# The differences between PPD and Sport dogs - As I understand it.



## HarpAggie2001

Hey all, I'm new to this whole protection dog world (sports and PPD). I'm just asking for some clarification on what I'm perceiving as the differences between the two. Some claim PPD and sport dogs are mutually exclusive (you can't have both in the same dog), and I want to make sure I'm understanding them correctly.

PPD - A dog that uses its own judgement to perceive threats and act accordingly. These dogs seem to be criticized for being on the verge of "out of control".

Sport Dog - A dog that is under strict control, doesn't make many decisions unless its commanded. These dogs seem to be criticized for being equipment focused, and won't consistently bite bad guys who aren't in a bite suit, or aren't wearing a sleeve.

Someone of a different forum indicated that a PPD typically isn't suitable to have off leash, in public playing etc. Others disagreed.

Just wondering if my interpretation is correct? Please feel free to correct or add to my understanding as you see fit. As always, a book could be written about the topic, and there's exceptions to every rule. But try to keep things "generally speaking" if possible.

I'm a long time competitive retriever trainer, and I'm diving into protection dogs head first. This is a similar debate that takes place between Field Trial Retriever trainers and Gun Dog trainers. Thanks for the feedback.


----------



## Baillif

There are good dogs and then there are dogs with weaknesses which depending on what they are can affect their ability to be a PPD dog or affect their ability to be handled well in sport. They are not mutually exclusive.


----------



## Slamdunc

Interesting views on PPD's and sport dogs. What forum, if I may ask did those descriptions come from, you can PM me that if you like.

A dog that isn't suitable off leash, or on the verge of being out of control is not going to be a very good PPD. Also, a dog that isn't suitable to be out in public and has such weak nerves, poor obedience and control or that much aggression will not be a very good PPD, IMO. If the dog can not be with it's owner in public, it's use as a PPD is limited. You wind up with a dog that is good guarding a junk yard, that is about it. 

There are many people that do not understand dogs and think because their dog barks aggressively at every one it sees, it is A PPD. Often, the exact opposite is true. There are certainly vendors, breeders and brokers that will sell a novice these "sharp" dogs touting "what a real dog it is" or it is the old style dog….. This "marketing" will fool a lot of people, that buy into this. 

No dog should be allowed to make it's own decisions on whom to bite, unless left alone in the house and an intruder comes in. True PPD's need as much control as any sport or even my Police K-9. There is a tremendous amount of liability in the PPD that was described to you. 

You have brought up the age old debate of sport dogs vs PPD. As Bailif correctly stated there are good sport dogs that would easily protect their handler. THey are some that won't. Just like there are plenty of so called "PPD's" that will not defend their handler when things get serious.


----------



## mycobraracr

Slamdunc said:


> Interesting views on PPD's and sport dogs. What forum, if I may ask did those descriptions come from, you can PM me that if you like.
> 
> A dog that isn't suitable off leash, or on the verge of being out of control is not going to be a very good PPD. Also, a dog that isn't suitable to be out in public and has such weak nerves, poor obedience and control or that much aggression will not be a very good PPD, IMO. If the dog can not be with it's owner in public, it's use as a PPD is limited. You wind up with a dog that is good guarding a junk yard, that is about it.
> 
> There are many people that do not understand dogs and think because their dog barks aggressively at every one it sees, it is A PPD. Often, the exact opposite is true. There are certainly vendors, breeders and brokers that will sell a novice these "sharp" dogs touting "what a real dog it is" or it is the old style dog….. This "marketing" will fool a lot of people, that buy into this.
> 
> No dog should be allowed to make it's own decisions on whom to bite, unless left alone in the house and an intruder comes in. True PPD's need as much control as any sport or even my Police K-9. There is a tremendous amount of liability in the PPD that was described to you.
> 
> You have brought up the age old debate of sport dogs vs PPD. As Bailif correctly stated there are good sport dogs that would easily protect their handler. THey are some that won't. Just like there are plenty of so called "PPD's" that will not defend their handler when things get serious.



I agree with this. A good dog can do either. Training is very different though. IMO a sport dog is actually less controlled. Like Jim said, a PPD is no good if you can't take it everywhere with you. My wife and I always say, "We like to live life with our dogs. If we can't take them everywhere with us then what good are they?" We train with real world applications in mind however still compete in sports. We do ask our dogs to work independent of us as well as with us. We also like pretty obedience and focus. Our dogs are asked to work in unknown environments. Not the same set up every time. I do believe there is a difference in the "type" of dog people want for each individual application(or different sport venue for that matter) as well as how they train it to bring out the traits they want.


----------



## HarpAggie2001

Honestly, I cannot remember the specific place I read that. I've been on so many of these forums, I can't remember. I specifically do remember the chap saying "I would never have my PPD off leash". Regardless, it didn't sway my goal to have a 100% reliable off leash dog. I have 2 high drive labs that are under complete control off leash. I realize that a Malinois is a different animal, but I'm confident I can get him there. 

My main goal is a confident dog with solid obedience. Biting is secondary.


----------



## Suka

Though I cannot say I'm the authority on protection dogs, your statement that some people feel sport dogs cannot be protection dogs because they only go for equipment and specific circumstances made me want to post about the sport of PSA. I love it, and it's been growing exponentially for a lot of reasons, but some of those reasons include what you mentioned above. There aren't always patterns to the training and trials, and the dogs bite hidden sleeves and muzzled, take down unsuited/unsleeved "perpetrators, in more "real to life" scenarios. You can see some of this in this wonderful trailer. I get the shivers every time I watch it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g1_gWSCAJgw


----------



## yuriy

HarpAggie2001 said:


> I specifically do remember the chap saying "I would never have my PPD off leash".


I'm sure there are plenty of people who feel the same way about their own dogs. I'm equally sure there are also plenty of people who have no problem letting their PPD dogs off leash, around other people, etc. 

It's really a case-by-case basis that depends on the training and behaviour of the dog and the handler's comfort level of letting that dog be off-leash. 

Geographical location (read: laws) will also play a huge role, but since you're based in Nicaragua, I'll venture a guess and say that you likely don't have to worry about that as much as someone in the US/Canada. 

Here in Canada, if someone breaks into your house and gets bit by your dog, they'll sue you and you'll be the one in trouble, with a good chance of the dog being put down. Doesn't make much sense, but that's how it is. 



Suka said:


> You can see some of this in this wonderful trailer. I get the shivers every time I watch it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g1_gWSCAJgw


I didn't see anything in that video that was overly impressive. Between the music, the dramatic fading of text, and the editing, the whole thing stank like a trailer for another one of Michael Bay's Transformer movies. 

The dogs had great obedience and bit on command, which is nice, but they only showed a few seconds of every "fight" and no instances of the dog releasing (out'in) and continuing obedience after being called off and still being pumped up and in drive. You don't want a dog that you can't control after giving the bite command.

I recently came across this old thread: http://www.germanshepherds.com/forum/breed-standard/417450-prey-monkeys.html . Flip through the pages and you'll see YouTube videos (like in post #56) of dogs that can _actually_ mess someone up. (Read the descriptions - some of those dogs have zero protection training at the time of the video being taken.) That level of commitment to the fight is what I'd want to see in a PPD.


----------



## Suka

yuriy said:


> I didn't see anything in that video that was overly impressive. Between the music, the dramatic fading of text, and the editing, the whole thing stank like a trailer for another one of Michael Bay's Transformer movies.
> 
> The dogs had great obedience and bit on command, which is nice, but they only showed a few seconds of every "fight" and no instances of the dog releasing (out'in) and continuing obedience after being called off and still being pumped up and in drive. You don't want a dog that you can't control after giving the bite command.


Yes it was just a two minute trailer for the nationals so it's not going to be detailed. There are a lot of detailed videos showing what you described.


----------



## yuriy

Ah, great. Would be nice to see an instance or two of the end-to-end behaviour in those trailers. Although I guess the general public would probably be only interested in the initial bite.


----------



## Mrs.P

Suka said:


> Though I cannot say I'm the authority on protection dogs, your statement that some people feel sport dogs cannot be protection dogs because they only go for equipment and specific circumstances made me want to post about the sport of PSA. I love it, and it's been growing exponentially for a lot of reasons, but some of those reasons include what you mentioned above. There aren't always patterns to the training and trials, and the dogs bite hidden sleeves and muzzled, take down unsuited/unsleeved "perpetrators, in more "real to life" scenarios. You can see some of this in this wonderful trailer. I get the shivers every time I watch it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g1_gWSCAJgw



You forgot that it is addicting! :Wild:


----------



## mycobraracr

yuriy said:


> I didn't see anything in that video that was overly impressive. Between the music, the dramatic fading of text, and the editing, the whole thing stank like a trailer for another one of Michael Bay's Transformer movies.
> 
> The dogs had great obedience and bit on command, which is nice, but they only showed a few seconds of every "fight" and no instances of the dog releasing (out'in) and continuing obedience after being called off and still being pumped up and in drive. You don't want a dog that you can't control after giving the bite command.



