malsrock

Well, some might tell you that, but are they right? A presumably reputable police dog trainer recently told me that the aim in proofing was to trigger the dog into defence or fight drive, whatever you want to call it. I gathered it was a nice way of saying "the dog should be seriously concerned for its wellbeing", because in the line of duty that's exactly what may happen, and they have to know the dog will react in the way that they need it to react. I think we have to be careful not to mix up the emotion behind a behaviour and how the dog reacts to it. Erik is a moderately proactive dog, so when he feels a little pressured he may well behave aggressively, whereas Kivi might feel the same level of pressure and do nothing. That reaction is obviously wildly different between both dogs, but how do we know it's not driven by the same emotional disturbance in both dogs? Incidentally, I'm sure it was a Ted Turner dvd I was watching that had a nice little flow chart including states that led to aggression. Frustration and rage where in there, I believe. Neither of those are fear-based. Training in defence drive is exactly that Corvus, the dog is pressured to fight for it's life basically and gains the courage to engage and fight learned by winning which consequently releasing the pressure that has been applied to the dog. The difference is, a truly fearful dog will retreat under pressure and a courageous dog won't, but they both display aggressive reactions that are fear based. Are they both fear aggressive, or is it only the dog that retreats under pressure considered fear aggressive???

I agree with everything Staranais has said but to give another example... I have seen many fear aggressive dogs choose to exhibit aggression when they could just high tail it out of there. My own dog is one of these. He learnt that aggression is the appropriate and best reaction in a situation driven by fear... there are a huge range of reasons that can lead a dog toward thinking aggression is the way to win. Talk to any reputable security/PP/police dog trainer and they will tell you there is a HUGE difference between fear based aggression and the kind of confident aggression that you should see exhibited in a working dog. The two are poles apart and it quite honestly scares me to think you consider them the same thing What the security trainers are talking about is the courage the dog has to engage a fight, not the reason why the dog reacts which has no relevence really. The dog will either instinctively engage or it will retreat under pressure. The engaging dog could be as fearful as the one who retreats, but engaging gets the job done and will be the one selected as having the required traits.

I'd imagine by careful observation from an experienced professional who takes a comprehensive history of the dog. Fear aggression is lack of social confidence. I'd imagine that the body language of the dog would be quite different in fearful dog than a dominant one. What might not differ is their reaction to a trigger to aggression. Stick your hand in the dog's face and either might bite. And if you ask any reputable behaviourist or trainer they will agree that it's only a very small percentage of aggressive dogs who are not fear aggressive... somewhere like 90% of aggression is fear based. I think if we really disected aggression down completely, even dominance aggression is triggered by the fear of loosing so we could probably say that all aggression 100% of it is fear based to some extent. Although aggression is a complex issue, but personally, I think we often use the term fear aggression far too loosely and doesn't always describe aggressive reactions correctly. A genuine fear aggressive dog IMHO is a nervous and submissive dog that is essentially a coward, has limited courage and reacts aggressively in fear of it's life when unable to flee. An example could be a dog that is petrified to get in a car who bites the owner in a state of panic as the owner tries to man handle him/her in. That to me is classical fear aggression???. A dog that has the courage and chooses to engage a fight where the option to run away exists, is not fear aggression in the true definition I don't think???. Dogs that have a low threshold to reacting aggressively towards a real or imagined threat they call "sharpness" in working dog terms. The same dog could also be diagnosed as fear aggressive, but if the dog has the courage to engage a fight, is called "civil aggression" which are essential traits sought after for training dogs in K9 security work. We could say that a dog with security/protection work potential is ultimately just a fear biter, but is that the correct diagnosis of those traits and that type of behaviour Perhaps if it is all fear based aggression, there would be a major difference in the way a training regime is applied to correct the dog that bites in panic getting into the car and the dog that reacts aggressively towards strange people or other dogs??? Fiona

That's a good question I am interested in knowing the answer as they seem similar personality wise???

I am so sorry to hear about your dog Elfin and hope he makes a good recovery. I always worry about dog parks, beaches etc that some fool will have a DA dog there that they can't control. I hope this dog owner can be brought to justice, this sort of thing isn't on Fiona

I'd imagine by careful observation from an experienced professional who takes a comprehensive history of the dog. Fear aggression is lack of social confidence. I'd imagine that the body language of the dog would be quite different in fearful dog than a dominant one. What might not differ is their reaction to a trigger to aggression. Either might bite. Yes, I think that is the only sure way of determining the situation and is extremely important to have an accurate diagnosis of aggressive behaviour to arrive at the best methods to rehabilitate the dog.

