# When breeders advertise..'natural suspicion", is this a good thing or a bad thing?



## ponyfarm

*When breeders advertise..'natural suspicion", is this a good thing or a bad thing?*

There is a common thread here on the forum of "my dog is reactive, my dog barks at people standing alone, my dog hackles at an unusual object, my dog is suspicious of strange people, my dog barks when someone knocks at the door, etc."

So, in looking a some websites of what I consider reputable breeders, I see in the description of their breeding dogs.."natural suspicion". I beleive they are promoting this as a good thing. 

Would it be wrong to think that this is exactly the reason the above problems are existing? But, what would a GSD be without natural suspicion?...would it be a golden retreiver? Are the problems occuring because the natural suspicion is not balanced with strong nerves? Or is it training problems or lack there-of? I feel there must be a delicate balance to allow the dog to express this element of its DNA without making it a basket case by trying to mold it into a golden retriever.

If GSD's are supposed to have "natural suspicion" then it seems like many of these "problems" are normal behavior and the handling of the dog needs modified to help it succeed. Things you might do with a lab or golden would not be appropriate for a gsd, thus the problems. 

So, that is my theorizing for the day..back to the question : do you think natural suspicion is what you look for in a good example of a gsd?


----------



## gagsd

ponyfarm said:


> ....
> If GSD's are supposed to have "natural suspicion" then it seems like many of these "problems" are normal behavior and the handling of the dog needs modified to help it succeed. Things you might do with a lab or golden would not be appropriate for a gsd, thus the problems.


Hmmmmm.


----------



## Freestep

ponyfarm said:


> Are the problems occuring because the natural suspicion is not balanced with strong nerves?


Yes.

Most all GSDs have natural suspicion. But you MUST have strong nerves to go along with it, or you have the reactive, fear-aggressive temperament we see so often.

Socializing/training is a big part of it too. But if the pup doesn't have strong nerves, socializing can only go so far.

Personally, I wouldn't want to purchase a pup from someone who touts "natural suspicion" without saying something about nerve.


----------



## Shade

Freestep said:


> Yes.
> 
> Most all GSDs have natural suspicion. But you MUST have strong nerves to go along with it, or you have the reactive, fear-aggressive temperament we see so often.
> 
> Socializing/training is a big part of it too. But if the pup doesn't have strong nerves, socializing can only go so far.
> 
> Personally, I wouldn't want to purchase a pup from someone who touts "natural suspicion" without saying something about nerve.


:thumbup: Totally agree, strong nerves are a must for a well balanced dog

But I would add, there is a difference between having a reactive dog and a aggressive dog. Nerves play a big part in how high of a threshold a dog has


----------



## PupperLove

Freestep said:


> Yes.
> 
> Most all GSDs have natural suspicion. But you MUST have strong nerves to go along with it, or you have the reactive, fear-aggressive temperament we see so often.
> 
> Socializing/training is a big part of it too. But if the pup doesn't have strong nerves, socializing can only go so far.
> 
> Personally, I wouldn't want to purchase a pup from someone who touts "natural suspicion" without saying something about nerve.


I totally agree with all of this ^^^

I would be wary of any breeder that boasts about natural suspicion. What kind of cradentials does the breeder have to make that kind of evaluation? Does the breeder know the difference between the breed's traits of actual natural suspicion and the signs of actual reactivity? Reactivness is far too common in this breed for me to put any kind of trust into someone who is using that as a selling point, personally. Any suspicious dog with weak nerves is going to be a handful, meaning the owner will need to take precautions through the dog's life.


----------



## gagsd

PupperLove said:


> I totally agree with all of this ^^^
> 
> I would be wary of any breeder that boasts about natural suspicion. What kind of cradentials does the breeder have to make that kind of evaluation? Does the breeder know the difference between the breed's traits of actual natural suspicion and the signs of actual reactivity? Reactivness is far too common in this breed for me to put any kind of trust into someone who is using that as a selling point, personally. Any suspicious dog with weak nerves is going to be a handful, meaning the owner will need to take precautions through the dog's life.


An awful lot of very experienced, and good (imo) breeders see it as a plus.

Sure, there are a TON of nervy dogs.... but an awful lot of canine issues are caused by handlers with good intentions.


----------



## PupperLove

True true

It is a part of the breed, so it makes sense for reputable breeders to want this in their dogs. The problem is, there are SO many breeders out there. I think it is really important for someone to see what kind of experience the breeder has in training and working their dogs to know whether or not the 'natral suspicion' is desired and true to the breed, or branched from weak nerves. Because too many breeders don't know the difference, hence the overwhelming amount of neurotic GSDs. Jackson's breeder definately didn't know the difference  . It also takes some knowledge on the buyers part.


----------



## StephenV

I believe the breed standard desired is "aloof around strangers" not "suspicious"? I can't see how a natural suspiciousness would be a desirable default trait, wouldn't that mean the dog is unable to make good judgements about his environment?
I adopted a rescue shepherd who is reactive and "has a natural suspicion" of anyone that approaches me or enters his territory he does not know. I have started training with a Certified Dog Behaviorist (CPDT-KA)(who describes him as "hyper-vigilant") and we are working to reduce that to a sociable level. Believe me, friends don't like it when they meet you on the street and your leashed "police dog" walks forward and eyeballs them ready to bite.
I think suspiciousness can be be all too easily learned by any dog of any breed given enough bad experiences.


----------



## Blanketback

gagsd said:


> Sure, there are a TON of nervy dogs.... but an awful lot of canine issues are caused by handlers with good intentions.


gagsd, if I'm reading something else into what you've posted, please correct me. That is, handler error accidentally reinforcing the reactivity? 

I also wonder how much of the handler is being mirrored by their dog. If you are a reactive person yourself, will that not carry down the leash? This could be a big can of worms, lol. I'm not meaning to offend anyone. But are there any members who acknowledge that they have an underlying fear that they may be projecting? I'm curious, because we all have our fears. Mine are driving and heights, lol.


----------



## gagsd

Blanketback said:


> gagsd, if I'm reading something else into what you've posted, please correct me. That is, handler error accidentally reinforcing the reactivity?
> 
> I also wonder how much of the handler is being mirrored by their dog. If you are a reactive person yourself, will that not carry down the leash? This could be a big can of worms, lol. I'm not meaning to offend anyone. But are there any members who acknowledge that they have an underlying fear that they may be projecting? I'm curious, because we all have our fears. Mine are driving and heights, lol.


Yes. I see people often, when the dog starts to "react" they make it worse and reinforce it. They reach down and grab the collar, they tighten up on the leash, they hunch over the dog and start messing with it. And of course what they are feeling on the inside can't be seen,,,,, but guarantee the dog feels it. Stress, conflict and worry from the handler cause the same feelings in the dog.


----------



## Blanketback

That's what I mean about projecting fear onto your dog. Say you're worried because your puppy is pulling and barking. I wouldn't worry about that at all because I would expect that. I wouldn't want whoever he was barking at to be frightened of course, but then I would say, "Boy, you have a big mouth for someone who wants to get attention. That's not a polite way to ask for it" or something like that, lol. And of course I'd know that I've got a long way to go as far as training goes - impulse control, manners, etc. But I wouldn't think there was anything "wrong" per se.

Or if you're afraid of a dark city street, or if you're afraid of an impending dog fight around loose dogs, or....endless possibilities.


----------



## cliffson1

Natural suspicion, IMO, is an excellent trait of the breed that you see sorely lacking in the breed today. Of course it should be accompanied by good nerve. If a breeder can't distinguish the differences in genetic aggressions, should they really be breeding? Or giving advice on aggression either for that matter?
You know the problem folks?, it is there are many people breeding that don't know good nerve or are breeding dogs with marginal nerve. These people can't afford to have natural suspicion, thus creating a trend towards the Lab/ Golden type temperament that has become so prevalent, that many think it is correct.


----------



## ponyfarm

cliffson1 said:


> Natural suspicion, IMO, is an excellent trait of the breed that you see sorely lacking in the breed today. Of course it should be accompanied by good nerve. If a breeder can't distinguish the differences in genetic aggressions, should they really be breeding? Or giving advice on aggression either for that matter?
> You know the problem folks?, it is there are many people breeding that don't know good nerve or are breeding dogs with marginal nerve. These people can't afford to have natural suspicion, thus creating a trend towards the Lab/ Golden type temperament that has become so prevalent, that many think it is correct.


Thanks for chiming in..I love your critical thinking! So my pup , imo, has natural suspicion and he seems to have good nerve as well. I like that trait as I feel like that is what makes a gsd a gsd!


----------



## Freestep

cliffson1 said:


> You know the problem folks?, it is there are many people breeding that don't know good nerve or are breeding dogs with marginal nerve. These people can't afford to have natural suspicion, thus creating a trend towards the Lab/ Golden type temperament that has become so prevalent, that many think it is correct.


Yes. I'd certainly rather that people who have no knowledge of what the GSD is supposed to be, to keep their hands out of breeding. When yahoos who have no clue start sticking random dogs together, you tend to either get sharp/shy, reactive, fear-aggressive dogs that have lots of "natural suspicion" but weak nerves, or you get dogs with middling nerve, sweet, submissive temperament, and little natural suspicion. 

Personally I think the latter is safer as a pet dog, and if BYBs insist on creating GSDs that do not fit the standard, I'd rather them go that way than the former. Either way it is a watered-down version of the GSD and not true to standard, but at least one is less of a liability.


----------



## hunterisgreat

Sure, I'm biased, but I think my male is an ideal for the breed as far as temperament & nerve goes. I think there are a number of folks on here familiar with the lines that would support that. My male will *not* allow you in the door without me home and yeah you're gonna get a full-on show of aggression at the door and I'm fine with that, and he does *not* like people who he hasn't seen me be cool with first. Yet, a random kid can stumble up and pull on his ears and he will not react. He'll wish the kid wasn't poking his eyes and pulling his ears but he will tolerate it. And yet still, if you're an adult and showing aggression at us, he won't hesitate to posture back up to and including contact/biting. This is a dog that is out in public in highly crowded areas *atleast* 2-3 times a week. He does not want affection or attention from anyone he does not know. He is purely indifferent to the affections of strangers. Cold by most peoples description. People whine about "I don't think he likes me" as they pet him because he just looks past them trying to survey who's gonna walk up next. To me, this is the ideal dog. I see tons of GSDs these days that have no clue who I am but will willfully lick my face... dogs that when I subtly posture at them, will lick my face... dogs that when I *distinctly* posture at them, the want to lick my face... thats not what I think a GSD should be.


----------



## Elaine

StephenV said:


> I believe the breed standard desired is "aloof around strangers" not "suspicious"? I can't see how a natural suspiciousness would be a desirable default trait, wouldn't that mean the dog is unable to make good judgements about his environment?
> I adopted a rescue shepherd who is reactive and "has a natural suspicion" of anyone that approaches me or enters his territory he does not know. I have started training with a Certified Dog Behaviorist (CPDT-KA)(who describes him as "hyper-vigilant") and we are working to reduce that to a sociable level. Believe me, friends don't like it when they meet you on the street and your leashed "police dog" walks forward and eyeballs them ready to bite.
> I think suspiciousness can be be all too easily learned by any dog of any breed given enough bad experiences.


Naturally suspicious and aloof are two totally different things and the naturally suspicious is a good thing because the dog is fully capable of making good judgements about the people around him. Your reactive dog isn't naturally suspicious, he's reactive and fearful. You can teach your dog to be fearful with bad experience, but, again, it's not the same thing.

Here's an example of a naturally suspicious dog: mine. I'm a night owl and regularly train in the middle of the night. Needless to say, I don't want to meet anyone else out there. On the rare occasion that someone is in the vicinity, my dogs will alert on them and watch them closely until they go away. There is no barking, no growling, no lunging, no aggression, just an alert watchfulness. They know there's no direct threat, but as it's in the middle of the night and unusual, they keep an eye on the stranger just to make sure. These same dogs are calm, cool, and collected during the day around all sorts of people, unless someone is doing something very freaky and potentially threatening, when they, again, would just watch them to make sure all is well. The ability to survey everyone around him in a calm and competent manner, watching for potential threats, but withholding any sort of aggression unless there's an immediate direct threat, is a naturally suspicious dog.

A dog without natural suspicion, like a lab, wouldn't give a weird stranger a second thought and would be more than happy to just run up to them for a good petting. It would never occur to this dog that anyone could be a potential threat and act accordingly.

A fearful, reactive dog, is inappropriately suspicious and treats everyone as a potential threat.

An aloof dog is just a dog that isn't interested in anyone other than his person petting or playing with him.


----------



## cliffson1

Hunterisgreat......your description of your dog should be what is written in dictionary as explaining the breed. Elaine, your post is is also right on point. Folks, all German Shepherds will not be like this for many reasons....but these are the traits(as described by HIG) that makes the dog a good herder, service dog, and working dog. Our problem in the breed is that many breeders put these traits way down on priority list.


----------



## hunterisgreat

Just found this. Thats Jäger and my nephew. We aren't normally around kids. He lives in FL so Jäger doesn't even know him.


----------



## crackem

This is another example of why buying or trainging based on internet words never makes much sense. To one person, "natural suspicion" is barking at strangers, to another it inolves no barking or reaction at all and everything in between.

I'm on the no display necessary unless a threat is there side, but always watchful.


----------



## codmaster

hunterisgreat said:


> Sure, I'm biased, but I think my male is an ideal for the breed as far as temperament & nerve goes. I think there are a number of folks on here familiar with the lines that would support that. My male will *not* allow you in the door without me home and yeah you're gonna get a full-on show of aggression at the door and I'm fine with that, and he does *not* like people who he hasn't seen me be cool with first. Yet, a random kid *can stumble up and pull on his ears and he will not react*. He'll wish the kid wasn't poking his eyes and pulling his ears but he will tolerate it. And yet still, *if you're an adult* and showing aggression at us, he won't hesitate to posture back up to and including contact/biting. This is a dog that is out in public in highly crowded areas *atleast* 2-3 times a week. He does not want affection or attention from anyone he does not know. He is purely indifferent to the affections of strangers. Cold by most peoples description. People whine about "I don't think he likes me" as they pet him because he just looks past them trying to survey who's gonna walk up next. To me, this is the ideal dog. I see tons of GSDs these days that have no clue who I am but will willfully lick my face... dogs that when I subtly posture at them, will lick my face... dogs that when I *distinctly* posture at them, the want to lick my face... thats not what I think a GSD should be.


Just curious. How does your dog distinguish between a "kid" who evidently he will allow stuff from and an "adult" who he will bite?

What if a "kid" showed aggression by whacking you?


----------



## hunterisgreat

codmaster said:


> Just curious. How does your dog distinguish between a "kid" who evidently he will allow stuff from and an "adult" who he will bite?
> 
> What if a "kid" showed aggression by whacking you?


How do you tell the difference between a puppy and a toy dog? How are you able to look at nearly any mammal including ones you've never heard of and know if you're looking at an adult or a baby of the species? Why are babies and baby animals universally cute? Why do lions sometimes "adopt" and care for baby gazelle? I don't know, but somehow we all have been inborn with the ability to distinguish. A solid dog will also measure *my* level of anxiety and comfort with a threat approaching. This is why walking up to my dog first will get a growl. Speaking to me first (whether you say "may I pet your dog" or "what would you like to drink") will not get the reaction.

Also, a solid nerved dog will know the difference between a real threat, a non-threat, an unconvincing attempt to be threatening by an individual who is deep-down a scaredy-cat. Anyone new at or attempted to do helperwork will tell you sound dogs will not bother with you if you try and "act" threatening. You have to actually be threatening. You can make a dog feel very threatened without making a noise, picking up weapon, or making stupid faces at them, just standing still... on your demeanor or "energy" alone. I usually concentrate very hard about hurting the dog for real.. this subconsciously shows in my posture or maybe it triggers a release of pheromones or sweat... don't know, but it works.

