Post by oksaradt on Nov 11, 2010 11:55:53 GMT -5
I'm going to try to touch on two subjects in the same post whle they are both fresh in my head.
Certifications
1) These are a necessary evil every search dog handler must endure for several important reasons:
a) It's a guarantee that the other search dog teams out there have at least a minimal competency in the field they are attempting....that's it, but that's important...that minimal level.
b) It's a guarantee that the handler has minimal education in what they need to know to be on scene.
c) national certifications provide better odds that the other search teams were evaluated by an objective evaluator and not their buddy who has seen them perform before better in the past so is going to give them a "buy" this time when they suck.
2) The certification SHOULD be upheld to it's standard; Thus, anyone reading said standard can have a good idea at what level the search dog team had to perform on the day of their testing. This doesn't always happen, but one has to hope.
a) All certifications have weak spots by way of said standards so handlers/teams can figure out ways to minimize their training and stress.
I'll use my own experience as an example: NAPWDA states all sources will have "bone AND tissue". To an HRD handler this means the dog is scenting primarily for tissue as it provides a
much stronger scent. My dog works primarly skeletal, but to make sure we could pass, I trained much more tissue in the previous month than normal. There is no national standard present currently that focuses on skeletal yet many of the HRD call-outs are just for that.
Another example is NASAR's standards are such that you know you'll have one high, one surface, one buried, and one negative AREA. So, the handler quickly begins to change their search techniques to accomodate what's left. This isn't really a big deal because one of the first questions an HRD dog handler should ask when deployed is "do we think we're looking for above or below ground? How old do we suspect the remains are?"
But, to pass the certification, an amount of gamesmenship is naturally produced.
b) An evaluator can have severe limitations put upon them when setting up a test. Someone contracts the evaluator to come in, knowing the standards, yet presents the evaluator with conditions "less than expected" of the standards. The evaluator could leave, but the point is really to help out the country by getting good dog teams out there. So, many times the evaluator does the best they can. This can mean the test is easier or harder than the expected norm. Handlers can whine, but it's ultimately up to the evaluator and his/her organization to cry foul. It basically comes down to the fairness of the evaluator and his/her experience level.
Again, I'll use my recent experience for example as one part of the NAPWDA test is water. I personally like this about this standards as I've always thought that water is just another buried and to separate the medium out from all the rest is to limit the search dog team. Most other groups have dogs certified in land cadaver and then, maybe, in water cadaver. If the search area has a large pond in it, does the land cadaver-only certified dog ignore the dog that wants to go into the water? If the dog makes a find in the water, could it be thrown out in court because the dog doesn't have that certification?
(Ok, if the dog is a lab, it's going to go into the water anyway, but if it swims out to a point, circles, and does a bark alert.....it's just land cadaver certified......
??)
Talking with other dog teams that had tested with NAPWDA (....doing my homework to help my dog and I pass.....) I was told that the bulk of the water test was really shoreline. This dissapointed me, but you take what you get. On my test in this area, they did the test from boats. While some teams were "concerned" as they'd only trained shoreline, I was ecstactic. I wasn't happy because I'd trained in boats (I consider boatwork as just part of the overall job). I was happy because this was a more realistic test of the dog team's abilities and one I could apply (if need be) in court.
And, I guarantee you, no scent machines were used for the test, though we did work in strong winds with white caps on the water.....fairly typical for my part of the world.
c) Testing by an organization tends to become cookie-cutter after a while such that dog teams that have tested with that organization before know what to expect while newbies do not. This creates two phenomena:
c1) dog teams take seminars directed strictly at passing the test by showing them what to expect.
c2) dog teams take a test strictly to see how it's done so they can prepare/train to the test to pass the second time.
Both phenomena create a dog team trained to pass the test rather than to search. I don't know about other countries, but this is the typical American way. We even have major industries to prepare our kids to pass college-entrance exams as high scores often provide entry into prestigious universities and/or major scholarships. The result is we have kids that do great at college entrance exams, but many aren't really versed at thinking for themselves.
Shoot in the dog world, dog owners hand their dog over to an "expert trainer" to get that world title so that they get bragging and breeding rights BECAUSE that "expert" knows the ins-and-outs of that test. Does it mean that dog with the title is the best hunter in that foray? No, it means that dog performed up to the standards of the artificial test. That such a dog can really hunt becomes beside the point.
