SERVICE DOG - BPSCA.net

SERVICE DOG
The British Police and Services Canine Association
Magazine
www.bpsca.co.uk ISSUE 59
PRICE £2.50 Free to Members

The British Police and Services Canine Association
Contents
Editor
Keith Long ISM
42 Greenacres
Ossett
West Yorkshire
WF5 9RX
Tel: 01924 264110
Mobile: 07712 129984
email:
kdlong@blueyonder.co.uk
Membership Secretary
John Warbutton
6 Meadway Crescent
Selby
North Yorkshire
YO8 4FX
Tel 07841 472 542
email: johnbpsca@aol.com
4 Editorial
5 New Members
5 BPSCA Committee
8 The Effects of Wind Upon Scent
12 Words of Command and Alternative Signals
20 Vets Corner
24 Tales of a Stick Man
22 Heath Working Dogs Trials 2010
27 South Wales Dog Section Celebrates its
50th Anniversary
28 South Wales Police Colouring Competition
30 A Canine Soliloquy
30 The Retrieva Tracking Collar
32 B.S.P.C.A. Trials 2010 Report
40 British Police Canine Association Application
Secretary
Dave Fletcher
BPSCA
PO Box 5277
Rugeley
WS15 9BU
Tel 07887 804998
email: dafl@sky.com
On the cover:
Associate member Gary Garner,
who received the highest points
at this years BPSA’s annual dog
trials.
P32
P28
The copy deadline for next issue is 13th December
Any articles, statements or intentions expressed in this magazine
may not necessarily reflect the view of the BPSCA. The Editor.
© This magazine contains official information and should be treated with discretion by the recipient. No responsibility
for the quality of goods or services advertised in this magazine can be accepted by the publishers or printers.
Advertisements are included in good faith. Published by Forces and Corporate Publishing Ltd, Hamblin House,
Hamblin Court, 92-94 High Street, Rushden, Northamptonshire, NN10 0PQ . Tel: 01933 419994. Fax: 01933 419584.
Managing Director: Ron Pearson
Sub Editor/Design: Hayley Smith Advertising Manager: Heather Branchflower
The Service Dog 3

British Police and Services Canine Association
Editorial
This year’s Service Dog of the year competition
took place, once again, at Newbold Revel. The
committee, through the magazine, would like
to thank the management of Newbold for its
use. As I have said on numerous occasions it is
a fantastic venue and we are privileged to be
able to use the facilities it provides.
This year the service dog of the year was won
by Mick Tustain. This is the third time Mick and
his dog Ike have won the service dog equalling
the past record. Well done!
I wonder if Mick and Ike can do it again?
The handler on the cover of the magazine is
Gary Garner. Having scored the highest marks
in the competition I think he deserves the
recognition of being on the front page. It is the
first time that someone who is not a serving dog
handler to accomplish this feat.
The following is a letter sent by George Grayson
past president of the B.P.S.C.A.:
The Service Dog of the Year Competition was
held at H.M. Prison Office College, Newbold
Revel, Warwickshire on Saturday 3rd July, 2010.
A very worthy winner who swept the board was
Gary GARNER with his 3 year old G.S.D. XENA.
Gary is a police officer with the Traffic Section
in South Yorkshire Police and not a member of
the Dog Section. He trains XENA himself and
keeps the dog at home.
I have nothing but praise for the quality and
standard of handling and training demonstrated
by Gary with this superb G.S.D. XENA. It was
a pleasure to watch them perform setting a
standard not for just for members of the BPSCA
but all Police and Service Dog Handlers in U.K.
This is so, so important.
The exercises were Obedience, Agility, Chase
and Attack, Recall, Test of courage with Stick
and Gun. There were 18 other competitors.
As everyone knows this venue for the Service
Dog of the Year sponsored by Purina is possible
one of the best in the Country and to compliment
the success the sun shined all day.
Well done Gary and XENA.
George GRAYSON
www.kumfi.com
Police Dog Inspector (Rtd)
Past President and founder member of the
British Police and Service Canine Association.
I think this letter explains why I decided to put
Gary on the front cover.
Once again I would like to thank all those who
contribute to the magazine by supplying me with
various articles. In particular Philip Kilkenny who
always turns up to give me a vets article. Not
forgetting the old faithful contributors Sam Perry
and Ron Stanley. Thanks also goes to Alistair
Todd for his trials report and Graeme Jones for
his article on this stick attack.
Last but not least the BPSCA committee and
members wish to thank Purina for making it a
special day with their sponsorship of the event.
The AGM is on 28 October at Newbold Revel
at 10 am. We hope you will be able to attend.
KD Long ISM
(Editor of The Service Dog)
British Police and Services Canine Association
BPSCA CLUB SHOP
Please visit www.bpsca.co.uk to veiw our online shop.
4 The Service Dog

Re Join and
New Members
- from 14 March 2010
Subscribing Members:
Avon Fire and Rescue Service
Members:
Mr D. Clake, Mr C. Stearn, Mr D. Swift, Mr
C. Jones. Miss J. Saye, Mr P Carter, Mr P.
Bridgeman, Mr G. Crook, Mr A. Bernard.
Associate Members:
Mr M. Adams, Mr Osborne, Ms J. Radley,
Mr S. Porter. Mr D. Allen, Mr K. Roper, Mr
A. Sheikh, Mr G. Garner. Miss R. Haycox,
Mrs C. Rivers, Mr J. Godman, Mr A. Smith.
Mr S. Leatham.
A big thank you to all new and
re-subscribing Members.
BPSCA
Committee
Members:
President
Steve Allen MBE
Chairman
Sam Mackay
Vice Chairman Ron Stanley
Secretary
Dave Fletcher
Membership Secretary John Warbutton
Editor
Keith Long ISM
Treasurer
Steve Ferguson
Website Overveiw
Manager
Andrew Sanderson
Website Content
Manager
Keith Long
Committee:
Sam Perrie
Jim Nunn
John Davidson
Colin Huskins
Mark Adams
The Service Dog 5

British Institute
of
Professional Dog Trainers
(Security Division)
For details of:
SECURITY DOG
HANDLER’S
ACCREDITATION
Please contact:
BIPDT Security Devision, The
Harrow, Tumbril Lane, Brockdish,
Norfolk IP21 4JU
Tel: 01379 852499
6 The Service Dog

The Effects of Wind
Upon Scent
Wind is simply the result of cold heavy air pushing
the lighter warmer air around the planet. It is
caused by the different parts of the Earth’s surface
heating and cooling at different rates and at
different times. Other influences upon the wind
are its proximity to oceans, landmasses, deserts
and mountains, the seasons of the year and
the topography and flora of the surroundings.
The direction of the wind is usually measured
by a weathervane, which indicates from which
direction the wind is blowing. The speed of the
wind is measured by an instrument known as
an anemometer. It can also be measured by
Doppler radar using microwaves.
The various speeds are graded on the Beaufort
Scale and are listed in their various categories
as shown in the table below.
All of them will affect the vagaries of scent to
some degree or another. Their speed, spread,
intensity and direction can be calculated fairly
accurately from the details of temperature
weather conditions and time factors and the
tables of the Airflow Dynamics facilities
The Mythical “Scent Cone”
For many years there have been Dog Trainers
who have believed in the theory of the “scent
8 The Service Dog
cone” and many still do.
For some reason, they believe that scent will
spread from a given source to form a “cone
of scent”. This is not strictly true in many
circumstances. In fact, under normal wind and
weather conditions it is very rarely the case at all.
Scent will spread from its source blown
by whatever strength and direction of wind
movement there happens to be present. Take,
for example a person hiding at a central point
on the North side of a large field situated about
fifty yards from the fence. Theoretically, if there
were no wind at all, the scent would spread
from him in ever increasing concentric circles
decreasing in strength as it did so and by being
exposed to the elements, finally decay and
disappear altogether. It would spread equally
in every direction.
However, these conditions could never possibly
maintain. Wherever there is air there will be
air movement. Even a category given on the
|Beaufort Scale as “light air” of 1-4 miles per hour
would be sufficient to alter the shape of these
concentric circles elongating them down wind.
There would be very little scent to be found to
the North of the hidden person The prevailing
wind would prevent most of it spreading in
that direction.
Also, any scent that was spreading towards the
right or the left of the hidden person would be
blown directly downwind in a similar fashion by
this same comparatively gentle breeze.
Any odours that are blown directly down a
central line from the source will form a band
or line of scent of exactly the same strength
which will only ever decay and lessen in strength
gradually, depending upon the distance it travels
and the longer it lies exposed to the elements.
the whole line will decay at the same rate
The only thing that will keep these odours
together in that central line and prevent them
from drifting to the left or right will be the
intensity or speed of the prevailing wind or air
currents blowing them all in the same direction.

