# civilian SAR certification



## eggo520 (Oct 28, 2007)

Sooo I just heard that NNDDA is no longer allowing civilians to certify for cadaver search. Anyone have any ideas about other organizations to go to? I know of a few but I'm just wondering if there are some I haven't thought of.


----------



## Legend14 (Apr 9, 2009)

NAPWDA - North American Police and Working Dog Association
NASAR - National Association for Search and Rescue
NASDN - North American Search Dog Network
NSDA - National Search Dog Alliance


----------



## eggo520 (Oct 28, 2007)

Thanks!







Do you happen to know what certification through each of these is like? I hear the NAPWDA test is very strenuous...any thoughts?


----------



## NancyJ (Jun 15, 2003)

The NSDA cert is being beta tested. I think they have some stuff in there that is making some folks cringe; something about poop. I can control my dogs leg lifting but not so sure about his butt.

LETS has a cadaver certification as does IPWDA. I met Kathy Holbert with LETS at our Rebmann/Koenig seminar and everyone on our team really liked her and felt she gave us advice that was very effective. 

My dog certified last year through NAPWDA first pass. We are coming up on our next test when we can schedule it, which can be hard! For 5 dogs, the testing took 2 full days. Of the 5 dogs, one did not pass. 3 of the 5 had prior certifications. Standards are on the web page. It was a rigorous test for a first time tester, and the evaluator can choose whether you work the water problems via shoreline and / or boat. 

She made us do both but we sometimes field calls with their team and she said she wanted the boatwork documented in our certification records. So in that regard, we may have had it a bit tougher. By the same token we did not have to search inside the vehicle but you *might*, but the building problem was a doozy with one source on a hot metal wall of a 2 story metal building with the scent dropping down on top of a front end loader. We had to work it out and explain what we were doing.

From what I understand though it is considered by NAPWDA a MINIMUM that any police dog doing cadaver should be able to do. The tests are very well described on the web page. There was no intention to "mess us up" or "be mean" and in our case, sources ranged from a q-tip dipped in fluid to a quart jar of something and included bone, tissue, fluids.

Remember this is a test for finding cadaver under different situations and you still need to get, whenever possible, acess to bigger scent sources since it is so different to work.


----------



## ladylaw203 (May 18, 2001)

All police k9 organizations have standards that are the minimum . That is why we are in existence. NO organization is trying to set someone up to fail. The problem that I have with most orgs with regard to HRD cert is that few are realstic and only use small amounts which does not test the thresholds of the dog. The flip side is that few folks can get the proper aids. Folks just have to realize that thresholds are a real issue with regard to a dog being fully operational and need to have that in mind when deploying if they have never exposed their dog to large amounts


----------



## NancyJ (Jun 15, 2003)

We learned at our seminar that even pooling training aids from everyone to make a large scent picture just is not the same; we need the real thing.

That said, we will take off work and drive for a few hours if we can get access before a body is moved. 

How do you feel about working old graves to simulate shallow graves in the 8 year plus range? I was still amazed at the large scent pool from an old cemetery.

Oh, regarding the NAPWDA test. To be honest after the first segment I relaxed and felt it was more of a learning experience than a test; AFTER each segment we discussed good/bad/suggestions for improvement.


----------



## eggo520 (Oct 28, 2007)

Another question for you guys. One of our team members suggested at training yesterday that our team consider setting our own standards, which would probably mean pooling several of those set by national police organizations, then train our dogs to meet those. Then, rather than seek NAPWDA, LETS or other national certification, we would bring in an outside evaluator to sign off that our dogs do meet these standards. What this would do is save our team members travel time and costs to seek national certification. We would still be GEMA licensed and have our FEMA NIMS courses. Thoughts on whether this is a good idea? Nancy, does your team require all members to have national certs?


----------



## NancyJ (Jun 15, 2003)

We do have internal standards / testing and did as you say [keep them in line with police and NIMS standards] but do strongly recommend external certifications as well.

