German Shepherds Forum banner

1 - 20 of 27 Posts

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
16,483 Posts
Out of stock for the moment but definitely a respected author! Thanks.
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
868 Posts
It will do nothing but reinforce my belief in a standardized certification system for all psd's. There are too many units that are improperly trained, ill supervised and poor utilized. The only thing it has ever done is make it more difficult for those of us that are doing it right.

DFrost
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,980 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
Well that is a lot of the problem with civilian SAR and HRD handlers. No oversight,in house nonsense etc. There are good ones out there. I use them,but far more that are not and these cases are going to court more frequently
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
115 Posts
It will do nothing but reinforce my belief in a standardized certification system for all psd's. There are too many units that are improperly trained, ill supervised and poor utilized. The only thing it has ever done is make it more difficult for those of us that are doing it right.

DFrost
^^This. It just keeps making our jobs harder and it is very, very frustrating. We just finished a water seminar, and many of the handlers had been to several seminars across the country. Not a single one had ever had any scent theory or knew what their jobs should be from those seminars. What the heck are they even teaching at those then? Fortunately these were all fairly new water handlers and were very willing to learn to do it right, so we didn't have a lot to undo.

We have been advocating for national standards for a long time, but there are so many groups that won't play well with others, you can't even have reasonable discussions. Many of the standards for SAR out there now have been brought down so far that we have discussed going back to the originals for team standards. Really, a 1 - 2 hour old track is not practical for a SAR dog.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
16,483 Posts
We push our members to test to the national standards for their records and as evaluations have become readily available in our area have become more insistent and most have taken them, but we also have more stringent in house. That said, all HRD dogs are NAPWDA certified annually.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
115 Posts
Yep, we don't have dogs we will allow to deploy until they have tested to a national standard. And dogs that come in from another standard are team tested before we will let them deploy.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
16,483 Posts
One of our air scent folks is going to be testing the NAPWDA area search soon. All of our operational trailing folks have passed the trailing test n addtion to the HRD folks passed the cadaver test.

The reason we are not yet up on area search is that we always work area search with a scent article and have had precious little problem getting one in real life (and they let us collect our own) but the NAPWDA test is 2 victims, no scent article...so we are having to add that in for the sake of the test and she is our "guinea pig" - her dog has already passed our 40 acre night test and 120 acre day tests and has been doing well at training with multiple victims no scent article (which, like I said is not what we ever encounter, just like a fresh one hour old trail)

SWGDOG threw out the Scent discriminating area search; some don't believe in it. It is in NASAR because the original folks around when those standards were written used and demanded it. Out in wide open wilderness areas I can see but in rural settings, suburban settings where there are folks out and about it really helps.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
115 Posts
I don't know why SWGDOG did that either, it didn't make sense. I really think they need both, because there are valid situations for both. Our area search dogs are started non scent discriminating first, and then we add the discrimination part as they understand their job. So far it has worked well.
I think there are issues with all the standards, but I still think teams need to be testing to them and understand the limitations, whether it be NAPWDA, NASAR, whatever. The standards are being dumbed down because not enough people were passing. Then there is something wrong with their training methods and they need to go back and examine that. So many teams are internally testing and from an IC point of view, it is a nightmare to work with unknown resources.
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
868 Posts
SWGDOG threw out the Scent discriminating area search; some don't believe in it..
I'd just ask this about scent discriminating SAR. It takes weeks of training to teach a drug dog 4 odors. Why should people believe a SAR dog can pick one odor out of thousands with a 2 second sniff. It makes me ask questions as well.

DFrost
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
115 Posts
If you can't have a scent discriminating area search dog, then you can't have a scent discriminating tracking trailing dog. It is the same thing. You can, obviously, have both, and have both do it very well. The area search dog is looking for the exact same thing as the tracking dog, they are just going about it a different way.

We have taken 4 dogs to the old standard Tracking / trailing ST I (two ~30hr old tracks, one urban and one wilderness within 24 hours) It is time consuming, it takes the right dog, and the right handlers, and proper training. But it is not impossible, nor so impossibly difficult that more people couldn't do it if they wanted to. But it takes a LOT of time and Proper training, so most don't want to make that commitment. Two of those same dogs were also area search ST I scent discriminating, or not, depending on whether or not we had a scent article available.

They can be exceptionally reliable, there is just sooo much poor training out there that agencies don't believe in them anymore. It makes the job for those of us who do it right so much more difficult.

The first time I was in NC in 2001 for an exercise, I had been up all night for a scenario, had not been in my tent for more than an hour, and Randy McKinney came and got me for a real lost person and said you are the only one here that has a chance at finding this guy. I had never even met him before, but he saw how well my dog worked and gave us a chance. The training pays off, and it works. Many handlers just don't make the commitment to get to that level.