As I have already pointed out, had there been
no wind at all, some of the odours would have
spread to the left and right of the source at the
top of the field . However, as there was a wind
blowing strong enough to blow the odours
down the field along the central line directly
from the source,that same wind would also be
strong enough to blow any other scent present
downwind along a parallel line and in the same
direction.
The speed of the wind is not going to decrease
at all the further it blows down that field, so it
will be carrying any scent in its path downwind
and at a constant rate at every part of the field.
(NOT JUST AT THE TOP)
So, logically, all the wind will be doing will be
preventing the scent from drifting any further to
the left or the right of the central line in precisely
the same way as it did with the scent that was
present at the top of the field.
Therefore, all the scent from the hidden man
will be blown in the same direction and at the
same speed downwind and as none of the scent
will be able to drift sideways at any point at all,
because the strength of the wind is going to be
the same all the way down the field, all the odours
will remain the same distance from the central
line as they were when they first emanated from
the source at the top of the field and started
being controlled by the prevailing wind.
So, contrary to the popular theory that the
odour will be formed into some sort of a “scent
cone”. The action of the constant speed and
direction of the wind upon the odours all the
way down the length of the field will force them
all into a single line or band of scent, swirling
all around within the confines of the wind but
still only travelling in one general direction. The
greater the strength and speed of the wind the
narrower this “line” or “band” is going to be.
Think of a cloud of smoke from a bonfire.
That doesn’t form a cone. It swirls around on
the various small internal currents of the wind
but it still only travels in one general direction
dictated by the wind.
The spread of scent is, of course, almost exactly
the same as the spread of smoke in many ways.
It not simply flat and two-dimensional. It also
rises to heights above which the dog is incapable
of detecting it.
Like the smoke from a bonfire it rises until it
cools and then it normally decays and disappears
before returning to earth. Therefore, it is only
the lower levels, which are of real interest to the
tracking dog trainer.
The reason why so many people believe in the
theory of the “scent cone” is that they tend to
forget that any wind that is present at the top
of the field will be blowing just as hard halfway
down the field as it is at the top of the field. So
the whole spread of the scent will be affected
equally. This means that the constant speed
and direction of the wind in that one direction
will always prevent any tendency for the scent
to drift sideways and enable it to form a cone.
The spread of scent does not depend entirely
upon the wind or the movement of air currents
alone, of course. It is also affected by the
topography and ground conditions of the
surrounding area, all of which is taken into
consideration by Air Flow Dynamics.
As these odours and the currents of air upon
which they are being carried cool down, they
become heavier than the warmer air surrounding

them. The heavier air, together with the scent will
then roll downhill almost like the mists, which
drift over and cover the lower lying parts of heath
and moorland, except that scent, unlike mist, is
invisible. From there, it will spread according to
the surface conditions it encounters.
For example, it will move much more easily and
quickly over smooth surfaces like those of a lake,
a concrete airfield or a tarmacadam car park. It
will float much more slowly over an unmown
meadow and even slower still through a field
of agricultural crops such as sugar beet, kale,
potatoes or rapeseed. Scent can almost come
to a complete standstill in heavy shrubbery and
in parts of the forest where it is covered and
sheltered from the sun the wind and the rain
by dense vegetation thick scrub and thickets.
Air currents themselves can be affected by the
contours of the ground and any scent carried
on them may be pushed around either side of
a hill or a rocky outcrop.
To demonstrate the effects of wind when
in contact with such an obstacle try a little
experiment. Light a candle and stand it on a
table. Place a bottle immediately in front of it
about an inch away from it. Blow on the bottle
at the opposite side from the candle and watch
the flame go out as the wind curves around the
surface of the bottle. Light the candle, shield the
left-hand side of it and try again. It makes no
difference which side of the candle you shield
the wind will curve around the bottle and blow
the flame out from the unshielded side.
A moderate breeze on the Beaufort Wind Scale
is calculated as being 13-18 miles per hour. At this
speed the residual scent lying above the ground
scent of a set of footprints in sand could very
well be blown on to dense vegetation several
feet away to the side of the actual visual track
forming an intermediate track which although
being almost completely invisible to the naked
eye; never having been disturbed or marked by
anyone or anything passing through it, would
still be detectable to the dog, which would still
be well capable of following it with its nose.
If the footprints were alongside a stretch of
water, where the wind could blow the scent
across the surface there is no telling how far
it might travel to form an intermediate track
on the other side, where visual tracking would
obviously be impossible and yet the trained
tracking dog would find no problem whatever.
The less resistance encountered at ground (or
water level) the further the scent will travel. It
is all subject to Air Flow Dynamics (and a little
commonsense)
From a Dog training point of view there will
also be a fundamental difference between odours
emanating from a living source (a person in
hiding) and an inanimate object such as a lost
wallet or a weapon.
In the case of a living breathing person the
odours from the source are going to be constant
and ever present. They will not decay nor dissipate
whilst that person is still in the vicinity.
The odours themselves will, of course, decay,
dissipate and evaporate the further they drift
from the living source and the longer they are
exposed to the elements.
On the other hand the life span of the odours
from an inanimate object will be so much more
limited as they begin dissipating the moment
they are deposited and have no mechanism to
create or supplement further scents or odours.
Odours from drugs or explosives will normally
take longer to dissipate or decay than those
of items of lost property as their odours are
constantly being reproduced and given off
by their very nature, as will odours from dead
and rotting tissue, as found in the discipline of
Cadaver Detection Dogs. All scents and odours
will have a slightly different rate of decay before
they actually disappear altogether, but no
matter which of them is present they will all be
governed by the laws of Air Flow Dynamics and
none of them will ever produce the “mythical”
Scent Cone.
Sam Perrie
10 The Service Dog

The Service Dog 11

Words of Command
and Alternative Signals
There are five main ways in which a trainer can give his dog a command or elicit a
required response from him. Teaching any of these different signals is simply a question
of logic. They are initially taught by using them in conjunction with the conventional
auditory words of command and once the dog is thought to be competent and is
responding to both the auditory command and the new signal the auditory signal is
gradually discontinued. The different kinds of signal are as follows:
Required Behaviour
When teaching required behaviour, correction
and praise are all that are necessary to teach
the dog to recognise certain situations and to
make a specific response to them. No words of
command are necessary at all. The signals to
which the dog will respond are mainly gained
from the body language of the handler or by
the memory of certain particular items or pieces
of equipment and how the dog has been made
to react to them in the past. One common
example is the automatic “sit”. This does not
even have to be taught; the dog automatically
becomes conditioned to sit immediately every
time the handler halts. Other instances include
the weaving frame or poles, the scramble board;
(scaling board) the “A” frame and the long jump.
The trained dog does not need to be told what
to do when confronted by them. All he needs is
to be released from the position he is currently
in, by being given some indication as to when
the new reaction is called for. The dog is hardly
likely to attempt to jump over the weaving poles,
start to “weave” through the long jump or to
dive straight through the scaling board simply
because he has not been given the “correct”
word of command specific to each obstacle.
The same can be said of the Guard dog when
confronted by a baiter wearing a padded sleeve;
he knows exactly what is required of him, all he
needs to be told is when to do it and when to stop.
Auditory Signals
These include words of command, whistles,
clapping the hands, a snap of the fingers, the
sound of a bell or even the sound of a car horn,
in fact, as the heading suggests, any signal that
can be heard by the dog.
The dog only requires one such signal, given
once only, for each specific action or series of
actions. Thus, even a particularly aggressive
animal can be taught to leave immediately upon
hearing something as quiet and as gentle as the
chime of a tiny budgie bell if he is properly trained
to do so ; by being made to listen for it and to
react to it. The dog must be properly taught,
by being checked meaningfully but silently every
time he is required to “leave”. If he is to react
immediately and correctly to the required signal,
then that signal (the tinkling budgie bell,) or any
other signal that you wish to teach him) must
be given at exactly the same time as he is being
checked. This must be practised continuously so
that, eventually, he is actually expecting to hear
that signal and is, therefore, listening for and
anticipating it and will, therefore, readily and
willingly respond to it.
Conversely, he can also be taught to leave on
receipt of an angry, harsh bellowed, strangulated
and desperate word of command such as “leave”
or “out” delivered at the top of the handler’s
voice. The choice is yours.
N.B. This angry bellowed word of command is
12 The Service Dog

