Is there possibly such a thing as too much dog? I have been speaking with a friend about the lines of mal's that we are breeding. Very dominant, agressive and handler hard / rank drive mal's. The question that i'm asking is for security dogs. You don't want a dog that will break on the job. So you must have dominance as well as aggression. But with these traits bring handler hardness? What are peoples ideas on this???

I want one! Here do I find them?

IMO aggression is a byproduct, either of drives or rank, training, handling, situation etc. Dominant aggressive dogs can be handled by people who understand and match their intensity. There is only 'too much dog' for 'not enough handler.'

Dominant Aggressive dogs are no joke and are very serious animals. How "bad" they are depends on who they are being handled by, what means is being used to handle/control them, how they have been trained, etc. In competent hands such an intense dog can be utilized to its peak, in the wrong hands the dog seems like it is "too much of a dog."

JMO

 Quote: andrew macleod

Is there possibly such a thing as too much dog? I have been speaking with a friend about the lines of mal's that we are breeding. Very dominant, agressive and handler hard / rank drive mal's. The question that i'm asking is for security dogs. You don't want a dog that will break on the job. So you must have dominance as well as aggression. But with these traits bring handler hardness? What are peoples ideas on this???

Do you mean that you are breeding Mals? Or just the working lines that are already out there?

I am not sure that those two traits will "always" bring "handler hardness or aggressiveness" to the table. But I do believe that the training has A LOT to do with it.

I am breeding the mal's which we have got from over seas. They are unregistered knpv lines, rambo, duco line breedings. With these dogs appearing in the blood lines you get very strong dogs. My question do come hand in hand with the handlers ability. As I train with a very small group of experianced handlers and trainers. We are just discussing the breedings of our dogs. As you do... But is there too much dog? When you are constantly battling with the dog for the Alpha position? Is the dog that you can never break worth the constant rank drive / handlers hardness? But these are the dogs that you use in the riots, special forces, prisons etc. The problem is everyone wants the hard tough dog. But when they get them, they get bitten and we get called to take them back!!!!! Yes people want these dogs with little experiance and think they know it all. This is why I sell to the military, security and home protection homes. So this is why I was asking is there such a thing as too much dog???

 Quote:

Is the dog that you can never break worth the constant rank drive / handlers hardness?

Break? I really don't like that word. You never want to "break" a dog.

I don't really understand what you are trying to get at. Naturally dominant dogs, those traits are obvious and evident from a very young age and should be handled, trained, and worked accordingly. If a dog is constantly challenging the handler this would lead me believe that the handler is making mistakes and appears "weak" in the eyes of the dog. Even a naturally dominant dog will only test its limits so much - and this is a direct result of having an opportunity to do so. If you are a strong, consistent leader that leaves no or very little margin for error or weakness your dog will be much less likely to challenge you "on a regular basis." They do require experienced, knowledgable handling and it is more effort and work on the part of the handler.

A lot of instances where a dog is handler aggressive as a result of dominance is the handlers fault. Inconsistent handling, rough/harsh/heavy handed/improper training, lack of leadership, or a mistake by the handler during regular handling etc. Too much emphasis is put on controlling the dog from the get go that some people forget to regulate themselves, to be fair, firm, and actually bond with their dogs.

Just my 27 cents lol

I'm not sure that this sounds like an ideal breeding situation if you don't really know your dogs or what you are breeding for. Every breeding should ideally be done for the betterment of the breed; breeding for specific phenotypes and hoping that those are inherited by the offspring.

There can of course be too much dog for a specific handler...for example, it would not be ideal to have a very sharp and/or dominant dog in a home with small children or perhaps even for a novice handler.

Breeding dogs comes with the moral obligation to that litter to find the right placement with handlers/homes. It doesn't sound like the placements have been overly successful thus far.

How interesting that you sell to the military. Who picks out the dogs for the program?

Curiousity question since I am not really into the whole breeding thing: if they are unregistered how are you certain they are descended from the lines you were told they are?

And since I also don't work with protection dogs...from what I read they are looking for stability (is that the word?) rather than dominance. Trying to describe mentally balanced and tenacity - "this dog won't back down." Or is that not what the military wants?

Julie - confidence/courage is the requirement for good PPDs/working dogs. It tends to happen that the most confident dogs are dominant. Courage/confidence is often linked to dominance/rank in the pack. IMO it is not a requirement for a working dog to be dominant in order to be a good working dog. Especially not if the handler cannot control their own dog.