So, that's my brief discussion on certifications....and for me that really is brief.
Search Announcements
This phenomena is limited mostly to the civilian SAR world. True, an elected law enforcement official will answer to the media that a search was performed and it might have involved dogs, but that tends to be the end of it. Going further can jeopardize a potential criminal investigation. Search dog teams should go into EVERY search with the understanding that it can quickly turn into a criminal investigation. I don't care if it's looking for "Timmy fell down the well" as someone could have pushed Timmy down that well. For you youngsters, that reference is from the old LASSIE shows when TV was in black-and-white and not HD.
Many civilian dog team handlers seem compelled to tell the world when they've had a search. I don't know if it's to demonstrate that they are needed, that they are utilized, or to thumb their noses at rival dog teams (don't even get me started on rival search dog teams...oi vey).
Some years back there were several handlers from multiple parts of the country that started giving out details about their searches. Said searches were known criminal investigations. Said handlers got their hands spanked and rightly so.
Especially in HRD, law enforcement will quickly stop using you and your dog if they learn you have loose lips. Court cases can take years to work out. LE may not have remembered to tell the handler they were going to court as they have a lot going on with their regular duties. LE expects us to know that we are to keep what we saw and what we heard to ourselves; Otherwise, LE is simply not going to use you anymore. They'll smile when they see you. They'll comment on what a great dog you have. They'll call someone else to do their searches for them. It only takes one butt-chewing by their boss about using you for them to never call you again.
Yet, I still see this routinely on the lists where SEARCH TEAM YADA was deployed at SUCH-AND-SUCH-LOCATION with many dog teams deployed and a successful find was made. I see search dog teams parade out for the cameras. I duck and hide from the cameras at every chance that I can. I'm not worried for my dog or myself. I just don't see that it's anyone's business but the LE I'm working for that I was there. The one time I've been on camera, I was told to by my office and I was kicking and screaming against it. But, they said to, so I did.
Media coverage about a lost person brings out one type of spectator. Media coverage about human remains brings out another type of spectator. What I do is not a spectator sport but serious business involving a serious matter.
If someone wants to watch my dog document a cemetery then come on down! Otherwise, let the LE do their job, keep still, and stay out of their way.
Respectfully,
Jim Delbridge
Certifications
1) These are a necessary evil every search dog handler must endure for several important reasons:
a) It's a guarantee that the other search dog teams out there have at least a minimal competency in the field they are attempting....that's it, but that's important...that minimal level.
b) It's a guarantee that the handler has minimal education in what they need to know to be on scene.
c) national certifications provide better odds that the other search teams were evaluated by an objective evaluator and not their buddy who has seen them perform before better in the past so is going to give them a "buy" this time when they suck.
2) The certification SHOULD be upheld to it's standard; Thus, anyone reading said standard can have a good idea at what level the search dog team had to perform on the day of their testing. This doesn't always happen, but one has to hope.
a) All certifications have weak spots by way of said standards so handlers/teams can figure out ways to minimize their training and stress.
I'll use my own experience as an example: NAPWDA states all sources will have "bone AND tissue". To an HRD handler this means the dog is scenting primarily for tissue as it provides a
much stronger scent. My dog works primarly skeletal, but to make sure we could pass, I trained much more tissue in the previous month than normal. There is no national standard present currently that focuses on skeletal yet many of the HRD call-outs are just for that.
Another example is NASAR's standards are such that you know you'll have one high, one surface, one buried, and one negative AREA. So, the handler quickly begins to change their search techniques to accomodate what's left. This isn't really a big deal because one of the first questions an HRD dog handler should ask when deployed is "do we think we're looking for above or below ground? How old do we suspect the remains are?"
But, to pass the certification, an amount of gamesmenship is naturally produced.
b) An evaluator can have severe limitations put upon them when setting up a test. Someone contracts the evaluator to come in, knowing the standards, yet presents the evaluator with conditions "less than expected" of the standards. The evaluator could leave, but the point is really to help out the country by getting good dog teams out there. So, many times the evaluator does the best they can. This can mean the test is easier or harder than the expected norm. Handlers can whine, but it's ultimately up to the evaluator and his/her organization to cry foul. It basically comes down to the fairness of the evaluator and his/her experience level.