Taking off and spending money to travel cross country to test is not in most of our personal budgets (time or money), particularly since we use PTO for searches, team events, etc.


----------



## NancyJ (Jun 15, 2003)

You know another thing that bites [and I see why it has to be this way] is you cannot pay an evaluator to come out other than to cover their expenses. At least not NAPWDA - not sure how NASAR does it.

So these folks are, like Renee must have been, running all over the country taking time away from their family, job [if not retired], etc to work their assess of setting up and evaluating tests. 

Really no room to complain about how hard they are to schedule. .......I hope they just continue to add Master Trainer / Evaluators .... I know they added some last year.


----------



## ladylaw203 (May 18, 2001)

> Quote: Then, rather than seek NAPWDA, LETS or other national certification, we would bring in an outside evaluator to sign off that our dogs do meet these standards. What this would do is save our team members travel time and costs to seek national certification. We would


Here is the problem with that. First of all, do NOT make up your own.. The standards of nndda,napwda and lets have been tested in court and held. Anytime folks start making up their own standards you throw the door open for the defense to try and impeach them. Do not re invent the wheel. If you are going to do this, NNDDA standards are the most difficult if you add the options. You also must find someone with a "resume" to be your certifying offiical outside of your org. This inhouse stuff is not impressive and has a built in conflict of interest
nasar is useless. Certifying a dog on grams for any field is a waste of time


----------



## ladylaw203 (May 18, 2001)

The main problem is that we certifying officials are cops with jobs. napwda will use other folks aids. I will NOT. I cannot testify in court as to what in the heck I have certified a dog on if it is not,um,obvious. BAD idea. So, I cannot fly with aids,and do not have the time to drive all over creation. The problem is that folks are going to have to be willing to go to the certifying official and not expect them to come to them. Just that simple. cops come here from all over the country to be certified in all fields. The thing tha aggravated us is that the civilians complained that they could not get off of work, blah blah but let them get a call to deploy and they would walk there. priorities


----------



## eggo520 (Oct 28, 2007)

It's interesting what I'm hearing from you guys in regards to expectations of evaluators and, in turn, those who wish to certify. If Renee was getting all kinds of ridiculous requests to take off work and travel for several hours to certify teams, then I can see why NNDDA shut out civilians. And yes, the problem with sources is a significant one.

What's interesting for me is that our team has always had the mindset that we will have to travel *TO* an evaluator to get our dogs certified. This is why both me and our director have gone to Texas from Georgia to certify with Renee. I would never expect someone to come to us unless we're paying them, which as Nancy mentioned doesn't always work. What is frustrating is that our area already had very few evaluators available (Renee was the closest for NNDDA) and now we're even more limited. I understand there is a NAPWDA tester in Charleston, but I have my reservations about the test (and other tests as well). It's just unsettling to not be completely OK with whatever option we decide to take. I'm lucky though...I won't have to recertify Holly until next year


----------



## NancyJ (Jun 15, 2003)

I have heard differing opinions on both tests -- some say NAPWDA is harder (it certainly has harder requirements than the basic NNDDA test) some say NNDDA is harder 

Bottom line - has NAPWDA certification ever been discounted in court as unuitable? IF I have a viable certification from them AND training records showing maintenance of proper training, reliablity rates, false alert rates, etc. then I am not going to worry about "who* has done the test, particularly if they are a recognized entity such as those listed above. 

What ever test I might pass on a one day event still must be backed up by scrupulous record keeping and adequate training history.

NIMS credentialing only llists NAPWDA, USPCA, NASAR and IPWDA and does not list LETS or NNDDA 

Now, what are the reservations concerning the NAPWDA test?

The only concern I would have is threshold levels which, I don't think NNDDA puts in writing in their standards about the size of aids except in the "options" section

For threshold levels, that is why we document in training scenarios and searches the approximate size of the scent source 

Conversely the NNDDA test does not specify use of any aids less than 3 months and most teams train with old stuff. Having trained on fresh tissue, it is in fact something the dog needs to have in their "catologue" as much as they need to have "big"

The NNDDA test also is not completey in synch with SWGDOG recommendations either.

