# Double Blind Issues



## Jim Delbridge (Jan 27, 2010)

As a follow-up on double blinds, I recently lost an HRD student/handler on the local civilian team that I'd spent two years investing in and torturing. She's now moved to another state to go to med school. My loss is Iowa's gain. I expect she'll have all sorts of new ideas to torture me with on her return.

Soooo, I have to get others on the civilian team to set up double blinds for me.....*sigh* non-HRD handlers. That last episode had the problem setter putting a source outside the area...no big deal, called it negative with both my dogs.
This last weekend, I had someone else define the area in a junkyard and the problem setter again choose from four sources what to put out there. As we're deciding who does what first, the problem setter says out of hand, "once you find your source then we can work the area dogs through there."

This is a common mistake and exactly why we must have double blinds. The problem setter tried to cover her behind, but it was too late. I'm mentoring the problem setter's daughter and she let mom have it. This is simply the learning curve of what's required. The problem setter has to be good at poker, letting nothing out. I didn't ask about the problem yet with one slip of the tongue I knew I had only one source. I did cover the area like there could be more and my dogs got to find the same source three times each.....but there was no pressure.

The problem was pretty simple in a great area, so after both my dogs worked it then I had the daughter set up a booger for my dogs to problem solve. While my dogs worked it, I realized there was piping that people could fit in, so we got a teenager to crawl backwards down into the fiberglass pipe till they were out of sight such that the disaster dogs had to avoid my charred remains and find the live person in the big tubes. My source was tossed under some haphazardly piled rusted 55 gallon barrels with air pockets all through them. My working dog only goes into rubble or unstable areas if there is scent there. He gave me a look of respect and challenge as he balanced his way closer to the source. Of course the GSD/dutch shepard disaster dog danced all over the different surfaces looking for his live person.

The handler that moved to Iowa worked very odd hours and often would set me up a double-blind two days ahead of time. She often drank a beer after an 18-hour shift while she was doing this in the woods, so we often searched the wrong area for quite a while or a critter would steal her source (as my dog would show us the way it went). While I'm not suggesting this is a good problem-setting style, she did set me up some great double blinds that we might spend hours trying to figure out where the area really was. Dogs got great negatives and eventually we'd make a find because by that time she'd have told me how many as she wanted her sources back. I'd have the first 30 minutes of working the area then coming out and saying, "look, we got nothing, so I'm calling it a negative." She'd walk back with me then look around and say, "oooo, this isn't right." And, then a real search would commence.

I don't like blinds with problem setter observers because I'll eventually hear, "one to go.....", "you might need to expand the borders I gave you a bit more...", "man he nailed that one!" (before I call it), etc.

Course, my first training partner had a habit of saying, "you found four sources? I did say four, didn't I? I'm sorry, there are six sources out there, keep working. no no, the hot dogs and the bologna that you passed on don't count. Noooo, I didn't bring that dead cat in here, it was already there......"

Dang I miss her. I deserved all the crap she gave me for the problems I gave her. We had a habit of setting problems up in very public places with sources no one could see. We'd then snail mail a map ( to the other one) of the area and write, "let me know if you find any or all."

Jim


----------



## David Frost (Mar 29, 2006)

Jim says: "*sigh* non-HRD handlers."

Soooo, do murderers have to attend a certain school to learn how to properly bury a body? 

DFrost


----------



## Jim Delbridge (Jan 27, 2010)

Actually, when I ask if I'm going to work a buried, I do ask if LE thinks it's an organized killer or non-organized. Organized tends to bury deep, cut-up into smaller pieces, leave hard scent problems versus large. Non-organized tend to dump or make shallow graves. Part of that forensic training was learning all about the different killers we have out there. Different mindsets dispose of human remains in different ways.

I sighed because dog teams that find living bodies tend to think visually rather that what nature can provide. It's all part of knowing what scent can do. A live person is an on-going hot air scent machine. Except for in the small window of active decomposition, HRD tends to work with scents that hug the ground or are at the whim of the elements. 

Not being a snob. I'm simply going by experience.

Jim


----------



## Peter Cavallaro (Dec 1, 2010)

HRD???? please define for the ignorant


----------



## Jim Delbridge (Jan 27, 2010)

Human Remains Detection

Cadaver Dog can be a "dirty word" in some areas because there have and are teams that tell L.E. that their "cadaver dog" will find anything dead, but can't pick out human. So, many of us migrated to a term that is more definitive.

