Where have you been Rich, haven't seen you on here as much? Good post by the way.
I think one of the reasons I've thought this is a quality in the past that I've wanted was because I thought that if the dog was rank, then it would not be so nice to others. SO many times my dogs are far too friendly to others. I guess I'm just a guy that likes that one-man dog kind of thing. I also thought that this behavior would help with that.

I think from a spectators type of perspective that this is why, like you mentioned. Even though the Belgian Shepherds are nothing like the Doberman of old in personality, I think many people want that type of thing when thinking of a PP Dog. I guess people hear this and it makes them think of the badest form of German Shepherd they can get. That's what I thought in the past. I've heard that in many cases rank dogs will allow you to be first BUT that's it.

Point being, regardless of what is true or if this type of behavior is good, I think this is how or why it's been becoming more popular. I know for me that was the case. I'm glad I'm still here learning before I step into something too deep hands on.

Ellen is correct in interputating hardness in the way she does.
If you have a hard dog, it will not respond to a nylon-slip collar or fur-savor for the most part when determined to do something that you do not want it to .Eg, not sit when told but understands the exerise; your level of compulsion will have to be higher to get through to this dog. This dog will not be affected by low levels of pressure, it will for the most part ignore it. Normally a hard dog, by the widley-acceapted defination will need a strong-prong collar correction sharp-prong, or a higher level of electric. Then after this the dog if he is a hard dog, will not really go down in drive, but go back to the level of drive before you corrected the dog. A hard dog will also take more lessons to learn an exersise when complusion is being integrated into a training program. Some people call them stubborn. A lot of Rotts are hard tempermented. This is a simplified answer and a complex isssue when looked at in depth. Nerves play a role in a dogs inborn-hardness. Hardness is also mistaken for high levels of drive, and how hard a dog hits when he bites. WHile this may play a part it is not really the whole picture or defination.
A truley hard dog is one that really is a pain in the butt for most to own ,and not the best dog for most to have for work. A degree of hardness is needed for work, but a level 9 or 10, is to not easy to controll in most cases. You do not NEED that level of hardness on the street. In most cases animals like that have alot of rank issues.

Brad,

One each dead computer.... now replaced. Gone from 233 to 1.6 ghz. Ok now it is quick.

Michael,

Suprise, suprise, I disagree. The 2 things aren't related. There are several things that contribute to the dog that won't respond without high compulsion. As I have stated before, in many cases these dogs have had little education in what a correction means. Since they can't interpret what you want they "resist" the correction. The handler responds bu increasing the correction. Once the dog is used to that level of correction, the required amout of required correction goes up. By starting with corrections when the puppy is younger, and teaching what a correction means while they are more willing to respond, you "cure" the "problem" before it occurs.

A dog can be extreamly hard in dealing with an outside problem, without having to have rank issues or being overly handler hard. A dog with good fight drive will be a hard, focused dog and it doesnt have to be rank to accomplish this.

Richard -- as usual I agree with what you say.

I didn't address handler hardness specifically because IMO it is included in "strong-willed" definition of hardness. When factoring in your examples of "extremes" caused by dominance and too strong or unwarranted (inappropriate) corrections causing a hard dog to turn on its handler, I consider those "extremes" primarily relationship and training issue problems, respectively, and not genetic or breeding issues in an otherwise "balanced" dog. These "extremes" become genetic/breeder issues IMO only when "nerve" is a problem. IMO the harder the dog, the sounder the nerves MUST to be to handle the higher drive that goes with that territory -- IOW less "sharp"; less "nervy"; less "reactive" (as opposed to proactive). What kind of "nerve" are show breeders selecting for?, are sport breeders selecting for?, are PSD breeders selecting for?, etc. -- that's not rhetorical, I don't know and am interested to know.

 Quote:

The dog that is overly hard will also not respond as well to commands when they are in conflict with the dogs natural drives.

