Lurking on another website followed a discussion by of police/protection dog trainers about dogs that are "hard to handle".

My question is -- do you believe fearbiters are a result of bad handling, or do you think they are born that way?
My other question is -- do they ever get over it completely?

My opinion and speaking in generalities is that fear biters are a nerve issue. Weak nerves. While there may be some environment/handling issues that triggered it, a dog with better nerves would of shrugged it off.

My boy Kingster has weak nerves and in a different home probably would of been a fear biter. Even now we are careful to keep his invisible safety bubble around him when meeting new people and allow him to approach people on his own terms.

But if someone pushed it yep, he would growl and bite in a minute if they invaded his space. I think that is where the fear biters get started, they growl when uncomfortable and the scary person backs off and after a few repetitions Bingo, a sure fire way for handling the new and scary stuff in life!

Ironically in my house full of protection trained dogs an idiot stranger is in more danger of a bite from my gentle Kingster. IE insisting on "becoming friends" past his comfort level and pushing it.

Now handler aggression is a different story........ Maybe not though, genetic disposition and dumb handling.... ROFL

Was a thread on handler aggression or fear biters? Or maybe it doesn't matter, it just got you thinking?

A thread on handler aggression. Comments on bonding a dog who is, for lack of a more sophisticated description, mean. A dog who "handles problems or pressure he perceives thru aggression and resorts to it quickly."
Interesting to hear super pros describe winning a dog over, what they put up with to come out the other side, so to speak.

In line with that Betty W said, I think they are BOTH born and made.... I think a dog may be born with weak nerves, or a bit on the sharp side. Pair that dog with a harsh handler and you have a recipe for disaster. Put that dog in a home with small unsupervised kids, and it'll go downhill quick.

I don't mind handling aggressive dogs. IMO, they generally give you fair warning that they are ticked off, and are contemplating biting you. A fear biter is much more unpredictable, and will go from looking 'fine' to going for the jugular, or biting your calf as you turn and walk away.

They're born that way.

 Quote: betty landercasp

A thread on handler aggression. Comments on bonding a dog who is, for lack of a more sophisticated description, mean. A dog who "handles problems or pressure he perceives thru aggression and resorts to it quickly."
Interesting to hear super pros describe winning a dog over, what they put up with to come out the other side, so to speak

That doesn't define a fear biter at all, completely seperate issue.

Agree with Al.

I'd take an true aggressive dog over a fear aggressive dog any day. An aggressive dog is much more predictable and can be controlled.

A fear biter is unpredictable and can only be managed.

Some amount of dominance is often associated with aggression and hence increased pack structure, training, and building a good relationship can help control or limit a dog with natural aggression.

A fear biter usually has weak nerves and isn't a stable dog.

As a side note I know more than one dog that had a rough start to life and was mistreated by humans (intimidation, abandonment and starvation if not active physical abuse) and did not resort to any sort of aggression- fear, defense, or otherwise. My GSD is one of those dogs.

Genetics and temperment really are paramount.

And I also agree with Kelly. A nervy-sharp dog may never resort to fear biting in the correct environment. But the dog will still have what I'd consider an unstable temperment and must be managed appropriately.

Interesting discussion and I’m not sure exactly what your question is Betty but it sounds like one I’ve pondered many times too.

Edward came to me as a “bad” dog that bites, and bite he did. Bob and my brother got a couple of skin breakers and I got some pretty good bruises. I think he could have easily been labeled as a “fear biter” in today’s terms. I was just told he was “bad dog” from the get go.

I looked at his bites as warning shots in my case and with the guys, I just knew their approach wasn’t going to end favorably – for them.

What was particularly interesting to me was that it had nothing to do with resource guarding. In the early stages, he’d be the one walking away from his food, bones, toys, whenever someone or another dog approached. Cornered, handled aggressively or approached unexpectedly, he was going to give you all he had.

He came to me at 2 years old and at 7 I’ve never had a more solid, trustworthy dog. He did therapy work (loved all human connections) and developed a real fondness for kids - bouncing all around and even on him.

I see a lot of similarities in Vince but more differences. While I have 110% confidence that he wouldn’t think about biting me, at this point I still don’t think he would hesitate with a quickly approaching child, an eager elderly person and everyone in between. It’s strange, women seem to be the worst. Most men get a bit of a once over. Women enter the picture and his lip curls immediately. Of course this isn’t all inclusive and I can now read the energy he’s reacting to, which includes some men. I won’t get into the previous owner, but this single mother had ME on edge in the first 5 minutes.

Fear (nervous issues) is an interesting thing in dogs. While we as individuals in a society tolerate the reactive jitters and outbursts of each other, even have numerous professions that regress folks to the beginnings of their issues (which usually doesn’t includes the womb – sometimes), and even judges and juries that acquit folks, based on past circumstances that may have triggered their current reaction to horrendous deeds they’ve committed, we often don’t afford the same level of understanding to our canine companions. They’re a fear biting nerve bag; they must have been born that way.

Just a bit of a stretched human example from the way I look at it:

From all accounts, this was an otherwise, very nice man. He was confused, scared and full of fear for how many more exhausting hours lay ahead. He came to our country, (new home, new situation) did not speak the language and spent hours (10) in arrivals after a 15 hour flight to our Vancouver airport. He was just feet away from someone that could have helped him immediately, if by some stroke of luck the players in the situation could have understood that. But nope, they killed him.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QPCgwCS3viQ

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/article790894.ece

Born to die like this? If only one person in that situation could have understood that this man simply wanted to connect with his mother (who was also just feet away, behind a wall), he would be alive today.

Had this been a woman (Chihuahua, Peekapoo, Shih Tzu) in the exact same circumstance, would the compassion necessary to rectify this situation have been applied instead of the immediate labeling judgment that “scared everybody” and no one willing to take the time to understand what was going on for him?

Would just anybody have been qualified to go up and approach this man? Absolutely not, however the ones that did had no understanding of what they were dealing with, only what they saw. A polish psychologist could have rectified this in minutes.

Had this man survived, would we expect that he immediately have a fond regard for all airports and tasers? That he immediately seek out RCMP officers to befriend? If he had strong nerves, should he be expected just to shrug it off? I know, more questions than answers and way toooooo much anthropomorphism, but I’m human and it’s an example of what makes sense to me.

Can all dogs be put in all situations that we, as a society, deem “social”? I don’t believe so but given half a chance to unpack their bags, with the right guidance and a learning environment, conducive to their learning style, I think they all have a potential to bring their unique prospective to the table without the fear and need to lash out because of it.

And while I get what all the literature (experts) say about bad genes, and agree to some extent, I don’t think they’re "born" to bite out of fear. I think that somewhere along the line (often very young) this has been an effective last resort (or first in some cases) and they’ve never been shown or conditioned to understand that an effective alternative exists.

I’ll probably get flack for this but for the sake of discussion, I think in many cases (certainly not all) it has more to do with the person doing the labeling than it has to do with an understanding of what got the dog to the place he’s at. Genetics is an easy answer.

Handler aggression in my opinion is normally induced by training BUT the genetic disposition was already there. The cases I have seen are very strong dominant dogs where someone or someones have decided that they can physically correct and dominate the dog, often without any kind of foundation or bonding with the dog.