The Association of Lowland Search & Rescue (ALSAR) has released a consultation paper to explore the benefits of having search dogs under the ALSAR umbrella. This has sparked debate from teams all across the country.

Currently, unless a dog team is already integrated into the foot team, the ALSAR foot team will call upon their local Lowland Search Dogs (LS Dogs) resource to assist in a search. It is an assumption that an ALSAR team with an integrated dog section must also be a member of LS Dogs. I invite someone to correct me on this as I have looked in as many documents as I have access to and cannot find it written anywhere. This means that although ALSAR teams have been calling upon LS Dogs units for assistance, they have always been able to have their own dogs or use any dog resource that they see fit. So why now? What has brought about this proposed change of direction? It would be useful to read a short statement from the ALSAR Chair as to why this is a good idea. Equally useful, a short statement from the LS Dogs Chair as to why it is not, if that is their current thinking. Historical precedence certainly suggests that we will read nothing from the latter on here.

I would say now that I have the upmost admiration for the members within the LS Dogs dog teams: the skill and dedication I have witnessed as an observer; as a handler’s support and as a prior role holder within LS Dogs leaves me in no doubt as to their value in a search. As for the dogs themselves, on more than one occasion I have been left in awe at what they can do. There is no doubt that dogs are an important cog in the search machine and their use will always be called upon.

So why are there two separate organisations? This goes back many years when ALSAR clearly did not recognise the full potential that a resource such as a trained dog can be and therefore made little effort to encompass dogs into the ALSAR framework. That may even be a little kind; a more accurate representation may be that they actively resisted the inclusion of dogs. So standalone dog teams started up and then they formed their own national body. And so it was: two associations each with several teams now existed. At the time it was fine and at the time it worked. Today it still works at a local level. ALSAR teams who have their own LS Dogs dogs use those dogs and call others to assist, whilst foot teams call for assistance from their local dog resource and we all work together, mostly in harmony.

A saying springs to mind that I often hear, “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it!” Well that is just a cop out and a much overused phrase to cover the laziness of exploring new avenues or improving upon the old ones. It is fantastic that this debate has been kicked off. We are now exploring those new avenues. How do we know what cannot be improved upon if we do not seek to do so. You see that field over there? How do you know the misper is not in that field if you do not take a look? Perhaps after the consultation is over it will be accepted that the status quo is as good as it can be for the time being and perhaps it won’t. My guess is the latter.

Both sides have a friendly competitive edge; a bit of banter goes on and that is great. It is healthy and it is fun and it can even help to promote excellence. Where it stops being fun is when one side does not accept the others expertise and an elitist approach develops. This is not as widespread as it could be, but this does still exist and I am sad to say that I have only ever witnessed this from the side of the dog teams. Not many, and in fact it is a small minority but I still see and hear it, in fact as recently as just a few months ago whilst on a search in the Hampshire area. Imagine this for second: a large wooded area; foot searchers have been through it in the rain and are cold, tired, wet but not downhearted – it’s what they do. One handler wanders up and tells them how worthless their effort was and that his dog could have covered that area in a fraction of the time and done a better job. Now how do you think those foot searchers are going to feel now? It’s that elitism that propagates the divide and establishes a bad vibe that can stick for some time. I must stress again that it really is a minority of the dog-team members, but it doesn’t need more than one to upset an applecart.

I have tried to take this on before without much success. I actively promote the idea of foot and dog teams working and training together. At the recent ALSAR conference the Chair of LS Dogs came to talk to the delegates about the benefits and virtues of joint teams and how to develop the notion of integrated teams into a reality. I asked the Chair if he was aware that this problem exists in small pockets and he said he did. I further asked that if LS Dogs were keen to promote the integration of foot and dog teams, how do they plan to address this problem. The answer was “we aren’t going to do anything”. To me, that came across as an oxymoron and indicated that LS Dogs as an organisation have very little forward planning. They think about today but not about the future. They talk about integrating teams at a local level but have no strategy to tackle this at a national level. The teams themselves can handle local issues. The national associations should be looking ahead at ways to strengthen partnerships and develop strategies on a national level in order to enhance and improve the business of Search as whole. And if LS Dogs are keen to integrate dogs into the foot teams then why have they not thought to promote the bigger picture of integrating LS Dogs into ALSAR? Is it that they just do not see past their own agenda?

Do they lack tangible leadership? Do they feel that they are in competition with ALSAR?

Each organisation has its own set of rules, standards, operating procedures, call it what you will, but both sides have the same ultimate objectives. Two is not always better than one and in cases like this it is the opposite. ALSAR, who holds a position in UKSAROG, is tasked with coordinating search and rescue for lowland areas in the UK. It makes absolute sense to me that as the coordinating body, they should be responsible for drawing up the standards that all lowland search resources work to and that should include LOWLAND search dogs. They should be ensuring that each area has the right levels of the right resources. I can see how certain members of LS Dogs may feel threatened by ALSAR planning to take on dogs as they have spent a great deal of their time building LS Dogs into what it is today, but they should not feel threatened at all. They should feel proud of what they have achieved so far and think of this as a fantastic opportunity to gain strength by joining forces.

ALSAR will need experts in dog and handler training and they are hardly going to start from scratch. Rather than reinvent the wheel they will draw upon the expertise that already exists within LS Dogs and I know already that there are many individuals and several teams who can see that this is the way forward and would welcome the opportunity to join ALSAR. This is not about hostile takeovers. It is not even about mergers. It is about doing what they already do, but doing it better in the future.

So what if ALSAR once rejected dogs: that is just history and they have so moved on from there.

So what happens if the LS Dogs Committee disagrees with my way of thinking? After all, who am I to talk? I have far less experience in all aspects of search than a lot of people I could name and everything I have said so far is just my own opinion and I speak only for me and not for my colleagues, team or any association. My predictions are that ALSAR, after a thorough consultation will establish their own search dogs. LS Dogs will lose many individuals and some teams immediately.

They will become a weaker resource than they already are and will find growth more static than it appears to be now. There will likely be a few pockets of hard-core steadfast members who just don’t like change and will dig in and battle on, but their lack of vision will blind them to the fact that it is not a war. It is not a fight and there should be no tears. If the LS Dogs committee were to see this for the opportunity it is, which is the prospect of a stronger and more robust, capable and resilient organisation; and if they were to recommend to their member teams that they transfer to ALSAR, then the benefits to all will be immediate. I do not imagine for one second that all the LS Dogs committee members will suddenly have nothing to do, as it was their expertise and commitment over the years that have gained the enormous respect that ALSAR hold for the various dog teams around the country. There will still be much work to do and the existing expertise will still be needed.

I for one, hope this happens. I hope that ALSAR vote to press ahead with ALSAR search dogs. I hope that all LS Dogs teams transfer to ALSAR. I hope the LS Dogs committee consider and recommend the same. I see this as the future. I see this as potentially being the single largest improvement to the mispers’ chances of survival since lowland search became organised. Fingers crossed.

This article is being discussed in our forum

By: Matt Johnston