K9 unit

[paracowboy]

As a dog lover & trainer that's a BIG downer  for me. It's like putting down soldiers that have seen action, beacause they are "damaged" & their social re-incertion in mainstream society is difficult... I'm sure there's a better way to do things than what has been done before. The handlers ARE further "damaged" when they must leave their K9 behind and knowing they are put down after their period of service must be gut wrenching.

In my ideal world: a handler & his K9 are partners and should be treated as such, they train together, serve together & are demobilised together.

that's the beauty of it, here, though. We're using the Brit template, but we can deviate where we like. If we want to keep a dog and handler team together for years, we do so. If we want to allow Rover to retire, we do so. The dog I worked with was allowed to retire by court order, and lived his remaining years on a farm with his retiring human partner of the time. 

The Yanks found this to backfire, though, in Vietnam. Handlers sometimes became too attached to their partners and would collapse if Scrappy died, or would refuse to send Scooter into dangerous positions. So, we gotta find a happy medium. Too, many nations won't allow dogs into their borders, if they come from certain countries, due to risk of disease. So, often dogs are posted overseas for the rest of their life, because they aren't allowed back into their home country.

So, if we were to get dogs, we would have to look at the various regulations already governing them, and be sure we can meet those regs, both fiscally, and ethically. (I don't want to be following the German or Russian templates, for instance, as their treatment of dogs is inhumane, entirely, IMO.)

 

[Sapper41]

As much as it pains me to say I would say that the MP trade is the only full time place for Army K-9. The engineers looked into getting dogs but in the end it was decided that it wasn't feasible.

I have seen Croation MP dogs and various civilian contractors being used to search for explosives as part of force protection in Afghanistan and worked with Bosnian Army Mine Detecting Dogs in BiH.  In a civilian Demining setting dogs are used for instance in area reduction, meaning they save time and money by showing where the mines are and where they are not.  Dogs need to be rewarded daily to find explosives thus having a dog sitting in garrison would be a waste of money.  In Bosnia teams had to set up a test strip of unfused mines to reward the dog.  This is the same thing in my day job having to bump test our various gas detectors.  Also, if you match a dog and a handler you are going to burn out the member by sending him overseas every year.

My opinion is that while the MP's will have to work closely with the engineers for conducting explosive searches they are in the best position to employ the dog effectively on a 365 days a year basis (overseas or not).

Chimo!

PS: maybe this will make them earn their spec pay

 

 

[paracowboy]

 

Dogs need to be rewarded daily to find explosives thus having a dog sitting in garrison would be a waste of money. 

no more so than having sappers 'sitting in garrison'. Just as the troops in garrison train and pracice, so do the dogs and their handlers. Otherwise, how would they perform their duties for real, and how would they learn to incorporate themselves with other units?

In Bosnia teams had to set up a test strip of unfused mines to reward the dog.  This is the same thing in my day job having to bump test our various gas detectors.

  this is just a training issue. In the British model I'm experienced with, the dog would not always receive a "reward". Sometimes he didn't find the explosives in practice, just as he wouldn't in real life. For him, the value was in playing 'seek', and for the handler, it was in the training.

Also, if you match a dog and a handler you are going to burn out the member by sending him overseas every year.

which is why I advocate the British model again. The dog remains in theatre, handlers are switched around, or trained in situ. It also prevents the handler from becoming too attached to the animal, and suffering traumatically should the dog be killed in the line of duty.

My opinion is that while the MP's will have to work closely with the engineers for conducting explosive searches they are in the best position to employ the dog effectively on a 365 days a year basis (overseas or not).

certain K-9 functions are most clearly identified with MP duties, but others are more so with Infantry, and others yet with Engineers. This is why the Brits maintain the RVAC. A seperate trade, the members of which are trained to work with the animals in their many different types of tasks, and to teach the required skill sets to members of other trades.

 

[jranrose]

I also have very limited knowlege on the topic. But I see a good solution. Better co-operation between the Military and RCMP. We have many things in common. Between training animals (Horses for the Lord Strathcona's vs. musical ride and dogs for the MP's), the PRT, CP and policing. If there were posting's between the two. There are more RCMP on oversea's tasking's than in previous years. I believe that the RCMP and MP's can be better deployed as a joint endevour. All resources put together for a more cost effecticve approach.

 

[paracowboy]

I also have very limited knowlege on the topic. But I see a good solution. Better co-operation between the Military and RCMP. We have many things in common. Between training animals (Horses for the Lord Strathcona's vs. musical ride and dogs for the MP's), the PRT, CP and policing. If there were posting's between the two. There are more RCMP on oversea's tasking's than in previous years. I believe that the RCMP and MP's can be better deployed as a joint endevour. All resources put together for a more cost effecticve approach.

yes, and no. For pure policing tasks, sure. Even for EOD-related tasks, sure. But you're not going to take an RCMP officer on a foot patrol into the desert or jungle.

