# stuck in your own way of training?



## Robbie Waldrop (Aug 31, 2013)

Having been exposed to lots of different methods of training, I finally met a trainer that actually made the statement *"been doing it that way for over 30 years and it works".* 

I was just watching a group train and the trainer and I discussed some training issues that some of the dogs were having. During that discussion, we had a difference of opinion (no big deal), but then the dreaded statement was told to me. I like this trainer as a person and a trainer but I hope that everyone on this site is open to new and better methods of training. We continued to talk throughout the day and I got the feeling that every method he taught was in stone and there was no alternative.

Keep in mind that these were all police k-9's and so most of them are not going home and researching/training for hours on their own to problem solve. 

I had some questions when he did narcotics training on vehicles. It was done at a junk yard with about 50 vehicles. Some of the handlers had expressed concerns about different issues during narcotics so the junk yard was just a quick set up for them to use (no problem). There were 2 hides of marijuana, both interior on separate vehicles. Hides laid for 30 minutes and then they announced for the first dog to come out. 

While handler was getting his dog, trainer asked the person who placed narcotics out to rub his hands on the door handle of a clean vehicle:-s. Of course the the dog gave an alert on the door handle of the clean vehicle. The handler was told that it was a false indication and to correct him for that. I was taken back by this and had to ask why he was correcting the dog during that exercise. I was told "if there are no drugs there, my dogs don't alert on just residual odor". 

I ask him several questions and did not get a detailed response at that point. I asked about a pound being in the trunk, taken out of the trunk and the vehicle being stopped shortly after, dog alerting on the trunk. He said dog should not have alerted because there are no drugs there.

I asked about when I worked highway interdiction, my dog would alert on the dash or console and I would open it up and found $45,000 cash or other large sums of money. I never found any drugs in the vehicle but the courts did not dispute the alert on money. I was told it was a bad alert. 

two questions for everyone
1. Do most of you who train dogs experiment with different methods and try to continue your education in training?

2. Can someone please show me a video of a dog that will walk past fresh residual odor on a vehicle?

BTW....If his method worked, why did all of the dogs alert on the clean vehicle? 

Just puzzled](*,)](*,)


----------



## Clarence Pierre (Jun 15, 2013)

Both your questions and points are valid. Bad training is bad training, and setting a dog up for failure to be able to correct an unwanted behavior is a technique to be used by skilled trainers who know what hey are doing. Of course there is no way for that to be enforced. Police trainers are notorious for doing it the way they do it "because" or "because that's how we have always done it" without regard to if it is relevent, if it actually works or if it is necessary. My suggestion to you would to be the one different than the norm and go find training to improve/enhance your dogs capabilities. If not then at least to maintain them. If you must report there for training then maybe you should send your concerns up the chain or suggest alternative training for "variety". Keep in mind also that if a person in a position of authority in a matter can't answer your questions and they make no effort to get you an answer then there is an issue there. You are where you need to be with your questions. As a trainer one is NEVER finished learning and correcting a dog for alerting on what you have trained him to alert on is just plain confusing for a dog. I guess he doesn't teach a dog to "fringe" either then since he is not giving a positive indication to the exact location of the hide. A Great trainer told me several times...Always be an advocate for your dog! That is what you did and that is what you should have done.


----------



## Annamarie Somich (Jan 7, 2009)

This type of person is usually close minded about a lot of other things too. For example, a canine officer like this may be close minded to new techniques and methods in other areas of his LE job, and even other aspects of his life. This person does not want to leave his comfort zone, or may not have the ability to do so.

Teachers in the public and private school systems must develop different teaching methods and approaches that fit their individual personality to address students with different learning styles and abilities. In order to survive, they must learn different discipline strategies to suit the student and situation or they will fail as far as classroom management and no one will learn. Student results are constantly monitored and teachers are rewarded accordingly, at least in my state.

It would be nice to see the concept of teaching to different learning styles in education carry over into dog training.


