Howard is dead on, in my opinion about how it works. One thing I would add, don't forget the handler is part of this equation as well. If the bad guy is shooting, about too shoot, or taking time to aim at the dog, well, it could well turn out to be not so good a day for him (the bad guy).

DFrost

Howard, believe it or not, I've had people send me emails, and on one occasion, called me on the phone and asked me to quit knocking the use of pseudo drugs for training. I also attended a seminar in Jacksonville, conducted by a well-known law enforcement training school. During that seminar, the b/h was discussed. While remaining as respectful as I could, I was adamantly opposed and stated my concerns. I was surprised at the number of canine officers that said, while it wasn't there choice in the first place, in actual situations it did not work very well. Which to me is understandable. Oh well, I'm old and have earned the right to be cranky. When my administration asked about it, I told them; it's the quickest way to get rid of me. Order me to do it and I'll retire tomorrow. It hasn't been brought up again.

DFrost

David, I have used pseudo drugs in the past. It was used during alert building exercises wherein the toy was buried and the ground sprinkled with the pseudo. This gave the dog a scent picture during the exercise and was safe for the dog. I've used pseudo sprinkled sticks as well but not a whole lot. Once I felt the dog knew the odor the real thing was used afterwards.

As far as FB and BH, I've been through many discussions on the two. I'm a FB guy and wouldn't do it any other way. I have heard the same stories as you from BH handlers. I believe its because once they've been in the sh** they finally realize that they want that dog to take a guy out ASAP. IMO BH in police work is just about liability and not handler safety.

BTW, my FB dog would do the BH...only because he couldn't get to the scumbags :-)

Howard

I agree about the barking when they can't get to the subject. I want that. I agree, it's strictly a matter of liability, which often times, bites them in the butt anyway. No pun intended.

DFrost

Although I’ve been successful in keeping pseudo’s out of our program, I can’t convince my admin to drop the B&H from the program.
David and Howard…. I’ve noticed the last few years a big push to focus the dogs on center mass hits and away from the extremities. Are you guys seeing this in your areas? I’ve noticed the advocates of this are doing a ton of suitwork and very little muzzlework

Matt, my personal opinion; I don't think we ever really got away from teaching center mass hits. I think what happens most is, it's easier to just get a sleeve out and take a couple of hits than it is to drag the whole suit out. Training realistic scenarios etc, I think maybe there is more emphisis on the "find". The bite is thrown in at the end, genearlly with just a sleeve. I agree that muzzle work is often put aside once the initial training is done. Sometimes we are our own worst enemies when it comes to training. Too Often, we get our 8 hours or whatever and we don't design that training time to a specific objective. I see that in all areas, ie drug, explosives and patrol. Sure we get the time in, but we just don't focus on specific objectives during training.

On another note: I trained two bomb dogs for Pittsburg under the old FAA program. This was back in the 70's. They were one of the first cities in the country to enter the old FAA, currently the TSA, program. One of my last acts was retiring one of the dogs before my retirement from the military in '88. Let me see, 2 goes into 8, 8 times 4, damn I'm getting old.

DFrost

DFrost

Matt,

I haven't seen or heard that trend around here but David is 100% right, laziness creeps into the training and the suit is abandoned. I like center mass hits but if the decoy stinks then the training goes to pot. Dogs that hit the flat part of the torso, (back and chest) usually get a crappy bite (on our suit anyway) and they end up transferring. The only way to really make sure they get a good bite is to tie them back when targeting the torso. I like to have them target the waist for a better grip.

As far as muzzle training goes...That usually is abandoned as well, mainly because it requires a lot of physical activity and a decoy who knows what they are doing. Also, it can be painfull. Personally, I love muzzle work. It does so many good things for the dog and you can see his intensity grow. Thats what its all about.

Howard

Guys, thanks for explaining the why of not just targeting the weapon hand unless it's what is moving. I understand now and it makes total sense. I appreciate knowing the why; it puts questions to rest. I've been told a few times in the past that I'm a pain in the neck cause I always want to know why.

The rest of this conversation is very interesting. What is FB, as opposed to BH (which I gather is bark and hold)?

Sandy, you are correct about the b/h, it's bark and hold. F/B is find and bite. Some believe if the subject, the person the dog is going after, ceases movement, the dog should release and guard the subject. Some believe, if the dog is commanded to bite, it bites until it's told to do something different. I'm a proponent of the latter. If I command the dog to so something, I believe it should do that until I tell it different, that includes the bite.

DFrost

I find it interesting that you police people would say what you have about a service dog. If what you say is true and they are not trained to bite a paticular part of the body, why is it 90% of all trainers where a left arm bite sleeve. When a suit is worn 90% of all decoys all take the bite on the left side. If a dog was not taught to bite on a target not only would the dog be in danger of getting hurt(Jammed). The decoy could not react fast enough and could, would, get hurt also. As far as grip, all dogs that are trained buy a reputable trainer is taught to have a calm grip. I would agree after the dog has been placed the maintanace of the dog go's way down because the various departments let any officer willing, to catch their dogs. Then the dog gets lazy and does'nt target as he should,(because the decoy does'nt know any better) and is allowed to be hectic because the "decoy" has no idea what he is doing. A dog with to much civil not only is'nt calm in his grip, he is closer to the edge of coming off the bite tucking tail and running, they also tend to want to grip as far away from the center of the body as they can. The bottom line is, if the dog has been trained by a GOOD trainer the foundation will be the same. It is true that a sport dog can survive in sport with minimal cival and alot of prey, and a PSD should have enough cival to stay in the fight. Whether sport or PPD, PSD, any body that knows dogs will be looking for balance. In my town the law allows for one bite if the officers are in danger, a second and third bite make laws suits, (per our city attorny) I realize this is a general statement. I realize a PSD must rebite in the case of getting hite while on the bite some will rebite the hand or object that is hitting them. Initial entry will be targeted, could be leg, arm, the pocket, or the sholder or back if running away. My main point is that the foundation should be the same. Hope I made sence. Lance


Ed's comments edited in late in this thread:

Lance - I suggest you check your attitude at the door. Your comments reflect a serious lack of experience and certainly a complete lack of understanding of training for police service dogs. Anyone reading this thread needs to take this into consideration. In the future you would be advised to not post to threads on police service dogs.

Ed Frawley