And there are times, when the delineation between where police can/should be employed, and where military can/should be employed, is going to interfere. For that reason, I maintain that the CF requires it's own Pooch Patrol capability.

 

[big bad john]

"Soldier" magazine, the official magazine of the British Army has a good article on the crosssection of K-9 units in the British Army.  It is on sale in Canada now I see.  It is worth a read.  The copies on sale in Canada are generally 2 to 3 months behind the subscriptions and the UK releases.

 

[big bad john]

http://www.mod.uk/DefenceInternet/DefenceNews/PeopleInDefence/FourYearOldKeriaHelpsToMakeIraqSecure.htm

Four year old Keria helps to make Iraq secure
15 May 06
Keria, a four-year old Springer Spaniel, and her handler, Lance Coproral Yvonne Watson, are working hard finding illegal weapons of war in an effort to reduce the tensions that are present in Iraq.


Springer Spaniel Keria, and her handler, Lance Corporal Yvonne Watson, are working hard finding illegal weapons of war in Iraq.
[Picture: Cpl John Hawkes]
Keria was rescued from abuse to start a new life in the Army as an Arms Explosives Search Dog or 'sniffer' dog. Yvonne (30) is a Dog Handler in the Royal Army Veterinary Corps. They are both on their second tour of operational duty.

A victim of mistreatment by children, Keria is still apprehensive in the presence of young people, but is an excellent search dog. They have both served a tour of duty in Afghanistan before coming to Iraq.

Called out whenever there is a suspicion that arms and explosives may be hidden, the duo deploy by helicopter, armoured personnel carrier or Land Rover to where they are needed. It is hot and difficult work, temperatures are already reaching 50 degrees Celsius in early May and summer has still to fully arrive.

Yvonne and Keria trained together at the Defence Animal Centre in Melton Mowbray and have been working as a team for two years now. Yvonne said:

"She is a lovely dog. I really think that we are making a difference out here to the local people. They are trying to get their lives together and I would like to think that we are helping. We have been very happy working together. I have applied to keep her after she has retired which is in another four years."

The dogs are housed in air conditioned kennels and even have their own swimming pool. They will move to Cyprus at the end of their tour of duty in Iraq.

Yvonne joined the Army three years ago after the downturn in the dairy farming industry. Her parents still live in Monikie, Dundee

 

[K_Johnston]

I think this should be an MP trade.  It should be a gradual start, but once we have a few units, you could send them where they are needed most, and rotate them out like everyone else.  In my opinion the dog and trainer should NEVER be seperated.  The dog and handler adjust to eachother, just as much as a small team (like a two man sniper team) adjust to eachother.  Not just tactics, but personality.  If you keep the trainer and dog together, then they dont have to adjust to new partners, and can jump right in at full effectiveness.  Also, if the need ever arrises, you could attach a dog team to a regular infantry unit for a short time.

Training shouldnt be that hard.  To get a unit together, we already have the facilities in place with many police forces.  You could send the dog and army handler to do training at a civilian police agency (maybe even have a few people take a trainer's course) and suddenly you now have the capability.

Coming to the medical.....well a lot of people are taking vet medicine, because there is a need for that right now.  Once they start getting into the work force, the available jobs will decrease.  Im sure if you allowed them to apply to the army, they would.  Im also pretty sure that a field medic could do anything that possibly could be done in the field.  You dont need a vet to stop bleeding.  The medics, in most cases, could bandage and probably stabilize a dog until it could get to the vets.

Basically for all aspects (training, structure, and med aspects), you can use civil guidelines already in place, and reduce costs to training by making an arrangement with the OPP or RCMP to send army teams in for training.

 

[paracowboy]

I think this should be an MP trade. 

then you limit them right off the bat. It should be copied directly off the British model, which spreads the knowledge across the entire military.

 

[GO!!!]

then you limit them right off the bat. It should be copied directly off the British model, which spreads the knowledge across the entire military.

I agree.

The major uses for a military K9 unit do not require a police officer. A dog used for mine/uxo/eod purposes would be best employed in the hands of an engineer, one used for patrol/tracking/riot control by an infanteer, one specially trained in Search and Rescue by a SAR tech and so forth.

Allowing military K9 units to fall under the LE umbrella would guarantee that they would not be used to their full potential as they would be immediately limited to LE activities, in the hands of MPs.

 

[geo]

A guard dog is not necessarily the best trained to sniff explosives.
A sniffer dog doesn't have to be mean and nasty.....

And MP dog handlers would prolly have a nasty disposition to boot

 

[K_Johnston]

Ok, I can see the points being made.  In that case then, use them in many arms, but my main point is keep the dog and trainer together.  I believe it would be more effective.  You could have SAR dogs, snifer dogs, guard dogs, infantry patrol dogs and others.  But to start a program where none exists, it may be easier to start with MP dogs, and then once there is an initial force, start branching out.

