# Recall/Refind Collar?



## Kevin Cramer

I came across this Norwegian video showing the dogs using a collar with a "loop" to indicate they found a victim. When the dogs are searching the loop is hanging underneath the dogs chin. When the dog finds the victim, he puts the loop in his mouth and runs back to the handler with the loop in his mouth and sits. It's a clear indication that the dog found the victim.

Has anybody seen or used this type of collar before?



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MqhAfXIxG6w&feature=mfu_in_order&list=UL


----------



## Chris McDonald

No, I never been to Norwegiana to see one


----------



## Nancy Jocoy

I have seen the collar - it is a type of bringsel.

I have not seen anyone use it over here. I want a bell on any dog running free in the woods and wood be concerned about anything in the dogs mouth getting snagged.

Other forms of indications like bump or tug (put the tug on your belt) seem to work fine.


----------



## Kevin Cramer

Thanks Nancy, I didn't know what it was called. I found the collar on a google search.

http://www.bringsel.com/bringk.html


----------



## Mirka Jantunen

I use a what we call a Swedish bringsel as Norwegian is considered a problem by some person/area search judges. I actually like the Norwegian loop model for the ease with which a dog can run with the bringsel in it's mouth. I know my dog has dropped her training reel in the woods at least once due to her panting too heavily and this can happen with her permanent bringsel, she'll probably pick it up on her own, but were a judge to see it happen they wouldn't be too pleased with that either. It'd be easier to hang on to the Norwegian model. The issues with said bringsel type is that the dog may get it's front feet through the bringsel, if it's too loose on them and if it's too tight the dog might not be able to grab the bringsel or at least they can't drop the bringsel on their own once they've picked it up. Mind you the break away mechanism works (often too well), but some dogs get quite frustrated, if there's an issue with the equipment while they are about to find the subject.

Mind you I don't currently train my dog for SAR, but for our national working trials. And only approved indications those (it's a sport and style matters quite a bit) are barking and using a bringsel. I chose bringsel as Healy would find it rude to bark at strange people. Now I only have to reward her a bit more for pulling on her long lead. We may well end up qualifying as a K9 team, too, as I have previous experience and as Healy's results from working trials are half the equation.


----------



## Zakia Days

I have seen video of it being used in a S&R trial/certification which I thought was in Finland on you tube in the past. Dogs in the video were bred by Petra Strubing Kennel Tulikuuma and her website has some video of the dogs in training for the certification and some of the actual certification/test. I wasn't sure if the person being found places the loop in the dog's mouth or if the dog grabs the loop on its own and returns to handler. I would be a bit concerned if the loop didn't have a "breakaway" feature and it gets caught on something as the dog is plowing through the woods.


----------



## Mirka Jantunen

Zakia Days said:


> I wasn't sure if the person being found places the loop in the dog's mouth or if the dog grabs the loop on its own and returns to handler. I would be a bit concerned if the loop didn't have a "breakaway" feature and it gets caught on something as the dog is plowing through the woods.


The dog is taught to grab the loop on its own. It's not like a missing person could be expected to do such a task for the dog. And there's a breakaway in the collar, which can be a bit too sensitive quite often. Healy's bringsel is a lot like this here: http://media.munstersystrarna.se/2012/07/IMG_0944-001.jpg Naturally it's attached to her collar and it's also short enough to suit her size and the color is close to pink as that way I should be able to tell from a distance, if she's indicating a find to me.


----------



## Craig Snyder

Mirka,

Is there a perceived advantage of using a bringsel over a jump alert refind dog? Or for that matter any other type of alert/refind dog?

Seems like this method must have some how grown out of a traditional method used for something years ago. Maybe a spin off of teaching retrievers and cross training hunting dogs for SAR? They were already use to bringing back a bird so carrying something back in their mouth was something they expected to do as an outgrowth of their hunitng training? I'm just guessnig.

While it's way cool I think to teach it, I can think of advantages of not using it and training a jump alert instead or even a sit and bark in front of the handler.

I'm thinking it might be good way to add additional indications for a cross trained dog. For instance, maybe grabbing and holding a bringsel for a water HRD dog might be a very safe, and effective indication on a boat vs.getting excited and pawing the water or barking. I don't know.

Craig


----------



## Nancy Jocoy

I checked up on the history and believe the history of the Bringsel was from WWI when soldiers wore some sort of fob the dog would tear off, bring back, and use to take the crew to the wounded soldier.

I would love to see an answer too as it seems the recall/refind with bump or bark indication either at handler or victim works very well over here.


----------



## Craig Snyder

That makes a lot of sense Nancy. Maybe it also helps explain the origin of the soldiers dog tags. A newer version of a WW I fob. I always thought it was the similarity to putting a tag on a dog but when I think about it, I don't think dog ID's and licensees were very common for dogs during WW II. I'm thinking a soldiers dog tag predates actual dog tags. 