A small child pulling on his ears or tail is not doing so with malice in his heart, and anyone... the dog, or you or me, can so plainly see that that we stop even realizing it. same with an adult... adult men can and do walk right up and pet him with no fanfare.


----------



## gagsd

Never mind.


----------



## hunterisgreat

gagsd said:


> Figured you changed it to "Nevermind" for a reason lol.


If you see the video I posted in the IPO section from a few weeks ago, there is a visiting toddler watching. When you hear the woman say something about jager wanting to play, was because he brought her the bite wedge.


----------



## codmaster

hunterisgreat said:


> How do you tell the difference between a puppy and a toy dog? How are you able to look at nearly any mammal including ones you've never heard of and know if you're looking at an adult or a baby of the species? Why are babies and baby animals universally cute? Why do lions sometimes "adopt" and care for baby gazelle? I don't know, but somehow we all have been inborn with the ability to distinguish. A solid dog will also measure *my* level of anxiety and comfort with a threat approaching. *This is why walking up to my dog first will get a growl.* Speaking to me first (whether you say "may I pet your dog" or "what would you like to drink") will not get the reaction.
> 
> Also, a solid nerved dog will know the difference between a real threat, a non-threat, an unconvincing attempt to be threatening by an individual who is deep-down a scaredy-cat. Anyone new at or attempted to do helperwork will tell you sound dogs will not bother with you if you try and "act" threatening. You have to actually be threatening. You can make a dog feel very threatened without making a noise, picking up weapon, or making stupid faces at them, just standing still... on your demeanor or "energy" alone. I usually concentrate very hard about hurting the dog for real.. this subconsciously shows in my posture or maybe it triggers a release of pheromones or sweat... don't know, but it works.
> 
> *A small child pulling on his ears or tail is not doing so with malice in his heart,* and anyone... the dog, or you or me, can so plainly see that that we stop even realizing it. same with an adult... adult men can and do walk right up and pet him with no fanfare.


Does this mean that an adult has malice in their heart if they gently pull a dog's tail?

I don't understand what you said above - a little confusing or maybe it is me.

You say this:
"*This is why walking up to my dog first will get a growl."*

But then a few lines later you say this:
*"adult men can and do walk right up and pet him with no fanfare"*

So as an adult male, if I walked up to your dog and tried to pet him - would I get* "a growl"* (and a bite if I kept petting?) or would I get *"no fanfare"* (whatever you meant by this expression)?

Or maybe you aren't really sure of what your dog would do?

BTW, what would you want your dog to do to a strange adult man (woman?) who walked up to you both and tried to pet him?


----------



## hunterisgreat

codmaster said:


> Does this mean that an adult has malice in their heart if they gently pull a dog's tail?
> 
> I don't understand what you said above - a little confusing or maybe it is me.
> 
> You say this:
> "*This is why walking up to my dog first will get a growl."*
> 
> But then a few lines later you say this:
> *"adult men can and do walk right up and pet him with no fanfare"*
> 
> So as an adult male, if I walked up to your dog and tried to pet him - would I get* "a growl"* (and a bite if I kept petting?) or would I get *"no fanfare"* (whatever you meant by this expression)?
> 
> Or maybe you aren't really sure of what your dog would do?
> 
> BTW, what would you want your dog to do to a strange adult man (woman?) who walked up to you both and tried to pet him?


I left out detail, apologies... I'm exhausted, tracking every morning, training every evening, and doing helper work several times a week for 12 hours at a time, while also working 50-60 hours per week at the day job. by walk right up i didn't really mean literally walk up, although people have before. People who walk up and try to interact who are very scared deep down (people will reach out to pet him with a trembling hand) will get a reaction. People who walk up like they've known him forever and pet without permission are usually ignored. People who ask permission or interact with me first *where he can see this* be them scared or not do not get a reaction. Angry drunks get a reaction, as do sketchy types. Probably because I'm tense when a belligerent drunk approaches or a crackhead starts trying to hustle me for cash.

A stranger who walked up and petted first who didn't posture at him won't get a reaction, however I consider that to be poor form on their part. I never touch someones dog without their permission. 

Also note that the aggression is higher on our "turf". They all take longer to settle when I'm talking to a stranger at the door than outside of our "territory". This is normal animal behavior.

If you walked up it would all depend on how you did so. If you were tense, holding strong eyecontact, squared off at him, yes. Growling. He has never lunged or even shown his teeth to people outside of bitework. 

Once a drunk guy was trying to start a fight or something with me, and he did all the wrong things at my male. He postured right back at the guy, charged and even "body checked" him and the guy jumped backwards (then tripped on his own feet and fell down). My dog could have easily chosen to bite him but did not. He pushed him into avoidance and that was his goal, not to bite. He understands when and where biting is appropriate. Another time a neighbor started a fight with my roommate. My dog got between them (his back to the roomie) and made it very clear the neighbor needed to leave post-haste. Again, no bite, no lunge, just strong posturing at the dude. he is very predictable in his posturing and I've shown many people that. I've had the same person approach him while posturing, and then turn around and approach with no posturing. First gets a show of aggression, second does not. Same person within a 2-3 minute span of time.

If he is letting you make contact with him, he is not going to bite unless you did something to cause pain stimulus. If you are petting him it is because he has allowed himself to be pet. If it wasn't something he wanted he would have pushed you into avoidance, or gone into avoidance himself.


----------



## Blanketback

A growl can mean many things. From a confident dog with solid nerves, the growl will be a beautiful deep throaty sound, and it means that the dog is keeping his eye on you, so don't pull anything stupid. If the dog is lacking confidence or has weak nerves, the sound has more of a nasal sound and it means that the dog is nervous so look out or you might get bitten. This is what I've observed.


----------



## cliffson1

Hunter it is difficult to adequately describe the type of dog you have. I have seen many dogs like yours in the past....it is not possible for you to answer every hypothetical that is raised, nor should you try. I think reasonable people can understand the type of dog you have. Congrats!


----------



## Tim Connell

cliffson1 said:


> Natural suspicion, IMO, is an excellent trait of the breed that you see sorely lacking in the breed today. Of course it should be accompanied by good nerve. If a breeder can't distinguish the differences in genetic aggressions, should they really be breeding? Or giving advice on aggression either for that matter?
> You know the problem folks?, it is there are many people breeding that don't know good nerve or are breeding dogs with marginal nerve. These people can't afford to have natural suspicion, thus creating a trend towards the Lab/ Golden type temperament that has become so prevalent, that many think it is correct.



Right on point, Cliffson...

I think some have an issue with throwing out the buzzwords "natural suspicion", "aggression", etc. and by each individual having their own definition of what they are is where it gets muddy...so it is hard to stay on the same page. My definition of "natural suspicion" is probably different than the next person...


----------



## hunterisgreat

cliffson1 said:


> Hunter it is difficult to adequately describe the type of dog you have. I have seen many dogs like yours in the past....it is not possible for you to answer every hypothetical that is raised, nor should you try. I think reasonable people can understand the type of dog you have. Congrats!


Yeah I agree its very difficult to describe him. Fortunately when I try to explain how he is to people either they don't believe me and never interact, or they do trust I have an idea what I'm talking about and interact with him and come to adore him. I have two good friends who are/were horrified of dogs, particularly GSDs because of bad experiences, and both love him now. I've had helpers scared to slip the sleeve or turn their back on him despite me saying he's fine, and yet I've had almost every club member hold a wedge or sleeve for me to do procedure stuff, guarding, etc (like in the video I posted yesterday)


----------



## hunterisgreat

Tim Connell said:


> Right on point, Cliffson...
> 
> I think some have an issue with throwing out the buzzwords "natural suspicion", "aggression", etc. and by each individual having their own definition of what they are is where it gets muddy...so it is hard to stay on the same page. My definition of "natural suspicion" is probably different than the next person...


Thats why with club members when i start talking about what I'm trying to do with their or my dogs, I always first recenter our language and what I mean when I use certain words. The lack of clarity in what is meant by different words is markedly bad in the dog training world lol.


----------



## gagsd

cliffson1 said:


> Hunter it is difficult to adequately describe the type of dog you have. I have seen many dogs like yours in the past....it is not possible for you to answer every hypothetical that is raised, nor should you try. I think reasonable people can understand the type of dog you have. Congrats!


Hunter,
That is why I changed my reply to "nevermind."


----------



## codmaster

gagsd said:


> Never mind.


 
Certainly, I can understand why you would not want to explain and would respond this way. No problem.


----------



## codmaster

Blanketback said:


> A growl can mean many things. From a confident dog with solid nerves, the growl will be a beautiful deep throaty sound, and it means that the dog is keeping his eye on you, so don't pull anything stupid. If the dog is lacking confidence or has weak nerves, the sound has more of a nasal sound and it means that the dog is nervous so look out or you might get bitten. This is what I've observed.


 
*Might get bitten in either case?*


----------



## Liesje

I have a GSD that is serious, aloof, and naturally more suspicious than outgoing (though does not possess social aggression to the level that some would insist is appropriate or desire) and have had one I sold very recently that so far as a young dog was none of the above. Guess which one walks in parades with elementary school kids, visits the school for obedience demos, comes to work with me and does "office therapy dog" visits, and is now coming to work with me to walk with a colleague that has always been terrified of GSDs? The naturally more serious, suspicious dog. The best thing about him, I think, is that he's very easy to read. He's easy for me to read and easy for a stranger walking up to read. He's never once lunged or snapped at anyone outside of his protection training/trial. He lives free in the house and often people from my extended family who are more like "strangers" to him will come over and enter my house when I'm not there. He takes treats from the hand of the mail carrier. He walks with me on public sidewalks crowded with pedestrians and stops to get his dog sundae at the ice cream shop where there are always groups of little kids and usually other dogs hanging around.


----------



## Blanketback

codmaster said:


> *Might get bitten in either case?*


Now how did I know you were going to jump on that? 

The best way I can explain the different growls is by likening them to car engines. You have your big ol' 8 cyl. and you have what people disparagingly call "rice rockets" and the sound is different for each, but similar in each group. 

If I hear a deep growl, I know I can get bitten if I ask for it. But only a fool would do this, so no, I probably won't get bitten. I could though, you're right...anything can happen. Life's funny that way. But in this case I'm not worried.

If I hear the nasaly growl then I'm very wary because I know the dog is upset and could be ready to bite. Whether this happens or not isn't so much up to me in this case, it's up to the dog. I don't like this sound at all.


----------



## onyx'girl

My nervy female does a deep growl and would probably bite if provoked. Her noise doesn't decipher her nervebase and you may be surprised because she is not "nasaly" in her vocals. 
I would think any dog that growls is warning and best to heed it or expect to get bitten. 
My male seldom if ever growls. I am confident that he is the one I'd want by my side in any situation we are placed in. My female would be considered a liability.


----------



## codmaster

I have heard my 4.5yo male GSD seriously growl ONCE in his life. When we were pursuadinghim that he was not the boss when he could decide to be aggressive with another male GSD. Had to flip him on his back and hold him there till he looked away from the pro trainer. He was very fortunately muzzled securely (trainer insisted on the muzzle after working with him a little and seeing him near this other dog before).

NEVER had i ever heard a growl like he gave the trainer as he took him down! VERY LOW and gutteral and yet very loud "Wild animal" like is the best description. Hair on the back of MY neck went straight up and wiggled around! Snapping as well!

But, to show the temperament he has - once he learned that, he was fine afterward with the trainer and also with the other dog.

And to show he doesn't hold a grudge he is MOST friendly with the trainer (unmuzzled!) every time he sees him - a "best friend!".


----------



## hunterisgreat

gagsd said:


> Hunter,
> That is why I changed my reply to "nevermind."


I'm more easily baited into debate than you lol


----------



## hunterisgreat

codmaster said:


> I have heard my 4.5yo male GSD seriously growl ONCE in his life. When we were pursuadinghim that he was not the boss when he could decide to be aggressive with another male GSD. Had to flip him on his back and hold him there till he looked away from the pro trainer. He was very fortunately muzzled securely (trainer insisted on the muzzle after working with him a little and seeing him near this other dog before).
> 
> NEVER had i ever heard a growl like he gave the trainer as he took him down! VERY LOW and gutteral and yet very loud "Wild animal" like is the best description. Hair on the back of MY neck went straight up and wiggled around! Snapping as well!
> 
> But, to show the temperament he has - once he learned that, he was fine afterward with the trainer and also with the other dog.
> 
> And to show he doesn't hold a grudge he is MOST friendly with the trainer (unmuzzled!) every time he sees him - a "best friend!".


So what are you saying. I hear mine show aggression several times a week... We train in that state of mind.


----------



## debbiebrown

if nyou have natural suspicion, fear and insecurity mixed in, thats a big time bomb. balance is so important, and solid nerves. again, i think the breed standard should be watchful, but solid enough to know the difference between threat and non threat. i know that breeders breed for different things. i think the biggest problem is that some of these high suspicion working dogs are sold as family pets, or to people who are not working these dogs, and or do not have the tools or time to handle this type of dog. not that working dogs can't make great pets. although i am not excusing poor breeding and producing fear and insercurity issues. which also happens Way to much!


----------



## Jag

debbiebrown said:


> if nyou have natural suspicion, fear and insecurity mixed in, thats a big time bomb. balance is so important, and solid nerves. again, i think the breed standard should be watchful, but solid enough to know the difference between threat and non threat. i know that breeders breed for different things. i think the biggest problem is that some of these high suspicion working dogs are sold as family pets, or to people who are not working these dogs, and or do not have the tools or time to handle this type of dog. not that working dogs can't make great pets. although i am not excusing poor breeding and producing fear and insercurity issues. which also happens Way to much!


I was with you in the beginning of this post, then you lost me. Suspicion is supposed to be part of the breed, is it not? So then, naturally, a good deal of them are going to be in homes as family pets. I don't see an issue with this...unless, as you noted, they have issues with nerves or not having a clear head. However, that part is NOT breed standard. So as long as they all-around meet the standard, I don't see any issues with the natural suspicion. In fact, I expect it. It's one of the things that sets this breed apart. With my first GSD, my mother became quite unnerved because she already feared them, and when my youngest (who was a toddler at the time) climbed into her lap, my dog sat next to her chair. He didn't bark, growl, or show ANY sign of aggression or being uncomfortable. He simply didn't know her, and she had "his" child. She even said "what if he starts to cry and then your dog attacks me?" I said "Don't you think he's smart enough to tell the difference between a fussing toddler and someone harming him?"  My last male lacked that natural suspicion. While he was protective of us and our home (went into 'watch' mode at night, etc) he would walk up to strangers I was talking to and ask to be petted. I'd rather he ignored them, but he was an attention seeker and just couldn't help himself. I think the bigger problem is unbalanced dogs being sold into "family pet homes"... not dogs with natural suspicion.


----------



## codmaster

Jag said:


> I was with you in the beginning of this post, then you lost me. Suspicion is supposed to be part of the breed, is it not? So then, naturally, a good deal of them are going to be in homes as family pets. I don't see an issue with this...unless, as you noted, they have issues with nerves or not having a clear head. However, that part is NOT breed standard. So as long as they all-around meet the standard, I don't see any issues with the natural suspicion. In fact, I expect it. It's one of the things that sets this breed apart. With my first GSD, my mother became quite unnerved because she already feared them, and when my youngest (who was a toddler at the time) climbed into her lap, my dog sat next to her chair. He didn't bark, growl, or show ANY sign of aggression or being uncomfortable. He simply didn't know her, and she had "his" child. She even said "what if he starts to cry and then your dog attacks me?" I said "Don't you think he's smart enough to tell the difference between a fussing toddler and someone harming him?"  My last male lacked that natural suspicion. While he was protective of us and our home (went into 'watch' mode at night, etc) he would walk up to strangers I was talking to and ask to be petted. I'd rather he ignored them, but he was an attention seeker and just couldn't help himself. I think the bigger problem is unbalanced dogs being sold into "family pet homes"... not dogs with natural suspicion.