 

[paracowboy]

Ok, I can see the points being made.  In that case then, use them in many arms, but my main point is keep the dog and trainer together. 

doesn't work. Too often, the medical/customs requirements means a dog is quarantined for months. Sometimes, a dog can't re-enter a country once it's left. What happens should the dog or handler dies, and the other remains?

But to start a program where none exists, it may be easier to start with MP dogs, and then once there is an initial force, start branching out.

too easy to have empire-building. Once a capability is handed to someone, they find ways to ensure that they, and they alone, keep it. MPs, Medics spring to mind, immediately.

The Brits have a viable, working system in place. It has been adapted to meet the many and vaired changing demands of modern warfare. Why re-invent the wheel? Just copy it.

 

[geo]

too easy to have empire-building. Once a capability is handed to someone, they find ways to ensure that they, and they alone, keep it. MPs, Medics spring to mind, immediately.

Empire building....... cheezzz..... always wondered why it wasn't the Army that controlled the school for bomb disposal and IEDs

 

[K_Johnston]

Empire building doesnt always happen when there is a better team to do it, or a better use.  And Im not saying take away all dogs from MP's, just put the dogs where they are needed.  MP's and infantry can have seperate dog units.  My example for this would be the RMP SERT team, or similar MP teams.  JTF took over that pretty quickly.
Also when they tried to have MP's doing intel work.  They found out that the jobs could be done better, so it was handed to seperate people.

Although Im probably just being stubborn, because I like the other models better.  I would hate to leave my dog, my partner behind.  And I also dont believe in sharing them........
Meh, ignore me.  Im stubborn and wont change my view.

 

[paracowboy]

Empire building doesnt always happen when there is a better team to do it, or a better use.  And Im not saying take away all dogs from MP's, just put the dogs where they are needed.  MP's and infantry can have seperate dog units.  My example for this would be the RMP SERT team, or similar MP teams.  JTF took over that pretty quickly.
Also when they tried to have MP's doing intel work.  They found out that the jobs could be done better, so it was handed to seperate people.

Although Im probably just being stubborn, because I like the other models better.  I would hate to leave my dog, my partner behind.  And I also dont believe in sharing them........
Meh, ignore me.  Im stubborn and wont change my view.

you have completely lost me.

I thought you wanted all dogs under MP control, now you're saying you wnat to take them away? And R(C?)MP SERT? What relationship does that have to do with MPs? And where do MPs and JTF2 meet?

What, exactly, is your military experience again?

 

[FastEddy]

A guard dog is not necessarily the best trained to sniff explosives.
A sniffer dog doesn't have to be mean and nasty.....

And MP dog handlers would prolly have a nasty disposition to boot

If that were the case their nasty disposition would be from, more than likely from the A..holes and Scum they have to deal with or suffer.

 

[Redneck052]

Having K9 units is a great concept for the CF.  However their use is not just norrowed to the MPs.  Yes the MPs could use K9s for their duties rather then relying on the RCMP for manhunts, bombsniffing, drugs, etc.

But other units could use K9 sections:

Inf/ Eng- for check points, bomb/ explosvive sniffing, land mines, urban patrols, urban assaults/mop-ups, etc

A dog is a great control factor in crowd/ people escort.  It is less threatening then a weapon, but more fearful of what it could do if it was "let loose", it also looks better on TV.

The down side with K9, is the "life commitment of the member resposnible for his K9 partner".  The dog is not transferable to others, it is with one member for its life span.

Refer to the RCMP K9 training, or other Police K9 training sites.  It take up to 4 years for a dog to be ready for the streets, but then again, who give a fuck if "Fang" takes a chunk out of Bin Laden's ass.

 

[paracowboy]

Having K9 units is a great concept for the CF.  However their use is not just norrowed to the MPs.  Yes the MPs could use K9s for their duties rather then relying on the RCMP for manhunts, bombsniffing, drugs, etc.

But other units could use K9 sections:

Inf/ Eng- for check points, bomb/ explosvive sniffing, land mines, urban patrols, urban assaults/mop-ups, etc

A dog is a great control factor in crowd/ people escort.  It is less threatening then a weapon, but more fearful of what it could do if it was "let loose", it also looks better on TV.

This was all addressed. Did you actually read the thread?

The down side with K9, is the "life commitment of the member resposnible for his K9 partner".  The dog is not transferable to others, it is with one member for its life span.

you didn't, did you?

Refer to the RCMP K9 training, or other Police K9 training sites.  It take up to 4 years for a dog to be ready for the streets,

nope, you didn't.

 

[IN HOC SIGNO]

When I was in Petawawa in the early nineties the MPs had a dog for drug sniffing. Do the MPs still use dogs for this?
I think they would make great addtion to the Forces. There are so many uses for them from bomb sniffing to drug enforcement (a real concern in our modern world).
When I was in Scotland in 2002 the RAF police were using them for security patrols around the fence perimeters as well.