Just courious.

[bergwanderkennels]

I have a new customer starting with me for Ob who's dog was just accepted to join and learn SAR.

The owner was also curious about trying Schutzhund but was told not to teach his dog schutzhund if he is going to do SAR that he should do one or the other but was not given a reason why?

I do not know too much about SAR but I was curious about giving it a try with my GSD Hella and I do train Hella at schutzhund.

[k9sarneko]

This is a huge debate with SAR people, especially with people who do not know exactly what Schutzhund is and only think about the personal protection and bite work. Old school thought that I have heard is that you should not do SAR with any dog you have done bite work with. I do not buy into this myself BUT reservations from instructors and other handlers did keep me from doing Schutzhund with my HRD dog. Maybe I should have made more of a stand but I got really tired of trying to educate instructors and other handlers on what Schutzhund really is all about so I just decided that if I want to do Sch. down the road I will probably not do SAR with that dog.

It is a debate that people get pretty passionate about so other answers will be interesting.

[Amaruq]

A lot of it, as Sharon stated, is simply ignorance on the part of people who see SCH as attack training. It is the protection aspect of the training that causes them to say that. The "team" I was on didn't have any issues with a dog being trained in bite work.

That being said unless someone is independently wealthy (i.e. does not have to work a real job for a living) finding the time and $$ to train both to be the absolute best that they can be in both venues is extremely difficult.

Quote:I do not know too much about SAR but I was curious about giving it a try with my GSD Hella and I do train Hella at schutzhund.

SAR is not something that you really "give a try" like agility or flyball. Being a SAR handler is a way of life. As I said above training dogs to do both SCH and SAR would consume so much time and if not done properly you would end up with maybe a mediocre dog in one area or another if not both. If the mediocrity is in the SAR aspect that is not fair to the potential victims and it could be the difference in finding a lost person and finding the corpse of a lost person. That is not a chance I would be able to take. It is not a 9-5 job. Most of the searches I was on were NOT during the day. Quite frankly 90% of the ones that were during the day were not live finds.

[wolfstraum]

I raised a dog to 2 years old, put his BH on him, had him nearly ready for a Sch1 - and let a friend have him on co-ownership...he was to finish titles and Koer - she had done SAR and given up on it at the time...then....!!!! a new opportunity came up to start a SAR team....the dog got his schh1 and RH - and then a very established SAR tester/trainer who moved into the area demanded she quit schutzhund training wtih the dog ....out of predjudice ....

while many dogs do not have the ability to do both, there are dogs who can...this dog could easily have finished his titles and KKL....(Herr Scheld, SV judge, told me at a year old, he was a KKL1 and probably would V rate to boot)...and the work would NOT have affected his ability in the SAR field detrimentally...but unfortunately, apparently so many dogs who have been tested for SAR show problems that the testers have assumed were caused by schutzhund, that there is a prejudice against dual training.

And as Amaraq says - both venues are ways of life, extremely demanding and time consuming...not many people can do both effectively no matter what the dog's temperament and ability.

Lee

[Liesje]

As a total n00b of both, I looked into SAR before I got Nikon but to me it sounded even MORE time consuming and more serious than SchH and there was NO WAY I could do both and do justice to both (especially SAR) so we went with SchH.

[bergwanderkennels]

Quote:while many dogs do not have the ability to do both, there are dogs who can.

Funny you should say that, I decided this evening to ask the training director of the club I attend for his opinion and Guess what? You'll never guess......

Volker is a German SAR judge AND SchH judge! Imagine that! He agreed also that most dogs do not have the ability to do both and that it is also not go to train both but strangely enough he thinks my Hella does have what it takes?

I think at least I am going to go out to where the SAR trains and check it out. I cannot hurt and I understand they do have to eval her.

[eggo520]

I agree with the others about the time commitments to both SAR and schutzhund. Our team trains every weekend with few exceptions...and I imagine that most SchH clubs do too. I can see how it would be hard to find time to do both and still have a life! Both fields can be very expensive, as well, so unless you have the money I would not try to do both.

On a side note, there might be some teams who fear that having a bite trained dog could be a liability. Our team used to have a bylaw that none of our dogs could be trained in bite work, but we changed it when a local reserve police officer wanted to join with his police dog, who is trained in narcotics detection, protection and tracking. Today, we allow dogs with bite training but on a VERY limited basis. I think it depends on the individual people you're dealing with.

[jocoyn]

We have several team members who have trained dogs in schutzhund and decided not to allow bite trained dogs on the team.
Some level of training, perhaps but each dog would need evalution.

1) Liability insurance is already breaking our pockets and we don't need more
2) Having dogs NOT trained in bitework is actually a plus with our police
3) No issue with schutzhund level of obedience control but we have not had someone convince us that if a dog was off lead and out of visual range of its handler, found the subject, and the subject took off that that training would not kick in . Same thing with a person with a stick trying to hit the dog.
4) Accidents can and to happen with dogs. But if word got out that a dog had "bite" training, the press could have a field day and it could severaly damage the team.
5) And of course, the time element - and the dual nature. We would prefer the team dogs did SAR and nothing else.

So those are some of the discussions we have had.

[pupresq]

I love the idea of being able to do both but I can understand where the liability thing would be a big issue. Even if the dog and handler were capable, dogs are not machines, accidents happen, and if there were any accusation of "aggression" the Schutzhund training would be blamed - fair or not. So much of liability seems to be perception unfortunately.

The big thing to me is that even though I see them mentioned together as a list of possible options to do with your dog, IMO they're actually apples and oranges as far as things to do. Schutzhund is an activity you do with your dog. SAR is a thing that you do, and for dog handlers their dog is a part of how they do it. But unlike Schutzhund, or agility, or whatever else, SAR is not about your dog, it's about finding someone who is lost. When I was training I really enjoyed it as an activity with my dog and the partnership with her but it's so much beyond that. When we moved here I knew I didn't have the time to do what it takes. I hope to get back to it in the next couple years because even though we'd barely gotten going when we moved, I truly loved it, but it'll have to be a time where SAR can be one of my top priorities because that seems to be what it demands.

[jocoyn]

Originally Posted By: pupresqSchutzhund is an activity you do with your dog. SAR is a thing that you do, and for dog handlers their dog is a part of how they do it. But unlike Schutzhund, or agility, or whatever else, SAR is not about your dog, it's about finding someone who is lost.

BINGO. Well said.