 
I don't reacll "suspicious" being in the breed standard, is it?


----------



## hunterisgreat

codmaster said:


> I don't reacll "suspicious" being in the breed standard, is it?


Aloof is:

a·loof/əˈlo͞of/
Adjective:	
Not friendly or forthcoming; cool and distant.
Conspicuously uninvolved and uninterested, typically through distaste.


----------



## codmaster

hunterisgreat said:


> Aloof is:
> 
> *a·loof/əˈlo͞of/*
> *Adjective: *
> *Not friendly or forthcoming; cool and distant.*
> *Conspicuously uninvolved and uninterested, typically through distaste.[/*QUOTE]
> 
> _suspicious_
> 
> Having or showing a cautious distrust of someone or something.
> Very Different, aren't they.
> 
> A suspicious dog will act in a very different manner than one who is simply aloof.
> 
> Aloof is what we (good GSD people who understand the standard) want - indifferent to things/people until they percieve a real threat (and the intelligence and experience to understand what a real threat is).
> 
> My own GSD male is a little too friendly and social to really make "Aloof" but I prefer that to one who is a little too suspicious.
> 
> just my own opinion!


----------



## debbiebrown

aloof is a better word. i don't really like the word suspicious, it can have alot of different meanings. so, when i said watchful i think that can go along with the breed standard. watchful, meaning, keeping tuned in with things and knowing what is a threat and what isn't.


----------



## Liesje

I do not think aloof and suspicious are the same. There should be some level of suspicion in the GSD and definitely aloofness. A dog can be aloof and *not* suspicious. I can agree with "watchful" if we like that word better, but again to me that is not the same as aloof.


----------



## Debbieg

Liesje said:


> I do not think aloof and suspicious are the same. There should be some level of suspicion in the GSD and definitely aloofness. A dog can be aloof and *not* suspicious. I can agree with "watchful" if we like that word better, but again to me that is not the same as aloof.


I also agree that aloof and suspicion are not the same! Suspiscion is seeing a threat everywhere, kinda of like my oldest son when introduced to his little sisters new boyfriend  Aloofness can be just leave me alone. 

I like the word watchful or the word "vigilant" or "discerning", "discriminating" better. To me it is just "a watchful making sure everything is ok" , 

A GSD should have the discernment to not have the same response to the behavior a child as to an adult man, but be always confidently vigilant or watchful of their surroundings


----------



## wildo

My opinion is that 'natural suspicion' is a bad thing for most owners. I'm not in law enforcement, I don't care much about schutzhund (where the constantly scripted exercises make me question the need for suspicion anyway), and I have no reason to put my dog in charge of my own protection. I still strongly believe that the mere presence of a GSD is enough to scare most would be attackers away. Unless you're training your dog for actual personal protection, I just don't see the need for such unending suspicion of everyone.

Some of the comments in the thread just have me baffled. Why would I want a dog that I constantly have to wonder how far his suspicion will go? I don't like humans that are constantly acting suspicious of others, and I certainly don't want a dog like that. Balance, in my opinion, is the ability for a dog to walk off the schutzhund field at the Working Dog Championships (where they most certainly were pushed hard), and greet a stocky, bearded guy like myself for the first time and want to play. Dogs that can be very serious when needed, but able to turn it off and be a wonderful, happy, playful family companion otherwise is what I'm looking for. Stability of nerve does not necessitate suspicion to me, and I would have no desire for such a suspicious dog.


----------



## cliffson1

So what should be the underlying reason for the aloofness?.....friendliness???


----------



## Freestep

wildo said:


> Balance, in my opinion, is the ability for a dog to walk off the schutzhund field at the Working Dog Championships (where they most certainly were pushed hard), and greet a stocky, bearded guy like myself for the first time and want to play. Dogs that can be very serious when needed, but able to turn it off and be a wonderful, happy, playful family companion otherwise is what I'm looking for. Stability of nerve does not necessitate suspicion to me, and I would have no desire for such a suspicious dog.


That dog that greeted you at the championships might have natural suspicion, too. He just doesn't suspect you of anything.

I think that, to a point, a degree of suspicion is necessary for survival; in people as well as dogs, too much naivete can be the difference between life and death.

However, in a balanced dog with strong nerves, the "suspicion" does not consume his entire being. He is watchful, but not worried. He is alert, but not aggressive (unless warranted). He is not paranoid, he is using judgment. I'd bet that a lot of dogs have natural suspicion and their owners don't even know it, because they've never been in a situation that should arouse suspicion.


----------



## wildo

I bet you're very right Freestep! But if breeders are _marketing_ 'natural suspicion' then they are likely not breeding dogs whose owners won't know about it. After all, you market the things you want to highlight. I doubt they are getting dogs like this:




Freestep said:


> However, in a balanced dog with strong nerves, the "suspicion" does not consume his entire being. He is watchful, but not worried. He is alert, but not aggressive (unless warranted). He is not paranoid, he is using judgment.


For me, if they have to market the suspicion, then it likely does consume the dog. He is constantly worried about some unknown threat. He is paranoid. Otherwise, why market it?

Like I said, I think this kind of dog has a purpose, and I can see why the folks here who are more aligned with police enforcement and schutzhund-for-lifers would want a dog like this. But for the average pet owner, I couldn't see myself wanting that.


----------



## Freestep

Yeah, I often wonder exactly what breeders mean when they tout "natural suspicion" in their dogs... what is it they are actually seeing? Without saying something about nerves, I tend to be suspicious (see, it can be a good trait!) about any breeder who brags about "natural suspicion". Of course the GSD should have it, but it should not necessarily be evident in normal, everyday situations where there is no threat. Ideally you would rarely see a dog act suspicious, and only in a situation where it is well warranted--ie, a shifty looking character coming toward you in a dark alley.


----------



## debbiebrown

suspicious, reminds me of like a border patrol dog, or a dog gotten purposly for protecting a property etc.not really a family pet. i don't even like suspicious in SchH or protection training, it can be in the mix of a stable balance, but not soley what the dog is made up of. training a dog in SchH with over the top suspicion to me would mean huge liability.


----------



## hunterisgreat

wildo said:


> . Balance, in my opinion, is the ability for a dog to walk off the schutzhund field at the Working Dog Championships (where they most certainly were pushed hard), and greet a stocky, bearded guy like myself for the first time and want to play. *Dogs that can be very serious when needed, but able to turn it off and be a wonderful, happy, playful family companion otherwise is what I'm looking for.* Stability of nerve does not necessitate suspicion to me, and I would have no desire for such a suspicious dog.


I don't think my dog should ever want to walk up and play with a stranger. That's the opposite of aloof. 

The bold is exactly what my male is. Natural suspicion and all. The keyword is family, if you aren't family you aren't in the circle of trust


----------



## hunterisgreat

cliffson1 said:


> So what should be the underlying reason for the aloofness?.....friendliness???


Exactly


----------



## hunterisgreat

debbiebrown said:


> suspicious, reminds me of like a border patrol dog, or a dog gotten purposly for protecting a property etc.not really a family pet. i don't even like suspicious in SchH or protection training, it can be in the mix of a stable balance, but not soley what the dog is made up of. training a dog in SchH with over the top suspicion to me would mean huge liability.


Over the top anything is bad. You can train a high drive dog with zero aloofness or suspicion to be excellent at schh, but not real protection. SchH is not protection training. DDR/former soviet states produced such amazing dogs because they were bred for border patrol. This is the ideal gsd in my mind. No one wants a dog that lunges at anyone who approaches, but I for one don't want one that will readily befriend strangers either, nor is that inline with the spec


----------



## debbiebrown

absolutely true! i was leaning twards suspicion in the form of lunging and biting at everything and anything. aloofness is something else, a gsd should not be a golden retriever type,


----------



## hunterisgreat

debbiebrown said:


> absolutely true! i was leaning twards suspicion in the form of lunging and biting at everything and anything. aloofness is something else, a gsd should not be a golden retriever type,


Lunging and biting at everything goes beyond suspicion. Suspicion implies distrust without action on that distrust, IMO. Other issues are at work in a dog like that. My male is highly suspicious, but in 5 years has never lunged or bitten anyone


----------



## debbiebrown

good point. controlled suspicion would be a much better mix in the balanced gsd.


----------



## JakodaCD OA

No expert here, but I also think "aloof" is different than "suspicious". What I see with Masi, and I could be wrong is, she is very aloof with the majority of people outside her "circle", could care less about people, content to just "be". The suspicion comes in (and again I could be wrong), is tho she could care less about you (general you), she knows exactly what you (general you) are doing. She's a 'watcher'. 

For example, walking, meeting up with someone , stop to talk, she's content to sit/be quiet, but she is 'watching' you and it's a 'serious' watch. While she may not be 'staring' at you, she knows every move your making. She has never been in a situation where she's taken it any further, so whether or not , she could discern a "threat" I honestly don't know. 

She doesn't lunge/nor bark, and as she's matured I see a pretty confident dog who goes with the flow and is pretty predictable for me, anyhow .


----------



## debbiebrown

Diane, Masi sounds like what it should be...............and i do think Watchful is a good discription. i still don't like suspucious discribed as a gsd trait even though it might have its place as long as its balanced in a stable dog.


----------



## Blanketback

'Watchful' is a synonym of suspicious, so in that respect I think we all do want to see 'natural suspicion' in our GSDs. 'Wary' is another one. Both of these are traits that I take for granted in a GSD. Maybe the breeders are using this in their marketing to weed out the buyers that they feel would be better off with a different breed?


----------



## Freestep

The problem is, a lot of people, and especially BYBs, use "code" to describe their dogs.

"Suspicious" = Afraid of strangers

"Loyal" = Has separation anxiety

"Protective" = Fear aggressive

...and so on. It makes it difficult for most people to sort out what is really going on with the dog. This is why I like breeder websites that show a dog's actual accomplishments; performance titles or real-life jobs such as law enforcement, SAR, service, etc., or the accomplishments of the dog's offspring.


----------



## Jag

It's not just BYB, it's people, too. The GSD pup my pug was playing with... her owner was telling me how 'protective' she was because if anyone walked up to him, all of her hair went on end. I told him that was fear, and he needed to get with a trainer on that before she filled out or it could be a HUGE liability. The biggest issue is that NO ONE is understanding the meaning. My boy should have natural suspicion, but he's a happy go lucky pup right now. It's in his lines. IMO, the Czech dogs are the last 'unadulterated' GSD lines...but that's only my opinion. Suspicion doesn't mean that the dog is paranoid or that it will just up and attack someone. To me, it goes with the 'aloofness'. I agree with Cliff... what do people suppose the dog is thinking or the reason why they're aloof?


----------



## wildo

cliffson1 said:


> So what should be the underlying reason for the aloofness?.....friendliness???





Jag said:


> I agree with Cliff... what do people suppose the dog is thinking or the reason why they're aloof?


Well this is the second time it has been brought up, so I'll bite. I assume you guys are implying that _suspicion_ is the root cause for aloofness. Do you have any grounds to substantiate that claim? Why couldn't aloofness stem from simple indifference? 

People here are so ready to push someone to a Golden Retriever if they want a social, happy dog. If the Golden can have a disposition of being human social, I see no reason why a GSD can't have a disposition of human indifference. And I definitely don't think it's easy to claim that suspicion is the one and only reason a dog could be aloof.

I have no issue being proven wrong. But I suspect such a claim would be rather difficult to prove and am wondering why you guys seem to think that. Could suspicion be a cause for aloofness? Sure. I find it hard to believe that could be the only cause though.

[EDIT]- My dog is rather aloof. She could not care less about other dogs or other people. She will not seek out attention from others. She is extremely socialized and I trust her 100% with any meet & greet situation. Even so, she will not initialize a meet and greet. She has no desire to be a social butterfly. I'd classify her as absolutely meeting the standard of aloofness. She has shown no signs what-so-ever of being suspicious. She cares about interacting with me and a toy, and that's it. Her aloofness absolutely stems from a bond with me and an indifference to others.


----------



## Blanketback

Freestep, your "code" explanation made me laugh. I guess in the *really* wrong hands, the phrase could be an oxymoron, lol!
Jag, I see that all the time too. It's so aggravating, isn't it?


----------



## Jag

Wildo... if an adult walks up to you, is your dog watching you the whole time or does your dog look at the person walking up? Maybe 'checking' to see if there would be a reason to be alarmed of if the person seems totally harmless? Not saying this means anything at all... I'm just curious.


----------



## JeanKBBMMMAAN

I think it is interesting to look at other breed standards to see what they say about things like this - just for kicks. 



> *Temperament *
> Keen intelligence, an independent spirit and innate dignity give the Chow an aura of aloofness. It is a Chow’s nature to be reserved and discerning with strangers. Displays of aggression or timidity are unacceptable. Because of its deep set eyes the Chow has limited peripheral vision and is best approachedfrom the front.


Chow Chow Page

Really? An aura?  



> *Temperament*
> The Schipperke is curious, interested in everything around him, and is an excellent and faithful little watchdog. He is reserved with strangers and ready to protect his family and property if necessary. He displays a confident and independent personality, reflecting the breed's original purpose as watchdog and hunter of vermin.


Schipperke Page

I have heard the word suspicious used with those breeds as well. 

I have a BC-Chow mix who is completely indifferent to other people. It is very interesting to watch her, because she is able to be social, just doesn't want to. And she doesn't seem suspicious until something suspicious occurs! 

This is an interesting conversation - thanks for it!


----------



## wildo

Hmm- that's a good question. No, I don't believe she's fixated on me and would be looking at the oncoming person. But she doesn't seem to linger on them. She's aware of their encroachment, but not bothered or suspicious of it I don't think. She'll look at them and tend to be indifferent to it. She'll look around at other things going on, like passing cars if we were by a road, or whatever else seemed interesting. I guess I just mean that: yes- she's aware of their presence, but no- she doesn't seem fixated or bothered by it.

I will say that I've been curious to try the ATTS test to see how she'd react to an actual threat approaching. I've never been in a situation where someone has approached me in a threatening way. Pimg's never been exposed to that, and I don't actually know what she would do. That's the reason why it's hard for me to answer. She's never been in a suspicious situation... I tried to get her temp tested at a local SchH club, but once they saw her age, size, and sex (she's a pretty big female)- they were disinterested in doing much of anything with her.

I usually carry a decent length beard, have a fairly deep voice, and am far from a lightweight person. Oh, and I'm a male, if you didn't know. Not many people are really interested in approaching me in a suspicious or malicious way. I suspect the sight of a GSD even increases their _lack_ of desire to do so. So like I said, she's never really been in such a situation. I suspect that my case is much different than some of you ladies where suspicious males may be more likely to approach you.


----------



## Freestep

wildo said:


> I assume you guys are implying that _suspicion_ is the root cause for aloofness. Do you have any grounds to substantiate that claim? Why couldn't aloofness stem from simple indifference?


It can, and does. I think suspicion and indifference are distinct from each other; many GSDs are simply indifferent or neutral to strangers, but that does not necessarily arise from suspicion. Suspicion, in fact, might be the opposite of indifference--it is there, but lies dormant most of the time, until it is provoked. 

Most GSDs of correct temperament do not walk around being suspicious of everything, but they have the ability to recognize a potential threat which will arouse that natural suspicion. For example, a good GSD can walk around in a crowded area all day long and not give a hoot about anyone or anything, as long as everything remains peaceful and everyone is minding their business. However, enter a creepy character in dark alley and the same dog will probably show suspicion. I believe it is the ability to recognize and judge a potential threat.

Natural suspicion was described to me in another breed, the Standard Schnauzer. Most Standard Schnauzer owners will tell you that this breed has an uncanny judgment of people. I once met a very successful show dog named Barry. He was super friendly; not knowing me from Adam, he jumped up on me and gave me kisses. The handler told me that Barry had a particularly sweet, social, friendly temperament and loved people. 