Concerning travel - well I am certainly not one of those who complained - but have work a regular job and have limits to just how much PTO I can take and how much I can travel. Not all of us have the deep pockets that some have. Sorry if my priorities include not losing my job that provides the income that allows me to do this and doing silly things like paying the mortgage.


----------



## DFrost (Oct 29, 2006)

"is not completey in synch with SWGDOG recommendations either."

Which is why I'd really like to see a national test, based on SWGDOG recommendations, available. I don't agree with everything SWGDOG proposes, but I am in agreement with the majority of it in all phases of detection work.

DFrost


----------



## ladylaw203 (May 18, 2001)

> Quote: The NNDDA test also is not completey in synch with SWGDOG recommendations either.


SWGDOG does not impress me. The first set of standards were given to me and after I critiqued them as totally ridiculous, they were trashed and they started over. I have not looked to see if they have fixed them. For example, certifying a dog in water cert on blood.... Um, that would be interesting to set up.... double blinds. please. that works with pharmacuticals but not worth a hoot for scent dogs. I could go on....... they were laughable. Hopefully, they have gotten it together. 
The problem I have with NAPWDA is that unless they have changed it, one brings their own aids. First, I think that is a bad idea because the dog has been working on the stuff and secondly, unless it is VERY obvious as to what it is,I could not testify in court as to what the heck I certified the dog on. I can see a possible problem with that. Just things to think about. Nothing is perfect. 
As far as that NIMS stuff, whomever stuck those orgs in there does not even know what orgs are out there. We just have not bothered to tell them. I guess we should as NNDDA is the largest in the nation by many many members....
USPCA does not do civilians last time I checked


----------



## ladylaw203 (May 18, 2001)

> Quote:
> Which is why I'd really like to see a national test, based on SWGDOG recommendations, available. I don't agree with everything SWGDOG proposes, but I am in agreement with the majority of it in all phases of detection


The rest was not too shabby. They really dropped the ball on the cadaver though. I guess all of those PHDs did not realize that blood was water soluble.......


----------



## ladylaw203 (May 18, 2001)

> Quote: Sorry if my priorities include not losing my job that provides the income that allows me to do this and doing silly things like paying the mortgage.


Well, here is the flip side of that. All of we certifying officials are cops. To travel to certify folks involves burning our precious vacation to do it. We are not paid for this privilege either. So, sorry if our priorities include not to losing all of our vacation and we want to pay our mortgages too


----------



## NancyJ (Jun 15, 2003)

I do see your point about blood being a "possible" aid even though it was not directly referenced - who would use it though?

NIMS credentialing was not limited to volunteers, hence USPCA listed. SWGDOG, PhD's? There are some but a lot of police representation on SWGDOG on the Membership page. Any attempt at standardization is going to be rocky and painful.

http://www.swgdog.org/


The NNDDA tests are 2/3. 67% correct on the basic test, 1 false alert, correct? But then has add on optional tests.

NAPWDA requires 11/12 correct. 92% with 1 false alert total

Then the other tests ........

There is definitely a need for standardization.

Our test had aids supplied by multiple people so we had to test on aids we had not trained on in the past. 

----------------

I any test there are going to be pros and cons for each test. Given availability I think one should certify on as many tests as possible but keep the test in perspective. Having seen enough dogs who have passed one test or the other, I know that a cert is only a very small part of the picture and not necessarily indicitave of a handler who knows squat.

-----------------

I agreed up front - I don't believe cadaver dog handlers think YOU should have to travel unpaid anymore than we should have to burn up even more of our PTO and time to travel 1000 miles to test.


----------



## DFrost (Oct 29, 2006)

Renee, I think it would be worth your while to review the newer SWGDOG standards. I agree there are some areas that need work, or in some instances fairly generic. I also think they have the making a some pretty good certification standards. There are quite a few respected trainers from police, SAR even the private sector on the committee. Sometimes the "science" needs to recognize this is dog training. All-in-all, I think they are doing a credible job. I agree standardization is going to be rocky and painful. I also feel the reason for that is mostly; ego, a resistance to change and for some, they know they can't meet real standards. 