Again, I'll use my recent experience for example as one part of the NAPWDA test is water. I personally like this about this standards as I've always thought that water is just another buried and to separate the medium out from all the rest is to limit the search dog team. Most other groups have dogs certified in land cadaver and then, maybe, in water cadaver. If the search area has a large pond in it, does the land cadaver-only certified dog ignore the dog that wants to go into the water? If the dog makes a find in the water, could it be thrown out in court because the dog doesn't have that certification?
(Ok, if the dog is a lab, it's going to go into the water anyway, but if it swims out to a point, circles, and does a bark alert.....it's just land cadaver certified......
??)Talking with other dog teams that had tested with NAPWDA (....doing my homework to help my dog and I pass.....) I was told that the bulk of the water test was really shoreline. This dissapointed me, but you take what you get. On my test in this area, they did the test from boats. While some teams were "concerned" as they'd only trained shoreline, I was ecstactic. I wasn't happy because I'd trained in boats (I consider boatwork as just part of the overall job). I was happy because this was a more realistic test of the dog team's abilities and one I could apply (if need be) in court.
And, I guarantee you, no scent machines were used for the test, though we did work in strong winds with white caps on the water.....fairly typical for my part of the world.
c) Testing by an organization tends to become cookie-cutter after a while such that dog teams that have tested with that organization before know what to expect while newbies do not. This creates two phenomena:
c1) dog teams take seminars directed strictly at passing the test by showing them what to expect.
c2) dog teams take a test strictly to see how it's done so they can prepare/train to the test to pass the second time.
Both phenomena create a dog team trained to pass the test rather than to search. I don't know about other countries, but this is the typical American way. We even have major industries to prepare our kids to pass college-entrance exams as high scores often provide entry into prestigious universities and/or major scholarships. The result is we have kids that do great at college entrance exams, but many aren't really versed at thinking for themselves.
Shoot in the dog world, dog owners hand their dog over to an "expert trainer" to get that world title so that they get bragging and breeding rights BECAUSE that "expert" knows the ins-and-outs of that test. Does it mean that dog with the title is the best hunter in that foray? No, it means that dog performed up to the standards of the artificial test. That such a dog can really hunt becomes beside the point.
So, that's my brief discussion on certifications....and for me that really is brief.
Search Announcements
This phenomena is limited mostly to the civilian SAR world. True, an elected law enforcement official will answer to the media that a search was performed and it might have involved dogs, but that tends to be the end of it. Going further can jeopardize a potential criminal investigation. Search dog teams should go into EVERY search with the understanding that it can quickly turn into a criminal investigation. I don't care if it's looking for "Timmy fell down the well" as someone could have pushed Timmy down that well. For you youngsters, that reference is from the old LASSIE shows when TV was in black-and-white and not HD.
Many civilian dog team handlers seem compelled to tell the world when they've had a search. I don't know if it's to demonstrate that they are needed, that they are utilized, or to thumb their noses at rival dog teams (don't even get me started on rival search dog teams...oi vey).
Some years back there were several handlers from multiple parts of the country that started giving out details about their searches. Said searches were known criminal investigations. Said handlers got their hands spanked and rightly so.
Especially in HRD, law enforcement will quickly stop using you and your dog if they learn you have loose lips. Court cases can take years to work out. LE may not have remembered to tell the handler they were going to court as they have a lot going on with their regular duties. LE expects us to know that we are to keep what we saw and what we heard to ourselves; Otherwise, LE is simply not going to use you anymore. They'll smile when they see you. They'll comment on what a great dog you have. They'll call someone else to do their searches for them. It only takes one butt-chewing by their boss about using you for them to never call you again.
Yet, I still see this routinely on the lists where SEARCH TEAM YADA was deployed at SUCH-AND-SUCH-LOCATION with many dog teams deployed and a successful find was made. I see search dog teams parade out for the cameras. I duck and hide from the cameras at every chance that I can. I'm not worried for my dog or myself. I just don't see that it's anyone's business but the LE I'm working for that I was there. The one time I've been on camera, I was told to by my office and I was kicking and screaming against it. But, they said to, so I did.
Media coverage about a lost person brings out one type of spectator. Media coverage about human remains brings out another type of spectator. What I do is not a spectator sport but serious business involving a serious matter.
If someone wants to watch my dog document a cemetery then come on down! Otherwise, let the LE do their job, keep still, and stay out of their way.
Respectfully,
Jim Delbridge