no quicker to teach than any other signal. It will
still have to be repeated practised and enforced
just as many times as any other signal and will
not prove to be any more effective nor any more
efficient than the tinkle of the tiny budgie bell.
Noise and angry shouts are no substitute for
correct, logical and properly applied training.
(See earlier paragraphs dealing with the words
of command, their correct delivery and usage)
The use of “clickers”, “silent whistles”, jingling
metal discs or any other audible signals ALL come
under the heading of auditory signals.
There is a growing body of trainers who insist
that some of these signals are new, such as the
clicker signals and are a much easier and more
efficient method of training a dog. THEY ARE
NOTHING OF THE SORT! They are merely another
form of auditory signal and will work in exactly
the same way and give precisely the same results
as any other auditory signal. SO LONG AS THEY
ARE USED IN EXACTLY THE SAME WAY!
What normally happens and what is likely to
give the impression that the dog is responding
much more readily to the “clicker” is that when
using the conventional signals, the trainer has
been guilty of FORGETTING to reward and praise
the dog EVERY TIME HE USES THE RELEVANT
SIGNAL. When he is taught how to use the
“clicker” he is not allowed to forget to reward the
dog immediately and as a consequence the dog
APPEARS to be responding much more readily
to the “new” signal than he did to the more
conventional signals (i.e. the words of command.)
The constant use of any word o f
command or signal without the
stimulus of correction, praise and
reward, will obviously cause the
dog to lose interest in that signal.
It will even lose interest in the
“clicker” eventually if the reward
is withheld because the handler
or trainer has forgotten to
give it immediately every
time the dog gives the
correct response. Whether
it be through ignorance
idleness or simply forgetfulness. (see
the chapter on “Clicker Training”)
Similarly, some young trainers doubt the
efficacy of the “silent” or “supersonic” dog
whistle because the first time they used it the dog
did not react to it by coming to him immediately.
There is, of course, no reason why the dog should
react in that way. All normal dogs can HEAR the
supersonic whistle which is pitched far too high
to be detected by the human ear, but before the
dog can react to it in any way, he must first be
taught by manipulation and reward, precisely
what it is you require from him whenever he hears
it. It must be fully understood that none of these
dog-training ideas and putative “innovations”
are magic wands.They are all based upon simple
basic logical training procedures and practices
and all of them require knowledge, time ,effort
and consistency on the part of the trainer if they
are to produce the required results.
No command or signal, no matter what form
it takes, can ever evoke the required reaction
or response from the dog every time, without
the necessary stimuli provided by motivation,
correction and reward. These signals include the
words of command the clicker, the whistle, the
hand signal, the body language or the odour
of the items sought. It encompasses auditory,
visual olfactory, tactile and even gustatory signals
(re-action to a specific taste).
Visual Signals
These are less common and, it must be said,
slightly less efficient than the first two. Firstly
because their practical use is limited and also
because the dog’s eyesight is far less acute
and highly developed than either its senses of
hearing or of smell.
The hand signal is, possibly, the most widely
known of all the visual signals, but the dog
can also be taught to respond to different
combinations and uses of lights.
For example a dog can be taught
to carry out simple tasks with the
use of the headlights of a
The Service Dog 13

vehicle,” sit” on full beam,” down” on dipped
lights, “stand” on flashing hazard lights and
“come” immediately the lights are all switched
off. (Or any variations of the above)
With the use of a hand held lamp or torch with
a fairly powerful beam, the dog can be taught the
“send-away” exercise when the beam is shone
straight ahead. He can be taught to drop into
the “down” position immediately the torch is
switched off and change direction left or right
when the beam is directed to either of those
positions. Pointing the torch directly at the dog
can be taught to mean, “come”.
If required, the dog can be made to sit quietly
in front of an obstacle and to negotiate it the
moment a light is flashed on and off again.
A whole line of jumps can be illuminated at
night and the dog taught to jump over the
one showing a flashing light. The lights can be
programmed to flash one after the other in no
particular or specific order at all and the dog
will react to them accordingly, taking each jump
as the trainer indicates it and without a single
word being uttered.
A favourite signal used by poachers at night
used to consist of a torch with the whole of the
lens blacked out apart from a small pinhole. The
dog was taught to run directly towards the light
the moment it was pointed at him or to find the
beam and then run in towards the source of the
light. Such a beam would be almost invisible
from the side view from any distance in the dark.
As it is quite easy to leave a light shining for
some time, these signals were much longer
lasting than an auditory signal, which is given
once and once only and will, quite naturally, be
of a shorter duration.
Olfactory Signals
These are probably the least understood and the
most misused of all the signals. Many trainers
and handlers simply cannot believe that they
actually work in the same way as do all the
other signals. Basically, the dog is trained or
conditioned to react in a certain way to a specific
odour or a collection of odours, in exactly the
same way, as it would be trained to respond to
a conventional auditory word of command. For
example, he may be ordered to lie down flat,
to adopt the “sit” position or to bark excitedly
whenever an article bearing a certain smell
is brought to his attention. He must then be
practised at the response exercise until such time
as he can carry it out without any other word of
command or signal being given to him, thereby
showing his handler precisely where the source
of that odour lies. For the best results, all that is
required in order to ensure that the dog gives this
unmistakable indication, is, first of all to teach him
what is required of him. Then to release him in
the vicinity where the presence of that substance
is suspected and leave the dog alone. He must
be allowed to do what his handler is incapable
of doing himself and never will be capable of
doing, namely detecting the substances or items
by their scent alone. Any ill-conceived notion that
the handler may have, that he can help the dog
by “showing” him with his hands exactly where
the most likely places are for him to investigate
must be strongly discouraged. As must any
attempt to “encourage” the dog to greater
efforts by the use of unintelligible high pitched
squeaks, whoops or hisses, or in any other way.
This will only serve to distract the dog and will
be counter-productive. The only conceivable way
in which the handler could make himself useful
would be to remove heavy obstacles out of the
dog’s path in places where he is showing the
most interest. If the trainer thinks that the dog
needs such noises to revive his flagging spirits,
then he should consider putting in a couple of
“dummy” drops to rekindle his interest, rather
than allowing the dog to stop work in order to
take part in a silly chasing game. What must be
fully understood by the trainer is that the odour
or “olfactory signal” becomes the executive
signal or the trigger, completely replacing any
other word of command or signal and rendering
them superfluous.
The practice of poking the hand or a directional
probe or wand into various “likely” locations,
(which is also introducing fresh human scent
into the immediate search area) must be strongly
discouraged, as must additional words of
command or other unintelligible phrases that
are repeated in high pitched and excitable
tones of voice. These are the last things a
dog needs in these circumstances; they are
hindrances rather than aids. The handler is
incapable of doing what he is asking his dog
to do, so he should refrain from interfering
and distracting him.
It is a similar situation to two or three

hospital porters poking their hands into the body
cavity of a patient on the operating table, whilst
a fully qualified and well experienced cardio -
surgeon is attempting to carry out micro-surgery
on the patient’s heart.
The word of command used to trigger the
dog off into his reaction to an olfactory signal is
exactly the same as any other word of command
or signal. In that it releases the dog into the
“search” mode that the dog understands to
mean, “go forward and find the olfactory
signal”. It should be given once and once only.
The dog will have already been schooled as to
what response he must give on finding it and
should not be interfered with any further by
anyone or anything but allowed to carry on
with his task. No further words or noises are
necessary until the dog “finds” then makes
his response and is rewarded.
If the dog has been properly, correctly
and logically trained, the odour will
trigger him off into a positive and
active response, which should be
unmistakable to the handler. This
might include barking excitedly,
adopting the “sit” or the “down”
position and staring fixedly at
the source of the odour, or by
picking up a special tag attached
to his collar and holding it in his
mouth until rewarded. However,
barking excitedly is not to
be recommended in covert
operations, where secrecy
and silence are essential
or in arms and explosive
searches where an arms
or explosives cache may
be booby-trapped with
a sonic trigger. Which
is yet another reason
why the “sniffer”
dog should not be
encouraged to dash
about madly and
frenziedly all over the
place.
In the case of an area
search, a fully trained
dog upon receipt of the
initial word of command
releasing him into the
olfactory mode should search the area without
any need for further additional words of
command, motivation or praise. Depending
upon the specific response training the dog has
received, when he finds the article he must either
make the response he was trained to make or
retrieve it. Once again it is the odour, which is
the “executive command” or the “trigger” which
motivates and elicits the required response from
the dog. There are, of course, situations where
it would be extremely unwise to teach the dog
to retrieve the article. Cases have been known
where a hand grenade with the pin removed
has been wedged in between two objects,
where it will be ready to explode the moment
it is disturbed. Alternatively an explosive device
with a trembler fuse has been placed inside the
pack, which will detonate the explosive at the
slightest touch. All these possibilities must be
fully and carefully considered and the relevant
safety precautions incorporated within the
training programme.
Passive Response Dog
I do not subscribe to the nonsensical phrase
“Passive Response Dog” when referring to a
particular type of working dog. I have made this
abundantly clear in previous writings and so far
no one has been able to explain to me the logic
nor the necessity of such an illogical category.
The meaning of “passive” in the dictionary
is inactive, motionless and not working or
operating. So, whenever a dog is said to be
making a “passive response “ to a hidden
substance he would be simply “doing nothing”
about it or “not working”. Neither of which
could possibly tell his handler anything at all.
This does not accurately describe the active,
successful, working dog. When a trained dog
makes some kind of response to a hidden
substance, be it adopting the sitting position,
quietly lying down in front of the substance,
picking up the indicator tag attached to his
collar or barking at the source of the odour, he
is actively doing something. What this inane
description is actually saying is that this dog is
carrying out an inert action, which is simply not
possible. This is an oxymoron and is as bad as
saying stationary movement or static agitation,
there is no such thing.
A much better description of the sort of dog

