# Only Working Prey



## Vandal

Wifey's thread and the resulting conversation promped me to start this thread. Ok, all you I.Es, why should dogs only be worked in prey when they first start bitework? Should it be all movement and grips? Should the helper ever confront the dog? 
When can the only prey work end? What are you looking for that indicates the time has come to move on?
You get the idea. Now, should you choose to respond, you MUST state reasons for your beliefs. If you don't, I will call you on it.


----------



## Zahnburg

Sorry Anne, I would respond but for some reason I don't think that my keyboard types the English language any longer.


----------



## Vandal

It's ok...you can respond...we have tools at our disposal.

Google Translate#


----------



## gagsd

It is really late, so hoping this will make sense.....
I think most dogs should be started in prey. But I have reasons!

Working a dog in prey seems "safer." Working a dog in defense/aggression requires a helper/handler team with more ability. They need to read the dog and find out what is too much, how far to push, and when to push. It just requires more talent; because you CAN screw a dog up by pushing, and pushing, and pushing. I do not think there are a lot of helper/handler pairs that can do that.

If you have a dog with lots of defense, it is nice to start them in prey, because that way you have a built-in fall-back to use as the dog matures.

Many, many people want to work young dogs. IMO, working a young dog/puppy with "pressure" is either impossible, or inappropriate. Prey-work can be done, and satisfies the needs of the overachiever handler. (Not talking green dog here, but immature)

Now, I am not saying these reasons are right, but I think they are legitimate.
So, thoughts?


----------



## onyx'girl

My dog really works better NOW in defense and not so much prey. He isn't about a jumpy, moving helper, but if that person swats him with a whip or tries to flank him, he comes out with some fire. He's been doing 'bitework' since he was 4 months old and it was prey in the beginning, but he is of higher threshold and not so crazy that the movement is what gets him going. 
He barked very early on, never had to encourage him to bark at the helper. Karlo was the pup that was out helping other pups to bark. But he was not crazy bark, just consistant bark if that makes sense( it shows now in his hold and bark) He was on a wedge a couple sessions, a pillow for a couple more, and the helper/club changed at that time. 
The new helper was all about presence...bald, big tattooed and fierce facial expressions(he was a national level trial helper but not so much a training helper). 
Karlo wouldn't look him in the eye the first time out, but wasn't focused on the sleeve either, he kept his eye on the threat. This was about 6 months of age. Pillow was used and I handled him, he was not ever backtied. 
I wouldn't consider this first w/ new helper session prey whatsoever. Karlo bit hard, but was not real confident with himself...so I patted him up and praised him. He wasn't pressured(other than the presence of the helpers looks, though I know he did try to make eye contact w/Karlo and Karlo wouldn't) and the helper knew he was young so kept it short and positive, but it was intense just due to the difference in helperwork. The eye contact was key in the helper reading Karlo's ability during that session.
The next few sessions went better, but I feel he was pushed too fast too soon, prey was never really in the picture, we did blinds too soon, and hold & barks before he was a year old.
I know now that we should have slowed down and not done the closed blind scenario's. Still not prey type protection on his part. But he always tended to look good, so the helper just progressed on. I then learned we were doing too much too soon, and decided to slow it down.
I changed clubs again when Karlo was 1.5 yrs(last year at this time) and we back stepped for a few sessions. Helper went with a bit more prey drive to balance him out and when he finally put pressure back on, K came out with confidence and power, the more pressure, the more power. Still not mature in the brain though. We've taken things slower in the past year, all phases have shown his early foundation(suspicion and a bit of lack of focus due to this) and his genetics....Czech/ WG blend. He is confident though in all venues I've taken him, never showing insecurity or hesitation. If I ask him to do something, he does. He doesn't rely on me for instruction, though. 
But on the flipside, I dont' ask enough of him, I tend to baby him, not correcting him effectively for example. He would give more if I asked more.
I think he is balancing out but needs the threat to get engagement as far as protection goes, he focuses now on the sleeve to reduce pressure and will guard it more if he has to work harder to get it. All maturity learning process on both him and me!


----------



## Renofan2

Jane: My experience with Brenna (another Andy Prodegy), is similar to what you describe in Karlo. We have really taking training slowly and concentrated on building good foundation. When she was 12 mos we started the hold and bark in the blind and after 2 sessions realized it was way to soon. Now at 20 months we have begun again and it is coming along really nicely. When young we could get her to bark in defense, but spent months developing prey. She was not interested in ball or tug but now has become much more interested. It has been a big difference from training my first schutzhund dog which was a german showline and worked almost all in prey.

C


----------



## hunterisgreat

Depends heavily on the dog. In order to avoid any "I.E." accusations, I'll describe only my dogs, as I have two very different dogs. In the general sense, as I said before, I believe teaching should be done in prey, then when the dog has a solid understanding, begin introducing more stress and working more in defense or fight drive... as everyone has slightly different use of those words, I'll define them for the context of my post. This is what I mean when I use the words:
Prey drive - chasing the ball, chasing the leather roll, bite pillow, early sleeve work, etc. The drive has no emotion in it. Its purely instinct, and doesn't cloud the dog's mind like other drives. The other drives all make learning more difficult. Learning is most easily done in prey.
Defensive drive - self preservation by meeting an imminent threat of violence with violence. This drive is one coupled with and triggered by stress. A dog with low defense and high prey should never be a working k9, but can certainly achieve a schh title (not saying they should, but thats reality)
Fight drive - "the best defense is a good offense".. meeting a perceived threat with violence before that threat's violence is imminent. I believe this is less stress than defensive drive, and marks a dog that really enjoys the fight. I believe this is the only one that is not present in most dogs (across all breeds). The other two are always present in some degree.

My female is extreme high prey drive, by anyone's measure that has seen or worked with her. Defense is there, but the astronomical prey means the defense drive must be intentionally stimulated in order to work in that drive in order to get it high enough to not be overshadowed by the prey drive. With her, stress is put on her, otherwise bite work becomes too much about the sleeve and not about an interaction with the helper. Push the stress just a little too high and she says "I'm done with the stupid game" and goes for the helper. She is extremely fast and has gotten the drop on a number of people, so this is not ideal simply from a safety standpoint, forget about training goals. Lots of whip or stick can easily push her defense very high.. when that happened, we can still train, but less of the session's lessons stick with her. She is presently getting more and more stress introduced to bring intensity into her b&h and stop any focus or persistent attention to the sleeve. After an overly stressful session you can see the stress manifesting itself in wanting to put the sleeve down and thrashing, getting chewy, lack of calmness on the bite, etc.

My male has high prey drive, but very high fight and defense drive. He has to be worked in a particular way. For him, he wants to fight the helper, and the sleeve is just what he knows he is allowed to bite. Eye contact, squaring off, walking in with a bunch of presence, pretty much ensures you will get him highly loaded in fight drive. This is great down the road, but when teaching it is really a hinderance. Teaching him has to be done in prey, or its just a big sparring match where not much was really accomplished other than him getting his dominate urges satisfied. It looks cool and intense to a bystander, but its counterproductive. When we are teaching behaviors, the helper always presents him a side profile, no eye contact, lots and lots of sleeve movement to keep him in prey. His sessions are very short and frequent. Its not that the stress would ever cause him to go into avoidance, or that he can't "take it", its simply that teaching in full on fight drive is not nearly as effective as teaching in prey. When I like what I see in his b&h built on a prey foundation, we'll allow him to fight a bit more... otherwise we are rewarding less than ideal behavior. 

At the end of the process, both dogs will have correct, very intense, fight/defense driven bark and holds. Most importantly, they will be operating out of well exercised behaviors that are now second nature to them, and they don't need to think much about what they are doing. At that point, I can let the helper lay on the stress on either dog.

Just so we are clear, a dog only ever trained in prey is not honoring the point of schh IMO. It seems that if you tell someone the dog is too stressed, they take it as a shot at their ego, and respond with "oh no, my dog isn't stressed, he can take that" blah blah blah... ego's are the biggest hurdle in training I've seen.. asking for too much too fast, being blind to whats happening in front of your eyes that is easy to fix if you only realize whats happening, etc. 

Who learns for a math test better, a child who is positively encouraged to do his best, given the material and teaching guidance he needs, and put through the stress of a final exam once he's built a solid understanding of mathematics, or the child that is told "the test is friday.. if you fail it, you'll lose your nintendo, be grounded for a month, etc"... learning under stress is simply less effective. In the same line of thinking, do martial artists learn by the instructor saying "here's how you block a punch... alright I'm going to punch for real, so make sure you block it" and inevitably gets punched in the face a few times before he gets it (but invariably never has perfect form), or the instructor who demonstrates the maneuver and has the student repeat and repeat with an imaginary attacker until the brain does it without any thought and the form is perfect, and then proofs and hones the block with real punches?


----------



## Liesje

I won't keep a dog that can only be worked in prey so I guess I can't answer the question. I do not like only prey work. Right now I have a dog that will always default to prey given his pedigree and his age so he's not being worked at the moment and probably won't be for some time. I have another dog that is somewhat the opposite, would not work in prey. Helpers would dance around doing misses and fancy movements with equipment and the dog just stood there. At a better age a new helper came out and put some pressure on and the dog has been biting and fighting ever since never shifting in the grip.

To me the helper is not my dog's friend and is not there to make my dog feel happy and safe. That is not saying that the helper should overpower my dog. The helper should know how to have the dog win and build the dog's confidence without just playing games of tug and petting my dog. 

I do think that the biting/gripping behavior comes from prey but IMO that is genetic anyway, either the dog has that or he does not have that so a dog that does not genetically work as much in prey might not have a fabulously quick strike and full grip but I personally am not overly concerned with this "bite development" thing. My goal is a dog that is out there to own the helper with his fight. Sleeve, suit, whatever, doesn't matter to me. I train him to target certain equipment or a certain area not because the dog wants to possess that thing or fight for that thing but because he knows that targeting that thing/area is what gives him the fight and diffuses the threat.


----------



## hunterisgreat

As an excellent example, to anyone openminded enough to objectively look at it, note how if I say something that offended someones ego, their mind becomes so predisposed to defending their ego and discrediting/dismissing the point made, that they never really objectively read what was said without any personal emotion causing the point to be misconstrued or misinterpreted. In the exact same way, that persons "fight drive" or "defensive drive"... the reaction to a perceived attack on their ego, clouded their thinking enough to prevent any meaningful discussion from taking place, and nothing was learned by any party involved... if my points were truly incorrect, and the person had just taken a moment to explain why and effectively convince me of the flaw in my reasoning or observation, then maybe I could have learned something? Thats why I'm here after all...


----------



## hunterisgreat

Liesje said:


> I won't keep a dog that can only be worked in prey so I guess I can't answer the question. I do not like only prey work. Right now I have a dog that will always default to prey given his pedigree and his age so he's not being worked at the moment and probably won't be for some time. I have another dog that is somewhat the opposite, would not work in prey. Helpers would dance around doing misses and fancy movements with equipment and the dog just stood there. At a better age a new helper came out and put some pressure on and the dog has been biting and fighting ever since never shifting in the grip.
> 
> To me the helper is not my dog's friend and is not there to make my dog feel happy and safe. That is not saying that the helper should overpower my dog. The helper should know how to have the dog win and build the dog's confidence without just playing games of tug and petting my dog.
> 
> I do think that the biting/gripping behavior comes from prey but IMO that is genetic anyway, either the dog has that or he does not have that so a dog that does not genetically work as much in prey might not have a fabulously quick strike and full grip but I personally am not overly concerned with this "bite development" thing. My goal is a dog that is out there to own the helper with his fight. Sleeve, suit, whatever, doesn't matter to me. I train him to target certain equipment or a certain area not because the dog wants to possess that thing or fight for that thing but because he knows that targeting that thing/area is what gives him the fight and diffuses the threat.


The quality of the bite is indeed genetic, but keeping that quality in high stress is to some degree conditioned.

The helper should be like a sparing partner... nothing more. Not a friend, not a hated enemy.

If you don't believe a dog's bite will deteriorate with too much stress, go do a really hard obedience session with lots of corrections and no rewards while a helper is agitating the crap out of the dog 20 yards away, and have the helper truly stress him. You'll see the bite quality, targeting, etc, all be less than that same dog with less stress. The only case where you wouldn't, is where the dog as been trained up to that level of stress, and has learned to work at that stress level, IMO. Up the stress past what he is used to or conditioned to deal with, and you'll still see the deterioration I think.

I wouldn't want a prey only dog either... nor do I have prey only dogs. In fact no one will handle my male for fear of him. when someone other than me has given a correction to either dog in bite work, it was not well received at all.


----------



## Samba

I'll never get this titling done, so for sure, I qualify as I.E.!

I don't understand all the prey work. I have seen a lot of it. There sometimes is an emphasis on getting grips, getting the youngster wanting to possess the bite item and setting up the idea of a possession game between the pup and the helper.

I was under the impression that the title could be earned in prey, so why ever move out of it?

Personally, I don't enjoy all prey work. It leaves me flat and disinterested. So, if that is the approach I am presented with, I just put the dog back in the car. One of the reasons I'll never title.

I started Hogan with a challenge from the helper. He got mad at that bad guy! Happy to give his presented part a good wrenching and fight. Dog didn't even know there was a "prey item" involved. Later, I took him to some work that was very prey based and while the dog impressed with his enthusiasm and skill, it left me feeling like I just ate plain oatmeal and that half the dog never participated.

I have not noted that working the dog in a balanced way results in difficulty learning on the part of the dog. It seems to help me. I mean aren't the exercises a balance of drive changes? Does one "teach" them in one drive and then bring in the changes later? Obviously I don 't understand it all.


----------



## hunterisgreat

Samba said:


> I'll never get this titling done, so for sure, I qualify as I.E.!
> 
> I don't understand all the prey work. I have seen a lot of it. There sometimes is an emphasis on getting grips, getting the youngster wanting to possess the bite item and setting up the idea of a possession game between the pup and the helper.
> 
> I was under the impression that the title could be earned in prey, so why ever move out of it?
> 
> Personally, I don't enjoy all prey work. It leaves me flat and disinterested. So, if that is the approach I am presented with, I just put the dog back in the car. One of the reasons I'll never title.
> 
> I started Hogan with a challenge from the helper. He got mad at that bad guy! Happy to give his presented part a good wrenching and fight. Dog didn't even know there was a "prey item" involved. Later, I took him to some work that was very prey based and while the dog impressed with his enthusiasm and skill, it left me feeling like I just ate plain oatmeal and that half the dog never participated.


An all defense dog is no better than an all prey dog, and is also just plain less safe to be around.

You could title in all prey, but that should be scored accordingly. Personally, I don't think the dog should be titled if its nothing but prey and the dog has zero defense. I would rather have a less accurate, less flashy, but intense and scary b&h at the expense of points, than a flashy prey-only b&h


----------



## GSDElsa

How do people not think that prey does not cloud the mind like other drives?


----------



## hunterisgreat

GSDElsa said:


> How do people not think that prey does not cloud the mind like other drives?