This is why it is so important to figure out as a trainer how to work with the dog's natural drives. Dogs often have a whole repertoire of behaviors associated with any given drive -- not just one. So if a dog uses an unacceptable behavior to express/satisfy a particular drive (a drive that is needed for the work to be done), one should try to figure out a way to teach the dog to satisfy that drive using another behavior that is acceptable to you and better serves your needs. For example, in herding the GSD's drive to control/possess sheep (prey drive) is often first expressed by running in (chase) to grab (bite) the sheep. Obviously this is not acceptable behavior for the shepherd who wants the dog to contain the sheep in a given area while they graze undisturbed. The shepherd has to figure out how to teach the dog a more acceptable behavior to satisfy this prey drive behavior naturally turned on in the presence of sheep -- for example the dog is taught to work a boundary instead (my web site explains it -- too long for here). The smart shepherd knows how to teach the dog by directing its natural drive (prey/chase/bite) into the acceptable behavior that serves his needs -- like patrolling a boundary. The not-so-smart shepherd OTOH only seems capable of knowing how to stop unwanted behavior usually by punishing corrections that negatively effect the quality of the drive -- but then he has to fill the hole created by drive he has distorted by putting in command/controlled behavior -- this may suit the shepherd but does not do much to satisfy the dog's natural drive. When the dog's natural drive is invoked but not allowed to be satisfied by some appropriately satisfying behavior, then you set the stage for displaced aggression. In sheepherding the aggression is usually taken out on the sheep instead of the shepherd (unfortunately <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" /> ) which gives the not-so-smart shepherd even more excuses to punish the dog which is often what not-so-smart shepherds enjoy doing most anyway <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/frown.gif" alt="" /> .

 Quote:

The thing that concerns me is that it seems people are breeding for these handler hard dogs. It seems that people WANT this type of dog.

Personally, I think they want this kind of dog to compensate for poor training methods. In the end, it only leaves increasingly brain-dead dogs in the gene pool to complement increasingly brain-dead handlers. JMO of course <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" /> .

 Quote:

For some reason these people think that the aggressive attitude to the handler will translate to a more aggressive attitude to an outside stimulus. This isn't always the case. In many cases I think this attitude is fostered by not teaching a dog how to respond to a correction when they are puppies. That response has a learned component, and if it is not taught early it is going to require a higher level correction and confusion in the dog as to what is desired when it recieves a correction. It seems that people believe that any correction early in life will create a long term decrease in drive that will ruin the dog for sport, PP, or PSD work. I don't believe that that is the case, in fact I think the opposite is true, because early lessons in correction allows for greater concentration on the dogs part and a lower level of correction in later life.

Very good point. Puppies need discipline -- age-appropriate discipline. In the wild they would receive it from the parents and later from the pack and rank/social order. We have created a void by domestication and need to fill it. Youth is IMO for foundation-building aimed at strengthening confidence, respect and team spirit (among other things) within a clearly defined but simple set of behavioral rules. If a solid foundation is built (which can take over 2 years for a herding dog ala Manfred's method), most everything else including correction pressure will follow pretty easily.

Ellen,

I agree with you totally. I include Rank and handler hardness because they seem to be becoming more tightly associated. I have come to believe that a significant portion of this is caused by poor foundation work in addittion to dogs being bred for these strong rank reactions.

I have worked with Giants for a long time. Every one of them I have dealt with had a point with significant rank problems. If properly dealt with it is a one or two shot deal. After that the dog understands what is expected and will respond to the handler. If the dog doesn't understand what the correction means it will just continue to fight in response to the correction. Most of these dogs don't need a real hard correction, ehich is a good thing because they are so tough that they are hard to hurt. Hard? Absolutely. Rank? At times... But they are still responsive to commands.

I have never seen the purpose in fighting with your own dog. It sets a poor precedent, it makes any subsequant corrections more difficult and at higher levels, and teaches the dog that the way to "power" is by winning the fight. That means that if he can win he now has the power. If you look at how pack behavior works, there is rarely a serious fight. The rank is established through the ability to control. That doesn't require a physical confrontation to establish. I think that is what many seem to be missing in training.

