Originally posted by Seven Pines Kennel: Due to the posts on this subject it is obvious that many of you have very little actual knowledge of the KNPV or their dogs. Guy Powell


Guy,

I couldn't agree with you more!! When I think of my own PH1 and all of the other KNPV-raised/-trained dogs for which I have decoyed, most of the previous posts are simply LAUGHABLE!!

k

Maybe I'm restaing the obvious, but I don't think a title a police dog does make...I have a Mal bred out of the Von Christel line. All the met lof stuff is crap as far as I'm concerned. I like my dog and it's attributes. I'm sure KNPV and SCH is fun and satisfying. It's evidently taken seriously as evidenced by this thread. To quote the infamous slow learner, Rodney King,"Can't we all just get along..."

Originally posted by marv0723:
Maybe I'm restaing the obvious, but I don't think a title a police dog does make...I have a Mal bred out of the Von Christel line.

Marv,

I couldn't agree more that a title does not, in itself, make a police dog. But, as a decoy, if I'm feeling under the weather, send a Schutzhund dog at me; if I'm my normal self, send on the KNPV dog--- that's where the fun is!!

In my post, all I was saying is that, from the KNPV dogs that I've seen and own, many of the previous posts were off base.

All systems produce sport dogs that can't do police work; however, it is my opinion that the KNPV produces awesome dogs, many of which that can make it on the streets.

Am I missing something? The original post was that almost all sport dogs are trained and work in prey drive. To do PSW a sport dog has to be reprogrammed out of this. Pretty straight forward if you ask me.

It is very refreshing and heartening to read the posts in this section that make the point about sporting dogs in KNPV not being suited for police service work. I have a thought about cross training dogs from sport to work. Don't do it. If the dogs are hyper and have a lot of "prey" drive, they would be hard to work with. A sport dog usually does not have the genetics to be a good working dog. I would select a dog from working lines - calm, stable, serious. Balanced drives. I would never work the dog in prey. Never. Be serious from the beginning. Work through applied stress with the dog. Working through applied stress builds the bond needed between handler and dog. If you want a service dog to work well around water, get them in the water. Slippery surfaces? Work on those surfaces. Work them in scenarios that reflect real life. Work them around fire, smoke, gunfire. Build trust. I see no need to ever work a potential service dog candidate in prey drive. Let the dog know the work is serious. A dog trained in prey will go into serious drive in a real life scenario anyway. Serious drive is fight or flight. Prey drive is out the window in a real confrontation or when real stress hits. That is why the dogs have to be trained to work through applied stress from a young age. The training has to be age appropriate. If a dog has only been worked in prey, and real stress hits on the street, that dog will go into fight or flight. If the handler wants the dog to work through the stress, then the dog has to have done this in the training. Otherwise the dog will not perform. When I say serious drive, fight or flight response, I'm not only talking about bitework. If the dog is having to track and the working area has a lot of stressors, that dog has to be serious about the work. Prey is gone. The dog feeds off the handler also. They reflect who and what you are. If the handler is calm, he can calm the dog. A working dog is a thinking animal. Communication is essential. Talk to the dog. If the dog is losing focus due to stress, talk to her. "easy girl", "it's OK". The ironic thing is when the stress hits and we have the greatest need to be communicating with our dog, that is when we stop talking to them. I think the communication aspect is crucial.

Gee... I've seen all this before. Sure sounds like the Gospel According to Mike McConnery. Correct me if I'm wrong (I doubt it).

Pete Felknor

Kent,

You seem to keep contradicting yourself. In a previous post you described a "serious" puppy session and described frustration building, one of the prime methods of stimulating prey drive!!! You don't want the dogs to go into avoidence, but say that the goal is to push the dog to a "fight or flight" point. So how many dogs are you washing out? It has been estimated that less than 10% of well bred working dogs will make it as a PSD, what do you recomend for the rest? You say that you don't want a "high Prey" dog and cite the breed with the highest prey drive bred into them?

You say that a dog trained in prey can't handle a real confrontation and then say they will go into the "drive" you want when confronted with the situation? Why do you need a balanced dog if you don't think prey is important?

The only one suggesting that dogs are worked ONLY in prey is you (and Catherine). The rest of us know that the dog needs to be worked in defense as well as prey to stay balanced. In addition there are situations where prey is the primaty drive operating, like runaways or send outs. If the dog is only worked in defense (against a direct threat) why would it go chase someone down. It has already won, the bad guy ran away. The threat is gone. Train on various surfaces, what a novel idea!!! Never thought of that!

In the "old days" we trained primarily in defense to start. That is why we started with 18 months to 2 year old dogs. Puppies didn't handle the stress and you "broke" more than you trained. Even when trained defense to start we converted to some prey work almost immeadiatly to relieve stress and teach runaways and send outs. We also didn't kid ourselvs that the dogs were working to protect us, they worked to protect themselves. That is why the dogs were "posted" to start, so they wouldn't associate the stress of training with the handler.

The reason training changed is that the new method works better. Train the old way, but don't advertise it as something new. I recognize the way I trained for 10 years.

You guys, you just can't resist. First it was Catherine, now it was Kent. Do either of them actually train PSDs for a living?
I can't belive how you guys just keep getting roped in . . . :P

Joy,

I always have a hook in my mouth... I am suprised it took this long for you to recognize it.

One may say Kent had a hook in his mouth...

Was any of this portrayed as being new? No, those are your words. This is yet another attempt to prove ones worth by number of years training and "I've done that" - well apparently it wasn't done the same way or with the same belief in a dog's ability. If I've been brushing my teeth since I was 3 does that make me qualified to be a dentist?

You can't explain the essence of the dog with drives, try as you might.

If the new ways of training are so much better, why are there so many ineffective service dogs and why is there such a high washout rate? You really think today's working dogs are better than working dogs of the past?