There are many different Mantrailing methods out there, and each has its own philosophy, structure, and goals. After the INBTI seminar this month, I want to take this opportunity to explain why I choose to teach the Kocher Method, for both my pet dog clients and in my search and rescue (SAR) dog training. I’ll share why this method works, why I believe mixing methods is a bad idea, and why tracking and trailing are absolutely not the same thing. They’re not even in the same ballpark.
To clarify: the INBTI is the institute founded by Kevin Kocher, created to train dogs to find missing people. I don’t know if he ever expected it to become the global organisation it is today but the influence it’s had on trailing around the world is pretty astounding. The Kocher Method, or TKM, is the foundation of what we teach. Anyone can use it. Anyone can teach it. But becoming an INBTI instructor is no small feat. It’s hands down the most rigorous and demanding training process I’ve encountered in the dog training world. Someone once described it as the “PhD of Mantrailing,” and I fully agree.
The Kocher Method (TKM) gets discussed a lot among the ever-growing number of new Mantrailing instructors emerging across Ireland and the UK, often by those who haven’t actually studied it, but assume they understand it. I have been lucky enough to train with some of the most experienced and skilled INBTI instructors, working with both sport and operational dogs, an opportunity not many instructors get. Monica Diaz Trias, an INBTI Instructor based in Spain, has been a positive influence on my understanding of the TKM and much of my reflection in this blog is from listening to her presentations and watching her teach.
From my very first INBTI seminar, everything changed about how I approached trailing. What I saw wasn’t just a method, it was a mindset. The Kocher Method, above all else, aims to maximise a dog’s motivation and love for trailing by making them a collaborator in their own training, not just a passive learner. It builds confidence and resilience in the dog when done well. Dogs don’t just learn new components that become reliable, they learn to problem solve scent puzzles, and they do it with passion and joy. TKM gives dogs the skills to solve problems they’ve never encountered in training, making them versatile, adaptive, and unstoppable.
Mantrailing is more than dog training, it’s become a lifelong passion for many dog owners. It changes how people see their dogs, how they connect with them, and how they see themselves. Many become true “students of Mantrailing”, they want to study it, understand it, and continuously grow. I love students like this! As instructors, we owe them, and their dogs, the best possible experience. That starts with being clear and transparent about the method we teach and why we teach it.
From the SAR perspective, our handlers work exceptionally hard with their dogs in their volunteer hours. They give selflessly and train relentlessly to be able to help their communities. They deserve to be taught with a method that is not just effective but proven. Not a cobbled together version created by someone who makes it up as they go.
This is why I believe Mantrailing students should know exactly what method they’re being taught. Clarity matters. When you commit time, trust, and emotion into learning something that deeply connects you to your dog, you deserve to know the foundation you’re building on. Instructors, in turn, should be clear about what methodology they teach and why they teach it.
One of the things I love most about the Kocher Method is the clarity it gives both the dog and the handler. It outlines the role of the dog with simple purpose: we want information. Not simply to “find the person.” That subtle shift in perspective is powerful. When the handler’s goal is to find the person, that’s when the influence begins, handlers start pushing the dog, trying to control the outcome. But when the goal is to gather information, the handler shifts to reading and responding to the dog.
So what information are we looking for from the dog?
- Is there a trail? Yes or No.
- Where does it go?
- Where does it end?
When handlers understand this, it encourages critical thinking. It helps them see their dog as a detective, not just a tool. The dog is the sensor; the handler is the interpreter. It reinforces the idea of team. It builds better teams.
Simple on Paper - Nuanced in Practice
TKM is deceptively simple. And that simplicity is exactly what makes it so powerful, and so often misunderstood. The magic is in the nuance. It’s in the details. In many ways, the Kocher Method reflects the best of modern dog training principles while being practical, repeatable, and grounded in real operational work.
