# Nosework (the sport) vs detection or SAR



## Kadi Thingvall (Jan 22, 2007)

I have a 3 month old pup that I'm raising as my next sport prospect. He's got great hunt drive, super retrieve, will search for any object (pvc, metal, wood, ball, whatever) and go pretty much anywhere to find it. Haven't found somewhere he won't go yet 

Anyway it's always been in the back of my mind that if he doesn't work out for me as a sport dog, for reasons other than health or temperament of course, that he could have a future in detection/search work of some sort, be it police, SAR, whatever.

So here's the question. There is going to be a Nosework seminar in my general area in the next few month which I was going to try to attend, and was thinking I'd take the pup. One seminar I would think isn't going to be a big deal, but I was thinking about possibly pursuing it past just the seminar. Would that be an issue down the line, if he had some work as a pup basically learning to indicate on non-illegal substances? Is it easy to fade those odors later if he ended up doing detection work? I would think SAR wouldn't be as big of an issue since they aren't going to be in court trying to prove the dog hit on drugs.

It seems like it would be simple to extinguish an odor, just use it as a distraction odor in a setup with a reward odor, and never reward the distraction odor until the dog quits bothering to indicate it. Is it really that simple though?


----------



## julie allen (Dec 24, 2010)

What I have seen, the imprint odor is what the dog will default to in high street when he gets tired. For instance, if you train articles on live human scent, then switch to cadaver, you have a two hour rubble search, with no remains, the dog will alert to an object that was handled. 
Or the dog was trained in hrd, then live scent, he may first search for live victims, but will possibly alert on a body seeking his reward. Its no by deal if a cadaver dog finds a live victim, that's great, but waste an hour digging out a body when you need two focus on potential life, not such a good thing. Just my opinion.

ETA- hrd handlers do end up picked apart by lawyers, records on training is essential. Look at the Florida Casey Anthony case.


----------



## Daniel Lybbert (Nov 23, 2010)

kind of off topic but 


> Haven't found somewhere he won't go yet


What are you going to do when you find somewhere he wont go or cant go or gets to tired to go or gets completely lost while going etc. How do you help them with out helping?


----------



## Kadi Thingvall (Jan 22, 2007)

Daniel Lybbert said:


> What are you going to do when you find somewhere he wont go


work him through it, higher state of drive, better reward, whatever. If he repeatedly won't go there, consider getting a new dog.



Daniel Lybbert said:


> or cant go or


I don't ask him to go places he physically can't go.



Daniel Lybbert said:


> gets to tired to go or


I try not to work him to that point, he's only 3.5 months old. 



Daniel Lybbert said:


> gets completely lost while going etc. How do you help them with out helping?


He's only 3.5 months old, so I'm not pushing him to hard. If something were to happen I have a secondary identical item I can place that would make it a successful find before he gets to the point he shuts down. When possible it's put out when he isn't looking so he can still find it on his own, if needed I'd help direct him in where he searched so he'd be successful.


----------



## Michael Santana (Dec 31, 2007)

Eliminating the odor through extinction isn't difficult, although I would not trust it for reasons mentioned above. 
My concern would be the case getting picked apart once they get wind that something like this has gone on. You may be better off just deciding on what odor you want to put the puppy on, and sticking to it. JMO, though.


----------



## rick smith (Dec 31, 2010)

Michael ... re: "Eliminating the odor through extinction isn't difficult"
i'm curious why you say this ... i would think it wouldn't be easy at all, but if it's from experience, exactly did you do it ?


----------



## Michael Santana (Dec 31, 2007)

rick smith said:


> Michael ... re: "Eliminating the odor through extinction isn't difficult"
> i'm curious why you say this ... i would think it wouldn't be easy at all, but if it's from experience, exactly did you do it ?



Just as Kadi mentioned above. You make the old target odor part of the distracting odor. something as simple as putting it in the "dead" boxes/tubes/spaces, and not rewarding any attention to it. You can come across this with anything that your pup is used to searching for, for example, tennis balls. 
I haven't had to do with with any of the normal target odors, as I do not cross dogs over from one to the other (explosives/Narc, etc..).


----------



## rick smith (Dec 31, 2010)

sorry but i'll be convinced it would be "easy" when someone explains how they have done it .... successfully and easily 

here's my thought process, because it makes no sense to me from a training standpoint
- you have trained a dog to alert on a specific odor 
- you have proofed this conditioned behavior on many other distractor ODORS (not objects)
- now you change the rules
- you decide to train to alert on a new odor and NOT alert (reward) on the original odor
- how do you tell the dog the rules have changed ? how does it know ?
- how many times will the dog alert as previously trained/proofed while you wait it out, or worse yet, correct it ? 
- if you simply remove the previously trained odor from the new odor work, you will be avoiding the issue, correct ? 
- overall, how will ignoring and refusing to reward a correct conditioned behavior NOT add conflict to the dog ?

the way i see it, the first thing you would have to do is COUNTER condition the learned behavior, which may be as hard to do as how "well" you proofed it, and then start all over and build up a new behavior with the new odor.
- i doubt you can "extinguish" it

i guess there must be something i'm not "getting" here ???
not saying it is impossible but sure seems hard to me !
-- i was gonna give an example but it might be interpreted as "apples and oranges"


----------



## Michael Santana (Dec 31, 2007)

You're right, maybe "easy" wasn't the best choice of words. I don't think it's impossible, though. 

Either way, you wont catch me doing it with any of my dogs. lol.


----------



## rick smith (Dec 31, 2010)

Kadi... if you are dead set on it use the KISS method ... train on black powder (fireworks are cheap), and get the dog "started" as an EDD


----------



## Kadi Thingvall (Jan 22, 2007)

I'll probably just avoid the entire issue and if I do decide to play in Nosework use a different dog  I can always do some of it later on with this pup if I decide I'm keeping him, so far he appears to be a keeper but ...

For those unfamiliar with Nosework it's basically detection work as a sport, the dogs are trained to indicate on essential oils like Elder (tree) and other uncommon odors. Hence the question if I taught him to indicate those odors, would it be hard later in life to switch him reliably to real drugs if he were to end up in a detection job.