Even working a drug dog, it doesn't take long for them to understand a new odor, once they have the concept of the first one or two.
It is nothing more than teaching the dog what we want them to find, and getting them to let us know (final response), and rewarding them for a job well done.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,980 Posts
Discussion Starter #13
Well from what I have witnessed,I have seen few dogs proficient in scent discrimination. Takes a lot of work and the courts have dumped scent lineups so personally I would not go there. What dogs are capable of and what we see folks able to train them to do are different thjngs:)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
115 Posts
I guess that's why we are on a Special Response Team :) Because we can and will continue to train to that level! My trainer and better half would kick my butt if I didn't!
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
16,483 Posts
I have seen it work both in training and real life and it is a lot of work to get a dog there. Much much much training wtih other folks out in the woods (distracters) is necessary as are many scent disrimination drills. It is every bit as time consuming as training and maintaining a good trailing dog.

We do not have the luxury of working pristine areas with fresh tracks and there are going to be others out in the woods looking as well. Anything to stack the odds in favor of finding the victim and not the other searchers, is a win win situation. For search statistics they are assigned a POD no higher than that of a non discriminating air scent dog and typically just given the POD of an open grid team if that is how they covered the area.

For the courts, well sending someone to jail on the basis of scent evidence which I gather is often picked up by scenting a dog at the track where they took off as opposed to a carefully collected scent article? Adrenaline Scent? a lot of other variables that are different in police work? I don't know. Never chased a suspect. Been on a number of person searches where a scent discriminating air scent dog saved a life that day.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,980 Posts
Discussion Starter #16
Curious about the scent discriminating air scent dog you referenced. Anybody else out in the area? Most article search dogs are finding whatever is laying out there with the freshest human odor on it, how mine did it anyway
David,you familiar with any case that someone went to jail based solely on something a dog found during an article search? No DNA nadda
I may be misunderstanding but what are you gathering?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
115 Posts
Curious about the scent discriminating air scent dog you referenced. Anybody else out in the area? Most article search dogs are finding whatever is laying out there with the freshest human odor on it, how mine did it anyway
Yes, there are other people in the area. It really isn't any different than a tracking dog following a particular person, only in this case the dog is using the air currents not necessarily the laid track. With the tracking dogs that are taught to also indicate on articles, the articles have the tracklayers scent on them, so yes they are taught scent discrimination on articles, even if the article was tossed. From a SAR aspect, there are very valid reasons for using both types of dogs. From a LEO aspect, other than targeted apprehension, I don't know that it would be that useful. A good tracking dog however could still have a similar function in a LE situation. Our patrol dog is rarely off lead to apprehend a suspect because he almost always gets them on a track, not an open area where he would have to search off lead. But we have done scenarios where he does building searches with other people inside the building, and only gets the "bad" guy after being scented to him. He simply ignores everyone else.
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
868 Posts
Curious about the scent discriminating air scent dog you referenced. Anybody else out in the area? Most article search dogs are finding whatever is laying out there with the freshest human odor on it, how mine did it anyway
David,you familiar with any case that someone went to jail based solely on something a dog found during an article search? No DNA nadda
I may be misunderstanding but what are you gathering?

I'm with you Rene'. I've always been cautious in my judgement. Like you, I believe it's more of "the freshest human odor" than anything else. That's just my experience though. I would hope other take a hard look at the situation and just how blind are the tests they observe.

Kind of like tracking a person in a car. Lots of them say they can, but no one would take up Terry Fleck on his challenge ha ha.

DFrost
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
16,483 Posts
Yes, there are other people in the area. It really isn't any different than a tracking dog following a particular person, only in this case the dog is using the air currents not necessarily the laid track. With the tracking dogs that are taught to also indicate on articles, the articles have the tracklayers scent on them, so yes they are taught scent discrimination on articles, even if the article was tossed. From a SAR aspect, there are very valid reasons for using both types of dogs. From a LEO aspect, other than targeted apprehension, I don't know that it would be that useful. A good tracking dog however could still have a similar function in a LE situation. Our patrol dog is rarely off lead to apprehend a suspect because he almost always gets them on a track, not an open area where he would have to search off lead. But we have done scenarios where he does building searches with other people inside the building, and only gets the "bad" guy after being scented to him. He simply ignores everyone else.
And even if you (Renee, David) do NOT believe the dog is discriminating and the dog just finds anybody, if they find the victim that is what matters in a search situation. There are almost always "fresher" people out there than the victim. And how do you account for the fact that once a non discriminating dog finds victim A, they continue to search for victim B while ignoring victim A? Isn't that discrimination?

I can see where saying the dog found "the suspect" is very different from a legal standpoint as that may be part of the evidence to convict if the dog's nose is used for identification. The main issue with the dog finding the "wrong" victim is time that is wasted during the effort. Usually our areas are so full of people the random hikers or whatever are going to run into human searchers anyway. Usually it is some rural area full of barbed wire fences, briars, gullies, and not remote wilderness settings.
 
1 - 20 of 27 Posts
Top