Jim


----------



## Nancy Jocoy (Apr 19, 2006)

Well, Jim you could always move to South Carolina and we will set up some real good problems. We have been doing double blinds and despite all the negative feedback folks give it I am finding to be REAL instructive. Amazing how much we can read someone who knows where they put it.

Not having a clue if an area has a hide or how many hids or what hides ads a whole new dimension and you learn to read each others dogs better two...just like if you were flanking them on a search.....

I know EXACTLY how I would dispose of a body hehehehe.......though I cant even kill a small critter let alone a person. But if I did.........


----------



## Jim Delbridge (Jan 27, 2010)

We began doing double blinds long ago out of necessity. We set up a problem for each other then would go be a victim for the live-find dogs. As we were hiking out, we'd hand the other a map of their area. Once the other had completed (or not) then our own dogs had to work it. It's where I got the attitude of not setting up a problem for anyone that I don't think my own dog can solve. It can be very embarrassing if you set up a "creative problem" that is beyond everyone's dogs. Course, torture each other enough and the dogs becomes a known resource where if someone else looses their source, her dog or mine would get called to come find it.

Jim


----------



## Dave Colborn (Mar 25, 2009)

David Frost said:


> Jim says: "*sigh* non-HRD handlers."
> 
> Soooo, do murderers have to attend a certain school to learn how to properly bury a body?
> 
> DFrost



hahaha.

Jim. You have to break everyone of this. Not specific to HRD. Handlers will try to read certifying folks and trainers. Listen for stopped conversation, intake of breath (preparing to say "AWESOME DOG" prior to the handler calling alert, etc) stopped movement, everyone staring at the dog.

The best cert I ever did, I came out and told the cert authority where the hides were and what was blank. No input whatsoever from him.


----------



## Nancy Jocoy (Apr 19, 2006)

I really do wish some of those who are so vocally opposed to it would give it a try. I didnt see the sense in it until we started doing it.


----------



## Dave Colborn (Mar 25, 2009)

Jim Delbridge said:


> We began doing double blinds long ago out of necessity. We set up a problem for each other then would go be a victim for the live-find dogs. As we were hiking out, we'd hand the other a map of their area. Once the other had completed (or not) then our own dogs had to work it. It's where I got the attitude of not setting up a problem for anyone that I don't think my own dog can solve. It can be very embarrassing if you set up a "creative problem" that is beyond everyone's dogs. Course, torture each other enough and the dogs becomes a known resource where if someone else looses their source, her dog or mine would get called to come find it.
> 
> Jim


What if the handler rewards the dog in an improper area? IE false alert?


----------



## David Frost (Mar 29, 2006)

Nancy Jocoy said:


> I really do wish some of those who are so vocally opposed to it would give it a try. I didnt see the sense in it until we started doing it.


I agree. Unfortunately there are still a number of folks that run less than 50% of their training blind. I can see why they'd be scared to death of a double blind. 

DFrost


----------



## Nancy Jocoy (Apr 19, 2006)

Dave Colborn said:


> What if the handler rewards the dog in an improper area? IE false alert?


We don't reward - just like on a real search. Just "good dog work more" We reward enough in training with knowns or unknowns single blind and give the ball to our flanker. Kind of like that jackpot thing.


----------



## Peter Cavallaro (Dec 1, 2010)

Jim Delbridge said:


> Human Remains Detection
> 
> Cadaver Dog can be a "dirty word" in some areas because there have and are teams that tell L.E. that their "cadaver dog" will find anything dead, but can't pick out human. So, many of us migrated to a term that is more definitive.
> 
> Jim


so what degree of body parts do they detect eg human teeth/ small dismembered meaty bits? and how fresh are we talking here, just curious. had no idea there were dogs trained specifically for this.


----------



## Jim Delbridge (Jan 27, 2010)

Dave Colborn said:


> hahaha.
> 
> Jim. You have to break everyone of this. Not specific to HRD. Handlers will try to read certifying folks and trainers. Listen for stopped conversation, intake of breath (preparing to say "AWESOME DOG" prior to the handler calling alert, etc) stopped movement, everyone staring at the dog.
> 
> The best cert I ever did, I came out and told the cert authority where the hides were and what was blank. No input whatsoever from him.


 
There ya go. And if it had been the first time you ever did it, you'd have been weak in the knees about then till he gave you the thumbs up.

Jim


----------



## Jim Delbridge (Jan 27, 2010)

Peter Cavallaro said:


> so what degree of body parts do they detect eg human teeth/ small dismembered meaty bits? and how fresh are we talking here, just curious. had no idea there were dogs trained specifically for this.