----------



## Janet Merrill (May 19, 2009)

Actually I think using the principles of NW is the absolutely best way to start a scent detection dog... they start by teaching the dog to hunt for what they call primary which is hunting for food....they don't add the odors until much later and it is a tremendopus way to foster and develop hunt drive....just because you start them in NW doesn't mean you will use anise or clove as the target odor etc..... when it came to introducing the odor I used HR .....and my pup at 7 months hunted for a clothes pin soaked in HR for 7 min in a warehouse with focus and intensity...


----------



## julie allen (Dec 24, 2010)

I think you can add odors, as long as the original training is not something you will encounter on a real search. Teaching a pup to hunt for food, then trying to proof him off later is difficult. Teaching to hunt for and object and you providing the food reward is different.


----------



## Janet Merrill (May 19, 2009)

Interesting but maybe belongs in another discussion.... I've never had a problem proofing off food or anything else as long as the reward was valuable enough to the dog


----------



## Chris Jones II (Mar 20, 2011)

If you intend for the dog to be a working detection dog do not under any circumstances start the dog in k9 nosework. [-X

That is a big nono afaik

It doesn't matter if you are successful in transitioning the dog from nw to detection. You prob won't be successful anyways unless standards are lowered but in the off chance u are you will be henpecked to death in court and the dog handlers career will be toast.


----------



## David Frost (Mar 29, 2006)

rick smith said:


> Kadi... if you are dead set on it use the KISS method ... train on black powder (fireworks are cheap), and get the dog "started" as an EDD


I only bring this up because it annoys me, ha ha, fireworks are not generally "black powder". 

DFrost


----------



## julie allen (Dec 24, 2010)

Janet, so you teach the dog to go find food, it eats it, then later you replace the food with whatever source you train for, set the food out and the dog leaves it? Is the imprint odor not the food? 

I can understand using food just out, to encourage searching. Maybe I didn't understand what you wrote.


----------



## Nancy Jocoy (Apr 19, 2006)

Janet, I am intrigued and would love it if you introduced yourself on the forum.

I can honestly say I don't know a single cadaver dog handler who has certified and worked an operational cadaver dog who started this way with a prolonged hunt for food [other than the breeder playing food games with the wee puppies]

Most of what I have seen is:

Randy Hare method-which I can't elaborate on because i have not trained in it but would love to learn - particularly given the variant Mike is developing that seems more suitable for a puppy that may not have the tugging built in yet but would have the food drive.

Scented throws, then hides with toys, then indication training - all of which is geared to put the hunt as the first trained behavior. I have a 7 month old puppy and that is how we started. He seems to be a little hunting machine and even quickly figured out an "opposite corner" problem in a building. [got himself out of a scent pool on a diagonal corner and worked to source on the opposite without my help]

Blocks, Indication, then searching. A method I don't think as many are using now. My observation on that method is it seems to me to produce a more handler dependant dog and is not very exciting to the dog.


----------



## Janet Merrill (May 19, 2009)

Although I often read WDF often I don't contribute...maybe I should more. I know what I want in my dogs and for me having a dog that will hunt with focus , intensity, ignore distractions and go forever is key. The best way I know how to do that is to develop the innate hunting skills a dog has. Teach the HUNT first.... And a way to,do that especially with a young dog is to have them hunt for something they want...independently and without pressure....the NW work folks have a great system to do that... You don't have to use their odors....use what ever you want , use black powder.. But the point is to have them learn to love the hunt and get proficient at it.... I teach the indication separately....add in a little Randy Hare and voila a great search dog.... If you have started with the right dog that is..


----------



## Janet Merrill (May 19, 2009)

And yes, Julie they initially eat the food because you want to foster their desire to find it..and when they are eating they are learning to stay because the food is in usually a box ( that box is where target odor will be placed when you add in target odor) And they are doing this not caring a hoot as to where you,the handler is, building independence if you do this all off leash like I did...... But that is not all you can teach using this method... You can teach them the concepts of searching corners, thresholds, highs etc while they are one minded so to speak... Not trying to do two things hunt AND recognize target odor. I didn't stay on food only too long but paired with target odor once my pup hunted at the level of intensity I wanted then switched to food reward at source then tug at source....does this all make sense now?


----------



## julie allen (Dec 24, 2010)

What type of SAR do you work in? So after the training. If a piece of hot dog is sitting in front of a tire, while searching a vehicle, the dog completely ignores it?


----------



## Thomas Barriano (Mar 27, 2006)

Chris Jones II said:


> If you intend for the dog to be a working detection dog do not under any circumstances start the dog in k9 nosework. [-X
> 
> That is a big nono afaik
> 
> It doesn't matter if you are successful in transitioning the dog from nw to detection. You prob won't be successful anyways unless standards are lowered but in the off chance u are you will be henpecked to death in court and the dog handlers career will be toast.


Chris

The sport of K9 NW IS detection work. The only difference is the source odor. I disagree with some of the training methods that the NACSW uses (too cookie cutter) but the objectives are the same. I'm looking forward to the Leerburg/Andrew Ramsey
NW DVD's, that teach Nose Work the same way Andrew trains
dog for the DOD.


----------



## Janet Merrill (May 19, 2009)

And yes Julie if you are asking me if I expect my dogs to ignore the hot dog I do..... when they are working they are on my nickle and I expect them to be working, not smelling dog pee, chasing a rabbit, eating hot dogs or doing anything but working....I also expect they will ignore the tug or ball or bone ...any distraction for that matter.....


----------



## julie allen (Dec 24, 2010)

Janet, that's great! I just have never seen a dog, in real life scenario, say
working under high stress for several hours on a building collapse, not revert back to the imprinted odor. I missed it, what type of SAR work you do?


