I guess one advantage with B&H dogs is that you could train these dogs to differ between a search for a criminal and a search for friendly people, kids and such that got lost in the woods for example, which gives you a wider use for the PSD, not only searching for criminals.

Ok, ya'll can take the e-collar off, point taken! <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" /> Our vendor actually comes in today for evaluations. I will enquire as to why the B+H was not introduced and the find and bite enforced and see if he is willing to introduce this training. This should speak volumes. As Reiner stated, different countries have different training programs.

It is amazing the amount of information offered when a subject is defended. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" />

Originally posted by Stig Andersson:
I guess one advantage with B&H dogs is that you could train these dogs to differ between a search for a criminal and a search for friendly people, kids and such that got lost in the woods for example, which gives you a wider use for the PSD, not only searching for criminals. Not the way that the B&H is currently taught you could not. Please read my earlier post.

Kevin, I don´t now how the bark and hold are trained in different countries, but I know that in some counties in Sweden they use PSDs that are trained to differ between search for a criminal and search for friendly people. A method that was introduced in the 70s and have been refined by the years and seems to work very well, there have been no accidental bites on innocent people during the years this method has been used.

The B+H in PSDs is like the "Great Debate" in firearms training and DT instruction, the argument is rhetorical and debatable until the end of time. Here is one un deniable fact about the B+H, it is one more tool in the tool box of PSDs; it has its proper and improper applications. No training method or philosophy or tool of the trade is the "end all" to every situation that can be encountered by LEOs. In my opinion, it is plainly ignorant not to teach, train and refine a PSD's B+H because like everything else in this line of work, you will NEVER know what you need and when you need it. Bring ALL your tools possible to the task at hand.

David , to answer your original question , in Minnesota we have alot of Police K9's and the number is growing . The vast majority are "Bite and Hold" . I haven't heard any rumors that this will change because they are "Biting police dogs". I do beleive we may see a small decline in the number of new Police K9's in the next few years due to the budget problems most local governments are having. I think the numbers will then increase once the economy improves. Just my opinion .

I see the "Bark and Hold" vs "Bite and Hold has reared it's ugly head again .I have been a Police Officer in a large city for 13 years . I have been a K9 Officer for 7 years and a trainer for 2 years . I'm on my 2nd patrol K9 trained in "Bite and Hold". I have had numerous finds and apprehensions with both dogs . We have 21 Patrol K9 teams in our unit . ALL of them "out" on command and ALL of them return to us on command . As a matter of fact the the MAJORITY of the other departments I work and train with can "out" their dogs on command and have them come back to them on command . They also don't have a problem with equipment fixation either if they did they are gone . We find that out pretty quick here .

The fact is both methods have their strengths and weaknesses and can be debated forever . It is up to the K9 Officers to train and deploy there K9's properly . There are poorly trained "Bark and Hold" K9's and poorly trained "Bite and Hold" K9's and they all make us look bad . If you train and deploy smart there isn't a problem with either method .

I know from my experiences on the street that their were certain scenerios where one method my have been better then another . That's the nature of Police work . I find that "Bite and Hold" works better for the majority of what we encounter in our city . That may not be true for other departments .

Michael Rivers would you be offended if I ,having a limited knowledge of the Schutzhund Sport came out on a discussion forum stating "the majority of schutzhund dogs are this or that " when I haven't even participated in the sport . That's how I feel about your comments .

Jim - a good post. I agree with you that sport dog trainers who have never been police officers should not be offering advise to police dog handlers accept possibly in obedience training. Schutzhund work is not police work. Its not even close to police work. Sport trainers often missunderstand this. I thing that people who have not been police officers should think twice before posting to the police K9 threads on the board.

Ed a very good point,it is easy to compare dogs in a normal environment but the street and the circumstances are not normal,they change by the minute,criminals soon make you change your mind about comparing sport and PSDs together with the deployment methods and rules you have to work within.
Paul