# IRO RH (2012) : Directability at a distance



## Kat Hunsecker

Does anyone train for the RH?
We are struggleinmg a bit with the direcability at a distance and were wondering if anyone else has done it and has some training advice....?!?
We started with a way smaller set up, but the straight out from the first marker seems to be the hardest....

thank you.


----------



## Jennifer Michelson

How is this tested? Do you send the dog to 'bases'? For urban sar we do 'directionals'. Dogs are sent out to bases (generally round or square and raised above ground, our are approx 2' tall). 4 bases are set up like a baseball diamond. Dog is started at 'home base' and sent to different bases. bases are 75' apart. So '2nd base' is 150' ft from the starting point with 'pitchers mound' in between. We are given a pattern that tests the dogs going out straight or at an angle, move to left or right and will 'go back' to 2nd base. Is this anything like what you need to do?


----------



## Bob Scott

It's place training on a bigger level. Also similar to a send out in Schutzhund and the AKC UD send out.
Start closer to the "base" and build distance slowly and randomly. When you move to another "base, back up on the distance again.
Marker training would be a big help in this.


----------



## Kat Hunsecker

Thanks so far here is whjat it is supposed to be:
You have to send out your dog to a starting marker 20m away from you. From there you have to randomly send them to 3 markers (pauseboxes or tables etc) each 40m apart. ( tables set up in a triangle , with the starting marker 20m inside this triangle) the handler remains outside the triangle)

I have started with just sending her to the first marker so she would go out and stop, small distance about 7m.

then I was standing in the triangle, between bottom two tables and send her left and right and straight, distance at this point were about 12m between tables.

she has some training in Agility and the jump on the table is almost self rewarding, but I do reeinforce with ball etc. my voice seems ok as a mrker, she does know the clicker,too. If I think we need a more neutral one.
I am not sure If I should use different commands for the different tables/ direction- or if i should do as did in agility and just use a "go" command and use body for direction?!
She seems to have trouble "picking out the table I point at'. She sometimes realizes that it is not what i wanted but is not sure as of yet as how to get it right. so i guess again I am wondering If I need to be more clear with special commands to help her out? she does recognize the tables as a place to jump on, just the right one is a bit difficult....
I want to keep it at this distance level until I have the directions secured and then will add distance.

Also if i send her from the middle to the straight one out, it is ok to send her to the two others, but when i send her to one of the side ones first it is very hard to get her going to the straight ahead one (from the handlers stand point)

Thank you


----------



## rick smith

not being able to see this happen and not knowing the RH might make this a stupid suggestion, but are you suer the dog is not getting confused by your body language .... 
examples :
- do you swing your arm when you point or is it a straight (stabbing) motion from the same start of your "point", straight to the direction ?
- are you moving, rotating head,neck and shoulders, etc when you point ? hard to describe this in words but the dog sees all of them 
...lots of subtle but inconsistent body language might make it confusing to the dog
- unless it' required i wouldn't use verbal commands at all, plus the dog will probably react to the signals more than the verbals if both are used

agree to start with very small pyramid, but i would probably make very obvious body language cues at first and as the dog starts nailing it fade the body language piece by piece
- if the dog has good EC with you sometimes moving your eyes in the desired direction will make them go that way too, but all depends on how attentive the dog is


----------



## Jennifer Michelson

I was taught with 3 commands- go out, go back and over. I start with a single target and work on that alone until dog gets it. Start close and work until dog is at final distance. I use the different targets, but one at a time. I guess there is a 4th command--'hup' for the dog to get up on the target. When dog gets 'go out' I move on to 'go back'. The body stance for 'go out' is crouching/leaning next to dog with 1 hand holding collar and 1 arm pointing to the target (dont command or release until dog is looking at correct target). The directional arm is along side the dogs head, aligned in the direction you want him to go. You want the dogs nose/eyes to align with your arm

When using a new target or starting asking to dog go from 1 target to another, I leave the dog in a sit, go to the required target, tap it (and leave food on it) and go back to the dog and send him. If you have a helper, this is easier. This fades out pretty quickly. 

'Go back' is used for the dog to leave 1 target and go in a straight line to a target behind the 1st one. Both arms in air, wait until dog looks over shoulder at new target, step forward and move both arms forward and command 'go back'. This is started with targets very close to each other and starting the dog close to the 1st target (even if they are proficient at the full distance). Slowly increase distance. If dog gets confused, shorten distance again.

'Over' is a large single arm swing in the direction of the target desired. Since our targets (bases) are raised, the command hup is used. I have found that is a great cue for the dog if it gets confused or to let it know that it is heading for the right base. I will use 2 bases and stand at the one my dog is on and send it to the 2nd one. Once the dog understands what I want, I lengthen the distance again and dont start on sending in the other sideways direction until I know the dog is comfortable in one direction.

hope this helps--it is hard to put it all into words!