Just out of curiosity, do you train protection/protection sport dogs? Nothing in that video was "easy". PSA requires a tremendous amount of control. Arguably more than any other venue. In the upper levels it's surprise scenario based. So you can't just train a pattern. There is a reason only 13(?) dogs have ever achieved a PSA 3 title since the creation of the sport. Not a single "3" team passed this last nationals, only a couple of the 2's and less than half the 1's I believe.


----------



## yuriy

mycobraracr said:


> Just out of curiosity, do you train protection/protection sport dogs? Nothing in that video was "easy". PSA requires a tremendous amount of control. Arguably more than any other venue. In the upper levels it's surprise scenario based. So you can't just train a pattern. There is a reason only 13(?) dogs have ever achieved a PSA 3 title since the creation of the sport. Not a single "3" team passed this last nationals, only a couple of the 2's and less than half the 1's I believe.


No, I don't, and I didn't suggest what was shown in that video to be 'easy'. Rather, other videos I've seen of protection dogs showed considerably more impressive end-to-end action than what was shown in this video. Suka clarified that for me in the subsequent post.


----------



## cliffson1

I've always felt that the opinion of what is impressive must be in context to what you have experienced as opposed to seen. Though those two can be the same, more often than not they aren't thus the advent of Internet experts. Just sayin!:wub:


----------



## Slamdunc

I just watched that video and I was very impressed. Knowing what it takes to get a high drive dog to that level and maintain control, focus and drive is very impressive, IMHO. TO heel a dog through distractions like that with focus, then have the same dog come out and do bite work with that intensity takes some really good training and a really good dog. 

I actually saw a couple of things I amy add into our Police dog decoying and training. The streamers on the blower were really good. I'm glad I watched that video.


----------



## cliffson1

I did not watch the video, SD, but having trained for PSA, decoyed for PSA dogs, and prepared/trained others for PSA work, I know that most good PSA dogs require a very high level of strength and nerve. I guess that's why video discussion seldom interest me, because most people judging what they see are basing judgement on not realizing what they are seeing


----------



## Suka

Oh, right I should mention I've only been experiencing PSA since 2013 with trials and training only my own dog and with two PSA clubs. 

Yeah the video is just pizazz as a trailer but I wanted to mention to the OP that there are sports other than IPO/Schutzhund and that they don't always rely on a visible suit or sleeve and the video did shown an instance of muzzle and the hidden sleeve carjacking. Oh, and PSA isn't the only other sport. It's just the one I have experience with. Best to go to a trial.


----------



## Slamdunc

cliffson1 said:


> I did not watch the video, SD, but having trained for PSA, decoyed for PSA dogs, and prepared/trained others for PSA work, I know that most good PSA dogs require a very high level of strength and nerve. I guess that's why video discussion seldom interest me, because most people judging what they see are basing judgement on not realizing what they are seeing


Cliff, that video is worth watching. I'm glad I watched it, some very nice dogs!


----------



## RZZNSTR

That was very cool!


----------



## hemicop

I"ve loooong had these debates with police K9handlers who feel "only LE can train REAL police dogs"!. 
Like others here, my opinion is if you can't do one, why would you want to train/have or try to do the other? I was very fortunate in my younger years to have learned from some very good German & Canadian breeders & trainers that didn't just talk the game but showed what they can do. I was even fortunate enough to meet quite a few German police officers who competed in both the civilian arena (Sch) and the police arena ( PSD,IPO, & others) so I've seen firsthand a dog can & should be able to do both. 
I was even able to persuade a local agency here to start adapting Sch training methods to their police-dog training regimen & helped their Head Trainer achieve his first Sch1 title on his service dog---something the agency NEVER had before. 
Now the big debate as I've seen it is one of "seriousness". Many LE handlers believe that civilian dogs aren't "serious" enough for police work. And depending on the Sch club & dog owner they're right. I belonged to a club that proudly advocated their dogs weren't serious about the protection phase. Then you have clubs where the training & breeding of the dogs is a high-dollar business for some members, so they want to insure their dogs get titled and will do anything to get their dogs to attain a title---all in the interest of selling & breeding. That is grossly wrong, IMO. 
HOWEVER, if you look at the Breed Standard and see what it says about a GSD you will find a GOOD breeder will try to achieve a well balanced breeding resulting in a GSD that is THE best at nothing---but 2nd best at EVERYTHING---and that's what's needed for police dogs. 
So is the police community right about "sport dogs"? IMO, no as they fail to take into consideration the individuals & theory behind a specific dog's training & fail to realize that given PROPER training a well-bred, well & PROPERLY trained "sports dog" will fit in to their "world just fine.


----------



## Slamdunc

hemicop said:


> I"ve loooong had these debates with police K9handlers who feel "only LE can train REAL police dogs"!.
> Like others here, my opinion is if you can't do one, why would you want to train/have or try to do the other? I was very fortunate in my younger years to have learned from some very good German & Canadian breeders & trainers that didn't just talk the game but showed what they can do. I was even fortunate enough to meet quite a few German police officers who competed in both the civilian arena (Sch) and the police arena ( PSD,IPO, & others) so I've seen firsthand a dog can & should be able to do both.
> I was even able to persuade a local agency here to start adapting Sch training methods to their police-dog training regimen & helped their Head Trainer achieve his first Sch1 title on his service dog---something the agency NEVER had before.
> Now the big debate as I've seen it is one of "seriousness". Many LE handlers believe that civilian dogs aren't "serious" enough for police work. And depending on the Sch club & dog owner they're right. I belonged to a club that proudly advocated their dogs weren't serious about the protection phase. Then you have clubs where the training & breeding of the dogs is a high-dollar business for some members, so they want to insure their dogs get titled and will do anything to get their dogs to attain a title---all in the interest of selling & breeding. That is grossly wrong, IMO.
> HOWEVER, if you look at the Breed Standard and see what it says about a GSD you will find a GOOD breeder will try to achieve a well balanced breeding resulting in a GSD that is THE best at nothing---but 2nd best at EVERYTHING---and that's what's needed for police dogs.
> So is the police community right about "sport dogs"? IMO, no as they fail to take into consideration the individuals & theory behind a specific dog's training & fail to realize that given PROPER training a well-bred, well & PROPERLY trained "sports dog" will fit in to their "world just fine.


Well, I do IPO and have done it for some time. I am also a K-9 trainer and handler, so I see both sides. I will say that most "good sport dogs" are not what I want in a Police K-9. I do agree that a well bred GSD should be able to do both. I have a dog that I raised from a pup that could have been a National Level SchH dog, but I retrained him to be my Dual Purpose Patrol / Narcotics SWAT dog. Truly, a rare GSD that could excel in both venues and work on our SWAT team for the past 7 years. You will not see many dogs like him, with super high prey and serious defense and fight drive. Not the dog that you bring to the family picnic or will allow a stranger to pet, handle or correct him. 

IMHO, the issue with converting IPO dogs to Police work is in the training and in the type of dog that excels in IPO. Granted, there are some very good trainers that work prey, defense and fight drive when doing IPO work, as I do. But, many dogs doing IPO are unbalanced and tilted towards high prey, which is great for the sport. I have a dog like this now, a genetically super tracking dog, super focus and OB, and awesome bite work. Full, calm grips and bites a ton. This female who can excel in sport, will not bite a person for real. As much as I love this dog, and she is a great pet and companion, IMHO she is not a Patrol dog prospect. I have imprinted her on narcotics and she is a super dope dog, just not a patrol dog. 

There are breeders that are producing the balanced GSD that can do both, but you really need to know what you are looking for and what you want. 

Getting back to GSD's being able to do both, most any Police K-9 should be able to easily obtain a SchH 1. But. most SchH 1 dogs will not be able to be Police K-9's. A dog with decent nerves and drives, especially prey can get a IPO or SchH1. However, prey will not sustain a dog in a real fight or under serious stress and pressure. That is when the fight and defense drives kick in. I hate to generalize, but most IPO dogs do not have sufficient fight drive for my taste.


