# weird hrd experience



## Karen Stagnaro (Apr 10, 2015)

I set up a practice hr training area on the top of small hill in a rural park area. I noticed a bad smell and found a shallow grave with a bunch of rocks stacked on top of the hole and I assumed someone had buried their pet. As I watched several other dogs work this problem, they all indicated on the grave, or close to it, and did their final recall. When I worked with my dog she did a beautiful final indication high in the tree about a foot from the shallow grave. She has never indicated on any other animal, but I don't remember ever exposing her to decomposing domesticated animals. Anybody have a similar experience and/or any ideas about what is causing the dogs to indicate?
A black canvas bag was sticking out of the ground and so I decided I had to open it and make sure it was an animal. It was a decomposing dog so I'm a little baffled about why the dogs would be alerting on it? Maybe the human scent on the duffle? but that odor shouldn't cause dogs to indicate. Just thought I'd throw this situation out there to see if anyone has had a similar experience or has some theory regarding why the positive indications from the dogs. Thanks!


----------



## Sarah Platts (Jan 12, 2010)

There’s a couple of things to think about. I’ve seen dogs alert on mice nests and animal dens because of the odor attraction factor. I’ve also see dogs alert to the strange and unusual because it’s just that. Different. The factors of fresh earth, lots of human activity smell, and a new dead odor can combine to trick a dog. How close to this was your human remains hide? Did you place it near or close to this grave? How much did you call attention to it? Or away from it? How much animal remains proofing have you done? What types of animals have the dogs been exposed to? 

The big thing is you really, really have to proof off every kind of animal you can think off. Each species does smell different in death. I can smell the decomp difference between dead cow vs horse vs sheep vs cat vs dog. So if you hand the dog a NEW dead smell they may first characterize that with searching for dead human until you tell them not. Put them on as wide a variety of dead animals as you can. I’ve been known to set up problems where the only thing out there is dead animal and run the problem. So negative for human, positive for animals. It’s one way I document that the dogs won’t default to animals in order to give me something because the human search is turning up negative and they want to please me.

My suggestion is to go back out there and do some remedial proofing. Dead human here…..Dead dog there….. and run it a couple of times, Correct or move the dog on for overt interest in the dog grave. There is a really good trick I started doing several years ago and it pretty much solved my animal problems. 

It’s literally one of my secret tricks of the trade but most people won’t do it because of the NIMBY issue. Anyway, in my backyard, off on the side fence I have a milk crate. I will pick up dead stuff while out on my dog walks and bring it home and chuck it under the crate. Dead turtles, mice, dog, cat, deer, opossum, raccoon, squirrel, rabbit, fish, crab, etc. Some of the stuff is from people dumping off their dead animals, some is from my dogs catching them. You can get the animal stuff from an obliging vet clinic if you talk nice to them. That’s where I got my first dog leg (from an amputation) to use. I just leave it there to rot down, never removing anything but always finding something new to chuck under the crate. I also run search problems in my backyard. So the animal is ALWAYS there. The dogs are continuously exposed to the full spectrum of animal decomp odor. I run positive and negative problems in my yard. I’ve had really good results with this way of animal proofing and with minimal effort on my part.


----------



## Robert Young (May 22, 2014)

I realize I am very lucky but my dog has never alerted on non-human remains. Once on her first search the guides found an odorous black plastic bag as well, which she gave a negative on when I had her check it. Being an LEO I was not as repulsed and of course felt the need to empty it still to validate my dog. It was a dead cat. That was one of this dogs first other dead encounters. There have been quite a few since then and PTL never once has she indicated on non-human remains. Therefore if this dog gave me her final on what you described there would be further investigation. Can you think of a better ruse to hide HR? Bury it and strategically plant a dead decaying dog they scooped up from somewhere conveniently in view on top. Sorry I can't help it-like I said LEO background compels me to make sure everything is on the up and up. I have learned to trust good dogs. The fact that more than just your dog gave a final on it just makes it more suspicious to me. But I don't have much HRD experience. I would bet that poster Sarah Platts nailed it.


----------



## Sarah Platts (Jan 12, 2010)

Robert, you are right. I didn't think it through far enough. I was *assuming* that when they removed the bag that the hole went no deeper or showed signs of further digging. But using animals to cover up for humans is a trick they do try.

I remember searching a park for a DB. My dog hit on one of the large metal barrels used for trash cans. Just wouldn't leave it. Everyone was telling me the dog was alerting on the trash in the can. I took the can and emptied out the trash in a line and then set the barrel down on its side about 20 ft away. Dog walked the trash line and then went and hit on the barrel. Come to find this was the second time they had shifted the DB's location and by this time I guess it was a bit juicy so they had used the barrel to move the body to its new grave in the park. They had a good plan and, but for the dogs, would have worked and it was pretty slick how they covered up the new grave (and no, I won't post what they did)

The other thing to mention is that if the same person is training the team dogs or the entire team is training the same way, then a weak point could exist for all the dogs. The other thing is that once you got a hit, and you started running other dogs on it, there is an air of expectation and human focus that can also cause the dogs to react wrongly.