----------



## Kat Hunsecker

Thank you for all the suggestions.
Yes, I know how bodly ques can throw a dog off. We were good at Agility, she reads me way to well, made me very contious about my positioning. 
I decided to use just a few commands, one for "go out" "wait" and "over" "hop". We practice a few minutes everyday, we seem to have had a little brake through yesterday. I increased the distance again, and this had seemed to be one of the factors that have improved the process. Will leave it there for today and maybe increase distance tomorrow again.
She gets the wait at the pylon fiarly well now. and I try for now to send her straight to the tip of the triangle, which works 60% of the time on the first try.
Left and right do not appear to be a problem at this distance. I can even stand outside the triangle allready.
I will stick to straight out then left or right for a while and then will mix it up.
she seems to greatly enjoy the game, she is trying hard to figure out what i want. the hopping on the tables is not an issue. just sometimes the wehre do you want me to go?
She even selfcorrected her yesterday. I try to point and "stare" at the table she is supposedto go. She picks it up well.
Keep you fingers crossed that we continue to make such progress!


----------



## Melody Greba

Last year I completed the RH directs with full points. 
The basis for my training was back-chaining rather than pushing to larger distances in forward chaining.

2nd base was always the main staple in our training and the first step. I started from pitcher's mound, not from the batter's position. After the dog was solid on always targeting to 2nd base, I'd teach one direct at a time until each was solid. And eventually incorporating it with my staple exercise; going to 2nd base.

BTW,The course was always at full distance, never made smaller for the dog. 

Eventually, after both left, right, and straight to 2nd base was solid, I eventually backed up to batter's mound and sent the dog to pitcher's then 2nd. This was a main-stay for several sessions and then I added the rights and lefts back into the mix.

That's for a FEMA style direct course. The RH it is a bit different. 

As Jennifer recommended, commands of back, over and hup are all instrumental. Also, the commands, "turn", "go" and a "down" are helpful to teach. (the fundamentals of "turn" are best isolated by teaching on an elevated board)

The RH course does not have a "table"/spool or other jump up object at pitcher's mound. Mine was marked with a cone. Which was fine b/c I trained on cones before I added the "hup" equipment. 

Next you can decide what YOU want to do to finish the course. I sent my dog to 1st base from pitcher's mound. Then from 1st the dog has to go out to 2nd base which is the difference b/t the RH and the FEMA directs. No going back to the cone at pitchers. I taught this with the commands "turn", "go", "over". 

Then the dog was recalled to come and "over" to 3rd base. 

The automatic "down" is a safety command to stop the action so it doesn't get into a screaming match of commands and dog confusion.

If you can take any help from this, have at it. But this is how I did it and gives you an idea of what it looks like to do it.


----------



## Thomas Barriano

All this talk about going to 2nd and 3rd base reminds me of my
High School years ;-)


----------



## Melody Greba

Thomas Barriano said:


> All this talk about going to 2nd and 3rd base reminds me of my
> High School years ;-)


Like the Meatloaf song? :-\"

Or were actually referring to sports?


----------



## Thomas Barriano

Melody Greba said:


> Like the Meatloaf song? :-\"
> 
> Or were actually referring to sports?


Sports, what are those? I was too drunk or stoned most of the time. I tried out for the JV Football team during my second year and broke my wrist the first practice. That was the end of HS sports for me


----------



## Kat Hunsecker

thank you Melody,

At first I was confused, cause I do not know Baseball, had my hubby draw the dimaond for me LOL....
anyways, the way you discribed it is the way we have been doing it. except the smaller scale first.

The first was for us,too, 2nd base.
We have almost full distnance now, just guestimated it today, were a little short, but the distance is not the issue.

She is not 100% solid on the command for straight out to 2nd base and "just" go to the cone, but she is learning it. I am at home plate at this point. left and right are getting good even from home plate. 
( i always speed step through the sends from pitchers mount at first- then move to home plate)

from left to right and right to left works ok, the sends from 2nd to 1st or 3rd are still to be worked on. she often comes back towards me first before following my directional send to the other bases.
But I think this will be just a matter of time until she B-lines it..

at the RH, we will not know until right before the test what the order of the send from the pitchers mound will be, so we have to be fluent in all orders.

On a side note... we have set up the "search test in actual scale for the RH, and we came to a point where I had to send her in a certain direction, and she found a pice of rubble to jump on...it was funny( but also amazing the transfer she had made from field to search), she figured out this is not what I wanted and found a little uphill slope further away to go on to. finnally she figured out I want her to go even further and it couldn't have been better, she cought a whiff of the subject... awsome unintended timing!!!!

We have learned today that we have a bit trouble with the search area given by the RH and the way we have to work it. We are used to gridding not staying center line. But they range by themselves pretty well, we usually just use a body turn with a few steps in the direction and they go out, here we have to stay on center line which throws us off a bit until we get the hang of it.

@Thomas: Well See i don't know baseball and i have heared about the numbered base use in other areas, but.... I have no clue what 1st, 2nd etc base really mean.... :lol:


----------



## Joby Becker

Baseball is the "Great American Pastime"

should be a standard minimum for residency, to at least know what it is 

the guy hits the ball with a bat from home plate, after the pitcher throws the ball from the pitcher's mound, and tries to get back to home plate after running around the bases and touching them, starting with 1st, then 2nd, then 3rd without getting touched by a glove worn by the opposite team, that has the ball in it....if he makes it all the way around in one play, it is a home run...

also a reference to intimate relations, usually with teenagers.