B/c defense and fight cause conflict, confusion due to the emotions involved. You can watch a dog in higher stress with defense and fight coming out, begin to make mistakes and get sloppy where it wouldn't have normally. To me that means the foundation is not solid enough, not second nature enough, that it is the default behavior even under high stress.


----------



## Zahnburg

This is the way I view it. Biting and barking are not mechanical things that we need to teach the dog, he already know how to bite and bark. For the dog to bite or bark in the manner that we want him to it is simply necessary to put the dog in the correct mindset to do that. This correct mindset is impossible to acheive using only prey or only aggression, thus I find it is important to take a balanced approach right from the begining.


----------



## hunterisgreat

Zahnburg said:


> This is the way I view it. Biting and barking are not mechanical things that we need to teach the dog, he already know how to bite and bark. For the dog to bite or bark in the manner that we want him to it is simply necessary to put the dog in the correct mindset to do that. This correct mindset is impossible to acheive using only prey or only aggression, thus I find it is important to take a balanced approach right from the begining.


I agree that dogs already know how to bite and bark... but to bark, right in front, and not touch the helper is not something the dog inherently knows, nor is releasing the grip when the helper freezes during a drive, nor is learning it is his bark that he can use to manipulate and control the helper. Those have to be taught.. its been my experience teaching comes much faster in a predominately prey driven exercise... what I am NOT saying, is that is where the exercise remains for the life of the dog, or that the drive levels and ratios to each other are not intentionally changed moving forward in the training.


----------



## Chris Wild

What Art said! 

Also I think with regard to aggression that people need to realize that what can appear on the surface to be similar behaviors can have very different mindsets behind them. Many people view the protection drives as just prey and defense and nothing else. There is more to aggression than just defense. Or rather, more types of aggression coming from a different place inside the dog and thus a different mindset and different reason for the dog doing what he is doing than just the stress and fight/flight response associated with defense.


----------



## Samba

I wasn't speaking of working a dog entirely in pressured defense. There is something other than an extreme, surely? If a dog can 't see something from the helper and use that to its advantage in learning the work, then what?

It is not all prey and defense. 

I see others posted while I sipped coffee.

When does the change occur? I Would prefer to keep it balanced so that all the dog is there to some degree in the learning. I don't really want the dog not bringing what is needed in the components to the work. I think it would be easier if one were to utilize all of the dog.


----------



## Liesje

FWIW I prefer defense over prey but like Samba is saying that doesn't imply extremes, though if I had to I'd consider an all defense dog over an all prey dog. It's not just the drive, but the threshold. IMO the high or all prey dogs I've seen have been quite low threshold as well. The dogs appear neurotic in protection, obedience, or just being a dog in the kennel or the home. I suppose I could deal with a high prey dog with a higher threshold but haven't really seen that in reality. I personally prefer more defense than prey, but that's only part of the equation. The dog must also fight, and I prefer a medium to high threshold as well (do not like an overly suspicious dog, see no reason why a dog with good fight and high defense can't live in the house and be safe). Right now I have a high prey dog with a low threshold and he tests my patience every day! (or every 5 minutes!)  Obviously the ideal is a balance of prey, defense, and fight with the dog appropriately switching drives.


----------



## Vandal

I didn't read all the posts carefully because I am in a little bit of a hurry this morning. So, if I did not interpret what is being said correctly, you'll have to excuse me for the moment.

Lets just concentrate on this one aspect for a minute. It appears that the idea behind "all" prey work is to make the dog feel confident and people are using it to avoid putting the dogs into 'conflict" because, when the dog is working in drives other than prey, they can't quite think straight. However, most people are working PUPPIES with prey attractions/work. Puppies , ( as a general rule), have not developed social aggression , ( it comes later, IF it comes at all), so, what's the point ? What are the benefits?

Jane did not state if she believes in the prey only approach or not...and why.


----------



## Liesje

I think as far as starting puppies in prey, people just want to work their dogs. A lot of people don't really know the difference and don't care, they just want something to do with their dogs that is age and breed appropriate, something that exercises their minds and bodies and is fun without being told they have to pay a lot of money to be in a club BUT can't work a dog until it's 18 months. I think a lot of people don't have access to good helpers so prey work is safe for the dog, handler, and helper. I think sometimes prey work is good to help with targeting (but IMO that can be done at home as just a game with the handler, doesn't have to be "protection" work).


----------



## hunterisgreat

Chris Wild said:


> There is more to aggression than just defense. Or rather, more types of aggression coming from a different place inside the dog and thus a different mindset and different reason for the dog doing what he is doing than just the stress and fight/flight response associated with defense.


Thats why I like to break it down further than just defense... some people don't believe in "fight drive", and say its just defense, but its a different sort of defense I think... in my opinion there is two real groups of drive, prey and food in one... i'd call that group, i dunno, resource acquisition based drives? And that group is without emotion, without stess or threat. All the other drives/behaviors... fight, defense, avoidance, submission, flight, I lump into group I would call "self preservation" and are reactions to pressure or threat.

Its easy to see dogs that are defense b/c they are fearful, and dogs that are defensive b/c it pleases some desire within to do so. Agree or disagree?
Make sense?


----------



## hunterisgreat

Vandal said:


> I didn't read all the posts carefully because I am in a little bit of a hurry this morning. So, if I did not interpret what is being said correctly, you'll have to excuse me for the moment.
> 
> Lets just concentrate on this one aspect for a minute. It appears that the idea behind "all" prey work is to make the dog feel confident and people are using it to avoid putting the dogs into 'conflict" because, when the dog is working in drives other than prey, they can't quite think straight. However, most people are working PUPPIES with prey attractions/work. Puppies , ( as a general rule), have not developed social aggression , ( it comes later, IF it comes at all), so, what's the point ? What are the benefits?
> 
> Jane did not state if she believes in the prey only approach or not...and why.


Confidence and keeping a clear head are part of prey work, but the primary point I believe, is to teach there. In the same way you teach any obedience without distraction, and then steadily add distraction. That that point you're no longer teaching in the pure sense, but honing and/or proofing what was taught.

Agree about puppies.. they have no defensive drive, and any heavy stress is just degrading the bond, causing confidence issues, etc. 

Don't understand the question.. the point of prey work with a puppy, or the point of trying to do defensive work with a puppy?


----------



## Vandal

I guess I should start a thread on targeting too. I have never had to teach a dog, ( who had all the necessary drives and temperament for protection work), to target. If the balance was off in the dog and worsened by poor helper work then it was a case of getting the dog back to the center of the sleeve using prey attractions, vs a darm plastic contraption attacted to the sleeve cover...lol....
This is along the same lines as where I am headed in this thread and was already brought up , however accidental that was......who the dog is.


----------



## hunterisgreat

Another point of all prey work, is working my own dogs.. I never put any stress on my own dogs, particularly my male. This would just cause conflict between us.


----------



## Vandal

> Don't understand the question.. the point of prey work with a puppy


The point of prey work with a puppy. From your posts, I get the impression you think protection is all about "teaching" it.


----------



## Vandal

Oh no, working your own dog...another thread.....


----------



## hunterisgreat

Vandal said:


> The point of prey work with a puppy. From your posts, I get the impression you think protection is all about "teaching" it.


teaching parts of it yes.. barking without biting is certainly not natural. releasing when the handler's drive stops and he freezes up isn't natural either. Its also a really effective way to prep them for some time in the crate 

What do you feel is the point of prey work with a puppy?


----------



## Samba

Funny, I was thinking...How hard is targeting if a dog has functional body/mind? 

I didn't do prey work with my pup. He got no introduction to the sleeve until he barked that creep out from behind the car. He was not freaked out in defense. Bite was on target with no training regards the sleeve.

I guess I was not so much of thinking of "training" the dog as I was asking the question...."Got schutzhund?"


----------



## hunterisgreat

Vandal said:


> Oh no, working your own dog...another thread.....


I don't think most people should, but in certain cases I think it is appropriate or even needed. I don't need to work my female at home. I do need to work my male, because his fight drive is much lower working with me, than with anyone else as I am no threat to him. I can teach what I want at home much easier than with another helper. I don't work my own dogs with any defensive pressure at all

Of course, "don't try this at home kids". Certainly not encouraging people to work their own dogs as they will usually cause more problems than anything else.


----------



## gagsd

I (or my helper) unintentionally taught a dog to target.... the leg. Oops


----------



## hunterisgreat

Samba said:


> Funny, I was thinking...How hard is targeting if a dog has functional body/mind?
> 
> I didn't do prey work with my pup. He got no introduction to the sleeve until he barked that creep out from behind the car. He was not freaked out in defense. Bite was on target with no training regards the sleeve.
> 
> I guess I was not so much of thinking of "training" the dog as I was asking the question...."Got schutzhund?"


There are certainly folks who don't do squat until over a year and get excellent results... personally I don't think either matter, but I encourage my roommate and his 9 week old to come, more so he is learning, not the dog.

Neither of my dogs did any protection work at all before ~1.5 years of age.


----------



## Samba

doubled


----------



## Vandal

I don't feel there is a point. I don't work pups. Might play with them once or twice myself to see what's going on and then no more. They watch from a run or they are tied out until they show me they are ready. Then they are started in a way where the helper is a "bad guy". What that helper does is at the right level for that dog. It's called reading the dog and reacting accordingly. The dog is confronted by the helper, and the dog drives him/HER away, ( prey).
The idea is to channel "aggression" into prey and prey is not play. That was always the point with prey work. What people are doing with pups is mostly playing, they are not working in prey.


----------



## gagsd

Vandal said:


> ...The idea is to channel "aggression" into prey and prey is not play. That was always the point with prey work. What people are doing with pups is mostly playing, they are not working in prey.


Now this is an interesting statement. I like that, makes sense, but have never seen it so logically put.


----------



## Samba

Is there any risk with this type of work with pups?

Over the years, I gave it up as it seemed a waste of time and gas due to it not being that useful. But, is there a problem with it?

Anne's description is good. And that first work is about the "man" and the dog's interaction with an actual being. Not a toy slinger.


----------



## Vandal

I also believe that each drive in the dog fuels the other, so trying to work with only one, is a mistake IMO. If the dog needs prey work to build it, I feel like you will have a problem later, no matter how much you try to "teach it". It is there, or it isn't. If it is there, it will come out when you work with all the dog's drives.


----------



## Samba

I have to say that beginning at the right beginning seemed so useful. The dog had no preconditioning about a toy game going on for months and months. Dog saw protection picture and reacted with protection behaviors...not trained, not something that freaked the dog the heck out. Always thought that first intro to the creep of a guy, who he then defeated was the best thing I did.


----------



## Liesje

When working targeting I do that more for suit work. Decoy might be moving, trying to evade the dog (not just moving in a straight line like an escape bite), I want the dog to bite a certain spot (not the leg or the arm, I want the dog biting between the elbow and the collarbone). Not necessarily talking about targeting the center of a sleeve. If doing sleeve work/SchH and my dog is not biting full and center there's something else going on other than the dog just not biting where I want him to bite.


----------



## Samba

I haven't done much bitesuit work. Do they have to be trained where to bite? My dog hit high on the body the first time and has since. Is this also something in the dog, or learned?


----------



## Vandal

I have trained all kinds of ways over the years. We tried prey work when the idea was first introduced years ago...and did it wrong. lol. There was a huge controversy about the introduction of the training idea using prey work, both in Germany and here. The loss of the "protective instinct" was the biggest concern and boy, were they right to be concerned.

People barely mention protective when they talk about protection now. It is all prey, defense , avoidance blah, blah, blah. Yes, I do it too but one thing I have not forgotten, is how imprortant that protective instinct is and just how many dogs have none of it nowadays. 

We were not teaching dogs to be protective, they already were. We were mostly teaching obedience to show the dog when not to bite vs when _to_ bite. They LIKED to bite...and I am certain that statement will be misunderstood in this now, way too P.C., dog world..


----------



## hunterisgreat

Vandal said:


> I don't feel there is a point. I don't work pups. Might play with them once or twice myself to see what's going on and then no more. They watch from a run or they are tied out until they show me they are ready. Then they are started in a way where the helper is a "bad guy". What that helper does is at the right level for that dog. It's called reading the dog and reacting accordingly. The dog is confronted by the helper, and the dog drives him/HER away, ( prey).
> The idea is to channel "aggression" into prey and prey is not play. That was always the point with prey work. What people are doing with pups is mostly playing, they are not working in prey.


When a puppy is chasing a tug, that is prey drive..


----------



## hunterisgreat

Vandal said:


> I have trained all kinds of ways over the years. We tried prey work when the idea was first introduced years ago...and did it wrong. lol. There was a huge controversy about the introduction of the training idea using prey work, both in Germany and here. The loss of the "protective instinct" was the biggest concern and boy, were they right to be concerned.
> 
> People barely mention protective when they talk about protection now. It is all prey, defense , avoidance blah, blah, blah. Yes, I do it too but one thing I have not forgotten, is how imprortant that protective instinct is and just how many dogs have none of it nowadays.
> 
> We were not teaching dogs to be protective, they already were. We were mostly teaching obedience to show the dog when not to bite vs when _to_ bite. They LIKED to bite...and I am certain that statement will be misunderstood in this now, way too P.C., dog world..


I assure you, neither of my dogs protective instincts are in any way suppressed by our use of prey to teach.


----------



## Samba

Hogan loves to bite, but not just biting...he really loves it in the context of protection and fighting. It is not something the dog has to learn, it not something they have to come to cope with so they can "learn". It something inherently satisfying to the dog as are all genetically programmed activities.

And, it is true..not PC these days.


----------



## Vandal

> I assure you, neither of my dogs protective instincts are in any way suppressed by our use of prey to teach.


You are simply not understanding what I am saying. You might understand later but somehow, I doubt it. Maybe not because you can't but because of the culture that now exists in SchH.

People are no longer using the protective instinct to train SchH "protection". That instinct comes mostly thru social aggression but the breeding now has removed much of that. Prey work is not play, there is a seriousness to it when it is combined with the rest . I can't, ( at the moment anyway), explain that better. Maybe someone else can try.


----------



## Zahnburg

X isn't a number!!!


----------



## hunterisgreat

Samba said:


> Hogan loves to bite, but not just biting...he really loves it in the context of protection and fighting. It is not something the dog has to learn, it not something they have to come to cope with so they can "learn". It something inherently satisfying to the dog as are all genetically programmed activities.
> 
> And, it is true..not PC these days.


Believe there was some miscommunication. By teach, I'm referring to B&H, obedience during protection, etc. Not teaching drives or desires.. those are there or they aren't.

Don't understand how what I write keeps getting distorted.. doing my best to be as clear as possible, but this keeps happening, and the whole discussion turns to discrediting something I didn't even say.. this is not constructive


----------



## Samba

What is it we are teaching with a the puppy prey work? My dog doesn't have that learning.

My dog can learn the bark and hold without prey? He already did it the first time. Just had to stop him from getting too close. I am confused.


----------



## hunterisgreat

Vandal said:


> You are simply not understanding what I am saying. You might understand later but somehow, I doubt it. Maybe not because you can't but because of the culture that now exists in SchH.


