Post by oksaradt on May 12, 2008 11:23:00 GMT -5
Just the title is like opening a can of worms.
I should start with the caveat...ok, several caveats
1) There is no real standardization of SAR K9 groups in the U.S., some states attempt it, California and Virgian appear to do it best, but there are still lots of ways to get around any system.
2) Many teams self-certify which creates a multitude of situations all in itself, such as:
a) "good ole boy" syndrome where a dog team really isn't that good, but "helll, everyone likes them and they are a cracker jack paper-pusher for the team", i.e. dog team may not be able to find a victim (dead or alive) on a bare flat Kansas prairie with the person jumping up and down screaming, "here I am!"
b) "Master Trainer".....this term USUALLY implies time served rather than skills. On many teams that employ this term, it's used as "I founded this group and I say who gets to search and who doesn't...capiche?" In many L.E. groups, this implies again time served under another Master Trainer with the implication that both have a clue, sometimes yes, sometimes *sigh* no.
c) "Refugees from strict teams" - We've been struggling at this for years and "by the gods" we should be able to search. These teams pop up periodically, some good and some bad. Many times the "new founding members" declare themselves all mission-ready and intend to certify at a later date.
3) National certification groups - NASAR, IPWDA, NDDAA, NAPWDA, FEMA, on and on. Homeland security is grasping at these for a method to get some sort of standardization. NASAR cadaver certs are very basic and the evaluators I've talked with admit that it's really a "beginner cert" that is used to get into any search. NAPWDA appears to be very rigorous and more applicable to real life except all the finds are on fresh tissue and bone. Rarely do cadaver dogs get deployed to find fresh tissue and when they do it's (or should be) a "no brainer". Working for skeletal remains is much more the norm whether buried, scattered, in walls, etc. Any way, with any of these national certs there may still be "good old boy" deals as well as "there's no way we're going to cert this dog team".
I know many handlers that their solution is to stack national certifications to add credibility just like show ring or dog sports. *shrug*
Why am I going through all this?
Because lately, both locally and nationally, I've been vented at about "other teams". Such attitudes are part of what creates "team fiefdoms" and "team wars". We should all be working for the "victim" rather than bragging rights and getting to search. That many teams may go years without a call-out causes them to become jealous and critical of teams they perceive are getting all the calls.
My attitude (over time) has become one of "whether I like how they search or not, we're stuck with each other, so it might be best to help them improve rather than hoard my "trade secrets"."
An example was this weekend when the local civilian team I belong to ended up "playing" with another local civilian team. We play in the same areas, do the same thing, but have different training philosophies. Invariably when these situations arise, I end up setting out fresh remains for the area search dogs to train on to find the "lost hunter that fell out of his deer stand in the woods two days ago. He died, but we'd still like the area search dogs to be able to find him." My attitude is that I'm training these dog teams for tornadoes. As we just experienced another wild weekend where 22 people died in several states, this is a definite need for the community.
So, I've worked with one of the dog teams several times, each time suggesting to the handler that he needs to develop some way for his dog to tell him when it's found human remains. This concept is often lost on area search dog people as ...well, their finds are typically whole breathing bodies, hard to miss. So, they assume, the dead remains will again be whole dead bodies. Having worked tornadoes over the years, several searches were for the remains that got spread in multiple directions after being battered by al the debris in the funnel cloud.
I asked the handler if it was ok to set up an overlap problem with bloody remains such that multiple remains might be in an area ...say ....100 feet by 50 feet and I'd make sure they weren't any closer than ....30 feet...(I was being nice). He said he'd like that.
We started his dog in a 10 acre area. The sources I set out would have been hard to miss and the handlers and flankers commented downwind they were getting hits as well. The trick is not to know it's there. The trick is to find it....., i.e. why we need a dog. Following the dog, the handler was able to tell when his dog found the larger source and rewarded the dog for just showing up.....his call, not my way of doing things, but not for me to be critical of either. I then told him that he knew he was in the area and his dog had to find more remains from that tornado victim. He set his dog back to work. I stayed where I was and observed the dog went into the second source very nicely. Dog put its nose on it then went back to the handler who continued walking.....the handler had no clue his dog made the second find...my point being his dog needed an indication for human remains. So, I let them suffer for a bit, the dog finding the source again and again the handler not recognizing the situation.
(A handler on my team that is in training quietly came up and asked in confusion, "ummmm, his dog has no indication?" I nodded and told her she was a good student and that I was very proud of her.)
Rather than make the handler look stupid or degrade him. I pulled him aside and suggested we let the dog show us its "Natural Indication" (discussed in imprinting) and that he should know his dog had found the 2nd source multiple times already. To his credit he agreed rather than try to blow smoke.
So, we took the dog to the first recognized source and let him find it again (for which he'd been rewarded) and waited. He looked at his handler expectantly, but his handler was being told to be quiet and still. His dog pawed the source and I rewarded with lots of whoops. His dog looked at me with the expression of, "oh, someone with a clue." He pawed the source again and I whooped again. The third time I told the handler to do the same....his reward system is whooping...again, not my call.
Soooo, with the association established, I told the handler to again walk the area with the dog sent to find more and to watch his dog this time instead of looking about and talking about NASAR. He did. His dog did a very pretty touch. The handler whooped. Do this about a 100 more times and I'd consider them ok to go clear house rubble in tornadoes.
So, my soapbox for this week is if you are in SAR and think your way is the only way, you might be shorting the victim when you have to work side-by-side with the teams that "do it the wrong way." As long as the victims get found, I'm happy.
