Robin Glover - PURE Dog Listener » Dogs in the news

Literary Aspirations

Robin Glover — Sun, 14 Jun 2009 16:14:00 +0000

They say that everyone has one good book in them, I’m not sure that’s true but I’ve an ego as big as the next person and so have been writing mine. it’s a long way from complete as I keep getting diverted. There are always dogs and their owners to be helped and of course my own family to be considered so I write as and when I can, which is not very often.

Nobody is going to be interested in my early life which featured a happy but largely uneventful childhood. It becomes more of a story when I joined The Metropolitan Police in 1967 and patrolled Soho and Mayfair until moving to The Special Patrol Group at Scotland Yard in 1969. In 1975 I transferred to Hampshire Constabulary where after a short posting on the Isle of Wight I was posted to the Dog Section where I stayed until 2002 when I retired. I then took on my current role of Dog Listener.

My first decision has to be whether to write one huge book the size of war and peace or break it into two or three segments. I think I’ll opt for a book about my Dog Section and Dog Listening experiences because they run seamlessly into one another and at times ran parallel. If I get anywhere with publishers then I could follow up with a tome about my London experiences and believe me, they were experiences.

In the meantime I have an interest in a couple of books by other people. One written by an American colleague Kim Kapes and titled ‘From Wags to Riches‘ which features a little story that I told her about one of my dogs. Kim uses the story to illustrate a point. She also freely acknowledges the contributions made by myself and others to the book. I therefore have no hesitation in saying “Buy This Book”.

The second publication is a different matter. Some time ago myself and a colleague, Caroline Spencer www.yourdoglistener.com assisted an owner with some seriously traumatised dogs. We worked long and hard, travelled hundreds of miles all at our own expense and much of the time in the face of indifference and “I know best” from the owner. In the end we reached a happy resolution due almost entirely to the work put in by Caroline. I then heard that the owner had written a book about the dogs and his experiences. I was interested to see what he had to say about the turn around we’d achieved in the animals. I was sent a copy of the book by someone who knew the work we’d put in. I checked the index, nothing. I flicked through the pages hoping to catch a glimpse of Caroline’s or my name, nothing. When all fails, read the book. After ploughing through 299 pages. There we were, or rather we weren’t. It was at the stage of the story where the writer realised that he had a huge problem on his hands. He knew that the dogs needed and I quote. “Someone with huge patience to train them. I doubted there was anyone around who fitted that bill. Well apart from me that was” So that was that. Caroline and I didn’t exist. We weren’t after star billing or even a name check but just a mention that he’d received some help and hopefully how well our method was in dealing with traumatised dogs would have been nice. This would have had a positive result in encouraging readers who had similar problems to know that help was available. It’s no big deal but I admit to feeling a little, no that’s wrong, feeling very used and exploited. It would however be a sign of petulance and petty mindedness not to tell you the title of the book….so I won’t.

Oh Dear How Sad Never Mind

Robin Glover — Fri, 13 Mar 2009 15:48:00 +0000

I came across the article below and was angry but not surprised. This is the government that was going to be ‘Tough on crime. Tough on the causes of crime’. When a politician produces sound bites like that you just know that they mean ‘We’ll make the copper on the streets job even harder than it is already, and when something goes wrong, we’ll have a large number of people sit around a table with cups of tea and decide how to blame the police for doing their job’.

Read the article and see all the different groups that sat in judgement. What a collection of letters in their titles, you could get a great score in Scrabble. One thing they have in common is that they’ve for the most part never done anything more dangerous than stand in a queue in a supermarket. This grandly titled ‘Learning The Lessons Committee’ which of course is a ‘multi-agency committee’ (it would be wouldn’t it?). Although multi agency it is a tad light on operational Police Officers who actually have to do the job. When I say a tad light I mean none, not one. it wouldn’t do would it, to bring a dose of reality to the proceedings?

