# Cadaver Pseudoscents



## Jared Martin

I was wondering how effective these are and if anyone has had any experience with them. I read on cadaverdog.com that they recommend them, but was wondering how others have found them to be.

I'm trying to decide what direction to go with Riley. It seems that, at least for my area, a cadaver dog would be the most relevant training. So I think I might head that way.


----------



## Nancy Jocoy

I would avoid them. No certification test allows their use and they only recommend them as a source of last resort [like in England where you can only use pigs] - They use the real thing as much as possible.

If you are going to go the cadaver route, I would outlay some money on attending cadaver seminars - it ain't cheap but without someone to mentor you, you will need help. Someone with a narcotics dog can help you with the basics [imprinting, alert] but probably not with all the nuances of looking for cadaver and scent transport**. You also need to decide are we talking about whole fresh bodies or cold case work? A big difference in size and nature of the source materials. 

You will need to get access to a broad spectrum of materials and you will need to line up opportunities to access complete bodes in various stages of decomp - we once drove 4 hours just to get access to such a scene because once a body is found the scene is well guarded as a potential crime scene.

Our team has been requiring potential cadaver handlers to have first trained a [different] dog in another discipline before starting a cadaver dog so that they know how to read dogs, how scent travels, have some familiarity with IC, have taken courses in BBP and Crime Scene and hazmat etc.

**things like underwater, buried remains where scent can go down, hit a water table and come out somewhere else, stuff that has been in the ground for 10 years or scattered by animals - all different from narcotics and bombs. Also cadaver work often has a large amount of negative searching for long periods of time and having a dog work for hours at a time without a find can be a bit different too.


----------



## Nancy Jocoy

Oh certainly buy a copy of the cadaver dog handbook but there are newer methods of imprinting and establishing the alert and commitment to source you may want to try. 

I know Rebmann and Koening are lightening up on seminars [our team is hosting one but it is only for advanced handlers with certified dogs or at their discretion, but it already has a waiting list] - and they are slowing down on the seminar route anyway. I would strongly consider Randy Hare from all I have heard.


----------



## Konnie Hein

What do you guys think of this article:
http://www.cadaverdog.com/articles/pseudoscents.htm

It seems Andy is saying the use of pseudo is OK and it works. I'm planning to train an HR-only dog sometime soon (as soon as the right freebie or near-freebie dog falls into my lap) and want to do as much research as possible into scent sources before I start training. My first wilderness dog had some HR training, mostly for water recovery, and we did use some pseudo. We also used real stuff and divers. The combination worked, but I can't say what effect using pseudo had on her training because of the use of real stuff and divers too. 

I know a lot of people are opposed to pseudo, which is why I want to do a thorough investigation of my options before starting. However, the above article talks specifically about documentation of scent sources, court cases, and reliability of dogs trained with pseudo. 

My main concern is documentation of training materials, especially if I ever have to go to court, however, I am not entirely convinced by the information/arguments provided in the article that using pseudo is a good idea.


----------



## David Frost

Quote from the article: "Dogs that have been trained on the "real stuff" won't alert on Pseudoscents."

I did read the article. There are several comments that are worthy of discussion. However relative the use of pseudo, that comment tells me all I need to know. 

DFrost


----------



## Konnie Hein

I'm right there with ya, David. This is primarily what interested me:

From the article:


> 1. Why use Pseudoscents?
> The Pseudoscents are only training tools which make the process of scent introduction and imprinting easy in a class setting. They are easy to handle and provide a portion of the overall scent picture to the dog. It allows us to concentrate on teaching basic training principles and timing of reinforcement. However, we also use other materials during the early phases of training in order to give as complete scent picture to the dog as possible. These target odors are introduced to the dog the same way the pseudo scent is.


So, why use pseudo at all if you're just going to use the real stuff anyways?? Why would it make scent imprinting any easier? How does it "allow us to concentrate on teaching basic training principles and timing of reinforcement?" That doesn't make sense to me. A target odor is a target odor. Start with one source and then expand, just like narc or bomb detection, right?

and 

From the article:


> 4. Has handler testimony ever been excluded in court because you trained with Pseudoscents?
> I do not know of any case where handler testimony has been excluded because they trained with Pseudoscents. In one case I was asked what I used to train and answered with Pseudo, soil, and blood. The defense asked about the chemical composition of the Pseudo, and I answered that I did not know, the formula was the property of Sigma and they could subpoena someone from there to testify as to the composition. All I knew was that it worked. I had no further problems with qualifying as an expert.