----------



## Annamarie Somich (Jan 7, 2009)

Also, teachers work to stay current in education and their subject area. They are required by law and most do so anyway in order to be successful in their job. If a canine officer is not staying current in the subject of dog training, are they even current in the rest of their job? I'm sure that their government body and department have training classes for improvement and to also meet government requirements. So why isn't the same concept applied to their subject area - dog training. The problem may be that there is no standardization in police K9. Food for thought.


----------



## Annamarie Somich (Jan 7, 2009)

Also, can departments afford to go through a lot of dogs in order to select the few that match one unique training style or one handler personality type? I know it's easy for a sport person to select and discard a dog. But at the same time, it's hard for even a sport person to find a good dog. I know that there is not an abundance of police dogs so I would think that departments may not have the opportunity or money to be that micro selective. 

Ha ha - as a 6th grade math teacher, I never got to select my students.


----------



## Jennifer Andress (Sep 4, 2013)

Annamarie Somich said:


> It would be nice to see the concept of teaching to different learning styles in education carry over into dog training.


This has been a busy topic of discussion in the APDT newsletters for a while (also, to maintain CPDT certification you have to do continuing professional education classes every year). I've learned a lot from the discussion, and I haven't even been following it super closely because I don't do pet training anymore. But getting clients to understand and apply training concepts correctly is, of course, a huge thing for a pet trainer, especially since your clients aren't relying on the training for their livelihood and so they may not be as motivated to keep up as a police narcotics handler might be. You really have to find a way to effectively reach people on their level, whatever that may be.

And of course on top of that, you then have to teach people how to recognize, understand, and reach whatever their _dog's_ preferred learning style might be. Layers!

Anyway, it's definitely not a topic that trainers are ignoring, at least not in that corner of the field. The understanding is still in its early stages, and very much still developing, but the interest is there.


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

If these dogs were somewhat new then it's completely unfair to expect a dog to pass a fresh, residual sent in order to find the target odor. 
I did SAR with my older dog and we put distraction in slowly and only when the dogs were hitting solid on target odors.


----------



## Steve Burger (Jan 2, 2009)

Our system looks very different to how it looked 9 years ago when I joined the club. I remember a few years ago when we were not quite getting the expression we wanted and we brought Jogi in for some fresh approaches. Lance said he does not like to hear a whoosh sound, which is the sound of the competition blowing by you. I was privy to a conversation between Lance and Jogi where each said they were resistant to putting out books or video's because they were both sure that in 5 years the methods would likely look different, and instructional media could not keep up. 

At the same time we are very careful to make sure that anything that is added fits the overall system where every piece is linked together.


----------



## Jon Harris (Nov 23, 2011)

Wow, I guess I'm going to be a little less diplomatic than the rest of the posters.

This trainer is WRONG.

First. there is no such thing as residual odor, live odor, fresh odor, minimal odor or anything else. The dogs detects odor period if it is there , it is there. You knew the odor from the hands was good and yes that was a good alert. In the real world maybe no find but surely not a false alert.

Ive had those and I have always except once been able to determine why the dog alerted. Drugs were there shortly before or odored items ( hands) came in contact with.

As a detection dog handler, and you prove this point yourself by even asking the questions here, I always tried to learn more.Always tried to hone the skill and I still do. I read, watch, listen, try just about everything that will make me and my dog better. The training and learning never stops.

The trainer you are speaking of needs to be re-schooled or retired. The later is probably safer for all concerned.


----------



## Catherine Gervin (Mar 12, 2012)

what is the dog supposed to learn from being corrected for falling into a trap? how is the dog supposed to differentiate between a passing touch and a stowed quantity? is it only being trained to concern itself with larger amounts? is it not discouraging to try and tell the handler "hey, there's some here" and then get corrected even though there was a trace really and truly there?
just curious as to how much subtlety a dog is supposed to understand?