----------



## hemicop

Oh, I agree with pretty much everything you said. But as I see it, the fault (?)isn't in the dog but the people. Far too many Sch enthusiaists think that their title equates to police work. Or that Sch training IS police work. 
Now using a SchI title as a basis, I certainly wouldn't put him on the street & at least with the clubs here wouldn't trust the dog's biting ability in a real situation. These can be the fault of the trainer as well as the dog's. Now in theory there'd be no difference in the sport & police dog. But we all know better. As I said Sch & GSD breeding have evolved into a somewhat expensive hobby so success is paramount over real training results. The by-product of that is the "sport dog"---won't bite hamburger but scores "V"s in all three categories. That doesn't interest me. Nor does the single-phase dog. Too many police dogs are land sharks with minimal obedience, mediocre tracking and partial, shaky or racking grips that from a LE liability standpoint, potentially produce excessive damage, and unreliable work. The fact you have an apparently exceptional dog & work with him above & beyond the minimum standard doesn't mean all police handlers & dogs are that way. 
I used to work for a fairly large agency that spends good money (5k on average) for adult prospects and quite frankly I'm not impressed at what I've seen. All this tells me is the training is lacking, not the dog as many are KNVP or Ring Sport titled (they don't like Sch) . 
If the trainers went back & read von Stephanitz's book on the GSD and saw just what he envisioned I believe the breeding and training would change-----quickly


----------



## RZZNSTR

Slamdunc said:


> Well, I do IPO and have done it for some time. I am also a K-9 trainer and handler, so I see both sides. I will say that most "good sport dogs" are not what I want in a Police K-9. I do agree that a well bred GSD should be able to do both. I have a dog that I raised from a pup that could have been a National Level SchH dog, but I retrained him to be my Dual Purpose Patrol / Narcotics SWAT dog. Truly, a rare GSD that could excel in both venues and work on our SWAT team for the past 7 years. You will not see many dogs like him, with super high prey and serious defense and fight drive. Not the dog that you bring to the family picnic or will allow a stranger to pet, handle or correct him.
> 
> IMHO, the issue with converting IPO dogs to Police work is in the training and in the type of dog that excels in IPO. Granted, there are some very good trainers that work prey, defense and fight drive when doing IPO work, as I do. But, many dogs doing IPO are unbalanced and tilted towards high prey, which is great for the sport. I have a dog like this now, a genetically super tracking dog, super focus and OB, and awesome bite work. Full, calm grips and bites a ton. This female who can excel in sport, will not bite a person for real. As much as I love this dog, and she is a great pet and companion, IMHO she is not a Patrol dog prospect. I have imprinted her on narcotics and she is a super dope dog, just not a patrol dog.
> 
> There are breeders that are producing the balanced GSD that can do both, but you really need to know what you are looking for and what you want.
> 
> Getting back to GSD's being able to do both, most any Police K-9 should be able to easily obtain a SchH 1. But. most SchH 1 dogs will not be able to be Police K-9's. A dog with decent nerves and drives, especially prey can get a IPO or SchH1. However, prey will not sustain a dog in a real fight or under serious stress and pressure. That is when the fight and defense drives kick in. I hate to generalize, but most IPO dogs do not have sufficient fight drive for my taste.


I could not have explained that any better! Well done Jim!

I equate Shutzhund v. police K9 with the following; Schutzhund is like going to the range and shooting targets. Police K9 (for the most part) is like experiencing combat. The stress and experience the police K9 encounters on a daily basis either on patrol or in special operations cannot be duplicated. IMHO I think it not only makes them a harder or tougher dog but a smarter dog.


----------



## hemicop

RZZNSTR said:


> I could not have explained that any better! Well done Jim!
> 
> I equate Shutzhund v. police K9 with the following; Schutzhund is like going to the range and shooting targets. Police K9 (for the most part) is like experiencing combat. The stress and experience the police K9 encounters on a daily basis either on patrol or in special operations cannot be duplicated. IMHO I think it not only makes them a harder or tougher dog but a smarter dog.



And that's as it should be. But don't confuse an improperly trained Sch dog with a properly trained one. A good Sch dog, like a good shooter, transitions well, knows the difference between the training field & street work and can work both. Ulk von Bungalow is a good example. 
Trained by Jurgen Ritzi & Rheinhard Lindner, both with German Customs, The dog could/would **** near flatten a barrel sleeve, work a body suit and scored very well in trials. Yes, he wasn't perfect & more than one police officer/K9 handler decoyed him back in the day to see if was a "real"  dog. 
And while Rhienhard is long gone, Jurgen still trains & breeds dogs as does his son and working with them it's obvious these are the kinds of trainers that need to be emulated & duplicated.


----------



## hemicop

RZZNSTR said:


> I could not have explained that any better! Well done Jim!
> 
> I equate Shutzhund v. police K9 with the following; Schutzhund is like going to the range and shooting targets. Police K9 (for the most part) is like experiencing combat. The stress and experience the police K9 encounters on a daily basis either on patrol or in special operations cannot be duplicated. IMHO I think it not only makes them a harder or tougher dog but a smarter dog.



This is the common opinion amongst LE. And while there's a degree of truth to it, obviously, don't think that the stressors in a trial can't or won't effect a police dog. It's all well-&-good to say not every titled dog can go into an alley, unsure footing, etc. to bite a suspect. But it's also true not every police dog can tolerate the level of control in obedience & protection that a trial dog is expected to have. The ideal would be to have a street-wise, body-suit trained K9 that can handle the stress of a trail. But that's an ideal situation........


----------



## mycobraracr

hemicop said:


> This is the common opinion amongst LE. And while there's a degree of truth to it, obviously, don't think that the stressors in a trial can't or won't effect a police dog. It's all well-&-good to say not every titled dog can go into an alley, unsure footing, etc. to bite a suspect. But it's also true not every police dog can tolerate the level of control in obedience & protection that a trial dog is expected to have. The ideal would be to have a street-wise, body-suit trained K9 that can handle the stress of a trail. But that's an ideal situation........



Too many people out there don't understand what happens to a dog who may look great when all it has to do is bark and bite, but don't understand the impact of when obedience and other stresssors are introduced. It can be amazing what happens when a dog is expected to think and still bite. (Not necessarily talking about K9"s and sport here. Just general satements.)


----------



## Blitzkrieg1

On the flip side I can import 10 dogs for police work tomorrow. 
It would take me alot longer and alot more money to find one dog that would be capable of IPO at the world level and have good potential for success.

I agree with a lot with the gist of what's being said but it's fun to be a devils advocate .


----------



## mycobraracr

Blitzkrieg1 said:


> On the flip side I can import 10 dogs for police work tomorrow.
> It would take me alot longer and alot more money to find one dog that would be capable of IPO at the world level and have good potential for success.
> 
> I agree with a lot with the gist of what's being said but it's fun to be a devils advocate .





I agree and disagree with this. Mostly importing dogs for police work is getting dogs out of the KNPV system. The types of dogs required for that are very different than the dogs who excel in ipo. The level of stress in the KNPV system is very different as well, even though their style of training is changing just like ipo did, the dogs are definitely different. At least from what I've seen.


----------



## GatorDog

Blitzkrieg1 said:


> On the flip side I can import 10 dogs for police work tomorrow.
> It would take me alot longer and alot more money to find one dog that would be capable of IPO at the world level and have good potential for success.
> 
> I agree with a lot with the gist of what's being said but it's fun to be a devils advocate .


This is absolutely true. To buy a green dog suitable for police work, you can look at quite a different number than the one needed to buy a dog for top level IPO..


----------



## hemicop

On club I was in had a police officer who brought in his police K9. He had images of easily breezing through all the way to SchIII and showing the "sport people" what a "real" dog was like. 
Well, one day we had an Sv Judge come over from Germany who worked at the Zoll (Customs) school. This officer asked if perhaps we should warn him that his dog was a "real"  dog & not some sport dog as he didn't want the judge to get hurt. He was assured the judge knew how to work with police dogs & not to worry. He sent his dog in for a hold & bark & sure enough, the dog came in low, looking for a leg & the judge corrected the situation. Now this dog DID have a good reputation in the dept. and caught more than his share of criminals. But the judge was so quick & corrected the dog just right, he reared back, looked a bit confused & immediately set-up for a H-&-B. 
Naturally the handler was a bit shocked/ angry/confused/impressed that he never really doubted civilian decoys after that. It was a good learning experience for all of us present but I think the officer learned the most that night.


----------



## mycobraracr

Again I think it goes back to where the dogs come from. KNPV has become a farm system for LE dogs. The last I was told, over 80% of PH1 dogs get sold to LE. So it becomes easy to find dogs for LE. On the flip side, I would say over 80% of IPO dogs fail LE testing. I do agree it's hard to find a dog suitable for high level IPO. Mostly because of what people are looking for in those types of dogs.