Richard -- I agree. Sorry, I have to copy something I wrote which is appropo her -- no time to write something new -- gotta get the sheep out to eat before the heat sets in -- will be brutal today.
~~~~~~~~~
Man and dog have very similar social structures and behaviors. So similar in fact that over the years long term studies of canine pack behavior have been undertken both here and in Germany to help shed light on human social behavior. Primitive man lived and hunted in social units called clans or tribes -- wolves lived and hunted in social units called packs. Within both clan and pack there was a strictly enforced social hierarchy from the leader down to the lowest in rank. The success and survival of the clan and the pack depended on how effectively the leader was able to command respect from his subordinates and thereby to maintain the social order necessary for cooperative efforts like hunting large game or herding large flocks. Over the millennia as hunter became herder, the "hunt to kill" behavior evolved gradually into the "herd to keep" behavior in both the shepherd and the shepherd dog. Man and dog discovered each other through their common need to cooperate in certain tasks and they learned to communicate with each other through their common language of social hierarchical behavior.

So what can we learn from this? First, we learn that dogs instinctively want to be #1 in rank, or as close to #1 as possible -- especially confident dogs with courage and sound nerves. Second, we learn that dogs instinctively want to cooperate -- if that were not the case, they would not live and work in packs. It is this innate ability in the dog to cooperate that I call its "willingness-to-please". However, until the rank order in the pack is clearly defined and settled, dogs close to each other in rank will not cooperate with each other -- they will continue to compete until the rank order is settled. It is the same in the man/dog relationship. If the rank order is not clear to the dog across the board and if the shepherd is not respected as #1 at all times and in all situations, then the dog will not exhibit that willingness-to-please attitude and will not reliably obey or ooperate with the shepherd. The dog will instead keep looking for the "hole" to break through to assert its own dominance -- this is where the dog gets accused of being an "opportunist" and where the shepherd complains about his lack of control over the dog. This lack of control over the dog by the shepherd merely reflects the dog's lack of respect for the shepherd.
~~~~~~~~~~
Real quick again -- I have found that the degree of dominance in a hard dog has not been an issue in training thru cooperation -- at least not in herding. In fact I have found that the more dominant (higher in rank) the dog is, the better the dog works on its own initiative and the more reliable it is when working independently -- just the opposite of what one might think. Any rank issue once it is dealt with as I describe above is totally overridden by the herding drive when working sheep. I would assume it would be similar in any kind of work the dog is really attracted to. The problem would be more apt to occur in rote obedience exercises or disjointed practice/drill precision training sessions (as for competitions) where there is no "task" per se -- there you have to "make play" so-to-speak (ie. balls, tugs, etc.) to divert attention from the command/control situation that exists by necessity here.

Ellen

Heat? What heat? It is supposed to be 113 today here.

I have found similar things with protection dogs. The dogs have to learn that you will work cooperatively with them. They need to believe that you will protect them and warn them of problems coming up. By the same token, the dog needs to believe that you trust them and their judgements. Your judgements take precedent, but you do pay attention to the information the dog is giving you.

What a surprise. Again I never said that the dog HAD to have rank issue' but alot of times they do. If you do not beleive this that is your point of view, which I say is not correct.
If you have a truley hard- TEMPERMENTED dog, then I will tell you this, you will never get through to a dog that is foucused on doing something with a slip-collar. If you introduce corrections earlier, sure this will help, but your theory on pressure is not entirley true. IF the dog understands an exersise, say taught the sit for food, a hard-tempermented dog that say's hey, I don't feel like sitting without food, will take a higher level of stress to make him comply. Each dog' (and this is where you are wrong) thershhold is diffrent and this is where the hardness lies.
I do agree that envoirment has alot to do with a dogs temperment, and how you train it in the beginging. But if the dog is a truley hard tempermented dog then little pops with a nylon-collar, or a little pop from a pinch collar, will not have a lasting effect on the dog.
Another example, a friend of mine got a tape from Germany with a young pup 8 months, the guy on the video was preparing food for the other dogs, he had a bad day, and punched the dog in the head, nothing hard, the dog was irriatating him, the dog just went on like nothing happenened, a soft dog would have folded. Ed had a dog that he wrote about that was rank, and had a hard temperment, and liked to fight dogs, so he was outside with this dog and I think it went to fight with another dog through a gate, and he smacked it with a shovel. He got his point acroos, and I am sure that a mild correction would have never phased this dog.
You are mistaken when you say that because a dog is tough in bite work, he has a hard-temperment, the two, do not always co-exisit. There is a diffrence in drive and thresholds for corrections and unpleasent things that happen to a dog.
The comes a time in every solid training progrma that the dog needs to be made reliable through corrections. Two things play a role: One being the foundation, and two the temperment of the dog.

The following are posts from Kevin. They are long but very informitive:

“The top sport dogs tend to be 7-8 dogs on a scale of 1-10. I've never seen a ten.
The schutzhund dog does make a great pet, go back and read Max von Stephanitz book, which is a must for the SchH and GSD enthusiast. Read it and see how far off track we have gotten, where beauty is placed above work and health.
Now to answer the above question from another thread. The very best schutzhund dogs seldom are the very best dogs to breed to. A very few people have the understanding of the dogs which are top end in the character scale. Some dogs when allowed as youngsters to control their situation can become difficult to handle. Some are hard as nails (which means they are resiliant to duress, they recover very quickly and negative experiences are very minor issues for them) and take excellent training to maintain let alone be competietive. These are the dogs that if they can be brought to the top level will receive the best critiques from the best judges, and subsequently be bred.
Since the extremes breed the norm, we cannot allow the 7-8 dogs to be bred exclusively or even in the majority since they would breed towards the norm and push trhe normal back down the ladder to the 5-6 dog. This is what has happened to the show line dogs. They breed to the 9 dog in looks but not 9 's in drive and hardness and fighting instinct. This has pushed the population of beauty dogs into a lower norm than the working line dogs which are consistantly bred to very hard dogs. It is the highly driven and very hard dog that we must seek out to breed to, not the medium dog that is vastly represented in the high points.
These traits do not mean that the dog is rank, but couple a little rank with all that drive and hardness and it can take experience to deal with it. A little rank in the 7 dog is easy to overcome even for most novices.
So, to produce litters with a 9 dog, a couple of 7-8 dogs and some 6-5's you must breed to the 9-10 dog. If we wish to have a litter with a 7 dog a couple 5-6 dogs and other falling into the 2-4 range (useless critters that cannot perform work, and usually are even problems as pets) then we would always breed the medium dog to the medium dog.”

