i had a thought
how are sec narc dogs trained and certifide here in aust

there are 2 ways i know of good and bad but i dont think eather will stand in court

u can train them on the sly but when it goes to court it wont stand up and probly land the handler in trouble as well

then there is also the phsedo stuff but as far as i know there is no further legal cirtifcation to prove the k9 can find the real stuff i know in the US the k9's has to be certifide once a year on the real stuff befor it can go on the street (i know were not yanks) but it makes the same question valid because in court you have to prove "beyound reasonable doubt" what happened

__________________
Regards

Nathan
"Cave Canem"

Hi Nathan

In Australia there is no certification for 'civilian narcotics dogs, or ANY type of detection dog. In regards to narcotics and explosives, the Government have total control.

A civilian narcotics dog find as far as I know, will not be allowed to be used in a court of law. In fact, there is even a chance of being sued or charged for invasion of privacy, depending on how the search was conducted!

If a narcotics dog indicates to a person, (by the law as I understand it), you can't even detain that person. All you can do is pass on the information to the police. Whether they will follow it up, is another story.

I doubt this law will ever change.

__________________
Life is a journey not a destination.

thats what i thought i know there is nothing in vic i thought it might be different in other states the only person i know that has permission for cival stuff is steve austin though his detecta dog company

No Steve Austin is not authorised or a certified narcotics dog trainer.

He is through his employment with AQIS, a certified AQIS detection dog trainer. If his contract was cancelled he would loose that authorisation within Australia. He is regarded as a governemnt employee for that particular job.

Other than that Steve has no more rights than any other civilian in Australia.

if thats the case he needs to clarify thing when he explanes his certs athen

Hi there Nathan,

I know this is a pretty old post I am adding onto but I don't get to peruse the website too often - I am on dial up ( we live in the sticks) and it takes forever to do or view anything hence why we have not been a big contribitor to the forums but soon to get broadband in the next couple of weeks - we wont know ourselves! We actually were able to get a government subsidy for satellite broadband because we can't get a metro-comparable service out to our place! Anyway - back to the topic at hand.

I am in complete agreeance with Mark regarding the lack of certification available for civilians to train narc dogs in Australia - being a goverment dog handler myself - I can't ever see civilian dog trainers getting certification here - not in the next 20 years anyway - when our drug problem gets as bad as the United States they might just begin to ponder the thought...

You might be interested to know that Steve left Hanrob (who have the AQIS contract) quite a while back around 18 months or so ago and has opened up his own business up in Dural in NSW.
AQIS only train on odours of agricultural interest and so I would be very surprised if Steve had the abilities to train on narcs due to his association with the AQIS training contract.

Keep the detection posts alive!! I'm keen to see more on this side of the dog training world!

cheers,

M.

I think it all depends on how the dogs are used (and of course trained) if for an example a private owned/trained detection dog was trained on psuedo and indicated on a location and or person. Would it not depend on how the investigation was then conducted? An example may be a school ground where the dog might indicate on a person and/ or location. The handler may then write up a report stating where and what his dog indicated. If the location and/or person which was indicated was searched by an authorized person ie.....the principal or maybe even the police.....I think the whole situation would be legal and stand up in court? It is a matter of knowing when you have or have not stepped over the line as far as the law is concerned.

I also am lead to believe their is a group of people pushing for certification of privately own detection dogs in Australia........but how long and what direction this process takes is a piece of string.

Steve

I have been approached by someone who is training scent detection dogs for security purposes (not sure if narcs or explosives) for a position as a handler. I know this person quite well and don't believe they would do so if illegal. I would have to get my security licence to take up this position so have not done so at the moment as weighing up pros/cons and expenses.

So are you guys saying that it is illegal to train dogs for this or it would not stand up in court? There are a few private companies that do this I think - in Vic and Qld I have trawled a couple of web sites stating they do this.

__________________
"Take this trouble for me: Make sure my shepherd dog remains a working dog, for I have struggled all my life long for that aim"
Max von Stephanitz

No, it's definitely not illegall to train explosives and drug dogs, or any type of detection dog.

1. You cannot get government certification for them.

2. Drugs - It is illegal to obtain or use real drugs. So you can only train on pseudo or if you can get it, the SOKKS- MPTS. Pseudo is ok, but many dogs have a little trouble transfering over to the real stuff. So if you can't also train with the real stuff, how can you be certified to the accuracy level required on real drugs?

I have my views on this SOKKS. Sure I am no expert on the stuff. However I have trained Drug Detection Dogs, and handled them for a few years in the RAAF. We were train to customs requirements, and certified to work with them and also state and national law enforcement. I was authorised to hold and transport real drugs for training purposes.

This SOKKS stuff, has me a little worried in regards to a dogs scent picture, so I am not an advocate of it. I would have to see trials done and see the results before I would use it. It goes totally against a dogs scent picture creation, so I have my doubts about it.

3. Explosives - If you have an explosives license then I see no problems. However again you will not get any type of Government certification.

Again you can also use SOKKS. But as stated above, I am unsure of its total effectiveness without clinical trials. I have seen none done on this training material.



There is a law about invasion of privacy. You as a civilian cannot be authorised to carry out drug searches. Sure you can ask the persons permission. If your dog indicates to a certain location, that person has a right to tell you to leave, and there is nothing you can do about it but, contact the authorities. If the police do decide to check this person, and nothing is found, there goes your credibility. You cannot stay on this persons property to ensure the drugs (if any) are not moved before the authorities arrive.

In regards to schools. As far as I am aware a principle can authorise a search of the school, but cannot authorise the opening of bags, etc. Law enforcement authoriteis must be called in, or permission received from the student to open the bag.

In a court of law, you must be able to produce documentation as to the accuracy of your dog. With drugs, if you state you only train on pseudo, I guarantee you a good lawyer will tear you apart. If you do a legal search and find drugs, then I see no problem. As the drug dog handler probably wouldn't even be called in to testify. However if the person being accused tries to fight the case due to an illegal search... Thats a different story!

This country needs to come along way before we can confidently use drug dogs in our communities, or even train them correctly..

__________________
Life is a journey not a destination.

Thanks for your reply

Thinking about it more I think it was explosives - doing a sweep of a venue etc.