----------



## G-burg

> On the flip side I can import 10 dogs for police work tomorrow.
> It would take me alot longer and alot more money to find one dog that would be capable of IPO at the world level and have good potential for success.
> 
> I agree with a lot with the gist of what's being said but it's fun to be a devils advocate .


See, I think it's the opposite.. From what I've seen, top level IPO dogs are a dime a dozen.. And most do not have that wow factor that I like to see.. But then again, a lot are not balanced in there drives.. And then you have the whole judging and points system..


----------



## Blitzkrieg1

Please direct me to your sources... I look forward to making a mint.


----------



## Blitzkrieg1

mycobraracr said:


> Again I think it goes back to where the dogs come from. KNPV has become a farm system for LE dogs. The last I was told, over 80% of PH1 dogs get sold to LE. So it becomes easy to find dogs for LE. On the flip side, I would say over 80% of IPO dogs fail LE testing. I do agree it's hard to find a dog suitable for high level IPO. Mostly because of what people are looking for in those types of dogs.


What's an IPO dog? A dog training in IPO or a dog that comes from successive generations of proven IPO dogs?
If it's the former I agree with you. Many people buy the dog then get into ipo. If it's the latter I would disagree.

To be honest when I think about where those 10 dogs would come from about 6 or 7 would have knpv blood in there somewhere the rest would be GSD from IPO lines.


----------



## RZZNSTR

It's all about what you want in a dog. For me, because of my background in the K9 Unit I am more in tune with a L.E. type K9. I'm not taking anything away from a good schutzhund dog but as I said before an L.E. dog (again, for the most part) is exposed to real life stressors and because of that is not only a harder or tougher dog but a smarter dog simply due to life experience. 
Can Schutzhund dogs do police work? The answer is yes, some can. Can L.E. dogs do Schutzhund? The answers is yes, some can. To answer that any other way would be silly now wouldn't it! One dog isn't any better than the other all things being equal (which they are not!). The training and attitude of the dog and handler comes into play here (boy that's a news flash). When the you know what hits the fan on the street the only points you need to worry about is winning the encounter.


----------



## Dalko43

hemicop said:


> On club I was in had a police officer who brought in his police K9. He had images of easily breezing through all the way to SchIII and showing the "sport people" what a "real" dog was like.
> Well, one day we had an Sv Judge come over from Germany who worked at the Zoll (Customs) school. This officer asked if perhaps we should warn him that his dog was a "real"  dog & not some sport dog as he didn't want the judge to get hurt. He was assured the judge knew how to work with police dogs & not to worry. He sent his dog in for a hold & bark & sure enough, the dog came in low, looking for a leg & the judge corrected the situation. Now this dog DID have a good reputation in the dept. and caught more than his share of criminals. But the judge was so quick & corrected the dog just right, he reared back, looked a bit confused & immediately set-up for a H-&-B.
> Naturally the handler was a bit shocked/ angry/confused/impressed that he never really doubted civilian decoys after that. It was a good learning experience for all of us present but I think the officer learned the most that night.


How did the judge correct the dog?


----------



## Steve Strom

Probably with the stick.


----------



## Dalko43

Steve Strom said:


> Probably with the stick.


I thought working type dogs, especially police K9's, were trained to ignore physical contact and continue with the take down?


----------



## Slamdunc

Dalko43 said:


> How did the judge correct the dog?


A dog that is trained to do a hold and bark and decides to get dirty will respect a decoy that corrects it strongly. Steve is more than likely correct on how the dog was corrected. A Police dog trained to do a hold and bark or a sport dog trained to do a hold and bark would more than likely react the same. Usually, a dog that gets dirty in the blind comes down to a training issue. 

One needs to realize that all dogs that are imported for potential Police K-9 prospects have a foundation in sleeve work. Just as all dogs that are raised for IPO or SchH have a similar foundation in the raising and imprinting stages. I've tested hundreds of "green dogs" for LE K-9's and to a one they have all been imprinted on tugs and sleeves. They have all seen a whip. Now, many coming over have never been on a suit, but they all recognize a sleeve and will easily bite it. 

A police dog sent into a blind on a training field will absolutely recognize the equipment. If the dog, a sport or Police K-9 is taught to do a H&B, it will most certainly respect a strong helper. Now, we do not teach the H&B, we teach a "find and bite." I guarantee that some of our dogs will absolutely ignore the sleeve and nail the Helper in the leg, hip, chest or ankle. I know this from experience and many of our dogs come from Holland and are KNPV trained. We have a few Czech GSD's that would gladly take the sleeve and make a game out of it. But the Mali's, Dutch Shepherds and and Mali X GSD's would be just as happy to take the leg and I like that. We do not use sleeves in our K-9 training, except for table work, to work on grips and equipment fixation issues. Some of our dogs require full suits, you can't be lazy and throw a suit top on and expect to be safe. I like leg bites and we spend time training it. 

I see this all the time, even with outstanding, proven Police dogs with lots of street bites. Push the dog into defense, get the snarling teeth, deep guttural bark and serious aggression, then bring out a sleeve and watch it all change. Watch the ears, listen to the bark change, posture and demeanor. Suddenly it is no longer serious to the dog and now he is in "prey." I address this very strongly in our training and will get a "prey" or equipment fixated dog back into a rage and it will quickly ignore the sleeve as if it is not even there. The man must be the bad guy in the dog's eyes, not the equipment. 

Here is the my view on this age old debate, most any decent Police dog should be able to do a SchH 1 pretty easily. It is really not that hard. Some PPD's could do it, it really depends on the dog. I think most PPD's that I hear people talking about are unbalanced and too far into defense and probably have an underlying insecurity causing the aggressive "looking" behavior. Most PPD's could probably not be Police K-9's from what I have seen and from what I read about on various forums. Many of these "PPD's" lack the nerve and drives to function well as a sport or Police K-9. Many IPO dogs would certainly make good or adequate Police K-9's. Many also lack the "edge" or are civil enough to bite a person for real. 

My view on really good sport or Police K-9's is the same. A good dog should have high drives, but balanced, high prey, high fight and high defense. The dog should be clear headed and confident. The dog must be civil and willing to engage a person with out equipment. The dog needs to be social enough to be around a group of people, but not Lassie and not overly friendly. The dog DOES NOT need to be able to petted by strangers or children. It DOES need to be social and clear headed enough to work around other cops or a judge and not redirect to them. 

Here is a big difference between IPO and Police K-9 work. We trial everyday and it is pass / fail. We do not get two or three years to train for our first trial on our club field with our buddy the decoy. For those that think that they and their dog can be a Police K-9 trial like this:

Load up your dog at 7PM and drive around for a couple of hours. Wait for a call from your "judge" to find out a rough starting point for your track. This call may come at 9PM or 1 AM or anytime in between. Your track layer will then take off running in an unknown direction, crossing several surfaces and maybe some fences. You are 20 - 30 minutes away going to an unknown part of your city, and must drive 100+ mph to make it in time to start your track. When your dog tracks, if you locate the track layer you may be able to release the dog and he must do a H&B. Then call your dog back and the decoy agitates and runs and you send him. Now you have to verbally out your dog on a decoy that is still moving, not locked up and standing still. Or perhaps the decoy stops running and you must down your dog before he reaches and bites the decoy. Because in that scenario the decoy does not have a sleeve or any equipment. If your dog doesn't stop and "terminate" then the penalty in not 10 points or a DQ, but is a law suit, civil liability and you may lose your job. If you can pass this easy "trial" you both may have what it takes. 

Now, I agree that not every Police Handler is the greatest dog handler in the world. Just as most sport handlers are not either.  But, a Police K-9 handler does not have to be the greatest dog handler ever, nor does he need to have the greatest dog ever to be successful. A good K-9 handler, first has to be a good cop that can think, work and make good decisions under pressure. Next he has to have decent control of his dog and get his dog into the right situations to find the bad guys. A good K-9 Handler needs good instincts, a good work ethic and the knack of being in the right place at the right time. With some better than average tactics to be safe and make it home in one piece. A little different than handling a sport dog. 

Sorry for the OT rambling. No offense is intended to any sport people, I have done and still do IPO. I love doing sport work with my dogs, and I have tremendous respect for anyone that puts in the time and effort to participate, train and compete in IPO.