----------



## Janet Merrill (May 19, 2009)

A very good trainer friend of mine and I joke about what folks write in and say OK let me first see your dog work and then I'll listen to what you have to say....so.... I have four Mals... the first Chai is FEMA Type 1 ( 2005,2008,2011) she also has her RH-B, and qualified for the IRO World Champships 2010 ...in disaster, only US dog to do it so far, veteran of Katrina, Ersnesto and the Springfield MA tornado. Also have Zia FEMA FSA 2011 to test Type 1 this summer, also have Adler IPWDA Advanced Wilderness HR ( 2010) also IPWDA Disaster Type 2 (2012) and then Asterix de la Forge , one of Konnie's pups, who will hopefully be the best yet....veterinarian by day, dog trainer the rest of the time...and FEMA evaluator on occassion.......


----------



## julie allen (Dec 24, 2010)

Thats good to see your point of view, as I have never met anyone that starts a dog alerting on food. Going back and reading, I think I misunderstood your post. Will you be in Memphis at the end of March for the hrd class?


----------



## Nancy Jocoy (Apr 19, 2006)

Ok so it sounds like you have the experience to back up your assertions, though your HRD certificaiton is one time one test. Valid question when someone on the comes up with what appears an unorthodox suggestion for training a detector dog.

FWIW, I have cadaver certs and experience: NAPWDA 2008,2009, 2012 and IPWDA ADV HRD 2010 - which is still, honestly, a drop in the bucket compared to what a number of the LE trainers on the board have and do as well as individuals who have helped us with our own training. Though any air scent live find training is just a different kind of detection work. Are the FEMA live find dogs also started on food? I think Konnie does the people in barrels.

It may be, however, the questions are based on what some of us have heard before...where the dog hunts for food for 12 weeks before being introduced to the scent:

http://www.especiallyforpets.com/k9-nose-work.html

I know my breeder had the pups hunting for their food a lot when they were little buggers but when I got him at 14 weeks he was into the ball and retrieving it and it was not long before I had him retrieving scent tubes with odor. Only problem I had there is he wanted to run off with them and chew on them.

So, we did not even put food into the picture. Just a noisy squeaky ball which he loved and only got for finding the HR. 

I am trying to understand why, unless you are talking tiny tykes who have not really started developing the other drives, you would not start with the target odor from day 1 and use the food as a reward if they are not ready for the ball or tug?


----------



## Zakia Days (Mar 13, 2009)

Janet Merrill said:


> A very good trainer friend of mine and I joke about what folks write in and say OK let me first see your dog work and then I'll listen to what you have to say....so.... I have four Mals... the first Chai is FEMA Type 1 ( 2005,2008,2011) she also has her RH-B, and qualified for the IRO World Champships 2010 ...in disaster, only US dog to do it so far, veteran of Katrina, Ersnesto and the Springfield MA tornado. Also have Zia FEMA FSA 2011 to test Type 1 this summer, also have Adler IPWDA Advanced Wilderness HR ( 2010) also IPWDA Disaster Type 2 (2012) and then Asterix de la Forge , one of Konnie's pups, who will hopefully be the best yet....veterinarian by day, dog trainer the rest of the time...and FEMA evaluator on occassion.......


Wow! Nice resume! Welcome to the board=D>!;-)


----------



## Janet Merrill (May 19, 2009)

Nancy.... I will send you my email so we can chat..... I get kicked off half the time as my replies get too long [email protected] .... love talking about all this


----------



## Janet Merrill (May 19, 2009)

For me it's all about pressure... trying to teach multiple things at once.... like asking my husband to multi task.... he tells me that is just for women HA.... it is about having the hunt be all important..and first building intensity in the hunt using something that is just a plain fun game for the dog...


----------



## Janet Merrill (May 19, 2009)

And no Julie I won't be in Memphis.... I'll be on vacation doing something not dog related for once.... to be clear.... I have a good friend who is a very very good NW trainer who has shared some of the concepts and principles of the work with me and watched some of the videos on youtube etc and I used some of those ideas when I started my pup... I am by no means very well educated in NW .... and I did not teach an indication on food... I loved some of the NW ideas and thought they would be a way to optimize what my pup had to offer....and it has been fun for both of us...


----------



## Nancy Jocoy (Apr 19, 2006)

Janet Merrill said:


> Nancy.... I will send you my email so we can chat..... I get kicked off half the time as my replies get too long[/EMAIL] .... love talking about all this


Would love to talk - with a 7 month old working towards becoming my second single-purpose cadaver dog, it is all interesting. Will shoot you and email.

Obviously where we are now is different than if I was getting ready to start but we do have a teammate who is back to the basics a dog none of us would have selected as a detection candidate (a little terrier with LOTS of hunt but distractability out the wazoo) - right now we are getting her to back off odor work and put some obedience on him but he may be a good candidate for experimentation.


----------



## Chris Jones II (Mar 20, 2011)

Thomas Barriano said:


> Chris
> 
> The sport of K9 NW IS detection work. The only difference is the source odor. I disagree with some of the training methods that the NACSW uses (too cookie cutter) but the objectives are the same. I'm looking forward to the Leerburg/Andrew Ramsey
> NW DVD's, that teach Nose Work the same way Andrew trains
> dog for the DOD.


I know that. it is not the nw that is the issue. it is training a dog to detect one thing and then training it to detect something else = very likely unreliable. A defense attorney will have a f'in heyday tearing your ass to pieces on the stand dependin on what your discipline is. Can it be done? yeah why not if you are not deployed or active. As you said its just detection. if you might have to go to court to defend the validity of yer training then good luck with that. bad idea afaik


----------



## Thomas Barriano (Mar 27, 2006)

Chris,

I don't think training a dog to find multiple odor is the problem.
Bad (undocumented training) is the problem.
A good drug dog will find MJ and heroin and meth and ecstasy etc
A EDD will find C4 and black powder and ammonium etc.


----------



## David Frost (Mar 29, 2006)

When I was in research, we had several dogs that were traine to find the big 4 drugs, trip wires, land mines and 10 explosives. The dogs were for research only, never intended to go to the field. There was a point of diminishing returns so to speak, where proficiency would start to suffer in one area or another. I know I was surprised at the number of tasks the dogs would perform with a measure of proficiency.

