# Selecting dogs



## julie allen

I'm not sure why so many people believe wash out dogs will make good SAR dogs. Talking with breeders, rescues, trainers, k9 departments, and so many will call with a dog that "didn't work for us" due to any number of reasons.
Why would I want to take a dog with poor nerves, low hunt, bad hips, or any other reason the dog sucks and put him to work hopefully to help save lives.
SAR dogs have to search for hours, not just a line of cars, or a school locker room. Hunt drive needs to be better than most narcotic dogs.

Dogs that were too nervous to work along the highway or on slick floors is no good to me. I expect mine to work in all sorts of nerve wracking scenes with me out of sight oftentimes.

Sport dogs that aren't sound enough to compete will never last on a three day search in rough terrain.

If a dog won't stick with a trail, there is no reason he should be out tracking lost people, and risk missing them.

I can understand a dog lacking bite/grips to compete or work. Other than that, I can't understand why anyone in the SAR world would accept sub par dogs, or why any breeder/owner/handler would recommend these dogs for this job. Does anyone else notice this?
Ok rant over.


----------



## Kimberly Grimm

I have never personally dealt with this, but have seen it mentioned on other forums - dogs not working out in bite sports being used as SAR dogs. I think it boils down to standards. My team would NEVER take on a dog that was used in bite work - good at it or not. We do too many PR events and need a positive public perception to ever take on the risk - even if it is only a perceived risk. Furthermore, I know there are teams that deploy dogs that aren't certified. Again, something my team would never do, but others are more than willing to. I know someone who deployed their dog on a search who had no alert and still has a long way to go with their training. Without some third party judging your dog, who's to say it really is up to snuff?


----------



## Jim Delbridge

Most people, even most dog people, don't realize what unique mixture of traits that are required to start with in creating a working search dog. If they get to watch yours, who does this work routinely, then your dog should make it look easy. I worked with a group of firemen for several times over a week and by the end of the week they were all asking me, "where does somebody find a dog like yours?" It wasn't the breed they were asking about, it was the attitude and the work ethic.

I adopted one dog from breed rescue because he literally destroyed a vet clinic in his desire not to be alone and to be with people. I tested him and told the rescue people that while he appeared to have many of the drives of a working dog, he'd never make a search dog as he lacked focus. He lived with me till his death some seven years later and I routinely would give him a chance after training my other dogs and he never showed me otherwise. I took him as I knew most other people would either put him on drugs or shoot him.

I always start with puppies that I've tested at a very early age for all the traits I require. 
Realize that the bulk of the dog community see only pet-quality dogs and will totally miss the intensity and focus displayed by a working dog. I simply tell them that I have more dogs than I can use at the moment, but I'll keep an ear to the ground.

Jim Delbridge


----------



## mel boschwitz

Julie, no kidding! I got a call the other day from a friend wanting to give me a dog she had rescued off the streets. 2yo hound mix, nervous, scared of people. She figured it would be a great dog for me because I could start him from scratch. Huh? Talked to another friend a few years ago because she had some reject hunting dogs that didnt have the drive to hunt but were very sweet so would make great SAR dogs. 

I'm retiring my female at 4yoa because of her hypothyroidism. She gets worn out at about 45 minutes. She still mentally wants to go, but physically she needs a break. Obviously that wont work for SAR. NONE of our other police k9's in my department ever have to work even that long. And to me that's not very long! 

I think a good SAR dog should have MORE drive than most other working dogs. The situations we put them in can be pretty extreme, both environmentally and physically. And for us it could be someone's life at stake, so second best just won't do.


----------



## Sarah Platts

I also tend to focus on hunt drive since SAR is more work than reward for the dog. My dog can run a 4 mile trail and get zero reward for it other than a "good dog" from me. I have had my share of phone calls by people wanting to give me dogs. Problem is I have all the dogs I want as do most handlers. I am not a vendor nor am I running a training kennel operation.