----------



## RZZNSTR

Slamdunc said:


> A dog that is trained to do a hold and bark and decides to get dirty will respect a decoy that corrects it strongly. Steve is more than likely correct on how the dog was corrected. A Police dog trained to do a hold and bark or a sport dog trained to do a hold and bark would more than likely react the same. Usually, a dog that gets dirty in the blind comes down to a training issue.
> 
> One needs to realize that all dogs that are imported for potential Police K-9 prospects have a foundation in sleeve work. Just as all dogs that are raised for IPO or SchH have a similar foundation in the raising and imprinting stages. I've tested hundreds of "green dogs" for LE K-9's and to a one they have all been imprinted on tugs and sleeves. They have all seen a whip. Now, many coming over have never been on a suit, but they all recognize a sleeve and will easily bite it.
> 
> A police dog sent into a blind on a training field will absolutely recognize the equipment. If the dog, a sport or Police K-9 is taught to do a H&B, it will most certainly respect a strong helper. Now, we do not teach the H&B, we teach a "find and bite." I guarantee that some of our dogs will absolutely ignore the sleeve and nail the Helper in the leg, hip, chest or ankle. I know this from experience and many of our dogs come from Holland and are KNPV trained. We have a few Czech GSD's that would gladly take the sleeve and make a game out of it. But the Mali's, Dutch Shepherds and and Mali X GSD's would be just as happy to take the leg and I like that. We do not use sleeves in our K-9 training, except for table work, to work on grips and equipment fixation issues. Some of our dogs require full suits, you can't be lazy and throw a suit top on and expect to be safe. I like leg bites and we spend time training it.
> 
> I see this all the time, even with outstanding, proven Police dogs with lots of street bites. Push the dog into defense, get the snarling teeth, deep guttural bark and serious aggression, then bring out a sleeve and watch it all change. Watch the ears, listen to the bark change, posture and demeanor. Suddenly it is no longer serious to the dog and now he is in "prey." I address this very strongly in our training and will get a "prey" or equipment fixated dog back into a rage and it will quickly ignore the sleeve as if it is not even there. The man must be the bad guy in the dog's eyes, not the equipment.
> 
> Here is the my view on this age old debate, most any decent Police dog should be able to do a SchH 1 pretty easily. It is really not that hard. Some PPD's could do it, it really depends on the dog. I think most PPD's that I hear people talking about are unbalanced and too far into defense and probably have an underlying insecurity causing the aggressive "looking" behavior. Most PPD's could probably not be Police K-9's from what I have seen and from what I read about on various forums. Many of these "PPD's" lack the nerve and drives to function well as a sport or Police K-9. Many IPO dogs would certainly make good or adequate Police K-9's. Many also lack the "edge" or are civil enough to bite a person for real.
> 
> My view on really good sport or Police K-9's is the same. A good dog should have high drives, but balanced, high prey, high fight and high defense. The dog should be clear headed and confident. The dog must be civil and willing to engage a person with out equipment. The dog needs to be social enough to be around a group of people, but not Lassie and not overly friendly. The dog DOES NOT need to be able to petted by strangers or children. It DOES need to be social and clear headed enough to work around other cops or a judge and not redirect to them.
> 
> Here is a big difference between IPO and Police K-9 work. We trial everyday and it is pass / fail. We do not get two or three years to train for our first trial on our club field with our buddy the decoy. For those that think that they and their dog can be a Police K-9 trial like this:
> 
> Load up your dog at 7PM and drive around for a couple of hours. Wait for a call from your "judge" to find out a rough starting point for your track. This call may come at 9PM or 1 AM or anytime in between. Your track layer will then take off running in an unknown direction, crossing several surfaces and maybe some fences. You are 20 - 30 minutes away going to an unknown part of your city, and must drive 100+ mph to make it in time to start your track. When your dog tracks, if you locate the track layer you may be able to release the dog and he must do a H&B. Then call your dog back and the decoy agitates and runs and you send him. Now you have to verbally out your dog on a decoy that is still moving, not locked up and standing still. Or perhaps the decoy stops running and you must down your dog before he reaches and bites the decoy. Because in that scenario the decoy does not have a sleeve or any equipment. If your dog doesn't stop and "terminate" then the penalty in not 10 points or a DQ, but is a law suit, civil liability and you may lose your job. If you can pass this easy "trial" you both may have what it takes.
> 
> Now, I agree that not every Police Handler is the greatest dog handler in the world. Just as most sport handlers are not either.  But, a Police K-9 handler does not have to be the greatest dog handler ever, nor does he need to have the greatest dog ever to be successful. A good K-9 handler, first has to be a good cop that can think, work and make good decisions under pressure. Next he has to have decent control of his dog and get his dog into the right situations to find the bad guys. A good K-9 Handler needs good instincts, a good work ethic and the knack of being in the right place at the right time. With some better than average tactics to be safe and make it home in one piece. A little different than handling a sport dog.
> 
> Sorry for the OT rambling. No offense is intended to any sport people, I have done and still do IPO. I love doing sport work with my dogs, and I have tremendous respect for anyone that puts in the time and effort to participate, train and compete in IPO.


That was absolutely spot on!


----------



## onyx'girl

RZZNSTR said:


> It's all about what you want in a dog. For me, because of my background in the K9 Unit I am more in tune with a L.E. type K9. I'm not taking anything away from a good schutzhund dog but as I said before an L.E. dog (again, for the most part) *is exposed to real life stressors and because of that is not only a harder or tougher dog but a smarter dog simply due to life experience.
> * Can Schutzhund dogs do police work? The answer is yes, some can. Can L.E. dogs do Schutzhund? The answers is yes, some can. To answer that any other way would be silly now wouldn't it! One dog isn't any better than the other all things being equal (which they are not!). The training and attitude of the dog and handler comes into play here (boy that's a news flash). When the you know what hits the fan on the street the only points you need to worry about is winning the encounter.


I want to touch on the *SMARTER* 'thinking' dog....IPO dogs are thinkers of course, but do they know how to independently think, decision making and deciphering. A dog that does think can be more difficult to train and doesn't just "do because I say so". 
IPO handlers don't want a dog like that, they want a dog that will do it for a ball reward. Takes way too much effort to train and work a dog that waits a bit, weighs the options or is such a thinker that they decide the handler is ridiculous(in their mind, lol). I know thinking can mean life or death and spur of the moment is sometimes better...but I'd rather have a thinker as my partner if my life depended on it.


----------



## GoodGodsUrge

Blitzkrieg1 said:


> On the flip side I can import 10 dogs for police work tomorrow.
> It would take me alot longer and alot more money to find one dog that would be capable of IPO at the world level and have good potential for success.
> 
> I agree with a lot with the gist of what's being said but it's fun to be a devils advocate .


Especially when you consider that many departments seem to be veering towards single purpose detection dogs. Such candidates are relatively cheap and easy to find. You don't even have to import them.


----------



## carmspack

just a few quick thoughts on the dynamics of the partnership between dog and handler in the two fields .

how many sports dogs live out their lives with their handlers? Seriously . 
There is always a better piece of equipment (dog) to trade until the ego driven results are achieved. Apparently you can make a mint .

Some of the officers, and I don't mean the "cowboys", say that there is an almost intuitive communication between them. A deep , interdependent bond . Security in that commitment, mutual trust . Not a tool , not a piece of equipment , not to be traded . A partnership .


----------



## carmspack

GoodGodsUrge said:


> Especially when you consider that many departments seem to be veering towards single purpose detection dogs. Such candidates are relatively cheap and easy to find. You don't even have to import them.


what a laugh and a half.
No way. 
That skill has been pretty much neglected in sport breeding in favour of dramatic long bites and speed.


----------



## GoodGodsUrge

carmspack said:


> what a laugh and a half.
> No way.
> That skill has been pretty much neglected in sport breeding in favour of dramatic long bites and speed.


I never said it had to be a herder. 

Many police and TSA groups in my area are moving to labs and GSHPs (cheap and easy to find a good one for nose work, less handler aggression, less liability, etc.). 

Either way, single purpose dogs are cheaper than their dual purpose brethren, and from what I understand from people who breed/sell/broker LE dogs, they are easier to find. One department nearby found a suitable candidate in animal control... a mutt.


----------



## RZZNSTR

onyx'girl said:


> I want to touch on the *SMARTER* 'thinking' dog....IPO dogs are thinkers of course, but do they know how to independently think, decision making and deciphering. A dog that does think can be more difficult to train and doesn't just "do because I say so".
> IPO handlers don't want a dog like that, they want a dog that will do it for a ball reward. Takes way too much effort to train and work a dog that waits a bit, weighs the options or is such a thinker that they decide the handler is ridiculous(in their mind, lol). I know thinking can mean life or death and spur of the moment is sometimes better...but I'd rather have a thinker as my partner if my life depended on it.





carmspack said:


> just a few quick thoughts on the dynamics of the partnership between dog and handler in the two fields .
> 
> how many sports dogs live out their lives with their handlers? Seriously .
> There is always a better piece of equipment (dog) to trade until the ego driven results are achieved. Apparently you can make a mint .
> 
> Some of the officers, and I don't mean the "cowboys", say that there is an almost intuitive communication between them. A deep , interdependent bond . Security in that commitment, mutual trust . Not a tool , not a piece of equipment , not to be traded . A partnership .