1st base=kissing
2nd base=boobs
3rd base=in the pants
Home Run=sex


----------



## Nicole Stark

Joby Becker said:


> also a reference to intimate relations, usually with teenagers.
> 
> 1st base=kissing
> 2nd base=boobs
> 3rd base=in the pants
> Home Run=sex


Ha ha Joby, you never cease to amuse me. I mean, you know, after all the other legit stuff you posted about baseball it certainly wouldn't have been complete without this morsel. :twisted:


----------



## Kat Hunsecker

LOL, Joby....

Baseball was for me somebody hits a ball with a stick... and people run arround the field... Your explanation is very nice...

especially the one about the intimate relations...LOL 
-now I am all clued in!!!!=D>


----------



## Melody Greba

Kat Hunsecker said:


> thank you Melody,
> 
> We have learned today that we have a bit trouble with the search area given by the RH and the way we have to work it. We are used to gridding not staying center line. But they range by themselves pretty well, we usually just use a body turn with a few steps in the direction and they go out, here we have to stay on center line which throws us off a bit until we get the hang of it.


Yea, this is where a good schutzhund sport foundation provides a nice template. If the dog knows the blind search for 6 blinds, then the walk down the center and directing the dog back and forth, is a known behavior for the dog. 

25 yrs in sch has provided a solid template for my years in search-- that is a bit less. 

I've had the opportunity of training with Cinci K9, on their equipment and their box course. The boxes are set up like sch blinds. Cross over b/t disciplines share many like behaviors and training exercises. 

The boxes may or may not hold a person, for us its a victim. Since my dog knew solid blind searches (the handler walks down the center line and directs), he went around the boxes just like a blind search. It was his first time at the course. However, he caught scent of someone in the box and did the head jerk, and went back in for a detailed search, and "hold and bark-schutzhund" or bark indication-USAR. Whatever you want to call it, it's all the same. A rose is a rose...

On a FEMA training deployment in Fla, I cleared an area using the same technique like what is in RH wilderness sport test. It was a good situation for its use. The fundamentals worked out well and differs greatly from the regular SAR wilderness of cutting the dog loose. (done that too and it depends on the situation)

The fundamentals of most of RH stuff has sch sport basis. It's a nice incorporation of sport and practical work in real life.


----------



## Melody Greba

Joby Becker said:


> 1st base=kissing
> 2nd base=boobs
> 3rd base=in the pants
> Home Run=sex


So 1st base is just kissing...huh? #-o


----------



## Joby Becker

Melody Greba said:


> So 1st base is just kissing...huh? #-o


french kissing or open mouth is I think the qualifier.

a pecking kiss is more like a walk I think...as opposed to scoring a hit, and getting on first base....

Am I wrong on this? that is how we always rated the base system....I dont want to give out false information...

if it is more than kissing, then what is 2nd 3rd and HR??? LOL


----------



## David Frost

A visual explanation, also a personal favorite;

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PN_YjM4V4fc


----------



## Melody Greba

Joby Becker said:


> if it is more than kissing, then what is 2nd 3rd and HR??? LOL


Mine was a tongue and cheek response...;-)


----------



## Kat Hunsecker

Yup, i agree... Schutzhund helps in the RH! The girl I am working doesn't do Schutzhund- well I should say i chose not to do Schutzhund with her, we had more fun with other things and i have other dogs to do schutzhund with...LOL So she never learned the blind searches, which now we have to figure it out a different way. The 50m aren't hard to tackle , since all our dogs range well, but I am not sure how much they insist on the directional send each time, or if it is ok if the dogs ranges itself and if you need to you can send them....
The set up on saturday was fabulous work on the first victim on her part, I just had to turn her lose and she went right and a big bow left and cought wind and worked it out, we weren't 20m in the search area at this point the 1 victim was about 70m in and we wind coming from behind. Second one was the one with trouble spot where I had to send her. since our victim was at the edge(side of the road) of the area and the wind carried the scent up the hill on the other side of the road.... 
It is going to take some habit changes on our parts...LOL


----------



## David Frost

Admittedly, I don't know that much about schutzhund. If I do understand correctly however, the decoy is always in the last blind. The blind search becomes more of an obediance exercise than a detection exercise. I would think a dog that would work the required pattern rather than work the odor would be a hinderance in SAR. 

Just my thoughts. 

DFrost


----------



## Kat Hunsecker

@DFrost:

you are right in that aspect! even if my girl would do blind searches, I would not use the same commands, actually our whole group doesn't- we do have dogs that do both.
It is a different mindset they are in. 
Now i was thinking about at the problem I had with my Aika, after the first feilures to send her out- where she was looking for an elevated spot, I quit using the directional command just pointed and gave encouraement. so yes, in retro spective, the directability over a distance trained on the field is not much help in the search area...
I think they cue off more from the attempt to make them hunt for scent in a certain direction.

and for the area search, I would walk wherever it would be easiest to pick up scent for my dog, not centerline...
Just thinking about often changes wind direction and speeds up here, you can guide your dog past the victim with a send from center line...
But this is what the test requires so we have to do it! so for the dog or handler to have knowledge in SchH (to learn the OB exersizes and some of the Dexterity) is very helpfull.

There needs to be a victim loyalty, which you are correct the "revier" excersize completly ignores. The dog is not allowed to search for the decoy- they have to do the pattern. where i expect the search dog to disobey me and follow the scent to the victim.