to which this silly phrase is attempting to refer
would be a “Controlled Response Dog”. This
would differentiate it from the hyperactive wild
and over-excited scrambling frenetic dog whose
response has been obtained by being psyched
up by the over-stimulation of its desire to play
with a toy.
A dog that has been fully grounded in
obedience before being taught the correct and
workmanlike approach to the detection of the
odours of different substances, will invariably
demonstrate the benefits of such discipline to
which the properly trained and controlled animal
has been subjected.
Every “search dog” or “sniffer dog” should
give a controlled response to the presence of
the substance being sought. There is no earthly
advantage in training a dog to run madly all over
the place in a frantic desire to play rather than to
work. Especially in the light of such cases where
the criminal element have deliberately boobytrapped
their hidden stores of drugs or explosives
and it becomes an extremely hazardous operation
for the handler as well as for the dog.
Tracking is another discipline in which the
olfactory signal should be the “trigger” and
the auditory words of command and noises
of encouragement and praise should be kept
to an absolute minimum. The dog should be
gradually taught that a track starts with an article
and the further the track goes which bears the
same odours or scents as that article the closer
the dog is getting to receive his reward. In the
initial stages he is rewarded every few yards or
so, gradually having to cover longer and longer
distances before receiving the next one. The
constant presence of the same odours motivates
him into continuing on to the end of the track
and of identifying the quarry, the person who
laid that track, who will also reward him.
If there is no article from which to commence
the track it is entirely possible that the dog will
start tracking on a random track which could
be the most recent one present at the scene of
the contact and not necessarily the correct one.
There is no way that any dog handler can tell
whether his dog is definitely following the track
of the person sought or not.
The words of command “seek on” and the
repetition of praise and encouragement from
the handler convinces the dog that even though
this may not be the correct track, it is certainly
the one that his
handler wishes
him to follow. The
constant repetition
of praise or words of
motivation from the trainer
can also detract from the
dog’s concentration.
If he happens to lose the
track and the handler orders
him to “track on”. The
dog may, in the absence
of the original track, (or
the one which he selected
randomly to follow in lieu
of the correct track at the
start of the operation,)
simply search around
until he finds yet another
and quite different track to
follow. Because he is being
praised and encouraged by
his handler he will assume
that this track too, is one
that his handler is happy for
him to follow and will quite
happily do so
On the other hand, when the
dog has been properly trained
to track from an article
at the start of the track
and there is an article at
the start of the current
track he is following, the
handler must take it with him in an airtight
container. In the event of the dog temporarily
losing the track, it can be placed on the ground
somewhere near the place where the dog
appeared to lose it. He can then be encouraged
to sniff around it and to pick up the same scent
again from the surrounding area where he lost
it and follow it to its logical conclusion.
Tactile Signals
These signals have the advantage in that they
can be used in the dark without any sound that
could give away one’s position. A light touch on
the base of the tail can be taught to indicate the
“sit” position. A touch on the top of the head
the “down” position, a hand under the stomach
would mean “stand” and a gentle pull on the
16 The Service Dog

choke chain, holding the dog back, followed by
the release of the dog “attack”.
A quick hook of the loose skin at the top of
the thigh with the forefinger would mean, stop
growling and settle down quietly. It could be
used at any stage when the dog is showing signs
of aggression and wanting to attack It could
even be used after the dog had been sent into
the attack and actually bitten the quarry and
the handler had reached him.
The signal is intended to mean Cease all form of
aggression, come straight back to heel, adopt the
“down” position and remain quiet but watchful.
Obviously, In the event of a dog having to be
sent into the attack in a covert situation, it would
hardly be sensible nor logical to give that sort of
tactile signal to make the dog “leave” in order to
preserve silence ,as the very act of sending the
dog into the attack would have compromised
any attempt at operational silence
Variations of all these signals are all possible, the
accent being dependent upon logical application
and simplicity of signal.
Electrical impulses and similar stimulation are
all nothing more than tactile signals. They are
delivered to an electric collar that is worn by
the dog and triggered by a radio signal from a
special sender unit held by the trainer. The sender
unit is calibrated in order to allow the trainer
to deliver the various strengths of stimulation
deemed necessary to achieve the required result.
One of the great advantages is that the signal
can not only be given from a great distance it
can also be given in the dark.
The same sort of electrical correction can be
delivered from an electric fence as is used for
the containment of livestock, or, conversely,
buried below the surface of the area within
which the dog is required to remain. The fence
is programmed to make the collar give off a
warning note if the dog approaches too close
to the sender unit (in this case the fence).Then
if the dog ignores the warning a small electric
shock is triggered off causing the animal to back
away from the fence. This method of correction
has the added advantage in that the handler
does not have to be present nor even see the
dog making the error
The electric collar is open to many variations
of application, such as sheep worrying, food
stealing, noise nuisance when left unattended
and many more.
These electrical aids are extremely effective
in the hands of a trained operative. They are,
however, open to abuse by inexperienced
trainers (In exactly the same way that a riding
crop, or, indeed, an ordinary walking stick can
be misused on a dog)
It must be clearly understood that it is not the
training implement that is at fault, nor can such
implements be held responsible for any perceived
acts of cruelty towards the dog. No matter if it
is a choke chain, a pinch collar, a lead, a special
head collar, a whip, a riding crop a walking stick
or a sophisticated electrical training system. It is
the person using these items (almost invariably
incorrectly) that may cause any unnecessary
pain, discomfort or cruelty towards the animal.
When using any form of correction the whole
training concept must be kept in perspective.
“Clicker” Training
Training a dog by the “clicker” training system
is not a magical short cut into training a dog.
If anyone thinks that it is then they are simply
deluding themselves. It is only another form of
auditory signal after all is said and done and it
can do no more than any other auditory signal
can do.
Using an ordinary word of command correctly
and delivering it in the correct manner is just
as effective and less limited in its usage. One
problem with clicker training is that eventually
the dog is going to need many more specific
commands. The number of different signals a
clicker can make is limited. Even a whistle can
produce an infinitely greater number of different
signals than a clicker. It is no easier for the dog
to understand, it does not teach the dog any
quicker and carries no advantages whatever over
the more conventional methods of training the
dog. it is , in effect an “additional signal” such
as would be penalised in competition if used in
conjunction with any other signal.
It could be of great use to those people
who cannot master the “normal” and logical
technique of giving the same conventional
word of command or signal every time, then
making the dog carry out the required response
and rewarding him immediately every time he
does so.
Where the clicker appears to have an advantage
over the conventional method is because, in the
The Service Dog 17

first place, the signal it gives is exactly the same
every time it is given, which is something that
some trainers are apt to forget. They will use
commands like “close” and “heel” interspersed
with unnecessary additional words of praise such
a “good lad” “come on then” accompanied
by squeaks and whoops “to keep the dog’s
attention” and all given in a high pitched voice
that varies from time to time .This is done, simply
to make the dog carry out an exercise that he
could learn to do much more easily if he were
to be given only one clear word of command.
For some strange and illogical reason many
people fondly imagine all these different words
of command and extraneous noises are, not only
attractive to the dog, but are also necessary in
order to train him.
In effect they are saying that it is easier for the
dog to learn several words of command and
accompanying “noises off” than it is for him to
learn one word of command given once only
in a well pitched tone of voice. This is certainly
not a logical precept.
What the clicker does is to replace all these
noises with one clear click, or in other words
to give precisely the same stimulus that
would normally be given by a solitary word of
command. So what is so different and where is
the advantage in that?
The other apparent advantage that the clicker
has, is that every time it is used, it reminds the
trainer or handler to reward and praise the dog
every time he carries out a command correctly -
which is something else that many trainers forget
to do! Good trainers do not need reminding, It
is second nature to them.
To keep things easy for the dog and the handler,
only one word of command should be given for
each separate response, followed by some action
that will cause the dog to carry it out, followed
by praise and reward.
Those who disagree with these facts should
carry out the same exercises for which they
advocate the use of the clicker and use another
signal in its place. The result would be no different
at all. I challenge any of them to show me
anything a clicker can teach to a dog that cannot
be done equally as well with any other signal.
Why should the clicker work any better than
any other “auditory signal” in any case? It isn’t
magic we are talking about here; it is training
an animal.
Pavlov used a bell, but only because it would
sound the same to the dog no matter who rang it.
Whereas a word of command could possibly have
sounded quite different to the dog depending
upon which of his many handlers gave it.
Gun dog trainers and Shepherds use whistles,
but again, that is only because the sound of a
whistle carries much further than a shouted
word of command and a whistle will also sound
exactly the same to the dog every time, no matter
who is blowing it.
All the clicker does is to give a signal to the
dog that a reward of some sort kind is about
to be given to him. It is used when the dog
does something the trainer wants him to do,
such as touching the end of a prodder with his
nose. The same exercise can be carried out and
exactly the same result achieved by using any
other “auditory signal”. This could be a whistle,
a bell, a squeaky toy, a duck caller or by simply
saying “prodder” or even “abracadabra” every
time if you so wish. Just so long as you reward
the dog immediately, every time he touches it
by giving him a piece of meat.
In exactly the same way as you would if you
were using the clicker.
Some trainers are actually using the clicker as
an additional signal to teach the dog dependency
upon a prodder. This prodder will be subsequently
incorporated into future training exercises and
will be used to teach the dog to carry out other
tasks. It is meant to back up the new signals they
intend to teach when making the dog carry out
the new tasks.
The simple truth of the matter is that teaching
a dog to follow the direction of the tip of a
prodder can be done just as quickly and easily
using conventional commands and signals
without the need of a clicker.
In any case, the exercises for which they
intend to use a “prodder” can be taught just
as quickly and accurately without the need of an
intermediate stage of training being introduced.
Such a method calls for the use of additional aids
and signals. So to go to the trouble of teaching
the dog to respond to a prodder is nothing but
a waste of time and effort.
The problem with ostensibly “new” dog
training ideas and methods is that, if you are
not very careful, you can fall into the trap of
“self delusion”. You will not be the first. One
famous trainer really thought that it was possible