“Fight drive and Rank are not dependent on one another. Much like high fight drive dogs usually show high prey drive, high fight drive is often accompanied by some rank. It doesn't mean that the dogs cannot be high in fight and not rank (I'll point out that my current dog is not rank yet very high in fight, and the dog previous was very high in fight and rank as #$%$!!, an earlier patrol dog I had...Dolf for Lou since he probably knew this dog....was very high in fight but was not rank at all). I prefer dogs of very high fight and low rank.
Now, do not forget that no drive really stands alone without some pressures from other drives and character traits, also, there is the concerns about rearing (I believe that rank issues can be grown into a dog that has the potential, very easily, and that way too many people are afraid they will decrease their young dog's potential in protection if they squash this behavior, it needs to be stopped prior to maturity for sure), and experiences as the dog grows his brain and subsequent behaviors.
I have also seen dogs labeled as rank when in fact the dogs were confused and panicked by the training (and genetic potential for this as seen in some Mink progeny) and bite because they are fearful and have low thresholds to survival behavior and have low thresholds to prey, causing the initial reaction to be in self-defense and unloading into a strange combo of overlapping drives.
OK, I hope this clears a few things up. You can have great fight and low rank, but often very extreme fight drives posses some level of rank, which is determined by both genetic potential and nurture.
Some really rank dogs have only medium to poor fight (the dog that uses rank in protection that bites his handler more than the bad guys, and when he does bite bad guys the hadler can see that the dog isn't terribly committed to the fight). Take the not uncommon image of a dog that has high rank and finishes a session of muzzle work and can't get off the field without marking (I hate these dogs).
Rank can and is directed at anyone that the dog sees within the heirachy or potentially becoming a pack member. Extreme rank (a poor trait and not of normal levels) boils over into all kinds of situations like protection and play. This is abnormal, not normal rank stuff that might be directed at the family members of a somewhat rank dog.
Donn was quoted as saying that the dogs selected for PSP are often rank, very rank. In part this was due to the limited amount the school could spend on dogs, so they got the bottom of the barrel, nasty rank critters that civilians wanted gone.”

Michael,

Not all "tough" protection dogs are hard temperamented, but a lot are. Enough that it is worth while to talk about the issue together.

You keep trying to change my statements. Who said anything about a "mild" correction with a slip? I can get a very hard correction with one. One thing I have found when it comes to correction tools is that people get an idea that something is required and go with it. If you have no confidence in your abilities to get a proper correction with a tool, you won't. Every tool has a place in training, I have used most of them at one point or another. There are times that I have needed a prong with a speific dog, but it is rare and once the dog understands what is required I go back to a nylon slip. The idea that dog training is a constant fight with the dog is not correct. Once the dog understands, the level of correction will go down. The purpose of a correction is not to try and over power the dog, but to re-direct the behavior. If you appoach every correction as an attempt to over power the dog, you are a setting up the situation that the dog sees every correction not as an attempt at communitation but a fight between your desires and his. Now the dog will only follow direction when there is the threat of compulsion, not a cooperative effort to a purpose.

If you have confidence in the tool you will approach the correction with the idea that it will work. That idea will transmit to the dog. If you don't believe in the correction, that will also transmit to the dog and the dog won't respond because it won't think you are serious. I know a trainer that can make an effective correction on almost any dog with a 2" wide FLAT collar. This guy is so dominant with dogs that there is no question in the dogs mind that he is serious. With dogs, your expectations will strongly color the dogs re-action to the correction. If you believe it, it will work. The idea that a slip or prong an only create a "little pop" is not how the world works.

Corrections are not punishment, they are corrections. The idea is not to try and overpower the dog, but teach what is desired. The ability to do that is based on the approach and attitude towards how the training takes place. Punching a dog, or hitting them with a shovel, isn't training. It is a reaction to a situation that probably shouldn't have happend or a desire to dominate the dog, not teach the dog proper behavior.