I wrote in the first post on this topic: “I’ve never had a dog bite his handler, except out of confusion.”

I now realize that this needs some explanation. A vendor just got a new handler from my department bit by two different dogs he was handling (his first dog washed out) in the first week of handler's school. Completely unacceptable.

My sentence quoted above should have read, "I’ve never had a dog bite his handler, except once when the dog confused him with the suspect."

In that case, the dog had found a suspect hiding in a garage. As the suspect fled through the walk-in garage door the handler was entering. As the suspect fled he crashed into the handler. Since the suspect was as big as the garage he knocked the handler to the ground. He landed on his back and the suspect kept running. As the handler went to stand up, his elbow entered the garage door, which had slammed open, swung shut and then was slowly opening again.

As the dog exited the garage in pursuit of the suspect he came across the handler's arm and bit it, thinking it was the suspect's. Fortunately, as did all my dogs, he outed quickly but not until putting a bite on the handler's arm that took 20 stitches to close.

Hope that clears up any confusion that my earlier post may have caused.

To Lou and Josh: I read this post with great joy. The discussions centering around semantics, training styles invoke lively discussion. We are fortunate that dogs can't lie. We certainly would be in BIG trouble if they were capable of making rational decisions. It appears that some behavior which is "normal" for an animal and deemed not appropriate by humans would need to be channeled into appropiate responses thru training. Someone referred to B.F. Skinner and operant conditioning. Obedience IMHO is a state of mind for a k-9, as compared to an action-reaction type response. We as humans may tend to lump it all together. If that makes the tractor run, I cannot critize what works for the individual tainer. Classical conditioning plays a part in this. Lou's method and Josh's methods of bonding work for them. And yes, Josh does train SAR k-9's. As an OUTSIDER who knows little about dogs, I offer this only as my humble opinion. "Old and in the Way" Bumper

Dr. L,
It's been many yrs since I got out of grad school, but . . . wasn't Skinner's work largely discredited in the field of human psychology due to the failure of the replication studies? If I recall correctly (and how likely is that?), unless all environmental variables could be controlled for, the results were not replicable.

You are correct. As I stated, it's the semantics that I found re" Skinner that was interesting. I believe someone referred to the equating of human responses to animal behavior which was a treatise covered by Mr. Skinner by the way. It does make for interesting reading. There was mention of an opus earlier in the post P.2 perhaps. That statement was different also referring to Skinner. I found it uplifting/jovial. I do not believe that the analogy was incorrect as I will not engage in a critique of any of the fine dedicated professionals on this site. I commend you all. I appreciate your concern re: Skinner. Bumper/PhD/OgP.

Hey there Bumper...
How goes it old man...LOL...don't panic folks I knows this guy so I'm not being too much of a smartass...LOL
Don't let his post fool you. Despite acting like he doesn't know anything about dogs, Dr. Bumper has been around PSDs long enough to have a few good tricks up his sleeve. I think he was on patrol w/ a K-9 when dinos still walked around New England...LOL...He has much to contribute should he choose to share some of his ideas.

Josh: Thanks for the kind words. I really know that the more educated I get, I less I know. Therefore, I will remain mainly as a reader. It's always good to hear from you. Congrats' on the results of the K-9 Olympics. As some "college boys" would say: "not bad for a civilian". Ha! The folks here will have to accept that that is an inside joke. Best to ya!If you need anything, well you know. Regards to the family/ Old & IN THE WAY--Bumper

Humm, the reason I was interested in Skinner was b/c the click-treat-and NEVER-correct crowd relies on *Skinner* as the authority for why you should never, ever use any form of compulsion on a dog. I remember him so well b/c I was in grad school when he crashed and burned. One wk, Behavioral Psych was all that, the next wk it was *Oooops. Let's talk psychoanalytic theory again . . .*
Guess this is what happens when ppl p/u tidbits of theories here and there and attempt to use them.

Desert Thunder: I am glad to see you saw my humor and that obviously the Skinner Comment was not mine in origin but a response to someone else's mention of him earlier in the post. Theories are only as good as the validity testing procedure that perpetuates it. Despite what Josh says, I do not remember the theory which was perported as fact that the world was flat. That became fact 'cause most desenters were removed from print so to speak. One day the world became round with one event. Here the professionals perport a theory or an axiom and are not afraid to state such. The semantics always get in the way. But if a theory stands up to the questions/tests placed before it one can learn from that.Acceptance is objective of course. I would believe that basically PSD's/SAR/and some sport dogs all have the same goal: Find and or control someone/something and by doing that the k-9 team becomes sucessfull. Not too many crimes are solved by a dogbite. BUT, that is not to say that when one goes to the job you do not bring all the tools necessary. This is my Humble opinion as an outsider. Respectfully-Old and in the Way- Bumper