Not saying that a dog that's a handful won't make a good detection dog. But if you are rejecting a dog for health/skeletal issues why would they thing that dog's going to be able to work a rubble pile or hundreds of acres of rough country? Ditto for food or animal aggression. More problems I don't need. Ditto with trying to pass off a several years old dog because by the time he gets trained he's on the downhill side of his working life. Ditto for behavioral issues. I don't have time to fix a screwed up head-case dog. Maybe after I retire and have nothing else to do. But that's not today.

As far as selecting a dog, I'm picking up a new pup in a week. When I went to select the puppy, the breeder told me one particular puppy matched all my specs. I pulled all the pups together and things seemed o.k. until I brought out a jar of cadaver scent pads. The breeder's choice decamped and went to sit on the other side of the room. The others began to work the odor. I capped the jar and tried again a couple of minutes later with the same results. So the breeder's choice was rejected and I selected from the remainder. Based on the breed and breeding the pups should have hunt drive but didn't want one that had an aversion to cadaver odor.


----------



## Kadi Thingvall

If the dog is a wash for health, temperament, etc (the reasons you gave) then it doesn't make sense that it would be good for SAR.

But I can see someone washing a dog because of grip style that could still be an excellent SAR dog. Or because of size, I've seen more than one dog washed from protection sports due to size that were very nice dogs in every other way. I know I have advertised dogs as having not enough drive for protection sports, but being a good SAR prospect. Meaning the dogs bite drive wasn't what I want for protection sports. The hunt drive was not an issue.

Other than that, you might want to look at the SAR groups for part of the issue. I've placed multiple dogs with people who wanted to do SAR and were "washed out" of their SAR group because the dogs had to much drive and were to intense. Basically the dogs drive levels freaked the trainers out. :-o I've also met quite a few dogs that are SAR dogs (not just playing at SAR but going out on calls and considered to be some of the better dogs in the group) who have what I would consider to be average drive at best, frankly I wouldn't have kept them as my personal dog. Meet a few dogs like that and it can color your perspective on what is needed in a good SAR dog.


----------



## Sarah Platts

Kadi Thingvall said:


> If the dog is a wash for health, temperament, etc (the reasons you gave) then it doesn't make sense that it would be good for SAR.
> 
> But I can see someone washing a dog because of grip style that could still be an excellent SAR dog. Or because of size, I've seen more than one dog washed from protection sports due to size that were very nice dogs in every other way. I know I have advertised dogs as having not enough drive for protection sports, but being a good SAR prospect. Meaning the dogs bite drive wasn't what I want for protection sports. The hunt drive was not an issue.
> 
> Other than that, you might want to look at the SAR groups for part of the issue. I've placed multiple dogs with people who wanted to do SAR and were "washed out" of their SAR group because the dogs had to much drive and were to intense. Basically the dogs drive levels freaked the trainers out. :-o I've also met quite a few dogs that are SAR dogs (not just playing at SAR but going out on calls and considered to be some of the better dogs in the group) who have what I would consider to be average drive at best, frankly I wouldn't have kept them as my personal dog. Meet a few dogs like that and it can color your perspective on what is needed in a good SAR dog.


I would not take or recommend any dog that has already had bite training to be used in SAR. Kadi, you might have missed some posts on another string concerning this issue. Most of the high drive dogs cause problems because they have drive in all the wrong areas. What you want for a protection dog I would not want in my SAR dog.


----------



## Kadi Thingvall

Sarah Platts said:


> I would not take or recommend any dog that has already had bite training to be used in SAR. Kadi, you might have missed some posts on another string concerning this issue. Most of the high drive dogs cause problems because they have drive in all the wrong areas. What you want for a protection dog I would not want in my SAR dog.


I didn't miss the posts, was just responding to the OPs post about why a "washout" might still be a good SAR dog. Some people/groups have problems with dogs with bite training, others do not. Of the SAR dogs I personally know, more have bitework training than don't, quite a few are actively training in both at the same time. While I completely understand the liability issues from a legal standpoint, I don't believe that with the *right dog *and *right training *bitework training is going to make a difference in the dogs inclination to bite a search subject. If good/proper bitework training is going to make the dog more likely to bite a subject, I would question if that dog really has the right temperament to be doing SAR in the first place.