However, one day they were at a dog show, out by their RV, and Barry was on the table being groomed. A couple of shabbily dressed, creepy looking young men happened to walk by--they clearly didn't belong there--and Barry fixed them in his gaze and let out a deep throaty growl. The handler said she'd never heard him growl before and was surprised by it--she didn't think he had it in him. The two men left, and Barry went right back to being his normal, friendly self.

So as I said before, suspicion is something that exists in a dog of good character, but you may never see it unless you are in a situation that warrants it.


----------



## cliffson1

It is very to easy to see who works dogs and who doesnt....this is not meant derogatorily, but in comments made from lack of experience. Dogs have the ability to discern and the GS with proprer temperament is one of the best. NOTHING is absolute....so a dog with natural suspicion does not have to walk around in non threatening environments on alert. Dogs learn to recognize certain environs just like they learn to read people. Most pet owners really dont understand the degree that dogs READ people in terms of body language, voices, posture, and emotions. Correct tempered GS are able to make sound adjustments to their character presentation based on these things. A dog walking at night has a different demeanor than one walking in the day(at least it should). At night is a good example of when your dog should increase their natural suspicion. Walk the same dog the same route in middle of the day and dog walks with tail lower and less NS. Dogs that have marvelous temperament in family and in general, when they go on duty in policework, their natural suspicion becomes heightened....because of potential threat....same dog goes home to house with kids and wife or husband and is regular pet. The breed SHOULD have natural suspicion, but the discernment piece allows them to use it wisely. A dog that walks the streets at night that doesnt increase its suspicion level is poor excuse for the breed....and people are breeding these dogs and they are not all BYB. A person who works their dog is very much aware of the dog's ability to use the natural suspicion discriminately....this is what the breed should be. Of course every dog doesnt have it and many people cant nuture it, but these dogs shouldnt be bred and these people shouldnt be owners.....dont change the dog....lol!


----------



## wildo

cliffson1 said:


> It is very to easy to see who works dogs and who doesnt....this is not meant derogatorily, but in comments made from lack of experience.
> 
> ...
> 
> Of course every dog doesnt have it and many people cant nuture it, but these dogs shouldnt be bred and these people shouldnt be owners.....dont change the dog....lol!


Gotta say Cliff, I highly respect your opinion! But I can't _not_ read this in a derogatory way. Hopefully there's still room in the world for those of us who have no interest in police dogs, and hopefully we can still continue to be GSD owners. Have I misunderstood your intent with that last underlined sentence?


----------



## llombardo

So for example....a GSD is taken outside to use the washroom on a leash...small kids walk by, the dog takes notice, but ignores them and continues with their business, but 2 minutes later a group of boys(not of the best character) walk by, the dog doesn't bark, but goes into full alert and focus's on those boys until they are out of the dogs vision....is this good behavior/bad behavior?? Suspicion or Aloofness?


----------



## Debbieg

llombardo said:


> So for example....a GSD is taken outside to use the washroom on a leash...small kids walk by, the dog takes notice, but ignores them and continues with their business, but 2 minutes later a group of boys(not of the best character) walk by, the dog doesn't bark, but goes into full alert and focus's on those boys until they are out of the dogs vision....is this good behavior/bad behavior?? Suspicion or Aloofness?


I would say it is just the ability to discern a threat from a non threat.


----------



## llombardo

Debbieg said:


> I would say it is just the ability to discern a threat from a non threat.


So is that natural suspicion then?


----------



## Debbieg

llombardo said:


> So is that natural suspicion then?



I think it matters on people's definition. I don't think a GSD should be suspicious of everyone and everything. I think that is just reactivity and a weakness.
I like the word vigilance or watchfulness to describe a good GSD. They should be ready to take necessary action when necessary, but can tell the difference between kids playing or skateboarding, a person with a cane, approaching haltingly and someone who is a real threat. He has no suspicion of children.

Benny does not have a best nerves and is a bit reactive, but I have raised him around kids. The other day, three children walking about 100 yards ahead of us to school, suddenly turned and charged right as us ( on the way back to their house to get something they forgot I think) 
Benny had no reaction at all, knowing kids are not a threat. If that had been three men he would have acted aggressively, whether our of fear or protection I don't know.


----------



## carmspack

you always have to understand the breed from a historic perspective. Sheep were on the move and shepherds moved with them , did not return to a home base , barn . They slept under the stars and at the time there were roaming wild animals and fellow shepherds , some who were apt to roll you at night and steal your purse , your provisions . So the suspicion is hard wired into the breed. It is a watchfullness , which has nothing to do with being aloof or neutral . Suspicion is a valuable attribute . It does not mean the dog goes into hysterics or cringes out of fear -- ALWAYS sound character is a must . The dog must discern what is a threat and then deal with it appropriately.


----------



## codmaster

Debbieg said:


> I think it matters on people's definition. I don't think a GSD should be suspicious of everyone and everything. I think that is just reactivity and a weakness.
> I like the word vigilance or watchfulness to describe a good GSD. They should be ready to take necessary action when necessary, but can tell the difference between kids playing or skateboarding, a person with a cane, approaching haltingly and someone who is a real threat. He has no suspicion of children.
> 
> Benny does not have a best nerves and is a bit reactive, but I have raised him around kids. The other day, three children walking about 100 yards ahead of us to school, suddenly turned and charged right as us ( on the way back to their house to get something they forgot I think)
> Benny had no reaction at all, knowing kids are not a threat. If that had been *three men* he would have acted aggressively, whether our of fear or protection I don't know.


 
I suspect my male would have reacted similarilly but I wonder if it had been three older men would he have had the same watchful reaction or how about three women? I really don't think it would be the gender of the three but instead their behavior that might cause a reaction.

Sort of like when you watch a good ScH decoy/helper and how they can agitate a dog into reaction (course they do it because they want to get that reaction - but it is interesting to watch them and learn what can cause a dog to react defensively).


----------



## cliffson1

Thank you Codmaster....people take pieces of what I write and ignore the other parts and try to make a point. I talked about the breeds ability to discern based on threat and reading people and environments. When I talk about the great ability of this breed and nothing being absolute I mean the dog has the ability to use the reading of the situation, the threat of the people, the posture of the people, the voice of the people, the occurrences of past experiences, to make a discernment. They are not programmed robots, course it is obvious this is not understood by some of the scenarios that are presented. Secondly, I spoke about What the breed should be which includes good nerve and courage with the NS to give the dog the ability to make wide ranging discernments....of course if your dog is lacking any of these traits they can't be as reliable...but I wasn't talking about those dogs in the first place.
@ Wildo....a good police dog is nothing more than a GS that possesses all the attributes listed in the STANDARD. Police dogs by and large make excellent pets, in times past many police and military dogs were donated from families. There are many people who cannot handle a good German Shepherd, why?....because they don't have the time to put the structure in the dog, or they don't put the discipline in the dog, or they don't put the time into the dog, and they create something they can't handle. Nothing wrong with the dog....bad ownership is problem whether it is lack of knowledge or lack of opportunity. The PC people then want the breed watered down so everybody can own one even if they do the above things I mentioned....this is destroying a great breed built for service to man. A seeing eye dog is not what it is because of its golden temperament....a seeing eye dog is what it is because of training and solid nerve base. Are seeing eye dogs family dogs? People try to make police dogs these extreme type of GS, they shouldn't be. A special forces person that hasn't been trained is just a regular person in society that is maybe more assertive than average and fits into society everyday. Some people shouldn't have this breed that do....IMO.....but because the PC people have basically altered the temperament and perception of the breed in many cases, their are many who think the new creation is correct and have not a clue of the abilities or capabilities of the breed. These people think that police dogs can't be pets and this is so sad!


----------



## llombardo

cliffson1 said:


> Thank you Codmaster....people take pieces of what I write and ignore the other parts and try to make a point. I talked about the breeds ability to discern based on threat and reading people and environments. When I talk about the great ability of this breed and nothing being absolute I mean the dog has the ability to use the reading of the situation, the threat of the people, the posture of the people, the voice of the people, the occurrences of past experiences, to make a discernment. They are not programmed robots, course it is obvious this is not understood by some of the scenarios that are presented. Secondly, I spoke about What the breed should be which includes good nerve and courage with the NS to give the dog the ability to make wide ranging discernments....of course if your dog is lacking any of these traits they can't be as reliable...but I wasn't talking about those dogs in the first place.
> @ Wildo....a good police dog is nothing more than a GS that possesses all the attributes listed in the STANDARD. Police dogs by and large make excellent pets, in times past many police and military dogs were donated from families. There are many people who cannot handle a good German Shepherd, why?....because they don't have the time to put the structure in the dog, or they don't put the discipline in the dog, or they don't put the time into the dog, and they create something they can't handle. Nothing wrong with the dog....bad ownership is problem whether it is lack of knowledge or lack of opportunity. The PC people then want the breed watered down so everybody can own one even if they do the above things I mentioned....this is destroying a great breed built for service to man. A seeing eye dog is not what it is because of its golden temperament....a seeing eye dog is what it is because of training and solid nerve base. Are seeing eye dogs family dogs? People try to make police dogs these extreme type of GS, they shouldn't be. A special forces person that hasn't been trained is just a regular person in society that is maybe more assertive than average and fits into society everyday. Some people shouldn't have this breed that do....IMO.....but because the PC people have basically altered the temperament and perception of the breed in many cases, their are many who think the new creation is correct and have not a clue of the abilities or capabilities of the breed. These people think that police dogs can't be pets and this is so sad!


So in "my kinda terms"...a GSD is suppose to have a solid nerve base and then training for ANYTHING is based on that. I have to agree and I do think that police dogs can be pets...I would not hesitate to get a retired police dog. I actually think they would make great pets


----------



## wildo

Thanks Cliff for elaborating on your comments! I guess I'm still nervous about taking that leap into leap into the working lines, but maybe I shouldn't be. I'm either going to have what it takes or I'm not...


----------



## Liesje

cliffson1 said:


> So what should be the underlying reason for the aloofness?.....friendliness???


I see aloofness as apathy. The aloof dog just doesn't care. It's not that he's suspicious or feels some threat and keeps his distance but he's neutral and sees no reason to interact with the other dog or person. I have people tell me all the time that my dog acts like they aren't even there, like he doesn't even see them. He's certainly not standing stock still keeping a hard gaze on them (unless they act weird or threatening), he's just plain aloof. He doesn't "see" anyone but his own people or an active threat. My friends and I call him a stronger word for butthole because that's how he acts around people that he knows are not threatening but he has zero interest in interacting with.

IMO a GSD should be aloof and possess some natural suspicion and the willingness to assert some social aggression. They should have all these things but I see them as different things; a dog can have these traits in different amounts or combinations.


----------



## ponyfarm

wildo said:


> Thanks Cliff for elaborating on your comments! I guess I'm still nervous about taking that leap into leap into the working lines, but maybe I shouldn't be. I'm either going to have what it takes or I'm not...


Wildo! You have what it takes. You can read a dog! You love to train and learn.

Max is developing into a really neat dog! If I can do it..you can do it too!! 

And I have to add..thanks to all the thoughtfull responses to this thread. The breeders that I was referring to that advertise "suspicion" are those that participate at high levels in schh and win. They are breeding dogs with good nerve..making good, overall dogs! The discussion was very informative and very thought provoking!


----------



## Liesje

I think I get where Willy is coming from, now having met him at a big dog event. I think it's fair to say we look for a lot of same things in a dog and he is right to have concerns about some dogs and compatibility issues. But Willy I think even if you don't know how to find exactly what you are looking for you know how to find a breeder or people that know, if that makes sense? There *are* a lot of really great working line dogs that would not be suitable for me but are definitely "correct" as far as GSD temperament and nerve. Some of what we are asking for and expecting goes a bit above and beyond. For me the biggest part of it has been learning to read my dog and learning how to be confident and in control no matter what. It might sound like hard work and anxious work but after a while it just becomes second nature and it's almost a gut reaction. If I am walking down the sidewalk and someone asks if they can pet my dog the answer might be yes or might be no and there's not like this mental checklist I'm going through but at this point I can just feel out the situation and make an instant judgment and be totally confident with myself and my dog.


----------



## codmaster

cliffson1 said:


> It is very to easy to see who works dogs and who doesnt....this is not meant derogatorily, but in comments made from lack of experience. Dogs have the ability to discern and the GS with proprer temperament is one of the best. NOTHING is absolute....so a dog with natural suspicion does not have to walk around in non threatening environments on alert. Dogs learn to recognize certain environs just like they learn to read people. Most pet owners really dont understand the degree that dogs READ people in terms of body language, voices, posture, and emotions. Correct tempered GS are able to make sound adjustments to their character presentation based on these things. A dog walking at night has a different demeanor than one walking in the day(at least it should). At night is a good example of when your dog should increase their natural suspicion. Walk the same dog the same route in middle of the day and dog walks with tail lower and less NS. Dogs that have marvelous temperament in family and in general, when they go on duty in policework, their natural suspicion becomes heightened....because of potential threat....same dog goes home to house with kids and wife or husband and is regular pet. The breed SHOULD have natural suspicion, but the discernment piece allows them to use it wisely. A dog that walks the streets at night that doesnt increase its suspicion level is poor excuse for the breed....and people are breeding these dogs and they are not all BYB. A person who works their dog is very much aware of the dog's ability to use the natural suspicion discriminately....this is what the breed should be. Of course every dog doesnt have it and many people cant nuture it, but these dogs shouldnt be bred and these people shouldnt be owners.....dont change the dog....lol!


 
Very well said about the desired temperament!

I know my dog has a diffeerent demeanor at night even when we walk over the same route! I would call him much more alert at night!


----------



## wildo

Liesje said:


> I think I get where Willy is coming from, now having met him at a big dog event. I think it's fair to say we look for a lot of same things in a dog and he is right to have concerns about some dogs and compatibility issues. But Willy I think even if you don't know how to find exactly what you are looking for you know how to find a breeder or people that know, if that makes sense? There *are* a lot of really great working line dogs that would not be suitable for me but are definitely "correct" as far as GSD temperament and nerve. Some of what we are asking for and expecting goes a bit above and beyond. For me the biggest part of it has been learning to read my dog and learning how to be confident and in control no matter what. It might sound like hard work and anxious work but after a while it just becomes second nature and it's almost a gut reaction. If I am walking down the sidewalk and someone asks if they can pet my dog the answer might be yes or might be no and there's not like this mental checklist I'm going through but at this point I can just feel out the situation and make an instant judgment and be totally confident with myself and my dog.


Good stuff Lies- completely agree.


----------



## cliffson1

people training for urban search and rescue are having a hard time getting candidates from this breed....(as are seeing-eye programs) because many are washing out in training or evaluations. Now there is no bitework in either of these endeavors....so I am asking why is the breed not making the cut. Many people who breed to stay away from aggression are not supplying these venues with dogs either.....so what is the problem????
I need some help on this, if you have a breeding program and the dogs are not candidates for Law Enforcement, they are not candidates for Search and Rescue, they are not candidates for seeing-eye programs.....are these people breeding dogs fitting the standard???


----------



## Freestep

cliffson1 said:


> I need some help on this, if you have a breeding program and the dogs are not candidates for Law Enforcement, they are not candidates for Search and Rescue, they are not candidates for seeing-eye programs.....are these people breeding dogs fitting the standard???


Exactly my thoughts as well.


----------



## Shade

cliffson1 said:


> people training for urban search and rescue are having a hard time getting candidates from this breed....(as are seeing-eye programs) because many are washing out in training or evaluations. Now there is no bitework in either of these endeavors....so I am asking why is the breed not making the cut. Many people who breed to stay away from aggression are not supplying these venues with dogs either.....so what is the problem????
> I need some help on this, if you have a breeding program and the dogs are not candidates for Law Enforcement, they are not candidates for Search and Rescue, they are not candidates for seeing-eye programs.....are these people breeding dogs fitting the standard???