to breathe up an over-aggressive dog’s nostrils
and, by so doing, quieten him down completely.
Or to teach dogs to walk to heel, or to sit and
stay, simply by clinking the links of a check chain
together closely beside the dog’s ear. This is
not just a silly joke. There were a tremendous
number of followers who swore by the efficiency
of these methods.
Thankfully, the majority of the members of
the dog training fraternity were not taken in by
all this nonsense. They knew that proper dog
training consisted of four main elements. They
are still the same today and are: -
1. Make the dog do something you want him
to do (by whichever method you find easiest.)
2. Simultaneously give him a signal as you
make him carry out the required action. (Thereby
creating an “association of ideas” in his mind)
3.Reward him for carrying it out (by praise,
physical caresses or food)
4. Practise the exercise and keep on repeating
it over and over again until the dog has learned it
thoroughly and can carry it out without hesitation
on receipt of the correct signal.
And that is all there is to it .Training a dog is
so simple and it just gets progressively easier
and easier doesn’t it?
Et Canes et Homines Docemus
Sam Perrie

Do you have any questions for our Vets Corner expert, or would you
like to see something covered in a future issue? If so, contact the
editor with your questions and suggestions.
Vets Corner
By
Philip Kilkenny
How and what
dogs see
As humans we rely very heavily on our vision.
Dogs on the other hand have vastly superior
senses of hearing and smell so in general are
much less reliant on sight. It is estimated that
in terms of discerning details, dog’s vision is
about one fifth that of a human, so something
we can distinguish at 100 feet would need to
be about 20 feet away for our dog to see it.
There are variations between breeds sighthounds
such as Greyhounds which hunt using vision
have much better sight especially compared
with dogs which hunt or track by smell such as
Bloodhounds. Because dogs do not need such
accurate vision they see a different spectrum of
colours which is far narrower than we can see.
Essentially they see the world in shades of blue
and yellow and are unable to differentiate red
and green. In human terms all dogs would be
considered colour blind.
Dogs are also inferior to humans when it
comes to depth perception. We perceive depth
well as the visual fields of our right and left eyes
overlap significantly in the centre. This is poorer
in dogs as their visual fields overlap less, but as
a result their field of vision is greater. Dogs have
a field of vision of up to 250 degrees where as
our own field of vision is less than 180 degrees.
However dogs do see better at night due to
a reflective surface behind the retina at the
back of the eye called the Tapetum Lucidum.
This structure reflects light back within the eye
thus maximising very low levels of illumination.
It explains why we can often see the eyes of a
dog at night long before we can see the owner
walking it! Dogs are also much better at detecting
movement, many breeds can detect movement
up to a kilometre away, although as already
discussed they would see little in the way of
detail, but by detecting the initial movement a
dog can then use it’s superb hearing and smell
to identify possible prey or danger.
It would probably be unfair to say that dogs
do not see as well as people, but they do
see differently. They simply have no need to
distinguish details and colours in the way that we
do. Undoubtedly, there are many more intricacies
to canine vision that we have yet to discover
perhaps with time we might even discover why
my dog hates Hi-vis vests so much but maybe it’s
just because the postman wears one!
20 The Service Dog

Fa
Ele
ligh
K-
• L
• L
• E
• MIL
• UTIL
Cooler in Summer
Lintran Professional Range
TACTICAL, POLICE, FIRE & RESCUE,
SECURITY SERVICES
Made in Britain
Warmer in Winter
Since 1988 Lintran has served the professionals including H.M. Services. Not: 1, 10 or 100 but 1000’s provided -
from the heat of Afghanistan, Diego Garcia, Indian Ocean and Gibraltar to the cold of Iceland for Icelandic Police.
From the North of UK, Lothian & Borders Police to Southern Counties of Avon and Somerset Police to Metropolitan
Police, British Transport Police and Belfast and Dublin security & Defence Animal Training Centre.
Pleased to fit out up to 150 vehicles for the RSPCA presently.
& the list goes on!
Tel 01673 885959
www.lintran.co.uk
DOG
BOXES
Cooler Hygienic dog boxes for over 21 years, as
chosen by RSPCA new national fleet of vehicles
C
Ne
ou
ad
fo
Th
wa
on
dig
ity
to
an
Example shows Vivaro van with built-in
storage - 3 GSD size compartments
above wheel arches, hand wash
basin, electric fan, auxiliary battery
and light beacons to meet all security
requirements.
VAN
FIT-OUTS
Fleet of vans recently completed for UK Border
Patrol at Channel Tunnel. These units in Transit
Connects were designed with flexibilty in mind to
hold either 3 GSDs, 3 labs & 3 spaniels or 6
spaniels all in one van.
Tel 01673 885959 www.lintran.co.uk Fax 01673 885956 Brentwood
•
•
•

ain
er
Give your dog and handler the edge
with Lintran Tactical Range
Health & Safety
n
s
s
Fans
Electrical and/or manual fans and
lightbars supplied and fitted. All colours.
K-9 VEST FEATURES
• Load-bearing D-rings at the shoulders and hips
• Low-profile drag strap
• Easy to adjust
Options
COVER YOUR ASSETTS- DUTY
TORCH CAMERA
New rechargeable torch with max
output up to 200 lumens with the
added benefit of latest 3GP video
format
The duty light camera is light, durable,
water and shock resistant and can fit
on to an officers belt.. The built in
digital video recorder with 2GB capacity
is easy to use and allows the officer
to record the events as they took place
and” cover your assets” later in court.
• MILITARY • LAW ENFORCEMENT • SEARCH & RESCUE • DIVING • HUNTING • OUTDOOR
• UTILITY • HOME USE
A professional kit is available which includes
all the necessary emergency stabilisation
first aid items needed when out in the field.
• Ballistic/Stab
Shank
Resistant
Packages:
Level I and IIIA
• Re-usable cool
packs
• Fully adjustable:
One size fits all
60-110lb dog
• Replaceable elastic and ballistic
bellyband
• Removable front chest protector
Range of tactical dog leads now
available including, Fast Capture,
Quick release leads and muzzles
Extreme
Beam
• Removable ID patches
• or just kick & stab
FULL RANGE OF TACTICAL TORCHES
• Viper • Web-Tex
• Viper • Extreme Beam • Julius K9
Combat K9 • Extreme Beam
• Signature K9 • John Humphris Range
ntwood House, Lincoln Road, Faldingworth, Market Rasen, Lincs LN8 3SF

Tales of a Stick Man
My name is Graeme Jones and I’m an operational
Police Dog handler and ACPO Instructor. My
particular interest lies within the art of the decoy,
criminal, baiter, helper, call them what you will.
I have written previous articles regarding this
role for The Service Dog and together with Sam
Perrie hoped to raise the awareness of this vital
role in preparing dogs for a life in the Services.
After all, a handlers life may depend on how
their dog reacts and copes with threat.
Having represented my own Force at both
one day trials and Regional level I have always
thought there was something missing regarding
the manwork phase. If someone was threatening
me with a stick or baseball bat, would he be
doing it from afar and would it be half-hearted?
Those Norman Wisdom-esque “Send your dog
Mr Grimsdale” vocals still make me chuckle
although it really is not a laughing matter.
Towards the end of the 1990’s, Schutzhund
enjoyed a pre-bickering heyday in this country
and some of the techniques found their way
into Police dog training. I watched my first
Schutzhund stick attack and thought “that’s a
bit more like it!” as the helper (their preferred
term) started to jog down the field, screaming
and exuding an air of menace. This led to some
research into further European dog sports such
as Belgian Ringsport, Mondio Ring and of course
my favourite, the KNPV. The thing that struck
me most about all of these was that the decoy/
baiter properly tested the dogs during the “test of
courage” phase of a trial. His role was to examine
a dog, expose any weaknesses and exploit them
so that a judge could score accordingly.
Through the BPSCA forum (sadly no more)
I made contact with Ian Walshaw who had
imported a Dutch bloodline KNPV bitch and
we met regularly to train and discuss the breed.
Subsequent trips to Holland (see articles in
previous issues) started to develop my training
style and in particular the KNPV trademark, the
stick attack. Now this is the real deal! The decoy
will enter the field, raise the stick towards dog
and handler some 120 + yards away and start
to jog away from them. This is important in that
it puts the dog at ease with no pressure. After
verbal challenges from the handler, the dog is
deployed. Now 120 + yards is some distance and
allows the dog to reach top speed. As the dog is
approximately 30-40 yards away the decoy will
turn towards the dog, accelerate and bellow
with real ferocity in an attempt to oust the dog.
The switch from prey to defence magnifies the
pressure the dog is under and is a real test. As
the dog launches (see link for an idea of how
far away the dog can be when it takes off http://
www.youtube.com/watch?v=qwjKij7lWrU) the
decoy will strike the dog with a reed stick across
the flank, again in an effort to put the dog off.
In 2007 I was asked to be the stick man at
the Yorkshire Cup at the Rivos Training Kennels
in South Yorkshire. Now Rome wasn’t built in a
day and to introduce a full blooded stick attack
at that time might have been folly. However, I
was going to give handlers and trainers a taste
of what a stick attack should be. I don’t know
if there had been a level of “gamesmanship”
circulating amongst the competitors but I was
approached several times, mainly by Police
Officers I have to say and given “advice” as to
how I should conduct the exercise for particular
dogs “for my own sake”. This is of course
fundamentally wrong. In the interest of fairness
the format should be the same for each dog,
it is only the timing of an attack which should
vary and I will explain why later. Suffice to say
I brought an element of doubt into the heads
of several dogs but quickly switched to allow a
successful outcome for the dog.
Later that year I judged the National
competition along with my good friend Dennis
Attard of West Yorkshire Police. I assembled the
competitors and gave them a briefing, paying
particular attention to the test of courage. When
advising them that I would be apportioning
24 The Service Dog