----------



## Nicole Stark (Jul 22, 2009)

This: Can you think of a better ruse to hide HR? Bury it and strategically plant a dead decaying dog they scooped up from somewhere conveniently in view on top. 

And this: I would bet that poster Sarah Platts nailed it.

I have to say my first thought was the same as the one on top. And certainly, dogs and people have been killed at the same time. Anyone paying attention... I won't finish that thought.

To the OP. I haven't had that experience but I did have something unexpected occur with what I think was an assault (possibly more). This occurred during an HRD seminar. I heard screaming and left the field with my Dutch Shepherd. I had her move in the direction of the noise. She led me to a trail, down an offshoot, to a matted down area where I found her standing over a basketball sized pool of blood and blood spatter on the foilage around it. It led off to a new path away from the area. At that time I had with me the instructor (a former officer) and a classmate, then again in the distance and direction of the new path we heard more screaming.

I know what I heard and saw. There is an ever present homeless population up here and yes, while it was like entering a different world walking through that homeless camp, I know that the woman screaming was not homeless. I heard what she said. Despite the police being called, it was just reported. I called the police later that night to ask them to meet me in the lot and I led them tot he location. Oddly, while discussing the earlier call(s) we were approached by a man that was obviously off a bit mentally but would not have struck you as a person of that specific homeless population although he was staying in the area. It was 10:30 pm and dark. What was his interest in our being there? Who knows.

I don't know the answer to your question aside from what Sarah has said. I have wondered for years how anyone who might be out on a random training day would handle this situaiton - or lets just say you didn't find the dog but something else you didn't hide that you are uncertain of. What's the protocol? Is it usually just dismissed as an animal find or something that wasn't part of the training and gets dismissed because of the signular focus on training? Do you follow your gut or what? Has anyone ever been in that situation or know of someone who has where it turned out to reveal something unexpected / tangible? In the situation I mentioned above singular focus mixed in with bias likely determined protocol. My gut says what we did was neglegent. I say that because the initial report focused too much on the homeless and I believe that as a result the incident was dismissed as an internal (domestic) matter. Further, it rained heavily after we left the area by the time I returned the blood was washed away.


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

Ditto with Sarah!

Proof, proof, proof! 

We proofed our dogs of anything and everything that may have an odor. 

Often times when we did scent box work we would have a proofed scent in with the target scent and the proofed scent also in boxes in front of and behind the target scent. 

This kept the dog from identifying the proofed scent with the target scent. 

Just because it was in close proximity didn't mean it was a part of the target scent. 

If you use scent tubes then proof off with empty scent tubes.

If you handle target items with latex gloves on then proof off of latex gloves.


----------



## Karen Stagnaro (Apr 10, 2015)

Thanks to all for your comments. 
After I posted this I spoke with another member of my team about what had happened and she had had the exact same experience with this dead dog. The team had all three of their certified hr dogs hit on the area so they had to dig up the dog as well. So we may have hit upon a weakness within our team training that we need to correct. I'm going to share all your comments with the rest of my team.
I have not been proofing as much as I should be. I did try a proofing problem last week with an empty glass jar and metal lid which she did alert and recall on. And as far as corrections -should I just do a gentle correction since she is a very soft dog or is there another more effective way to correct this behavior?
I haven't worked on many different types of dead animals. Basically just the ones we frequently come across as we are training- lots of deer, jackrabbit, and animal bones. I'll have to be prepared to pick up any dead animals I see during one of my hiking trips.
The canvas bag was a big one and we did not unbury the dog all the way. We just unzipped it and looked inside. So I guess there could be something underneath...
Do any of you train on a cotton ball or whatever, that hasn't been in direct contact with the source but left in a bag or container with the source?
I'm also wondering if, when you work problems, do you just have one source in the area or do you try putting 2 or 3 and have the dog continue on with the problem after finding the first and second source?
And do you think that most of the training should be done such that the dog should not be able to see the source?
Thanks for sharing your experience!


----------



## Sarah Platts (Jan 12, 2010)

If the dog you are working with has a fringing issue then, No, I don't put out more than one source. Part of the problem is as the dog is fringing they may come across the next odor. Now you have 2 "finds" but the dog selects one and abandons the other. Does this happen on a real search? Of course. The dog will go past a smaller amount of odor to track the larger one. But if you are trying to firm up the alert sequence then I do one hide per area, then move to the next. Part of this is because I used to have a dog that did refinds. Got to be a problem when he located one, was doing the refind, ran across the odor for the second, and defaulted to the second. Then the problem was the dog couldn't figure out which one to alert on so he would find the midway point between both and alert. When I asked him to "show me" he would just look in both directions and indicate again. That was not something I was looking for. Sure, in real life, you won't argue the default to a stronger source but in training.... not something I want to encourage. 

