is this the old psp cert standards or is this a new updated one. thanks don

This is a new one though I believe there is some fine tuning on the horizon. It was implemented 1998 or so.

No certfication is meant to be reflective of a dog's TOTAL capability,no more than my department's firearms qualification,for example, is meant to test an officer's complete capability with his/her weapon. Any set of standards are only meant to evaluate the very basics. I personally,dont certify "piss poor" dogs.I have spent enough time in court over the course of 24years to do that and I have a heck of a lot more concern for officer safety than that.
Regardless of the organization that one chooses to certify under,training only to pass that particular set of standards will result in a dog severely lacking in skills,tactics etc.

If the certification is not challenging and meaningful in regards to performance it is way too common to see the level of street performance reflect the minimum standards. Cops all too aften are lazy and or just don't understand the implications of just getting by. It is important to raise the height of the bar. Since K-9 work is training for what we will perform vs. firearms where we train for what we hope never to perform there has evolved a difference. If firearms work was up to me the standard would change also. Standing on a square range firing on command is an acknowledged poor means of training and evaluation....but so ingrained in the system that changing it proves to be virtually impossible. Fortunatly, the canine community is smaller, and can be more responsive, resulting in progresive standards and the resultant training that goes with those standards.

Here in Texas,TCLEOSE sets the standards for law enforcement and corrections,with the exception of police canines. Years ago,all testing,certifications etc were given a numerical score,70being passing. This pertained to firearms qualification,written tests, etc etc. This nummerical score began to bite everyone in the butt in the courtroom. Now,everything is pass/fail,with no numerical score whatsoever. All mandated in service,yearly qualification etc are all pass/fail,very generic in nature. This of course,carried over into police canine certifcation standards to a degree. Our ongoing training in our department is far more practical,and intensive than any of these standards reflect,in all areas. I certainly require more out of my k9teams than is necessary to pass annual certification.And,our department has some different situations to train for,such as marine interdiction,etc. I do see your point,Kevin and I agree. But until we all get each other's organizations to agree on a single set of standards,there will be little consistency.

>>>>> I do see your point,Kevin and I agree. But until we all get each other's organizations to agree on a single set of standards,there will be little consistency.<<<

I don't think all organizations have to agree on standards. In fact that is always the sticking point. It always causes a lot of fighting when the subject comes up. What I do believe is that the standard that is selected for must be challenging. I do not believe it is or should be in the hands of National and or regional even local organizations of which there are a growing number to present and dictate. Unfortunatly, there are few administrative types that ahve the knowledge and experience to implement strong standards of performance for the street behaviors their teams are or should be encountering. It ends up being left to a few forward thinking handlers and departmental instructors to push the limits. The ultimate goal is to be able to apply the dogs in a wider variety of circumstances safely and within constitutional constraints. Organizations need to focus on education and training, not certifications provided.

While this might be off point a little from the first question, I believe that problems arise from a lack of bite development. I feel that dogs are not trained in thier proper drives and therefore it is impossible for the dog execute a buiding search properly.

Originally posted by Mike1:
While this might be off point a little from the first question, I believe that problems arise from a lack of bite development. I feel that dogs are not trained in thier proper drives and therefore it is impossible for the dog execute a buiding search properly.

???????????????????????? Explain???????

While I am off a bit from the first question, and should have been clearer on my statement, everyone seems to be debating, maybe I am wrong but with tatics, leash vs. no leash, but at the end of the day it does not matter, umless the dog is working in proper drive. Spending the time to set polices about issues like these is kind of like putting the cart before the horse. I have seen and worked active police dogs that would not bite a suspect because he has no sleeve on. But these handlers are debating whether or not the department should let them in off leash because the dog is going to to more damage to the suspect becasue he can't be controled. The odds of this type of dog biting anyone is slim to none. Most departments, not all, over look the very foundation of the patrol dog which is bite development, and debate issues such as these. Organizations need to be more concearned with training then just earning a cert.

I think search tactics, as was mentioned before should be dictated by the structure/situation. Dogs should be trained to search on/off lead, in a directed or free pattern.
Handlers should have a idea where the dog is regardless of the dogs style of training (H+B vs Handler Control). Innocents can and do end up in search areas, bad bites will damage all of k-9.
Prior to doing the search, handlers can do things to help the dog-Enter via Point of entry or known location of subject. Let the dog acclimate prior to search, standing inside the structure(w/cover) listening,smelling..can make the difference in a dog that searches visually, running to the rear of a area..and a dog that combines all their senses and is more efficient.
As a handler saftey issue, knowing how your dog works is very important.
I have done many on lead/ close directed searches-in areas without a secure search area, like abandoned structures, and residences and such when the possibility of a bad bite is greater. IE neighbors call after seeing man break in to home w/owners on vacation..turns out to be drunken son home from college, passed out on the sofa.
The issues being brought up about selection ,training, deployment...is why I believe PSD's should be trained by people with actual experience in the subject matter.
trials and certifications with the different associations is great as a starting point, it answers the question to JQ Public that the psd's are meeting a standard, good for court.
Not to be taken too seriously, as pattern training kills