VanCamp wrote:
"I think that puppy and youth training of a working dog (for protection) should be done in a way that does not diminish drive or harm the handler/dog relationship. So "basic obedience" done before, and during, bite work should be positive in nature."

VanCamp,
I am not trying to turn this into anything that it is not. I'm only saying that what some people think is "positive," may have its problems too. I am by no means firm on this, but as I said, I think it requires further thought. That is all.

The main objective in early bite work is to build drive. Any type of compulsion reduces drive. So this becomes counterproductive. After you are at a point in drive building where you are comfortable with the results then you can introduce compulsion. This is when the Drive-Compulsion-Drive theory works best.

Good morning gents.

Right on Jason, I've got ya now.

I think that unless you are captain compulsion and completely ruin a dog’s spirit with obedience, it doesn't hurt to do obed before bitework. Again, I might be biased to the dogs I select and work with. If the dog has a REAL natural ability to do K-9 work, they will do the bitework regardless of the early obedience. I don't think that years ago people were so worried about crushing drive. Dogs worked or they didn't. The idea of waiting until a dog was 2 or so and let him be a jerk so you wouldn't ruin his bitework seems a bit off. If you have properly selected and tested your dogs, you can be some pretty heavy obed and never affect bitework. You might not have the total dog you could if you had not been so compulsive or harsh, but the dog, if properly selected, should still work. If this is strictly about sport, then perhaps for the sake of points one would want pretty/flashy obed and bites so to score better. This would in fact change the way things were done.
When I have a new handler and new dog, we do not start off with bitework, heck I know my dogs will bite. I start my handlers with obedience and bonding. Control does not hurt bites if done correctly. I said in another post, you couldn’t even do proper bitework IMO if you do not have obedience and control. The two must work together for a total dog. You must be able to down, stay, recall, re-direct, call back and all sorts of obedience exercises in order to have proper tactics. You can't teach tactics if you don't have obedience. If you don't have obedience, you can't teach proper bitework. JMO.

Josh good to hear from you. Here is my opinion on what you said. The difference between you and others is simple. You start with the right dog. Most people who work dogs use dogs that do not have the proper genetics to do the work in the first place. All compulsion reduces drive. But if you start with a 9.5 in drive and reduce it to a 9 when all is done then you have a super dog. But if you start with a 6 and make mistakes that reduce it to a 5 or 4 then you have junk.

Vince,

With using a reward based system, even when you introduce corrections they can be very light. Very little compulsion means no loss in drive. With traditional Sch trained dogs the obedience is left to later and the levels of compulsion required for adequate obedience control goes up, reducing drive.

 Quote:

Originally posted by Vince P.:
"You start with the right dog. Most people who work dogs use dogs that do not have the proper genetics to do the work in the first place. All compulsion reduces drive. But if you start with a 9.5 in drive and reduce it to a 9 when all is done then you have a super dog. But if you start with a 6 and make mistakes that reduce it to a 5 or 4 then you have junk."

A agree with Vince here. On the other hand, if you are genetically starting with a 6, can you build into a 9? Is this too much to expect out of a "6"?
<img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/confused.gif" alt="" />

In the in the famous words of Mr. Pesci, O.K., O.K., O.K., O.K., O.K.!!!!!!!! apparently, I need to come around to the 21st century. All the excellent points you all made seem to come to this, and experience is the pinacle, it's not whether or not you do obedience with a puppy, its more of the point, if one decides to do obedience at a young age, how its done is just as important. See, guys, I ain't so bad for a uni-browwed knuckle dragger!!!!!!!!!!!

IMO Chuck, if you have the genetics of a six that’s all you have. You might make it look like a good dog, but you will never make him more than he is. You must remember as stress rises drive and ability decreases. A dog that works at a solid high level of drive will not maintain this high level during high stress periods or prolonged physical exhaustion. A dog who has only been taught to bark at a suspect or SAR victim 5 times before a reward might not bark at all when physically exhausted. A dog that has learned to bark 80 or 90 times will probably get out a few solid barks even when tired. If you are counting on a dog to save someone’s life (SAR) or a handler's life (LEO) or the lives of the public/other officers you are doing everyone a disservice starting with a dog who is already not the best possible candidate for the job. If you are training sport, or for your recreation, sure learn on a dog who is not the best. It will make you a better trainer in the long run. If you have real lives on the line, you can not afford to start with anything that needs to be "built up."