Editing Search Manager/Search Technique Effectiveness
From PCSAR
Warning: You are not logged in. Your IP address will be recorded in this page's edit history.
The edit can be undone. Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then save the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
| Current revision | Your text | ||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
== Search dogs == | == Search dogs == | ||
| - | A | + | A NASAR analysis of the effectiveness of |
search dog teams. There are no good statistics for SAR so wildlife | search dog teams. There are no good statistics for SAR so wildlife | ||
detection dogs are used to approximate. | detection dogs are used to approximate. | ||
{{blockquote|"wildlife detection dogs operating in the field cover approximately 5 to 25 ha/hr with reported detection rates of 33% to 95% based on various measuring systems. Lastly, wildlife detection dogs were found to be 5 to 15 times more effective than trained humans in the field."}} | {{blockquote|"wildlife detection dogs operating in the field cover approximately 5 to 25 ha/hr with reported detection rates of 33% to 95% based on various measuring systems. Lastly, wildlife detection dogs were found to be 5 to 15 times more effective than trained humans in the field."}} | ||
