# Human Remains Detection



## ladylaw203 (May 18, 2001)

I held one of my seminars two weeks ago and wanted to pass along some points to consider. I also evaluate HRD dogs for the Army contract in Iraq/Afghanistan.

I see some common problems. Lack of proper training aids we know. 
The dog's thresholds are too low for realistic ammounts when trained on small amounts. The dogs will fringe on above ground remains and in water situations. Folks need to be aware of this.

Next I am seeing pattern trained,handler dependent dogs. Meaning that the handlers set up short training scenarios, lead the dog to the aid and inadvertantly cue the dog. Set up realistic scenarios, long search time in large areas. Make the training realistic. Pay attention to your body language such as stopping in front or close to the aid,thus cueing the dog. Also pay attention to stop talking to the dog when he exhibits a change in behavior working odor. Let him work until he reaches final trained response WITHOUT talking. When you are in a real search and do not know where the training aid is,the dog will walk it when he does not receive verbal encouragement
When working negatives, let the dog work it out. Some folks correct the dog the minute he looks toward a negative aid. You will not know in the real world that it is a non target odor and if the dog does not receive a correction, may false. Let the dog work the odor and make the decision to leave it. If the dog is about to exhibit trained final response, THEN, give him the leave it command and take him to a positive aid. 
Just some thoughts


----------



## MaggieRoseLee (Aug 17, 2001)

Thanks for the update and info..


----------



## Catu (Sep 6, 2007)

Thanks for the info! The day I win the lottery I'll go to one of your seminars 

I'm with you with talking handlers. something that get into my nerves are those handlers that speak to the dog all the time. Let that poor dog concentrate!!! I don't speak with the dog at all after the command, which is a formality, because it knows what it's supposed to do by all the previous ritual and at most I encourage a best barking once the alert as already been given. 

But I do need an e-collar for training... I noticed lately that I tend to put my hand in the pocket to have the toy ready if I feel the dog is about to alert. I need someone to watch me and zap me every time I do it because most of times I'm not even aware.


----------



## catbest (Apr 3, 2001)

Great suggestions! I am constantly trying to remain quiet and not show any expression both to my dog AND my training partner when I have set up HR for her dog. Do you have any other seminars planned this year? I have one 20 month old female I am training in cadaver and a new eurosportu pup coming in another month I want to start correctly from the get go. I live in Washington State. Any other seminar's you like and recommend?
Cat


----------



## ladylaw203 (May 18, 2001)

I am going to have another one in the Fall. I may have a young/green dog workshop later on this summer. 
I have Nuky male,Egon,and a female,Bona from Eurosport and 3 Paxton pups. I am waiting for my Nuky/Thalia son to be old enough to ship
Go to my Facebook page and you can see photos from the seminar. Taunya was there with Samir,who did a bang up job at cadaver training and a woman from Houston with a Nuky son


----------



## DFrost (Oct 29, 2006)

ladylaw203 said:


> Next I am seeing pattern trained,handler dependent dogs. Meaning that the handlers set up short training scenarios, lead the dog to the aid and inadvertantly cue the dog.


I'd bet a dollar to a donut you'd find the same problems if they are also involved in drug and/or explosives detection. 

DFrost


----------



## ladylaw203 (May 18, 2001)

Yep, see it in seminars with police k9 handlers. That is why the narc handlers come here to run over my aids and we provide large aids at our EDD seminar


----------



## catbest (Apr 3, 2001)

ladylaw203 said:


> I am going to have another one in the Fall. I may have a young/green dog workshop later on this summer.
> 
> I would love to get this info when you have it scheduled.
> 
> ...


----------



## NancyJ (Jun 15, 2003)

You know - I have not had a threshold issue with drownings and Grim has two legitimate water finds under his belt - with good location - one in a slow moving river and one in a lake - and that was his first season operational on the boat. Not sure what the summer will bring. We have only trained with a pump though and early divers. I am not convinced there is a lot of decomp odor out there 3 hours after someone is in the water........

Most of what we search for on land is old crime scene stuff though. That, I am finding, is a whole discipline in itself [pinpointing] since the strongest scent may not be where the body is........really getting into learning those techniques, old graves, etc. Learning how to help him work it out when he gets hung up in a tough low scent area by moving him out of /back in etc. He usually runs straight to the big sources but, unforntately has only worked one full body and one fresh decomp scene after body removed. Defintely a lot of scent. Small bone is defintely tougher for us.

Negative search areas - large ones - very important part of training I think.