I think Jim's (Slamdunc) explanation of a patrol dog and carmspack above post explain it very well. As I said in the earlier post L.E. K9s experience makes them a smarter dog. I simply mean that as anything else you draw on your experience and training in everyday and stressful situations. 
The L.E. K9 experiences situations that an IPO dog won't or can't. Again, with the L.E. K9 the only points that count is winning the encounter!


----------



## Slamdunc

To be clear, I am not saying that Police K-9's are the quintessential work dog or GSD's working as K-9's are better than sport dogs. I have seen many excellent GSD's in IPO that I would be happy to have in my unit as a Patrol dog. We pay a fair amount for our Patrol dogs, currently between $7 - 8K. Many of the super nice GSD's that I see doing well in IPO would probably sell for more, if their owners would even part with their dogs. 

I do like a smart dog, they are easier and more fun to train. I do like a dog with high prey and ball drive because I can get a lot out of a dog in "drive." IMHO, and many may disagree with me but I do not need or want a dog to think too much. I want to do the thinking and I want the dog to react to my commands with out hesitation. With that said there are times when I will let my dog use his "super senses" and think through problems. A tough find when I know the dog is in odor, well the dog needs to work it out. I am only so much help when it comes to finding a hidden, concealed bad guy on a windy night. That is the dog's area of expertise and I will rely on him to work it out if necessary. I'm not big on over thinking things and my dog needs to be the same way. I like a dog that does what I tell it do, when I tell it to do it and does it at 110%. This is not a democracy, more like a benevolent dictatorship.


----------



## Blitzkrieg1

carmspack said:


> what a laugh and a half.
> No way.
> That skill has been pretty much neglected in sport breeding in favour of dramatic long bites and speed.


 
Single purpose dogs are about the easiest to find. They are available in any number you want and in many breeds from Labs to Malinois. Its not something that we lack for.

How many sport handlers do you really know? The vast majority I have encountered, train with and know keep the dog in the house with them as a pets when they arent on the field.

Yes many of the more serious enthusiests have standards and wont keep a substandard dog. For many breeders this can be intimidating and they blame the sport and the handlers instead of looking seriously at their program.


----------



## Sabis mom

I see a lot of debate about LE and sport.

This is a brief description of what my PPD/ Patrol dog had to do. And I am not sure a lot of sport dogs would cut it.

We worked for a private security company in a major city, in Canada where security are not allowed to carry weapons. Back in the early 90's when I started, I got to pick up the dog and the truck, the keys and a pager with a roll of quarters. They put dog patrols on sites where the guards had been attacked, or places that were simply to big and exposed. My dog had to be able to walk through an office building and determine if there were people around, if they were people that needed attention paid, if there is a threat. They needed to be able to move through low rent apartment buildings, parkades, fields, alleys, malls or poker rooms as the need presented. They assisted with our community policing contracts, walking the strolls, chatting with the working girls, dealing with trouble makers, making arrests when the need arose. They needed to shift from patrol, to escort, to detection, to crowd control, to protection sometimes all in one shift. We worked minimum 12 hour shifts. For the first half of my career the dog was my only back up. No phone, no radio. Not nervy, over defensive dogs at all. They needed to be our everything, and they were. Keep in mind that our dogs can only bite if we are threatened. By liability the assailant has to be closer then 6 feet, and if we can't justify the dog is usually dead. So dirty isn't an option, mistakes aren't an option.


----------



## G-burg

> *That skill has been pretty much neglected in sport breeding in favour of dramatic long bites and speed.*


Amen sister!!!


----------



## hemicop

Dalko43 said:


> How did the judge correct the dog?


Yup! He used a stick---one under the chin , then a quick one clipping an ear. I WISH I had his skills! "Slamdunc" is spot-on in his assessment if you ask me. It's hard to get K9handlers to accept the concept of civilians training their dogs or that a sport dog can be VERY similar to their working dogs. 
It's been awhile since I was involved with the dog sports but I remember it well & try to keep abreast of some things. 
Locally, the clubs have become too sport oriented, IMO, so I don't go there much.


----------



## hemicop

. This is not a democracy, more like a benevolent dictatorship.[/QUOTE]

And by necessity, I think it kind of has to be. On the sport-side of things I once attned a trial where a friend, who was the track-layer, made all the turns for SchIII to the left. Now many know most trial-tracks will have left & right turns, but it's not a requirement. IIRC, out of about 5 SchIIIs that day, only one passed. Why? the handlers didn't trust their dogs, They were certain the track HAD to turn right at various points so they stopped or pulled their dogs off, thinking the dog was wrong----odd since we rely on the dog's nose for that phase but we "know" better than him?!?!
On the working side----more than once I've called for a K9 only to have the team search & tell me the there's nothing inside. I'd sometimes just sit on the building or yard for awhile & wait & see if anyone left after all the Patrol units were gone. There's been times I'd catch the burglar & during his interrogation he'd tell me how the dog got within inches of him & the handler would call him off or the dog simply missed him. Of course I'd relay this info to the K9 Unit & immediately the excuses would start flying---- wind, the suspect was BSing, I didn't know what I was talking about (after all I'm not a K9 handler & therefore not an "expert"), etc., etc. 
The point being that it seems many handlers, sport & working alike, need to trust their dogs more. Afterall isn't that why we spend all this much time training them?


----------



## cliffson1

When it comes to nose work in particular, " Trust your dog" is one of the first three commandments!!!?
BTW, I can and have given many stories of trusting my dog in unusual circumstances,( like the time I called a drug alert on the car of a one star general at a car roadblock, nobody wanted to make that general get out the car and search him and his car....but I trusted my dog!) and the alert turned out positive!...... Trust your dog!


----------



## onyx'girl

hemicop said:


> . This is not a democracy, more like a benevolent dictatorship.





> And by necessity, I think it kind of has to be. On the sport-side of things I once attned a trial where a friend, who was the track-layer, made all the turns for SchIII to the left. Now many know most trial-tracks will have left & right turns, but it's not a requirement. IIRC, out of about 5 SchIIIs that day, only one passed. Why? the handlers didn't trust their dogs, They were certain the track HAD to turn right at various points so they stopped or pulled their dogs off, thinking the dog was wrong----odd since we rely on the dog's nose for that phase but we "know" better than him?!?!
> On the working side----more than once I've called for a K9 only to have the team search & tell me the there's nothing inside. I'd sometimes just sit on the building or yard for awhile & wait & see if anyone left after all the Patrol units were gone. There's been times I'd catch the burglar & during his interrogation he'd tell me how the dog got within inches of him & the handler would call him off or the dog simply missed him. Of course I'd relay this info to the K9 Unit & immediately the excuses would start flying---- wind, the suspect was BSing, I didn't know what I was talking about (after all I'm not a K9 handler & therefore not an "expert"), etc., etc.
> The point being that it seems many handlers, sport & working alike, need to trust their dogs more. Afterall isn't that why we spend all this much time training them?


So by trusting your dog, you have to know that your dog can think on its own? You just made my point....trusting your partner does come down to knowing your dog can think, decipher and make decisions. Most LE K9's are not attached to a line are they? A protection dog may not have the handler directing it due to situations...it has to think on its own.


----------



## Slamdunc

Well, you have to trust your dog, the dog has the super senses we don't. That comes down to training and being able to read your dog. A good handler that has a well trained dog is going to be able to read that well and believe what he sees. 

