What is your opinion of civilians, (Schutzhund trainers), selling K-9’s?

Question

Hello Ed,

    Allow me a little of your time. I am a K9 handler with the Pittsburgh police department, up here in Pittsburgh, PA (Go Steelers). I started working with dogs in the army in 1976 . I have 15 years experience as a police handler. First off , I want to say, I enjoy your videos ,and have even purchased a few. I am currently on your mailing list. I don?t always agree with you, but always find your videos, and articles, top quality and interesting/thought provoking. I especially enjoy your sarcasm and humor.

    What I am writing you about, is to get your opinion on a couple of issues that really stick in my craw. The first has to do with NAPWDA. They are very big up here in western PA .While I believe their original intentions were good and honorable, what I see now are people who just want to say they are "master" trainers so they can make a buck or two. People who are masters only of seminars and workshops, but have little or, no actual street experience. My department is not the biggest around, we are 1200 strong with a 28 team K9 unit, but we get plenty of work. I believe training HAS to be mixed with practical application.

    Second, there are no state standards in PA concerning police work dog teams. Therefore, any schutzhund trainer can make friends with an officer from a four or five man department and sell and train them a "police dog " while I easily admit the superior skills in some areas of dog training that allot of civilians have, I am a big advocate dog police training being done by POLICE. Especially narcotics training.

    I am seeing civilians associated with NAPWDA selling Sch. dogs as police dogs, and people who train in schutzhund convince these small departments that is the way to go. I feel this is only going to hurt all of us in the long run. A training school in the middle of our state , run by a "master " trainer offers green handlers a complete course in THREE weeks with the end results being they are trained handlers with street ready , dual purpose, police service dogs! Our housing police just sent three of their officers to this trainer. I saw the dogs when they got back. All were sch. 1, and all never saw a bite suit and all three have already run into problems! Anyway, I rambled on a bit, if you get time in your busy schedule, let me know what you think about civilians training police service dogs and "master" trainers.

    Thanks,
Vince

Accepted Answer

I agree with almost everything you have said in your email. I have your email in my web site because I do think this issue needs to be addressed by more departments.

    I would like to qualify the fact that while I am a member of NAPWDA I do not follow the politics of the organization so I am not familiar with any Master Trainers that sell dogs or give seminars.

    We have a police K9 assoc. here in WI. (Wisconsin Law Enforcement Handlers Assoc or WLECHA). This org. is well represented in the state. We have 90 out of 110 K9 handlers as members. For a number of years I have tried to talk the org. into setting up a state standard for certification. The board has been reluctant to do so. I believe the reason is they are concerned about liability (which is a lame excuse) and I think they are concerned that they will be forced to train their dogs to a higher level than they are now trained.

    My argument has always been that if we do not step to the line and set our standards the State Standards and Training will do it for us. This will in effect result in something being designed by people (probably civilians) who are unqualified to do this.

    This past year the Controlled Substances Board for the State of WI made issuing a license for drug dog handler conditional to being a member of NADWDA or USPCA. They somehow forgot to include our State Organization. So we already see an outside influence beginning to happen. We have enlisted the help of the Wi Sheriff's Assoc. (my sheriff is the president) to insist that they also include WLECHA.

    So I use my own state as an example of how civilians can influence police K9 handlers in unproductive ways.

    I certainly agree with you that Schutzhund trainers have little to no place in trying to train and sell police service dogs.

    If a local schutzhund club was smart they would try and gain support of the local K9 officers. This could be done by volunteering to run tracks for the handlers, the sch helpers can usually function as a decent decoy for muzzle work. Things like this would help foster a relationship with local K9 handlers. When that happens you will see more k9 handler become interested in sport dog training. They in turn would point local civilians interested in dog work towards the schutzhund clubs. It's a win win situation for both parties.

    This issue of civilians offering 3 week courses for dual purpose police dogs is ludicrous. Any department that buys into a program like this is setting themselves up for a law suit and a failed K9 program. I would seriously doubt that the people who do this are very good schutzhund trainers. They certainly are scam artist. Schutzhund training is a sport. In NO WAY does it even come close to qualifying a trainer as a police service dog instructor. The people who do this not only hurt K9 programs they also hurt the image of Schutzhund in this country.