Please explain... I'm remarkable good about incorporating other's sound advice into my own understanding of really any topic. If you can convince me with sound logic and/or fact, I'll believe you... I have no believes that are absolute or written in stone. Think you're selling me short here


----------



## hunterisgreat

Samba said:


> What is it we are teaching with a the puppy prey work? My dog doesn't have that learning.


lol good lord... I wan't referring to puppy work in that response.


----------



## Vandal

I added more to my post above. I will try later but I don't have time at the moment. I think Art needs to explain it. lol.


----------



## Vandal

Before I go I will just say this. Some of this you are not supposed to understand right away. It requires you to sit and think about it, work some dogs, think some more and so on.
I can assure you, I didn't understand when I first started but the difference in me was, I was open to considering what was being offered. Maybe who was offering it had something to do with it but I put those ideas in my head and I went and worked dogs, lots of them. There were many " so that's what he meant" moments. People who dismiss ideas out of hand, will never be good dog trainers. Not saying that is you but I do see lots of the " I don't understand, so, it must be BS" kind of thinking with people who train in SchH.


----------



## Liesje

Samba said:


> I haven't done much bitesuit work. Do they have to be trained where to bite? My dog hit high on the body the first time and has since. Is this also something in the dog, or learned?


Yes and no. Since Nikon's had two years of SchH he will bite an arm if that is what is presented, and a lot of decoys do both so even when they don't mean to they present like a sleeve. If he is worked more "real" he will bite chest/collarbone area. I believe in ringsport the dogs bite legs which I personally don't like but he's never tried that. I want him biting an armpit because it is a target from the front or the back (so far he's only had maybe one or two bites from the back but at a higher level the dog's do their courage test with the decoy shooting at gun at the dog and at the last moment the decoy turns and tries to evade the dog so the dog will bite the back). Also practically speaking if a dog bites you in the armpit...yeah ouch! I think it's a great spot for a bite, very painful, keeps the dog in close so his weight can really drag on the person. If you have a weapon it allows the dog to disarm without going at the arm/weapon as much. As far as what we do the dog is not going to lose or gain points for biting an arm vs armpit vs collarbone it's just a preference of mine and has not been difficult to adjust during a few protection sessions and doing some prey/play work at home having the dog chase a tug or kongtails up into my armpit.


----------



## Samba

Oh, I was asking about what it is we are teaching the pups in early prey training? 

Hunter, you might have posted while I was typing or out to air the dog. I am trying to post in the vein of the discussion so that is not necessarily in response personally to a specific post. Others will do that also. Hopefully, that will help.


----------



## Samba

I have found it to be much like school. You go to the general classroom and you get the surface, popular textbook learning that is out at the time. If you are lucky, you develop and then you go to the library. You dig up works by experts in their fields. What you discover is often revealing, contrary to the popular stuff but so much closer to the truth. And more interesting!

Interesting about the bitesuit target training. Thanks.


----------



## Liesje

Samba said:


> Oh, I was asking about what it is we are teaching the pups in early prey training?


I just make it a game and have them come up in the armpit with a large toy. Like messing with a flirtpole or doing prey work with tugs and bite pillows except getting them to chase around and come into that area. Especially if I do SchH too I think it helps so when we do suit later on the dog is not entirely habituated on biting sleeves/arms. Does it really matter? Probably not but I don't think it hurts either.


----------



## Samba

Yes, what you describe Liesje is different from the helper lead puppy prey work I see so often. 

I am wondering what is the learning we want our pup to get while out there? I think it might be detrimental myself. But, I am only a vaulted I.E.


----------



## hunterisgreat

Vandal said:


> Before I go I will just say this. Some of this you are not supposed to understand right away. It requires you to sit and think about it, work some dogs, think some more and so on.
> I can assure you, I didn't understand when I first started but the difference in me was, I was open to considering what was being offered. Maybe who was offering it had something to do with it but I put those ideas in my head and I went and worked dogs, lots of them. There were many " so that's what he meant" moments. People who dismiss ideas out of hand, will never be good dog trainers. Not saying that is you but I do see lots of the " I don't understand, so, it must be BS" kind of thinking with people who train in SchH.


I believe I'm the opposite of "I don't understand so its false". I did just ask for something to be explained after all. 

p.s., I do work dogs, lots of them, all the time. No, I'm not sitting with 30 years under by belt, but then I'm way to young to have that anyway.

Learning is not foreign to me, and I'm quite capable of and always evaluating my methods, understanding, etc. Lets keep the discussion on the validity of points. If you feel I don't understand something, explain why. If you just make statements like the above ones, or put forth points with no explanation, fact, or basis as to why you feel it has merit, then its really without any substance at all.


----------



## Samba

Where is Art? 

If a person says that working a pup/ dog in prey/play can be detrimental because of the lack of balance that brings, because of the decrease of intensity and good balance of the dog's drives needed for correct behaviors? ....what further explanation would make it graspable? I think it may take some experience training lots of dogs and also exposure to work that shows what is being spoken of. It is so often that seeing is believing. It is very useful advice indeed, not a put off most likely.


----------



## hunterisgreat

Samba said:


> Where is Art?
> 
> If a person says that working a pup/ dog in prey/play can be detrimental because of the lack of balance that brings, because of the decrease of intensity and good balance of the dog's drives needed for correct behaviors? ....what further explanation would make it graspable? I think it may take some experience training lots of dogs and also exposure to work that shows what is being spoken of. It is so often that seeing is believing. It is very useful advice indeed, not a put off most likely.


Who said I'm not seeing what I described? Think I just pulled this stuff out of my rear? I can tell you that for my male, right now, cranking on defense will hurt our training program. Not because I think that, because I have seen that in person, and have witnessed the problem corrected in person, with multiple dogs.


----------



## Liesje

I think to get back to the original questions, part of the issue is that not everyone cares about "balance" or what can be detrimental down the line. In some clubs, the majority of the people are people who very likely will never put a SchH title on a dog. Is this good or bad I don't know. Not condoning it just saying what I personally see. People join SchH for something to do with their dog and think it is a good idea because their dog is a GSD or working breed and what could be more appropriate, plus it gives them a chance to try three phases and not just normal pet obedience. A lot of the dogs maybe are not cut out for training to SchH3 but that is yet another discussion....if a dog *can* be safely worked in prey at a lower level (ie, not training a SchH3 routine, maybe not even ever titling period) do the clubs tell those people to bugger off? I think some do and some don't.


----------



## Samba

Who in the world would "crank on defense"? I know no one here is talking about such a thing. It is far from black and white, all or nothing work when done correctly. 

I have a somewhat defensive female. Sure, she gets more prey presentation when needed. But, I can't see getting her to work well in something that is not what she is genetically. If she were so defensive that she could not learn in an appropriately balanced training, I would think there is a problem somewhere. In the dog or the work or both.


----------



## hunterisgreat

Samba said:


> Who in the world would "crank on defense"? I know no one here is talking about such a thing. It is far from black and white, all or nothing work when done correctly.
> 
> I have a somewhat defensive female. Sure, she gets more prey presentation when needed. But, I can't see getting her to work well in something that is not what she is genetically. If she were so defensive that she could not learn in an appropriately balanced training, I would think there is a problem somewhere. In the dog or the work or both.


Yes i know. there was some exaggeration there incase you didn't catch it. My male doesn't work in defense, like what you are likely describing... I've seen and worked dogs that are really working too far in defense by choice/instinct/training. Its not like that. He fights. You'd have to work the dog to understand. I could just work him and turn blind eye to the fighting, but then our training progress would be slower, there'd inevitably be more conflict in the dog, and the end product lower quality. And at the end of the day, the people I train with and learn from have explained why this method will be more effective, have shown me why this is more effective, and have produced results where others have failed. It is hard for me to argue results.


----------



## Samba

Okay, I understand your post but I don 't understand it in the context of a prey based training program and puppy start. Are you advocating the prey basis as the approach to training schutzhund in the beginning?

Also, where is the conflict coming from?


----------



## Vandal

Hunter, there is an edge of defensiveness in what you pick out and argue with while you ignore the rest of what is written. Example:


> People who dismiss ideas out of hand, will never be good dog trainers.* Not saying that is you* but I do see lots of the " I don't understand, so, it must be BS" kind of thinking with people who train in SchH.


Note the , " not saying this is you" comment. Your posts also are conveying what Samba is talking about. It is not just about one or the other. Most of the time, the helper is working with all the drives , almost simultanoeusly, in varying degrees, depending on the dog. There is no, now I do just defense and now I do just prey. The idea is to somewhat weave it all together. 
I meant what I said and I also said I, ME, NOT YOU, didn't understand it at first. I am also not always talking directly to you, although there are people on this forum who take almost all of my comments personal. 

I have no formula for you to follow but you can read all my posts more carefully, and perhaps it will be more clear to you.

It DOES require that you work dogs, ( and you do have to have some natural ability and intelligence), to fully "get it". You can take that personal if you want also but it's not intended that way.

Art is right...X is not a number.


----------



## hunterisgreat

Samba said:


> Okay, I understand your post but I don 't understand it in the context of a prey based training program and puppy start. Are you advocating the prey basis as the approach to training schutzhund in the beginning?
> 
> Also, where is the conflict coming from?


Well, as I said before, fighting and defense is distracting and hinders the learning process... which is why we start teaching in prey heavy exercises. 

The conflict with my male is that the session becomes, for him, all about fighting and less is being taught/learned/retained, and at the end of the day I'm not out there just to waste time and give him something to bite and wear himself out with. He's there to learn. The fighting itself introduces confusion, and this causes mistakes, which might result in corrections, which introduce conflict, which clouds the mind more, which causes more mistakes, etc etc. Things are less game, and more personal for him.


----------



## Vandal

> fighting and defense is distracting and hinders the learning process


No it doesn't. It is PART of the "learning process".


----------



## Vandal

There is also much to say concerning working with what the dog brings on the field but this concept is completely gone in SchH.


----------



## Liesje

hunterisgreat said:


> Well, as I said before, fighting and defense is distracting and hinders the learning process...


???????


----------



## hunterisgreat

Vandal said:


> Hunter, there is an edge of defensiveness in what you pick out and argue with while you ignore the rest of what is written. Example:
> 
> Note the , " not saying this is you" comment. Your posts also are conveying what Samba is talking about. It is not just about one or the other. Most of the time, the helper is working with all the drives , almost simultanoeusly, in varying degrees, depending on the dog. There is no, now I do just defense and now I do just prey. The idea is to somewhat weave it all together.
> I meant what I said and I also said I, ME, NOT YOU, didn't understand it at first. I am also not always talking directly to you, although there are people on this forum who take almost all of my comments personal.
> 
> I have no formula for you to follow but you can read all my posts more carefully, and perhaps it will be more clear to you.
> 
> It DOES require that you work dogs, ( and you do have to have some natural ability and intelligence), to fully "get it". You can take that personal if you want also but it's not intended that way.
> 
> Art is right...X is not a number.


I'm not being defensive I promise... if this were a face to face discussion that would be apparent, but this is the net and my tone and demeanor are lost here... 

Anyway, I was just explaining that I do in fact weigh any advice I get regardless of the source. I don't believe I've ignored anything. Don't quite understand what you feel isn't clear to me.

I did not mean to imply working solely in one drive or another as that isn't truly possible. When I say "working in prey" I mean that is the primary drive. 

It DOES require working with dogs to "get it". I DO work with dogs. When I'm not working with dogs directly, I'm observing.

Its the internet, nothing here is personal or offensive to me. I'm pretty thick skinned. I DO enjoy a good debate, and feel my on points are worthless if they can't stand up to a good debate... primary reason I'm around here. I DO get annoyed when I say something, and its distorted into something I didn't say, and then that statement is the basis for implying I'm wrong, or inexperienced, or "can't get it", or "having trouble understanding" as then the whole discussion takes a turn that is of no value to me. I DO take care to never offend anyone (I DO believe you've never seen me insult anyone on here, call names, etc). I think that the fact I DON'T engage in that sort of thing, speaks to the point that I'm not defensive or getting my undies in a wad.


----------



## hunterisgreat

Vandal said:


> No it doesn't. It is PART of the "learning process".


I agree, it is part of it... similar to the way distractions in obedience are part of that learning process.


----------



## Liesje

Defense drive is a distraction to working in prey?


----------



## hunterisgreat

Liesje said:


> Defense drive is a distraction to working in prey?


stress is a distraction. A dog working in defense has some amount of stress. A dog working primarily in prey drive has less stress than the dog working primarily in defense, and is less distracted. I've repeated the same statement like 20 times in 20 ways, and its still getting lost. I don't know how else to explain my point. If you don't believe me, thats perfectly fine, and I'm not going to try to convince anyone. My own experiences have show this to be true to me, and thats all that really matters to me. All I can say is the advice given here, to bring in balanced levels of defense, right at this moment in time, would be a bad move for MY dog. Not because I think so, but because that approach was not working for us.


----------



## Liesje

Repeat it as much as you want I guess I just plain don't agree. Just wanted to make sure I was reading what I thought I was reading.


----------



## Samba

Are we talking about a level of defensiveness that makes a dog unclear? Unreachable? 

I am fairly sure the balanced approach works well. My dog can see defense type stuff and it makes him better. I don't enjoy working him without it. Something is missing and would remain untapped in the dog. Why would I want to work a dog without a great deal of what makes protection untapped?

Now, that there may be something interesting going on with a particular dogs make- up and training, I would not advocate a special situation as being a good approach to train protection in general. If my dog does not work in the way I way described the current dog, I have never found a training approach that significantly changed the dog. It might help me weedle something along in the exercises, but get outside those particular settings and the dog was always ready to reveal what he is as it can not be significantly altered by training in my experience.


----------



## Zahnburg

Vandal said:


> I think Art needs to explain it. lol.


No thanks. My head still hurts from the other day :headbang:


----------



## hunterisgreat

Samba said:


> Are we talking about a level of defensiveness that makes a dog unclear? Unreachable?
> 
> I am fairly sure the balanced approach works well. My dog can see defense type stuff and it makes him better. I don't enjoy working him without it. Something is missing and would remain untapped in the dog. Why would I want to work a dog without a great deal of what makes protection untapped?
> 
> Now, that there may be something interesting going on with a particular dogs make- up and training, I would not advocate a special situation as being a good approach to train protection in general. If my dog does not work in the way I way described the current dog, I have never found a training approach that significantly changed the dog. It might help me weedle something along in the exercises, but get outside those particular settings and the dog was always ready to reveal what he is as it can not be significantly altered by training in my experience.


I've seen training approaches that drastically change a dog. In relatively short periods of time at that. Even the way we train both my dogs is very different and highly tailored to the dog.

Perhaps you'd see my male, and say "See there is a balance of defense and prey going on right now" where I would describe him as primarily working in prey... because this is of course subjective based on what I know it looks like when he's loading and wanting a fight and working on high fight drive. I can't really say for sure... it would require you come work my dog several times to have any way to really figure that one out.


----------



## hunterisgreat

Liesje said:


> Repeat it as much as you want I guess I just plain don't agree. Just wanted to make sure I was reading what I thought I was reading.