----------



## Jon Harris (Nov 23, 2011)

what the dog learns from that type of MISS-TRAINING is not to alert to trained odor.

what is the difference in odor from the hands on the door ( for discussion no dope in the car) and 50 pounds well sealed in a container that is not breathing. To the dog? nothing.

to the officer with a dog trained by this yahoo? a missed find
the the dope dealer? a lucky break. Dont tell us where this is being taught. It will give a free ride to the bad guys to transport through that area.

This is simply common sense. 
Maybe ask him how to train the dog to tell the difference in illicit dope and not medical MJ. That would be a trick


----------



## Sarah Platts (Jan 12, 2010)

Jon Harris said:


> Wow, I guess I'm going to be a little less diplomatic than the rest of the posters.
> 
> This trainer is WRONG.
> 
> First. there is no such thing as residual odor, live odor, fresh odor, minimal odor or anything else. The dogs detects odor period if it is there , it is there. You knew the odor from the hands was good and yes that was a good alert. In the real world maybe no find but surely not a false alert.


Thank you. I had a discussion once with a narcotic trainer who had a similar philosophy. He told me that his dog was proofed off of and would not react to any "residual odor". It got a bit heated and I finally laid out this scenario: Car has had 100lbs of MJ in the trunk for a week during the summer. It was removed just before the search. However, the folks forgot one MJ seed on the driver's side floor board. I asked this guy what his dog would do. He's like what do you mean? I asked him if he expected the dog to ignore the large amount of odor remaining in the trunk and only hit on the single MJ seed on the floorboard? The guy just stood there staring at me and finally said I didn't understand odor very much and walked away. I asked to get moved out this guy's class as I considered him to be a dufus.


----------



## Jon Harris (Nov 23, 2011)

you were right. he is a dufus.


I can imagine him teaching us what I do. I am explosive detection dog handler now and he better alert on any amount of trained odor.

This can also get into the discussion of trying to teach a dog not to respond on small ( in some states allowed) amounts of MJ. It just doesnt work and should not be taught,

No where in the US is MJ completely legal Not even Colorado.
There is discussion misguided in my opinion about trying to extinct dogs off small amounts of MJ because of some states allowing small amounts

So the officer stops a car full of minors with dope on them but his dog wont alert to small amounts because they are allowed Well not in this case. Any amount is illegal 


I actually had a military prosecutor say she thought the dogs were unreliable because small amounts were legal and these would be wrongful searches so she wouldnt use them.
I explained she was incorrect about the topic. She told me she was a lawyer and she knew better than a street officer.

I explained to her ( i was no longer in the military) she was wrong and didnt have a clue what she was talking about. I then asked here , since she was a military prosecutor just where in the military a small amount of dope was legal? She didnt have a answer for that. 
I then asked her to take my number and call me if she was prosecuting any of my cases so I could request someone that knew what the hell they were doing. About that time my wife pulled me out of the conversation. Probably a good thing


----------



## Robbie Waldrop (Aug 31, 2013)

I learn something new about training everyday weather it is with my dogs or others that I train. I have always approached training dogs to a statement I heard years ago made by Duke University basketball coach "k". 

When asked by a reporter in the off season what his coaching style was, he replied by asking "what players am I coaching?" He went on to say that he waits until he has been around his players for weeks until he decides what will and will not work with those players. 

I felt this was a perfect translation to the training of dogs, no two are alike. I always remind myself that I will not force anything on a dog, yet figure out a way to get it done through other means of motivation.


----------



## David Winners (Apr 4, 2012)

LOL @ Jon... I don't know what I would do without my wife to keep my foot out of my mouth.


The whole argument of residual odor is crazy to me. Odor is particles of the substance the dog is trained to alert on suspended in the air. No matter how it got there, or of what vapor pressure, it is still odor. Why would you possibly correct a dog for responding to odor. I won't even correct a dog for what I think is a false, because honestly, he knows better than me what he smells, and unless he's in a sterile situation, there could be odor there. UXO are found all the time in training. What's on your feet?