This is not an assumption I'd regard as a safe one. Fear aggressive dogs may trigger straight to fighting without showing a single indicator of flight behaviour. A dog may have learned that flight is not an option or not a successful one. Have the dog onlead and many will know flight is not an option. Its the very unpredictability of the response that can make fear aggressive dogs some of the most challenging to deal with. A notable dog trainer once commented that if as much time and effort went into managing aggressive dogs as went into trying to analyse WHY they aggress, then there'd be far fewer dangerous dogs around. I'm inclined to agree. Bottom line is most handlers don't care as much about why their dogs bite as stopping it. The right professional will focus on that. Oh and once a dog has escalating to drawing blood on people or other animals, I think the term "reactive" needs to be dropped in favour of what the dog is - aggressive. I understand your point of view, but what in that case has determined fear aggression and not aggression generated by social dominance???. If a dogs jumps straight into defence drive with a low threshold to reactivity...........how is a dog displaying this behaviour diagnosed as being fear aggressive???.

Or you go to a behaviourist who is also a qualified law enforcement dog handler Loeka (sorry I missed you at training tonight BTW - I was too sick to make it ) the chances that your dog is reacting out of the type of 'civil aggression' malsrock is referring too would likely be quite slim. The vast majority of aggressive dogs are fear aggressive, this is not so much about what the aggression looks like but also what triggers the aggression. Fear aggressive dogs for example will aggress towards unknown people/dogs/etc but will generally be fine with people/dogs/things they know. ETA: The trainer/behaviourist you use also has a lot of experience with high drive working dogs so would definitely recognise the difference in types of aggression (although I am sure you know this! ) That's a good general overview Huski I agree, but true fear aggression has a typical flight behaviour in their body language which happens prior to reaction. Social aggression I have found has a similar appearance in the reactive state, but what triggers the dog is anything outside of it's pack that doesn't belong generated by dominance in a territorial way. I think the importance which a behaviourist should be able to determine is what the reactivity is for a training plan to be formulated for the particular dog.

That is a good summary of the situation I think you are correct Skye

Kavik - I am really interested in your issues with Zoe - what methods did you use and what would you have done differently? What does your dog actually do Skye???. Does she jump around and misbehave or bark and lunge aggressively at strangers or other dogs when saying she is reactive??? Fiona

You're right. It doesn't. But it sure lessens the chances of the dog developing unwanted ingrained behaviours (eg leash pulling) AND means that issues requiring professional help are likely to be identified (and hopefully acted on) far earlier. I also took Skye to puppy classes and then obedience - we are still reactive but I have no doubt that I will end up with one helluva good dog given time - it is just frustrating that everyone points people in the direction of behavourists when not everyone can afford it. Don't get me wrong, I have no objection to behavourists/personal trainers and will gladly pay the fees but some people who come on these forums do not have the extra $200+ which is why we need to have people at a club level who will help them inclusive of their club fees and without prejudice. I agree Skye especially with working breeds, reactivity is not necessarily a dog with issues, it's often just sharpness and civil drive which is expected and quite normal in working breeds and should be catered for more than it is. Providing the dog isn't reacting in fear and reacts in prey drive and social aggression, dogs like that are very trainable and need the reactivity knocked on the head and the owners taught how to handle them properly. I don't think behaviourists in those cases are what the dog needs and I have seen better results from K9 handlers/trainers working with owners of dogs to correct dominance type reactivity.

Yes, my Mali boy is "exactly" as you have described Staranais I had always previously trained with check chains and negative reinforcement with good results, but I promised this boy I would get with the times and train with positive motivation and reward and have only used a flat collar which has tested me a bit. I am enjoying the responses I have received training in drive and when he's playing up at his worse, pull the ball out and get lightning sits and drops and the behaviour I am looking for which has been amazing learning curve how this all works Training on the sidelines in distractive atmosheres is excellent I think and I have had good results with my boy wanting to chase other dogs and getting himself all ramped up over it. Fiona

I would have to say from my own experiences playing with different breeds, the dog with the most determination, speed and courage to catch prey for the dog's size was a JRT. Next I would say a Kelpie, Malinios, WL GSD. I think if a JRT came in working breed size, it would be almost unbeatable :D

YES!!! absolutely

In a nutshell, the ANKC just need to learn and play the game properly without this idiotic blindness towards working activities and titles. It shouldn't matter what breed clubs or state organisations think about anything FCI sanctioned and the ANKC need the strength to say for example, Schutzhund/IPO is FCI recognised and there will be no discussion on the matter. The same applies to the "attack training" perceptions. The ANKC shouldn't take perceptions of this nature on board and should never be entered into. If the FCI say that Schutzhund/IPO isn't attack training, the subject should be closed on that basis. What I think is totally frustrating, is that the ANKC if they were prepared to seek the support, have the world bodies behind them to argue idiotic whims that are presented like the Victorian legislation. If the FCI, WUSV etc presented an opposition debate to the government on the subject supported by the ANKC, there may be different outcomes and laws resulting. It seems that the ANKC just sit there nodding their head to any nonesense presented by a breed club or whatever without reserching the credibility of the presentations properly, if at all???.

