I also have to disagree w/Catherine about footstep tracking vs *real* tracking, I'm not sure what she considers *real* tracking, but . . . IMO, Sch tracking is an excellent foundation for other types of scent work. We've switched footstep trained dogs over to SAR and it was soooo easy for them, once they found out they could *cheat*. They come into the new discipline w/more focus and self control b/c of the foostep tracking. And, if it's taught correctly, ie motivationally, they have a good attitude about it.

That's the point Joy. Footstep tracking is harder because it takes more obedience to train. That is why it was chosen. Not to be real but as an obedience test as well as a nose test.

Vince,
Do you really think obed is a major part of Sch tracking?? I guess my own bias is, if the dog tracks, great. If not, wrong sport for this dog. I really love to see a dog that understands the game and really enjoys it. I guess eventually, it does become an obed exersize of course when the articles come into it.
One of the comments I consistently got when I took my Sch tracker to some SAR trainings was how *focused*and methodical he was, I saw that as a side benefit of Sch tracking.

Richard,

How would I proof my dog in the "real world"? Good question but I don't know what that has to do with sport vs real. You can't evaluate what a dog will do in real life faced with a real threat by watching it on a sporting field. They're just not the same.

Renee,

What I mean by work is SAR, police K9, protection, assistance dogs, etc. - its not sport. The difficulty I have with sport is that it doesn't really test the dog's ability to think and react under stress, or to track. A dog knows its under no threat on a sporting field.

I don't have as much 'leash time' as most, this is just what I see from my limited experience.

Footstep tracking is not natural tracking so I don't see the point of it - and its harder because it goes against the dog's natural ability. Pups can be easily taught to track without food so why is food used? I guess I shouldn't say 'taught to track' since they already know how to track. If they have good working genes then why would they need food as a motivator? If as much time were devoted in working with their natural abilities as using food then the end result would be the same wouldn't it? I know its been explained and I've heard all the reasons, but I suppose footstep tracking will never make logical sense to me.

I question how Schutzhund is really valuable in testing the breed worthiness of the GSD - unless its for Schutzhund.

Catherine,

You can tell a lot about a dog by how they function in a stressful situation, especially if the handler is stressed. Those things all happen in sport work. That is part of the purpose of certifying PD. Is it an abolute test of the dog...no. Is it a good indication of what the dog can do...certainly.

Not all dog sports are as scripted as Schutzhund. A portion of understanding what your dog will actually do comes from challenging the dog in unfamiliar circumstances. Most handlers that go to the trouble of entering a trial want to do well. That means the handler is stressed, that stress is transmitted to the dog. So the dog is stressed and can be seeing the situation for the first time. That will further stress the dog...will it still bite? What constitutes a "real world" bite for the dog? The handler is stressed, the dog is facing something new, against someone they don't know, in unfamiliar circumstances....sound familiar? It is a good bet that if the dog cuts and runs in that situation (the trial) there is a good chance that the dog will do it in the "real world". The idea that there is not a solid test in a protection trial comes from people that don't want to enter.

There are several varities of protection trials with unannounced protection scenarios. If you can't tell the difference in a purely prey dog and a dog operating in fight drive by watching Schutzhund, try Pro K-9, NAPD, or several others. It becomes painfully obvious which dogs can and can't survive a real world encounter. If you are going to count on your dog for your saftey, you better have a very good idea that the dog can and will do the job. A tough protection trial will provide that information. Until someone can give me a better option I will continue to recommend that you enter your dog in a couple of tough protection trials to proof the dog. You don't have to go on to title the dog, but at least see what the dog will do in tough circumstances.

Catherine,

Explain a training day you and your dog do to "proof" for real life situations. I have asked this question before but it was never answered.

OK, Catherine, one more time with feeling…

***The difficulty I have with sport is that it doesn't really test the dog's ability to think and react under stress, or to track. A dog knows its under no threat on a sporting field.***

I prepared a long speech, but I see Richard beat me to it and I don't really have anything to add to that.

***I don't have as much 'leash time' as most, this is just what I see from my limited experience.***

Then get some. No one on this board was born with a leash in their hand and a trophy in their mouth (with the exception of Vince, maybe <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" /> ). Only through personal experience will you get the answers you are looking for.

***Footstep tracking is not natural tracking so I don't see the point of it - and its harder because it goes against the dog's natural ability.***

Footstep tracking IS part of natural tracking, just like air scenting is, and as such CANNOT go against the dog's natural ability.

***Pups can be easily taught to track without food so why is food used? I guess I shouldn't say 'taught to track' since they already know how to track.***

That's right, they already know how to track, they are born with it. My 10-wk old pup tracked my 6-yr old son for at least a mile under blizzard conditions. Why? Because he was looking for his buddy. Would he do it if it was someone else? I doubt it. We don't need to teach dogs how to track--we need to teach them WHAT tracking is. Teach them that when you say "find it", or "such" it means "put your nose to the ground and follow the scent", no matter what's waiting at the end. That's why you use food--to teach and motivate. How else would a dog understand what you want from him? In nature dogs only track what is of interest to THEM-your job as a trainer is to teach them to track WHAT you decide, and WHEN you decide, that's why tracking is also an exercise in obedience.

***but I suppose footstep tracking will never make logical sense to me.***

The reason footstep tracking is used in SchH is simply because it's a test for the dog's ability to scent, willingness to work and trainability, a standardized test against which a multitude of dogs is evaluated under strict set conditions, just like any other test. How else would you evaluate these abilities?

***I question how Schutzhund is really valuable in testing the breed worthiness of the GSD - unless its for Schutzhund.***

You know, Catherine, we can argue till we are blue in the face re "sport vs real", or until Ed decides to close this thread <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" /> , but don't you think your statement is a bit presumptuous?

Books have been written on this subject, if you haven't read them, please do, if you have and still didn't get your answer, who am I to even try? SchH was not invented by anyone on this board, it was invented by Max von Stephanitz--the creator of the GSD--as a test for breed worthiness.

Maybe we should give him SOME credit?

There is an article on my web site, *Elements of Temperament* that may help Catherine understand why Sch is useful as a breed suitability test and how it tests dogs in ways that are not so obvious. Not that I think anything will get thru to her until she's had sufficient *leash time* to have an idea what it's all about.
You did a good job, Renee.

Richard,

I understand what you're saying. And its important to train as you would work (to steal a quote from someone else).

Joy,

I have read different articles on your website. I've also read much about Schutzhund, and will see more training and trials.

Renee,

I won't belabor the point. I simply have a very hard time believing that this is what Schutzhund was really meant to be like and that it hasn't devolved rather than evolved. Don't get me wrong, it certainly does have its place, but it is simply a sport and thats where it ends for me.

I will continue to evaluate it. Thanks for the responses.

Catherine,

Why do you avoid my question? What training
do you and your dog do that is real? How are you "proofing" your dog. Do you do any
bite work training with your dog or is this
just talk?