Once the dog is firm on one with the correct behaviors then I will start to incorporate additional hides.

Yes, I do work with scent pads. Partly because its a fainter odor than even the smallest amount of HR. I do it on regular basis because not all DB's leave fluids behind depending on how they are packaged. But they do leave the area saturated with decomp odor. Something to remember is that the dogs are not trained to alert on human remains. They are trained to alert on the odor of human remains (aka: decomp). To illustrate this, say you cook a bag of popcorn in the microwave. You then leave with the bag of popcorn. But someone else walks in and says he smells popcorn. Is he wrong? Is he wrong because there is no more popcorn in the kitchen because you took it with you? No, because he is smelling the popcorn odor. The fact that you left with the popcorn doesn't mean it never existed as proven by the odor of the popcorn left behind. The odor is what he is smelling. The odor is what he is remarking on.

As far as seeing the source? Yes and no. When I'm working with puppies or a dog I'm trying to teach targeting to, then I put it out in open or semi-open sight. Mostly because then I can get behavior right at the target. And when the dog is truly using his nose, it's like he's blind. You can leave stuff right out in view and the dog walk all around it while working the search pattern because they are using their nose - not their eyes. But you have to watch out for the sneaky ones who catch on quick and flip between the two senses. That's when you get dogs alerting on empty jars and containers. So put out fake stuff on a regular basis. Don't cross contaminate your fakes. If using gloves lay the fake first then real, when picking up at the end use fresh gloves and pick up fake then real. So you are not picking up real and then go pick up the fake running the risk of depositing HR odor on your fakes. Ideally, if I'm picking up the real, I like someone else to pick up the fake. If the dog indicates wrongly, I just move them on and fail to respond to it. There is no reward for wrong answers. I may say "no", and "back to work" and then big time reward for locating the correct stuff.


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

The incorrect indication gets no attention and no reward. 

A behavior not rewarded will fade in time. 

Some may correct for it. I never did. 

I believe loss of reward is very effective for a high drive dog.


----------



## Meg O'Donovan (Aug 20, 2012)

Sarah, your popcorn explanation was great. What do you mean by fringing issues?


----------



## Sarah Platts (Jan 12, 2010)

Meg O'Donovan said:


> Sarah, your popcorn explanation was great. What do you mean by fringing issues?


I've had dogs walk right up to the source then fringe the scent pool to make sure *this* is the right spot and not scent dropping in from another area through chimney or lofting effects. While the dog is making sure of the hide, if they hit the scent pool from another closely placed hide then you can see the dog in a quandary over which to alert on first. Ben, number 3 dog, decided it was not his job to make that decision so would pick a point midway between the two and indicate. I would then have to grid out to find the two hides.

I see this with dogs that are very picky about not making a mistake and wanting to be absolutely sure of things.


----------



## Meg O'Donovan (Aug 20, 2012)

Thanks for explaining, Sarah. So does fringing mostly/only apply when the dog is working a site with multiple sources and hovers between them, or would you also say it's fringing when a dog goes in to a single source but then comes back out a bit to check/make sure (maybe circles scenting), and then goes in to source again (and stays). Is fringing always an undesirable behavior?


----------



## Sarah Platts (Jan 12, 2010)

Meg O'Donovan said:


> Thanks for explaining, Sarah. So does fringing mostly/only apply when the dog is working a site with multiple sources and hovers between them, or would you also say it's fringing when a dog goes in to a single source but then comes back out a bit to check/make sure (maybe circles scenting), and then goes in to source again (and stays). Is fringing always an undesirable behavior?


Its several things. I would say its not so much the first thing (hovering between them) but more the second (going in but then coming out to work the edges). And I don't think it's such a bad thing but it can cause the handler to think things through more. It could be the source is in such a position that the dog cannot work to source and all you will see is the dog working the edges around and around. For some people the fact that the dog went to the source and then left it to further work the scent pool is a problem. I had a guy fail one of my dog on a certification test for just that reason. The dog would come back to indicate correctly on the location but the guy didn't like the fact that the dog left it in the first place to work the entire scent pool before indicating.
Another type of fringing issue is when the dog just works the edges of the scent pool and won't go to source. The dog gets to the boundary and indicates without working the scent through. Sometimes you see this with dogs who have an odor aversion to the smell of HR or dogs that have only worked with very small amounts. Unless you work with varying amounts (what I see happening) is when the dog gets to the upper threshold level it's been trained to the dog stops and indicates. The dog doesn't recognize the smell of the larger amount as the odor its been trained on. Best analogy I can come up with is perfume. A person who applies a spritz of perfume smells different than someone who bathed with the whole bottle. Sure it's the same material but it the odor level of that material is different and the dog treats it as a separate odor.


----------



## Meg O'Donovan (Aug 20, 2012)

Thanks for the second explanation too.


----------