----------



## NancyJ (Jun 15, 2003)

Ok here we go. I understand these dogs alerting away from source NOW

Are they really fringe alerting due to a threshold issue or possibly alerting out of frustration because they do not have the proper experience working out a big scent pool? I have seen similar behavior with dogs who do not have experience with sources left out over several days where the pool becomes large and complex and broken up. Many folks just put out stuff for 30 minutes and expect the dog to be able to work our this large area and it is very different.

Also, UNKNOWNS. A lot of folks are only working knowns and what we do when we train together is each person sets up an area and the other handlers [who go out one at a time with the person who set it up so they are working blind] - there are no rules as to how many hides, what type of hides, even if there are ANY hides. But then we work the area and discuss what did or did not go wrong etc.

I agree with you on the ranging.


----------



## ladylaw203 (May 18, 2001)

jocoyn said:


> Ok here we go. I understand these dogs alerting away from source NOW
> 
> Are they really fringe alerting due to a threshold issue or possibly alerting out of frustration because they do not have the proper experience working out a big scent pool? I have seen similar behavior with dogs who do not have experience with sources left out over several days where the pool becomes large and complex and broken up. Many folks just put out stuff for 30 minutes and expect the dog to be able to work our this large area and it is very different.
> 
> ...


. 

Yes:smirk: seriously, dogs trained on only small amounts many times will remain "stuck" in the area where the odor is identical in amount to what they have been trained on. Threshold must be raised to large amounts. some dogs work it out, some dogs stay right there and will not budge. do it in shallow water too. ANd yes,the sit time comes into play as well. But,still, that dog has to be able to work that odor to point of origin and if the dogs are used to tiny little amounts,and I chunk out 100lb, many struggle. It is fascinating to watch


----------



## NancyJ (Jun 15, 2003)

Given that, how do you explain full body finds by dogs who don't have this exposure? I know that we have at least a dozen drownings found by dogs on our team - we pinpoint well enough to be called in routinely by two other teams....We rarely get a call for full body deceased though sometimes that does happen but even the live find dogs pick up on those...........

Maybe we count old cemetery training as full body though? There is certainly a huge scent pool around old cemeteries.


----------



## ladylaw203 (May 18, 2001)

jocoyn said:


> Given that, how do you explain full body finds by dogs who don't have this exposure? I know that we have at least a dozen drownings found by dogs on our team - we pinpoint well enough to be called in routinely by two other teams....We rarely get a call for full body deceased though sometimes that does happen but even the live find dogs pick up on those...........
> 
> Maybe we count old cemetery training as full body though? There is certainly a huge scent pool around old cemeteries.[/quote
> 
> ...


----------



## NancyJ (Jun 15, 2003)

Right on top in 75 feet of water diver dropped straight down on the body from the marker. That one I definitely remember because the squad went down in disbelief as they thought the body would have moved but it did not- it was almost straight down from where the accident occured. There was a pretty good current at the bottom as there usually is in our large reservoirs that are dammed up river systems.

I honestly don't know numbers for the lake finds, but I know they were close - it is not like they give us numbers but it was fast for the divers and they call us back for more which I don't think they would do if we were not really narrowing it down for them. One the ponds in 15-20 feet of water - right on top. One came up as it was too full of holes for the divers but it came up right where the dogs indicated. Our lake bottoms are full of trees and all kinds of debris [flooded farmland] and it can be very hard for them to do any kind of gridding/spiraling.

Drowned child - shoreline - was in the eddy the dog jumped into and almost did not get out of.

Dont know on the moving water ones I participated in because they decided NOT to put in divers and the floating bodies were found both times in the channel where the dogs indicated but downstream about 100 yards or so trapped in brush the day after the search.

To be honest, the behavior I see on a whole fresh body is a lot more subtle than decomp and a scent pump.
----

All of these dogs has had a whole body exposure, but not as a routine part of training.


----------



## ladylaw203 (May 18, 2001)

jocoyn said:


> Right on top in 75 feet of water diver dropped straight down on the body from the marker. That one I definitely remember because the squad went down in disbelief as they thought the body would have moved but it did not- it was almost straight down from where the accident occured. There was a pretty good current at the bottom as there usually is in our large reservoirs that are dammed up river systems.
> 
> I honestly don't know numbers for the lake finds, but I know they were close - it is not like they give us numbers but it was fast for the divers and they call us back for more which I don't think they would do if we were not really narrowing it down for them. One the ponds in 15-20 feet of water - right on top. One came up as it was too full of holes for the divers but it came up right where the dogs indicated. Our lake bottoms are full of trees and all kinds of debris [flooded farmland] and it can be very hard for them to do any kind of gridding/spiraling.
> 
> ...