Makes a lot of sense of dog tags being an adaptation of a WW I type of bringsel/fob used by Military SAR dogs. Makes sense they would have put ID info on those too, thus allowing the dog to bring to handler the ID of the person the dog was going go take him back too.

Need to do some more research on that!

Craig


----------



## Craig Snyder

From Wkipedia - May or may not be right but evidently the germans started licenscing dogs quite a while ago.

Franco-Prussian War
The Prussian Army issued identification tags for its troops at the beginning of the Franco-Prussian War in 1870. They were nicknamed _Hundemarken_ (the German equivalent of "dog tags") and compared to a similar identification system instituted for dogs in the Prussian capital city of Berlin at about the same time.[3]

Craig


----------



## Nancy Jocoy

Ah according to this a bit different and Stephanitz was not a fan of the bringsel. Though I did read somewhere else they pulled it off the soldier.

http://doglawreporter.blogspot.com/2011/07/red-cross-iron-cross-ambulance-dogs-in.html


----------



## Craig Snyder

Great article Nancy! I really liked it! I think all K9 officers should be called "Wow-Wow-Lieutenant". :lol:\\/=D>

Craig


----------



## Bob Scott

Nancy Jocoy said:


> Ah according to this a bit different and Stephanitz was not a fan of the bringsel. Though I did read somewhere else they pulled it off the soldier.
> 
> http://doglawreporter.blogspot.com/2011/07/red-cross-iron-cross-ambulance-dogs-in.html



Doesn't make sense to teach it for a real world SAR dog. I would think the bringsel would be item specific to the dog. If it's not there there then what is the dog expected to do?
Sport only in most instances today.


----------



## Craig Snyder

Bob Scott said:


> Doesn't make sense to teach it for a real world SAR dog. I would think the bringsel would be item specific to the dog. If it's not there there then what is the dog expected to do?
> Sport only in most instances today.


I think that was part of the whole problem back then. That's why they started attaching the bringsel to the dog's collar so it always "had" the item. I think it just grew out of what they were doing. A bark alert couldn't be used due to the threat of drawing enemy fire. 

With trench warfare in WWI a jump alert wasn't practical as the handlers were either lying down or crouched in a trrench. In addition, these dogs at that time only appear to have worked in a limited area. I believe the article said 240yds x 50 yds? That's a fixed area in front of the handler of about 2.5 football fields. 

For today's SAR dogs that area is much larger. I've seen wilderness dogs range 1/8-1/4 mile from their handler's at times. So I think for the times and situation, the bringsel was the workable solution. Today's world I don't see it as being the preferred solution for wilderness SAR dogs. I do think that it might be a nice alternative for certain detection dogs like HRD on boats, or bomb dogs where a passive alert is needed.

Craig


----------



## Nancy Jocoy

We have had handlers who elect to have the dog bite a "bringsel" on the handler's body...just s mall tug. But I would rather not have anything depend on a peice of equipment that could get lost. For the boat, the body language leading up to and trained indication should be more than enough.


----------



## Jim Delbridge

The bringsel almost always comes up with new handlers that are working out the alert they want to train. In my area, it's just too hot for it to be feasible as an alert. Even the bringsel on the handler's belt quickly gets changed to either a bang or a bump. I've seen really high drive dogs with a belt bringsel actually either pull the handler down or rip belt loops. It's almost as much fun to watch as the 98 lb handler who teaches their 120 lb dog to do a body bang. Doubly entertaining is convincing the handler that "bracing for impact" is actually a cue, so they can't do that either. The lab that launches itself at the handler from 12 feet away is always an adventure.
With such alerts, I have always wondered at the logic of labeling the bark as an active alert.

As I recall, the bringsel tends to be credited to the Swiss some decades back and it's rarely too hot for the dog to grip the bringsel on a long run there.

And then of course, there's the handler that trained three or four alerts on the dog till the handler settled such that on testing day the handler has to tell the evaluator all the alerts the dog might do on a find.

Pick early and pick well.


Jim


----------



## Nancy Jocoy

Then you have the "do everything" dogs with different indications for different disciplines. Yeeeesh.
At least even WWI sounds like the live find dogs were trained to ingore the dead.


----------



## Jim Delbridge

yup yup, "My dog knows which job it's doing by what I put on it." 
I taught at one seminar where a dog had a harness, choke, flat collar, and stim collar on it all at once. The handler had transmitter around his neck, clicker in one hand, touch stick in the other, and reward in pocket. By the end of day one, I had duct taped the handler's hands to his sides and put duct tape on his mouth. I stripped the dog naked. We entered the search area and I pulled off the duct tape on the handler's mouth just long enough for him to say, "go to work."

Dog found all three sources in the area without reward until the last find and I tossed the ball from behind the handler. 

Many handlers would have been pissed. This guy had tears in his eyes and stated that I'd proved that his dog could do it. As I was not the lead instructor, I just smiled and nodded.

