Anne, can you come and share your opinions about
working the dog without emotion with my Schutzhund club? I totally agree with you, I think calmness goes a long way. I hear a lot of crap at training because I won't "crank" on my dog. ...But to each their own.. I am going to train him with calmness and motivation.
I have seen several men work Feviel, and only watched one woman work him. He practically melted when the lady did obedience with him. She used food and talked very softly and quiet. No emotion..Just hot dogs and a kong.
It was truely amazing. She is pictured with Feivel on Mikes web sight.
After seeing it happen I really believe motivation can go a long way!!!!!!!!!!!


Cathi Windus

Anne, excellent posts! Congrats and good luck with your dog!

What a shame about Feivel. The 'experienced' people should have paid more attention to the receptiveness Feivel paid to the woman and worked on that. Gender does not play a role in dog handling IF you are a good handler.

I have experienced the same situation with one of our PSD's. 3 yr old dog passed around from handler to handler, all green. Our course was his last chance (?!) The length of the course did not permit adequate bonding time and the dog was pressured to perform with a handler who was scared of him. Dog's fault, he was PTS <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/frown.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/mad.gif" alt="" />
He would have been a kick butt dog.

It seems many people want these super hard, aggressive dogs but don't want to invest the time it takes earn their loyalty.

I think Cathi makes a good point. Men often confuse dominance and control. One dosn't necessarily lead to the other. With some hard dogs it can be counter productive to try and establish control from physical domination. Often it is better to use other motivations to gain the control through other methods. That doesn't mean that you can allow the dog to dominate you, or that physical confrontation may not be necessary at some point. I have seen many a guy struggle with learning tone of voice to communicate with a dog.

Originally posted by Anne Kent:

As for the male/ female issue, almost all of the dogs I have seen with this problem have been trained and subsequently handled by men. My dog was handled by four men before he came to me. No one was successful handing the dog...except lil' ol' me...the female. So, no, I do not agree that women handlers cause this behavior nor do I think you must dominate a dog like this. In fact, as I stated before, you can't dominate a dog with this type of power even if you are a big strong man. IMO, it is not a question of physical strength, it is the relationship you develop with the dog.You do need to have a certain attitude I suppose but I do not think that is something that only men can achieve. Certainly, there are both men and women that should never attempt to train a dog with this type of an issue. It has less to do with gender however, and more to do with being able to contain your emotions and to be clear with the dog. Many people are incapable of this, men and women. I certainly had to work on myself more than the dog in the beginning.
The anger issue has a great deal to do with whether you will be successful. It took the good part of a year just to get the dog to really trust me. That has been the key and I have learned to not take anything he does personally.
Most people get rather angry if their dog growls at them and feel that they must display a great deal of anger when it happens. Obviously, this is a mistake, IMO with any dog, but most certainly with a dog that has already shown what I think, are defensive behaviors toward the handler.
Anne, I don’ think you understand what I’m saying. First the behavior I never stated was caused by a woman. You seem to describe pack order expressed as “domination” or “anger/angry” thing, from the handler towards the dog. I’m not suggesting I or anyone train to punish a dog or be out right abusive. However, when corrections are needed the dog does need to know that he has to obey your correction; there is no option in this. One good correction is better then a few half ass ones. The dog will only respond to your correction if you are the pack leader hence, pack order. I say respond as the reaction to comply with your training. A handler aggressive dog usually does not have this order; ergo, will refuse to comply with the desired command/exercise. Emotions IMO have little to do with training. Dogs do not think in emotions, only humans. They respond to there instincts. Dogs will respond to treats, and prey drive, but also to pain. I say pain not in an abusive way, but in the way of a strong correction. They learn to avoid the pain by doing the exercise properly. They receive the pain when they get out of line, or deviate from what is accepted. This is placed on them by you the pack leader. If you can’t give a strong correction because the dog challenges it, you have a serious problem, because now the dog will win and think he has the pack order. If you allow this and then reward the dog for it with the sleeve, tug, or food you have know reinforced this behavior. Some trainers might not see it this way, but it is true. Being clear with dog is giving the right reinforcement at the right time. This can be positive or negative reinforcement. It has nothing to do with or minds or what were thinking, accept when to reward, when to correct.
I’m wondering what you would do if a dog growls at you? Here you mention the “angry” thing again. How would you stop this behavior? As I see it the only way is through pack order, what I previously talked about.
Lastly you state “Perhaps it is a weakness in the dog's character when he tries to defend himself against a ranting, raving, loon, (usually a relative stranger), that has him by the neck, or who knows where else. Or, perhaps it isn't.”
I don’t see a dog fighting back as a weakness, it is a natural reaction. In a fight, human or animal two entities challenge each other, one will win one will loose. The dog that fights back is relying in its instincts (not emotions). If a ranting raving loon is threatening a dog it’s only natural for the dog to fight back, or chose to flee. Most suspects that have a police/military dog sent on them will fight back at the dog “ranting and raving” most definitely a lunatic for having been in the situation where the dog is scent. For that dog to fight back or defend himself is natural.
To conclude, all I’m saying about the male/female issue is that a male walks, talks, stands, smells, looks different than a woman. It’s not a bad thing, just the way it is. Think of male /female dog, obviously a difference in there size and demeanor. How many female police/military patrol dogs do you see or know of? Not many, right? Why because they work differently. (again not a bad thing) What I’m saying about training in schutzhund is that a strong handler aggressive male dog most likely will not work well with a woman. Why? Because the presence of a male handler impacts the dog differently than the presence of a female handler. This presence alone won’t make for pack order, however with good training and the right male handler (not all men have the ability either) that team should be able work out handler aggression and pack order.