This isn't entirely convincing to me.

So, if a person lives in a state where possession of real HR is illegal, it seems that Andy would promote the use of pseudo for these folks. And, it seems he uses it as a part of his foundation training process, along with other scents. I guess I agree with the first part because those folks would have no other option, but not necessarily the second.

It's tough to "talk" about this stuff on-line while worrying about how comments might be perceived in a court of law (for those folks training HR where this is a concern). I have a friend who trains her dogs for HR here in CT and you can bet I'll lean heavily on her for advice on how to approach this issue. I just wanted to get a feel for what folks who have experience training for this feel about the opinions presented in this article.


----------



## Megan Bays

Whenever people soak toys in the cadaver scent, what do they soak them in?


----------



## Nancy Jocoy

Years ago I did train with some of the stuff and I *have* seen dogs trained on it hit on the real thing. Same thing - a dog trained on the real thing does not hit on the pseudo unless it is in their mental catologe. The dog that I used pseudo with did not really go very far; we never got to the stage of using distractors so I don't know what else he might have hit on.

I have *heard* caselaw has stood up on pseudo but have not seen any of the records.

I don't have any of the stuff now. But it is very hard to access the full spectrum. It takes a lot of handlers here and there using each other's aids

The one scent that is hard for most cadaver handlers to get is someone who is only a few hours dead. Actually had an interesting discussion with another cadaver dog handler about that. Sometimes the live find dogs do a better job on that. We have had alerts on real whole dead bodies shortly underwater but it is much more subtle behavior for the cadaver only dogs than just a little bit of decomp. My female who was trained in live find first was much more animated on her drowning than was my cadaver only dog who seemed a bit confused.

Oh I don't ever scent toys with cadaver scent, I have just put the scent in a container inside a PVC scent tube.


----------



## Konnie Hein

Megan - I think they just put them in a container along with the HR so they acquire the smell. Perhaps some folks soak them in the pseudo chemical.

Regardless, I don't plan on doing that. I don't think it's at all necessary. JMO based on my approach to detection training.


----------



## David Frost

"I have *heard* caselaw has stood up on pseudo but have not seen any of the records."

I can't speak specifically for pseudo cadaver. With psuedo drug scents however, there is no court case where the use of pseudo has been detrimental to the case. In the many discussions I've had against pseudo, I've usually mentioned that. My objection has always been a training issue. In my opinion, there just isn't a good reason to train on an odor that certifications won't accept. On an odor, that in most cases, unless trained specifically on the psuedo, a dog trained on real odor won't respond. It just doesn't make sense to me.

DFrost


----------



## Chad Byerly

[David, first off, I hear your concern on this subject. I've trained with pseudo narcotics. They were easy to deal with and not too costly (I thought).]

I have questions about the pseudo corpse (I and II) and drowned victim scents:

Does a 1mL vial need to be used each training session? 
If stored properly, can the pseudo-saturated training aid be used again?

It seems cost prohibitive to start a dog with pseudo, if it costs about $10 per session, per odor. Anyone who knows about training cadaver with these aids, please give me a rough idea of how the pseudo is used.

Thanks.


----------



## Nancy Jocoy

For those who use them, formulation I and II can be reused if kept in a sealed vial after soaking a gauze with it. The water scent is in a capsule and is a one time thing.


----------



## Chad Byerly

Thanks Nancy, and now more questions related to the corpse scents...

Is one entire (little) vial used on the gauze?
And could the gauze (after being used in a tin or tube) be put in a sealed container and reused later?
Or would just the leftover liquid in the vial (if any) be sealed and reused?


----------



## Nancy Jocoy

When I trained with them [*I do not anymore*] I saturated the gauze and then put the mostly empty vial in with the gauze. The scent seemed to last for at least a month with sealing it after each use. 

Not a source I would leave out for anything but short periods of time. And that is a real problem. You leave something out for 24 hours and the scent picture is entirely different than for the short times you would want to leave out the pseudo.

Those who use the water scent tend to put it in a matrix [eg hair stuffed into pantyhose] to slow down the scent from diffusing away. The water stuff will NOT work in cold water.


----------



## Chad Byerly

Thank you, Nancy. 

Your answers will help a friend make a more informed decision.


----------