Lessons: Using Police Dogs Against Youngsters
12-Mar-09
A case in which two youngsters were injured by a police dog raises both good practice and lessons to be learned regarding using police dogs on juveniles…
The Learning the Lessons Committee is a multi-agency committee established to disseminate and promote learning across the police service. Its members are: ACPO, APA, Home Office, IPCC, HMIC and the NPIA. The Committee produces bulletins with articles containing lessons from investigations. One such article is published below:

Police received an anonymous call about the sound of breaking glass coming from playing fields and, suspecting a burglary, went to the scene with a police dog handler and his dog. They spotted four youngsters running towards the top of the field but because they were in hooded tops and jackets they could not tell how old they were. The Force did not have a policy about using dogs against juveniles.
The dog handler shouted that he had a police dog and would send it after them unless they stood still. The youngsters kept running and, as he was too far away to catch them on foot, he sent the dog after the nearest suspect. When the dog brought the suspect to the ground, he discovered the suspect was a girl. One of the other suspects was still moving, either running or waving his arms around and shouting. The dog ran at him and knocked him to the ground.
The dog’s actions injured both the girl, who was 15, and the boy, who was 12. She had a bruise on her arm and grazed her side and stomach; he had a cut to his upper lip and scratches on the back of his shoulder. The youngsters had not managed to get into the pavilion but three of them (including the two caught by the dog) were given a reprimand for criminal damage.
Good practice: After-care card, with suitable advice and contact information, carried by dog-handlers to be given to anyone who had received a dog-bite; copying all third-party dog bite reports to the Professional Standards Department for review and possible referral to the IPCC.
Key messages are to ensure the Force’s dog deployment policy gives guidance or instruction about deploying dogs against juveniles; integrate records held on dog-handlers to give a comprehensive picture of their performance.

Well readers what do you think? Why did it take all of these very highly paid people to sit round a table and discuss what any right thinking person could work out for themselves.

There was a crime in progress. It was either burglary or criminal damage to the pavilion.

A police dog handler attended. It may well be that had he not attended as promptly as he did then the criminal damage would have become burglary as they gained entry.

The dog handler located the offenders and challenged them. It was dark and they were wearing hoods. Their age and/or gender would not have been apparent to him.

They ignored the repeated challenge and decamped, as a result they were stopped by the dog, well boo hoo. So they were 15 and 12, old enough to be out in the dark and commit crime, old enough to shout abuse at police, old enough to cost you and me, the taxpayer, even more money. They were lucky to get away with such slight injuries, either it was a very young dog or the handler was very switched on and quickly called his dog off.

The point is that the offenders had choices. They had a choice not to either destroy property that wasn’t theirs or to try and steal. Having decided against that choice, when confronted by the dog and handler they then had the choice to run or be compliant. They chose to run. Everything has a consequence of action either good or bad. These people made bad decisions and showed lack of respect for their community so why are we discussing what the police should have done?

She was a girl! Yes, and your point is? Go into any city centre at night or even just stand outside a school and you’ll hear language, see yobbish behaviour and violence that you’d expect to see in the east end of London when the Krays were around.

He was 12. Once again his decision. If he wants to play the hard man the world can end in pain. Just what was the handler supposed to do? Perhaps run alongside them and on discovering it was a girl let her go? To the best of my knowledge the law applies to both genders. And as for the 12 year old boy there are some big lads of that age, I have had a 13 year old try to stab me and a 14 year old swing a scaffold pole at me with such force it broke my foot so you’ll forgive me if I don’t feel sorry for these little darlings.

Anyone who decides to take on a police dog is very stupid and the outcome will not be in doubt, sadly part of the outcome will be a collection of bleeding hearts blaming the police or victims.

Dogs as Film stars

Robin Glover — Fri, 02 Jan 2009 12:10:00 +0000

On the 31st August I posted an article part of which included a warning about fashionable breeds and how they can go out of style just as quickly and then clog up the rescue centres. Further to that it now seems that 2009 is to be year for films about ‘cute dogs’. There are a number of films either made or in production with some big name stars. The dogs include a Chihuahua, Labrador, German Shepherd and a multi pedigree. One of the films ‘Marley and Me’ I am told by people who’ve seen it in the US where it is already on release; is not too sickly sweet. I am however concerned that we will have an infestation of unwanted chihuahuas later in the year.