 
Ok. see if this makes sense because I figured you were talking about deeper water. WHere I see the most fringing is in shallow water. If you are dealing with deeper water,you are dealing with scent that is more equal to the small amounts that dogs are trained on. You get those dogs down here and put them in 7 foot of water and they will alert way downriver. Again, the threshold issue becomea a REAL problem with full bodies above ground and full bodies in shallow water. Make sense?
I do not care for the scent pump. Training dogs on air NOT human remains. I have seen it cause real issues. be like training a narc dog on air blowing over a load of dope. The dog is not being exposed to actual target odor, just air

Side scan sonar is something every team should have. We are making 100% recoveries here with dogs AND side scan. If I have reliable witness as to where the guy went down, I do not need a dog. Also, these bodies are generally, right where they went down or within a very short distance. They do not move, they drop like a rock


----------



## NancyJ (Jun 15, 2003)

Yes, we do NOT have our own side scan but the folks we usually search for do. The state DNR usually beats us to the scene at drownings too and they have all kinds of bells and whistes. 

Actually on the 75' search after my dog alerted I saw a buoy about 5 feet away..........it was a the sonar anomaly...[it was dusk and that buoy was almost invisible]......got them to mark it on GPS and pull it out of the water for the 2nd dog [we usually run 2 on water] .........I think they still like the dogs because of the amount of "stuff" in the bottom of these lakes--they did not cut trees, bulldoze houses, etc. Just built the dams and flooded.

I will have to watch for fringing in shallow. First water search I did go on was in a farm pond though and the dogs were spot on.


----------



## ladylaw203 (May 18, 2001)

I dont know if you all do fund raisers or take donations, but 1500 will buy a side scan that works. You dont have to buy the 3K job that I have. just a thought
And some dogs do work through the threshold issue, it just depends on the dog. As long as folks realize it could be a problem, it can be worked through


----------



## NancyJ (Jun 15, 2003)

Well, Renee........just had a real life search that made me think about whole bodies, shallow warm water, and scent dispersal everywhere. We have a lot to learn from this one. Fortunately he came up in almost exactly where a teammate marked suggested they put in divers last night, but all the dogs had a lot more scent behavior in a cove on the downwind side of that spot. It was very difficult..Much more than the fresh deepwater finds.

Though I will admit we have seen similar large area dispersal with the scent pump running for 8 hours solid - starting to get pockets of scent in all kinds of strange places.

Another reason to come on out to Texas [it is just so freaking far! and we have to get off so far in advance]


----------



## NancyJ (Jun 15, 2003)

Dive teams find man's body in Lake Lyman | GoUpstate.com


----------



## Catu (Sep 6, 2007)

Is this your team?


----------



## ladylaw203 (May 18, 2001)

jocoyn said:


> Though I will admit we have seen similar large area dispersal with the scent pump running for 8 hours solid - starting to get pockets of scent in all kinds of strange places.
> 
> Another reason to come on out to Texas [it is just so freaking far! and we have to get off so far in advance]


 
I know I am at the end of the world:crazy: You can come anytime. Do not have to wait for a seminar  
You are seeing why I do not use that scent pump . The dog is working AIR NOT HR. It is air blown over HR. Think about it. You are rewarding your dog for fringing because the dog cannot alert at source. Source is in that pump on the shore. No wonder the dogs have problems working a full set of remains in shallow water. Make sense? As long as folks realize what is going on, and realize that where that dog is alerting is NOT where the body is going to be.


----------



## NancyJ (Jun 15, 2003)

That is a generous offer and I will take it back to the team.

I am thinking the issue is not so much the chamber on shore but that the bubbles drive the scent [and you will only get the volatiles and those volatiles that dont absorb into the tubing] to a single point on the water as apposed to a broad diffuse area. And then of course the difference in the sheer magnitude of scent. 

The chamber on shore is well sealed so the bubbler in the water is the source just as the ground or water surface is the source on a buried or submerged problem.

Be that as it may, I do see the value of working the "real thing" in significant quantities - something we cannot do here.


----------



## ladylaw203 (May 18, 2001)

jocoyn said:


> That is a generous offer and I will take it back to the team.
> 
> I am thinking the issue is not so much the chamber on shore but that the bubbles drive the scent [and you will only get the volatiles and those volatiles that dont absorb into the tubing] to a single point on the water as apposed to a broad diffuse area. And then of course the difference in the sheer magnitude of scent.
> 
> ...