:thumbup: Extremely well put and valid points, especially the last paragraph. I wish the newbies who want a lab in GSD clothing would realize this . Research beforehand would solve SO many problems


----------



## wildo

Shade said:


> I wish the newbies who want a lab in GSD clothing would realize this . Research beforehand would solve SO many problems


I'll come right out and say it-- due to this forum, I've bought hook line and sinker into the desire for a "proper" working line shepherd. But I'm pretty sick and tired of being told that because I don't want something that _might_ be too much for me (given that I've never owned a WL shepherd) that I _really_ am asking for a lab (or Golden) in GSD cloths.

It's a pretty arrogant perspective really. Not all of us have the experience of the uber-ultra-super-badass-hardcore-done-it-all-before people that are here. THAT'S why we're here asking questions. At least that's why *I'm* here anyway.

Guess what- while not a *working line* German Shepherd, my GSD was my first dog. And I didn't know squat about the breed prior to getting her. I'm sure glad I didn't come here _prior_ to getting her asking about dogs. I might have ended up with a Golden!


----------



## carmspack

that is one of the reasons I am putting the development of Nickolas out there - to show a totally sane , sociable dog , with coping skills and all the proper aloof to strangers -- yet social -- and levels of suspicion , which was already shown on one of the blogs where he is watching someone move around in the far distance , yet totally relaxed and composed - till the man came to a point and the dog volunteered to move out and forward , give a woof, give him a body bump (oh its you) and then go back to Mike. Let's see him develop and do the bite work and then lets see where he ends up as an adult . This is a dog I picked for service.

I am sick and tired of people using the words German Shepherd , riding on the good things , when they are not even close to making any effort whatsoever to stay somewhat within the standards - going totally rogue .
Well you can knock yourself out and produce what ever kind of dog you want , but if you use German Shepherd then that has to stand for something. Kennel clubs should not allow those dogs to be recognized. German Shepherd is more than dna from another gsd .


----------



## wildo

Here's the thread Carmen's referencing. It will be good to be able to cross reference it from this thread: http://www.germanshepherds.com/foru...189671-nickolas-journal-dogs-development.html


----------



## RocketDog

I'm sick and tired of people acting like a properly bred working Labrador is all giggles and kisses. They're not. A serious working dog is exactly that: serious. My Labrador could've easily been the dog liesje was describing instead of Nikon.


Also Wildo, I feel much as you do. My first shepherd years ago was much more serious and mature and as described. I thought I'd done research but hoo boy obviously I did not. I didn't realize how much had changed, and sometimes I feel very bad and guilty for occasionally, to be blunt, wishing I'd waited instead of getting Rocket, good as he is. I can only hope as he continues to mature he becomes more aloof, but in the end, he will be what he will be.


----------



## Shade

wildo said:


> I'll come right out and say it-- due to this forum, I've bought hook line and sinker into the desire for a "proper" working line shepherd. But I'm pretty sick and tired of being told that because I don't want something that _might_ be too much for me (given that I've never owned a WL shepherd) that I _really_ am asking for a lab (or Golden) in GSD cloths.
> 
> It's a pretty arrogant perspective really. Not all of us have the experience of the uber-ultra-super-badass-hardcore-done-it-all-before people that are here. THAT'S why we're here asking questions. At least that's why *I'm* here anyway.
> Guess what- while not a *working line* German Shepherd, my GSD was my first dog. And I didn't know squat about the breed prior to getting her. I'm sure glad I didn't come here _prior_ to getting her asking about dogs. I might have ended up with a Golden!


Willy, I'm sorry if you saw arrogance. No matter what the breed I love dogs in general and want the best for them. Delgado is not my first dog but he's my first GSD and I see they are a working breed first. His Mother's line has nothing but SCH3 on both sides. His Dad's line is no less intense and I was worried that he might be too much to handle. 

I spend a lot of my time at home dedicated to obedience and exercise with him, he gets three hours daily running at a dog park plus a twenty minute on leash training walk and constant obedience both in class and at home. But in return I have a well balanced and behaved dog, he's not perfect but he's still not yet 8 months old. Once he's old enough I plan on doing agility, tracking, and RallyO along with advance obedience. He's intense but loving and yes I do think he would go crazy in a home which wouldn't fulfill him, if I pass away I've already setup that he goes back to his breeder. 

Would the average owner want him? I've seen people fawn over him like there's no tomorrow but run away when they see his intensity. He listens very well to me but I've worked hard to earn his respect and he'll flip his middle claw at most people lol. But would I trade him in for a easier dog? Not the slimmest chance

Is he the average WL? He has good drive yet is biddable when asked, aloof yet loving towards his family, and protective but not aggressive. Sounds like a GSD to me and he's exactly what I was looking for

Now I can't comment on whether you should get a WL, I don't know you personally. You have done *amazing* work with Pimg. I've watched your videos and I've learned a lot and can't wait until Delgado is old enough to do full on agility. You obviously spend alot of time and effort into her training and it's paid off. If you want a WL then go for it, find a breeder and spend time with their dogs on their turf and see if you still want one.

Honestly I don't think WL or SL is better, both lines have awesome dogs 

Oh and by the way my parents have owned nothing but lab, lab mixes, and one golden . I happen to love them


----------



## gagsd

I think a dog with proper nerve, drive, suspicion,'letc..... Should be a good pet. I don't spend hours exercising or training my dogs every day. 
Most well bred GSDs just need basic training, an owner with common sense, and a way to exercise. Sure young dogs and puppies are more work.... And yes there are some pretty intense dogs at the end of the spectrum.
But a committed, sensible owner with a stable home should not have that awfully much trouble.


----------



## JakodaCD OA

I agree with Mary ^^

Willy, I think as Lies pointed out, you would do fine with a WL providing you find the right breeder that can peg their puppies and match one up to fit your lifestyle and "wants" as well as "dont wants".

The last 3 gsd's I've had/ have all been czech/ddr lines and no they aren't golden retrievers, and yes I've heard alot say ddr's can be stubborn buttheads, but I just haven't seen that with the ones I've had.

While I don't think they would have/had done well in a home where one expects the dog to lounge around all day, they shouldn't "be" loungers. Settle when appropriate yes, but get up and go with the flow when asked of them.

That's what I've always had, and will continue to go for, a dog that can settle when the time comes, and one that will go all day if I ask it to.

I think you would be fine with ANY dog you got willy, so don't be afraid to take that plunge, there are so many great breeders out there I'm sure a few of them would be happy to match you up with what you desire


----------



## wildo

Thanks thanks thanks everyone!! I certainly didn't mean to derail this thread. We can go back to talking about suspicion! I know I'll have to take a read through Carmen's thread. Perhaps specifically the video she's mentioned...

Most definitely, just like with what a GSD "should be," everyone has a differing opinion of what "natural suspicion" is. It will be good to see Carmen's video as at least some tangible thing we could discuss.


----------



## cliffson1

Wildo your opinion of WL dogs may also be the problem.....like you have to build up your courage to get one....what do you think they are..... monsters?
Read carefully the post from Mary.....it is based in truth moreso than the opinions of many people of WL that have heard stuff from other people. There are thousands and thousands of regular families and people that own WL and many of them are their first dog. Just like Ive tried to relate that many police dogs are not super badazz dogs off duty....but it just doesnt seem to take.


----------



## sparra

cliffson1 said:


> Wildo your opinion of WL dogs may also be the problem.....like you have to build up your courage to get one....what do you think they are..... monsters?
> Read carefully the post from Mary.....it is based in truth moreso than the opinions of many people of WL that have heard stuff from other people. There are thousands and thousands of regular families and people that own WL and many of them are their first dog. Just like Ive tried to relate that many police dogs are not super badazz dogs off duty....but it just doesnt seem to take.




I find myself rolling my eyes sometimes when I hear people talking about owning a WL.....like you have to be some big shot professional to handle them. We have a very good dog and he is from some pretty strong lines....Cliff has seen his pedigree....and he is a complete joy to own. I would not have done nearly the amount of stuff you have done Willy in the dog world.....but I have "coped" he is just a dog....not some "unknown" beast to tame.
I think it can be an ego thing sometimes...."I own a big tough GSD so don't mess with me" type thing. We are just an ordinary family with kids who live on a farm with a beautiful pet who just fits in with everyone.


----------



## RocketDog

gagsd said:


> I think a dog with proper nerve, drive, suspicion,'letc..... Should be a good pet. I don't spend hours exercising or training my dogs every day.
> Most well bred GSDs just need basic training, an owner with common sense, and a way to exercise. Sure young dogs and puppies are more work.... And yes there are some pretty intense dogs at the end of the spectrum.
> *But a committed, sensible owner with a stable home should not have that awfully much trouble.*





sparra said:


> I find myself rolling my eyes sometimes when I hear people talking about owning a WL.....like you have to be some big shot professional to handle them. We have a very good dog and he is from some pretty strong lines....Cliff has seen his pedigree....and *he is a complete joy to own.* I would not have done nearly the amount of stuff you have done Willy in the dog world.....but I have "coped" he is just a dog....not some "unknown" beast to tame.
> I think it can be an ego thing sometimes...."I own a big tough GSD so don't mess with me" type thing.* We are just an ordinary family with kids who live on a farm with a beautiful pet who just fits in with everyone*.


And this is exactly what I am/want/will always want.


----------



## carmspack

there are lots of working line breeders who use hyperbolic descriptions for marketing -- Leerburg when they had pups comes to mind, recent pedigrees presented to me for examination - you would barely recognize them to be GSD for some of the descriptions -- which is not normal , if the description is correct , or desireable for gsd.
Look at the Beretta the 5 week old herding dog -- very brave, full of natural drive, good looking dogs -- you don't think you can't do your agility with any of them. Wildo look for the correct GSD and then do agility with them.


----------



## sparra

Shade said:


> I spend a lot of my time at home dedicated to obedience and exercise with him, he gets three hours daily running at a dog park plus a twenty minute on leash training walk and constant obedience both in class and at home. But in return I have a well balanced and behaved dog, he's not perfect but he's still not yet 8 months old. Once he's old enough I plan on doing agility, tracking, and RallyO along with advance obedience. He's intense but loving and yes I do think he would go crazy in a home which wouldn't fulfill him, if I pass away I've already setup that he goes back to his breeder.


I would say this is on the extreme side of how much exercise a dog gets. The average dog owner doesn't have nor should they have that much time to spend with their dogs. If your dog needs this much to keep him happy then I would say it seems a lot. The common misconception is that unless you can spend hours on hours "stimulating" your dogs mind then a WL isn't for you. My dog would get NOWHERE near this much exercise etc yet he is a happy well adjusted dog.....today for example I have said two words to him all day as I am cooking for shearers juggling a 4year old and a new baby.....I just don;t have time for Luther today and he is JUST FINE with that.....that is how I feel they should be.....fit in with you when they need to....switch off and be just as content. JMO


----------



## debbiebrown

Genetics is what it comes down to. are these breeders researching and testing what they are breeding? a stabl;e working dog can be a good pet, an unstable dog lacking in balance of drives and mental componants is a time bomb pet or not.


----------



## Shade

sparra said:


> I would say this is on the extreme side of how much exercise a dog gets. The average dog owner doesn't have nor should they have that much time to spend with their dogs. If your dog needs this much to keep him happy then I would say it seems a lot. The common misconception is that unless you can spend hours on hours "stimulating" your dogs mind then a WL isn't for you. My dog would get NOWHERE near this much exercise etc yet he is a happy well adjusted dog.....today for example I have said two words to him all day as I am cooking for shearers juggling a 4year old and a new baby.....I just don;t have time for Luther today and he is JUST FINE with that.....that is how I feel they should be.....fit in with you when they need to....switch off and be just as content. JMO


Where in my post did I state he *needs* three hours a day? That's what I give him because it's keeps him happy and healthy. He's also crated for 4 hours twice a day for two days a week while I work. Does he destroy his crate or anything in the house, no. *Can* he go with less exercise, yes but he would be very unhappy, he loves both mental and physical stimulation. He's still young and has puppy energy to boot, I anticipate he'll end up bring medium energy when he's finished growing. 

I don't revolve my life around my dogs but I do put a lot of effort into their happiness. That doesn't make me a better or worse owner then others. Delgado does have a off switch and will settle while in the house nicely, but he's not a low energy/low maintenance dog. I wanted a dog to work with and that's what I got. He wouldn't be happy with not getting attention or work for a long period, that's not the type of dog he is. 

Not all WL are equal in their demands

Anyways, back to the original topic..


----------



## Freestep

JakodaCD OA said:


> Willy, I think as Lies pointed out, you would do fine with a WL providing you find the right breeder that can peg their puppies and match one up to fit your lifestyle and "wants" as well as "dont wants".


That's the key. If WL dogs can go on to be guide dogs for the blind, service dogs for the disabled, etc., they can certainly go into a normal home as well. The key is pup selection. Yes, some WL dogs can be a handful (so can some WGSL, ASL, BYB, etc.) but if you choose the right temperament, energy level, and drive level for your needs, you should be just fine. Just find a breeder you trust, and go from there.


----------



## wildo

cliffson1 said:


> Wildo your opinion of WL dogs may also be the problem.....like you have to build up your courage to get one....what do you think they are..... *monsters*?


You know I just _have_ to point out this recent thread title, right?
http://www.germanshepherds.com/forum/agility/190859-finally-good-training-session-monster.html

:rofl: YES, actually, I do think some of them are monsters (not KristiM's dogs, just making a joke with her thread title). And no, I don't want a monster. I think there are plenty of dogs out there that likely are VERY true to the standard, and people with experience like Cliff probably really like the dog. I don't know Cliff's thoughts on Irmus Galan Nalag, but with his breeding popularity, I suspect many good breeders are finding what they want in him. After seeing him in training and trialing, I personally don't want anything to do with him.* For me*, he is *way* too much dog! He _would_ be a monster in my care, I suspect.


Seriously though guys- you really are great confidence boosters. I have a couple breeders in mind, one I've chatted with on the phone and feel _very_ comfortable with. But I _truly_ did not intend to threadjack. Let's please get back to discussing natural suspicion. Carmen mentioned the blog for dog "Nick"

See here.


> Upon returning from across the field after laying a track, Jon's form could be made out roughly. As he drew closer to our location, naturally, he appeared to be growing in size as he approached. At about 60 yards away, Nick became aware of this movement and monitored his progress towards us until he was approximately 10-15 yards away, at which time Nick stood, moved forward from our spot, placing himself between both Jon and I (See photo below). At approximately 15-20' away Jon
> stopped and stood staring at Nick and I in a relaxed manner. There was only a small pause as he stood assessing Jon and then advanced on him, paying a bit of disrespect (for lack of a better term) by jumping and bopping Jon in the groin area and engaging him briefly then returning to me after. No growling, shrieking, hackling, barking and carrying on. No more than a small "woof" under his breath when Jon was approaching, never backing up. Perfect.​


Discuss that^^


----------



## wildo

And I hope it's obvious that I was using the word "monster" loosely in reference to Irmus. I don't want to be on the record calling him that. What I meant, and hope that I related, is that I think he's a LOT of dog. Easily the most intense GSD I've ever met. _IN MY CARE_, I don't think I would have the skill to train him to _not_ be a monster. I'm sure he's a very nice dog for someone who wants all that intensity!


----------



## gagsd

I have a _z Diehlomov_ dog. While she was a monster for the first 6 months, she is a super easy dog to live with now. We call her The House Mouse because she is so quiet inside. If she has "natural suspicion" I have yet to see it.
Just an easy, social, dog with tons of "drive" when working and very trainable.


----------



## cliffson1

Wildo.....have you ever seen Irmus in a social or family setting as opposed to on the competition field with Mike..(where he is trained to be intense) ....just curious as to what you are basing Irmus's day to day intensity level on?