DFrost


----------



## Jennifer Michelson (Sep 20, 2006)

David, what is an acceptable level of proficiency? How many tasks would you feel comfortable asking a dog to perform? Just curious. 

A little 'funny'. I decided to teach Griffin, my then 7 year old live find dog, a few tricks. One was 'shake'. He is a bit of a nut, so it turned out to be hitting me with his paw rather than holding it up for me to shake. One weekend shortly there after I did a training problem with a teammate. He went and found her but there wasnt a quick alert (bark). He did bark, but after a delay. I walked in and my teammate was laughing, she said "he came in and hit me!!". That was the end of any tricks for Griffin. I decided that his brain was full.


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie (Jun 8, 2008)

Janet Merrill said:


> And yes Julie if you are asking me if I expect my dogs to ignore the hot dog I do..... when they are working they are on my nickle and I expect them to be working, not smelling dog pee, chasing a rabbit, eating hot dogs or doing anything but working....I also expect they will ignore the tug or ball or bone ...any distraction for that matter.....



Janet,

With the dogs that were started with searching for food, and then pairing with food and finally odor alone, have you seen cases where the dog won't initially indicate for the odor when its not paired with the food. He keeps searching. With this dog, even though he was rewarded by his handler, he seemed more motivated to search for food rather than odor, once find would result in a food reward from the handler.

Terrasita


----------



## David Frost (Mar 29, 2006)

Jennifer Michelson said:


> David, what is an acceptable level of proficiency? How many tasks would you feel comfortable asking a dog to perform? Just curious.
> 
> A little 'funny'. I decided to teach Griffin, my then 7 year old live find dog, a few tricks. One was 'shake'. He is a bit of a nut, so it turned out to be hitting me with his paw rather than holding it up for me to shake. One weekend shortly there after I did a training problem with a teammate. He went and found her but there wasnt a quick alert (bark). He did bark, but after a delay. I walked in and my teammate was laughing, she said "he came in and hit me!!". That was the end of any tricks for Griffin. I decided that his brain was full.


From experiences much deeper than mine, it's not uncommon for a patrol dog to be dual trained with drugs or explosives. Most EDD's are trained on 13 explosives, but the full contingent of patrol work. The required proficiency on most detector dogs it a measured 90%. In addition the dog is required to maintain the proficiency as a patrol dog, usually measured as a go/no go basis. It's doable, BUT, the selection process for the dog is more involved. I think there is a degradation in some skill somewhere when a dog is trained to perform all those areas. IT's a matter of what you as the handler are comfortable with. 

DFrost


----------



## Konnie Hein (Jun 14, 2006)

Thomas Barriano said:


> Chris,
> 
> I don't think training a dog to find multiple odor is the problem.
> Bad (undocumented training) is the problem.
> ...


In my experience, training a dog to find multiple odors is a problem if you ask him to find only one of those odors, and expect him to consistently and reliably ignore any others he's in active training or maintenance for.


----------



## Nancy Jocoy (Apr 19, 2006)

Konnie Hein said:


> In my experience, training a dog to find multiple odors is a problem if you ask him to find only one of those odors, and expect him to consistently and reliably ignore any others he's in active training or maintenance for.


I think that is at the heart of the original question.

What constitues "active training or maintenance" How long does it take to relaibly extinguish an odor from the dog's 'memory bank' of things to indicate on? 

IOW if I start on a nosework odor such as birch, can I eliminate that from a detection dog? If I start with food, will that interfere later when it is not a target odor?

At least that is where I thought it was coming from.


----------



## Kadi Thingvall (Jan 22, 2007)

Nancy Jocoy said:


> I think that is at the heart of the original question.
> 
> What constitues "active training or maintenance" How long does it take to relaibly extinguish an odor from the dog's 'memory bank' of things to indicate on?
> 
> ...


That was exactly where it was coming from 

Basically I wanted to know if I started my pup in nosework, then decided later I wasn't going to keep him for Ringsport and sold him for detection or SAR work, would the nosework odors be easy to eliminate so he could have a successful career in detection or SAR work.

From what I was reading there seemed to be less concern with the ability to reliably transfer him over, and more concern with an attorney in court tearing apart a case because at one point in the dogs life, when he was a pup, he was taught to indicate on something like birch, clove, etc.


----------



## Konnie Hein (Jun 14, 2006)

If there isn't specific case law or studies pertaining to this, I think the best we can do is guess or give anecdotal evidence. If somebody has examples of case law or studies, please post about it.

Regardless of the legal angle, I personally wouldn't buy a dog that I knew was trained for other target odors first. There are enough "baseline" distractions in the environment (plus, most pups are started in hunting with a ball or tug) that I'm not going to purposefully make my job harder by adding more to that list. All other things being equal, I'd skip over that dog and buy one that hasn't had that experience. I don't have proof that it creates problems (or doesn't), but I also don't have the time or desire to conduct that experiment and find out it didn't work. However, other people might be happy to purchase a dog who demonstrates that he's capable of good detection work regardless of his training history, and be completely willing to put the time in to extinguish the alert on the initially trained odor.


----------



## julie allen (Dec 24, 2010)

I personally do have a dog, started on narcotics, that we have switched to hrd. Most of the time, she ignores narcotic hides, most isn't good enough.
She will alert to hrd, awesome detection dog, but when things get tough, add some time to the problem, if there is Meth in the area, she will go back and alert.


----------



## Nancy Jocoy (Apr 19, 2006)

Truth be known, Grim was started on black powder for a short while because he was a demo dog for Dan Reiter.

I was able to proof him off and it was a short lived exposure but it is always in the back of your mind. I have never seen any issues with it in training. 

I could only say that if I were in a situation where there was a trained indication that led to additional investigation (crime scene/digging, etc) you can be sure I would go back and test (with witnesses) the dog on black powder immediately to confirm and report it if there was a trained indication.


----------



## Konnie Hein (Jun 14, 2006)

Have you recently done any training searches with him in a search area devoid of cadaver material where black powder was present?