----------



## Sarah Platts

Kadi Thingvall said:


> I don't believe that with the *right dog *and *right training *bitework training is going to make a difference in the dogs inclination to bite a search subject.


----------



## Sarah Platts

Kadi Thingvall said:


> While I completely understand the liability issues from a legal standpoint, I don't believe that with the *right dog *and *right training *bitework training is going to make a difference in the dogs inclination to bite a search subject.


We are going to have to agree to disagree on this subject because of the extreme rarity of those two factors actually occurring.


----------



## Jim Delbridge

Kadi, I hear what you are saying. A lot of SAR groups are self-taught. The group I started with were mostly Schutzhund people and took forever to give up that a trail should be foot by foot step. About six years ago, a local group split up and about half asked to come train with our group. We'd train with anyone and leave it up to them if they wanted to stick around. At the time, I was helping to train a lab team on area search and had set up an easy ten acre problem where I asked the victim to circle around and walk into the area from upwind such that it was only air scent and no track. One of the teams that asked to come play with us walked up and I asked her if she'd like first dibs on it just being polite. Thirty minutes later of watching her and her dog basically tightly grid the area, she still hadn't found the victim and I suggested we pause and see what the lab team could do. She looked at me with a wry smile and said, "sure, give it your best shot." We released the lab, it took off at a run, found the victim, came back, did a sit, and the handler ran off with it to the victim. Total time to completion was five minutes. Victim had not moved and had been parked on a camp stool in a circle of cedars. The visiting team handler just stood there with her mouth open. She'd trained with her dog for four years and the concept of letting the dog take off like that and race back was totally foreign to her with the team she'd come from. Unless dog teams go to seminars out of their comfort zone, they often don't have a clue as to what's possible. That dog handler stuck with us and convinced herself to wash the dog she was with as while it made a great TDI dog, it was not area search material. The way these dog teams were going to pass the NASAR 80-acre test was to make sure they could grid/walk their dogs over the 80 acres in the time alloted for a find. It was ludicorous, but it's what can happen when people simply try to work out for themselves how searching might be done.

Jim Delbridge


----------



## julie allen

So true. Many sar volunteers are not good handlers, or they are very inexperienced with good dogs. I place the blame here for sure, I just didn't want to bring up specifics lol.

I have no problems with a dog with poor grips or bite, if he isn't aggressive. At the time a good handler realizes that dog won't work, not enough training has gone on to for me to worry with it. 

I have seen, and personally used dogs that have had protection training. In the right situations, they can be fine. Safer than an unpredictable nervous dog that some sar handlers use. I prefer social dogs, either way.


----------



## Ben Thompson

I have a really aggressive dog that triees to bite everyone does anyone think he would make a good SAR dog? I didn't actually read many of the posts.


----------



## julie allen

Ben Thompson said:


> I have a really aggressive dog that triees to bite everyone does anyone think he would make a good SAR dog? I didn't actually read many of the posts.


That depends, does he like to "sniff the ground all the time"?? Lol


----------



## Jim Delbridge

Ben Thompson said:


> I have a really aggressive dog that triees to bite everyone does anyone think he would make a good SAR dog? I didn't actually read many of the posts.


 
This might sound a bit foolish, but it's the way it is. Even if you made him HRD only, he'd be a liability. Last seearch I did, I had three deputies each reach into my vehicle and pet my dog as they were asking, "is it ok to pet him?" I simply told them to rub his ear and he'd follow them home. He's very vocal if you pet him right (as in a passerby might think of the lunchinette scene from "Harry met Sally" with Meg Ryan.....

He had done a good thorough search of the area, but I'll guarantee you that the deputies will remember the petting more than the work he put in. It's simply human nature.

I know a fellow who still teaches around the country and has a stellar rep, but when he'd bring his mal to seminars it was parked in a crate in the back of his big red diesel duelie truck with a camper shell. It never failed that a novice dog team would walk past the back of the diesel camper and the whole vehicle would shake from side to side as the mal thundered his bark. It always left the wrong impression. It also made me think less of him as a dog handler as he ignored it. I've had one try to do that and we have routine "come to jesus" meetings about it. I washed that one from search work, but that was only one of many reasons.