the bulk of the marks to the willingness of the
dog to engage the suspect, I was underlining
the fact that this exercise is a test of courage.
Some wrongly thought that this was to favour
the Malinois’ drive but this is simply not the case.
I have taken thousands of bites both here and
abroad and I can whole heartedly say that the
most devastating collision to date came from a
German Shepherd who knew how to use his
considerable frame.
So that’s the background, here’s my take on
the “Stick attack test of courage” and how I’ve
used it. Service dog trials are an excellent means
of grading a teams development in an number
of areas. However, handlers and dogs for that
matter, have been consistently sold short when
it comes to letting them know what their dog
will do when they are realistically threatened.
It is not a nice place to be when your dog fails
you for the first time in the heat of battle, so
why not explore the dogs character in a safe
environment. Those who have trained with me
will know that I like to train both realistically and
physically hard. That is not to say I ever train past
what I think the dog is capable of but I will stretch
them. The art is to recognise the point at which
the dog is reaching it’s limits and step back from
that to allow the dog to succeed. Everybody and
I mean everybody learns from it. Dog, handler,
trainer and/or decoy gain a snapshot of where
that dog is at that particular moment and it is
up to them to develop the way forward for that
team. Obviously not every training session is an
intense one as that inherits its own problems
such as over aggression, but it should form part
of a development program. It’s no coincidence
that at one point, three quarters of my shift
were Tactical Firearms handlers with dogs that
were completely reliable whatever the situation.
Now then, back to the timing of the attack.
Each dog, when approaching a decoy, will offer
signals, body language if you like that indicates
what the dog is feeling at that precise moment.

They may do this at a distance or close up. Some
of the higher drive dogs will sometimes flatten
their ears to their head and at that moment I
will up the ante because it’s at that moment the
dog is deciding to commit to the engagement.
Others will look at you wide eyed and pricked
eared. What I’m saying is that there are clues
out there that the dog is in a decision phase
and it’s at that point the decoy should press the
dog and force a decision. When that decision to
fight or flight is actually made will govern the
decoys next actions. A committed dog will collide
and bite the decoy and continue to do so until
commanded out. The decoy should continue to
engage the dog to explore the level at which the
dog will maintain the fight and then obey the
approaching handlers instructions. The dog that
shows avoidance and is not willing to engage
such a threat must therefore have that threat
reduced to a level acceptable to the dog. I will
often go into high pitched play mode or flee to
trigger prey drive (a recognised pressure reliever)
to allow the dog to recover. This is purely from
a training point of view. To continue to press a
dog that is plainly fearful and in avoidance is
nothing more than cruel and not to be tolerated.
Dogs that avoid are not all bad dogs, it’s just they
haven’t been exposed to that level of pressure
before. This can be seen in the abreaction - the
ability to recover composure quickly and re-enter
the contact. Some dogs take longer than others
and it is these dogs that need to be examined
more closely as to their suitability for service work.
The National Service Dog competition for this
year saw 19 competitors enter the final phase
of the trial - the manwork. I had been asked by
John Farrer of HMP Whitemoor to stand in as
stick man following a late withdrawal. I know
this made a few nervous but once again, those
who know me know I will not break a dog and
will switch to allow a successful outcome. My
brief from Judge PC Ali Todd (Metropolitan
Police) was to “test” the dogs, which allowed
me some freedom. Because of the safety factor
I was to wear a bite jacket. It has to be said that
dogs, more than handlers, become savvy to
competition bite work. To test a dog’s courage
they should be taken out of that comfort zone
and asked to deal with what’s in front of them.
To that end the exercise started with me entering
the field and instead of offering the usual
stimulus of bawling and shouting and therefore
putting the dog at ease, I remained perfectly
quiet until the dog was released. Closing the
ground between myself and the team provided
the handler with the sufficient need to release
the dog. Once the dog was released I entered
the phase previously described of assessing the
time at which to press the dog etc.
Quite a few of the dogs had commitment issues
and it is for those handlers to examine their
training or indeed their dogs suitability for such
work. Interestingly enough, I was approached
by a number of handlers and particularly those
whose dogs had not performed to expectation
and congratulated for a “real test” of their dogs.
They said it had given them food for thought
and something new to consider when training.
It is after all what we all crave, a fresh challenge
when training, no matter how many years in the
game. I have to say though that I encountered
some fantastic dogs on the day that gave me a
sound thrashing for daring to challenge them
and it is those dogs that quite rightly deserve
to be called a Service Dog.
Graeme Jones
ACPO Inst
MBIPDT
SEK Decoy

South Wales Police Dog Section Celebrates
its 50th Anniversary
Media Open Day: Thursday 19th August
The SWP Dog Section has celebrated its 50th
birthday on the 23rd of August 2010.
To celebrate this landmark event, we invited
all to visit our Dog Training School and discover
the outstanding achievements of the Section
over the past 50 years.
Visitors would have had the opportunity to see
the dogs in action, and to meet the Dog Trainers
and Handlers currently involved in the pioneering
work of one of the UK’s most respected and
influential Training Schools.
Our VIP for the event was s 13-year-old Lois Fish
- a young lady who proudly represents the future
of the SWP Dog Section with her enthusiasm
and determination to become a Handler. Senior
Officers were also be in attendance.
The Open Day took place on Thursday 19th
August, 10am - 12pm. A great day was had
by everyone. Claire.Barton@south-wales.pnn.
police.uk.
Award winning company, specialising in bespoke and
proven designed tactical garments and equipment.
Stock items also available.
Khakis Blues N 2's Ltd
Unit 59 Business Resource Centre, Knowsley Business Park, Admin Road, Knowsley, Merseyside L33 7TX
Tel: 0151 545 0985 Fax: 0151 545 0985
sales@kb2s.co.uk sallyann@kb2s.co.uk www.kb2s.co.uk
The Service Dog 27

South Wales Police
Officers paws for thought as they judge
children’s colouring competition
South Wales Police officers faced a new challenge
this week- as they chose the top dogs of their
children’s Canine Constable Competition.
Handlers from the Force’s Dog Section selected
two winners from the hundreds of entries
received, with the help of Real Radio’s Barry the
Bassett Hound.
The competition was launched to celebrate
the Dog Section’s 50th anniversary in August.
Children across South Wales were asked to colour
in their own Canine Constable, and state how
they think police dogs keep South Wales safe.
After much deliberation from the officers and
Barry, the two lucky winners were announced as
7-year-old Elle Davies-Williams from Aberdare,
and 9-year-old Cerys Johnson from Pencoed.
Elle, who named her canine constable Hero,
said “Hero loves to help his owner to track
down criminals and sniff out bad drugs and
keep people safe”. Cerys stated that her police
dog Carly “has a good nose and can sniff drugs
and many, many more”.
The girls will receive a special VIP visit to the
Dog Section during the October half term.
Inspector Mark Hobrough said: “The dog has
become a vital and loyal asset of the policing
team, and continues to play a crucial role in
helping us to keep our communities safe. We’ve
received some fantastic pictures, and I would like
to say thank you to all the children who entered
the competition. I look forward to meeting our
winners Elle and Cerys later this month.”
Runners Up:
Eryn Aston (age 5, Pontyclun) and Canine Constable Sherlock
Ethan Carter (age 10, Swansea) and Canine Constable Tyson
Caitlin Davies (age 10, Maesteg) and Canine Constable Radar
Lloyd Gunner (age 5, Nantymoel) and Canine Constable Sonic
Sion Wells (age 5, Llanelli) and Canine Constable Llew
Sara Wells (age 8, Llanelli) and Canine Constable Dylan y Ddraig
28 The Service Dog