But again, we have to do what the test requires.... in both SchH as well as SAr if we want to get certs or titles.
Not always fond of what is asked- but this is a different discussion.....:mrgreen:


----------



## Melody Greba

David Frost said:


> The blind search becomes more of an obediance exercise than a detection exercise. I would think a dog that would work the required pattern rather than work the odor would be a hinderance in SAR. DFrost


The blind search is an ob exercise and the decoy is exclusively in the 6th blind during a trail. In training, the decoy could be in any of the blinds and often is. He's done blind searches many times without a decoy and I rewarded by throwing the ball. But since the picture was different for the dog, he really wasn't expecting a victim in a box but was just doing a blind search. 

However, for an experienced USAR K9, the nosework is well built in. it was really quite enjoyable to see him do a "blind search" around boxes in a Sch style pattern and see him catch scent. 

The only build-up was foundation in the work of each discipline. Went just like clockwork.


----------



## Melody Greba

Kat Hunsecker said:


> @DFrost:
> Just thinking about often changes wind direction and speeds up here, you can guide your dog past the victim with a send from center line...
> But this is what the test requires so we have to do it! so for the dog or handler to have knowledge in SchH (to learn the OB exersizes and some of the Dexterity) is very helpfull.
> :


I have a video and haven't watched it for a quite a while. The handler does have to remain behind the dog. I'm confused on how it would work if the dog gets scent and bee-lines it to the victim, up ahead and leaving a victim on the other side but not as far ahead. 

But *if* I remember right, the dog does have to be directed very similiar to what I described, from one side to the other and walking down the center. But I could be wrong.


----------



## Kat Hunsecker

Blind searches are just that blind searches!!!!
A fun game to play, but it is an OB excersize. Not a true search! The dog get's tought to ignore the scent to get to the blind with the decoy. the OB overrides natural nosework. I had a building serach trained dog, that had to find the fastest way possible to the decoy- she would ignore all empty blinds or decide over distance if the blind was empty or not and preceeded to the "filled" one. This is goal orientated working. I could make her run the blinds, but just through OB.

Melody:
You have a valid question there and this is where I have trouble with that set up and staying on center line!.
to stay at the scale of the RH and the test set up we did last weekend. This is a big trouble spot in the RH.

100m x 200m search area, first victim 90m into area left ahnd side, second victim 190m right hand outer edge of search area.
Wind coming from behind- so search area started with wind blowing away from us instead of from front.

started 20 m into area, aika roamed freely very wide and ahead of me, cought scent of victim on left side B lined there, alert and refind.
which by the rules i cannot go back he line, would have left me with 70m unsearched on the right hand side.
For lack of claryfication, I returnded back to the point where I left the center line and resumed the work from there. Is this correct, I don't know!?

If the wind would have been in our face, it could have been entirely possible for her to B line all the way to the back end and find victim number 2 first, I guess you are allowed now in the 2012 rules to walk back the line, but in reality. I would have left the centerline just a little ways from my start point, and technically didn't search the area down center line yet.

So a dog with a great nose, will ignore directional send and get to the goal. how this affects the trsting? I dunno- i hope the Judge will not falt us for ahving a great nose and picking up our search where we left center line?!?


----------



## Melody Greba

Kat Hunsecker said:


> So a dog with a great nose, will ignore directional send and get to the goal. how this affects the trsting? I dunno- i hope the Judge will not falt us for ahving a great nose and picking up our search where we left center line?!?


When and where are you trialing? Is this for the RHA? Who's evaluating?


----------



## Kat Hunsecker

We are working on a trail in spring, with an FCI /SV Judge from Gemany. We are in SD.
We'll have RH-E and a few RH FL As.


----------



## Melody Greba

Kat Hunsecker said:


> We are working on a trail in spring, with an FCI /SV Judge from Gemany. We are in SD.
> We'll have RH-E and a few RH FL As.


Have you guys scheduled the judge yet? I'd be interested. Thx.


----------



## Kat Hunsecker

We have verbal agreement from Judge, we are sending the official judges request this coming week!
So he should be officiallys cheduled in a few...


----------



## Elizabeth LaPointe

Hi there!
I've done some work with directability--I'm prepping my 2 dogs for the RH-F-A, so I know your pain. I took a seminar with Resi Gerritsen. Her recommendation was this:
1. teach the cone first (food on the cone--send the dog, etc.) when that is good, add the 3 tables
2. Put the dog on a long line, and go with dog to the cone when you send it. Give it a command (your choice) to stay, down, sit. Then send to one side or forward (your choice) but go with the dog. When the dog is on its way in the right direction, say "hup" then "sit" (or down--whatever you want on the table) and praise and treat. 
3. Then do this at the other 2 tables. Her key points were to make it a full pattern from the get go--and not to use food on the tables (as the dog is then always looking for food and you want them focused on you and the next direction). This worked pretty well for my girls, but I found I wasn't get the speed between the tables. So I started to:
4. work with another trainer (who does a lot of agility). Her suggestion was to do some work with the directionals away from the tables. Send the dog to the cone then give it a directional command and as soon as they move off in that direction, throw their favorite toy out in front of them. Boy did this raise the motivation for my girls on the tables!

I'm not sure where you are from but you may want to check out www.sdona.org. They are purely about the RH training and have a seminar series being offered in Indiana, VA and Montana this Spring. They are bringing an IRO world champion over from the NL to teach it!