Nothing wrong with disagreeing  I don't need validation in order to enjoy discussions with people, or to hear their advice on other matters. No harm, no foul


----------



## Liesje

I was going to go into detail but remembered another thread where we both had very very different ideas of what constitutes defense and fight in the dog's frame of mind so I think it's apples and oranges and I will naturally disagree.


----------



## hunterisgreat

Liesje said:


> I was going to go into detail but remembered another thread where we both had very very different ideas of what constitutes defense and fight in the dog's frame of mind so I think it's apples and oranges and I will naturally disagree.


Could very well be an issue of a difference of language.. thats why sometimes I proceed lengthy posts with *MY* definitions... we we aren't speaking the same language then any discussion is pretty much already dead in the water.

Also, like any good student, I am always learning more, and so even my own definitions are changing over time as my understanding increases


----------



## Samba

Well, yes, I have seen dogs get way too amped and overloaded in the training. Once they got set so high, it'svery difficult to dial that dog back down. Never saw a "fix" work completely in that situation. When such a thing occurred, well, then we aren't talking about a puppy prey and play foundation versus balanced approach. That loading too high is another kettle of fish.

There can be problems in the largely prey built training. Unbalanced.


----------



## hunterisgreat

Samba said:


> Well, yes, I have seen dogs get way too amped and overloaded in the training. Once they got set so high, it'svery difficult to dial that dog back down. Never saw a "fix" work completely in that situation. When such a thing occurred, well, then we aren't talking about a puppy prey and play foundation versus balanced approach. That loading too high is another kettle of fish.
> 
> There can be problems in the largely prey built training. Unbalanced.


Way too amped and overloaded in what capacity? Prey? Defense? 

BTW, I've not been talking about puppy stuff for some time now


----------



## Samba

Oh well since the puppy and prey was the beginning and purpose of the thread, I was trying to tie the posts to the topic of conversation.

The other things about trying to fix an issue with a dog got me confused as to that versus the topic of the thread!


----------



## hunterisgreat

Samba said:


> Oh well since the puppy and prey was the beginning and purpose of the thread, I was trying to tie the posts to the topic of conversation.


well, where I train, with puppies its all prey until they aren't puppies and have matured. I've seen dogs that get too high in prey, but I've also seen dogs that were trained prematurely with way too much defensive to young. Its easier to fix the former than the latter, from what I've seen. The latter seems to also carry with it, much more persistent problems than a dog too high in prey.

Also worth noting, that just because we are doing one exercise in high prey, doesn't mean thats applied across the board, in all exercise.


----------



## Shaina

We have started working my 5 month old in both. She fires up easily, loves the tug, loves to bark, but will snap at the helper if he challenges her. We've brought defense in slowly, but at the same time I know that my pup isn't quite.. "normal" LOL. She has very high prey and defense, but is also a very balanced pup out in the real world. My boss is my trainer/helper, and she LOVES him to death. But, as soon as he postures and cracks the whip and I give her the command, she knows what to do. We've been careful not to bring out too much defense since she is already a little firecracker, but I think it depends solely on the dog youre training. We have a few pups about her same age that come to my work, and none of them would be able to handle pressure and have such a precise on/off switch.


----------



## hunterisgreat

I can appreciate that you have a young pup that you're proud of, but that isn't defensive drive. Defensive drive is not developed at that age, nor do dogs exhibit real defense against someone they "love to death". It is a game to her, not a real threat. If (and they won't at this age) the other pups hackled, tail low and not wagging so much, teeth exposed, growled, and only snapped, or front mouth bit at the helper, that would be defensive drive.

I'm sure you've had your puppy bark at a strange object it didn't like for some reason.. maybe a broom or vacuum.. and expressed a discomfort being near it. That was the beginnings of defense.


----------



## Samba

Seems there is puppy training all over!

It is not protection training as these are mere pups. Just what sort of training is it?

Is it like Gymboree that we over achieving yuppie mothers took our toddlers to?


----------



## lhczth

My female Deja would have been ruined or sold if someone had tried to work her in prey. This is a dog that has tremendous fight drive (the desire to control, dominate and over power the helper). She is not stressed by working in fight, so the skill was working with her natural drives and balancing this by channeling her fight into the sleeve. She was 20 months before I really did much with her. 

Deja's brother, Donovan, has a lot more prey drive and I could have worked him easily from a young age. I chose to wait until he started to show maturity and social aggression so that I will have the power I want in the barking AND in the biting. Full grips may come through prey (and genetics), but the hardness of the grip and the power comes through fight drive/aggression. Until this summer he had maybe rounds of bitework. He is 2.5 and still does many rounds of just barking with no bites. Doing a bunch of prey work would have been very counter productive for this dog (thank you Anne and the others that made sure I listened).

While in Germany the work I saw involved channeling suspicion/aggression into the prey object. They did not do rag work with any dogs at any time and this includes 4 month old puppies. Funny, this work was with not just GSD but Mals and Airedales too. This is how I learned years ago.


----------



## Fast

Chris Wild said:


> What Art said!
> 
> Also I think with regard to aggression that people need to realize that what can appear on the surface to be similar behaviors can have very different mindsets behind them. Many people view the protection drives as just prey and defense and nothing else. There is more to aggression than just defense. Or rather, more types of aggression coming from a different place inside the dog and thus a different mindset and different reason for the dog doing what he is doing than just the stress and fight/flight response associated with defense.


:thumbup::thumbup::thumbup:


----------



## Samba

I have seen, heard and read about this channeling into prey. A basis in prey is not this. Power will not be there.

I feel like working the dog too much without this power can be detrimental.

Interesting point on the fight drive. Dogs can love this and it is not a stressed and defensive situation. My male will seek that fight and really hopes for it. The desire for it speeds learning rather than hampers it.


----------



## SchHGSD

lhczth said:


> While in Germany the work I saw involved channeling suspicion/aggression into the prey object. They did not do rag work with any dogs at any time and this includes 4 month old puppies. Funny, this work was with not just GSD but Mals and Airedales too. This is how I learned years ago.


This is still the case. I have a German Mal, and when I asked the breeder to send me "rag work" videos of the 8wk old puppy I was thoroughly chastised. Work starts with barking, I was told. Barking the helper off the field. Bites do not come into the picture until much later, when the dog is done teething and more mature.

Then again, while in Belgium this summer I saw a 3 month old female GSD do a bark and hold, escape bite, and back up bites on a rag at a pretty prominent GSD club. It was fun to watch, but I did wonder, is this the drive/attitude we WANT in these exercises? She was, BTW, screaming and barking the whole time to get to the man. Oops, no. To get to her toy.

Watched a video last weekend from a pretty well known sport guy. In regards to bitework and focus on the man, he said (paraphrasing here) "If I can get my dog to give the appearance of aggression while still working in prey throughout his schutzhund career, I want to do that."

Just playing devil's advocate here. When I started in this sport some 15 years ago, I thought prey was the way to go, because I THOUGHT it made my dog more comfortable. The novice in me then HATED seeing my dog challenged, threatened, or pushed, even if he won and felt proud afterwards. Now, while I want a healthy amount of prey drive in my dog, I no longer feel that way. But I DO think I am in the minority.


----------



## hunterisgreat

Samba said:


> I have seen, heard and read about this channeling into prey. A basis in prey is not this. Power will not be there.
> 
> I feel like working the dog too much without this power can be detrimental.
> 
> Interesting point on the fight drive. Dogs can love this and it is not a stressed and defensive situation. My male will seek that fight and really hopes for it. The desire for it speeds learning rather than hampers it.


Well, I don't know what to say other than me and those I train with don't quite agree with that statement, and we all do just fine, so perhaps there are many ways to skin a cat.


----------



## hunterisgreat

SchHGSD said:


> Just playing devil's advocate here. When I started in this sport some 15 years ago, I thought prey was the way to go, because I THOUGHT it made my dog more comfortable. The novice in me then HATED seeing my dog challenged, threatened, or pushed, even if he won and felt proud afterwards. Now, while I want a healthy amount of prey drive in my dog, I no longer feel that way. But I DO think I am in the minority.


Feel compelled to respond.. I've never said anything about being in prey throughout a career in the sport. Said quite the opposite actually


----------



## Fast

Vandal said:


> People are no longer using the protective instinct to train SchH "protection". That instinct comes mostly thru social aggression but the breeding now has removed much of that. Prey work is not play, there is a seriousness to it when it is combined with the rest . I can't, ( at the moment anyway), explain that better. Maybe someone else can try.


I'll give it a go. 

I think the biggest difference is the overall intent. Working a puppy in play drive is just playing with the puppy. The same as one might do in obedience. It might excite and wake the pup's drives, but it never has a serious intent. When you work the dog in prey it always has a serious intent. The helper is always keeping himself a bit dangerous. The helper also needs to keep in mind that he is looking for aggressive responses to opposition and reacts appropriately.Even when the dog is chasing the prey he he knows the prey might put up a fight in the end. The helper dosen't completely disconnect the prey from the fight.


----------



## Samba

Which statement? I made a few of them there.


----------



## hunterisgreat

Samba said:


> Which statement? I made a few of them there.


Defense & fight drive speeds learning. I believe in brings power and intensity, at the expense of learning faster and it also leads to a less full, less calm grip. If it was both the most intense, most powerful, and most effective way to learn, and produced a perfect grip, why would prey be of any use whatsoever?


----------



## Samba

What are they "learning" because they are in prey?? I really don't get this?


----------



## Fast

hunterisgreat said:


> stress is a distraction. A dog working in defense has some amount of stress.


Stress is only a distraction for a dog that lacks the genetic and training to deal with whatever is causing the stress. It's the confusion caused by the stress that causes the problem. But with good genes and training the stressed dog can preform much better than stress free dogs.


----------



## hunterisgreat

Samba said:


> What are they "learning" because they are in prey?? I really don't get this?


I didn't say prey drive taught them anything. I said they learn more effectively in higher prey, and lower defense.


----------



## Samba

My dog looks like crap without the stress. That is the point of wanting the dog to work in the fight drive. I really will load him in the car if a helper serves us oatmeal! It will not be the state I want the dog to be in when "learning" or practicing or whatever you call doing the exercises.


----------



## Zahnburg

hunterisgreat said:


> so perhaps there are many ways to skin a cat.


There sure are, but the hide is going to end up looking much better if you use a sharp knife and make the cuts in the proper places as oppossed to hacking at it randomly with an axe.


----------



## hunterisgreat

Fast said:


> Stress is only a distraction for a dog that lacks the genetic and training to deal with whatever is causing the stress. It's the confusion caused by the stress that causes the problem. But with good genes and *training* the stressed dog can preform much better than stress free dogs.


Yes... this is where you don't pile on stress before the dogs understands what is expected. Perfect genes and too much stress before the dog understands whats being asked will still result in a poor bite and being chewy.


----------



## Fast

hunterisgreat said:


> Defense & fight drive speeds learning. I believe in brings power and intensity, at the expense of learning faster and it also leads to a less full, less calm grip. If it was both the most intense, most powerful, and most effective way to learn, and produced a perfect grip, why would prey be of any use whatsoever?


Because you need all of it to have a good dog. There are no extraneous drives.


----------



## hunterisgreat

Zahnburg said:


> There sure are, but the hide is going to end up looking much better if you use a sharp knife and make the cuts in the proper places as oppossed to hacking at it randomly with an axe.


I don't have any concerns about the tools in our training program


----------



## Fast

hunterisgreat said:


> Yes... this is where you don't pile on stress before the dogs understands what is expected. Perfect genes and *too much stress* before the dog understands whats being asked will still result in a poor bite and being chewy.


So you do see the need for some stress? Just not too much?


----------



## hunterisgreat

Fast said:


> Because you need all of it to have a good dog. There are no extraneous drives.


And that didn't really address my point at all.


----------



## SchHGSD

hunterisgreat said:


> Feel compelled to respond.. I've never said anything about being in prey throughout a career in the sport. Said quite the opposite actually



My comments were not for you, they were in response to the thread titled "Working in prey only."


----------



## gagsd

Fast said: Stress is only a distraction for a dog that lacks the genetic and training to deal with whatever is causing the stress. It's the confusion caused by the stress that causes the problem. But with good genes and training the stressed dog can preform much better than stress free dogs

And isn't that were the idea of "prey work" originally came into play? It gave the dog an outlet to the "defensive" work?


----------



## Samba

There is not much to be learned if one already knows and has the most proficient everything of everything. I started out there too!


----------



## hunterisgreat

Fast said:


> So you do see the need for some stress? Just not too much?


I keep getting pigeon holed into the "only prey should ever be used" box and I've never said, implied, alluded to, suggested, etc, this in any way shape or form. I said we TEACH in prey, and introduce STRESS after.


----------



## hunterisgreat

Samba said:


> There is not much to be learned if one already knows and has the most proficient everything of everything. I started out there too!


No need for insults or ego stroking! 

No one has actually discussed what I've said, too busy distorting it into something else and attacking that.


----------



## FG167

Vandal said:


> People barely mention protective when they talk about protection now. It is all prey, defense , avoidance blah, blah, blah. Yes, I do it too but one thing I have not forgotten, is how imprortant that protective instinct is and just how many dogs have none of it nowadays.
> 
> We were not teaching dogs to be protective, they already were. We were mostly teaching obedience to show the dog when not to bite vs when _to_ bite. They LIKED to bite...and I am certain that statement will be misunderstood in this now, way too P.C., dog world..


This is what I hope for in my new puppy. I want him to be extremely stable and protective. I've had him evaluated by several different helpers at this point and they have all said the exact same thing - he has an impressive bark already and is very, very balanced. I am assured that he will be just what I am looking for - as much as anyone can guarantee what a puppy will turn into  Oh,and my puppy, he LOVES to bite - as does his half-brother, Ike. Neither are mean or unstable or anything to that effect but they both relish getting their mouths on something and biting. 

I have a fairly clear idea of what kind of work I want done with my pup and then I just need to leave the rest up to my helper and TD to get me there. I don't want him worked only in prey. I also absolutely do not want anyone trying to get defense in my immature pup - I've seen it done and the after-effects and that's not somewhere I want to go. So, we'll do a couple more barking sessions and then he'll be put up from protection for awhile until he matures. 

That being said, I lucked out by getting the exact temperament and drives that I asked/wanted/hoped for and that will most likely work with the program I have outlined. IF I had a dog that would only work in prey, then that's what we'd do. If I can't get the well-rounded dog I want, I work with what I've got. At the end of the day, I want to do something with my dogs and prefer it to be this sport that I've fallen in love with.


----------



## Fast

hunterisgreat said:


> And that didn't really address my point at all.


When you wrote "too much stress" it seems that you negated your point and contradicted what you have been writing on this thread.