 
My dogs train for their first year of life on clean teeth and bones: surface, elevated, and buried.
My working dog was on an accelerated training program (due to necessity) and was working 10 "historic level" teeth buried 14-18 inches aged one month in the ground.
The new kid is getting a slower training schedule.
After their first year, they get to do decomp, but it's basically a no-brainer after working the hard stuff. Fresh blood is toughest for them, but I've never been called out to find fresh blood all by itself. L.E. has CSI's and luminol for that. Dried blood is not a big deal. My dogs train on dental, skeletal, muscle, adipose tissue(bodyfat), neural, and adipocere (grave wax) as well as combinations found naturally.
jim


----------



## Jim Delbridge (Jan 27, 2010)

Dave Colborn said:


> What if the handler rewards the dog in an improper area? IE false alert?


It's not uncommon to not reward the dog when working a double blind. It's not uncommon to not reward the dog on a real search. When I head out to to a search, I always throw something out on my land just before I leave to work the dog on when we get back. Realize that if you dog hits a buried that someone has gone to great lengths to hide, you have to rely totally on the dog and (might) find out down the road if you were right. I've had sheriffs tell me two-three years later that finds were made on my dog's hits. One case they already had a mandible, but the family wanted more. The L.E. showed them my flags, but said they had enough. The family came back with hand tools and pulled all the moss up off the rocks and found the finger and toe bones that fell into the rocks that the scavengers didn't find.

In the example I cited on the beginning of this thread, the problem setter used my sources. A really decent double blind would use sources that my dogs haven't ever used. Once both of my dogs got close to either source, you could see them visibly relax as they recognized it. I have to routinely create new sources to give my dogs a new chemical make-up they haven't quite seen before. Arpad Vass has identified some 478-plus chemicals that come off the body during its decomposition. No one knows what the dogs identify as uniquely human. Vass is trying to make a good guess with his new tool that he calls "L.A.B.R.A.D.O.R.", but my money is still on the dogs for at least two more decades.

Jim


----------



## Dave Colborn (Mar 25, 2009)

Jim Delbridge said:


> It's not uncommon to not reward the dog when working a double blind. It's not uncommon to not reward the dog on a real search. When I head out to to a search, I always throw something out on my land just before I leave to work the dog on when we get back. Realize that if you dog hits a buried that someone has gone to great lengths to hide, you have to rely totally on the dog and (might) find out down the road if you were right. I've had sheriffs tell me two-three years later that finds were made on my dog's hits. One case they already had a mandible, but the family wanted more. The L.E. showed them my flags, but said they had enough. The family came back with hand tools and pulled all the moss up off the rocks and found the finger and toe bones that fell into the rocks that the scavengers didn't find.
> 
> In the example I cited on the beginning of this thread, the problem setter used my sources. A really decent double blind would use sources that my dogs haven't ever used. Once both of my dogs got close to either source, you could see them visibly relax as they recognized it. I have to routinely create new sources to give my dogs a new chemical make-up they haven't quite seen before. Arpad Vass has identified some 478-plus chemicals that come off the body during its decomposition. No one knows what the dogs identify as uniquely human. Vass is trying to make a good guess with his new tool that he calls "L.A.B.R.A.D.O.R.", but my money is still on the dogs for at least two more decades.
> 
> Jim


OK. So do you train this way all the time so the dog never gets primary reward on the find once they are trained?


----------



## Dave Colborn (Mar 25, 2009)

Nancy Jocoy said:


> We don't reward - just like on a real search. Just "good dog work more" We reward enough in training with knowns or unknowns single blind and give the ball to our flanker. Kind of like that jackpot thing.



Got it. I asked another question before I got to this post. I agree with this once the dog is trained. I think it is very valid part of a program. Probably haven't done enough of it myself.


----------



## Jim Delbridge (Jan 27, 2010)

Dave Colborn said:


> OK. So do you train this way all the time so the dog never gets primary reward on the find once they are trained?


 
Nope, the double blind is a check to keep the handler honest. It's a tool we all should use to see if we are cueing the dog, if we've become a crutch for the dog in training, or we are too controlling. I worked with one handler whose dog would only search where she faced. She had no idea that she always faced the source when she trained her dog. I proved it to her by tossing a very strong source out in 1 ft tall grass and asking her to face any direction in a 270 degree arc, but not to face the source. It was obvious that her dog could smell the source, but it would never deviate from her gaze in it's search area. I know a lot of handlers that get into the habit of helping their dogs make a find. In a double blind, if they help, more than half the time they will cause the dog to false alert. And, there are the handlers that try to out think the problem setter (or calamity in a real search). They convince themselves that they know where the scent source is, so they force their dog to search in that area, to dwell in that area, and often the dog finally gives in with an alert.
There are lots of bad habits we can all create in training. The double-blind is a reality check. A failure in a training double-blind should be considered a gift if the reason for the failure is determined....egoes can be so fragile. Most people that avoid a double-blind at all cost are afraid of what will happen. If that's the case, they should not be on a search either as now they are cheating the victims.