The dog might be stellar at his/her work, but PR is also a big part of it. Before I started search, I had a beautiful gentle 87% wolf-dog with a CGC on it. When I met the civilian search group I started with, they were late for a demo with 40 girl scouts. The camp leaders were grateful that I got Worf out and let them pet him and we discussed his breeding and the liabilities of it, how to properly approach dogs, etc. Worf was off-lead trained and very well mannered, but I never considered using him for search work as I knew that a victim was very likely to run away from him if he found them simply because he was mostly black with golden eyes. A working search dog is a whole unique package with just the right mix for both you and the public. 


Jim Delbridge


----------



## Howard Knauf

Sarah Platts said:


> We are going to have to agree to disagree on this subject because of the extreme rarity of those two factors actually occurring.


 It's not as rare as you think. I'm not a SAR pro but I can tell you that we use our patrol dogs to perform the same function in finding lost children, elderly folks and people who may be in harms way ie: suicidal. I have never had a bite on a person whom we found in a SAR capacity as a patrol dog team. JME but I do understand where you are coming from. Being a civilian, or law enforcement likely is the difference here in application. I am covered by the city...you have liability concerns as a civilian.


----------



## Sarah Platts

Ben Thompson said:


> I have a really aggressive dog that triees to bite everyone does anyone think he would make a good SAR dog? I didn't actually read many of the posts.


Ben, I'm guessing this is your dog?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nleKpFIjvDY&feature=player_embedded


----------



## Sarah Platts

Oh, I should add it contains "adult language".


----------



## mel boschwitz

I think for on lead dogs I wouldnt have as much concern if the dog had bite training- a good handler should be able to read the dog when it's getting close to the subject. (Although I am aware that there have been several court cases where on lead bite dogs have been used for missing persons and the handler did not adjust to the dogs alert properly and a bite happened). Off lead would definitely concern me. Some people with mental disabilities who are afraid of dogs can react similar to bad guys and could initiate a bite response in some dogs. And while that shouldnt be an issue for an HR dog, you dont know what your dog may come across when he's out of sight of you. For liability reasons alone I wouldnt recommend a dog with bite training. And liability coverage only goes so far, even for LE. If you know your dog is likely to bite and you choose to go anyways you may still be liable in a civil suit unless the courts grant you qualified immunity if you are ordered to search by a superior. And then that superior may be get the civil suit instead. It's just an offshoot of using excessive force.


----------



## Howard Knauf

Good post Mel. You are 100% correct.


----------



## Ben Thompson

Sarah Platts said:


> Oh, I should add it contains "adult language".


 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w80imeg_XpM I think this is the kind of dog you two wanted to get but....I didn't read the posts that carefully?


----------



## mel boschwitz

Oh yeah. Sign her up. Lol](*,)


----------



## Sarah Platts

doesn't do anything for me. Can't speak for Julie. I didn't see any indications that this dog would be temperamentally sound enough or successful as a search dog. For me, just because the dog is posed with a child isn't proof of anything. But I did like the way she almost got a piece of her handler.


----------



## mel boschwitz

Actually I didnt think she looked all that comfortable with the child. No interaction or interest. More like she had been put in a down/stay and knew better than to leave it.

I also liked the almost getting the handler part. And all that reactivity with no training? Could you see her with that kind of reactivity and an autistic child? Lol.

She must be related to Psycho from the cartoon video. Lol


----------



## julie allen

Well at least the bark alert is already down pat .


----------



## julie allen

It does look bad on scenes when your own dog is biting you. However it keeps all the bystanders from wanting to pet the "rescue dog"!


----------



## mel boschwitz

julie allen said:


> It does look bad on scenes when your own dog is biting you. However it keeps all the bystanders from wanting to pet the "rescue dog"!



Always an upside. Lol


----------



## Sarah Platts

mel boschwitz said:


> Actually I didnt think she looked all that comfortable with the child. No interaction or interest. More like she had been put in a down/stay and knew better than to leave it.