 
But the dog is NOT working TO source nor being rewarded AT source because source is on the shore. The dog is being rewarded in the fringe. The dog is working the odor of HR in air that has passed over the source. This causes fringing AND the worst part is the dog is being rewarded for that threshold of odor. It would be the same prinicipal as me working a dog over air blown over dope or explosives and rewarding the dog for that. Does not cut it. Dogs worked on the scent machine will have problems with full bodies in shallow water. I have seen it  And if the source one puts in that catraption is tiny, that compounds the problem


----------



## NancyJ (Jun 15, 2003)

But if the source is 10 feet underwater the dog is not alerting at source either......

Isnt the intent for the dog to target the highest concentration of scent available to them and if the chamber on shore is sealed and not leaking scent it will be that which is coming out of the hose?


----------



## ladylaw203 (May 18, 2001)

No, point of origin is the source. The air blowing over source is no different than being downwind,for example, from HR. I understand what you are saying. I am referring to what the dog is being taught by use of that thing which is not to follow the odor to its strongest point,IE source of odor,but alert in the fringe odor. That air that is being released is just scented air and rewarding the dog at the end of that hose is creating a dog with a very low threshold. No way does the end of that hose or the source itself in this case mimic a full body which is what we seek in water.
And what is source? I seen folks use blood which is not a good idea either. Am I making any sense at all?


I am not necessarily a fan of SWGDOG but the below just confirms what I have been preaching for years 



Absolute Threshold Operational usage: The minimum intensity of a stimulus that 
is detected by a particular dog. In the case of odor it is the minimum 
concentration of vapor.
This threshold varies from dog to dog and is affected by climate and the 
internal and external environment.
Scientific usage: AT is determined by a statistical average based on the point 
where a specific compound can be detected via machine 50% of the time.
Note: This definition acknowledges that large and small amounts of the same 
compound don't necessarily smell the same to the dog. The
"absolute" may not be as relevant as it was formerly because of
recent developments in learning.
From : http://www.swgdog.org/


----------



## NancyJ (Jun 15, 2003)

ladylaw203 said:


> No, point of origin is the source. The air blowing over source is no different than being downwind,for example, from HR. I understand what you are saying. I am referring to what the dog is being taught by use of that thing which is not to follow the odor to its strongest point,IE source of odor,but alert in the fringe odor. That air that is being released is just scented air and rewarding the dog at the end of that hose is creating a dog with a very low threshold. No way does the end of that hose or the source itself in this case mimic a full body which is what we seek in water.
> And what is source? I seen folks use blood which is not a good idea either. Am I making any sense at all?


I am not sure I am convinced by your analysis of this because I have seen dogs on our team who have never trained on a body in shallow water pinpoint a body in shallow water. All of our dogs have experienced and been worked up to a full body.

My teammate worked the area the night before and correctly marked the location of the victim on the map. She has a few more years of water experience than do I and about 4 times as many water searches. We have garnered enough water experience to know there is more we don't know than we do know but with about 20 solid finds in everything from shallow water to over 200 feet deep are doing well with our water program. 

I have to dissect why I did not pinpoint in the same location and have the analysis

-not having worked that much scent in the water, when my dog went ballistic, I thought he had just reverted to his old barking on the boat behaviors and he was just in so much scent he went crazy. I also had knowledge of where the boat had been anchored when the victim went down and logic is in a still lake he will come up where he fell in. Well either they got the boat location wrong or he moved 100 yards. So, I committed the cardinal sin of SAR handlers and did not trust my dog - but I definitely need more experience working out a large scent pool on a boat because I have to tell the boat driver where to go so my dog can work it out.

In all fairness by the time I worked it, there would have been 12 hours more time for the scent to develop, and conditions were stagnant with no discernable breeze where my teammate had about a 5mph steady wind to work with. But we need to be able to work things out in all conditions so I am trying to explain but not excuse.

Hindsight is 20/20 because in the secondary and weaker scent pool he was dipping his head and giving a woof .... pause woof but in the area where the victim was it was staccato and I thought he was going to fall off the front of the boat

No argument that we should all strive to work as large a variety of sources possible in both age, variety, size, etc. So yes, I have driven hours just to work the scent left behind from a full body find. 



