Originally posted by Richard Cannon:
Dave,
Even in cases where a puppy seemed to be abnormally fearful I have seen them be strong confident adults. I have seen the opposite also. Hmmm... I have seen weak dogs that APPEAR to be strong, confident adults... until they are exposed to something UNUSUAL that they have never seen before... then, the initial perception of danger re-emerges.

It would be simple enough to devise an experiment with dogs that showed a lot of fear as pups... then exposing them to something new / unusual... and watching their initial reaction.

Isn't this the idea behind the old Koehler stake out test from the 1960's? ...Dog is tied out, man approaches with a wierd limp, big hat, umbrella etc.

Dave,

We were just discussing that type of thing last week in training. The trainer had several dogs lined up for a test with an umbrella opening right in front of the dogs face as it charged for the bite. He predicted the dogs that would go through it and those that wouldn't before they started. The issue was training. With the dogs that had been exposed to more things in training they would by pass the umbrella until called out and then go investigate the umbrella. Dogs with less exposure to enviornmental distractions would balk at the umbrella. None of the dogs had seen the umbrella before.

With training and exposure to many different things the dogs had learned that they had a job first and then they could go check out the distraction. Dogs with less exposure needed to check out the distraction first. Then deal with the bite. I have long thought that there is also a component of trust in the handler involved with dogs. If they are not convinced that the handler will not put them in a bad situation the dog will be hesitant. If the dog has confidence in it's handler, and that the handler won't lead it in to trouble the dog will be hesitant.

We have all dealt with dogs that are obviously suffering from a genetic fear problem, but most dogs come down in the middle somewhere and to try and make this a black and white issue is a disservice to most of the dogs we will deal with in our careers. Exposure to new things is one of the things that allows the dogs to learn, to write it all off as genetic is an over simplification.

Wait a minute, Richard. If skittishness IS primarily genetic, we do a disservice by ignoring that fact and continuing to breed weak dogs.

You are VERY correct that training to cover up these weaknesses has DRAMATICALLY improved in recent years... heck, many trainers have become experts in getting weak dogs to look stronger than they are. Thats good too.

But my point is that we shouldn't ignore the genetic factor. This posting is under the "general breeding" category.

By the way, openning an umbrella in the dogs face was NEVER part of the Koehler test... the man never gets close enough for a bite.... its only to create a NEW and UNUSUAL stimuli to assess temperament (how the dog PERCEIVES new situations) BEFORE any protection training is conducted.

I'm sorry if this gets off topic, but what exactly is meant by 'proper training and socialization'? I think that training can help with a dog that has envirornmental based fears such as poor socialization, etc. but, how does it help a dog with genetic based fear? How do you train away something that is programmed in? I'm being completely serious because I have tried everything with my dog to no avail. I've asked before and I'll ask again, because I will do just about anything to make this dog less fearful.

You can never "train it away", you can only control it....maybe.

Because most dogs are mediocre at best, most people have had a weak nerved dog at some point. My last male is now a Sch3 and scores well... BUT, you NEVER know if he's going to get spooked.

In our last trial, one of our weaker males was going for a Sch1. He was looking GREAT until the helper popped out of the other side of the blind-- unexpectedly... game over... he backed up and refused to bite... not good.

Its sad, but sometimes the best thing for the owner is for them to come to the realization that their dog will NEVER get over genetic skittishness... rather than to just keep hoping it will go away.... I've been there.... its no fun.

I guess that fear of the unknown has such an important survival value for not just wolves, but for most wild animals that it should be inherited (since any animal that is brave until injured won't live long enough to reproduce).

I don't think that most dog people want fearless dogs either, other than some terrier people*. There can be no sharpness or defense without the ability to perceive threat. I think working dog people have the problem, not of eliminating fearfulness, but of keeping it at a low level and balancing it with strong nerves so that a dog can work through a threat.

Perhaps there should be a breed value assigned to temperament as well -- so that we can have a means to take into account not just what an individual dog's temperament is, but how likely it is to pass it on based on its littermates, ancestry and existing progeny... ^_^

Dei.

*And some could go to extremes. Gamekeepers breeding Border Terriers used to administer the following test: they'd take a litter of 4 week old pups and lift each one by the upper lip. If it snarled, it lived. If it yelped, they drowned it.

Interesting idea... then instead of just 2 categories (courage vs. fear) we would have a scale that also included genetic info... ahhh.... its nice to dream.

You are right about SOME fear being useful in defense... excellent point.

I know that the SV already has its Breed Value number for HD and that the ADRK recently introduced dog base numbers for HD, ED, overbite, so it's not total wishful thinking (just three-quarters). It wouldn't be that hideously hard. The main thing is to have a sensible method of collecting data and expressing it in a form that is useful to breeders and owners.

It'd work best if there's a good test for young puppies (so that there's less training to muddy the results and it's more likely that an entire litter can be tested). Each dog has its score as well as another score representing the mean of its littermates. That way we can have a basis for answering the question of does a dog produce pups more like itself or more like the background it came from (ie do the more fearful dogs in a litter produce pups that are braver than them and vice versa).

Once there's enough information systematically gathered, we can start to make predictions of an individual's worth to the temperament of the breed. The main challenge is that there will always need to be some qualification of the results as different temperament variations suit different people, but it's not impossible. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

Dei(just my two wishful pence).

Dave,

My point wasn't in relation to that particular test, but to the idea that dogs will learn with exposure. It is impossible to seperate what is genetic and what is learned once the dog is older. In some cases there are some good clues in the history of the dog, but such subtle things can effect it that it is impossible to tell.

One of the things that tends to bother me is that, breeders blame owners and owners blame breeders, and nobody is realling looking at the dogs. People just throw the dog in the backyard and do nothing with it and blame the breeder. Breeders take dogs that are toatlly freaky and then blame the owner for any thing that goes wrong. Personally I will always feel that both nature and nurture are equally important and worry about my part. It is all that I can control. This is also part of the argument for only breeding the best stock and carefully selecting a breeder and really looking at the parents of the dog.