----------



## hunterisgreat

FG167 said:


> This is what I hope for in my new puppy. I want him to be extremely stable and protective. I've had him evaluated by several different helpers at this point and they have all said the exact same thing - he has an impressive bark already and is very, very balanced. I am assured that he will be just what I am looking for - as much as anyone can guarantee what a puppy will turn into  Oh,and my puppy, he LOVES to bite - as does his half-brother, Ike. Neither are mean or unstable or anything to that effect but they both relish getting their mouths on something and biting.
> 
> I have a fairly clear idea of what kind of work I want done with my pup and then I just need to leave the rest up to my helper and TD to get me there. I don't want him worked only in prey. I also absolutely do not want anyone trying to get defense in my immature pup - I've seen it done and the after-effects and that's not somewhere I want to go. So, we'll do a couple more barking sessions and then he'll be put up from protection for awhile until he matures.
> 
> That being said, I lucked out by getting the exact temperament and drives that I asked/wanted/hoped for and that will most likely work with the program I have outlined. IF I had a dog that would only work in prey, then that's what we'd do. If I can't get the well-rounded dog I want, I work with what I've got. At the end of the day, I want to do something with my dogs and prefer it to be this sport that I've fallen in love with.


So you see the dangers of putting too much stress on a dog not ready for it. This is part of what I was talking about. At its best, it slows a training program, at its worst it leaves an otherwise promising dog in shambles.


----------



## hunterisgreat

Fast said:


> When you wrote "too much stress" it seems that you negated your point and contradicted what you have been writing on this thread.


please enlighten me. It didn't seem to negate anything I believe.


----------



## Samba

I do not mean to insult. I have not seen distortion. I can't imagine why someone would want to do that? Where is the distortion?

I do wonder if your dog has some issues in training and perhaps in genetic make up from your description. I have owned a number of them myself. Those dogs do not define the appropriately endowed dog working in fight drive or the approach to developing them. 

The work reveals the dog in many ways. It does not create the dog. We can do this and that to try and mitigate something that needs mitigating, but it will not erase it. If a dog has had some very bad training, then the brain scratch is really hard to erase also. But those are special situations for people working through them. The approach would not necessarily apply to the dog capable of working under stress and loving the fight such that it brings out the best in them.


----------



## hunterisgreat

Why don't some of you do this.. Take your dogs out. Do some real rigorous bite obedience with the helper nearby ready to take a bite.. Really work the obedience and avoid any routine the dog is familiar with and have a lot of corrections to put conflict and some confusion on the dog, try to teach him to walk backwards so he doesn't know whats expected of him now. Send them for a bite. You'll likely get a full on defensive/fight explosion as the dog dumps all that conflict out onto the helper. Watch the magical perfect bite go to crap in a heartbeat. It'll be chock full of power, and he'll look awfully impressive from a pure rage/intensity standpoint, but the bite will still be front toothed and shallow. Worse, he didn't learn crap because the confusion and conflict and stress was a brick wall in the way of absorbing any wisdom from the session.

Obviously, don't do any of the above, but picture it in your head.


----------



## Zahnburg

hunterisgreat said:


> Yes... this is where you don't pile on stress before the dogs understands what is expected. Perfect genes and too much stress before the dog understands whats being asked will still result in a poor bite and being chewy.


Ok, I'm going to try to explain something. Hunter, I think the reason you are having difficulty understanding what is being said is due to your fundemental belief that dogs must be "taught" protection. This is simply untrue. A dog will naturally bite or bark in a certain way when he is confronted with a certain situation. It is the helpers job to create the situation that naturally stimulates the behavior we want from the dog, and then react accordingly to the dog. 

Biting poorly or barking poorly has less to do with the dog not understanding but rather has to do with the helpers failure to create the proper atmosphere to bring that from the dog.


----------



## GSDElsa

hunterisgreat said:


> Way too amped and overloaded in what capacity? Prey? Defense?


Do you see being way too amped and overloaded as being a problem these days?


----------



## Samba

What in the world are you talking about, Hunter? Are you using this thread to tell us particularly about your dog's individual circumstances rather than to discuss approaches to early training as in puppy prey or balanced work,etc? If so, that might be the reason for the confusion?


----------



## hunterisgreat

Samba said:


> I do not mean to insult. I have not seen distortion. I can't imagine why someone would want to do that? Where is the distortion?
> 
> I do wonder if your dog has some issues in training and perhaps in genetic make up from your description. I have owned a number of them myself. Those dogs do not define the appropriately endowed dog working in fight drive or the approach to developing them.
> 
> The work reveals the dog in many ways. It does not create the dog. We can do this and that to try and mitigate something that needs mitigating, but it will not erase it. If a dog has had some very bad training, then the brain scratch is really hard to erase also. But those are special situations for people working through them. The approach would not necessarily apply to the dog capable of working under stress and loving the fight such that it brings out the best in them.


Trying to insult the quality of my dogs is certainly a low blow. If I were a little more sensitive than most, that may have hurt my ego. Shame on you for resorting to such tactics instead of addressing the points themselves lol

When someone has no response to a point, or no way to dispute it, they often alter the point into something they CAN dispute. as an example, its been implied repeatedly that I said there should be no stress in training, or that all training is always done in prey. Never said such a thing.

I assure you both dogs are more than suitable for SchH. Not because I think so, but because many other folks think so that have actually worked or witnessed them.


----------



## hunterisgreat

GSDElsa said:


> Do you see being way too amped and overloaded as being a problem these days?


I asked a question. I did not make a statement.


----------



## hunterisgreat

Zahnburg said:


> Ok, I'm going to try to explain something. Hunter, I think the reason you are having difficulty understanding what is being said is due to your fundemental belief that dogs must be "taught" protection. This is simply untrue. A dog will naturally bite or bark in a certain way when he is confronted with a certain situation. It is the helpers job to create the situation that naturally stimulates the behavior we want from the dog, and then react accordingly to the dog.
> 
> Biting poorly or barking poorly has less to do with the dog not understanding but rather has to do with the helpers failure to create the proper atmosphere to bring that from the dog.


Please direct me to where I said protection must be taught. The reason you're having difficulty understanding my points is because you are confused as to what I have or have not said


----------



## hunterisgreat

Samba said:


> What in the world are you talking about, Hunter? Are you using this thread to tell us particularly about your dog's individual circumstances rather than to discuss approaches to early training as in puppy prey or balanced work,etc? If so, that might be the reason for the confusion?


Having a meaningful debate is more or less useless online. I used my dog as an example, so that I don't get the "I.E." label.. I certainly am more able to describe my own dog than anyone here. The illustration was to demonstrate how prey work is important. It was lost as folks were too busy making up arguments for me and then arguing them lol


----------



## hunterisgreat

If anyone wants to have a no-conflict, no-insult, no I-disagree-with-you-so-your-dogs-are-crap-as-is-your-training-skill, no-oh-silly-youth-you-might-understand-one-day discussion on topic, I'm certainly open to it. If you are unskilled in debate, and cannot DIRECTLY discuss a point I made that you disagree or agree with, please save us both the time and effort. Its getting too difficult to try to keep directing people back onto the topic of what was actually said vice what was someone felt like hearing. To make it ULTRA CLEAR we will go paint by numbers style:

Prey drive brings a full mouth calm grip in genetically capable dogs.
Defensive drive brings an intense bite with more chewing, and more shallow biting than the same dog in prey.

Rule 1: If you disagree, explain why. 
Rule 2: If you can't stay on topic, its unlikely I'll respond.
Rule 3: Put your ego down. I don't care that your dog will magically never get stressed or make a mistake, or too much stress won't make his bite trash. I know the truth.


----------



## GSDElsa

hunterisgreat said:


> I asked a question. I did not make a statement.


And I was asking YOU a question...


----------



## Samba

Hunter, please consider that what one writes and how it is communicated has a lot to do with the responses on a written forum. I usually find that if I am misunderstood by a few then I have not said what I meant to or missed the context of discussion. 

I didn't imagine that anyone would think this was a discussion that negated the use of prey action in protection training! Is that what you thought was going on?

There must be a grip that is out of much more than just a prey bite or a defense bite? Surely?


----------



## hunterisgreat

Samba said:


> Hunter, please consider that what one writes and how it is communicated has a lot to do with the responses on a written forum. I usually find that if I am misunderstood by a few then I have not said what I meant to or missed the context of discussion.
> 
> I didn't imagine that anyone would think this was a discussion that negated the use of prey action in protection training! Is that what you thought was going on?


I have spent almost the entire thread trying to fix whatever miscommunication took place. I said what I said, and somehow that got taken as "train in a prey only vacuum, and defense should never enter the picture", which then begets another poster to assume this is what I said, and further attack that argument which was not mine in the first place, so on and so forth. I cannot keep up with the cascade of miscommunication that took place, so I restarted above.

I'm also far and away more non confrontational than most on this forum, or the internet in general. You've never caught me insulting someone, suggesting their dog is crap (cause we all know thats the fast track to pissing someone off), or their training was trash.


----------



## hunterisgreat

GSDElsa said:


> And I was asking YOU a question...


Right... so why would I answer a question if mine are not being answered?


----------



## Samba

I think that I may have missed something because to say that prey can be useful is so basic to training and was not at all what we were talking about .....that I could not connect the dots at all. I thought you must be arguing for the prey training side as the question was about beginning puppies in prey.

To start inserting things about a dog that has gotten unbalanced and then try to apply that to the discussion of a common basic approach to beginning training... yes, I got lost by that the diversion of that.

We could have a thread about attempting to fix dogs worked or working inappropriately. Now, back to prey training as the approach to beginning protection work on a young puppy.

I don't think a dog has to have a lot of prey basis to bite in prey. They don't really have to learn that either in my experience.


----------



## Zahnburg

OK Hunter let us readjust this topic. It is getting a bit confusing. SchH protection involves three things: Guarding, Grips and Obedience. When you are talking about using only prey to initially "teach", which of these three are you teaching and how does only using prey help with that?


----------



## GSDElsa

hunterisgreat said:


> Right... so why would I answer a question if mine are not being answered?


Because I think you are missing the fundamental thing here which is that people feel that TEACHING in prey is not universally the answer.

In fact, many of these people have likely seen dogs primarily worked--nee-TRAINED in prey way too amped up and overloaded. There seems to be misconception on your part that training in prey will not cause these issues.

Past threads I have seen by you make me think that you do not necessarily see the "overloading" that can easily (and oftentimes DOES) happen with this kind of training.

While it may be the preference of YOU and the club you belong to to "teach" this way, many very bright individuals--as exhibited by those who have responded in this thread (and I'm not including myself in this categorization) do not feel that the results of that kind of teaching are ones that are personally desireable to them.

This is not meant as a low blow, but rather an illustration of this. I remember a debate you were having in the past about your bitch's behavior in the crate while waiting her turn for protection work. Many people saw it as a problem...you did not. Many of the same that are responding in this thread. You see teaching a certain way as undesirable, but what your end result may be is not what they want their end result to be.


----------



## hunterisgreat

Samba said:


> Hunter, please consider that what one writes and how it is communicated has a lot to do with the responses on a written forum. I usually find that if I am misunderstood by a few then I have not said what I meant to or missed the context of discussion.
> 
> I didn't imagine that anyone would think this was a discussion that negated the use of prey action in protection training! Is that what you thought was going on?
> 
> There must be a grip that is out of much more than just a prey bite or a defense bite? Surely?


You can edit without an "last edited" subtitle? Well that makes it harder for me to keep up.

To the last statement, not sure I fully understand. Are you asking if I believe a dog bites exclusively in only prey, or only defense? If that is your question, obviously no.


----------



## hunterisgreat

Samba said:


> I think that I may have missed something because to say that prey can be useful is so basic to training and was not at all what we were talking about .....that I could not connect the dots at all. I thought you must be arguing for the prey training side as the question was about beginning puppies in prey.
> 
> To start inserting things about a dog that has gotten unbalanced and then try to apply that to the discussion of a common basic approach to beginning training... yes, I got lost by that the diversion of that.
> 
> We could have a thread about attempting to fix dogs worked or working inappropriately. Now, back to prey training as the approach to beginning protection work on a young puppy.
> 
> I don't think a dog has to have a lot of prey basis to bite in prey. They don't really have to learn that either in my experience.


My original statement was very very very simple. When teaching something in bite work such as the positioning during the b&h, it is more effective to teach with less conflict and less defense, in primarily prey.


----------



## Liesje

hunterisgreat said:


> So you see the dangers of putting too much stress on a dog not ready for it. This is part of what I was talking about. At its best, it slows a training program, at its worst it leaves an otherwise promising dog in shambles.


I see this differently. Working that way too young is stressful because that drive is not really there yet, not because that drive is stressful. Big difference, IMO.


----------



## hunterisgreat

Zahnburg said:


> OK Hunter let us readjust this topic. It is getting a bit confusing. SchH protection involves three things: Guarding, Grips and Obedience. When you are talking about using only prey to initially "teach", which of these three are you teaching and how does only using prey help with that?


By teach, I mean, introduce a new behavior that I am asking for. I do not mean hone, or proof, or tweak or alter an existing behavior.

In that context, obedience should not be being taught during protection as it should already be there
A solid grip should be genetic, however keeping that grip solid with ever higher levels of stress is conditioning to keeping a solid full grip with more and more defensive/fight drive involved. I would not use the word "teach" in this context.
Guarding, would be taught in prey in my opinion, and when the picture was clear to the dog, defense increased to bring intensity after the dog has been taught.

Please, if you disagree or want to correct me, do so in a constructive manner. Just attacking what I say will increase my own defense and make me too preoccupied with dodging insults to really learn anything. If you calmly explain why something is wrong, without introducing conflict with me, I can probably effectively understand and digest what you have to share, and maybe even share that understanding with others someday.


----------



## hunterisgreat

Liesje said:


> I see this differently. Working that way too young is stressful because that drive is not really there yet, not because that drive is stressful. Big difference, IMO.


Did you see where I told the person with the puppy that defense isn't developed in pups that young a page or two back? See, we agree. In the referenced post I also used the word stress. Sometimes it seems you've decided to disagree with me, before reading what I said

Defense however, is a response to stress/threat and is not something the dog enjoys or wants to do. What you would call defense in response to a threat/stress out of a desire to be defensive, I would call fight drive, if I understand you correctly.


----------



## Liesje

hunterisgreat said:


> Did you see where I told the person with the puppy that defense isn't developed in pups that young a page or two back? See, we agree. In the referenced post I also used the word stress. Sometimes it seems you've decided to disagree with me, before reading what I said
> 
> Defense however, is a response to stress/threat and is not something the dog enjoys or wants to do. What you would call defense in response to a threat/stress out of a desire to be defensive, I would call fight drive, if I understand you correctly.


No, I don't agree with you because I disagree with this post. I do not see dogs who naturally work in defense as being and more or less "stressed" than prey dogs. I do not agree that defense is a distraction for learning in prey nor do I believe that learning only happens in prey. I do not agree that working a dog in defense or putting some pressure/stress on a dog automatically deteriorates the grip. 

Anecdotally, my "defense dog" lacks a bit of power and speed when striking yet never shifts in his grip while my friend's "prey dog" is fast and strikes hard but chews up and down the sleeve... Defense is not overly stressful for a defense dog because that is his primary drive and that is what he understands how to use in order to win/fight/overpower the helper. If you try to work my dog all in prey he may just stand there and look at you sideways. If you try to work my friend's dog only in defense he will shut down. But a skilled person can pretty easily work both dogs in such a way that taps into their primary drive yet encourages both and brings them closer to balance. As far as age/maturity, the prey type helper tried to work my dog when he was younger. The dog would bark but never really bit and gripped, it was just halfass. I stopped that, waited several months, and brought him out to a different helper that places much more emphasis on tapping into defense and bringing out the fight. THe combination of more maturity and that type of work brought out a totally different dog, the dog I wanted all along.