> I am not necessarily a fan of SWGDOG but the below just confirms what I have been preaching for years
> 
> 
> Absolute Threshold Operational usage: The minimum intensity of a stimulus that
> ...


I don't think the SWGDOG quote supports the statement.
It is basically describing that each dog has a detection limit and that limit is impacted by several variables, including the acuity of the dogs sensory system as one of those variables. It says nothing to the issue of fringe alerting.


----------



## ladylaw203 (May 18, 2001)

jocoyn said:


> I am not sure I am convinced by your analysis of this because I have seen dogs on our team who have never trained on a body in shallow water pinpoint a body in shallow water. All of our dogs have experienced and been worked up to a full body.
> 
> *Well, I have been doing this for over 20yrs and this applies to ALL scent detector dogs. I have stated in the past "some dogs can work it out" One cannot assume one's dog will however,hence the need to train on all thresholds and some handlers can read their dog very well which comes into play.*
> 
> ...


 
*Absolute threshold IS the discussion with regard to fringing. We learned this long ago with narcotic detector dogs. The dog's threshold has to be raised in training for large loads. Again, dogs are individuals. And AGAIN, some dogs can work it out,but one cannot train based on the assumption that THEIR dog will work it out. I have been instructing seminars for many years and folks come here from all over to work their dogs on my training aids. Many are horrified when their dogs fringe far from source. Again, Nancy, you have to think about this issue and under what circumstances this comes into play which is full sets of remains above ground and full sets of remains in somewhat shallow water. It is all about the amount of odor that is available to the dog,and what his threshold is. I have seen this occur for years on real searches and dogs DO fringe and bodies are found later far from where the dog exhibited final response.*


----------



## ladylaw203 (May 18, 2001)

The minimum intensity of a stimulus that 
is detected by a particular dog. In the case of odor it is the minimum 
concentration of vapor.



This is indicative of the low end of a dog's threshold. The smallest degree of odor that the dog can detect. When one rewards a dog for exhibiting final trained response in the minimum concentration and does NOT raise the dog's threshold to a realistic amount,many times, one has a dog that consistently exhibits final trained response in THAT concentration of odor as opposed to working it to the larger (point of origin) source. Hence,a dog that alerts and exhibits final trained response in the fringe because THAT degree of concentration is what he has been trained to find.
I have seen this occur over and over. common knowledge for cops. All dogs are not the same and some handlers can read the dog and realize the problem,and keep working the dog.


----------



## NancyJ (Jun 15, 2003)

Well,there was not an alert (or should I say trained indication) .........as I indicated I mis-read my dog's behavior and moved him out of the area of highest scent concentration. So he was giving scent behaviors in the other scent pool but that was all I could say and all I did say. My teammate who has never trained on a body in the water marked the spot correctly on the map the night before (I worked that area blind the next morning). We all thought my dog had reverted to old barking ways [and he does bark only when in scent] and put out another dog. 

In training with the pump we do know where scent leaves the water and although they are working the scent sometimes 50 yards a way, they are not rewarded unless the get us to and alert AT the place where the bubbles were exiting the water. [which we usually turn way down] and are not visible. 

I still know too many folks who have found bodies and marked the location properly close without ever working on huge amounts of material because they always make the dog work to the strongest scent of whatever they are working, be it a bone or several pounds of material. 

There are certainly respected dog handlers with many water finds who also train with a scent pump. Not just folks who train seminars without real life experience.

So, I am still not sold but that really doesn't matter. I definitely see the value in training to as wide a variety of source sizes as possible but in my mind it is more a case of giving the dog the experience of working out an overwhelming scent pool, and though the overwhelming majority of our drownings have only been in the water for 2-4 hours and this was a very different experience .

----------

I guess our first full body experience was a baaaad whole body. We got out of the car and 200 yards away could smell it and wondered why nobody had called to complain about the odor. All the dogs ran straight to it. Based on what you are describing all the dogs should have got out of the car and sat down because I normally can't smell our training aids out in the woods. Some dogs did get to within a few feet of the body and hackled, some did not.


----------



## NancyJ (Jun 15, 2003)

Look what I am saying is that I am acknowledging that the dog should really have experience working at the "point of saturation" as I understand it is called. That level of scent where they really are overwhelmed. My dog has worked it out on land but had not had that experience on water.

I guess what I am saying is that I do not believe working with smaller sources does damage - if most of our calls are for victims 2 - 4 hours in the water often 75-200 feet down, we are not working with a lot of scent to start with and you need training for the small stuff as well as the big stuff.