 That's why I said "posed"



mel boschwitz said:


> I also liked the almost getting the handler part. And all that reactivity with no training? Could you see her with that kind of reactivity and an autistic child? Lol.
> 
> She must be related to Psycho from the cartoon video. Lol


Let's just say she's not a dog I want.


----------



## Sarah Platts

julie allen said:


> It does look bad on scenes when your own dog is biting you. However it keeps all the bystanders from wanting to pet the "rescue dog"!


And the lawsuits.... Is it legal to sue yourself?


----------



## Sarah Platts

julie allen said:


> Well at least the bark alert is already down pat .


yep, as long as you have some guy 4 feet in front of her acting hostile and another right behind her egging her on.


----------



## mel boschwitz

Sarah Platts said:


> yep, as long as you have some guy 4 feet in front of her acting hostile and another right behind her egging her on.


So she 'll probably be best as a trailing dog then. Lol. The handler can run her on a leash and encourage the subject to jump around when the dog makes the find to get the final alert. Lol

Lets go see if she's for sale. Lol. Jk.


----------



## Sarah Platts

I'm up for that. And what's going to be the final alert? 

A Bite Indication?

We can get Ben to play the victim..... He likes aggressive dogs.....lol


----------



## Sarah Platts

Oh, gee..... I tripped and dropped the lead...... Oh, crap, there goes the dog. Guess she found Ben. The bushes are all shaking and I hear a lot of cursing and some loud screams.


----------



## mel boschwitz

Dual purpose dog. Find the victim, give bite, get some new training aid for the cadaver dogs. Lol


----------



## rick smith

are these correct assumptions ?
1. a SAR dog should be able to work off lead and out of site from the handler ?
2. a (patrol) PSD working on a SAR op would always be on lead ?


----------



## Sarah Platts

rick smith said:


> are these correct assumptions ?
> 1. a SAR dog should be able to work off lead and out of site from the handler ?
> 2. a (patrol) PSD working on a SAR op would always be on lead ?


1. Yes. Almost across the board there is an expectation that the dogs should be able to work off-lead and perform correctly when out of sight. Even with my trailing dogs I am forced to drop the lead to navigate or negotiate round or through obstacles. Very few sar dogs are kept totally on-lead all the time. Even BH handlers are forced to drop the lead now and then when the dog goes through brush and brambles. 

2. My question back would be to the patrol officer would be "Since you are turning your dog loose, how comfortable are you that you trust your dog that they will just do the B&H and not look for that bite even if the subject is behaving odd or making strange noises or gestures?"


----------



## mel boschwitz

rick smith said:


> are these correct assumptions ?
> 1. a SAR dog should be able to work off lead and out of site from the handler ?
> 2. a (patrol) PSD working on a SAR op would always be on lead ?


As Sarah said, but with the caveat for on lead dogs being that they probably wont get much, if any, out of sight training. Yes, we may drop the lead to navigate around obstacles, and most of them would-and should- go without us, their alert is usually silent, and they wont come back to get us. So if we dont keep up we wont know where they are. Most long floppy eared dogs are difficult off lead because they are so nose motivated that there is very little, if any time spent training off lead. The handler learns to keep up or give up.


----------



## mel boschwitz

rick smith said:


> are these correct assumptions ?
> 1. a SAR dog should be able to work off lead and out of site from the handler ?
> 2. a (patrol) PSD working on a SAR op would always be on lead ?


And to question#2, I would add.. How comfortable is your department with that same scenario? The cost of a civil liability lawsuit in the event of a bite will probably fall to someone above handler level.


----------



## Sarah Platts

a bit off the track here, alot of departments are now doing special training to deal with and how to approach folks with autism. It's a different world.


----------



## David Winners

Sarah Platts said:


> a bit off the track here, alot of departments are now doing special training to deal with and how to approach folks with autism. It's a different world.


Care to expound on this? I'm interested.