----------



## Harry Keely (Aug 26, 2009)

Nancy Jocoy said:


> Truth be known, Grim was started on black powder for a short while because he was a demo dog for Dan Reiter.
> 
> I was able to proof him off and it was a short lived exposure but it is always in the back of your mind. I have never seen any issues with it in training.
> 
> I could only say that if I were in a situation where there was a trained indication that led to additional investigation (crime scene/digging, etc) you can be sure I would go back and test (with witnesses) the dog on black powder immediately to confirm and report it if there was a trained indication.





Konnie Hein said:


> Have you recently done any training searches with him in a search area devoid of cadaver material where black powder was present?


I was just going to ask Nancy about that, does SCSARDA train at Camp Croft, I know you are a Spartanburg County based team for the most part, that place is loaded with ordinance and old casings and rounds. Just sking because that happens to be a popular place for privately put together SAR teams in SC.


----------



## Nancy Jocoy (Apr 19, 2006)

We trained at Camp Croft for years; yes I am aware of the old ordinance.

About a year ago they sent out a letter saying that all dogs had to be on lead at all times and the only place SAR dogs could train was on a useless piece of property on the other side of Dairy Ridge Road.

Fortunately we have other large training venues.

But yes, that was a constant distracter I never logged as such! FWIW, Johnson Lake is closed to everyone. [Have not been there in the past few weeks to see if it is opened back up]


----------



## Nancy Jocoy (Apr 19, 2006)

Konnie Hein said:


> Have you recently done any training searches with him in a search area devoid of cadaver material where black powder was present?


Not recently. If he can go back to work I will certainly try that [expanding nose time and having black powder out towards the end - had not thought about pushing the distracter out to the end of nose time-I think that is a good "take home" for any problematic distractor]. We did have several long "needle in a haystack" searches at a hunt club this summer with no indications. 

As is, there is a very good chance he will wind up retired. I was hoping for another year, and he just recertified end of January, but now he has been having some neuro issues that may be DM...but until we get the test results back (genetic marker, not diagnostic) he is on 100% crate rest -- If he does go back it won't be without me taking him through full spectrum in the training logs again because of the health issues he has had this year. 

The odds are that he will get to train small stuff for fun and all my energy will be focused on Beau. The team has other dogs who are certified and operational.


----------



## julie allen (Dec 24, 2010)

Thats what I find with raven. If there is a large search area with no cadaver, she will initially pass the narcotic hide, but as time goes on she will go back and alert sometimes. Though she has only been working on cadaver 6 months or so. I have seen others default back as well.


----------



## Nancy Jocoy (Apr 19, 2006)

I will hopefully get a chance to test it [working him that long].....His last "reward" for indicating on black powder was in 2006


----------



## Harry Keely (Aug 26, 2009)

Nancy Jocoy said:


> We trained at Camp Croft for years; yes I am aware of the old ordinance.
> 
> About a year ago they sent out a letter saying that all dogs had to be on lead at all times and the only place SAR dogs could train was on a useless piece of property on the other side of Dairy Ridge Road.
> 
> ...


 
Was just wondering, becaue of your deogs initial training of black powder, that would of been always in the back of mind.


----------



## Janet Merrill (May 19, 2009)

Terrasita,
I wish some of the real NW folks would jump in.... My experience is only my young dog... But this is how I did it.... I used accessible food in a box as a movitator to ALLOW my pup to teach herself how to hunt playing the shell game and teach concepts like thresholds, corners, highs etc... All off lead...., I then paired the odor... HR.... Then I made the food in the box inaccessible... In a container with holes so they could smell it....and when the dog found it I ran in with a big reward... Big party... The party became a much bigger bang for the pup than the intentionally less significant reward in the box the dog couldn't get to anyway.... Then I faded the food in the box....... And as my pups ball drive turned on I used ball and tug at source to reward..... And added in my distractions during the hunt... Toys,balls and lots and lots of food... Not accesssible but around and what I had used initially in the boxes.... Does this make sense....

Feeling a little guilty about Julie's question....would my dog eat a hot dog... Thought she was talking about when we are training etc.... Like everyone I use food as distractions... My dogs no no better than anyone's and always looking for the chance to embarrass me... If they saw a piece of dropped food would they maybe stop and snarf it up.... But are any of them actively searching for food.... No ...... One of the rules they understand... Like the dog pee rule


----------



## julie allen (Dec 24, 2010)

Janet, the reason I asked, is because food rewards are controversial in detection. Especially in hrd. 
I will start a small pup using food as a reward, though not to search for food. I may test a dog on a thrown piece of food, but when training begins I want him looking for a specific odor always. 
I'm not saying you way wont work, I'm very open to learning any thing that gets the end result.
One of mine would stop and grab the hot dog. She isn't a finshed dog, so I don't take a chance of leaving food out where she could self reward. It is contained still.
Another of mine, would not touch it. We worked a building collapse recently, that was a pizza place on the bottom floor. After her search, the rubble secured and bodies removed, I was able to see the pile of food in what was left of the kitchen. She never even slowed down there. She was started with a food reward. As you say, its the interaction with the handler that should be the important part. Though some dogs don't care about that. They just want the reward.


----------



## rick smith (Dec 31, 2010)

Janet
1. was there a reason you didn't pair the target odor with the food right from the get go as they were learning to use their nose ?
2. did you fade the food in incremental amounts or all at once ?
3. did you keep the amount of target odor constant ?


----------



## Gerald Dunn (Sep 24, 2011)

going to ask a dumb a dumb question here but I know nothing about nose work, where do you get the "target odor" to work from? human order ether live or dead????


----------



## Janet Merrill (May 19, 2009)

Answer to Gerald question is I used Human remains....