Good luck!
Liz


----------



## Kat Hunsecker

Yeah, it is tricky you are right. 
I agree the Agility is very helpfull. My girl did Agility first and she loves it!!! 
I keep the sessionjs very short, and she does fine. Well letssay we drew a couple of blanks in between and i feel mighty stupid making pointing and wierd looking gestures in the direction of the tables and my dog staring at me in surprise what funny body movements i can amke...LOL
Despite our problems we seem to make progress. You lose one when you gain one i guess. 
I think it is just a matter of continuing to do it and hope the light goes on one day- hopefully sooner than later... :lol:
for now i am still helping a bit with walking with her, maybe I am moving to fast as she wants to come to me before she can go from table to table . It is entirely possible i expect too much from her at once....

That Seminar thing sounds very inetresting, I think i read a link to it someplace else. Might be too late for us for preparations, but it could be very interesting regardless. 
With all the rule changes the informatioon about the RH is rare, yes we do have the rules from 2012, but all the explanations arround are sparce....
We will train and we hope we train the stuff as it was intendet... LOL
I will keep my eye on this Seminar.... thanks


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie

I actually started a little of this as dry work for my herding dogs. A couple of years ago I had discussed something similar with a bird dog trainer. I'm having a hard time visualizing certain aspects of this though. What distances are you working with for the test. I understand the bases and pitcher's mound to 2nd to 3rd or 2nd to 1st. So I'm assuming you cast in a certain direction and the dog searches? Do you ever re-cast--what we herders call a redirect? Is he in sight? What does the dog do if he doesn't pick up a scent in that direction? I'm thinking this would be cool to work with with my puppy. With Khira I used cones, but I like the idea of the little bases to start.

T


----------



## Kat Hunsecker

Well, the directablity over a distance is happening on the field, no scentwork involved in there....
the distance between the tables is 40m (~ 44yards), the first send to the pitchersmound is 20m (22yards).
No casting of the dog there, just a directional send.....

I see it as a excersize to be able to send the dog in different directions. It can help with certain things during search.

The test is touching on important aspects of the real search, sometimes better then others. 
The directional send, is used occatiopnally, but most of the searching the dogs do themselves.
The same goes for the way you have to work the area search in the test. To cover lots of ground this method is way to exhausting for the dogs, and inefficient.
But I can imagin this tests control and the ability to find?! Not sure on that, but we train for it. It is hard for us, because our dogs have learned to work independent and with less "control" over their workstyle. They are used to work it out themselves not beeings end in little loop type sweeping motions. they will get scent and comitt to it.
Which might be resulting in failure of the test.... 
You are given the line you have to walk and send the dog from there. Depending on the wind conditions, the dog can get air of a victim fast and take you way out in the search area. It happened to me the last time we set it up. Luckly the second person was further behind, but we would have had 70m on one side unsearched....


----------



## Elizabeth LaPointe

For those interested in the RH work, SDONA (www.sdona.org) is working with trainers and K9 handlers to get videos of each of the different elements so that what is described on paper (sometimes with challenging language interpretations) can actually be visualized. We don't have the directability exercise on the website yet but it is a priority one for us to do as it is one of the more difficult exercises to train. The videos include the information directly from the rules along with some clarifications gained via to IRO trainers. 

Hope this helps! Will post when we get the directability exercise video'ed!

Liz


----------



## Nancy Jocoy

I guess I read more into "what do we get out of this particular challenge" into the question and perhaps I am wrong. I can see that level of precision maybe needed on a rubble pile.

The questions asked are similar to mine - My own dog free searches independantly and if I see a void or an area where, intellectually he would probably hit scent, or an area that is visually intriguing to me, I will send him into that area. I have sent him way down bridge embankments, into culverts, but directional control has not been very specific- a sweep of the hand and a redirect if he gets too far. I seriously doubt I could send him to a pitchers mound nor have him do little sweeps in front of me.

We have done enough car and buidling stuff (cadaver) that he can detail a car without my input and he always works rooms the same way, same direction due to force of habit. And that training has queued the dog into following the hand. But then that is also something dogs do naturally.

Actually on our most recent NAPWDA re-certification we had 5 rooms, two with odor one of which had to be high (and obviously all unknown) and I just went into each room and closed the door and stood there and he detailed the rooms as always and nailed both of them quickly and efficiently with no false indications in the blank rooms. 

Other than that I give very little direction and have not felt a need to. My own speed of motion sets the pace for his searching style and detail of coverage but he is already biologically hardwired to know HOW to hunt and locate source odor - I just have to get him into the right areas.

My big concern there is will obedience to the command have the possibility to override obedience to odor?


----------



## Kat Hunsecker

We did a trail set up again this weekend, and the dogs are getting the hang of us not giving direction by walking, but by pointing. 
We also "figured out" that 50m to each side are an average ranging distance for the dogs- of course some go further some don't. Since we actually measured the area with a range finder.
I think since we have not done perfectly ranging sweaps with our dogs (like revier) the nose still overrides the directional send. I guess it is possible to find a happy medium. We just have to get it consitent now.
But I think this mstill might underestimate the dogs noses, but i also cans ee the point of direction and control over the dog....