I won't pay a dog for what I believe is a false. I just move them on and reward for what I know is good behavior.


----------



## Howard Knauf (May 10, 2008)

Robbie Waldrop said:


> two questions for everyone
> 1. Do most of you who train dogs experiment with different methods and try to continue your education in training?
> 
> 2. Can someone please show me a video of a dog that will walk past fresh residual odor on a vehicle?
> ...


1. Yes
2. I should hope not. If it does then there is a problem.

The Harris case and the proposed fallout for police detection dogs was frought with nightmares on what was to come. One thing being tossed around by the supreme beings was that officers would have to train dogs not to hit on "residual" odor. That would have spelled doom to the drug detection dog in law enforcement. IMO it can't be done, and if someone does do it then I would have no faith in the dog anyway.


----------



## Jon Harris (Nov 23, 2011)

there was actually a debate in police k9 magazine a few issues ago about training to not alert on small amounts. About half of the trainers suggested that was the way to go. Those would be the trainers I would not go to . Point is people even ones that should be knowledgeable are thinking about it. talking about and actually trying to train dogs not to alert on small amounts 
I can not see the logic in that at all.


----------



## Ted Summers (May 14, 2012)

I sort of operate under the assumption that there is _always_ some better smarter or faster than I am. No matter if its dog training, bike racing, or any of my other pursuits. Maybe I'm a lifetime student type guy, always looking to learn and always looking to teach. Anyway.....

There was a 'research seminar' last year at UNLV (I think) that published some papers sort of dealing with this. Also, the Scentlogix guys kind of address exactly this in their 'white paper' stuff. For example, they claim their cocaine kit has a profile similar to 500 pounds of the substance. There are several documented cases of dogs trained on very small personal amounts of real source and totally blowing the large finds. For what it's worth, I don't think I ever correct a dog for alerting on a scent. For what it's worth it seems it maybe possible to train a dog to not alert on scent but source only but.... I'm not smart enough to figure out how to do it. It's not likely a behavior in the dog but a containment and source handling issue by the trainer(s). Also, it seems like there are a lot of other low hanging fruit to get before tackling something like this. 

I agree, saying "you don't understand odor'' when questioned is pretty ignorant.


----------



## Howard Knauf (May 10, 2008)

Ted Summers said:


> There was a 'research seminar' last year at UNLV (I think) that published some papers sort of dealing with this. Also, the Scentlogix guys kind of address exactly this in their 'white paper' stuff. For example, they claim their cocaine kit has a profile similar to 500 pounds of the substance.


 Not sure what that means in this context other than if you use that product the dog may not indicate on anything less than that weight of the real stuff. I wouldn't assume that though. Maybe they are trying to covertly explain why dogs trained on pseudo will sometimes miss the real stuff.



> There are several documented cases of dogs trained on very small personal amounts of real source and totally blowing the large finds.


 This is true. It's happened to me in training with my EDD. I had been championing for larger training aids for awhile and the misses confirmed my needs. I recieved them shortly thereafter!


----------



## Jon Harris (Nov 23, 2011)

there are a couple points here. On the sentlogix aids. Ive never seen a dog trained on them that would not alert on real stuff but I have seen it the other way around. 

The scentlogix, if I understand the principle gives off or duplicates the parent odor of the substance. That straight parent odor is not as concentrated in real stuff as that is mixed with all sorts of things so the sentlogix give off the scent profile of large amounts. This can be adjusted by the amount you use and the packaging but I have no way of knowing what the protocol as to how to simulate what amount is.

yes dogs can get overwhelmed with large amounts of odor if not trained on it being narcs or explosives That is pretty common as few of us can train on large amounts

you will see the dog looking really confused like he knows there is something around but cant tell where it is because he is saturated. We had a bomb dog that when exposed to large amounts shit all over himself as he was alerting Only happened on big finds.


----------