DFrost


----------



## ladylaw203 (May 18, 2001)

I am aware of who is on SWGDOG. I was asked from the very beginning and turned them down. They now have representatives from other police orgs including NNDDA. As I said, all looked pretty good with the exception of the cadaver standards., However, a LARGE amount of our tax dollars has gone into this,travel, motels etc etc ad infinitum and now according to someone on the board they do not now, nor have they ever intended on becoming a national standard. They are simply trying to advise us. Hummm, really? Things have changed. Again, I do not care for the money that has been spent and very little accomplished. They have come up with nothing that is not already in existence various places and have blown a lot of our money doing it. There is more to it than meets the eye....


----------



## ladylaw203 (May 18, 2001)

> Quote:I do see your point about blood being a "possible" aid even though it was not directly referenced - who would use it though?


That was in the original SWGDOG water cert that I was addressing. Blood is water soluble and not a viable aid to be used in water., Not on this planet anyway


----------



## eggo520 (Oct 28, 2007)

Nancy, my reservations with NAPWDA stem purely from stories I have heard about how the tests are set up: the hot wall and the front end loader, the Q-tip dipped in fluid then placed in a vehicle...it just gives me the impression that the NAPWDA test is horribly unrealistic. Maybe I am just hearing the worst and not giving it enough credit? I am certainly willing to give it a try, but I also don't want someone to tell me that my dog is worthless because she couldn't pinpoint the exact location of a dry rib bone swinging from the rafters of a barn (or something equally ridiculous).


----------



## NancyJ (Jun 15, 2003)

I think what I did like about it was that it forced to train in scenarios we don't often see but would give a good picture of our dog working scent, us being able to help our dog with a challenging unknown problem, having the dog work in unusual situations on unstable surfaces, ignoring animal remains, having control in a detailing situation [vehicles], working a high hide [which I realize, once again is not the norm] 

I found that it was as much about questioning me "what is your dog doing", "hmmm what do you think is going on here"

Even with the cert, we decided we needed more work on scatter and shallow graves - 

with the scatter, one of the things I got at our seminar was to get my dog doing multiple finds with no reward until we got to the end because the ball at each find would require me to calm and refocus him each time and without it he would search even harder to find everything anticipating the final reward. 

With the shallow graves, finding out we need to let the dog alone and just give them time to work it out. 

Same thing - we need more work with river search training because that is where our most difficult water callouts have been [think barely navigable in a jon boat, not a real river]

Little sources to me are often easier than the big ones too. You get a big scent pool [and yes we do that as often as we can] and there is much more work to pinpoint source. I have not had any problems with alerting at some low threshold by mainly training with small, though. Maybe because we mix in big and we always go to source.


----------



## ladylaw203 (May 18, 2001)

> Quote:Maybe I am just hearing the worst and not giving it enough credit? I am certainly willing to give it a try, but I also don't want someone to tell me that my dog is worthless because she couldn't pinpoint the exact location of a dry rib bone swinging from the rafters of a barn (or something equally ridiculous).


I think part of the problem with most orgs is that few folks have the proper sources,so you wind up with this. NAPWDA will use the sources of those they are certifying and typically, folks do not have great training aids. Also, I could be wrong,but I do not think the certifying officials for USPCA and NAPWDA have to have expertise in the field that they are certifying in. So some are kind of putting things out like they would be doing for a narc dog. And yes,that would be pretty ridiculous because it is not realistic. 
perhaps you can get with folks who have certified with them in the past and pick and choose where you go


----------



## NancyJ (Jun 15, 2003)

I would look at the standards for the various organizations; it appears NAPWDA has similar to NNDDA; I know our Master Trainer had a long career as a K9 handler and was a Master Trainer in NARC before cadaver but has been doing cadaver for at least 6 years that I know of [as long as I have known her] and, now retired, has thrown herself into this particular topic with gusto.