David Winners


----------



## mel boschwitz

Sarah Platts said:


> a bit off the track here, alot of departments are now doing special training to deal with and how to approach folks with autism. It's a different world.


With mental issues of all types, not just autism. My department just took a class on dealing with subjects with Alzheimer's/dementia.


----------



## julie allen

mel boschwitz said:


> With mental issues of all types, not just autism. My department just took a class on dealing with subjects with Alzheimer's/dementia.


That's great! Even the search patterns are different when dealing with patients with psychiatric problems.


----------



## julie allen

Sarah Platts said:


> And the lawsuits.... Is it legal to sue yourself?


With all the lawsuits nowadays, I wouldn't be surprised if some dumbass doesn't try.


----------



## julie allen

David Winners said:


> Care to expound on this? I'm interested.
> 
> David Winners


http://www.dbs-sar.com/SAR_Research/lost_alzheimer.htm


----------



## Meg O'Donovan

julie allen said:


> http://www.dbs-sar.com/SAR_Research/lost_alzheimer.htm


If there are any studies on searching for those with autism, especially ones that give the conclusions for search strategies, could someone provide them, either here or in a new thread? This information is really helpful, not only to me, but to my SAR managers. 

Thank you all very much for the wealth of experience and knowledge that you freely share. It is a great gift.


----------



## Sarah Platts

David Winners said:


> Care to expound on this? I'm interested.
> 
> David Winners


There are different levels of the autism spectrum. Folks with autism have 7-10 times more interactions with law enforcement and the average person. The officer really needs to be paying attention to other behaviors to understand what they are dealing with. With up to 50% being nonverbal (and/or have hearing issues) , they will not respond to commands or obey instructions. If you attempt to talk with them they will turn away from you or even run away. They may appear to be psychotic or under the influence of drugs or alcohol. Anything that affects their sensory perception (lights, dogs, sounds, odors) can trigger a meltdown with them. Frequent behaviors include hand flapping, screaming, hitting, or pacing. They may appear argumentative, belligerent, or stubborn. They don’t understand dangers such as traffic, water, or other hazards. They are slow to respond to commands. They may mimic your behavior and frequently invade your personal space. Several of the ones I know love to gallop up to you and envelope you in a great big bear hug. They can't stop touching you. One kid (I think he’s 16) stands over 6 ft tall and weighs in at a healthy 280 lbs. So imagine you approaching the home and this great big person bursts out the door galloping to you, refusing all commands to stop, and grabs you. It’s not hard to understand why 6-10 of them are stun gunned or killed each year by LE.

You can't be confrontational. These kids and adults focus on things or perform an action, or engage in a behavior where if you interrupt it - they freak out and then things go downhill fast. They are incredibly strong and don't react to pain the way you think they should. They can react negatively to visual stimulus such as uniforms, lights, etc. Some have a severe aversion to dogs while others are drawn in and will launch themselves at the dogs. (So if you have a very reactive dog or one with protection or patrol training you can figure out what happens next)
Routine is strong with these folks and they don’t do things the way you want them done – they are done the way the autistic person wants them done. You have to work with them and quietly manipulate them to get them to do what you want.

They are very reactive to touch and just touching their hand or putting a hand on their shoulder can set them off. Some don’t react well law enforcement clothing or gear. You have project calm and controlled movements. You can’t be angry, impatient, or irritated with them. You will probably have to repeat yourself over and over again since they frequently keep asking “why” or respond with “no” to everything. If they are engaged in a repetitive behavior, unless it’s harming them, you let them keep doing it. You do everything to keep them calm and prevent the situation from escalating.


----------



## Jim Delbridge

rick smith said:


> are these correct assumptions ?
> 1. a SAR dog should be able to work off lead and out of site from the handler ?
> 2. a (patrol) PSD working on a SAR op would always be on lead ?