Buildings and cars are different than woods, while you will use more detail work arround cars and building, in the woods you don't have to do it as abd, for area searches.
If you are looking for small scent amounts this would change there,too, but you would not work that big of an area either...


----------



## Jennifer Coulter

So is this IRO thing a sport? I keep hearing about "judges" and "trails". It is kind of like a stylized SAR thing for titles?


----------



## Nancy Jocoy

Kat Hunsecker said:


> Buildings and cars are different than woods, while you will use more detail work arround cars and building, in the woods you don't have to do it as abd, for area searches.
> If you are looking for small scent amounts this would change there,too, but you would not work that big of an area either...


Certainly. My dog knows where I am in the woods and how I am moving and just my moving pace impacts how he works. I cant imagine NOT being able to give some level of direciton to an offlead wilderness dog - not along the lines of steering them through a search area but rather directing them to cover blank areas or areas of interest.

For the cadaver dog my speed dictates the dogs level of detailing as he is going to do his nosework relative to my location.


----------



## Kat Hunsecker

The IRO is not a sport, it is the International Rescue dog Association. 
the reason why I talk about trail is, that we can do it in conjunction with the SchH trail. And they do have i think competitions,too. If you have fun doing this. But the IRO is a certyfieing body- international!


----------



## Thomas Barriano

HI Kat

Looks like the SDONA
http://www.sdona.org/k9sar-sport-and-mission/
is trying to sell it as a sport?


----------



## Kat Hunsecker

I hope they don't. Haven't checked this webpage,yet. But this would have a negative effect...
I just glanced over this page, and what I saw first was a membership- and fee.... I kinda got burned with this stuff, as some orgs, take your money and then don't care. so I am very iffy on joining yet another group. Where I am at now, I can do both, sport and SAR.. works for me. But I would bot want to see it as a sport....

We have done the first level of the RH allready, and the Judge we had, was looking at the true suitability of the dogs for the task. I don't see it as a sport....


----------



## Kat Hunsecker

Yeah, looks like SDONA has a sport division.... and a mission ready division....
but it looks to me like this their internal thing- not the IRO itself!


----------



## Thomas Barriano

Who gives the RH suitability test/title? Is it strictly an IPO title or is it IRO recognized? The SDONA website looks pretty professional and they are bringing over a World Champion to do three seminars. I don't do SAR myself but if they keep the "sport" separate from the mission ready side. I don't see a problem?


----------



## Nancy Jocoy

I know the organization has a solid history and there is a good bit that is very good but the focus is more on disasters and much more urban/suburban environments than we have in this country. It would be good to take from it what is useful but I am not sure how much, if any, influence USA handlers would have over improving the tests for over here.

Having a cadaver dog (3x NAPWDA, 1X IPWDA advanced) and a puppy heading into cadaver work, I am looking at some of the agility tests but am fine with the NAPWDA obedience as being an acceptable level and none of the IRO tests apply to cadaver work. The water test looks like finding live folks in the water? All the water searches we go on, they are probably pretty much dead for a few hours.

Any certifying organization will have pros and cons but for the US, I would not consider using any test than is less than meeting the NIMS speifications as a wise choice for granting operational status. The minimum there is 40 acres and plenty of agencies (NAPWDA,IPWDA,NASAR,NSDA) do have certifying tests at this level. 

Not sure how IRO certification works for USA teams certified as such for overseas deployments. Are US responders not required to go through FEMA?

I agree obedience control is really an issue with civilian teams and part of what led NAPWDA to institute an obedience control test. To be honest I like the pass/fail assessment of an experienced master trainer than a points based assessment by a judge who may not have any real world experience in a search discipline.

Trailing, from what I have been told, is a novel concept over there which is not really understood, and footstep tracking is really *not* too great for older trails where you don't have a known starting point. 

So there probably is some good stuff - certainly the schutzhund folks tend to have a lot of insight on dog training. By the same token, I learned a lot more about actually searching from an old coonhound guy turned searcher than any sports folks I have met.


----------



## julie allen

I am dealing with that too, I have no trouble directing my dogs. To direct them to a marker, then to sit and wait has only been added because of USAR. Like the planks, ladders and seesaws. This is very helpful for rubble. 
At our earthquake drill, the only access to the building was a tunnel, long dark, slick surface, and rocked back and forth, and was three feet off the ground. Only room for one, so the dog had to be sent, she did awesome.
Anyway I feel the directionals are only a way to test, as dogs will naturally follow body language or hand signals,what have you, if you practice this.


----------



## Kat Hunsecker

Thanks Julie
maybe Elizabeth can shine some light on us for her organisation, too so we understand better with the sport stuff.


----------



## Kat Hunsecker

Thomas Barriano said:


> Who gives the RH suitability test/title? Is it strictly an IPO title or is it IRO recognized? The SDONA website looks pretty professional and they are bringing over a World Champion to do three seminars. I don't do SAR myself but if they keep the "sport" separate from the mission ready side. I don't see a problem?


 
All RH titles including the RH-E is IRO. not IPO. 

And you are right, if it stays seperate, I think it can be fun. Cause doing something with dogs is fun and if you do not want to go out and Search, i think it is still a fun thing to do. Just concerns me that it might mix to much and gets to competative in the sport side, and loses its origin, but i guess the Organisation can keep track of this.