On day two he left our group in a huff as the lead instructor used him as an example of the handler being the biggest handicap. There was another group teaching cadaver at this seminar, so he went to them. On day three, he returned and asked to work with me alone as his dog sucked with the other group.........oi vey The scarey thing is it's almost guaranteed to see at least one handler like this per seminar if not more.

Jim

Oh the dog's alert was a bark with a nice natural touch for targeting....a dobie.


----------



## Mirka Jantunen

Craig Snyder said:


> Mirka,
> 
> Is there a perceived advantage of using a bringsel over a jump alert refind dog? Or for that matter any other type of alert/refind dog?
> 
> Seems like this method must have some how grown out of a traditional method used for something years ago. Maybe a spin off of teaching retrievers and cross training hunting dogs for SAR? They were already use to bringing back a bird so carrying something back in their mouth was something they expected to do as an outgrowth of their hunitng training? I'm just guessnig.


Nope, I don't think so. Maybe in a big dog, small handler situation? At least around here most retrievers use a bark alert, I think. Teaching retrieve is a must in trials (again this is a sport) as the obedience part is the same as in SchH. In SAR some dogs use a jump or a touch alert, but quite a few dogs are trained for both SAR and sports, which leads to there being quite a few SAR dogs with bringsel indications. My person search group has one such dog.


Craig Snyder said:


> For today's SAR dogs that area is much larger. I've seen wilderness dogs range 1/8-1/4 mile from their handler's at times. So I think for the times and situation, the bringsel was the workable solution. Today's world I don't see it as being the preferred solution for wilderness SAR dogs. I do think that it might be a nice alternative for certain detection dogs like HRD on boats, or bomb dogs where a passive alert is needed.


Over here handlers prefer that the dog works within eyesight, unless it gets a "live" scent. I do remember one time, when we were on a training camp in the middle of nowhere in January, and the triple discipline (tracking, air scent, rubble piles) dog found the track within the first minutes, sprinted to the subjects and started barking and barking and barking. He got to bark for solid fifteen minutes, we timed it from the safety of the cabin about a mile away, as there was some two feet of snow through which the search team had to travel.


Jim Delbridge said:


> yup yup, "My dog knows which job it's doing by what I put on it."


My dog does know the difference between her choke (compulsory in obedience) and her flat bringsel collar, working dog vest (compulsory in trials), indication harness and lead. I'm also hoping she'll eventually begin to associate said vest and choke with article search as that is the mandatory apparel for that part of the trials. We've practiced article search so little she couldn't have really formed a strong association yet. This isn't to say she couldn't do the work without the apparel, but as it is compulsory in trials naturally we practice with those specific items on, too. Naturally she also knows when we are about to leave for our search practice, too. And I'll be sure to repeat the same steps (preparing her rewards etc.), when we are leaving for a trial.


----------



## Kat Hunsecker

I was debating on getting a norwegian bringsel collar when I started with my Anka. But i was talking to a few people that used it and they said it can be a bit difficult if you have dense vegitation. some dogs lost it due to the brake away...

We stuck to the leather tab on the collar. In general we let the dog "decide" what kind of alert comes easiest. Anka decided she needed to bring me something when she found. In the beginning this could be the whole handler (the ball tucked in the kangarroo pocket of the hoody) and she pulled on the string draging the "victim " along. Then she brought sticks, grabed radios out of the victims hands, stole blankets they sat on.... so we decided it might be best to give her something to bring back. Heat wasn't that much of an issue. The tab was big and just long enough, she could rest it in her mouth and pant if needed. she also took sshort brakes in a creek or pond, picked it back up and continued on her way back to me. We put some lighting in it for nights. that helped. 

Most of our dogs do jump alerts, it seemed to come easiest, one other dog also does the bringsel. For us the tab on the collar is fine.


----------



## Gillian Schuler

Kevin Cramer said:


> I came across this Norwegian video showing the dogs using a collar with a "loop" to indicate they found a victim. When the dogs are searching the loop is hanging underneath the dogs chin. When the dog finds the victim, he puts the loop in his mouth and runs back to the handler with the loop in his mouth and sits. It's a clear indication that the dog found the victim.
> 
> Has anybody seen or used this type of collar before?
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MqhAfXIxG6w&feature=mfu_in_order&list=UL


Yes, we use it in SAR training in Swizerland. However, it is not always a "clear" indication of having found the victim. In training, too much stress can cause the dog to present the "Bringsel" as we call it in German.


----------



## Nancy Jocoy

A search Sunday is very typical of what we get...So many briars the dogs tongue was cut bleeding as were my arms. And the dog typically works odor with his mouth partially open and needs it too cool otherwise.

Seem to be able to keep a bell clear and not get hung up but can't even imagine the dog having to carry something in its mouth. No harness, just a collar he can back out of if need be.


----------