----------



## ladylaw203 (May 18, 2001)

jocoyn said:


> Well,there was not an alert (or should I say trained indication) ...
> 
> In training with the pump we do know where scent leaves the water and although they are working the scent sometimes 50 yards a way, they are not rewarded unless the get us to and alert AT the place where the bubbles were exiting the water. [which we usually turn way down] and are not visible.
> 
> ...


I am hardly talking about folks that only go to seminars so I am not sure what you mean by that. You made my point about the scent machine. You cannot work to the strongest scent because it is on shore. And yes folks find bodies without training on large amounts. I have made calls on patrol because little Susie's doggie brought a hand up on the back porch too. Dogs will react to an anomaly. My point is that I see large numbers of dogs and see the reactions and I KNOW that this is a problem. We cannot train our dogs on the asumption that they can work it out. some do,some do not. This has been proven over and over . You are not convinced because you have not seen the bodies missed that I have over years and been the one to have to go fix it.


----------



## ladylaw203 (May 18, 2001)

jocoyn said:


> Look what I am saying is that I am acknowledging that the dog should really have experience working at the "point of saturation" as I understand it is called. That level of scent where they really are overwhelmed. My dog has worked it out on land but had not had that experience on water.ll
> 
> I guess what I am saying is that I do not believe working with smaller sources does damage - if most of our calls are for victims 2 - 4 hours in the water often 75-200 feet down, we are not working with a lot of scent to start with and you need training for the small stuff as well as the big stuff.


 
Where did I say that is causes damage????????????? Did I say ONLY train on large amounts?? NO. What I am saying is that dogs need to be exposed to all aspects of HR in order to be fully operational and that folks who only train on small amounts have issues with full body recoveries in shallow water and shallow buries or above ground. I have been seeing this for years. Thresholds matter in HR,explosive detection and narcotic detection. This is just a fact


----------



## NancyJ (Jun 15, 2003)

You police folks must hate us engineering types  

Ok guess I misread you - I thought you were saying not to train at all on the small sources or with a pump. I do ackowledge you have far more experience than I. 

I do clearly want to work the big stuff, but in the meanwhile must try to work on ways to work these out or even say on a call that I dont have the experience for locating a body ready to float in shallow water. We will have to talk with the dive team - they could really help us a lot if they let us work the area before the retrieved it. BY the time it is in the water for 1 day or more, 30 minutes to let the dogs work it and gain experience is not that much..........

I was referring to some of the folks like Lisa Higgins and Dee Wild and Andy Rebmann/Marcia Koenig who do train with such devices and do have extensive real-life experience. 

We do know there are plenty of other folks teaching seminars who have been on precious few real searches and that is what I meant and will leave it at that.


----------



## ladylaw203 (May 18, 2001)

jocoyn said:


> I was referring to some of the folks like Lisa Higgins and Dee Wild and Andy Rebmann/Marcia Koenig who do train with such devices and do have extensive real-life experience.
> 
> .


 
I know all of those folks and I know how they train. I used one of those contraptions at one of my seminars years ago as an experiment just to see what it was. No thanks. Again. A lot of dogs will go out and hammer a full set of remains and that includes FLuffy,who is a pet without training the way I do. My point is that we cannot expect ALL dogs to be able to generalize. They simply do not and it has been proven over and over again. 
This is why folks who ONLY deploy for ancient remains with archeologists do NOT EVER work their dogs on fresher or larger amounts. They do not want their dogs thresholds raised. 
Some of us have also done some extensive scientific experiments with thresholds that will soon be published.
At the end of the day there are NO absolutes,however, we have learned over the years to train as we work and work as we train and try to expose our dogs to anything and everything that we might expect them to work in the real world. That just increases our potential to be successful


----------



## ladylaw203 (May 18, 2001)

On this thread of thresholds.............If this does not work any better than the explosive detectors I have seen, I will stick with a dog





http://www.forensicmag.com/article/labrador-new-alpha-dog-human-remains-detection?page=0,0


----------



## shrabe (Apr 18, 2008)

As I am new to the HRD world with a newly certified dog I find this topic fascinating! I do have to say though, that as we train we try to incorporate blinds, negatives, as well as small, and large source. I try to vary how I train and what I train with as much as possible.


----------



## ladylaw203 (May 18, 2001)

The other thing to do is set up scent problems when you can in ways that make the odor behave in various ways. Such as thermal uplift,create scent voids etc. Not only does it teach the dog to work the odor to source but gives you confidence by watching your dog work odor in different scenarios.


----------

