I just finished watching a tracking video by Ed Frawley. I was very impressed with what the RCMP is doing with tracking training to say the least. I picked out many things that I am going to use with my own tracking training. I have always considered tracking to my dog and my weakest area.The only question I have is in regards to the indication of an article on the track. Ed said that a dog should never be trained to indicate by laying down at the article. While I am not argueing this point, I would like some explanation as to why. Both my current and previous partner were trained this way. They both seemed to readily take up a track again after locating an article.

Well I guess this question doesn't deserve an answer. Thanks anyway

I don't recall seeing this question before. Probably 99% of the people here (myself included) have ZERO experience in RCMP tracking. However, my guess is that it has to do with keeping the drive / intensity high throughout the entire track.

K;

Most of this crew turns in early, you posted pretty late for anyone working regular hours. Probably your post got bumped off the next AM and few got a chance to see it. Anyway:

I have not seen the RCMP video but I have done my fair share of tracking. I do have the FST video and, in there, Ed makes the comment that PSD's SHOULD be trained to down at the article so as not to disturb evidence by mouthing / scratching, etc. Probably he changed his mind after working with the RCMP. In the Training Articles section of this site there are several good ones on the subject of tracking PSD'd...one by Gary Murray on this exact topic.

There are two schools of thought on this subject; a) that the dog should do some sort of passive indication, usually a down, or b) that he should give an agressive indication...i.e. scratch, pick up, etc. Both ways are used by various, successful Canine trainers/units and both have their points.

Having first hand experience with both methods, I must say that, while I understand the rationale behind downing at articles, my personal belief is that...for working PSD's...an agressive indication is preferrable. I have observed more than one strong tracker ignore articles that I knew full well he could see and smell on a track because...I believe...he just did not want to stop and down...probably because he was taught the "such / platz" by compulsion.

Agressive indication is more "natural" and easier to train...especially with a high-drive dog. There is some truth to the fact that, since most PSD tracks are at night, a "down" indication may be more "positive" if the handler is not able to see the evidence, yet I have had agressive alert dogs find buried evidence on actual (not training) tracks with no problems. How much evidence has been missed because a dog did not stop and down (or, conversely, did not indicate agressively) none of us can ever know for certain, but I am willing to bet that dogs trained to down will miss more.

If I were to train the passive/down for evidence, I would do my level best to do it without force or compulsion if possible, but I would much rather use that time to do other things I believe are more important to the overall success of the team/unit. Training time is precious enough that we must set priorities wisely and get maximum benefit from our efforts. Others will, I am certain, feel differently, but for me, the benefits of passive article indication for PSD's (NOT for bomb dogs!) are not worth the trade-off.

A PSD should not be doing aggressive indications on evidence on a track - not only is this going to drive evidence techs nuts - it disturbes evdience. All you want is your dog to indicate an article and move on - the handler can toss down some kind of a marker or he can take his dog off the track - DOWN HIM away frokm the article and then restart the track when he is finished with his business.

Teaching a dog to down by an article is asking for problems with a dog disturbing evidence. With the possibility of DNA being collected from evidence - the more you can preserve it the better.

I don't want my cadaver dog bringing me pieces or scratching on the cadaver. I don't want my track dog to pick up evidence. It's just as easy to train the dog to sit at this point as it is to go into the down position or to give an aggressive response. Mr Frawley mentioned disturbing the evidence which is a concern and drives evidence techs crazy. Picking up articles can also be dangerous. IED's have been discarded from fleeing felons. Why take the chance. As for the bloodhound, well he just tracks, runs into trees and wears everyone out that is following him. They aren't real bright, but they can track a popcorn fart in a blizzard.

DCFrost

Off topic guys, sorry. But, I read a recent study on scent detection and discrimination in canines. The article stated that there is almost zero difference between the scenting abilities of different breeds. All the test subjects could detect the same minute traces of chemical over the same elapsed time and under the same varied conditions. They were all able to detect into the one parts per trillion range.

Is there any street experience that shows difference in breeds other than temperamental differences that affect ability to track or do detection?

Interesting Vancamp. Where did you see this article? Is there a link?

Few people have tracking experience with dogs from different breed groups (sporting, herding etc.) so it is possible that there is little measurable difference.

No link, real print. I'll try to find the article and scan it for you. Mail me with your e-mail address. No promises, I don't remember where the hell I found that article.

Van Camp, I'd be interested in that article as well.