WINNER
Elle Davies-Williams
WINNER
Cerys Johnson
The Service Dog 29

A Canine Soliloquy
I wish my owner training me would use some
common sense, It’s odd to find an, otherwise,
quite lucid man so dense, although he knows my
hearing is acute beyond a doubt, each time he
gives me a command, he feels obliged to shout,
He’s well aware, I tell him long before he ever
knows, that my mistress is returning from the
market where she goes, he even brags to all his
friends about me when they meet. “This dog can
hear a feather fall from fifteen hundred feet.”
But once he has me on the lead, he soon forgets
his boast, He screams out “heel!” and strangers
think I’m deafer than a post.
Another thing, why do these “trainers” all seem
to agree, another language must be used to train
the likes of me? Exaggerate and emphasise, for
instance don’t say “Sit !” screech “ssittarr” with
a double ess (and don’t forget to spit!) a sitar
means an instrument from India to me and what
that’s got to do with sitting down, I fail to see.
Why not say, “Sit”? the meaning’s clear and
I’ll drop my posterior. If he can hear it, so can I,
my hearing’s far superior.
Another strange anomaly is meaningless and
gross. He yells out “heel” and checks me hard,
then all at once screams “close” although I
understand his drift, I still think it’s a shame, that
he feels he should use two words which mean
the very same, why can’t he learn consistency,
he doesn’t have a clue, why waste his time with
several words, when one alone will do? He sticks
a dumbbell in my mouth then roars, “hold” in
my ear, then “Take!” yelled in fortissimo, to
make his meaning clear. But when he throws
the thing away, this aggravating wretch, does
he tell me to “hold” or “Take” it then? No, he
bawls “Fetch !”. Then cannot understand why
I don’t streak off down the floor. The simple
reason is I’ve never heard the word before. So
then he starts to teach me “Fetch” I try with all
my heart, but still I can’t see why he didn’t use
“Fetch” from the start. The words for “Down”
(“Flat” “Platz” or “Lie”) I’ve learned them
all - child’s play, but, once again, he has to slip
another word in, “Stay”.
The first time that I heard this word, the
meaning wasn’t clear, so I lay quiet - acting
dumb, as if I couldn’t hear, It turned out I was
right this time, which only goes to prove, that
this word isn’t meant to mean a thing, except
“don’t move”.
Now if you just say “Down” and I obey the
word you say. I can’t be moving anywhere, so
what’s the point of “Stay”? I’ve since discovered
what it does mean - (ludicrous but true) it’s what
a “trainer” tells himself he wants his dog to do.
The three positions in which it is possible to
stay, are “Down”, and “Sit”, (the common
ones) and “Stand,” (the show ring way). As
each one has its own command, specific to
position, it proves that “stay’s” a “trainer’s”
word- used for self erudition. Used simply to
remind themselves without a lot of fuss, exactly
what they are attempting to achieve with us.
Because they are the way they are, simplicity
they hate. They’ve introduced another word,
which means the same thing “Wait”.
It means “do nothing” just the same, it’s meant
to be ignored, and trainers use it on themselves
to stop them feeling bored. When taking me on
exercise my owner walks quite straight, but when
he does “obedience” he gets in such a state,
left foot turned in (to miss my feet) left elbow
tucked in tight, forearm pressed in, wrist cocked
hand flat, and he looks a sorry sight. I used to
feel embarrassed when I took part in this game,
then noticed with amusement that they all walk
just the same, they shout commands they wave
their arms and learn a language new, that’s all to
do with “training dogs” plain English just won’t
do. If dogs can tell by sound alone, whose feet
approach from town? almost three hundred
yards away, Can’t they tell “Sit” from “Down”?
There is no need to emphasise, distort the
30 The Service Dog

word, or shout, just speak and then manipulate
and we shall work it out.
Consistency and repetition’s all we need from
you. Then you will realise how well your “stupid”
dog can do. There is no need for sterner tones
to make your dog obey, a word is just a signal
to us canines anyway, if we can hear it and it’s
clear, we don’t have any choice we do it or
we’re made to, there’s no need to raise your
voice. Eventually we’ll learn the word and what
we have to do, and if you’ve never raised your
voice, there’ll be no reason to.
If on the other hand you always shout to make
your dog obey then you will always have to
shout - you’ve trained him in that way. Nor do
you need to wave a toy to make us walk at heel
just check us gently when we stray then praise
us - that’s the deal. We’ll soon walk naturally
at heel, if you stay natural too. there is no need
to wave that toy the whole time like you do.
Another thing we cannot comprehend is why
you squeak, high pitched, as though we’d never
understand you when you speak.
Dogs do not learn from tones of voice, ‘though
some folk think this true. We work on words
that you repeat, whilst showing us what to do.
The words themselves don’t matter much as
long as you’re persistent, the tone is immaterial
- but - DO try to be consistent. Don’t deafen us
or baffle us with different command, just give it
quietly to us so we all can understand. Perhaps
you’ve never given any thought to what you do.
Well, think about it now, but from a canine
point of view.
Et Canes et Homines Docemus
Sam Perrie

B.S.P.C.A Trials
On Saturday the 3rd of July 2010.1 P.O Alastair
Tod and Graham Shaw (both full time instructors
at the Metropolitan Police Dog School (( Keston)
attended H.M. Prisons College, Newbold Revel.
Where we had the privilege of judging the
B.P.S.C.A Working Trails 2010, The facilities and
the areas provided for us to set up our tests were
first class. The weather was exceptionally kind to
us with glorious sunshine throughout the day. In
fact, maybe too sunny for Graham’s strawberry
blonde complexion.
There were 3 elements to the mornings
proceedings. I judged the obedience section.
Graham judged the Agility in a separate area.
Prison Officer Pat McLaughlin j u d g e d t h e
property search competition. With 18 dogs and
handlers the teams competing time was of the
essence. The teams competed in number order
entering the main arena for the obedience which
consisted of heelwork (normal, fast and slow pace
with the halt in the sit), Recall (70 paces from
the handler with the dog left in the sit), Retrieve
(handler’s own article) and finally the Speak
On Command (leaving the dog in a controlled
position, handlers choice, and facing the Dog
4 Paces away), They were given feedback on
their exercises and then proceeded to the agility
area. The teams performed a series of 10 jumps
under full control, Graham and I felt that the
general standard of control and agility was at a
very high level. Both Graham and I have judged
and competed at a National level in Police Dog
Trails and we felt that the standard displayed
by the competitors (many of whom are doing
this all in their own time) was at or above the
levels displayed at the National Police Dog Trials.
Congratulations to all concerned. The winner
of the Obedience Trophy (The Presidents Cup)
was awarded to Damien 0 Donnell with his Dog
Clive. The Agility Trophy(The Scruff Trophy) was
awarded to Gary Garner with his dog Xena who
did not drop a mark throughout this whole phase
of the competition, An exemplary performance.
After lunch Graham and joined forces to judge
the criminal work phase of the competition„
We both marked each round and the average
between our scores was given as the final mark.
\\that was good from our perspective was that we
didn’t vary much with our markings which were a
couple of points either way at best. The tests were
as follows Chase and Detain, Discontinuation
of the chase by either a recall, stop or standoff
(handler’s choice), Stick Attack and Gun Attack
Again the standard displayed by the dog and
32 The Service Dog

ls 2010 Report
handler teams was to be commended. There
were some excellent rounds with the criminal
work Trophy going to Mick Tustain and his dog
Ike from Nanstead Parks Police.
The element of the test that caused some
issues to a number of the teams was the Stick
Attack. The criminal was Graham Jones from
Cleveland Police. Graham is a very experienced
and qualified helper who armed with a clacky
bamboo stick came on to the field in a bite
jacket as opposed to a sleeve that a lot of dogs
are used to. He was passive standing with his
arms out stretched. The dog was sent and as it
approached he exploded into life threatening the
dog with the stick running at it and shouting.
The arm was not presented in the usual manner
for the dog. If the dog did not engage the
criminal he was briefed to reduce the threat and
allow the dog to bite. A number of dogs were
phased by this test and it highlighted the need
to vary and progress the type of experiences
and training we expose our dogs too in order to
allow them to cope with a greater threat. This
is particularly pertinent for the service dog who
do not know what they will be exposed to at
work. With greater confidence and experience
for the dog to draw on the dog the dog will be
more efficient in the workplace we would like
to thank the organizers for an exceptionally well
run event. We were made most welcome and
the hospitality was excellent. We would also
like to thank our stewards and criminals who
did a first class job all day. We would also like
to commend the handlers on their turnout and
the way that they received their feedback. Both
Graham and I would particularly like to draw
attention to the organizer of the event Mr Ron
Stanley. Ron at 80years of age both organized
and competed in the event. His dog was a credit
to him coming 3rd in the B.P.S.C.A. Working
trails 3rd in the obedience and criminal sections
of the competition. His level of commitment,
enthusiasm and fitness is of the highest level he
is a credit both to himself and Heath Working
Dogs who he represents.
Our congratulations go to the winners of the
respective trophies’. I would urge more service
dog handlers to participate in this event in the
future. I am acutely aware that restrictions are
put on handlers who wish to attend Dog Trials.
However without competition standards will
drop and without testing dogs in open forum
shortfalls in training will not be exposed and
worked on.
The Service Dog 33