If you do see these films then think long and hard on leaving the cinema before you take the step that can lead to heartbreak for both dogs and humans.

Once Hollywood have exhausted the cute dog theme the next project is to milk the cute cate scenario (is there one?)

Be Careful About Who You Let Near Your Dog

Robin Glover — Tue, 16 Dec 2008 12:20:00 +0000

Below is an article I picked up from a Chicago newspaper. Once again it concerns the use of cruel training gadgets on dogs. Every dog owner should read this as a cautionary tale. It’s horrific not only for what this woman has done but the justification she uses. In essence what she says is that it’s alright to attach an electric shock collar to a dogs genitals and if anyone complains then they’re only doing so because she’s black or a woman (or maybe both). No thought that it is wrong to torture a dog then? It’s much easier to blame someone else. Wrong! If you either treat a dog this way or allow anyone else to do so then it matters not what gender, race, colour or religion you are this is still cruel and unacceptable. If it’s not illegal in your part of the world then it should be.

I know that I talk about this subject a lot and annoy the hell out a lot of ‘traditional trainers’ or sellers of cruel training gadgets (often one and the same people) but it really is important. Whichever method that you choose to train your dog, please ensure that you are involved at every stage. Please don’t let someone charge you a lot of money, take your best friend away and then return them days or weeks later ‘trained’. You don’t know what’s happened to your dog or what equipment has been used. Even if you’ve found the best trainer in the world how can you carry on the training if you’ve not been party to it? If the dog has bonded with anyone it will be with the trainer not you. You are the one after all, who handed total control of your dog to a stranger. How can he trust you not to do the same again sometime in the future?

Your dog, your best friend and certainly your responsibility.

Click on and read the following link, you will, I hope, be angry. But at the same time see the positive side in that people are no longer sitting back and accepting this behaviour just because someone on TV says it’s ok. I’ve left some of the comments to the paper attached as well. They make interesting reading, particularly if you have an interest in following the links to the bigger story.

http://www.chicagoreader.com/features/stories/dogtraining/

Police Dog Sections Cut

Robin Glover — Sun, 14 Dec 2008 11:55:00 +0000

A recent story confirmed my suspicions that the Police Service (you mustn’t say Police Force……it’s naughty). Have been taken over by Social Services.

For years certain elements in the ‘community’ and Government have been trying to either get rid of Police Dogs altogether or restrict their use and capabilities. Why? Very simple, they are effective, they have no pre-conceived ideas. They only know that the offenders track goes this way. They don’t know and certainly don’t care that in that particular area the ‘community’ don’t like the police entering ‘their’ neighbourhood. If the bad guy went this way, well that’s where he went. If someone attacks a police dog then they will be bitten. If they run away the dog will stop them. The dog is the only piece of kit in the police toolbox who, two hours after an offender has left the scene can put his nose on the ground and say to his handler “He went this way and he dropped this weapon or threw away these car keys”. They can be used to track criminals, find missing persons, search buildings for suspects hiding, search crime scenes for evidence, deal with public disorder. Disarm and detain violent offenders, teach road safety to children, act as great public relation ambassadors and of course also find drugs, explosives, firearms and money. All this for a few dog biscuits and a bit of love and affection. Good value I’d say.

The rot set in when it was decided that a manager is a manager and their roles are interchangeable. No knowledge is required of the department that is being managed. We saw just how well that worked when the man put in charge of the Royal Mail came straight from heading the Football Association. there was a connection in that both organisations failed to deliver. If you’ve never worked or trained a dog how can you know when things are not right? If you’ve never been on your own down a dark alley at 3 a.m. with a group of people trying to fillet you with cutlery marked ‘made in China’ how can you appreciate the stress your staff are under? The fact that you ran the ‘Department of Folding Chairs’ for the government and can compile a mean pie chart doesn’t mean much in the real world.

