Solid foundations do more than just foster confident searches; they ensure reliability. This Scent Session examines how gaps in early foundational training subtly influence false alerts, often unnoticed by handlers. When dogs are not consistently reinforced at the true odour source, they don’t fail; they adapt.
Our dogs could begin taking shortcuts, responding to pooled scent, lingering odour, or visual cues rather than focusing on precise olfactory cues, where the source is strongest. This session challenges common beliefs about early success and explains why speed and apparent clarity can sometimes mask underlying fragility in the foundation.
This first session in the Understanding False Alerts series explores the powerful influence handlers have on their dogs’ detection behaviour. Inspired by the famous Clever Hans effect, it encourages you to look beyond the dog and consider how movement, posture, timing, and expectations might act as subtle cues, even when we think we're being completely neutral. If you're aiming for clearer searches, more independent dogs, and truly trustworthy signals, this session provides the perfect foundation to start with.
Poor scent husbandry can cause issues even before the dog starts its search. When hides are handled carelessly or residual odours are left in the environment, those careless moments become the "hides" that the dog is trained to find. This can cause the dog to be called away from its task, which might lead to confusion, frustration, and misunderstandings. In scent detection, managing odour carefully isn't just good practice; it's absolutely vital to support the dog's learning and confidence.
In scent detection, clarity is frequently confused with confidence. A dynamic sit, a sudden freeze, or a textbook indication reassures handlers and trainers alike. However, what if that clarity is not solely attributable to odour? What if the dog is responding not to scent, but to pressure? Today, we shall examine how excessive pressure during indication training systematically increases the likelihood of false indications, and why some of the most convincing alerts may, in fact, be the least dependable.