I hope Elizabeth we get soem inside insight.... That would help alot.


----------



## Elizabeth LaPointe

Hi All--
I would love to share insight. So, we started SDONA to appeal to both--sport and mission people. As with every title and every certification, there are aspects of a standard that may or may not be applicable to "work". Even SchH protection is more of an obedience exercise in many regards than a true test of "protection work" or what may be needed for a good police dog. 

There has been an absence of the IRO perspective in the US for quite some time, yet they have developed an internationally recognized and practiced standard for deployment, and tests that are used across the world. We recognize that the area tests (using directability to cover the area rather than "gridding") may seem too controlled for many and not allowing their dogs to work naturally and range on their own according to scent. I think however, both techniques have their place in the SAR world. Running a trail hasty and using the directional work can be very effective and can assure oneself that the area on either side of a trail is actually covered. If you overlay this technique with the research summarized by Koester (Lost Person Behavior) then you find a large percentage of certain "common" categories of lost people are found within X meters of a trail or road. I tend to agree that the tracking test may be less useful in our real world scenario, but what I do know, is that teaching a dog to track before they trail just adds another tool to their toolbox. I have an IPWDA certified trailing dog that will be going for advanced certification in 2 months and also RH-F A level testing later this year. She can do both, as can many dogs. 

I know many in the SAR world are hungry for local (or broader) deployments. That it can be challenging to keep skills "sharp" in training when faced with the same areas, people, etc. to train with. Competition would provide another opportunity to test skills. We all know that nerves can impact how we and our dogs perform, whether this is during a SAR test, and IRO trial or on a real search mission. I think the greater exposure we have to these types of opportunities, the better prepared our K9 teams will be for actual search work. 
SDONA is not looking to make money off of any of this. We are all volunteers and we are spending a lot of time trying to make the IRO /FCI regulations understandable and palatable to local teams. We are videoing the elements and reviewing them with IRO trainers to make sure we are portraying the exercises correctly; and simply trying to get this out as another resource/opportunity to learn. I think the IRO will evolve over time--they are committed to reviewing and revising their requirements every so many years (5?). The requirements on the SDONA site are brand new--they have been active since Jan 1, 2012, so even the interpretation of the rules will evolve in the coming year. 

We hope if we can get a foot hold in this country and have people qualified under these standards, that we can contribute teams to the United Nations effort when disasters occur. This is the primary interest of the IRO. But they know, as do we, the sport side is incredibly important to this goal, and that for every 5 sport only members, they may only get 1 team interested in going on for the additional training and testing to get to Mission Ready, but for the teams that do, we all know and appreciate what a huge impact a well trained K9 SAR team can be on a search and rescue mission. 

So we are new to the scene but pretty clear in our goals. It really is about offering opportunity and education for those interested in "something else". We are open to opinions and ideas about what our NA community needs to give this a try. 
Keep the questions coming!
Thanks-
Liz


----------



## Nancy Jocoy

I honestly do not have an issue with new things, new approaches etc, but I do think the focus on Wilderness should still be to get folks on local teams and encouraging NIMs compliant nationally recognized certifications. 

If the group has flexibility for the MRT tests, I would sure encourage them to put the Wilderness tests in those buckets [and NIMS adjusted to what was already out there; it is not like some beaurocrat came up with the size/types of classifications]-- certainly IPWDA air scent would be a good supplemental to the IRO Air Scent mission ready.

Agree with you on a personal level with tracking as a good foundation before trailing but there are just as many (or more) who do not take that approach, are highly respected, and I don't have enough trailing experience to make a qualified decision 

I think directionals are good and I would certainly send a dog on either side of a trail IF the conditions were such that he would not be able to pick up the odor and follow to source from the trail without my help. 

My concern with too much control while searching is creating an artificial situation where you can't read subtleties in body language or having the dog break free and go to source due to obedience to the direction...but then I have not seen it in action...so it is a theoretical concern. I also think that much detail and concentration would severly limit the ability to search a 40-80 acre area.

We use Koester all the time and it is a valuable resource but, remember, it is simple statistics coupled with some insights on the way the subject would behave....I have seen just as many real searches fall on the outside edges of the Koester models as inside; the models are only as good as the data that is fed it. Far better than the old data on LPB though.


----------



## Konnie Hein

Nancy Jocoy said:


> My big concern there is will obedience to the command have the possibility to override obedience to odor?


I think this depends on how important the reward (and thus the odor) is to the dog, how you train obedience to odor, and how you train the directional exercises.

Choosing a self-motivated, high-drive dog, training the directional exercises "in drive," and incorporating scent work into the directional exercises are all important parts of the whole picture.


----------



## Nancy Jocoy

Konnie Hein said:


> I think this depends on how important the reward (and thus the odor) is to the dog, how you train obedience to odor, and how you train the directional exercises.
> 
> Choosing a self-motivated, high-drive dog, training the directional exercises "in drive," and incorporating scent work into the directional exercises are all important parts of the whole picture.


And please understand - I am not opposed to directional control-you have to be able to send your dog to areas where you want them to search and I gave some examples - just to whether the wilderness dog needs to be (as I percieve from some posts) under constant directional control or on an as needed basis.