I would like to kind of close the loop here, put on my kevlar vest and get ready for that place in the woods to hide.....what is the most important thing for me is not just that I chose to adapt some of the NW principles to my program but why.... I am no great expert only four dogs in 9 1/2 years. That said.... I felt as a trainer I was missing the boat..... Having watched lots of dogs work over the years I realized as has several of my trainer friends that what really in my mind separates the mediocre even good dogs from the great dogs that take your breath away is not that they find well but they hunt well. I have folks tell me how they have started their 8 week old pups on odor and gosh they recognize it..... My personal feeling is that dogs live by their noses, ask anyone with a blind dog how well most of those dogs do...there was a study published in the Journal of Applied Veterinary Behavior a few years ago where they trained dogs to by smell identify parasites in sheep feces... As a more economical method of parasite detection....one of my friends says dogs are noses on wheels..... .....The smelling part is easy for dogs..... The hard part I thought is the work of finding it...... I see so many folks starting young puppies in programs that I couldn't do.....really didn't want.....most folks and scientists agree the most important developmental phase of a dogs life is young.... Opinions vary to exact age but young... Some say 8-16 weeks . I wanted a program
that would first do no harm and focus on building hunt as a stand alone exercise no lumping of multiple tasks....such as I had been taught in the past...the line up so to speak. I wanted my pup to learn to work with joy in the work as for me that means better performance.... I wanted intensity and her to work in drive.... Not a have a hohum attitude. I also subscribed to the theory true or not that behaviors they learn themselves are stronger..... So let her teach herself by setting up a program that is fun... No pressure from me to perform. And focus on one thing only the search. Why not pair from the get go.... Well why pair from the get go.... The smell part is easy for dogs....make things as simple as possible. I have seen so many successful live find dogs now that were trained focusing on building the hunt , add the other stuff later, that I believe I was missing the boat with my old training program. Would I use this program again... Yes absolutey... Would my pup be as good if I used something different, maybe, but I am very happy.... She hunt very,very well.....


----------



## Janet Merrill (May 19, 2009)

Sorry Rick , I did not answer your question.... I know I didn't 't grab the same source every time when I was pairing but I do know they were all significantly smelly... And probaby all mostly the same stuff in diffent jars......what I did in regards to fading the pairing is I just monitored intensity and drive.... If it dipped I took a step backwards..... I did have a time I was pulling out my hair a little....like lots of dogs I think as she got older her food drive was dropping so her performance dipped. I switched to a ball and tug over source and she just took off. As a young pup she had little ball or retrieve drive but as she matured it kicked in... It was just finding the right time to make the switch and I was a little slow....

The other thing I learned and used with this pup..... I had never realized dogs could be so competitive.... I had heard years ago that dogs don't mimic... But from what I have read that thinking has changed.....but I decided to have her watch my older dog search, especially in new places as I was hoping it would help her generalize locations better....it was a terrific tool.... My other dogs were never quite like this but she is a tyrant.... Like the kid at school who always wants to be first in line at recess.... So we played the game of watch the "big dog work"
.... And then once in awhile she got to do first.....I think the competition was very useful.... Of course she cheated and if she could see him was like a bullet to the hide which is what I wanted at first then I had to cover her crate so she learned to echo locate so to speak...so had to make that not as easy ..... But I really like the results of that added game....


----------



## Carolyn Pettigrew (Dec 7, 2010)

I only do NW the sport. My dog and I are going for our NW2 this summer after I recuperate from surgery. Food is used as a distraction during the trial. My dog is a total gluttonous carb addict (swear I don't know where he learned that) but last week he passed over the open container of cinnamon rolls on the table to search and indicate on the anise-scented q-tip that was inside a Kleenex box, also on the table. I do use food at the source as his reward, too. It's interesting.

I do notice that of the three odors he has been trained on, the first, birch, elicits the strongest reaction. Probably just because he's been rewarded for that for so many months longer than clove or anise. But we do continue to use birch in searches and he is rewarded for finding it unlike in your scenario where the dog would not be rewarded for, or even frequently exposed to, the original odors, I think? I wouldn't be inherently worried about the methodology or responses of the dog, but the legal side might prove more contentious, I have no idea.

Sent from my ATRIX using Tapatalk


----------



## Nancy Jocoy (Apr 19, 2006)

I guess the same question applies to food as was put to me about the black powder.

Has starting the dog on food been tested after the dog has worked to the end of what folks call "nose-time". 

No kevlar vests needed. There is risk, and sometimes great reward, in trying things not the conventional path. 

I think the expectation from HR dogs is a bit different in that there are often long tedious searches (like looking for bones when a skull has been found-or even looking for a body where you might be out a few hours-as opposed to quick scans then being put up before the next session) 

NOTE: From what I see on some NW class descriptions pairing of target odor with food is not done for 12 weeks? It sounds like you were doing much earlier which to me is not much different than putting HR in a scent tube and throwing then hiding toys with source. You know I don't like scented balls. I like having the dog always finding source and not residual. Another topic I guess. I defintely think getting the hunt down before worring about other peices is important.


On the side, I had thought about the older dog thing as a lot of hound folks do that. Beau did learn off-lead walking through woods with Grim and me when he was smaller.


----------



## Janet Merrill (May 19, 2009)

Thanks Caroline for jumping in.... I never did formal NW classes but have a good friend who is a great NW teacher/trainer who also does SAR and HR and she gave me tips and advice along the way, so nice to hear from someone who has done the program, have you been happy with how your dog searches? 

I progressed as I felt my pup was ready to progess so shorter than 12 weeks but I think like any program you adapt to the talent and skills of your dog...in regards to food.....I do wonder if food is different than prior black powder or narcotics training as food is everywhere and they desenensitize to it naturally. So it hasn't the same association/value unless presented in a certain scenario....


----------



## julie allen (Dec 24, 2010)

Janet Merrill said:


> Thanks Caroline for jumping in.... I never did formal NW classes but have a good friend who is a great NW teacher/trainer who also does SAR and HR and she gave me tips and advice along the way, so nice to hear from someone who has done the program, have you been happy with how your dog searches?
> 
> I progressed as I felt my pup was ready to progess so shorter than 12 weeks but I think like any program you adapt to the talent and skills of your dog...in regards to food.....I do wonder if food is different than prior black powder or narcotics training as food is everywhere and they desenensitize to it naturally. So it hasn't the same association/value unless presented in a certain scenario....