----------



## wildo

cliffson1 said:


> Wildo.....have you ever seen Irmus in a social or family setting as opposed to on the competition field with Mike..(where he is trained to be intense) ....just curious as to what you are basing Irmus's day to day intensity level on?


No I haven't. I've seen him taken directly out of the van, walked to go to the bathroom, and then onto the field. I've also seen him compete. But no, I have not seen him in a family or non-training situation and agree I don't have the "whole" picture. 

I still think, please correct me if I'm wrong, that a dog's drive on the field could still outweigh their ability to settle. Even if the dog can settle and be social and happy and all that-- it's almost as if you saying that the concept of "too much dog" (which let's be honest- is usually in reference to the dog at work) doesn't really exist. Surely you don't mean that, right?


----------



## Freestep

wildo said:


> I still think, please correct me if I'm wrong, that a dog's drive on the field could still outweigh their ability to settle.


...on the field? Yes, once a dog has been trained to the sport, it might be hard to get the dog to settle when on the field. He will be expecting excitement and action. 

In the home, it's a different story. No matter how intense the dog is on the field, he's not going to view his home the same way, in most cases. You can see an extremely intense dog on the field, and the same dog might be totally calm in the house and in situations where nothing is going on. The drive on the field does not necessarily override the dog's entire being to the point that he's continually excited. There is an "on" switch and an "off" switch.

My Luka is a good example. To see her zooming around in the yard playing ball, you'd note her intensity and drive (even at age 11) and think, "Dang, that dog has a LOT of energy--she'd be a pain to live with." But it's just the opposite. Indoors, she often resembles a throw rug. Cats run over and by her, and she barely moves a whisker. She is totally content to lie around the house while we watch TV or do whatever--sometimes I don't even know I have a dog in the house. But call her toward the door, and BOOM--there she is, shivering with excitement and bouncing up and down in anticipation of a ball game. She'll dash outside and chase the ball for as long and as far as you can throw it and demand more. It borders on annoying if you're trying to get anything done in the yard when she's out there. 

But, when she comes inside, it's like a switch is thrown. She'll run in, pick up her favorite toy and lie down with it. And before long, I forget she's even there again.

True, there are dogs who do not have an "off" switch and can't settle down in the home, but those occur in all lines (and many breeds), and it isn't correct temperament. I've had that type, too, so I'm not going to tell you they don't exist... but, a good breeder should be able to evaluate the energy and drive level of each pup, and have a good idea of what the sire & dam produce. If the breeder knows what you want, they should be able to select the right pup for you.


----------



## KristiM

Lol wildo, havoc IS a monster. He is exactly what you would not want in a working line dog. It is not due to natural suspicion though... I do think that a gsd should have natural suspicion and I think most do. It's all about thresholds, with a low threshold the dog thinks that most things require suspicion. With a higher threshold the dig thinks very little requires suspicion. Havoc is pretty low threshold. Even still that is not why I say he is a monster, yes he has natural suspicion (which is fine with me) but he also has a giant chip on his shoulder and is always kinda looking for a fight. He also has WAY over the top territorialism (which would be a discussion for another thread.) dogs like him do exist in the working line world, but from what I have seen he really is not te norm. My other gsd (also west working line) is pretty much the ideal dog, he can be suspicious but only when he needs to be, he settles well but has enough drive to do whatever I ask him to. He to me is the definition of aloof, he doesn't pay much attention to anything, people, dogs, places, loud noises etc....That being said if the situation ever arose that he had to seriously protect me or my property, I think he would do the best he could....but he would never fight like havoc would. I know that havoc would fight to the death to protect himself, his pack and his territory. Is that necessary? I honestly don't think so, but there are jobs out there where dogs like him are needed and incredibly useful. 

Guess who was the better schutzhund dog? Havoc by leaps and bounds and this is the problem with breeding with just sch in mind, the sport DOES in a lot of ways favor the over the top dog IMO. Wildo I think you have actually met havoc's sire (you have a you tube video of him on your channel chuck Von dorneburger bach) I am curious as to what your opinion was of him? I love working line GSDs and will own another one, but I will NEVER AGAIN seek out a dog like havoc.


----------



## carmspack

Wildo have a look at hard core working line dogs , who did not go into "official" work - Badger and Fedor , could have - Aza , in spite of his wild retrieval - we pulled from consideration because he did not have that determination , the persistence , would do the work and look forward to doing something else - was a goofy pup in his mind , slow to mature-- he is PERFECT as family member . This is sort of a learning experience for me when I introduce new genetics , which his sire was -- All Things "Dog": September 2012


----------



## cliffson1

No Wildo, I mean that you seem to have strong opinions and I wanted to see if it was an informed opinion or not. Countless people have given you examples of WL dogs that settle down nicely....I'm curious if you have some inside information that Irmus is one of the "too much" dogs, or is it something you are projecting to support your reluctance about WL. When I see people with strong opinions, I like to know the strong evidence to support that opinion so I can learn more.....Thanks


----------



## cliffson1

@ Wildo....not trying to be contrary my friend, but sometimes I hear opinions that though it may have a grain of truth, is not really representative of the complete picture in my travels. Because many people who are very new to the breed or are reading to maybe get their first dog; will take as gospel things they read here from either learned posters, or frequent posters. Therefore, I sometimes try to flush out the solidness of some opinions so that either we all can learn or that people don't pick something up to guide them that is more myth than fact.


----------



## Chris Wild

wildo said:


> a dog's drive on the field could still outweigh their ability to settle.


*On that field* perhaps. Dogs are very situational. When put into a situation where they are expected to be drivey and intense, they know they are expected to be drivey and intense, their handler is encouraging them to be drivey and intense, they are getting a zillion different environmental cues telling them to be drivey and intense, all with a very long history of experience of that sort of behavior being not only appropriate in that situation, but expected and rewarded, then of course that is exactly how they are going to act because it's how they've been conditioned to act in that specific situation.

Put them in a different situation, one with a different environment, different cues, different expectations, different handler vibes... and they will act quite different because there they have a completely different set of habituated behavioral patterns. 

Sure, some dogs are nutty all the time. That is a nerve problem. But there are a whole lot of super high drive, intense, "monster" dogs that can turn it right off, settle down, and become practical couch potatoes when appropriate.


----------



## KristiM

I agree with Chris Wild, my "monster" can and does settle in the house, he is not "on" all the time. But I do still think that he is challenging to work because of how intense and high drive he is. I think of it this way, my one gsd is like a Toyota, reliable, easy to work, does what I ask of him and does it well. Havoc is like driving a Ferrari, incredible performance and speed but pretty easy to get out of control and crash. I think dogs can be great house dogs but still be "too much" for some people to handle in training. This (like anything) does have a lot to do with conditioning. I have to admit that a lot havoc's intensity was likely created by me. I also try to remind myself that he is young and he improving with age.


----------



## Mrs.K

Chris Wild said:


> *On that field* perhaps. Dogs are very situational. When put into a situation where they are expected to be drivey and intense, they know they are expected to be drivey and intense, their handler is encouraging them to be drivey and intense, they are getting a zillion different environmental cues telling them to be drivey and intense, all with a very long history of experience of that sort of behavior being not only appropriate in that situation, but expected and rewarded, then of course that is exactly how they are going to act because it's how they've been conditioned to act in that specific situation.
> 
> Put them in a different situation, one with a different environment, different cues, different expectations, different handler vibes... and they will act quite different because there they have a completely different set of habituated behavioral patterns.
> 
> Sure, some dogs are nutty all the time. That is a nerve problem. But there are a whole lot of super high drive, intense, "monster" dogs that can turn it right off, settle down, and become practical couch potatoes when appropriate.


Agreed. Mine are couch potatoes in the house but once I flip that switch, it's on. 

Another reason why dogs can't settle in the house is overstimulation. Sometimes, when reading those exercise topics I wonder if people are exaggerating or if they actually do give their pets "that" much stimulation and if they do, I am not surprised at all that their dogs can no longer settle and need constant stimulation.


----------



## Mrs.K

wildo said:


> And I hope it's obvious that I was using the word "monster" loosely in reference to Irmus. I don't want to be on the record calling him that. What I meant, and hope that I related, is that I think he's a LOT of dog. Easily the most intense GSD I've ever met. _IN MY CARE_, I don't think I would have the skill to train him to _not_ be a monster. I'm sure he's a very nice dog for someone who wants all that intensity!


Two weeks ago I traveled to Texas, with all three of my dogs. We've spent two to three days on the road. On the way to Texas we spent one night in a Best Western Motel, outside was a big green yard which wasn't fenced in. It was right in front of the pool area. 

The second they got out of the car and I walked towards that field, I could feel how fired up the girls were. They were like Monsters, chasing each other like crazy. After nearly 10 hours in the car, with only potty and water breaks, they needed to stretch their legs. 

However, once I called it quits, I leashed them, got my stuff and walked into the foyer, booking a room. We went to the room, dogs settled immediately and I went to sleep. 

The same happened when we finally made it to my friends place. After they inspected everything, they immediately settled. But open the door to the backyard and let them outside and the first thing they do is chasing and playing until they realize "Hey, I have to potty, maybe I should go and release myself". 

WL dogs are no different to handle than any other drivey dog out there. They are not difficult in the house at all. I know for a fact that I could give you any of my dogs and you wouldn't have any issues at all handling them. 

My friend who "doesn't like dogs" and has never owned any dogs, handled Indra and Yukon while I was at the Austin Schutzhund Club with Nala. 

Dogs like Gildo, Olko or Satan always settled in the house without any issues. I expect a dog to settle in the house, no matter how driven they are. Granted, there are trainers who advise you to keep your dogs crated at all times, so they explode on the training field and if you let those dogs out of the crate, I fully expect them to go nuts in the house because they have never learned to settle. 

When my new trainer let me stay over at his house, he allowed all three of my dogs to be outside a crate, in his house. They stayed in the room I slept in and again, they settled right away. On the training field Nala is a very intense dog but in the house she is the most easy going and most affectionate little girl you could find. You'd never guess how much of a firecracker she is on the field. 

However, mine are used to a lot of traveling. They go pretty much anywhere I go. No matter where we go, give them some time to inspect the house and then they settle right away. 

On the way back to NY we made a re-route to Lana's place and visited her. They made themselves at home right away. 

It's a matter of training, genetics and routine. If you don't make a big deal out of it, your dogs won't make a big deal out of it either.


----------



## Mrs.K

Sorry for a third post but I forgot to add something. 

After we left Lana's place (dogs and I) we went through Louisianna and spent the night at a days in, in Lafayette. (scary place by the way)
It was around midnight when we checked in and we were ten minutes in the room when somebody pushed down the handle and tried to enter the room and I was very glad that Indra was watching. She was alert and went into a frenzy, so did the other two. From that point on she spent the next hour in front of the window, looking outside "guarding" the door, when she finally decided everything was "clear" and came to bed. 

To this day I don't know whether or not somebody tried to break into our room or if they just had the wrong door. The next morning, when we got ready to hit the road and I looked around where I actually stranded, it didn't look like the best neighborhood or a place where you'd like to live as a single woman.


----------



## sparra

Shade said:


> Where in my post did I state he *needs* three hours a day? That's what I give him because it's keeps him happy and healthy. He's also crated for 4 hours twice a day for two days a week while I work. Does he destroy his crate or anything in the house, no. *Can* he go with less exercise, yes but he would be very unhappy, he loves both mental and physical stimulation. He's still young and has puppy energy to boot, I anticipate he'll end up bring medium energy when he's finished growing.
> 
> I don't revolve my life around my dogs but I do put a lot of effort into their happiness. That doesn't make me a better or worse owner then others. Delgado does have a off switch and will settle while in the house nicely, but he's not a low energy/low maintenance dog. I wanted a dog to work with and that's what I got. He wouldn't be happy with not getting attention or work for a long period, that's not the type of dog he is.
> 
> Not all WL are equal in their demands
> 
> Anyways, back to the original topic..


Seems I have offended you which was not my intention so I feel I need to apologize


----------



## Cassidy's Mom

Freestep said:


> ...on the field? Yes, once a dog has been trained to the sport, it might be hard to get the dog to settle when on the field. He will be expecting excitement and action.
> 
> In the home, it's a different story. No matter how intense the dog is on the field, he's not going to view his home the same way, in most cases. You can see an extremely intense dog on the field, and the same dog might be totally calm in the house and in situations where nothing is going on. The drive on the field does not necessarily override the dog's entire being to the point that he's continually excited. There is an "on" switch and an "off" switch.





Chris Wild said:


> *On that field* perhaps. Dogs are very situational. When put into a situation where they are expected to be drivey and intense, they know they are expected to be drivey and intense, their handler is encouraging them to be drivey and intense, they are getting a zillion different environmental cues telling them to be drivey and intense, all with a very long history of experience of that sort of behavior being not only appropriate in that situation, but expected and rewarded, then of course that is exactly how they are going to act because it's how they've been conditioned to act in that specific situation.
> 
> Put them in a different situation, one with a different environment, different cues, different expectations, different handler vibes... and they will act quite different because there they have a completely different set of habituated behavioral patterns.


:thumbup: I totally agree, and I have living proof. Willy, I know you went to the CanAm flyball tournament and saw just how excited, drivey, and LOUD those dogs can be. That's exactly how Halo is too, once I get her out there and line her up. She's barking her head off the entire time we're waiting for the race to start, and I have to have a firm grip on her collar, with my other arm underneath her belly, to prevent her from dragging me off my knee onto my face when the start dog runs by, because she's lunging forward so hard. 

But she NEVER barks in her crate at flyball tournaments, and she's calm and laid back around the house. She can be quite intense but she has no trouble settling and just hanging out in the house. Right now Tom and I are here in the office on our computers and both dogs are crapped out on the floor. Keefer is right behind my chair, as usual, and Halo is flat out on her side under Tom's desk, probably asleep. She has drive but she can turn it on and she can turn it off, and she's adapted just fine to our home and lifestyle, which does NOT include hours and hours of exercise and stimulation every day. I can't say how much of that is HER, and how much of that is what Chris is talking about with habituated behavioral patterns. My dogs have never had an expectation that they'll get intense physical exercise every day, so they don't pester us for it when they don't get it.

You'd have a lot of fun with Halo, she'd probably love agility.


----------



## wildo

cliffson1 said:


> No Wildo, I mean that you seem to have strong opinions and I wanted to see if it was an informed opinion or not. Countless people have given you examples of WL dogs that settle down nicely....I'm curious if you have some inside information that Irmus is one of the "too much" dogs, or is it something you are projecting to support your reluctance about WL. When I see people with strong opinions, I like to know the strong evidence to support that opinion so I can learn more.....Thanks


It's true- countless people have given me examples of WL dogs that settle. I don't begin to deny that. And I'm not sure i ever claimed that WL dogs _can't_ settle. I don't have the time right now to go back and read all my posts in this thread- but I'd like to think that my main point was that there does exist the concept of "too much dog." Whether the dog can settle or not, too much dog is still just that- too much dog. I completely agree with you Cliff that a good breeder, breeding for BALANCE will be 100% able to meet my needs. I'm in complete agreement.

No, I absolutely have no insider info on Irmus! LOL!! I only have my eyes and my inexperience. 

If he settles fine in the house- that's great. It doesn't change the fact that I don't think I would have the right stuff to handle him on the field. But Mike Diehl _obviously_ has way more experience than me!! As Chris pointed out a couple posts ago- no question Mike has trained and nurtured that kind of intensity. That's wonderful, really! I don't have a problem with it- and I don't think I have the experience to say that I have a problem with it even if I did, lol! All that I know is that dog scares me because I don't have the skill, experience, or balls to handle something as intense as him. And don't forget, Irmus actually was the first working line German Shepherd that I've gotten to watch in person. Talk about a crazy introduction to working lines!

