“WHERE was the tranquilliser gun?”

Outrage is building over the killing of a trainee Airport Security Services dog, shot dead by police after it was spooked and escaped its handler at Auckland International Airport this morning, causing runway delays.

Police shot the dog, named Grizz, at the direction of Auckland Airport staff. Grizz, one of three puppies who joined the team in May 2016, was a 10-month-old border collie and German shorthair pointer cross.

He was six months away from graduating.

“Do they not have a tranquilliser gun?” asked 1News TV host Hilary Barry. “They’ve got to have tranquilliser guns, surely? I don’t care if your plane’s delayed, they don’t need to shoot the dog. I’m not happy. No need to shoot the dog. Forget the review. Don’t shoot the dog.”

The incident has been likened to the shooting of Harambe the gorilla at Cincinnati Zoo last year, which sparked global outrage.

Embarrassed to be a kiwi today. Killing a dog so flights can continue Auckland Airport. No excuse! Disgusting #poordog #aucklandairport — juliette banks (@julzbanks) March 16, 2017

Grizz is going to be this generation's Harambe, I just know it — Stephen Murray (@smurray38) March 16, 2017

After Harambe and Grizz, why don't we just make all guns tranquiliser guns? — Jo Thornely (@jothornely) March 16, 2017

“Auckland Airport staff directed police to shoot the Avsec dog, which was loose at the airport this morning,” said Inspector Tracy Phillips.

“This followed considerable efforts over several hours by Avsec and airport staff to contain the dog after it was first reported to be loose at 4am. This is not an outcome anyone wanted, and police were only asked to be involved as a last resort.”

Phillips referred all further inquiries Auckland Airport and Avsec.

A source said police staff and Grizz’s handler are “absolutely devastated”.

The Herald understands Avsec has a staffer who shoots birds at the airport, but that person could not get to the scene immediately and police were ordered to shoot Grizz.

“All efforts to capture the dog were exhausted and the airport company had no option but to request police to shoot the dog,” Avsec spokesman Mike Richards said.

“The handler and Avsec are naturally upset but do understand there were no other options, in the very difficult circumstances. The dog was not on the tarmac at the time.”

Richards said Avsec would “undertake a review of the incident to try and ascertain what spooked the dog and if this has any implications for ongoing training”.

In a follow-up statement, Richards explained the sequence of events. “Something caused Grizz, a trainee detector dog, to escape from his handler while he was being loaded in to the back of the Avsec Explosive Detector Dog unit wagon at Auckland airport around 4:30am today,” he said.

“Grizz escaped landside [the public airport area] and ran through to the sterile [security protected] area. He managed to get airside when a gate opened to let a truck through.

“He was on initial airport environment socialisation program as part of his training before undertaking block courses and assessments including the critical task of identifying explosives.

“The airport Emergency Operations Centre was activated and a full search was commenced. It was difficult to search as most of the time it was dark. He did not have a permanent handler so was less responsive than a dog with a permanent handler.

“All efforts to recover him failed. All of Auckland’s Avsec off duty dog handlers were called in and there was a massive effort to locate and retrieve him. The fact that the incident took place very early in the morning did not help as it was pitch black for the first two hours and he could not be found.

“When he was located he would not let anyone near him and kept sprinting across the runways. We tried everything, food, toys, other dogs, but nothing would work. The area is too vast and too open to try and use mobile fencing.

“In these difficult circumstances the Airport’s Emergency Operations Centre team decided to have the dog destroyed. Avsec and the handler and members of the Explosive Detector Dog Unit are naturally quite shaken but understand the reasons for the decision.”

Richards added that the total approximate investment in getting a dog like Grizz to final graduation was $NZ100,000 ($91,000).

Sixteen domestic and international flights were delayed as ground staff tried to catch the animal. “We did everything we could to try and catch the dog, but we couldn’t,” an Auckland Airport spokeswoman said.