----------



## hunterisgreat

If you look at what I said through the lense of my definitions of defense and fight, it should be more palatable to you.


We do agree on pups and defensive development. Why is being in agreement so hard to accept?


----------



## Samba

I do not feel the fight drive that I know as desirable in protection comes from much of a defense component, though some. So, inherently, my understanding of fight drive is different from the idea that it is primarily a derivation of defense.


----------



## hunterisgreat

At any rate, I do honesty believe it is a difference in language that is causing all the hangups between you and I... We are really talking about the same things, we just must agree on a mutually understood grammar to communicate effectively


Also then, this applies to you and samba


----------



## Fast

gagsd said:


> Fast said: Stress is only a distraction for a dog that lacks the genetic and training to deal with whatever is causing the stress. It's the confusion caused by the stress that causes the problem. But with good genes and training the stressed dog can preform much better than stress free dogs
> 
> And isn't that were the idea of "prey work" originally came into play? It gave the dog an outlet to the "defensive" work?


I think that was the original intent. But I don't agree with that fully. My believe is that all of the aggressive drives are connected. It's like a music equalizer, if you crank up only one tone you tend to make the music sound like crap. But if you bring up all of the levels and emphasize certain tones you get a great sound.


----------



## GSDElsa

hunterisgreat said:


> Why is being in agreement so hard to accept?


Because people don't agree that teaching in prey causes overall less stress on all dogs


----------



## hunterisgreat

GSDElsa said:


> Because people don't agree that teaching in prey causes overall less stress on all dogs


Lol I said we agreed on puppies not having developed defense..


----------



## Fast

hunterisgreat said:


> I keep getting pigeon holed into the "only prey should ever be used" box and I've never said, implied, alluded to, suggested, etc, this in any way shape or form. I said we TEACH in prey, and introduce STRESS after.


I'm asking the question so I don't pigeon hole you. I was looking for clarification.


----------



## hunterisgreat

hunterisgreat said:


> At any rate, I do honesty believe it is a difference in language that is causing all the hangups between you and I... We are really talking about the same things, we just must agree on a mutually understood grammar to communicate effectively
> 
> 
> Also then, this applies to you and samba


Whoopssss samba and i


----------



## Samba

There is perhaps an element of defense drive in fight. I would preferably have fight from less of defense motivation and more social aggression and desire to overcome. In fight drive the dog is forward and willing to take the fight to the person. It is more than a reaction of defense and wanting to defray threat. I think it is genetic and can not really be trained as such. I guess the good helpers know how to develop it, but can't put it in there?


----------



## hunterisgreat

Samba said:


> There is perhaps an element of defense drive in fight. I would preferably have fight from less of defense motivation and more social aggression and desire to overcome. In fight drive the dog is forward and willing to take the fight to the person. It is more than a reaction of defense and wanting to defray threat. I think it is genetic and can not really be trained as such. I guess the good helpers know how to develop it, but can't put it in there?


Should I take that as an implication my helpers are bad? Does a good helper develop it, or is it genetic??


----------



## Samba

I have never tried to train a hold and bark in prey? I have always worked so hard to get the helper to show the dog that the hold and bark is also a fight and the dog controls the helper there. Do I need to switch to teaching it in prey to get the dog in proper position? Are you saying this would be the best way because of the positioning of the dog? Why does the nature of the hold and bark seem so much more important to me and that it not be in prey in any great degree?


----------



## hunterisgreat

Samba said:


> I have never tried to train a hold and bark in prey? I have always worked so hard to get the helper to show the dog that the hold and bark is also a fight and the dog controls the helper there. Do I need to switch to teaching it in prey to get the dog in proper position? Are you saying this would be the best way because of the positioning of the dog? Why does the nature of the hold and bark seem so much more important to me and that it not be in prey in any great degree?


1. First question seemed like a statement
2. We also teach the dogs its them that control the helper. The fight comes naturally later, but during the teaching phase, I want to minimize the fight
3. There is no switching... its just manipulating drive levels.
4. I'm saying teaching is more effective in prey without all the fight and defense. 
5. How did you conclude its more important to you? The final product of the B&H should not be in prey in great degree... this was a false conclusion of my point that I teach in prey on your part. You concluded that I everything that follows the teaching phase I also do in prey. I've not said this, nor implied it.


----------



## FG167

hunterisgreat said:


> I'm saying teaching is more effective in prey without all the fight and defense.


This may be true for some dogs. I do not believe it is true for all dogs. Some dogs learn horribly if they are too much in prey. They can't think, they are using hindbrain so-to-speak and not clear-headed. Others excel when they are at the right level of prey-drive. Still others learn best with a little healthy fear linked in there. In fact, I prefer to teach utilizing both - it comes naturally to me. I am not saying just in SchH but in every day life, I set things up for the dog to learn with no conflict, then if they disobey or whatever, I back that learning up with a little healthy fear for clarification of ramifications. I think the same can be applied to Protection. If a dog has the basics in prey and then you back it up with the correct level of threat, the dog will dang sure remember that lesson. Although I think that if you teach a dog the whole lesson utilizing threat, it is also possible - provided the dog has the ability to respond the way that you are trying to push him into. *shrug* I think conflict can lend itself to some interesting teaching methods no matter the age. It's up to the handler and the trainer to decide how much...


----------



## Samba

I don"t know why I haven"t taught it in prey.  The helpers I went to were pretty clear about how they wanted the dog to approach this exercise in their mind/drive. The helper just never said we will teach it this way and then change up the dogs mind /drive about it later. I thought the dog was learning as the most important part the drive to automatically come in to when they see this exercise/picture in the routine. I really did think that was the critical feature. I wonder why I got that impression? could be I misunderstood.

i am still not sure what it is that the dog is going to be learning better because it is prey? Where to sit? I can"t think that prey drive is necessary for that learning.


----------



## hunterisgreat

FG167 said:


> This may be true for some dogs. I do not believe it is true for all dogs. Some dogs learn horribly if they are too much in prey. They can't think, they are using hindbrain so-to-speak and not clear-headed. Others excel when they are at the right level of prey-drive. Still others learn best with a little healthy fear linked in there. In fact, I prefer to teach utilizing both - it comes naturally to me. I am not saying just in SchH but in every day life, I set things up for the dog to learn with no conflict, then if they disobey or whatever, I back that learning up with a little healthy fear for clarification of ramifications. I think the same can be applied to Protection. If a dog has the basics in prey and then you back it up with the correct level of threat, the dog will dang sure remember that lesson. Although I think that if you teach a dog the whole lesson utilizing threat, it is also possible - provided the dog has the ability to respond the way that you are trying to push him into. *shrug* I think conflict can lend itself to some interesting teaching methods no matter the age. It's up to the handler and the trainer to decide how much...


I agree exactly.. We put the basics down in prey, and add stress when the basics are understood. I also believe you can teach a dog with some fear the whole time, I just few that as less effective, but the end goal can still be achieved. The dog must simply work through more conflict and confusion, and probably endure more corrections along the way


----------



## hunterisgreat

Samba said:


> I don"t know why I haven"t taught it in prey. The helpers I went to were pretty clear about how they wanted the dog to approach this exercise in their mind/drive. The helper just never said we will teach it this way and then change up the dogs mind /drive about it later. I thought the dog was learning as the most important part the drive to automatically come in to when they see this exercise/picture in the routine. I really did think that was the critical feature. I wonder why I got that impression? could be I misunderstood.
> 
> i am still not sure what it is that the dog is going to be learning better because it is prey? Where to sit? I can"t think that prey drive is necessary for that learning.


I don't think we ever have some drastic drive change... I think if we did all prey, then one day said "he's ready, bring him into heavy defense", it would be very counterproductive. In general we would bring in progressively more defense, as long as the exercise was still correct or "correct enough" and the bite quality remains strong


----------



## Samba

Interesting on the bite quality. With more fight in it and less prey, I get better grips. Good grips come from the power in the fight which is more than the prey bites in my experience.

My apologies, i thought that you meant you taught the exercises in prey and got better learning. There are people who teach this stuff in a lot of prey drive so I thought you were talking about doing it in prey drive.


----------



## Fast

hunterisgreat said:


> Defense however, is a response to stress/threat and is not something the dog enjoys or wants to do.


I think this might be where the big difference lays and I don't have the words to disagree enough.

Dogs do enjoy the stress and threat from the helper.....*IF IT'S A GOOD DOG!!!* 

I read an interesting study earlier this year that showed that when a dog is corrected he gets an endorphin rush and the pleasure centers of the brain are stimulated. 

There is also the idea of what I jokingly call "thrill drive". Some dogs get off on exciting situations. For example, I have a young dog right now that loves to tease my old bitch. She'll be sleeping and he will do something like creep up behind her, nip on the butt and run. She has beaten him up countless times for this but he is driven to do it. And even after a good butt kicking he is liable to do it again within an hour. Why does he do this over and over again? I think it's because he gets a thrill out of it. 

Hunter have you ever played a violent sport? There is a reason why few champion boxers retire when they are on top. Most fight until they can't win anymore. Even though the training, diet and lifestyle are very stressful they love the sport. 

I'm always stressed when I trial my dogs. Yet I continue to spend 20 hours a week training. And just because it's stressful does not make me not what to do it. The stress makes me feel alive. 

Next thing. Another reason I don't train without serious intent with puppies is because puppyhood is the time when a dog is imprinted with much of his behavior. If he learns that the helper has a friendly side. If a dog knows that the helper has a friendly side they will seek out that friendly side with appeasement behaviors. I want my dog to always react with aggression and never have appeasement on his mind.

You might like to read this :Elsevier


----------



## hunterisgreat

Samba said:


> Interesting on the bite quality. With more fight in it and less prey, I get better grips. Good grips come from the power in the fight which is more than the prey bites in my experience.
> 
> My apologies, i thought that you meant you taught the exercises in prey and got better learning. There are people who teach this stuff in a lot of prey drive so I thought you were talking about doing it in prey drive.


To dive more into grips... full mouth and calmness is a prey quality. Intensity and raw power are brought on through defense. Trying to start in defense without enough prey leads to chewy bites that aren't full mouth, but you can still bring up prey to get the full mouth and calmness back if it was there genetically anyway. Once its second nature to the dog and he understands what is expected, he will bite full mouth and calm, with intensity, in defense or fight drive. At that time, prey becomes less important and it is then defense or fight that we would want to work in to keep that intensity.

I teach in primarily prey with as little conflict and confusion as possible... (in the same way I teach obedience with food, without prey. I see food as the clearest headed and able to learn as a dog can get)... there are no doubt elements of defense and fight there, I cannot make them go completely away. The end picture, should not be prey.


----------



## hunterisgreat

Fast said:


> I think this might be where the big difference lays and I don't have the words to disagree enough.
> 
> Dogs do enjoy the stress and threat from the helper.....*IF IT'S A GOOD DOG!!!*
> 
> I read an interesting study earlier this year that showed that when a dog is corrected he gets an endorphin rush and the pleasure centers of the brain are stimulated.
> 
> There is also the idea of what I jokingly call "thrill drive". Some dogs get off on exciting situations. For example, I have a young dog right now that loves to tease my old bitch. She'll be sleeping and he will do something like creep up behind her, nip on the butt and run. She has beaten him up countless times for this but he is driven to do it. And even after a good butt kicking he is liable to do it again within an hour. Why does he do this over and over again? I think it's because he gets a thrill out of it.
> 
> Hunter have you ever played a violent sport? There is a reason why few champion boxers retire when they are on top. Most fight until they can't win anymore. Even though the training, diet and lifestyle are very stressful they love the sport.
> 
> I'm always stressed when I trial my dogs. Yet I continue to spend 20 hours a week training. And just because it's stressful does not make me not what to do it. The stress makes me feel alive.
> 
> Next thing. Another reason I don't train without serious intent with puppies is because puppyhood is the time when a dog is imprinted with much of his behavior. If he learns that the helper has a friendly side. If a dog knows that the helper has a friendly side they will seek out that friendly side with appeasement behaviors. I want my dog to always react with aggression and never have appeasement on his mind.
> 
> You might like to read this :Elsevier


You left some out a good bit of the study. The dog enjoyed the threat from the OWNER, not the experimenter. I'm not paying $30 to read the full text... sorry, the abstract will do fine for me.

Yes, I did submission fighting for several years studying Gracie jiujitsu, a contract in the Marines, raced motocross and endure for most of my life, and started skydiving at 16 years old. Well aware of the drives and emotions involved in all of that.

Enjoying the threat and fight with the helper is what I would call fight drive, not defense. Defense is a defending oneself, triggered by feeling its necessary or bad things will happen, and is not natural for any animal to enjoy. The enjoyment you are speaking of is what a full contact fighter feels when entering a ring, knowing he will likely be hurt, possibly severely. The same fighter, cornered in an alley by thugs armed that he is ill equipped to deal with, is not enjoying himself. He has genuine fear, and will fully defend himself rather than slump and cry, but he would miracle himself out of the situation if he could. That is defense

My dog loves the fight... loves it. I have to keep it toned down a bit to more effectively teach whatever behavior I want to teach. I can teach with the fight there, but its less effective.


----------



## Samba

I thought thought the article was about appeasement behaviors and familiarity? Was there another article I missed?

So you are basically saying you are working with the dog without getting it into a frenzy and too high in drive?


----------



## Fast

Samba said:


> I thought thought the article was about appeasement behaviors and familiarity?


It was and dogs become too familiar with the helper if they are playmates. If the dog believes that he is on the field to play and then the helper becomes a true bad guy, what do you think the dog is going to do?


----------



## Fast

hunterisgreat said:


> Enjoying the threat and fight with the helper is what I would call fight drive, not defense.


Hunter, what are the three elements of defense?


----------



## Samba

That is a good article on that phenomena. Familiarity is going to elicit the same behaviors from the dog it would show its owners. I never did enjoy those super friendly rag tossers or those going about all lovey dovey with dogs.

I think it is important that the dog see a level of threat or intensity from the helper (pups not so ready for that). This is not a game of prey and possess the toy. If the dogs get this impression, how are you going to remove that? Could get ugly.


----------



## Samba

hunterisgreat said:


> Defense however, is a response to stress/threat and is not something the dog enjoys or wants to do. What you would call defense in response to a threat/stress out of a desire to be defensive, I would call fight drive, if I understand you correctly.


I am confused as to what that paragraph means?


----------



## Samba

Nevermind, I reread the context and got it. It is that definition thing again. What a messy thing to only type about.


----------



## Fast

Samba said:


> That is a good article on that phenomena. Familiarity is going to elicit the same behaviors from the dog it would show its owners. I never did enjoy those super friendly rag tossers or those going about all lovey dovey with dogs.