When doing detection work on the street you must rely on the dog for the alert. Just as Cliff mentioned, btw that took big cojones to call that alert. Way to trust your dog.:thumbup:

Another example of trusting your dog is in tracking as hemicop correctly mentioned. When tracking a suspect you have no idea where the guy actually ran, so you use your dog to track. The dog has the 220 million + olfactory cells in his nose, we have 5 million. 1/8th of a dogs brain is dedicated to odor processing, I don't even use 1/8 of my brain on a daily basis. So who am I going to trust? The cop or witness who said he ran that way or my dog who takes me in a different direction? I'm trusting the dog, he has proven to me on many occasions that he knows where to go. Following my dog has made me look very good and put a lot of bad guys in jail. My longest track to an apprehension was around 2 miles. The oldest and most difficult track was from a burglary, that happened 8 hrs before my arrival, 30+ mph winds and 2" of rain that day. I started the track in an apartment complex in 3" of water from 1 shoe print. Boomer took me through the complex to another apartment building about a 1/2 mile away. Highly contaminated, lots of folks out and walking around. The track ended there, I checked the next 3 buildings and all were "negative" from the dog. Went back to the building and found the suspect lived there and was a serial burglar at 17 years old. In all honesty, I thought that track was a waste and it was pouring out. Had been raining all day and most cops do not like to get wet. The reason I got the dog and decided to try the track, against all odds, was because I felt really bad for the victim of the burglary. A single mother that worked hard for everything she had and to take care of her teenage son. The apartment was looted and I knew she would not be able to replace her computer, jewelry, Ipad and TV. I couldn't leave with out at least trying and feel ok about it. It was a good feeling when Boomer took off through the flooded back yard and headed through the apartment complex, I knew I was on it. I was thrilled that I put the extra effort in and it paid off. There are few things in my line of work that are more satisfying than tracking to a suspects house or finding him hidden in some concealed location. 

You and your dog are a team, whether in sport or work. You must help your dog and set it up for success. You must trust the dog when he is "on it" and working reliably. But, that comes from good training and the ability to read a dog. When I train a detection team or a patrol dog in tracking, I quickly go to "blind finds" and running "blind tracks." After a month of training everything is "blind" to the handler. Meaning the handler does not know where the aids are hidden or where the track goes. Doing this forces the handler to read the dog's body language and cues. When you can do this, you are a team and you will trust your dog.


----------



## hemicop

onyx'girl said:


> So by trusting your dog, you have to know that your dog can think on its own? You just made my point....trusting your partner does come down to knowing your dog can think, decipher and make decisions. Most LE K9's are not attached to a line are they? A protection dog may not have the handler directing it due to situations...it has to think on its own.


 It depends on the situation & dept. policy. But the bigger "problem" (?) is the LEOs that simply don't feel a bond with their dog & see him merely as a tool. For those officers won't trust their dog, won't look at the big picture when deploying them and won't own up to errors and/or make excuses for their performance. 
Some years ago we had a very bad situation where a known shooter, still armed shot one of our K9s that was sent on him. Now why you would essentially bring a dog to a gun fight is beyond me, as we knew where the suspect was yet the dept. felt a need to use a dog before using a negotiator. The result was a dead K9, a seriously depressed handler & eventually he left the Unit and a (still) vague policy regarding barricaded suspects.


----------



## carmspack

"Now why you would essentially bring a dog to a gun fight is beyond me, as we knew where the suspect was yet the dept. felt a need to use a dog before using a negotiator."

that's the cowboys.
don't use a dog where a tazer will do the trick --- 

you're not in sport doing the long flying in the air sends to a decoy with a sleeve


----------



## Slamdunc

I have found that my dog has been as effective if not more effective on many occasions than a tazer. Tazers are not 100% effective and have limited range. Personally, I'm not bringing a dog or a Tazer to a gun fight, I'm bringing my rifle. 

There are times when I have gone to armed subject calls / shots fired calls with my dog and rifle. Walking in at night to the area of a shooter, trying to arrive unoticed, the dog can be an asset. I have some pretty good tactical obedience on my dog and I can handle a rifle and my dog. He is attached to my belt on a bungie leash and told to heel or down, when needed. He is neutral to gunfire and will lay calmly at my side if I discharge my weapon. 

Having worked my dog on the SWAT team for the past 7 years, I have been in a few uncomfortable spots. I have utilized my dog in some very dangerous situations, knowing full well the risk. I have also declined utilizing my dog on a few ops. Fortunately, I have the ability to speak up and say yes or no on the deployment. Out SWAT tea, leaders and supervisors respect my judgement and will discuss a deployment and go with my assessment. 

But, and it's a big but, if the dog will save Officers lives in a situation, that is his job. I have a friend whose dog was recently killed on a armed barricaded SWAT standoff. The POS came out of the house and moved directly to the reaction team. The dog was deployed and the suspect killed the dog, just before he was shot and killed. There is too much to get into, but it was a good deployment and the dog absolutely saved some of my buddies lives. I am not one to Monday morning QB dog deployments on the internet. If we were speaking in person and I knew who you were, might discuss these things in detail. It never seems to work out well on the internet. 

Regarding deployments, I am a fan of negations, gas, more gas, wait, gas, more gas, wait, then a robot and me and the dog doing a covert clear with the team. That is generally how we do it.


----------



## carmspack

so what in today's world is the role of the working LE k9?

locating suspect - alert - hold - contain , handler protection creating a barrier , scent discriminating - locating devices , drugs, contraband , cadaver , lost and injured , imposing order and control . 

sophisticated uses .

I know that there is a risk to the dog. I had one (RCMP dog TomBrown) who lost his life due to blood loss sustained in active duty - knife wound -- his sister Tetley is the base for my lines to this day.
Another one - reported in papers and nominee for Purina Hall of Fame award , provided safety for his handler who was ambushed (3 guys , one in a tree) - saved his life , dog worked through his own injuries , and currently there are two that are in the Detroit area , brothers, who are SWAT.

I know full well what the risk is to the dog . Even so I will not hesitate to offer a dog for this kind of work -- 

" If we were speaking in person and I knew who you were, might discuss these things in detail. It never seems to work out well on the internet. "

I understand and appreciate this. Deployment has to be good and reasonable and realistic use of a dog .
Been there, done that, will be there again .


----------



## Slamdunc

carmspack said:


> so what in today's world is the role of the working LE k9?
> 
> locating suspect - alert - hold - contain , handler protection creating a barrier , scent discriminating - locating devices , drugs, contraband , cadaver , lost and injured , imposing order and control .
> 
> sophisticated uses .
> 
> I know that there is a risk to the dog. I had one (RCMP dog TomBrown) who lost his life due to blood loss sustained in active duty - knife wound -- his sister Tetley is the base for my lines to this day.
> Another one - reported in papers and nominee for Purina Hall of Fame award , provided safety for his handler who was ambushed (3 guys , one in a tree) - saved his life , dog worked through his own injuries , and currently there are two that are in the Detroit area , brothers, who are SWAT.
> 
> I know full well what the risk is to the dog . Even so I will not hesitate to offer a dog for this kind of work --
> 
> *" If we were speaking in person and I knew who you were, might discuss these things in detail. It never seems to work out well on the internet. "*
> 
> I understand and appreciate this. Deployment has to be good and reasonable and realistic use of a dog .
> Been there, done that, will be there again .


My comment in bold was not directed to you, I apologize if it came off that way. It was a general statement on my feelings of discussing some topics on forums, LE work is one of them. I hope that makes sense. 

The LE K-9 has many uses as you correctly stated, some are rather sophisticated. But, the dog as you know is another tool to use and must be the right tool for the job. A K-9 like any use of force must be used judiciously and appropriately. 

That is awesome that you are producing dogs that are being used as LE K-9's.


----------



## GoodGodsUrge

carmspack said:


> so what in today's world is the role of the working LE k9?


Speaking as a tax payer: I really don't care about bites. I care about cost and convictions.

Bites don't get convictions. Finding evidence gets convictions. Same goes for detecting explosives or finding a lost jogger, it's the nose that matters. 

Bites do open the field for law suits, though, and I'd be curious to know how much money is spent every year on such things. I think it's probably a lot:

Hidden Cost of Police Dogs Bites Cities - latimes

Pierce County to pay $225K to police-dog bite victim | The Today File | Seattle Times

Police dog bites cost forces thousands in compensation - BBC News

More than five people a week are bitten by police dogs, figures show | UK news | The Guardian

I'm not saying there is no place for dual purpose police dogs. However, in this day and age I think it's a diminished role. This is especially true when you consider that crime rates - both violent and nonviolent - are down to where they were in the 1960s, aka "the good 'ol days," and more and more communities are decriminalizing drug possession and treating it as more of a public health issue than a criminal issue. I think the cost benefit of have lots of dual purpose dogs around just doesn't add up.

Here are the crime statistics collected by the FBI from 1960 to 2014 if you don't believe me. The first chart is hard numbers, the second chart is rates.

United States Crime Rates 1960 - 2014


----------



## cliffson1

Hey Jim, it turned out that the General has initiated the roadblock for drug detection, for troops going into Kelly Hill @Ft Benning. He drove his 18 year old sons car in that morning to see if he was using drugs. We found about six or seven seeds in back seat/floor. I wouldn't want to have been that kid that night!!!....lol


----------



## Slamdunc

Cliff, you must have had a big sigh of relief when first, the dog was spot on and two the General was OK with it. 