No, please don't think I have insider info. Nope- just a newbie with no experience. 



cliffson1 said:


> @ Wildo....not trying to be contrary my friend, but sometimes I hear opinions that though it may have a grain of truth, is not really representative of the complete picture in my travels. Because many people who are very new to the breed or are reading to maybe get their first dog; will take as gospel things they read here from either learned posters, or frequent posters. Therefore, I sometimes try to flush out the solidness of some opinions so that either we all can learn or that people don't pick something up to guide them that is more myth than fact.


Perfectly fine with me. As I said a post or two ago- I'm here to learn. I am an opinionated person, no question. But my opinion is easily modified as I discover facts and am presented with factual information. My opinion most definitely has been shaped by many posters here. Some of it I may have taken as gospel when I shouldn't have.


--Carmen--
I know you've given me a number of dogs to look into. I promise I will eventually get to it. I'm really more focused on Pimg's medical issues right now and just can't go much further than casual chat like in this thread. Once all this medical stuff is figured out, I'll sit down and dig into what you've sent. Promise.


----------



## Mrs.K

@Wildo, the German SV has an Agility Section and they even have their own Nationals alongside the Schutzhund Nationals where the 75 best German Shepherds competed in Agility against each other. 

This is Gerlie vom Kirschental's run. Enjoy 






Here is a run from another dog
http://youtu.be/AnfJ3Qa2uIo

Amy vom Fasanenbrunnen
http://youtu.be/Ocb19bowp5I


----------



## wildo

Wow- those sure are some interesting courses, and interesting handling too! Very different from most anything I've seen. Thanks!

[EDIT]- the black dog in the second video was much nicer, in my opinion, than Gerlie vom Kirschental. Gerlie had such a bazaar handler with such strange lines. The black dog seemed more driven, was faster, and seemed more agile. The courses are very odd- very compressed with not much space between jumps. I doubt you'll see anything even close to that in the states. In fact, best I know is that USDAA "pushes the limits" with courses having a 17' space between jumps. The courses in these videos you posted have much shorter jump spacing- some looked as short as perhaps 12'. Still, I'd LOVE to see something like this a SchH shows here!


----------



## Mrs.K

It's the nationals and not supposed to be easy. The black dogs handler admitted that the dog was doing great and that she messed up the handling. It was the first time she qualified for it. 

I agree, the handler of Gerlie looks awkward and reminds me of a certain Trainer and Judge out here in my area. 
The second run I liked much better but I am not agility buff so you are definitely more versed in that field. 



wildo said:


> Wow- those sure are some interesting courses, and interesting handling too! Very Idifferent from most anything I've seen. Thanks!
> 
> [EDIT]- the black dog in the second video was much nicer, in my opinion, than Gerlie vom Kirschental. Gerlie had such a bazaar handler with such strange lines. The black dog seemed more driven, was faster, and seemed more agile. The courses are very odd- very compressed with not much space between jumps. I doubt you'll see anything even close to that in the states. In fact, best I know is that USDAA "pushes the limits" with courses having a 17' space between jumps. The courses in these videos you posted have much shorter jump spacing- some looked as short as perhaps 12'. Still, I'd LOVE to see something like this a SchH shows here!


----------



## wildo

I didn't mean it should be easy. I meant that, at least for USDAA (which has the shortest obstacle spacing that I know of [around 17']) many would say that much less distance is unsafe. That's why I find it interesting to see such compact jump spacing.


----------



## KristiM

It looked crazy tight to me too. Especially on a course FOR GSDs who definitely have a greater stride length than a lot of other popular agility breeds.


----------



## hunterisgreat

cliffson1 said:


> It is very to easy to see who works dogs and who doesnt....this is not meant derogatorily, but in comments made from lack of experience. Dogs have the ability to discern and the GS with proprer temperament is one of the best. NOTHING is absolute....so a dog with natural suspicion does not have to walk around in non threatening environments on alert. Dogs learn to recognize certain environs just like they learn to read people. Most pet owners really dont understand the degree that dogs READ people in terms of body language, voices, posture, and emotions. Correct tempered GS are able to make sound adjustments to their character presentation based on these things. A dog walking at night has a different demeanor than one walking in the day(at least it should). At night is a good example of when your dog should increase their natural suspicion. Walk the same dog the same route in middle of the day and dog walks with tail lower and less NS. Dogs that have marvelous temperament in family and in general, when they go on duty in policework, their natural suspicion becomes heightened....because of potential threat....same dog goes home to house with kids and wife or husband and is regular pet. The breed SHOULD have natural suspicion, but the discernment piece allows them to use it wisely. A dog that walks the streets at night that doesnt increase its suspicion level is poor excuse for the breed....and people are breeding these dogs and they are not all BYB. A person who works their dog is very much aware of the dog's ability to use the natural suspicion discriminately....this is what the breed should be. Of course every dog doesnt have it and many people cant nuture it, but these dogs shouldnt be bred and these people shouldnt be owners.....dont change the dog....lol!


Your posts communicate what I try and fail to adequately explain


----------



## hunterisgreat

wildo said:


> Thanks Cliff for elaborating on your comments! I guess I'm still nervous about taking that leap into leap into the working lines, but maybe I shouldn't be. I'm either going to have what it takes or I'm not...


I have three working lines that sleep in my bed and go to dinner and drinks all the time. Working line doesn't mean crappy as a pet. It means stronger nerves, higher drives, etc.


----------



## hunterisgreat

wildo said:


> I'll come right out and say it-- due to this forum, I've bought hook line and sinker into the desire for a "proper" working line shepherd. But I'm pretty sick and tired of being told that because I don't want something that _might_ be too much for me (given that I've never owned a WL shepherd) that I _really_ am asking for a lab (or Golden) in GSD cloths.
> 
> It's a pretty arrogant perspective really. Not all of us have the experience of the uber-ultra-super-badass-hardcore-done-it-all-before people that are here. THAT'S why we're here asking questions. At least that's why *I'm* here anyway.
> 
> Guess what- while not a *working line* German Shepherd, my GSD was my first dog. And I didn't know squat about the breed prior to getting her. I'm sure glad I didn't come here _prior_ to getting her asking about dogs. I might have ended up with a Golden!


See my sig? Those are my first three GSDs. All (strong) working line. Jump right in, the water is fine


----------



## Mrs.K

Honestly, he doesn't need a hardcore working dog. All he needs is a working-line dog with moderate drives for what he wants to do. You can find that kind of dog in pretty much every litter.

Isn't one of the Wildhaus dogs doing Agility? I think her name is Bretta? 

Correct me if I'm wrong, Wildo. You want a driven dog that has enough drive and speed to get you further in Agility but you don't need over the top hard-core drive or pedigrees like many here suggest.


----------



## Mrs.K

hunterisgreat said:


> See my sig? Those are my first three GSDs. All (strong) working line. Jump right in, the water is fine


I've been at the Club where the Breeder of Ketscher Wald dogs is the helper. That club was just half an hour away from where we lived and I've seen him and his dogs in action. I don't think that is what Wildo is looking for.


----------



## wildo

Mrs.K said:


> Honestly, he doesn't need a hardcore working dog. All he needs is a working-line dog with moderate drives for what he wants to do. You can find that kind of dog in pretty much every litter.


Well, I am fairly confident that I am no where near close to getting another dog, but I am ready to start doing research for one. I'm not sure I subscribe to the statement that a WL of "moderate drive"would suit my needs. I think Pimg has moderate drive. I'm looking for my next dog to go _beyond_ the next level, not just get me to the next level. It's kind of like saying that you want to go from local SchH competition only to world level (or at least national level) competition. It takes a special kind of dog to get you there, and moderate drive is probably not it.



Mrs.K said:


> Isn't one of the Wildhaus dogs doing Agility? I think her name is Bretta?


Yep- there are many Wildhaus dogs doing agility. MRL has Bretta Lee and Glory B who are nice dogs. There's a number of others as well.



Mrs.K said:


> Correct me if I'm wrong, Wildo. You want a driven dog that has enough drive and speed to get you further in Agility but you don't need over the top hard-core drive or pedigrees like many here suggest.


I'm not sure. I have to learn more about drives in general to be able to answer that. I need to do research on how "drive" relates to agility anyway.


----------



## Mrs.K

wildo said:


> Well, I am fairly confident that I am no where near close to getting another dog, but I am ready to start doing research for one. I'm not sure I subscribe to the statement that a WL of "moderate drive"would suit my needs. I think Pimg has moderate drive. I'm looking for my next dog to go _beyond_ the next level, not just get me to the next level. It's kind of like saying that you want to go from local SchH competition only to world level (or at least national level) competition. It takes a special kind of dog to get you there, and moderate drive is probably not it.
> 
> 
> 
> Yep- there are many Wildhaus dogs doing agility. MRL has Bretta Lee and Glory B who are nice dogs. There's a number of others as well.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not sure. I have to learn more about drives in general to be able to answer that. I need to do research on how "drive" relates to agility anyway.


Okay, so at this point you don't even know yourself what you want. Then why argue the point that others advise you to jump right in? And I'm not sure if we both think of moderate drive as the same. Just from experience, a lot of people think they have a high drive dog and then when you get to see these dogs in person, they are just medium to low drive, however I am pretty sure that you know the difference since Agility is a Sport where drive and speed plays a major role. 

Wildo, WL dogs are not scary monsters. Granted there are dogs out there that I wouldn't want to own but these type of dogs, if the breeder is not a total wagjob, won't end up in a pet-home. 

There are a lot of breeders that specialize in breeding a certain type of dog. If there is a certain kennel known to produce over the top agility, next to the general working dog, than I'd start my research with that kennel. 

I'd say you don't need too much of a serious dog. I can see you with something flashy, fast, compact, prey drive. But you don't need that serious aspect, you don't need that big, heavy, bulky serious dog, what you need is a compact firecracker that comes with lots and lots of natural speed and that genetic obedience that everybody is talking about. A dog like Nala but less intense and slightly less prey-driven. Because she is a little too much for agility but speedwise, energywise and body structure wise, she would make the perfect Agility dog. 

At least that is what I would look for in an Agility dog. Of course that's just my opinion and you have to know yourself what, in the end, you are going for. We all have different preferences.


----------



## onyx'girl

Mrs.K said:


> Honestly, he doesn't need a hardcore working dog. All he needs is a working-line dog with moderate drives for what he wants to do. You can find that kind of dog in pretty much every litter.
> 
> *Isn't one of the Wildhaus dogs doing Agility? I think her name is Bretta?*
> 
> Correct me if I'm wrong, Wildo. You want a driven dog that has enough drive and speed to get you further in Agility but you don't need over the top hard-core drive or pedigrees like many here suggest.


There are several WH dogs doing agility. Three from Karlo's litter and many others are excelling. We dabble in it, Karlo loves it(and for his size he is extremely graceful and agile), but I just haven't a good place to train around here.


----------



## Mrs.K

onyx'girl said:


> There are several WH dogs doing agility. Three from Karlo's litter and many others are excelling. We dabble in it, Karlo loves it(and for his size he is extremely graceful and agile), but I just haven't a good place to train around here.


Than that is a good kennel to start with because I am pretty sure that Chris Wild knows exactly what Agility Handlers look for in an Agility dog.

There is a reason why her dogs are so successful in Agility.


----------



## Freestep

wildo said:


> I'm not sure I subscribe to the statement that a WL of "moderate drive"would suit my needs. I think Pimg has moderate drive. I'm looking for my next dog to go _beyond_ the next level, not just get me to the next level. It's kind of like saying that you want to go from local SchH competition only to world level (or at least national level) competition. It takes a special kind of dog to get you there, and moderate drive is probably not it.


We might just be talking semantics here, but what seems "moderate" to you may seem low compared to working line dogs. I have never seen your dog in action so I cannot comment on her drive level, but drive is more than the desire to chase a ball or jump through a tire--it is the desire and ability to do these things against all odds and all obstacles, through **** and high water, with a very high threshold for avoidance. Even a "moderate" drive dog can excel at agility--indeed, sometimes moderate-drive dogs are easier to control and manage--but high-drive dogs are generally easy to train once you control the object of their desire.

High-drive dogs are not necessarily hyper. As we've all said many times, there are many high-drive dogs that settle in the house very nicely. However, sometimes high-drive dogs will get themselves into trouble, because the focus on what they want can be so intense that they can injure themselves in pursuit of it. I have a breeder friend whose dog was inside a 5-foot wrought-iron fence; it was the kind of fencing that has the spires on top. The breeder was working another dog, and the dog inside the fence got so excited that she attempted to scale the fence, impaling herself on one of the spires. Thankfully, the injury was not life-threatening, but it put her out of commission for several weeks. 

So sometimes, with a high-drive dog, you have to watch out for them, as some have no sense when they are in drive and would probably jump off a cliff after a ball. A moderate drive dog would probably be a bit easier for your first *working line* dog. Then again, even high-drive dogs can be very managable given the right training and structure. It all depends on the individual dog.

I hope this has not confused you further.


----------



## Mrs.K

Freestep said:


> We might just be talking semantics here, but what seems "moderate" to you may seem low compared to working line dogs. I have never seen your dog in action so I cannot comment on her drive level, but drive is more than the desire to chase a ball or jump through a tire--it is the desire and ability to do these things against all odds and all obstacles, through **** and high water, with a very high threshold for avoidance. Even a "moderate" drive dog can excel at agility--indeed, sometimes moderate-drive dogs are easier to control and manage--but high-drive dogs are generally easy to train once you control the object of their desire.
> 
> High-drive dogs are not necessarily hyper. As we've all said many times, there are many high-drive dogs that settle in the house very nicely. However, sometimes high-drive dogs will get themselves into trouble, because the focus on what they want can be so intense that they can injure themselves in pursuit of it. I have a breeder friend whose dog was inside a 5-foot wrought-iron fence; it was the kind of fencing that has the spires on top. The breeder was working another dog, and the dog inside the fence got so excited that she attempted to scale the fence, impaling herself on one of the spires. Thankfully, the injury was not life-threatening, but it put her out of commission for several weeks.
> 
> So sometimes, with a high-drive dog, you have to watch out for them, as some have no sense when they are in drive and would probably jump off a cliff after a ball. A moderate drive dog would probably be a bit easier for your first *working line* dog. Then again, even high-drive dogs can be very managable given the right training and structure. It all depends on the individual dog.
> 
> I hope this has not confused you further.


What he means is something like that:
Indra Building Search - Jumping off the second floor - YouTube


----------



## wildo

Freestep said:


> We might just be talking semantics here, but what seems "moderate" to you may seem low compared to working line dogs.


That's a _really_ good point that I hadn't considered, Freestep! Thanks for pointing that out. *Mrs.K*- I believe I've commented via PM that I really liked the speed of your Indra. Would you consider her medium drive?? I would have thought she's indeed high drive.


----------



## carmspack

good points Freestep -- I have stated , Cliff has stated , that a well bred balanced GSD can be suitable for just about any calling - Badger for example - hard as nails in bite work , police evaluated, awesome tracking dog , outstanding pet , handled in agility by a child . I can provide so many other examples -- 
Working line and breeding for working , we are beginning to see distinctions in this , and for sport breeding . When a dog is described have that description match the STANDARD . When you get adjectives in the ozone , that is when you have to question the balance of the dog.


----------



## Mrs.K

wildo said:


> That's a _really_ good point that I hadn't considered, Freestep! Thanks for pointing that out. *Mrs.K*- I believe I've commented via PM that I really liked the speed of your Indra. Would you consider her medium drive?? I would have thought she's indeed high drive.


She is medium to high drive. She has a lot of aspects of a high drive dog. 

HOWEVER, to be frank. If I was a serious IPO competition handler, with the ambition to trial at the top of the world, she's not the dog to do it with. She may get you qualified for the LGA (regionals, I believe) and you might even be lucky enough to get to the Nationals BUT since I have her and Nala, if I was that ambitious handler, I'd get rid of Indra, keep Yukon and concentrate completely on Nala. Because she's got that special something and she's got enough of it that multiple, accomplished handlers and trainers would buy her from the spot without looking at the linage. 