Pet peeve of mine too. On the other side, I really hate it when a handler brings their dog around me, the helper. It's hard to get people to understand that they have to act like their 12 week old puppy is really going to hurt me. If they can't treat the dog like a "killer", the dog has a hard time believing he's one. 

It's funny, when these pups give me a hard stare and I avoid and run away. You can see them feel power surge through them, then they try to give chase or a few barks. Cool stuff 

We had a newbie visitor to the club the other day that commented about how brave I was to work dogs when I was obviously so afraid of them. That was one of the nicest compliments ever. :laugh:


----------



## Samba

Appropriately "skeered" helpers are hard to find!

Ha, when I went somewhere I got it for bringing my pup all non-chalant by the helper. It turned out to be a good place.


----------



## Samba

I read somewhere an article about schutzhund that said beware of a place that starts your in defense rather than prey. Isn't there some middle ground that challenges and responds to the dog? 

Of course, over doing it and sending a dog into avoidance is yucky, especially if done repeatedly. Not acknowldeging a dog's power is icky too. So is a bunch of prey that never touches the best of the dog's ability or presents a challenge.
I think such an admonition is misleading. It shoud just say don't go to bad training and good luck with that!


----------



## Fast

Samba said:


> I think such an admonition is misleading. It shoud just say don't go to bad training and good luck with that!


I think for a lot of people it is not that misleading. It's their best option for getting their dog titled. It's been said over and over on this forum that good helper work is rare commodity. And if you don't have good helper work, training in mostly prey is a good option. And I would rather see people doing that than abusing the dog or dropping out of the sport.


----------



## Samba

Well, that is a very good point. It Is perhaps better than nothing or ruination. I haven't been able to embrace it so here I sit on the computer feeding peanut butter crackers to a pretty good dog.


----------



## JanaeUlva

Helmut Raiser Der Schutzhund, page 65, Training the Hold and Bark. "the most effective way to teach the hold and bark is to use prey work as a foundation. The dog has to learn that he can flush out a helper, who is standing in the blind, by barking, and consequently make prey. The dog learns a direct action to reach his drive goal, the bark takes on a very demanding tone. If one practices the H&B with a dog who bites primarily out of defense drive motivation, then one has to activate the defense behaviour's antagonist - avoidance behavior. The dog experiences a drive conflict of extreme psychological stress. <snip a bit> because of this unavoidable stress situation the dog's ability to learn is seriously impaired. In good dogs this exercise usually becomes a problem, because the provocation of avoidance behaviour inevitably activates the defense behaviour even more strongly. This is also the reason why the H & B exercise should be mastered fairly well before the dog is worked too far in defense drive."


----------



## Samba

Yeah, well, thanks Helmut.


----------



## cliffson1

Hunterisgreat...isn't Frans Slaman in your club????


----------



## Samba

If he is, Frans has good skills.


----------



## Vandal

WOW....this is a hum dinger of a thread here....I am still on page 16. Slow down so I can catch up. .


----------



## Samba

How did this get to 18 pages??


----------



## Shaina

Fast said:


> It was and dogs become too familiar with the helper if they are playmates. If the dog believes that he is on the field to play and then the helper becomes a true bad guy, what do you think the dog is going to do?


I certainly disagree with this. With a strong dog, it doesn't matter who the helper is, or if they've known them for years, helped raise them, etc. A good dog is going to do it regardless of who it is, which is how it should be. This goes beyond schutzhund and a little bit in the edgy part, but what if a family member the dog has known all of its life hurts you? Would you expect your dog to not take it seriously just because they know the person? I won't,and don't, ever think that of my dog. Dogs with a precise on/off switch will listen to you and know immediately that the threat is real.


----------



## Vandal

> The dog has to learn that he can flush out a helper, who is standing in the blind, by barking, *and consequently make prey*.


He is not saying train the HB in prey. It is what has already been said here...channeling aggression into prey. Same way we start young dogs, confrontation by the helper ( "defense" if you want to call it that), running away when the dog barks, (prey). Just about everything in protection training follows this scenario . Sometimes in big ways, other times in more subtle action from the helper but it is pretty consistent. 
Prey work is very important but like I said, it is not play and there is a level of seriousness to it. Therefore, like defense work, it also, is not something for puppies. Fast did a good job of explaining it


> I think the biggest difference is the overall intent. Working a puppy in play drive is just playing with the puppy. The same as one might do in obedience. It might excite and wake the pup's drives, but it never has a serious intent. When you work the dog in prey it always has a serious intent. The helper is always keeping himself a bit dangerous. The helper also needs to keep in mind that he is looking for aggressive responses to opposition and reacts appropriately. Even when the dog is chasing the prey he he knows the prey might put up a fight in the end. The helper dosen't completely disconnect the prey from the fight.


I think the answer most are agreeing with is that pups should not be worked, period, "prey" or not. I agree. The old ways of training in protection are slowly coming back. Why? Because they made sense. Yes, people did it wrong a LOT but the idea was still good. Years ago, there were many dogs ruined by too much defense work. Outs , control and confidence were issues more than a lack of power. However, the dogs were different, more serious, more social aggression, more fight...whatever word you want to use, more dogs were not playing. Therefore, finding a way to channel some of that was a pretty good idea. Problem is, now it is being used on dogs who are genetically different than those dogs from years ago were and now it is believed that puppies benefit from it. 
All manipulation to make dogs "look" like they have the drives and instincts required of a protection dog. That's just dishonest. 

I have to say this about the constant remarks concerning genetic grips being ruined by stress. Well, I guess if you are a complete idiot and just beat the crap out of your dog over and over you might see some effect. I personally have never seen a dog who bit that way, get worse when normal to intense pressure was applied. They usually just bite harder but the grip sure doesn't get chewy or go half full. Something else is going on there or maybe I just can't even picture the amount of abuse the dog that is doing that is being subjected to.


----------



## Jason L

Samba said:


> How did this get to 18 pages??


I'm on page 8!


----------



## mareg

It 100% depends on the dog. For people to give loooonnnngggg drawn out explanations on a forum is kind of silly and a waste of time.

simple....balance the dog. Dont take a whip to a puppy and if a three year old dog cant take some frontal pressure either the training was lousy or the dog needs to find a new hobby.


----------



## lhczth

Vandal said:


> I have to say this about the constant remarks concerning genetic grips being ruined by stress. Well, I guess if you are a complete idiot and just beat the crap out of your dog over and over you might see some effect. I personally have never seen a dog who bit that way, get worse when normal to intense pressure was applied. They usually just bite harder but the grip sure doesn't get chewy or go half full. Something else is going on there or maybe I just can't even picture the amount of abuse the dog that is doing that is being subjected to.


:thumbup: The training on Nike was awful. Too much pressure coming from the helper at all times and then from me to gain control. All through this her grip never changed. It was always full and hard. We had a lot of other issues surface (like not outing, being dirty, etc), but the grip never changed. If anything she learned to fight and bite harder. She would crush the sleeve and was like trying to drag an anchor on the escape and was very hard to drive. THAT is genetics. 

This has been a good thread and thank you Anne for explaining what Raiser meant. I had hoped you would come in and clarify this for people.


----------



## hunterisgreat

cliffson1 said:


> Hunterisgreat...isn't Frans Slaman in your club????


Don't we have a pretty young pup from you at our club


----------



## hunterisgreat

Shaina said:


> I certainly disagree with this. With a strong dog, it doesn't matter who the helper is, or if they've known them for years, helped raise them, etc. A good dog is going to do it regardless of who it is, which is how it should be. This goes beyond schutzhund and a little bit in the edgy part, but what if a family member the dog has known all of its life hurts you? Would you expect your dog to not take it seriously just because they know the person? I won't,and don't, ever think that of my dog. Dogs with a precise on/off switch will listen to you and know immediately that the threat is real.


A previous roommate, asked if my female would bite him if he tried to start a fight (knows nothing of dogsport). I told him I doubt it, that we've never trained that, and he's lived there for a year so thats a lot of conflicting stuff for the dog to deal with. He did a great acting job of "assaulting" me without warning later that night, without any input from me (busy "wrestling" him off me) female strike him hard full mouth in his upper forearm/start of his elbow, lots of blood. So, perhaps I agree with this post, and this is why I'm not that worried about my dog seeing our helpers off the field, though they've never petted him or interacted, I expect my dogs to be calm and composed if we are doing obedience with the helper standing 5 ft away giving advice, and not view him as a threat (b/c he isn't at that point)


----------



## hunterisgreat

JanaeUlva said:


> Helmut Raiser Der Schutzhund, page 65, Training the Hold and Bark. "the most effective way to teach the hold and bark is to use prey work as a foundation. The dog has to learn that he can flush out a helper, who is standing in the blind, by barking, and consequently make prey. The dog learns a direct action to reach his drive goal, the bark takes on a very demanding tone. If one practices the H&B with a dog who bites primarily out of defense drive motivation, then one has to activate the defense behaviour's antagonist - avoidance behavior. The dog experiences a drive conflict of extreme psychological stress. <snip a bit> because of this unavoidable stress situation the dog's ability to learn is seriously impaired. In good dogs this exercise usually becomes a problem, because the provocation of avoidance behaviour inevitably activates the defense behaviour even more strongly. This is also the reason why the H & B exercise should be mastered fairly well before the dog is worked too far in defense drive."


I (unfortunately) haven't read "Der Schutzhund", but its on my list. This is exactly what I was trying, and failing apparently, to communicate.


----------



## Vandal

There are a couple of problems with this thread. First, no one can see the work that is being talked about. Second, people's writing styles are maybe having a greater affect on how they are understood vs what they mean. The back and forth about defense and prey is the biggest example where it seemed some were picturing very young dogs being backed into a corner or something. The term defense is as it was described by Hunter but it is a common term that means something else to others. It is easier to use it than to try to insert a replacement word.

The HB is never all about prey and certainly, you don't put so much pressure on a dog from the get go that he breaks down. I mean, this is just common sense, so, talking about it is maybe kind of unnecessary. 

There is an age factor in this. If you wait to start protection, you can use more of all the drives because they are available. If that is the case, people have to consider the attitude the helper presents during all of the work. Being in character matters. I see many people teaching the HB who are not in character, ( and never will be), and no, I am not talking about looking like a vulture, hunched over and staring at the dog. It is in what you are thinking, feeling etc. Many people think if they don't play the part, it is easier for the dog and they tell themselves they are doing "prey work", they are not, they are simply working the dog in a lower drive state and that includes the prey drive. That's why you see that more playful behavior when some people say they are training in prey. The dogs will never look at Helmut like he is a playmate, so, what he is talking about is perhaps completely different than the way other people work ' in prey".


----------



## cliffson1

@ Hunterisgreat....Shhhhh....don't want to worry the pup with all this talk...lol


----------



## hunterisgreat

Vandal said:


> There are a couple of problems with this thread. First, no one can see the work that is being talked about. Second, people's writing styles are maybe having a greater affect on how they are understood vs what they mean. The back and forth about defense and prey is the biggest example where it seemed some were picturing very young dogs being backed into a corner or something. The term defense is as it was described by Hunter but it is a common term that means something else to others. It is easier to use it than to try to insert a replacement word.
> 
> The HB is never all about prey and certainly, you don't put so much pressure on a dog from the get go that he breaks down. I mean, this is just common sense, so, talking about it is maybe kind of unnecessary.
> 
> There is an age factor in this. If you wait to start protection, you can use more of all the drives because they are available. If that is the case, people have to consider the attitude the helper presents during all of the work. Being in character matters. I see many people teaching the HB who are not in character, ( and never will be), and no, I am not talking about looking like a vulture, hunched over and staring at the dog. It is in what you are thinking, feeling etc. Many people think if they don't play the part, it is easier for the dog and they tell themselves they are doing "prey work", they are not, they are simply working the dog in a lower drive state and that includes the prey drive. That's why you see that more playful behavior when some people say they are training in prey. The dogs will never look at Helmut like he is a playmate, so, what he is talking about is perhaps completely different than the way other people work ' in prey".


Hey, I can't be accused of not trying to "sync" up the language  ... I pointed out that I felt that was part of the disagreement. I can only communicate in the language I understand  if my words mean something different to me, than they are received by you, we're sort of already setup for failure. In reading what you all were writing, it became clearer to me that there was communication issue.

I fully understand about committing to the role when doing helper work. I've begun doing helper work myself, and already had the opportunity to work full prey dogs that don't really care too much what you do and stay prey driven, and dogs that get pretty defensive with just eye contact. Personally, I don't posture physically so much. I concentrate on thinking about fighting the dog, and I believe that cues in the body/face posture automatically. At first I tried "trying to look aggressive", and don't believe any dog has ever believed that.


----------



## Vandal

Do you take everything people say as an " accusation"? I worry about you. That's just not healthy. 
I was trying to help clarify since it was ten against one. You do tend to make "statements" and I think that gets people arguing with you. Just saying.


----------



## hunterisgreat

Vandal said:


> Do you take everything people say as an " accusation"? I worry about you. That's just not healthy.
> I was trying to help clarify since it was ten against one. You do tend to make statements and I think that gets people arguing with you. Just saying.


Point taken.. I get in few debates or difficulties communicating effectively in person, so perhaps its with how I write vice speak, or something to do with me demeanor offline or any number of qualities in people that are different online.. I saw my last statement as a validation of what you said basically. Of course, my defensive wall IS to some degree up, simply because its 10 against 1.

You shouldn't worry about me


----------



## crackem

I think too much gets made of all of this all the time. And it's easy to write about and deal with hypothetical situations. it's fun, get's people thinking, but overall, i think people believe too much of what they've written or read and haven't seen enough.

I tend to shy away from drive talks as anything more than just generalities anymore. There's too much confusion to really explain in detail, and that's my opinion. 

I always want balance, I think that is best, but i've worked enough dogs to know all sorts can make great dogs. 

I think starting in prey makes sense, it's fun for everyone and the dog is able to "think" a bit clearer, but while working mainly in "prey" doesn't mean you can't challange puppies at times to see how they react. Sensible pressure, some can take more younger, some can't. Do what the dog in front of you is telling you to do and make it better.

I don't really care if the dog is biting out of "prey" or "defense" at all really. They all hurt. I care more that the dog is under control and able to stay in the game or fight, however they view it. Enough dogs that people would say are locked in "prey" would have hurt me seriously under heavy pressure and they don't flinch or care. Just as other dogs would bite out of a different frame of mind and hurt me the same.

So many dogs, so many handlers and so many variations in what people want out of their dogs. Make note of strengths and weaknesses, have a goal and have fun training


----------



## Fast

JanaeUlva said:


> Helmut Raiser Der Schutzhund, page 65, Training the Hold and Bark. "the most effective way to teach the hold and bark is to use prey work as a foundation. The dog has to learn that he can flush out a helper, who is standing in the blind, by barking, and consequently make prey. The dog learns a direct action to reach his drive goal, the bark takes on a very demanding tone. If one practices the H&B with a dog who bites primarily out of defense drive motivation, then one has to activate the defense behaviour's antagonist - avoidance behavior. The dog experiences a drive conflict of extreme psychological stress. <snip a bit> because of this unavoidable stress situation the dog's ability to learn is seriously impaired. In good dogs this exercise usually becomes a problem, because the provocation of avoidance behaviour inevitably activates the defense behaviour even more strongly. This is also the reason why the H & B exercise should be mastered fairly well before the dog is worked too far in defense drive."