 Well, again we get into some teams are self-taught and sometimes the long-line is a safety line rather than a control line. For example, the search I did that's referred to in "Pet Peeve" was around a 5-acre partially frozen pond. The pond was created by flooding a wooded wash and there were lots of steep inclines. So, I either followed him with the long-line or watched him drag it when I'd send him down a step incline with dense trees next to shore. Many times I didn't see him, but only the long-line. When it would start moving again, I'd make my way to the next incline or low spot to catch up with him. If he'd found scent, he's to bark and stay in place till I get to him, but he might go into the water somewhat to pursue scent; Thus the need to have a long-line handy on him to pull him back out if he was stuck in broken pond ice. As there was no scent, he never went into the water, but we covered very thoroughly as a previous dog team had guessed there might be someone in the frozen pond and from what I gathered may have talked her dog into it. 
If I'm working alongside a busy highway, I tend to run him on a long-line now for safety. In the past I've worked my dogs off-lead right next to a moving highway successfully, but so many "texters" and cell phone users will drive towards a distraction on the side of the road. I want the long-line in case an emergency yank is necessary. 
If we're in a building, the woods, etc. then he's off-lead and I only manage his area keeping a mental image in my head of areas he's checked and not. And has I've been taught now on building searches, after a free search then we do a clockwise directional, then counter-clockwise directional, then center check of each room. I can do the directional on- or off-lead depending on the dog.

The main difference is that with an apprehension dog, the officer has a pretty good idea that someone is there to find and often they are not nice people. With a SAR dog, the odds are higher that no one is in your search area and if they are then they are possibly clueless innocents.

Jim Delbridge


----------



## julie allen

Meg O'Donovan said:


> If there are any studies on searching for those with autism, especially ones that give the conclusions for search strategies, could someone provide them, either here or in a new thread? This information is really helpful, not only to me, but to my SAR managers.
> 
> Thank you all very much for the wealth of experience and knowledge that you freely share. It is a great gift.


I think Jim covered it above, but if you need more I'd be happy to check.


----------



## julie allen

rick smith said:


> are these correct assumptions ?
> 1. a SAR dog should be able to work off lead and out of site from the handler ?
> 2. a (patrol) PSD working on a SAR op would always be on lead ?


Both *should be able to work offlead if trained properly. However if the PSD will engage in a fight without command, then I would expect him on lead.

If the SAR dog is not properly trained or selected, and there is risk of biting, I would expect that dog not to be deployed. JMO of course.


----------



## David Winners

Thank you!


----------



## Misty Mott

I think I read all the posts in this link and just wanted to add my input. Perhaps, it is not poor handlers (although there certainly are some out there), or poor dogs (I have seen my share of those) or that a SAR K9 should be bred, not rescued (my first dog was rescued, my second was bred and both were/are good trailing dogs) but a lack of education of the public and other working dog disciplines. I have gotten the impression that people feel that any dog that "likes to sniff the ground and is good with people" is perfect for SAR. As we all know very well, this is certainly not the case. I have spent much time instead of "evaluating" these dogs, I educate the owners and let them see on their own what makes a good SAR prospect. Our SAR team does a lot of public relations work and we always have people coming up to us asking to join our team because they think their dog would be good for SAR. Early on, we were naive and watched the frustrations as those dogs washed out. Now we are proactive and state right up front what is expected and it has saved a lot of time for us and the embarrassment for the dog owner when they realize they didn't know their dog very well or much about SAR and how much work and how time intensive it is. That being said, I really think early education is a big key. This goes for the non-public with other working dogs. I have had several retired police dogs offered to me for training to be a SAR dog. I kindly explain that our team has the policy of not accepting any dogs that have had bite training and most are quite understanding. I also explain that regardless of the tracking training the dog has, it will probably take a year or more to put the additional training I would need into the dog as well as to building up the relationship with the dog. Third, I already have 4 dogs in my house, my working dog, my retired dog, my pet dog, and my foster dog. My family would probably kick me out if I took in one more! LOL I then take their info and refer them kindly to any other group I honestly feel would be receptive to the dog. This is not to say that a "washed out dog" can not be a success in SAR work (I have seen it happen) but perhaps there is another more appropriate job for them and I am happy to help them in that direction while simultaneously educating the person about what we look for in a SAR dog. I have always found people interested in the education and amazed because they often "just didn't know."


----------