B.P.S.A. Service Dog
This year’s competition was once again a resounding success for the BPSCA. The efforts put in
by the committee paid off once again making it a competition to be remembered by everyone.
There was a fantastic turnout considering the cutbacks of many Dog Services. It was also nice to
see old and new alike, showing their skills with their faithful friend. This year there were enough
entrants to have drug search which our president Steve Allen MBE had the pleasure of judging.
If you are interested in the dog trials and would like to know more about them. The schedules
and methods of work along with the trials rules can be found in the events column.
This Year’s Competitors and Draw Number:
1) Mark Adams with dog Tyson G.S.D. Tyson
has qualified CDEX,UDEX,WDEX in working
dog trials. They won the Yorkshire Service Dog
2009 and also the BPSCA associate member with
the highest score and only one point difference
between him and the BPSCA trial winner.
2) Mick Tustain with dog Ike Malinois. This team
have won the service dog competition twice .
In 2006 and 2009.
3) Gary Wright. We have no information on Gary
4) Arthur Rivers with dog Blitz GSD. Arthur
won them Mick Smith Trophy in 2005 with his
old dog Oscar
5) John Warbutton with dog Jaeger Rottweiler
John is a licensing officer for the MPGS dogs.
This is in their second trial.
6) PC Dave Clark with dog Alf GSD. Dave is with
Parks police and is a regular competitor in this
competition. He was second in 2007, Service
Dog of the year in 2008 and came third in 2009.
7) Gary Garner with dog Xena GSD. Gary is a
serving police officer in the highway policing
unit, dog training is purely a hobby. Xena is a
three-year old bitch. This is her third appearance
at the service dog. Gary and Xena won the agility
trophy in 2009.
8) Jim Schmidt with dog Simba GSD. They won
the BPSCA working trials in 2008 .
9) Guy Morgan with dog Buck GSD. This is their
third time at the service dog.
10) Arthur Smith with dog Kane. This is the
first time he has competed in the service dog.
11) Ron Stanley with dog Duke GSD. Ron is an
ex royal air force police handler and has been
competing with Duke since 2002 with quite a bit
of success. Duke has been working on Emmerdale
as Aaron Dingle’s dog Clyde since 2009.
12) Leslie Appleyard with dog Brodie Malinois
GSD cross. Lesley is a regular competitor that
obedience shows with two of her dogs and are
at H WD trials.
13) Prison Officer Carl Young with dog Mido GSD
Carl won the Prison Service National Dog trials
in 2007, runner up in 2006 and third in 2005.He
also came second in the Service Dog 2009.This is
the second time he has competed in the service
dog competition. Mido is his new young dog.
14) Damien O’Donnell with dog Clive Malinois
Damien trains with Heath working dogs and is
the bite work instructor.
15) Bernie McCourt with dog Texas GSD. Texas
is only 18 months old. Bernie is a dog handler
with the Northern Ireland prison service and is
a regular competitor in the service dog trials.
16) Dave Robinson with dog Babu GSD/Malinois
This is their third time at the service dog
competition.
17) John Davidson with dog Dennis Malinois.
John Dennis won the Victor Ludorum coat in
2007.
18) Felicity Ashford with dog Den Malinois.
Den is 18 months old. Felicity is new member
to our association.
19) Alan Robinson with dog Roscoe GSD. Roscoe
is 22 months old. Alan is a dog handler in the
Northern Ireland prison service and is a regular
competitor at the service dog trials with many
trophies to show for it.
34 The Service Dog

og Of The Year 2010
Drugs
20) PC Jones (Durham police)
21) Martin Peacock (Heath WD)
22) Damien Donnell (Heath WD)
23) George Guest (Heath WD)
24) Officer dog handler Paul Bridgeman (HM
prison service)
25) Joanne Coorsey (Heath WD)
26) NWAST (HM prison service)
Judges and Stewards
Obedience
Judge: PC Todd from the Met Police
Steward: Niall McDowell HM Prison Service
Agility
Judge: PC Shaw from the Met Police
Steward: John Farrar HM Prison Service
Man Work
Judges: PC Todd and PC Shaw from the Met Police
Steward: Niall McDowell HM Prison Service
Property Search
Judge: Pat McLaughlin HM Prison Service
Steward: Steve Barker MPGS
Drug Search
Judge: Governor Steve Allen M.B.E. HM prison
service
Criminal Work
Chase & Attack : Paul Nicholson
Recall or Stand Off: Alan Wilson
Stick Attack : Graham Jones
Gun Attack : John Farrar
Trophies
Trophies to compete for:
BPSCA Service Dog of the Year Coat & Trophy
Editors Cup for the dog & handler scoring
most points.
Reserve Champion Cup for runner up
Trophy for third place
BPSCA Working Trials Coat & Mick Smith Trophy
for winner
Trophies for second & third place
Presidents Cup for first place in Obedience
Zak & Scruff Trophy for first place in Agility
Neil Yates Trophy for first place in Work
Secretaries Cup for first place in Property Search
Trials Results
Service Dog of the year:
1st Mick Tustain with “Ike” Malinois Wandsworth
Parks Police with 410 points
2nd Carl Young with “Mido” GSD HMP
Whitemoor with 392 points.
3rd Alan Robinson (NIPS) with dog Roscoe GSD
with 387 points.
BPSCA Working Trials Championships 2010:
1st Gary Garner Heath Working Dogs with Xena
GSD 414 points also the winner of the Victor
Ludorum Editors Cup for the dog and handler
gaining the most points.
2nd Damian O’Donnell Heath Working Dogs
with dog “Clive” Malinois 400.5 points.
3rd Ron Stanley Heath Working Dogs with Duke
GSD 392 points.
Trophy Winners:
Criminal Work - Neil Yates Trophy
1st M Tustain and Ike
2nd G Garner and Xena
3rd R Stanley and Duke
Obedience -
1st D O’Donnell and Clive
2nd C Young and Mido
3rd R Stanley and Duke
Agility -
1st G Garner and Xena
2nd A Rivers and Blitz
3rd M Tustain and Ike

Agility
1 st
2 nd 3 rd
Drug Search
1 st 2 nd

Criminal Work
1 st 2 nd 3 rd
Obedience
1 st 2 nd 3 rd

Property
1 st 2 nd 3 rd
Service Dog
of The Year
38 The Service Dog
1 st 2 nd 3 rd

Working Dog
Championship
1 st 2 nd 3 rd
Winner of
The Editor's
Cup for
Overall
Highest
Score
The Service Dog 39

British Police and Services Canine Association
APPLICATION FOR ASSOCIATE MEMBERSHIP
Mr/Mrs/Ms/Miss……Initial…… Surname…………………………………………………………
Occupation:…………………………………………………………………………………………..
Address:………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………
Town: …………………………………………………………………………………………………
County:………….……………………………………………………………………………………
Country: ………….………………… Post Code:…………………………………………………..
Tel No. (Daytime)………………………… (Evening)……………………………………………...
E-mail: ………………………………………………………………………………………..………
Signed:…………………………………Date:……………………………………………………....
PROPOSED BY:
Full Members Name…………………………………………………………
Membership Number…………
Expire Date:…………………………………………………..
Associate Membership: (*Delete as applicable)
£15.00 per annum*
£50.00 per five years*
Please make cheques payable, in sterling, to B.P.S.C.A.
Please forward to: The Membership Secretary
British Police and Services Canine Association
Mr J Warbutton
6 Meadway Crescent
Selby, North Yorkshire, YO8 4FX
Tel: 07841 472 542
email: johnbpsca@aol.com
More information available at www.bpsca.com
40 The Service Dog

British Police and Services Canine Association
APPLICATION FOR MEMBERSHIP
Mr/Mrs/Ms/Miss……Initial……..Surname…………………………………………………………
Address:………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………
Town: …………………………………………………………………………………………………
County:………….……………………………………………………………………………………
Country: ………….………………… Post Code:…………………………………………………..
Tel No. (Daytime)………………………… (Evening)……………………………………………...
E-mail: ………………………………………………………………………………………..………
Name Force/Unit:.....................................................................................................................
Rank (where applicable):..........................................................................................................
Specialised Service Dates........................................................................................................
Course Qualifications (may be required):..................................................................................
Signed:....……………………………………................................. Dated:…………………………
Membership: (* Delete as applicable)
£15.00 per annum*
£50.00 per five years*
Please make cheques payable, in sterling, to B.P.S.C.A.
Please forward to:
The Membership Secretary
British Police and Services Canine Association
Mr J Warbutton
6 Meadway Crescent
Selby, North Yorkshire, YO8 4FX
Tel: 07841 472 542
email: johnbpsca@aol.com
More information available at www.bpsca.com
The Service Dog 41