“It had been on the outer perimeter of the airfield. It got loose at 4am and we spent three-and-a-half hours trying to catch him. They did everything they could, but unfortunately it had to be shot. It’s really sad. It’s a working dog and they are very important to us at the airport.”

National animal rights organisation Safe declared the shooting of Grizz as “needless”. “Safe is appalled about the needless killing of this dog,” said spokesman Hans Kriek. “A tranquilliser gun should have been used after efforts to catch the dog failed.

“If such a gun was not available — which it should — then they could have borrowed one from Auckland Zoo or elsewhere. We hope that lessons will be learned from this and that better systems will be put in place to avoid such unnecessary killing in the future.”

According to the Avsec website, they employ explosive detector dogs, which are different from Customs and Ministry of Primary Industries’ dogs. “Their job is to sniff for explosives and explosive materials not drugs or food. Each EDD team consists of one dog and one handler,” the website said.

“These teams do a very important job protecting travellers, airline crew, airport workers and New Zealand at large by ensuring that no dangerous materials are present on aircraft or in our airports.”

Current status: Sitting in a plane in Tauranga that can't take off because a dog is on the Auckland Airport runway. — Adam Morris (@bigmarnmorris) March 16, 2017

They are at the main airports in Auckland, Wellington, Christchurch, and Queenstown. “Our dog teams search for any explosives in car parks, navigation facilities, unattended cars and unattended items/bags, cargo, and aircraft,” the website said.

“They also conduct random searches around the airport environment, at check-in counters, screening points, and gate lounges. By being visible they can act as a deterrent for any wrongdoers.”

Andrea Midgen, the acting national chief executive for the SPCA, told Stuff.co.nz the airport would only have shot Grizz as a last resort. “I would say it’s one of those unfortunate accidents,” she said. “They put a huge investment in those dogs to do the job they do, and they treat them as part of the family.”

A spokeswoman from World Animal Protection said: “We are deeply saddened to hear of the death of Grizz the dog. Our thoughts are also with his handler. We don’t believe the fatal shooting of a working dog should be a last resort.”

Tony Wright, writing on Newshub.co.nz, argued the shooting showed staff at the airport will “panic and make rash decisions when under pressure”.

“Grizz was killed because of the huge amounts of money involved — airlines are fined thousands for not getting to their destinations on time,” he wrote. “The situation needed to be dealt with quickly, and in this case, rather ruthlessly.

“Unfortunately for Grizz — the life of a dog was expendable. Airport staff obviously panicked and needed the matter dealt with quickly — but whoever gave police the final order to shoot Grizz needs to be held accountable. When calm heads were needed, there was anything but.

“If staff at Auckland Airport couldn’t control one of their own security dogs without shooting it dead, who knows how they’d handle an actual terror event or life-threatening situation.”

A poll of more than 16,000 readers by the Herald found nearly 70 per cent of people thought the dog should not have been shot.

Not everyone disagreed with the decision. One passenger at Auckland airport told 1News: “Sad for the handler. No one likes to see that sort of thing happen, but unfortunately, if it’s causing problems ...”

Another added: “Gotta rely on the right people to make the right decisions.”

Bradley Griggs, a behaviour specialist with Canine Services International, told news.com.au it was a “very sad situation”, but said while it was “very easy to speculate about what could have been done differently, only those on the ground making the decisions at the time are actually privy to that information”.

“It’s conceivable that the dog was not able to be contained to a specific area for long enough to allow the capturing team to respond,” he said.

“Even in suburban areas where it can be much easier to contain a dog at large, this can be a very long and drawn-out process. In a large space like an international airport [it] could conceivably require a massive amount of manpower, resourcing and co-ordination to capture a dog that was in a highly frightened state.”

Griggs said while “chemical immobilisation” via a dart gun would have been a “preferable outcome for all concerned”, there are limitations to the technology which “may have potentially rendered that equipment useless even if it were available”.

An earlier version of this article originally appeared on NZ Herald.