How does a dog desensitize to food naturally? Most wilderness searches will not have food lying about. 
Then look at dogs for allergies, like peanut detection dogs. They are trained to alert to anything containing peanuts, or nuts, but aren't trained to eat it. They don't (hopefully) become desensitized. I feel that anything that would later need to be eliminated just shouldn't be trained to begin with. Then you never have to worry about the dog defaulting back to that odor.


----------



## julie allen (Dec 24, 2010)

Scenarios change. I had a conversation yesterday with a trainer who was working a collapsed college after away tornado. Very experienced trainer, and very experienced dog. The dog was sent out on rubble, and later returned with a tennis ball. Sent out again, came back with another ball. Lol turns out, he found a whole section on the back side of the rubble that was nothing but tennis balls. Even though he had been proofed using balls, after days of searching, this happened. He was started with scented balls.


----------



## Joby Becker (Dec 13, 2009)

there are plenty of people that use food rewards for detection work, the ATF for example...maybe even the FDA I think...


----------



## David Frost (Mar 29, 2006)

Interesting discussion. In spite of being a dinosaur, the discussion reaffirms my belief in the way I train detector dogs. The dog is rewarded for a particular odor. The rest just doesn't matter. The dog isn't confused about what it can/can not respond to. It responds only to the target odor and that behavior is reinforced. 

DFrost


----------



## julie allen (Dec 24, 2010)

Joby Becker said:


> there are plenty of people that use food rewards for detection work, the ATF for example...maybe even the FDA I think...


Do they start the dogs searching for food? Or just reward with food?


----------



## Joby Becker (Dec 13, 2009)

julie allen said:


> Do they start the dogs searching for food? Or just reward with food?


have no clue


----------



## Nancy Jocoy (Apr 19, 2006)

julie allen said:


> Do they start the dogs searching for food? Or just reward with food?


I think that was the issue precipitating the discussion.
The program for NW has a 12 week phase of hunting for nothing but food.
The food is never associated with a trained indication, though.

FWIW, I don't use scented balls either, I did throw PVC tubes with actual source in them but scented balls, to me, are residual odor. But we did do the throws for a short time though, just imprinting.

I dunno, my breeder had the tykes hunting for food at a young age.....as soon as they could eat solid....a suitability test is throwing balls and toys in heavy brush which they have to hunt for....maybe all that is not really that different than the hunt for food?


----------



## Ariel Peldunas (Oct 18, 2008)

David Frost said:


> Interesting discussion. In spite of being a dinosaur, the discussion reaffirms my belief in the way I train detector dogs. The dog is rewarded for a particular odor. The rest just doesn't matter. The dog isn't confused about what it can/can not respond to. It responds only to the target odor and that behavior is reinforced.
> 
> DFrost


David,

I was curious, and I apologize if this has been covered somewhere else and I missed it ...what method do you use to train your detection dogs? What are your observations regarding the likelihood of false responses on distractor odors/anomalies when using this method? I know you have mentioned you proof off of distractor odors. I was wondering how much interest the dogs show during that proofing phase and if it's possible to train in a way that the dog never shows interest in anything but target odor during all phases of training. Or maybe it's natural for the dogs to experiment and see if something other than target odor produces the reward and the proofing stage makes it clearer that only target odor is rewarding.

If this question is best answered in a separate thread, I can certainly re-post somewhere else. And I directed the question at David but am certainly interested in hearing from others as well.


----------



## Janet Merrill (May 19, 2009)

Julie, when my very experienced FEMA dog comes back with piece of rubble in her mouth ( we have one as part of a collection from every test she has taken) she is telling me, the dumb handler, that there was no one there.... that she is all done and I need to get a clue ... she is not searching for concrete just trying to tell the stupid handler to move on.......I have seen other dogs do similiar behaviors...when they have cleared an area...


----------



## David Frost (Mar 29, 2006)

I don't use scented articles. I use the actual substance. I know it seems very simplisitc, but I get the dog to sniff, I pay the sniff. Good boy/girl becomes the marker, the primary reward ball/tug/toy is then presented. I generally start the dogs out on boxes and pay from the box, by hand. I don't care if the dog knows I give the reward and I'm not all that concerned about a "stare". I like to run 5 trials in a set and run 6 to 8 sets, per dog, during a training session. At some point, primarily a judgement call based on how the dog is doing, I'll introduce the response. I don't necessiarily "proof" off distractor odors, unless there is a problem. Through out training, I conduct negative tests on everything that is associated with training, that isn't a target odor. Only those odors the dogs attends to are "proofed". I do agree a dog, in training might respond to a different odor, I call them "novel" odors. It's my experience, that problem goes away after all the odors have been added. In the meantime, I ignore any response except the correct one. The dogs seem to figure it out pretty quickly.

DFrost


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

I think to much attention/valule is placed on the dog for staring at the find. If it's trained to alert only on the primary source of scent then it's close enough for the handler to determine the location.
To me, the stare is the same as asking a dog for constant eye contact in heeling. Neither make the find or the heeling more accurate.


----------



## Janet Merrill (May 19, 2009)

I agree with Bob...I use a bark alert and my dogs are so active when they bark, they spin and jump... would love to have a nice stare at source but I haven't found a way to train it ( not worth the trouble, maybe) .... I used BSDs for awhile with my older Mal... who had lots of RH training as well so he does lots of nose poking during his bark, spin routine and didn't mind the ball launched in his face, my new pup got the ball launched literally twice ( girls are smarter) and was smart enough to back up from source which I didn't like.... so we gave up the stare at source while you are barking as style points. So they do lots of barking and as I get closer they get closer with the bark so they are literally touching the source if they can but are staring at me...if it is accessible on the ground they are in a bow with source between their front legs...


----------



## Nancy Jocoy (Apr 19, 2006)

My own experience with wanting to go back to the stare at source after not having it is not having the dog look to / for me after the find but to stay focused on the find.

The other issue (and perhaps training vs real world) teeth and small bone scenarios can be hard for the handler to locate the source without a clear "touch" by just having the dog sitting there and not looking at source....it does help pinpoint.....Now real world "my dog hit here-let forensics find the darned teeth" vs. Training "I can't leave human bones laying around after I am done"

And, of course, a lot of LE "like" the sit and stare and expect to see it. Fashion or not, truth be known we could get by with an agressive response too but nobody wants that. For some reason it is ok for coyotes to disturb a body but not a trained dog.