I remember years ago when I was a Narcotics Det, I had done a couple of search warrants and served different folks with several indictments for the distribution of narcotics in one week. The next week I was getting calls form some very influential people that I had arrested or indicted family members of theirs. I remember stressing over two cases for a few days, because of who the relatives were. I was not going to drop the charges or the indictments, but being relatively new I was concerned about how it could affect my career. Fortunately, both said "do what you have to do." It was understood and it all worked out. But, I know the feeling. 

I'm sure the General's son learned a lesson. :laugh:


----------



## Sabis mom

GoodGodsUrge said:


> Speaking as a tax payer: I really don't care about bites. I care about cost and convictions.


 
Speaking as a human, a wife and a mother I care about officers going home to their families. 
I don't give a rat's ass how many times a dog is deployed or how many times it bites, as long as it's there the one time it's needed.


----------



## Slamdunc

Sabis mom said:


> Speaking as a human, a wife and a mother I care about officers going home to their families.
> I don't give a rat's ass how many times a dog is deployed or how many times it bites, as long as it's there the one time it's needed.


Thank you! 

Speaking as a K-9 Handler, I can tell you that my dog has made more money for our city than he has cost. Just his value in preventing injuries to Officers (there is a cost for that as well) and minimizing injuries to the citizens that he has bit, is considerable. The value in a Dual Purpose Police K-9, that protects Officers and saves lives is priceless, IMHO.


----------



## Sabis mom

Slamdunc said:


> Thank you!
> 
> Speaking as a K-9 Handler, I can tell you that my dog has made more money for our city than he has cost. Just his value in preventing injuries to Officers (there is a cost for that as well) and minimizing injuries to the citizens that he has bit, is considerable. The value in a Dual Purpose Police K-9, that protects Officers and saves lives is priceless, IMHO.


 I am not in law enforcement. I grew up in a family littered with police and military. K-9 dogs hanging out with us kids at family events. I felt the fear when uncles and cousins didn't call, and the pain when they didn't come home. I felt the grief and the thankfulness when we lost one of the dogs. 
I worked for years in the private sector, before we had vests and phones. One too many times I stared at my 4 legged partner and prayed, knowing it was the only thing standing between me and them.
I chanced upon my husband one night, drinking with the dog and listened to him telling my four legged partner that he didn't care how many times he got growled at as long as he continued to bring me back home every morning. 
I left them to their peace making.
No taser is ever going to tell you that there is a guy with a weapon behind that door.


----------



## GoodGodsUrge

Sabis mom said:


> Speaking as a human, a wife and a mother I care about officers going home to their families.
> I don't give a rat's ass how many times a dog is deployed or how many times it bites, as long as it's there the one time it's needed.


You do know that police officers _sign up_ for the job, right? They know and accept the risks going in. They can quit if it turns out to be too much for them. I'm sure you're also aware that professions such as truck driving and construction are actually more dangerous than police work... so lets not martyr anybody just yet. 

Here is a work-up done by the state of Idaho looking at the cost of a police dog. Of course, this was done in 2004, so costs have gone up since then, but you get the idea. It's not an insignificant amount of money... especially in this day and age when everybody is having to tighten their belts.

http://www.isp.idaho.gov/pgr/Research/documents/k9s.pdf

Either way, as I said in my other post, non violent drug offenses are starting to be decriminalized. Drug use in general is beginning to be seen more as a public health issue than a criminal one. This shift will decrease the demand somewhat for police dogs and correction dogs both.

Crime is down to a 50 year low. Which means less need.

An officer is taking a huge chance at being sued if his dog bites anybody. And that money is underwritten by the tax payer (just like the dog, the car, the salary, and everything else he uses). Read the articles I linked to. Often money is payed out to innocent people or other police officers because the dog bites the wrong individual. Many times it's paid to the suspect because of excessive use of force.

Either way, dogs are far more valuable for their noses than anything else. As I said, noses get convictions and find lost people. Not bites. 

You see many law enforcement and TSA groups moving to single purpose detection dogs for all the reasons I've provided. Clearly they've decided it's just not worth the liability.


----------



## Sabis mom

_You do know that police officers sign up for the job, right? They know and accept the risks going in. They can quit if it turns out to be too much for them. I'm sure you're also aware that professions such as truck driving and construction are actually more dangerous than police work... so lets not martyr_ _anybody just yet._

I'm sorry that is just a stupid statement.

Police officers sign up for the job of defending the rest of us, and you think they should not have any and all tools and support we can give them? 
They can quit if it gets to be too much? If what gets to be too much? Getting assaulted? Getting shot? Attending crimes in progress is dangerous. Do you understand that a dog clearing a building with it's nose may need to restrain the person it's looking for right? 
Truck driving and construction? Maybe but mostly people aren't actively trying to kill them.

Do you actually know what a K-9 team does? Or are you just here to incite an argument about something you know nothing about. 
As a taxpayer I can't think of many better uses for my money.


----------



## MineAreWorkingline

GoodGodsUrge said:


> You do know that police officers _sign up_ for the job, right? They know and accept the risks going in. They can quit if it turns out to be too much for them. I'm sure you're also aware that professions such as truck driving and construction are actually more dangerous than police work... so lets not martyr anybody just yet.
> 
> Here is a work-up done by the state of Idaho looking at the cost of a police dog. Of course, this was done in 2004, so costs have gone up since then, but you get the idea. It's not an insignificant amount of money... especially in this day and age when everybody is having to tighten their belts.
> 
> http://www.isp.idaho.gov/pgr/Research/documents/k9s.pdf
> 
> Either way, as I said in my other post, non violent drug offenses are starting to be decriminalized. Drug use in general is beginning to be seen more as a public health issue than a criminal one. This shift will decrease the demand somewhat for police dogs and correction dogs both.
> 
> Crime is down to a 50 year low. Which means less need.
> 
> An officer is taking a huge chance at being sued if his dog bites anybody. And that money is underwritten by the tax payer (just like the dog, the car, the salary, and everything else he uses). Read the articles I linked to. Often money is payed out to innocent people or other police officers because the dog bites the wrong individual. Many times it's paid to the suspect because of excessive use of force.
> 
> Either way, dogs are far more valuable for their noses than anything else. As I said, noses get convictions and find lost people. Not bites.
> 
> You see many law enforcement and TSA groups moving to single purpose detection dogs for all the reasons I've provided. Clearly they've decided it's just not worth the liability.


Have you looked up the cost of an injured or killed police officer?

How about the cost to the general public when the best of the best do start refusing the work due to a lack of concern for their safety and welfare? Who will be left to do the work and what will be that the cost to the public?


----------



## GoodGodsUrge

MineAreWorkingline said:


> Have you looked up the cost of an injured or killed police officer?
> 
> How about the cost to the general public when the best of the best do start refusing the work due to a lack of concern for their safety and welfare? Who will be left to do the work and what will be that the cost to the public?


I think cell phone cameras have helped expose exactly the type of person commonly attracted to law enforcement work. 

Look, clearly some here think it's okay for cops to be able to do anything under the sun - including trampling on the rights of others, using excessive force, etc. I guess that's to be expected, this is a forum populated by people who like doing bitework with dogs after all, people who probably share a bit in common to those who gravitate to authoritarianism, fear, gun ownership, and get off on seeing "bad guys" get beat on. I understand the audience.

I just don't happen to be one of them. People are innocent until proven guilty in a courtroom. People are merely suspects until they are charged with a crime and convicted. 

But lets stop with the aspersions. 

Read the links I posted to. Understand them. Look at what is happening in the world around you. There is growing intolerance for dog bites of any kind. There is growing intolerance for police brutality. There is a growing push for the decriminalization of drug possession and nonviolent drug offenses. Crime - both of the violent and nonviolent varieties - is way, way down. Down to where it was in the 60s.

Police forces are expensive. Police dogs add significantly to that expense, especially when you consider that probably millions of dollars are spent every year on police dog bites (often enough to innocent people or other cops). Schools and other important public programs are struggling to make ends meet, and many are closing due to lack of funds. I'd rather see the money spent on those programs than on buying dual purpose k9s and all the liability that entails. I vote accordingly in my community.

I've provided evidence to back up my views. Please provide data to back up your views as well. Bring on the numbers. No need to descend into emotional anecdotes and disparaging comments.


----------



## Castlemaid

This is turning into a cop-bashing thread with hints of political content. Such a good discussion, derailed by someone with an agenda. Sorry.


----------