Kind Regards…Chet

CHet,

I think that often we rely to heavily on a "strong" correction. Though I do use and understand the requirement for a strong correction. And you can not allow a dog to get away with dominating the handler. There are 2 components to the effecitveness of a correction. One is that the dog understand and react to the correction. The other is that the correction contribute to effective training. Physical domination is not the only way, nor necessarily the best way, to deal with gaining obedience control over a hard dog. Some men will tend to rely too heavily on it, and the dog/handler relationship can suffer. The result is a lck of the desired control. I learned this the hard way with Giants. While there are times that you have to use physical confrontation to maintain proper control, it doesn't necessarily make for the best relationship or the best/fastest learning of obedience. Although the dog understands that you will not accept an attempt at physical domination over you, the obedience will come faster through a more positive relationship. You may get more from the dog by using other forms of correction, like tone of voice, to communicate your desires to the dog. It is easy to fall into a rut, and stay on one thing. Perhaps this is why some dogs do better when they change handler, in somecases going to a handler that uses other, less physical, methods even with a hard dog.

Richard...I agree with what you said. I understand that that is not the only way to get results. It's good you mentioned those points.

Best...Chet

Anne, thank you for joining this discussion. This is just the kind of a dialogue I was hoping for. We all may agree or disagree on some issues, but at least we are discussing something that has been long overdue. I was going to make a few comments on what you said earlier but something that Chet said threw me off track.

Chet:
“Emotions IMO have little to do with training. Dogs do not think in emotions, only humans.”

Unless I read what Anne said too quickly, I thought she was talking about human emotions and how they affect human/canine relationship. Whether dogs have emotions is a different subject altogether.

Anne said:
“Perhaps it is a weakness in the dog's character when he tries to defend himself against a ranting, raving, loon, (usually a relative stranger), that has him by the neck, or who knows where else. Or, perhaps it isn't.”
Chet replied:
“I don’t see a dog fighting back as a weakness, it is a natural reaction. In a fight, human or animal two entities challenge each other, one will win one will loose. The dog that fights back is relying in its instincts (not emotions).”

Again, she is talking about human emotions, and I detect a note of sarcasm in that statement as well. Maybe she can clarify that <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" /> .

Chet, your approach is conventional and rather simplistic. It has been done and is being done. However, it creates an adversarial relationship between dog and handler. Can it work? Sure, in some cases. I know of one handler/dog relationship that fits your description where the dog actually went places. A very experienced handler and a very dominant male. But it’s been an uphill battle from the get-go until the dog died (of natural causes), with numerous scars on both sides. What we are trying to establish here is whether such confrontations can be avoided.

With a lot of dogs that are full grown and change hands, the problem with handler aggression alot of the time lies with not enough bonding time. I have seen a few dogs that were good dogs in Europe with thier old owners, and come over to the States and start biting the handler. I think that this is because the new owners take these dogs and expect them to perform in a few weeks, and take corrections. This is wrong. Alot of dogs with aggression will not tolerate this, and this will start a never ending cycle. It only stands to reason. I have also seen strong dogs that were trained by men, shine with a woman. With a stronger, harder older dog that has had disipline from a male handler, and is set in his training, when taken over by a good female handler, most look at it like a breath of fresh air, and present a nice picture. But I do think that when you have a super strong handler hard male and he is a still a bit handler aggressive, the dog will walk all over most woman handlers. Dogs are in tune to gender, I think.

Originally posted by Michael Taylor Rivers:
Dogs are in tune to gender, I think. I tend to agree with this. They seem to have their own preference. I also saw some very hard dogs do much better with women. OTOH, I saw at least one dog who bit a couple of women and did quite well with a man.

No argument with your statement: “I think that this is because the new owners take these dogs and expect them to perform in a few weeks, and take corrections. This is wrong.”

However, I’ve seen a few cases where the owners were bit pretty bad during the “bonding” period, with no training or corrections involved--in either play or without any provocation whatsoever. The only common denominator was age (over 18 mos) and bloodlines (Crok).

Chet, I do actually understand the concept of compulsion and as I said before, the "attitude" needed to work a strong dog. I also think I understand how you would approach training a dog like the one I described. However, IMO, there are more ways to establish yourself as the boss than with just compulsion or testosterone. As I stated in my first post, I do and have used compulsion when I felt I really needed to. In the beginning especially, I was almost always in a position where I could do this without re-enforcing the bad behaviors that the dog had learned. What's the point in correcting the dog and allowing him to succeed in his old ways?
I really hate to get in these conversations about who, ( men or women), are more equipped to handle dogs. To me it distracts from the topic at hand and is a bit too simplistic. There are men that could never handle the dog I have....I know of four who couldn't and I am sure there are women that cannot as well. However, two of the people that helped me were women and for sure one of them, (who is almost 60 years old), certainly could have handled the dog. I really have nothing else to say about the gender issue.
What do I do if my dog growls at me? Well, I have only owned one in the 30 years that I have been training. Most of my dogs I have raised from pups so this type of behavior never became an issue. With the one I have now...I ignore it. I continue to do exactly what I am doing but I ignore that behavior. Over the last year it has gone from growling at me for just petting him....to only growling when he plays with me. He growls when he plays and it is a play growl. IMO, when you make a big deal about a behavior it usually becomes one or makes the existing behavior bigger. Example, in the beginning if I was petting him, at some point his body would stiffen and he would start to growl. While my instincts told me to stop petting him and back away, I forced myself to continue petting him in a very relaxed and unconcerned fashion. After I few seconds, I could see the dog start to relax and the growling stopped. Do you think using complusion would have been the better choice? I don't and I have the proof looking at me thru my back door right now.
Renee was correct, I was referring to the emotions of the handler. I don't think you are saying that dogs are not disturbed by the emotions of their handler. So, I guess I don't know what you are saying ...you'll have to explain that I guess.