Most times, when you can see the dog, they touch it before they sit or come real close but a lot of times we work in heavy brush (or kudzu- ever worked in kudzu?) where the sound of the bell stopping may be my indication to find the dog even if he is 15 feet away. Obviously I will do everything possible to see my dog because I want to read that body language too. We only do night cadaver searches for the "recently dead" , such as checking out ponds or following up on strange behavior by a live find dog during a live person search. The rest are done with enough light to see the dogs work.

----

The boxes was the first way I learned to train (but Grim was started with throws). We saw a lot of dogs trained that way dependant on the handler for showing them where to search, which may not be so bad for some scenarios but for wilderness / offlead and free searching it seemed to impair that. I realize that method is very old and time tested. How, with that method, do you get the dogs to work independantly?


----------



## Ariel Peldunas (Oct 18, 2008)

David Frost said:


> I don't use scented articles. I use the actual substance. I know it seems very simplisitc, but I get the dog to sniff, I pay the sniff. Good boy/girl becomes the marker, the primary reward ball/tug/toy is then presented. I generally start the dogs out on boxes and pay from the box, by hand. I don't care if the dog knows I give the reward and I'm not all that concerned about a "stare". I like to run 5 trials in a set and run 6 to 8 sets, per dog, during a training session. At some point, primarily a judgement call based on how the dog is doing, I'll introduce the response. I don't necessiarily "proof" off distractor odors, unless there is a problem. Through out training, I conduct negative tests on everything that is associated with training, that isn't a target odor. Only those odors the dogs attends to are "proofed". I do agree a dog, in training might respond to a different odor, I call them "novel" odors. It's my experience, that problem goes away after all the odors have been added. In the meantime, I ignore any response except the correct one. The dogs seem to figure it out pretty quickly.
> 
> DFrost


Similar to MWD "protocol box" training? Not sure if that's how they still do it or what they still call it ...that's what it was called when I learned it. 

When you say you pay from the box, do you actually have a hole in the box that you stick your hand in to reward through or just bring your hand close to the box over the hole where the dog sniffs?

I know what you mean about knowing when to move on being a judgement call. A lot of people ask me how many repetitions they should do of this or that before moving to the next phase. They always seem disappointed when I don't have a specific answer that applies to every dog.


----------



## julie allen (Dec 24, 2010)

I had to add the "dead balls" with the Dutch bitch who just wasn't getting the ranging out to search. It helped her alot, but she already had the cadaver scent down. And I'm still working now to leave a ball that is just lying around in the field.
I don't mind them if they look at me. I tried to get raven to stare at the source, lol but she just stares at the wall, or straight in front, where she thinks the ball is going to appear.
Greta is so OCD about being inches from the source, she actually pulled a source out of the water by the string it was tied with. Dunked her head under and pulled the string, and she has never attempted to pick up a hide before. Ugh.


----------



## Carolyn Pettigrew (Dec 7, 2010)

The NACSW training protocol is to have dogs "learn to search" first by looking either for food or a favorite toy. The dog does this for many weeks before odor is paired with the food or toy. The classes are targeted to pet owners and dogs, some with environmental sensitivities, some that have difficulty working around people, some just tend to look to their owners for guidance and stay close waiting for OB commands rather than going off to search... their program is made to be suitable and fun for a range of dogs and owners. 

There are certainly people training dogs in a variety of ways other than the "NACSW way" that obtain NW titles and do well in the sport!

This is a really interesting discussion. I like hearing all the different methods-- due to different philosophies, experiences and temperament (of handler and dog! Haha), and of course the end result or alert you want from the dog, depending on what sport or work the dog is doing.


Sent from my ATRIX using Tapatalk


----------



## David Frost (Mar 29, 2006)

Ariel Peldunas said:


> Similar to MWD "protocol box" training? Not sure if that's how they still do it or what they still call it ...that's what it was called when I learned it.
> 
> When you say you pay from the box, do you actually have a hole in the box that you stick your hand in to reward through or just bring your hand close to the box over the hole where the dog sniffs?
> 
> I know what you mean about knowing when to move on being a judgement call. A lot of people ask me how many repetitions they should do of this or that before moving to the next phase. They always seem disappointed when I don't have a specific answer that applies to every dog.


Well, can't say about the military, ha ha we didn't use boxes when I was in. If we did, it was just some card board boxes. Yes, the boxes I use have a hole in the back and we present the ball to the dog (we being the handler). I'm the same way about when to move on. I could say it's generally around 60 to 70 trials, but could be as few as 40 or as many as 15 or ...... well you get the idea, ha ha. Ya just know when it's time.

DFrost


----------



## Janet Merrill (May 19, 2009)

I'd love to see some videos of folk's dogs working so we could see some of the results of the different methodologies..... always want learn something new to add....love to see Nancy's young pup....maybe Julie's as I can't make it to TN..... anyone else?.....I'll try to get some......but I will admit to being a little technologically challenged.....maybe the NW folks can do a few as well ...


----------



## julie allen (Dec 24, 2010)

Lol I can't even post photos let alone video


----------



## Janet Merrill (May 19, 2009)

Julie, just look at it as another training challenge...LOL

I didn't see your post about using food reward.... Sure it is not ideal I agree but I know a trainer who produces great live find and HR dogs and when she evaluates them for what job they will .. if they tug they go live and if they are food dogs then HR...... They are expected to have equal talent otherwise....my preference is ball/tug but then with Mals that is usually their choice as well... LOL


----------



## Nancy Jocoy (Apr 19, 2006)

My phone videos look like something out of "the Blair Witch Project" in cinemagraphic quality...especially if I am moving but I may try some Friday...hard to do with the boxes as it is so fast, but I am taking the day off to do some training with the sherrif dept dive team (Beau's first boat ride too) and if it is not raining I may try to get some pix of him doing an area search. [and see if all the indication training is paying off]


----------