One of the key things I love about TKM is how it encourages splitting over lumping. Instead of presenting a dog with a complex series of skills all at once, each component is taught separately. We break things down, starts, body language, scent discrimination, motivation, problem-solving components, and build each one clearly. Only when a dog is proficient in a single skill do we begin pairing it with others.
This structured, layered approach respects how dogs learn. It keeps the experience positive and builds deep, lasting understanding. Most importantly, it allows the dog to feel confident, successful, and motivated.
The method understands that the handler and the dog are a team. The handler facilitates the trail; the dog leads it. But if the dog encounters a problem, we want them to tell us. We teach our dogs that if they get stuck, they can tell the handler and the handler can help. Some critics say this creates dependency. But in reality, this is where nuance and proper handler instruction matters. If your dog is sufficiently motivated, they will try to solve problems. If they give up too soon, it’s not a fault of the method, it’s likely the result of a handler error, like asking too much too soon, lumping components, too much distraction etc.
Regardless of whether you are a SAR handler on an operational callout or a pet dog handler doing Sunday training, you are always anticipating. It’s human nature. You may not notice it. Most of the time it’s subconscious. For SAR handlers, you’ve likely been given a briefing: the missing person’s age, medical condition, habits, and routines. Instantly, your mind starts generating a profile, and your “Lost Person Behaviour” training kicks in.
For pet dog handlers, it’s the same: “Where does my runner usually hide?” “I’ve trailed here before…there’s that alleyway, that car park, that bench…”
This internal narrative influences how we move, how we feel, and how we handle the line. Managing that influence, remaining neutral, is a practiced skill. Not something to avoid or ignore, as in some other methods. We teach our handlers to be aware of it and work with it. Because awareness and neutrality are what protect the dog’s independence and accuracy.
Another reason I teach the Kocher Method is that it allows for a clean training pathway without shortcuts. It’s a structured, layered, and motivating approach that brings both clarity and purpose to the dog. It avoids the overuse of cueing, patterning, or shortcut-based learning. You won’t find false motivation tactics here, no pointing them in the right direction from the scent article, no sticking to low distraction or low contamination trails. Instead, the Kocher Method empowers the dog to think, to choose, and to lead.
It also teaches the handler to stop directing and start observing. That’s one of the greatest transformations I see in my students, from those just starting out to SAR handlers gearing up for certification.
Finally, let’s talk about mixing methods. I get it, there are lots of enticing ideas out there. A bit of this, a bit of that. But mixing methodologies is rarely productive. It muddies the message, confuses the dog, and leads to breakdowns in understanding. Training dogs is not like cooking, this isn’t a “pick your favourite ingredients” kind of task. Dogs thrive in clarity. Handlers thrive in structure. If your method contradicts itself or changes day to day, your team can’t progress.
Seminars: A Space to Grow
One of my favourite parts of being involved in INBTI is the seminars. Every time I attend, I learn new exercises, new teaching strategies, and gain a deeper understanding of the method. It’s not a rigid system. It evolves. Instructors adapt and innovate while staying true to core principles.
Seminars challenge us, inspire us, and connect us. They make us better for our dogs and for the people we may one day search for.
Why Tracking Is Not Trailing
The mechanics, the goal, the learning pathways, the handling, all different. Tracking is obedience. Trailing is freedom to follow the movement of scent. Tracking focuses on disturbance to the ground. Trailing follows the scent of an individual. Tracking looks down. Trailing looks forward. Tracking asks, “Where did they step?” Trailing asks, “Where did they go?”
It matters. Because when you find yourself on a trail that’s three hours old, in an urban environment full of contamination, you need a dog who isn’t just mechanically following steps. You need a dog who understands what they’re doing. A dog who can solve that problem. That’s what the Kocher Method trains them to do.
That’s why I teach it.
Because our dogs deserve our best, and so do the people we search for.
Thanks for reading!
– Éadaoin
Assistant Instructor, INBTI | Founder of Hounds and Helis