Jim


----------



## Peter Cavallaro (Dec 1, 2010)

Jim Delbridge said:


> My dogs train for their first year of life on clean teeth and bones: surface, elevated, and buried.
> My working dog was on an accelerated training program (due to necessity) and was working 10 "historic level" teeth buried 14-18 inches aged one month in the ground.
> The new kid is getting a slower training schedule.
> After their first year, they get to do decomp, but it's basically a no-brainer after working the hard stuff. Fresh blood is toughest for them, but I've never been called out to find fresh blood all by itself. L.E. has CSI's and luminol for that. Dried blood is not a big deal. My dogs train on dental, skeletal, muscle, adipose tissue(bodyfat), neural, and adipocere (grave wax) as well as combinations found naturally.
> jim


 
thanks for the insight into a new world (for me), interesting. not that i hope you get a lot of work though :-o.

BTW is selection similar to narc dog detection and similar breeds

cheers


----------



## Dave Colborn (Mar 25, 2009)

Jim Delbridge said:


> Nope, the double blind is a check to keep the handler honest. It's a tool we all should use to see if we are cueing the dog, if we've become a crutch for the dog in training, or we are too controlling. I worked with one handler whose dog would only search where she faced. She had no idea that she always faced the source when she trained her dog. I proved it to her by tossing a very strong source out in 1 ft tall grass and asking her to face any direction in a 270 degree arc, but not to face the source. It was obvious that her dog could smell the source, but it would never deviate from her gaze in it's search area. I know a lot of handlers that get into the habit of helping their dogs make a find. In a double blind, if they help, more than half the time they will cause the dog to false alert. And, there are the handlers that try to out think the problem setter (or calamity in a real search). They convince themselves that they know where the scent source is, so they force their dog to search in that area, to dwell in that area, and often the dog finally gives in with an alert.
> There are lots of bad habits we can all create in training. The double-blind is a reality check. A failure in a training double-blind should be considered a gift if the reason for the failure is determined....egoes can be so fragile. Most people that avoid a double-blind at all cost are afraid of what will happen. If that's the case, they should not be on a search either as now they are cheating the victims.
> 
> Jim


I saw Nancy's post. I agree completely with what you are both saying. Most dogs are really fantastic if you get the handler out of the way. This is just one more way of making the handler rely on the dog. I also think some trainers can watch without cuing.


----------



## Jim Delbridge (Jan 27, 2010)

Peter Cavallaro said:


> thanks for the insight into a new world (for me), interesting. not that i hope you get a lot of work though :-o.
> 
> BTW is selection similar to narc dog detection and similar breeds
> 
> cheers


Welllllll, we're having a discussion on that on another list. Some people do it the same way using ball drive. Others of us test puppies to find the "naturals". That's what I do. I audition litters at 5-7 weeks of age to find the "natural HRD dog" with all the right traits that I like to train with.

My philosophy is not all high-ball drive dogs can be HRD dogs, but puppies obessed with HRD scents with a high-ball drive are often easy to train. If you really get interested in finding a scent dog for live, trailing, or HRD then let me know and I'll send you a link to 46 lllloong pages on how I audition litters.
My current working dog was the result of auditioning nine litters. My 19-month old in training was found after auditioning three really great litters where the breeders were contacting me to look at their puppies.

Dog handlers that continue past their first dog in HRD tend to become as obsessive as their dogs in the hunt.
Jim


----------



## Peter Cavallaro (Dec 1, 2010)

_ If you really get interested in finding a scent dog for live, trailing, or HRD then let me know and I'll send you a link to 46 lllloong pages on how I audition litters._

Jim interested in live trailing (if its what i think it is) but HRD is something i would not pursue. i asked purely out of curiosity.

if its about working dogs i want to know about it is all - and thats a whole lot more than just dogs that bite.

love tracking and have good dog for it but have never tracked a moving person, that would be super cool - i don't think there is any AKC or other org that does that in oz. closest would be PSD handler which i am not.

will follow you up for link to article via PM

thanks for info.

cheers


----------