We now see very real cuts in dog sections across the UK. one of the largest, Greater Manchester, are halving their establishment. Think of all that dedication and experience in both dogs and handlers, gone at a stroke. Once lost experience takes a long time to regain, if it ever is. What will happen to the money saved? A lot will be kept by the government and the rest will be spent on ‘management suites’ and teams of clerical staff to compile more targets and paperwork for the two policeman left actually doing the job to meet and complete.

Joined up Government they call it.

I’m Both Interesting and Unusual

Robin Glover — Thu, 13 Nov 2008 10:01:00 +0000

No real surprise there then. But it’s true, my occupation although not specifically named Dog Listeners but people who deal with dog behaviour problems; was listed as one of the ten most interesting or unusual jobs.

My occupation came in at number four. Just below embalmers but above kosher certification consultants and vibration consultants. I’ve no idea what the latter do…….or do I? I would imagine that they get a buzz out of their job.

Also on the list are court jesters, feng shui consultants and Ravenmaster at the Tower of London.

So when considering a career it doesn’t have to be banking, sales or a service industry. You could get out there and rattle those ravens.

Every Chance Rescue

Robin Glover — Thu, 13 Nov 2008 08:44:00 +0000

I am pleased to announce the founding of Every Chance Rescue. Not another charity you might say and you’d be right. Every Chance aims to do what it says in it’s title, give every dog, every chance.

Countless dogs are needlessly put down because events out of their control have led them to bite or even just show verbal aggression. Many of these deaths could be prevented and in an effort to make this happen Every Chance was founded.

You will be hearing a lot more about this venture but in the meantime have a look at our ‘Mission Statement’

Every Chance Rescue

Mission Statement

Every Chance Rescue, a non-profit making organisation was formed in October 2008 to bridge the gap that traditional rescue organisations cannot fill.

The organisation is run entirely by Jan Fennell qualified and monitored Dog Listeners and sits alongside Jan Fennell International Dog Listeners Ltd.

Using international best selling author, Jan Fennell’s method of Amichien® Bonding, Every Chance Rescue work with dogs that other organisations find impossible to re home and is dedicated to the rehabilitation and re homing of such dogs.

Every dog that comes into care is given appropriate veterinary treatment and is re homed fully vaccinated, neutered and micro chipped.

We work diligently to save dogs from mistreatment and unnecessary death, provide them with a safe, secure environment and foster homes where they receive the highest quality of care and treatment. Ultimately we place them with owners that are fully supported by Dog Listeners to provide Amichien Bonding® in a safe and loving home.

Dog Breeds and Breeders

Robin Glover — Sun, 31 Aug 2008 16:25:00 +0000

So you’ve decided to get a dog. That’s one decision out of the way. The next is what type of dog? Should it be a pedigree or cross breed or ‘multi pedigree’ as I like to think of them? Puppy or older rescue dog? Dog or bitch?

All these questions need to be considered before you go and look at any live dogs. the decision is not yours alone, the rest of the family must have some input too. Really think this through, your family structure, lifestyle, working hours, house size and garden size are all relevant to your final decision as to whether you can look after a dog and if so what size you can comfortably introduce into your household.

There have been several good tv documentaries lately about breeders and show dogs which have been horrific but were well worth watching because knowledge is power. I have been making my living with dogs for 30+ years and yet did not know until seeing one of these programmes that the distinctive ridge on the Rhodesian Ridgeback is an indicator of Spina Bifida. The dogs born without the ridge are the healthy ones. Knowing that you would think that the sensible and caring breeder would go for the ridgeless variety wouldn’t you? In fact the policy of the breeders is to ‘cull’ all ridgeless puppies. ‘Cull’ is a term used to make the killing of perfectly healthy puppies sound a little less brutal and let’s face it, stupid.

Eugenics it’s called. It went down very big with Nazi Germany in the 1930s in their quest to build a master race. They at least, were logical about it and placed fit young men with fit young women with the idea of producing strong babies. Even in prewar Germany they wouldn’t have thought it a good idea to kill all the strong healthy children and nurture those who would be a burden on the state for the rest of their probably short and painful lives.