And that's what makes the difference in a dog. She is a solid working dog but she's not top dog material. 

Does that make sense?


----------



## wildo

Mrs.K said:


> And that's what makes the difference in a dog. She is a solid working dog but she's not top dog material.
> 
> Does that make sense?


_Completely._ That's got to be the fun part about digging in and learning about lines, in my opinion. As Carmen (and Cliff, and ...) has said "over and over" [not sure I've countered them over and over], a dog bred to the standard should make a solid working dog. But I want more than a solid working dog- I want that "edge" that "something" that pushes the boundaries of what GSDs typically accomplish in agility. Yes, I realize that sounds pompous- as in, "who the **** is Willy that he could accomplish this" but a goal is a goal. It's a goal I've set my mind to. Is there any other GSD that's tried out for the USA World Agility team? I don't know. But someday- I'll have one at the try outs. Someday.


----------



## Mrs.K

carmspack said:


> good points Freestep -- I have stated , Cliff has stated , that a well bred balanced GSD can be suitable for just about any calling - Badger for example - hard as nails in bite work , police evaluated, awesome tracking dog , outstanding pet , handled in agility by a child . I can provide so many other examples --
> Working line and breeding for working , we are beginning to see distinctions in this , and for sport breeding . When a dog is described have that description match the STANDARD . When you get adjectives in the ozone , that is when you have to question the balance of the dog.


I believe we've all been saying that for a long time. It's what we all preach over and over again.


----------



## Mrs.K

wildo said:


> _Completely._ That's got to be the fun part about digging in and learning about lines, in my opinion. As Carmen (and Cliff, and ...) has said "over and over" [not sure I've countered them over and over], a dog bred to the standard should make a solid working dog. But I want more than a solid working dog- I want that "edge" that "something" that pushes the boundaries of what GSDs typically accomplish in agility. Yes, I realize that sounds pompous- as in, "who the **** is Willy that he could accomplish this" but a goal is a goal. It's a goal I've set my mind to. Is there any other GSD that's tried out for the USA World Agility team? I don't know. But someday- I'll have one at the try outs. Someday.


Oh, it makes sense and why not push the limits. There are so many that say it can't be done until someone does it. If that is what you want. Go for it.


----------



## carmspack

Wildo you are missing the point "But I want more than a solid working dog- I want that "edge" that "something" that pushes the boundaries of what GSDs typically accomplish in agility" all these SOLID stable adaptable dogs that I have been talking about can and are high levels - regionals and nationals schutzhund , are working police dogs in some active areas , bomb dogs , working farm dogs , and look to the Swedish dogs and some of the KNPV -- super power yet sociable . Personally Jean Dominique-DeBords german shepherd Espoir du val des Hurles Vent still hard to beat, a top French ring GSD , could hit the top of the 8 foot palisade more easily than many of the competing Mals -- fly over the pit -- .
The thing about balance is that when one thing is out of position you no longer have balance .


----------



## Mrs.K

Carmspack. I think I know exactly what he means. There are solid working dogs and there are solid tworking dogs with that special something. Not all dogs have it. It's that something everyone wants, that type of dog that is out on the field and all of a sudden everybody stops talking and just watches because it's that impressive. 

Is that a solid working dog? Yes, it is, but it's not just a solid working dog. It's what is generally called a "Kracher" (cracker) in Germany. That's what he wants. He wants one of 'those' dogs. Not something that is solid but mediocre and you and me know well enough that the majority of dogs are "mediocre" and that sometimes, once you had that special match, you'll never find another one like that ever again.


----------



## Freestep

wildo said:


> But I want more than a solid working dog- I want that "edge" that "something" that pushes the boundaries of what GSDs typically accomplish in agility. Yes, I realize that sounds pompous- as in, "who the **** is Willy that he could accomplish this" but a goal is a goal. It's a goal I've set my mind to.


Again, I think we're running into problems with semantics--when you say you want "more than a *solid* working dog", I think you are using the word "solid" to mean moderate, not over the top, good but not great. 

When we dog-folk use the term "solid", we are talking about strong nerves and a stable temperament. We use "solid" to mean strong, stable, dependable, incorruptable. Believe me, what you want is a solid working dog, in the dog-folk sense of the word. The opposite of solid would be nervous, unstable, reactive.

What you are saying is that you want a dog with the drive, biddability, and physical ability to excel in sport. Not just to do well, but *excel*, and win competitions. This is not an intangible quality nor is it an unattainable goal--this is what working GSD breeders DO for a living! Well, not literally, as most good breeders cannot pay the bills with dogs, but you see what I'm saying. 

Who would say you cannot acheive your goal? Get the right dog, do the right training, and you're on your way. You may not acheive it with your first dog--most people don't--but it's a great learning experience and a lot of fun, and then maybe your next dog will be the Agility champion! Or maybe not! But you will always have something to strive for, with plenty of love and dedication, and a big win is all the sweeter when it's a long time coming.


----------



## wildo

Yeah- maybe that's why everyone thinks I keep questioning them. I get it. I agree that a solid working dog is a solid working dog. And I agree that if anything is out of balance- then balance doesn't exist. I get it. 

But like Mrs.K stated- I don't buy for a second that every one of the "solid working dogs" posted in this thread have that "something" that would trip my fancy. That's the thing about an opinion. What really "does it" for me might not be the same as what "does it" for Carmen. If I start from a foundation of "solid working dog" and then find that "something" to put on top- that's what I'm looking for.

A perfect example (since we've already strayed SO far off topic) is one that I've brought up before. Take Chuck vom Dorneburger Bach and Furious von Wolfstraum. Both are _very_ nice dogs. Both are solid working dogs. I imagine most people looking for a "solid working dog" couldn't go wrong with either.

Now Chuck is significantly more titled than Furious. Chuck has proven he's got what it takes a number of times. In fact, his own owner even states, "He has a power in protection that I have not seen from many dogs and it is something very special." (emphasis mine) But when I watched them both, Furious is the one that had that "something" _for me._ What is it? Happiness. Joy. Energy. A spark for life. I spotted it a mile away and I loved it. I believe this comes from her grandmother- Babsi vom Hexenforst. I don't know where Babsi gets it- maybe she supplies it herself.

The point is that both those dogs are excellent, balanced, solid working dogs, both can be described as having that something-- but only one of the two "does it" for me. I'm not sure why wanting that extra "something" makes you think I'm not getting it. We all want that extra something in our dogs. I'm pretty sure.


----------



## GSD07

Mrs.K said:


> ...once you had that special match, you'll never find another one like that ever again.


 I also know exactly what you mean here. He wants a dog working with whom gives him that increadible feeling that sky is the limit, and he and his dog are getting there. The perfect match, may take a while to find one.


----------



## carmspack

may be a problem in the breed is that people think solid is mediocre -- and crazy is high drive -- " Not something that is solid but mediocre and you and me know well enough that the majority of dogs are "mediocre" and that sometimes, once you had that special match, you'll never find another one like that ever again. "

I wouldn't say the majority of dogs are mediocre - I see many who sure could have had better , more interesting, more respect-the-dog's-intelligence - training , more socratic , less didactic . If anything I see far too many nervy reactive dogs .


----------



## carmspack

Furious - it's a great pedigree V Furious von Wolfstraum - German Shepherd Dog


----------



## Freestep

wildo said:


> The point is that both those dogs are excellent, balanced, solid working dogs, both can be described as having that something-- but only one of the two "does it" for me. I'm not sure why wanting that extra "something" makes you think I'm not getting it. We all want that extra something in our dogs. I'm pretty sure.


I think you're talking about something other than ability, drive and balance. I think there has to be some chemistry--some dogs immediately strike you as pleasing, others don't. Attitude? Spark? It's a gut thing and varies from person to person, so it's hard to put a name to. As long as you recognize what you want when you see it, that's all that matters.

I haven't seen either of the dogs you mentioned, so can't comment on what "it" might be.


----------



## KristiM

Just thought I would add... Wildo my dog is out of Chuck and a half sister to furious. If you want to know more about him let me know My main focus with him is agility.


----------



## wildo

Man, KristiM- I saw you say that earlier, and completely spaced it. I'll send you a PM for sure...


----------



## Mrs.K

carmspack said:


> may be a problem in the breed is that people think solid is mediocre -- and crazy is high drive -- " Not something that is solid but mediocre and you and me know well enough that the majority of dogs are "mediocre" and that sometimes, once you had that special match, you'll never find another one like that ever again. "
> 
> I wouldn't say the majority of dogs are mediocre - I see many who sure could have had better , more interesting, more respect-the-dog's-intelligence - training , more socratic , less didactic . If anything I see far too many nervy reactive dogs .



Line up 30 of the best working males and I guarantee you, there is one dog in there that stands out. Not only looks wise but personality, traits, everything, the whole package makes him stand out, and even though the others are of the same quality that one dog that stands out, is even better. 

Please tell me you know what I'm talking about


----------



## Debbieg

carmspack said:


> may be a problem in the breed is that people think solid is mediocre -- and crazy is high drive -- " Not something that is solid but mediocre and you and me know well enough that the majority of dogs are "mediocre" and that sometimes, once you had that special match, you'll never find another one like that ever again. "
> 
> I wouldn't say the majority of dogs are mediocre - I see many who sure could have had better , more interesting, more respect-the-dog's-intelligence - training , more socratic , less didactic . If anything I see far too many nervy reactive dogs .



Yes! Isn't the GSD supposed to be a "jack of all trades" and not extreme? That is what I have always loved about about them. I think this stable confident temperament can be found in Working,and Show lines but is getting harder to find because of people who want extremes. (more of this and that) Maybe some see a wonderfully stable balanced utility as mediocre and look for xtremes, but that is not what a balanced GSD is meant to be as I see it.


----------



## Mrs.K

Debbieg said:


> Yes! Isn't the GSD supposed to be a "jack of all trades" and not extreme? That is what I have always loved about about them. I think this stable confident temperament can be found in Working,and Show lines but is getting harder to find because of people who want extremes. (more of this and that) Maybe some see a wonderfully stable balanced utility as mediocre and look for xtremes, but that is not what a balanced GSD is meant to be as I see it.


I am not talking about extremes. I am talking about the same dogs you are talking about but they've got that special something. Call it Charisma and that makes them stand out. Spunk, Flashy, not extreme though. 

You can have a highly driven dog that isn't extreme. 

If I have to compare both my girls, Nala is simply the better dog and it's valid to say that because she's got that special something that so many want. 

The dogs that Carmen presents, THEY HAVE THAT SPECIAL SOMETHING. I really don't get what's so hard to understand about that...some dogs got it, others don't. It's that simple.


----------



## GatorDog

Mrs.K said:


> I am not talking about extremes. I am talking about the same dogs you are talking about but they've got that special something. Call it Charisma and that makes them stand out. Spunk, Flashy, not extreme though.
> 
> You can have a highly driven dog that isn't extreme.
> 
> If I have to compare both my girls, Nala is simply the better dog and it's valid to say that because she's got that special something that so many want.
> 
> The dogs that Carmen presents, THEY HAVE THAT SPECIAL SOMETHING. I really don't get what's so hard to understand about that...some dogs got it, others don't. It's that simple.


I think it's a matter of opinion at that point. What dogs that some people may think 'have it' some others may consider extreme.


----------



## KristiM

I agree that it comes down to a matter of opinion as to what is "extreme," what "has what it takes" and what is a "dud." I do think that in order to do extremely well in dog sports, you have to have a dog that is a little extreme The dog sport world is so competitive these days that in order to have that edge against the competition you need a dog that out does the rest. (Not to mention the trainer.)


----------



## cliffson1

I think some of this is foolish.....any decent working dog is going to be as much as the trainer makes it....I can see Dean or Mike wanting special because they would make the special be seen....but give that same dog to me and he will be a good dog, because the specialness is in the hands of the handler more times than not.


----------



## Mrs.K

cliffson1 said:


> I think some of this is foolish.....any decent working dog is going to be as much as the trainer makes it....I can see Dean or Mike wanting special because they would make the special be seen....but give that same dog to me and he will be a good dog, because the specialness is in the hands of the handler more times than not.


No Cliffson, there are dogs that stand out because they've got something that other dogs. It's the same with humans, or horses. 

BUT just because that dog has that special something doesn't mean you'll ever make it to the national because you as the handler might not be good enough. However, everyone can see that special something. 

An excellent handler can take any dog and make something but if a sporting handler had the choice between a dog that "has it" or doesn't have it. Which one, do you think they'd go with?


----------



## cliffson1

All I'll say is that I've seen a lot of very good dogs that didn't look special with the handler they had....so I guess I just don't get it.....anyway everybody should seek what makes them happy


----------



## onyx'girl

cliffson1 said:


> All I'll say is that I've seen a lot of very good dogs that didn't look special with the handler they had....so I guess I just don't get it.....anyway everybody should seek what makes them happy


I think of this daily....my dog could have done so much better with a handler that knew what s/he was doing. Thankfully he doesn't hold a grudge!


----------



## Debbieg

onyx'girl said:


> I think of this daily....my dog could have done so much better with a handler that knew what s/he was doing. Thankfully he doesn't hold a grudge!


Yeah I think this too! Glad my dog is as good as he is despite my mistakes and seems happy and content.

If our GSD's had a forum I wonder what they would say about us!


----------



## Mrs.K

I think we all think that about our dogs.


----------



## debbiebrown

i think you can take most any dog and make something out of them with the right handling. proof is my dog, fearful and insecure from the get go, very suspicious of his surroundings out of fear. it was touch and go learning how to handle him. he has had all opportunities in his life, he's 4 years now. done agility, and he is not scared of any surfaces, loud noises, etc. because of the help from an excellent breeder trainer in my area and Cliff you know her i have learned alot about my dog and learned how to handle him and train with him. he is excellent in OB and could definitely pass that part in SchH, he is an excellent tracker and loves it, and is totally involved with the track not whats going on around him. unfortunately because of his temp, we can't do protection work with him, which no doubt he would love judging from his tug work and his drive, but excels in every other way. took tons of work over the years to get his focus, but has been the best for him. not that everyone would want to dedicate themselves to working with a dog like this can be frustrating unless you have the right folks to work with. but i am proud of what we have accoplished and what i have learned as a handler of a dog with these issues. on the field this dog has every confidence in the world, and it has helped him in every day life. so, very possible to take a dog and make him all he can be.


----------



## Ruthie

cliffson1 said:


> I think some of this is foolish.....any decent working dog is going to be as much as the trainer makes it....I can see Dean or Mike wanting special because they would make the special be seen....but give that same dog to me and he will be a good dog, because the specialness is in the hands of the handler more times than not.


Interesting thread. I don't get on here very much anymore, so I missed most of the discussion that I would have commented on. But, I really wanted to say something about this.

I think what Cliff says here is true. We often judge other's dogs by their capability and our own by their behavior. We think that because WE can't accomplish something with our dog it means that they are not capable. Maybe it is just my world view, but I truly believe that we end up with the dogs that we end up with for a reason. 

There is nothing wrong with having a wish list and looking for "the perfect dog". My late husband and I did TONS of research and looked for a certain thing in our dogs, but neither is perfect. No dog is perfect. Both have things about them that I love and both have things about them that I would change if I could. But they both have great potential! My younger dog would be a superstar in someone elses hands, but he doesn't belong to them, he belongs to me. 

My focus has to be on how I can become a better handler and learn from my dogs and learn to communicate with them better and train them to behave better. I can't focus on the fact that I wish I could do this or that with my dog or I wish he could be like this one or that one. I am thankful for what I have and the awesome bond that I share with each. They are both a God-send to me.

There are moments when I accomplish something as a handler and I look at my dog and see him respond to the training and I see glimpses of that brilliance, that something special that you guys talk about, and THAT is what matters to me.


----------



## cliffson1

:thumbup::thumbup:


----------

