This discussion began under the sport tracking thread.

We were discussing a very different (controversial) tracking approach that I use.

I start on hard surface and as soon as the dog / puppy understands the basic concept of following scent I introduce scent "contamination" by finding a lot (or field)where people have been walking recently.

The theory is that the other scent / crushed vegitation etc. will seem random to the dog so that only the actual track will lead to success. As a result, the dog will learn to follow a specific odor at an early stage of the training process.

This approach was adapted from other police trainers and is really still in the development / experimental stages to some extent.

J. Parker asked how long I had been using this approach and how successful its been etc...

Different parts of this approach have been used for years by police trainers and S&R bloodhound people with good success but putting it all together in this manner is new for me.

Dave I would like to hear more about this method. Lets use a 12 week old Lab for example. This Lab will be raised and trained for Police/SAR tracking and narcotic detection. Could you describe in detail how you would set up your first tracking session for this pup? Type of hard surface, temperature, food and how much, handling, etc? This style of training is opposite of what I have always practiced but it has caught my interest. It reminds of the choice some trainers have made to train cocaine (less odorous)first and add marijuana (strong odor) last. They have described their intentions and purpose quite like yours. Just for the record are you a SAR, Police, or Sport handler and what breed are you handling?

Thanks,
Mark Connolly
K9 Command

Mark, I'm finishing a doctoral program at Michigan State and am no longer working the street as an officer. The bulk of my experience is in the sport arena where I had some success using a modified forced tracking approach (Tom Rose method)

My new approach is still evolving but is very similar to what the Dutch police use for HST.
Ed has a video that will be helpful to any that are interested.

I also was influenced by Steve White, a police trainer that uses the "toolbox" approach and has started on hard surface for years. (toolbox meaning -- to train the dog to have all tools needed for the job). I think some articles by him are still available on the web.

Disclaimer:
I make no personal claims that this is a "superior method"-- but I do think that similar techniques may be the wave of the future in police tracking.

As for details-- I'll try but this type of forum is limited.

The first track begins after the pup has already done some "backyard or living room" tracking for hotdogs etc.

I have adopted the Dutch approach... laying footsteps on hard surface in stocking feet or barefoot. I start with food every few footsteps but discontinue this as soon as the pup gets the idea-- then just food at the end.

When each new surface or distraction is first taught-- I lay a short, simple, straight tracks as though it were the first day.

As soon as the pup is fairly consistent at following short tracks 50-75 feet, we find a parking lot (like a school lot)where there is distracting human scent and start with simple short tracks.

If done correctly, the dog/pup should be very intense and sound kind of like a vacuum cleaner-- I highly recommend Ed's HST video to understand what it should look like.

I also forgot to mention... no correction is used in this approach. However, if the beginning pup gets too far off track I will redirect her. Did I mention that I prefer females? They just seem more natural in my experience.

Oh, well now you've done it! I like my boys, they are the best! Grrrrr!!!

Just kidding.

Anyway, sounds interesting. Thanks for answering my questions!

I have adopted the Dutch approach... laying footsteps on hard surface in stocking feet or barefoot. I start with food every few footsteps but discontinue this as soon as the pup gets the idea-- then just food at the end.

The Dutch approach if you're refering to what is currently going on at their schools (there are two police dog schools in Holland) also differ immensely in their approach to tracking. One appears to be based in the article search (which is a force approach) then stretched into a track. the thing that cements the track together is the articles. Get from one to the next. The other approach was quite different where a small stick was used to releave stress on the track for the dog. He searched for this small toy via tracking. They all went very early to hard survaces without returning to easier vegetated surfaces. The feel of these systems is different. So, from my observation i would not say that the Dutch have a system just some talented instructors with experience. One thing to note, all the dogs worked footsteo to footstep on the track. there was no windscenting or airscenting on the track. Headsup behaviors were not allowed and the dogs did NOT display hunting behaviors for the track. In 20 years of working dogs I have never seen such nice tracking dogs. There was no guess work as to whether the dog still was working the track, it was obvious when they were. For those that doubt that it can be done footstep to footstep, I laid the track done by the GSD in Ed's video (without the handler or his partner knowing any more than where I started) and observed the tracks being placed for the Malinois.

Kevin, I was only giving them credit for the stocking foot idea that I am now using successfully. As far as I know, I'm really not using anything else that they are doing.

I appreciate your input--can I ask 3 quick questions?

1. The school that uses the "stick". Is that forced or motivational-- How did they encourage the dog to be precise?

2. Did you see any evidence of the dogs "shutting down" under pressure from force?

3. You spoke of the different "feel" between the schools. Which approach did you like most?

Thanks for your time, Kevin.

I appreciate your input--can I ask 3 quick questions?

I'm just relaying my observations. Videos are fine training tools (if I didn't think so I wouldn't work with Ed on any of his productions) but sometimes there are things that cannot be communicated via audio and video. As for the Hardsurface tracking tape everyone with aspirations towards tracking regardless of style should see it.

1. The school that uses the stick. Is that forced or motivational-- How did they encourage the dog to be precise?

It was motivational entirely.

2. Did you see any evidence of the dogs shutting down under pressure from force?

No but these were mature finished dogs. Most of the time that a dog who has some compulsion in tracking quits is due to the force being directed at the act of tracking. A good trainer using some compusion in tracking NEVER, NEVER, allows the dog to perceive that he is being forced to track!
In fact the dog that showed some loss of drive and a little confusion was the dog that had no compulsion. But, this was far from a finished dog and was relatively new tol the work (less than 50 tracks if I recall correctly).
Also, watching four dogs work with four different handlers is a pretty small smaple size so I will be careful in drawing any broad conclusions from the experience about the Dutch tracking.

3. You spoke of the different feel between the schools. Which approach did you like most?

Both had great merrit. Both were based on a selection process for their style of work, this may be the single most important thing to understand, that the experienced instructors selection resulted in a dog being used that matched the training technique used.