If you are going to get a thoroughbred dog make sure you attend the kennels or breeders home and see the litter on their home turf together with the parents. Don’t be confused or dazzled by pedigree papers they’re often not worth the paper they’re printed on. If you’re going for a breed that is classified as ‘working’ such as Labrador, German Shepherd or Spaniels then I strongly advise that you go to a breeder that breeds working stock. In many breeds, the German Shepherd is a good example, the working and show dogs are almost separate breeds with the show variety having an exaggerated sloping back end and, in many cases, is almost unable to walk. Have a look at a Police Dog or Guide Dog for the Blind, they have a good straight back and stand there looking comfortable because they are as nature intended. I’m not really sure what show dogs are about, would you make Jordan Prime Minister on the grounds that she’s got a big chest?

Another type of dog to steer clear of is fashionable ‘must have’ breeds which come and go out of fashion as quickly as skirt lengths change. I’ve read recently that the ‘must have’ in a certain social circle of women is the Pug. This is a breed that comes ready equipped with a whole range of health problems as a matter of course. When you add a sudden demand then unscrupulous dealers will churn them out regardless of quality. Another area of risk is when a dog appears in a film or on tv. Remember 102 Dalmatians? Ask any rescue centre how they were inundated 6 – 12 months after the films release when all those cute puppies grew up. How long before the R.S.P.C.A are swamped with Pugs because they’re ‘so last year’.

Three Silly News Stories

Robin Glover — Mon, 07 Jul 2008 17:08:00 +0000

It must be ‘Silly Season’ looking at the press this week. We of course had the one serious story covered in a separate blog about Shock Collars in Wales.

Silly story number one was the introduction of a new non emergency phone number by Dundee Police to take pressure off of the 999 system which was being overloaded by trivial enquiries.

It was decided that a bright eye catching poster was needed to draw the public’s attention to the change. After much discussion it was decided to use a picture of an eight week old German Shepherd puppy, a potential Police Dog. Sitting in his handler’s upturned cap doing what pups do best, looking cute. Next to the picture were details of the new phone number. A simple idea, people see the cute picture, look at the poster and get the information.

No problem? Wrong, of course there is a problem. What if it upsets one of the few Muslims who live in the force area? They think dogs are unclean so everyone in the Police Service must make a grovelling public apology for the ‘insensitivity’ of the Police and of course withdraw the poster. Has anyone complained? One local politician out to make a name for himself. I know that there are people of all persuasions who trawl the media looking for some way, anyway, to be outraged or offended but come on, hasn’t some senior Police Officer or Government member got the guts to stand up and point out to the troublemakers that it’s a picture of a small dog advertising a phone number? That’s all it is, furthermore, the number is to help ‘the community’ a word beloved of these easily offended people who are usually self styled ‘Community Leaders’. In many cases of course the last thing these ‘leaders’ want is a happy and contented community because then their power base would be gone and they would have to revert to their true selves, sad inadequates with a strong dose of bitterness.

It is also of interest that it is now not uncommon to see Muslims with dogs, if only to guard their premises and that a number of Muslim clerics have stated that, even those who do consider dogs unclean make an exception in the case of hunting and ‘Service’ dogs because they are assisting mankind. A storm in a teacup, or should I say a Police Cap?

Silly story two. Once again political correctness interferes for no reason, and of course, doesn’t ask the people who have to do the job. This time it’s worry in case a explosive detection dog had to search a Muslim household and as a result offended the occupants. As previously mentioned the dog would be a service dog and therefore if not OK at least acceptable. The only thing that would be offensive would be dog saliva. So what have the brains come up with to prevent potential terror suspects being made ‘unclean’ by saliva? Yes you’re right, got it in one. Fit them with little lace up bootees, that’ll solve it???

