Pubdate: Tue, 15 Apr 2003 Source: Big Sandy News, The (KY) Copyright: 2003 The Big Sandy News Contact: http://www.bigsandynews.com/ Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/1975 Author: Scott Perry Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/prison.htm (Incarceration) DRUG DOG DILEMMA CAN BE EASILY FIXED Our story last week about the dilemma two area agencies face now that they each have dope sniffing dogs with no trained officers at the other end of the leashes serves as an expensive lesson. Of course you know who will be picking up the tab. The trouble is that these dynamic drug detecting duos work as a team, and you just can't run in a replacement any time you like. Drug dogs and drug dog handlers train together and then live together. These dogs are very expensive and the training costs are very high. Small police agencies just can't afford a lot of changeover, at either end of the leash. Now we have drug detecting dogs at the Big Sandy Regional Detention Center and in the Paintsville Police Department whose handlers have found work elsewhere. The agencies must decide to either pay for new officers to be trained or sell the dogs to agencies who have the funds to cover the high costs. Odds are that both the jail and PPD will opt for plan B. We have an alternative suggestion. There is certainly still a need for a dope sniffing canine at the jail and in the PPD's jurisdiction, which happen to overlap. So, why not transfer one dog (the youngest or the best) to the Johnson County Sheriff's Department and then use the proceeds from the sale of the other canine to pay for the training of a handler? That way we get a dog, who can work at the jail, in the city, the county or with any other agency in need. Whoever the sheriff assigns the dog to as canine officer should be required to sign an agreement, before he or she is trained, to stay on the job for a minimum length of time or reimburse the department for some of the cost of the training. Everybody wins, including the taxpayers. Fair enough? - --- MAP posted-by: Jackl