----------



## Kat Hunsecker

Nancy Jocoy said:


> I honestly do not have an issue with new things, new approaches etc, but I do think the focus on Wilderness should still be to get folks on local teams and encouraging NIMs compliant nationally recognized certifications.
> 
> 
> .


I am not sure what you understand under NIMS complient? Can you elaborate?


All tests have flaws! I could pick even more on the RH because it excludes Bloodhounds! Well not really i guess you could technically enroll a Bloodhound. And If a Bloodhound ever gets through this test, I bow infront of his handler/trainer! We do ahve two on the team, and we are sad this test isn't suitable for them. 
Regardless of that, i still like the RH testing, there is not much room to wiggle, most excersizes in the intend, are good exersizes to test. Maybe I understand it better, since for most teams in Europe i know, this test isn't the end of training. And in Germany for example, you have to have the AD (Endurance test),for the Rescue dogs- if i remember correctly, so endurance shouldn't be an issue. and a bigger area, of course needs to be trained.... but this is your own responsibility .... same as continuous trainingafter other certs.

Elizabeth, thank you for clariefying this. I really appreciate it. Though I am still worried about this beeing very new over here, can drift into sport- and very easily can catch the sport image. Education needs to be done!


The obedience will not override the odor, if you train smart. The problem I have with this system is the way you have to work the test area. Our dogs commit and go to source, show excellent victim loyalty even if we sent them in a certain ditrection. It is just, that you have no control over the way you walk this area, as most of you, we have strong and changing winds, and you walk down the middle line and the wind carries odor to the dog past one victim and the dog takes off. You cannot go back and start where yous topped your search, leaving you with lots of area unsearched. 
This is what bothers me about this sending system with remaining on the middle line.


----------



## Nancy Jocoy

Kat Hunsecker said:


> I am not sure what you understand under NIMS complient? Can you elaborate?.


At what level are you asking?

As far as I know there is not a specific *requirement *that resources are credentialed under the ESF9 buckets which were established a number of years ago but agencies aligned their tests with the types that were established. I know agencies till ask us to list our resouces by number and put them into the various categories.

I will assume you have had IS 100/200/700/800 and 809 .

http://www.fema.gov/pdf/emergency/nims/508-8_search_and_rescue_resources.pdf


----------



## julie allen

My take on the directionals is just a formal way to test. Its not really implemented in real world, as the way you describe your dogs Nancy, is actually what you want the dogs to do.


----------



## Nancy Jocoy

julie allen said:


> My take on the directionals is just a formal way to test. Its not really implemented in real world, as the way you describe your dogs Nancy, is actually what you want the dogs to do.


Ok that is what I was trying to understand because I knew someone who steered her dog like a remote car on wilderness searches. [kind of like steering a trailing dog from behind]


----------



## Kat Hunsecker

> Any certifying organization will have pros and cons but for the US, I would not consider using any test than is less than meeting the NIMS speifications as a wise choice for granting operational status. The minimum there is 40 acres and plenty of agencies (NAPWDA,IPWDA,NASAR,NSDA) do have certifying tests at this level.


This statement confused me, as I can't remember that NIMS gives you an area size to test in. I remember NIMS as talking mainly about Chain of command.... and not certifieing criteria. But maybe i just overlooked it?
FEMA only has some specs for Disaster, this took quite some digging, but we weren't really interested in this, we like fishing in the woods...

checked your link, I know now partially what you arev talking about, but testing wise, we just found Disaster tests from FEMA.


----------



## Kat Hunsecker

Anyways, back to the original problem, we still have trouble with the sending from table to table.
somewhere in there, she is not understanding the direct line. She still checks in with me first.
I was wondering If i should run this as an agility course, as in making it a cricle drill and I stay in the middle? To help her understand the perimiters?!
I even was thinking about flagging the way from table to table. We have a thinking issue in this thing we have to egt out, before it ingrains too much in her head, the game is coming back to me first....


----------



## Nancy Jocoy

Kat Hunsecker said:


> This statement confused me, as I can't remember that NIMS gives you an area size to test in. I remember NIMS as talking mainly about Chain of command.... and not certifieing criteria. But maybe i just overlooked it?
> FEMA only has some specs for Disaster, this took quite some digging, but we weren't really interested in this, we like fishing in the woods...
> 
> checked your link, I know now partially what you arev talking about, but testing wise, we just found Disaster tests from FEMA.


FEMA had gone down the whole path of curriculum and credentialing but it all ran out of steam - they had even specified which tests would meet which requirements for each resource type (e.g., NASAR, NAPWDA, IPWDA)


----------



## Konnie Hein

Kat Hunsecker said:


> Anyways, back to the original problem, we still have trouble with the sending from table to table.
> somewhere in there, she is not understanding the direct line. She still checks in with me first.
> I was wondering If i should run this as an agility course, as in making it a cricle drill and I stay in the middle? To help her understand the perimiters?!
> I even was thinking about flagging the way from table to table. We have a thinking issue in this thing we have to egt out, before it ingrains too much in her head, the game is coming back to me first....


I read the beginning of this thread a while ago, so I don't remember what you tried. Where/how is your dog getting rewarded for arriving at the correct table?


----------



## Kat Hunsecker

When she gets to the table she gets a click, reward at the table. When it was fast she gets the ball if slower a treat.


----------