I have a suspicion that anyone having their property searched with a terrorist connection is probably going to be less than pleased anyway and the arrival of a dog is going to be the least of their worries, unless of course the dog finds ‘the hide’. Once again people who don’t live in the real world are just looking for conflict. they are following their own agenda.

We did try boots on police dogs back in the 80s when inner city riots were sweeping the UK but found that the dogs were a little less than impressed with their new kit. Some ripped them straight off, others refused to move and those that did tended to stagger as if drunk before picking one of the other options to deal with them.

Silly story three, the top three breeds in a list of the most aggressive dogs are, 1) Dachshund. 2) Chihuahua 3) Jack Russell. We Dog listeners have a saying that to blame a dogs behaviour solely on its breed is like saying all Frenchmen wear berets. Of course breeds have certain pre-dispositions that we’ve bred into them but almost without fail their behaviour is down to the way that they interact with their owners and the signals they get from them. Owners of bigger dogs are probably more aware of the potential of trouble if their dogs bite. Many owners of smaller breeds either don’t believe that their dog would bite anyone or if they do don’t think it either hurts or matters. Owners like this often get a rude awakening when they injured party turns up at the Police Station demanding action.

Don’t worry what breed or mix of breeds you’ve got, big or small. If you give them the right information so they can rely on you (that doesn’t mean nagging them with sit, down and stay ad nauseum), they will be happy and safe dogs. the best way to achieve this is by contacting me or one of my colleagues and arranging a consultation. You can find a list of qualified Dog Listeners by visiting Jan Fennell’s website www. janfennellthedoglistener.com

To read the full ‘Ankle Biter’ story click on http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/howaboutthat/2254479/Sausage-dogs-are-the-most-aggressive-dogs.html

Electric Shock Collars Banned in Wales

Robin Glover — Mon, 07 Jul 2008 16:29:00 +0000

The good news is that the Welsh Assembly have banned Electric ShockCollars. The bad news is that it remains legal to buy sell and use them for the forseeable future until further legislation is enacted.The very bad news is that the UK Government is not following suit. I remember a certain Anthony (call me Tony. I’m just a regular guy) Blair promising ‘joined up government’ when he came to power. That obviously doesn’t cover things that probably 99% of the public think is wrong like cruelty.

How about this for a response to the ruling? A statement from the UK government says: “While we are aware of a number of scientific studies on electric shock collars DEFRA considers that to date those studies published in this area are not sufficiently robust and that the evidence base needs to be built on before consideration can be given to either banning or regulating their use.”The government is not prepared to do this unless there is clear evidence that these devices in themselves are harmful to welfare.

“DEFRA,now there’s a name to conjure with. The Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. would that be the same DEFRA whose incompetence at their own laboratories allowed the Foot and Mouth virus to escape thus decimating the UK cattle population, forcing many farmers into bankruptcy and some to suicide? The same DEFRA who have systematically made a complete hash out of dealing with, Bird Flu, Blue Tongue, the Bovine TB issue to name but a few? I’d go to Lucretia Borgia for cooking lessons before seeking DEFRAs opinion on animal welfare.

The fight goes on against both shock and spiked collars, we’re not going away. How a supposedly intelligent person can put out a press release like the one above I just don’t know. Did they not read what they had written before sending it out for release? Perhaps they should have said ‘They’re only a little bit cruel. Ok, so they hurt the dogs and place them under stress because the dog doesn’t know what’s going on but hey! We need to be robust and really put the animals under pressure so that we can see them really traumatised. Only then can we have discussion and focus groups talking at public expense for several years at least before coming up with some wishy washy non decision.”

I favour the attitude of Sir Winston Churchill. When he was presented with a situation in which it was obvious what had to be done, what was the right thing to do, would write across the papers in big letters so that there could be no doubt about his wishes. “ACTION THIS DAY!”. just let some civil servant or politician try and say they misunderstood the Prime Ministers intentions. Surely any right minded person must know that this equipment is cruel and therefore should not be available to anyone to use at anytime?

Click on the link below to read the whole story

http://www.dogworld.co.uk/News/27-welsh-ban-for-shock-collars