Context is so important. Raiser does not work puppies. Also the dogs are started from the beginning with aggression.


----------



## Fast

Shaina said:


> This goes beyond schutzhund and a little bit in the edgy part, but what if a family member the dog has known all of its life hurts you? Would you expect your dog to not take it seriously just because they know the person? I won't,and don't, ever think that of my dog. Dogs with a precise on/off switch will listen to you and know immediately that the threat is real.


Newbies are so cute.


----------



## Samba

Fast said:


> Context is so important. Raiser does not work puppies. Also the dogs are started from the beginning with aggression.


This is good to hear. 

I was afraid Helmut had gone all crazy on me. Something in the book may be lost in translation. No affront to Armin intended.


----------



## cliffson1

Good post Crackem! One of the problems with drives is two people will watch same thing and see something different. Wrote a post on here some years ago about channeling from prey to defense and back to prey or vice versa depending on the dog and what you are seeking to accomplish while working the dog....have not written another post on the subject. To me it all involves being able to read a dog and have the knowledge to do what you need to maintain balance. I leave these topics alone, though I will say we were working on channeling last night with a two year old bouvier that I was working(decoying). Also, we weren't doing Sch training, but preparing a dog for a SDA trial, still good bitework training is good bitework training.JMO


----------



## Samba

So does it matter if fight drive is diminshed? I mean, since prey bites hurt and all?


----------



## JanaeUlva

Yes context is very important. And yes, Helmut makes it clear in his introduction that he thinks it hard to find good helpers who can "utilize which inborn drives to turn the dog into a protection dog." He goes on to say that these "inborn drives are prey-drive, defense-drive, aggression (fighting-drive), avoidance behavior and trainability." 

This is a very long post for sure, but I wanted to put the H&B quote in context. Makes ya want to read his book! I'm re-reading it again because like the Bible, context of time, context within the book are important and then there is the age old problem of interpretation.

So for context -- In Part 1, his theory section, he states "Today, I administer doses of defense-drive promotion on an individual basis and not often very heavily, and I believe that the dog benefits from it.". Before that he stated that "the fighting drive is an extension of the play drive." he continues, "I know from practical experience that dogs which do protection primarily as a result of their defense drive may still be lacking in good fighting drive." "the dogs desire to seek the fight is in my (HR) opinion an essential ingredient of the fighting drive." He says "in all dogs in which I found pronounced fighting drive I also found pronounced prey drive." "The dog must see the helper as his rival. The object of the competition could vary: it could be prey, or social motivation where the helper appears as a combatant."

My post was merely quoting the first paragraph of "training the Hold and Bark" that is Chapter 3 - and again his first sentence is "The most effective way to teach the hold and bark is to use prey work foundation." He then says "the hold and bark should be mastered fairly well before the dog is worked too far in defense drive." key might be "too far." 

In Chapter 1 , Helmut talks about "prey drive promotion" and that it "should be started with the 3 months old dog (page 31)The goal should be that the dog views the sleeve as his prey, and if given the chance to make prey, he will try to pull it towards himself by biting vigorously." He continues with the sentence "the prey drive is subject to stimulus and action specific exhaustion, and consequently should not be worked too often. Once a week is sufficient." in his book, prey work using a rag continues on until the dog is physically able to carry a sleeve, "usually between the ninth and eleventh month" - page 38. He mentions in this chapter, in a section called the Attack, that the primary exercise in prey drive is the attack (on the sleeve).

In Chapter 2, Helmut talks about defense drive promotion. Without continuing to quote his entire book, he says in the first paragraph that the dogs defense drive can stem from defense of his prey or in defense of itself. He says "the defense drive matures late and once awakened cannot be extinguished. Therefore it is important for the training to include defense promotion at just the right time and it's impotent not to let avoidance behavior occur during defense drive promotion." He states here as well as later that "I therefore believe, that a dog must have learned the H&B exercise before any major defense drive promotion takes place." 

In Defense Drive promotion, HR says goal one is the dog learning he can intimidate the helper who is challenging the dog for its prey, he learns to "counter". After which the dog is rewarded with the prey, the sleeve. In the second goal of defense promotion, HR states "the dog has to learn, that he can defend himself against the helper by attacking and biting . . ." "The dog should be mature and confident; under no circumstances should a dog be younger than 15 to 18 months, because in it, the dog is faced with open aggression not just a threat." (page 56)

The conclusion was interesting - "if one has fun dealing with dogs <snip> then one can consider dog sport a hobby with a clear conscience. With those people in mind, this book was written <snip>."


----------



## Shaina

Fast said:


> Newbies are so cute.


Hmm.. very welcoming approach to a newer user. Certainly makes me want to chime in on conversations.

Guess I'm out on this one - I've got numerous multi-time-national level champion trainers agreeing with me, and I don't doubt them for a second. Guess this is why there's so many flakey dogs in the sport  Nice trying to have a nice conversation! Should have figured that only people with posts into the hundreds can have logical opinions and not get bullied over them.

Ta-ta!


----------



## Gwenhwyfair

I am currently working on the obedience with my dog, she is doing well. The trainer and facility owner/trainer** think my dog would be a good schutzhund dog. 

They have tested her for prey and defense. She shows good drive in prey, stronger in defense, therefore he says she should be worked in prey drive much more at the start.

Sounded reasonable (to this newbie!) and in accordance with what you mention in red below.

Yes? No? Any suggestions, things to watch out for?




(** both are long time participants in Schutzhund, members and host training facility of the local Schutzhund club)





Vandal said:


> There is also much to say concerning working with what the dog brings on the field but this concept is completely gone in SchH.


----------



## Vandal

My quote referred to working with who the dog is genetically. If you have a dog who is more on the "serious side", for the lack of a better way to put it, it is not possible to make the dog into one who is more motivated by prey objects. You can use prey work to build confidence but prey work that requires the dog to chase the rag or sleeve, or is looking to make the dog into a more sleeve oriented dog, doesn't work.

I do see people trying to do that in SchH, where they want the dog to care more about the sleeve than the dog is genetically capable of being. The idea behind holding the sleeve WAS to teach the dog that he can get calmness there. There is stress involved when a dog works in aggression and when the dog understands that holding the sleeve, ( which the dog SHOULD consider to be part of the helper), controls the helper, that allows the dog to have some calmness when biting. It makes the dog more confident as a result because he is controlling the fight. People have now separated the sleeve from the man and that was never the intention. It has become a reward vs being part of the helper. When a dog brings aggression out on the field, many now get busy trying to teach the dog that SchH is just a game. Some dogs will never view it that way, so, trying to make them into sleeve dogs turns it all into kind of a mess. That is when you will see them chew etc because the sleeve has no meaning to them.


----------



## Vandal

Also, you have to consider that Helmut wrote that book back in the 80s. As I have said before, the dogs were different. They had more social aggression than the dogs do now. Therefore, the idea of working pups, was not as "harmful" as it can be nowadays. I do believe he no longer works pups but I have not worked with Helmut for years. Someone told me that.
The other thing is the problem with books. People seem to have a tendancy to forget one aspect of the forest while they are reading about another tree. There are so many factors to consider and I really think only people who actually do helper work can understand it completely. You have to see the reactions and behavior from the dog. You also have to be someone with the required sensitivity TO see it.


----------



## Chris Wild

Having had the opportunity to train with Helmut a couple times in the past few years and spend many additional hours sitting on a couch sipping coffee and discussing dogs, I can verify that no he doesn't work puppies. And his approach to the hold and bark is exactly as Anne described with aggression being channeled into prey. It is not *taught* in prey. Rather the dog is worked in a manner that stimutes aggression and when the dog responds with strong *aggressive* barking, the helper then backs down and flees, transitioning he dog from aggression to prey. Helmut believes that developing both drives, aggression and prey, simultaneously and teaching the dog to transition between them with barking coming out of aggression and biting coming out of prey (both for grip reasons, and to relieve the stress) is very important. And since that can't be done with young pups, he doesn't work pups.


----------



## JanaeUlva

Vandal said:


> Also, you have to consider that Helmut wrote that book back in the 80s. As I have said before, the dogs were different. They had more social aggression than the dogs do now. Therefore, the idea of working pups, was not as "harmful" as it can be nowadays. I do believe he no longer works pups but I have not worked with Helmut for years. Someone told me that.
> The other thing is the problem with books. People seem to have a tendancy to forget one aspect of the forest while they are reading about another tree. There are so many factors to consider and I really think only people who actually do helper work can understand it completely. You have to see the reactions and behavior from the dog. You also have to be someone with the required sensitivity TO see it.


Yes I have considered those possibilities that the dogs could be different as everyone keeps pointing out, that maybe since writing this book HR might have changed his opinion on some things, and finally as HR states the helper needs to understand what drives they are seeing and to act appropriately. So a safer bet would be to wait on training puppies until they are older and possibly more resilient. It is human nature IMO, during a learning process, to get lost in the forest thru the tree or whatever, but all we can do is keep trying to learn about each tree and ultimately the total forest. Theory is a nice place to start but actual experience is essential. And thru experience ideas thus technique have and will continue to change. That is what makes all this so interesting. I will bet the best trainers are the ones who take the individual dog, the theory and experience and make it a bit of their own. Or else nothing would ever change. That is why I like reading posts and anything else I can get my hands on and then try to work my dog with an open mind to who she is. I enjoy watching the different dogs working in my club and how the helper addresses the similarities and differences in them. Hoping i can learn more. In the end I want to feel I did the best I could by my dog and it's all a balancing act. Thank you everybody for sharing ideas, theory and most of all experience.


----------



## Chris Wild

JanaeUlva said:


> that maybe since writing this book HR might have changed his opinion on some things.


He most definitely has and has come out and said exactly that on a couple of occasions.


----------



## Catu

Vandal said:


> I have to say this about the constant remarks concerning genetic grips being ruined by stress. Well, I guess if you are a complete idiot and just beat the crap out of your dog over and over you might see some effect. I personally have never seen a dog who bit that way, get worse when normal to intense pressure was applied. They usually just bite harder but the grip sure doesn't get chewy or go half full. Something else is going on there or maybe I just can't even picture the amount of abuse the dog that is doing that is being subjected to.


As I see it grips, just like the bark, are an expression of how the dog feels, and the reason why SchH judges care about grip compared to other protection sports. It is not like they want a hard, calm, deep bite to show how the dog can crunch the arm bone of the "bad guy", it it's how to achieve such grip the dog must be in the correct state of mind. A dog with a genetic grip doesn't have stronger masseters, it's a dog with a higher stress threshold and with the ability to channel said stress into fight instead than into avoidance, then a given amount of stress won't compromise the quality of said bite unless, as Vandal said, the amount is borderline abuse.

Now about the B&H. I've not read the Raiser book, from what I understand from the extracts posted here, it is not like you want the dog to bark IN prey, like the wolf wanting the rabbit to get out of the bushes (much of what we do to encourage the bark alert in SAR dogs) but to make the prey item something very valuable, something the dogs really wants to posses, and therefore is willing to fight for it, then the bark comes from social aggression. Correct me if I'm wrong, as I said, I've not had the pleasure yet to read the book.


----------



## JanaeUlva

Chris Wild said:


> He most definitely has and has come out and said exactly that on a couple of occasions.


Thanks! I will research to see what I can find. If anybody has direct access to any of his recants on his original theory and/or training techiniques can you PM them to me. It would be nice to see what he has learned since writing his excellent book.


----------



## Fast

Shaina said:


> Hmm.. very welcoming approach to a newer user. Certainly makes me want to chime in on conversations.
> 
> Guess I'm out on this one - I've got numerous multi-time-national level champion trainers agreeing with me, and I don't doubt them for a second. Guess this is why there's so many flakey dogs in the sport  Nice trying to have a nice conversation! Should have figured that only people with posts into the hundreds can have logical opinions and not get bullied over them.
> 
> Ta-ta!


The number of post has nothing to do with it.


----------



## Chris Wild

JanaeUlva said:


> Thanks! I will research to see what I can find. If anybody has direct access to any of his recants on his original theory and/or training techiniques can you PM them to me. It would be nice to see what he has learned since writing his excellent book.


This was in conversation in person, not posted anywhere online.

He will be doing a seminar in FL in a couple of months. I don't know if there are any spots left but if you're really interested in his training you could certainly go see it yourself and ask him.


----------



## Gwenhwyfair

O.K. I see what you are getting at!

My background is with horses. I've witnessed people doing this with horses too, pushing them to do something they cannot do conformationally and/or mentally. I've also seen it mess up, sour, some nice horses who would have otherwise been fine participating in another sport.

My dog just turned 18 months and I'm new at this so I will take it slow with her and one day at time to see where she settles and is happiest. I'll also keep my mind open to checking out other sports that she may do well at too.

Thank you for you response. btw your Heist vom Adler Stein, enjoyed watching his videos on your website, handsome boy! 





Vandal said:


> My quote referred to working with who the dog is genetically. If you have a dog who is more on the "serious side", for the lack of a better way to put it, it is not possible to make the dog into one who is more motivated by prey objects. You can use prey work to build confidence but prey work that requires the dog to chase the rag or sleeve, or is looking to make the dog into a more sleeve oriented dog, doesn't work.
> 
> I do see people trying to do that in SchH, where they want the dog to care more about the sleeve than the dog is genetically capable of being. The idea behind holding the sleeve WAS to teach the dog that he can get calmness there. There is stress involved when a dog works in aggression and when the dog understands that holding the sleeve, ( which the dog SHOULD consider to be part of the helper), controls the helper, that allows the dog to have some calmness when biting. It makes the dog more confident as a result because he is controlling the fight. People have now separated the sleeve from the man and that was never the intention. It has become a reward vs being part of the helper. When a dog brings aggression out on the field, many now get busy trying to teach the dog that SchH is just a game. Some dogs will never view it that way, so, trying to make them into sleeve dogs turns it all into kind of a mess. That is when you will see them chew etc because the sleeve has no meaning to them.


----------



## Fast

JanaeUlva said:


> Thanks! I will research to see what I can find. If anybody has direct access to any of his recants on his original theory and/or training techiniques can you PM them to me. It would be nice to see what he has learned since writing his excellent book.


I emailed him a few years ago to ask for a couple of questions and he replied quickly with the answers. His email is on the SV-2000 website.


----------



## JanaeUlva

Thanks Chris, Fast, Vandal,
I found this interview where Helmut stated: "HELMUT: Yes, in the 35 years when dog sports has been a hobby of mine, I have had to rethink quite a few things. At the same time – some principles have stood the test of time. Some I have discarded in the meantime and then returned to later – they have appeared to have worked after all. Dog sports itself has changed a lot in this time." Wish he would write another book

I checked out the seminar he will be offering in Florida, but that is the month I'm going for my BH so I'll have to try and catch him some other time. 

Fast, thanks for the idea to email Helmut! I emailed him asking a few questions concerning his book and changes in his training theory/techniques.


----------