Jim
I should start with the caveat...ok, several caveats
1) There is no real standardization of SAR K9 groups in the U.S., some states attempt it, California and Virgian appear to do it best, but there are still lots of ways to get around any system.
2) Many teams self-certify which creates a multitude of situations all in itself, such as:
a) "good ole boy" syndrome where a dog team really isn't that good, but "helll, everyone likes them and they are a cracker jack paper-pusher for the team", i.e. dog team may not be able to find a victim (dead or alive) on a bare flat Kansas prairie with the person jumping up and down screaming, "here I am!"
b) "Master Trainer".....this term USUALLY implies time served rather than skills. On many teams that employ this term, it's used as "I founded this group and I say who gets to search and who doesn't...capiche?" In many L.E. groups, this implies again time served under another Master Trainer with the implication that both have a clue, sometimes yes, sometimes *sigh* no.
c) "Refugees from strict teams" - We've been struggling at this for years and "by the gods" we should be able to search. These teams pop up periodically, some good and some bad. Many times the "new founding members" declare themselves all mission-ready and intend to certify at a later date.
3) National certification groups - NASAR, IPWDA, NDDAA, NAPWDA, FEMA, on and on. Homeland security is grasping at these for a method to get some sort of standardization. NASAR cadaver certs are very basic and the evaluators I've talked with admit that it's really a "beginner cert" that is used to get into any search. NAPWDA appears to be very rigorous and more applicable to real life except all the finds are on fresh tissue and bone. Rarely do cadaver dogs get deployed to find fresh tissue and when they do it's (or should be) a "no brainer". Working for skeletal remains is much more the norm whether buried, scattered, in walls, etc. Any way, with any of these national certs there may still be "good old boy" deals as well as "there's no way we're going to cert this dog team".
I know many handlers that their solution is to stack national certifications to add credibility just like show ring or dog sports. *shrug*
Why am I going through all this?
Because lately, both locally and nationally, I've been vented at about "other teams". Such attitudes are part of what creates "team fiefdoms" and "team wars". We should all be working for the "victim" rather than bragging rights and getting to search. That many teams may go years without a call-out causes them to become jealous and critical of teams they perceive are getting all the calls.
My attitude (over time) has become one of "whether I like how they search or not, we're stuck with each other, so it might be best to help them improve rather than hoard my "trade secrets"."
An example was this weekend when the local civilian team I belong to ended up "playing" with another local civilian team. We play in the same areas, do the same thing, but have different training philosophies. Invariably when these situations arise, I end up setting out fresh remains for the area search dogs to train on to find the "lost hunter that fell out of his deer stand in the woods two days ago. He died, but we'd still like the area search dogs to be able to find him." My attitude is that I'm training these dog teams for tornadoes. As we just experienced another wild weekend where 22 people died in several states, this is a definite need for the community.
So, I've worked with one of the dog teams several times, each time suggesting to the handler that he needs to develop some way for his dog to tell him when it's found human remains. This concept is often lost on area search dog people as ...well, their finds are typically whole breathing bodies, hard to miss. So, they assume, the dead remains will again be whole dead bodies. Having worked tornadoes over the years, several searches were for the remains that got spread in multiple directions after being battered by al the debris in the funnel cloud.
I asked the handler if it was ok to set up an overlap problem with bloody remains such that multiple remains might be in an area ...say ....100 feet by 50 feet and I'd make sure they weren't any closer than ....30 feet...(I was being nice). He said he'd like that.
We started his dog in a 10 acre area. The sources I set out would have been hard to miss and the handlers and flankers commented downwind they were getting hits as well. The trick is not to know it's there. The trick is to find it....., i.e. why we need a dog. Following the dog, the handler was able to tell when his dog found the larger source and rewarded the dog for just showing up.....his call, not my way of doing things, but not for me to be critical of either. I then told him that he knew he was in the area and his dog had to find more remains from that tornado victim. He set his dog back to work. I stayed where I was and observed the dog went into the second source very nicely. Dog put its nose on it then went back to the handler who continued walking.....the handler had no clue his dog made the second find...my point being his dog needed an indication for human remains. So, I let them suffer for a bit, the dog finding the source again and again the handler not recognizing the situation.
(A handler on my team that is in training quietly came up and asked in confusion, "ummmm, his dog has no indication?" I nodded and told her she was a good student and that I was very proud of her.)
Rather than make the handler look stupid or degrade him. I pulled him aside and suggested we let the dog show us its "Natural Indication" (discussed in imprinting) and that he should know his dog had found the 2nd source multiple times already. To his credit he agreed rather than try to blow smoke.
So, we took the dog to the first recognized source and let him find it again (for which he'd been rewarded) and waited. He looked at his handler expectantly, but his handler was being told to be quiet and still. His dog pawed the source and I rewarded with lots of whoops. His dog looked at me with the expression of, "oh, someone with a clue." He pawed the source again and I whooped again. The third time I told the handler to do the same....his reward system is whooping...again, not my call.
Soooo, with the association established, I told the handler to again walk the area with the dog sent to find more and to watch his dog this time instead of looking about and talking about NASAR. He did. His dog did a very pretty touch. The handler whooped. Do this about a 100 more times and I'd consider them ok to go clear house rubble in tornadoes.
So, my soapbox for this week is if you are in SAR and think your way is the only way, you might be shorting the victim when you have to work side-by-side with the teams that "do it the wrong way." As long as the victims get found, I'm happy.
Jim