USPCA is kind of a moot point, as now is NNDDA. So your choices are limited. My take is test to what you can and train so that you cold confidently pass everyones test [even those you cannot take] and more. 

I think a LOT of GA folks are NNDDA so that is interesting what to do. I would also be getting up with those folks and see what they are doing.


----------



## eggo520 (Oct 28, 2007)

> Originally Posted By: Nancy JI would look at the standards for the various organizations; it appears NAPWDA has similar to NNDDA; I know our Master Trainer had a long career as a K9 handler and was a Master Trainer in NARC before cadaver but has been doing cadaver for at least 6 years that I know of [as long as I have known her] and, now retired, has thrown herself into this particular topic with gusto.
> 
> USPCA is kind of a moot point, as now is NNDDA. So your choices are limited. My take is test to what you can and train so that you cold confidently pass everyones test [even those you cannot take] and more.
> 
> I think a LOT of GA folks are NNDDA so that is interesting what to do. I would also be getting up with those folks and see what they are doing.


I think this is a great idea. You make a good point about having your dog ready for anyone's test, regardless of who is testing. I should look at it more like this! I have some pretty specific goals for my dog this year, and almost a full calendar year before we have to recert, so in the meantime I'll try to get in touch with some other GA people.


----------



## DFrost (Oct 29, 2006)

I can't speak for the others, however, there are specified levels of training and "time served" before becoming a certified trainer or judge with USPCA. It's a moot point though, you must be law enforcement to certify with USPCA.

DFrost


----------



## ladylaw203 (May 18, 2001)

> Quote: I can't speak for the others, however, there are specified levels of training and "time served" before becoming a certified trainer or judge with USPCA. It's a moot point though, you must be law enforcement to certify with USPCA.


I think they are the same with regard to once one is a certifying official ,one can do all fields. they may have changed it.

The main problem that all orgs have with regard to HRD is lack of proper training aids. That is universal. Something is going to have to ultimately be done if this country wants dogs that are fully operational


----------



## NancyJ (Jun 15, 2003)

NASAR is the one that let any certifying offical certify any discipline

Untl very recently NAPWDA only had two certifiying officials in Cadaver and now they have about 5. But for us it really does not matter WHO we certify with as long as they are recognized in Court. 

Here is the list of Master trainers
http://www.napwda.com/about/roster_master_trainer.phtml


The NAPWDA requirements seem long and complex. You have to go through all kinds of hoops to be a trainer and a trainer cannot certify anyone - not sure how one goes from trainer to master trainer.


----------



## DFrost (Oct 29, 2006)

From the USPCA website;

1. Applicant must be a member in good standing of the USPCA. Applicant must have handled or trained a police service dog that has obtained a PDI title in a recorded sanctioned USPCA certification trial.
2. Applicant must have judged a minimum of two (2) Regional Trials covering all phases of obedience, agility, box search, article search, and criminal apprehension.
3. A total of not less than thirty-five (35) K-9 teams must be judged over this period. This means thirty-five (35) teams in each phase

There are similar requirement for the other venues.

DFrost


----------



## ladylaw203 (May 18, 2001)

> Quote: The NAPWDA requirements seem long and complex. You have to go through all kinds of hoops to be a trainer and a trainer cannot certify anyone - not sure how one goes from trainer to master trainer.


That is good. And,believe me, I jumped through some hoops myself



> Quote: NASAR is the one that let any certifying offical certify any disci


NASAR is not a national police service dog organization. And USPCA is the one that I was thinking about


----------



## ladylaw203 (May 18, 2001)

Forgot. LETS also certifies civilians in HRD


----------



## NancyJ (Jun 15, 2003)

I mentioned LETS earlier in the thread and my positive impression of Kathy Holbrook

I would like to certify with them but it does require a 40 hour course first. I think I am all PTO'd out this year but may look into this. We have thought we would like to pull her in for some more training though.

http://www.letsk9professionals.org/cadaver.html


----------

