dogs. I’ll continue to fight for our war heroes so they don’t have to jump through hoops to adopt their canine companions.”