This is incorrect. I agree with Aiden. As far as I am aware, there can be as many registeries or controlling bodies in any country as anyone wishes to have, but only "one" will be FCI affiliated. The USA have several where I think the AKC is the FCI affiliated body, there is also the UKC which isn't and a few others too. There are breed specific registers, working dog registers and many that are not FCI affliliated around the world and some people have dogs registered with two or more registeries in some countries. There is nothing to stop a working dog registery being formed where say a litter can only be registered with them from work titled parents for example. The litter would have ANKC registration "PLUS" registration from the working dog body who recognise Australian Schutzhund or KNPV titles etc. If someone is looking for a working dog with a recorded history on a more work stringent model, they could look at litters registered with the working body as the first port of call and the ANKC for those people becomes only a formality. An FCI affiliated organisation does have an obligation to follow certain FCI protocol according to rules of membership, so I guess it amounts to what the FCI will do about the membership of organisations who don't play the game perhaps

Yes, my 8 year old GSD I can confidently say has 100% recall trained pretty well as Bedazzled has explained. My 12 month old Malinios is getting there, but is still a bit iffy with some distractions...........other dogs generally. I remember the stage well when my GSD would be totally confused which way he would go between my OH calling him and me and we conditioned him that coming to the leash holder provided the best reward. Using the long line to real them in, change directions in low distractions, proof that, then add distractions, patients, consistency and persistance you will get there in the end The other thing I forgot to mention I think helps too, is just calling them around the house to come when called. I have just started to get my Mali coming off a side fence bark in the back yard and I just give him rub, "good boy", let him lick my face and have a fool around and then call him to follow me. To come when called I think has relevence where ever it's done even from room to room around the house. The more you practice it the more the dog becomes conditioned to respond to being called to you if that makes sense???

With respect Tapferhund, Dogsvic could tell you anything. It's best coming from the FCI regarding membership status IMHO Another organisation can easily be formed to take up the FCI membership status for Australia if the ANKC isn't Malsrock, I am lost for words ;) May I ask..are you a member of a controlling body?? And....what do you mean by your second sentence????? Tapferhund, I took your post as recommending to ask Dogsvic if the ANKC are members of the FCI where personally I would prefer to hear it from the FCI themselves if the the ANKC are members or not. If the ANKC are not members of the FCI, they can virtually do as they please, but if they are members and breaching FCI protocol, it adds a further dimension into the debate with added pressure applied for why they shouldn't be removing working titles from a dog's pedigree. The FCI as far as I am aware, permit only one organisation from each country to be a member. If the ANKC are not members, it leaves it open for another organisation to apply for Australian FCI membership I would imagine which is up to the FCI if it's accepted or not. I am a member of DogsSA which I have already written to them regarding this situation as both my dogs have Schutzhund/IPO working titles in their ancestory.

With respect Tapferhund, Dogsvic could tell you anything. It's best coming from the FCI regarding membership status IMHO Another organisation can easily be formed to take up the FCI membership status for Australia if the ANKC isn't

I did a couple of sessions at a club with my Malinios, purely to be in the presence of other dogs in volume more as an exposure exercise so I could train some refocusing steps in that atmoshere but I wasn't accepted with any support at all. It was more, "you can't bring a dog like that here", are you a first time dog owner.........I am 49, doesn't appear that you have displayed leadership skills with your cop this, "GSD X"..........no Belgian Malinios he is........oh Malamute is he I really felt like being vindictive and coming back with my GSD to show them what real obedience and handler control is all about. Personally, I don't think a lot of those training groups know how to handle and train reactive dogs and being non supportive and condescending towards the owner is their way around the situation perhaps. My GSD wasn't reactive and wasn't a thing in his raising and training that I had to deal with, but my Mali is a different ball game and something like others with reactive dogs we need the support to iron out. I think I am being responsible wanting to train and correct my dog's reactive behaviour, and I walked away feeling like an irresponsible owner for bringing a reactive dog to a training field Fiona

Good work to Greg and Erny, your letters are excellent. Erny, I think a resolution by the FCI on the ANKC's membership status is vitally important to see where we stand in that regard. Not to disbelieve the suggestion that they are not members, but we need a conclusive determination on that matter I think. If they are members of the FCI, to point out a breach of protocol by removing titles could also be adventagious to the task IMHO

Oh my, I can relate to this............I have an 8 year old GSD, my main man........he's a total gem that I don't even need to leash him other than for council requirements. I also have a 12 month old Belgian Malinois with a ton of reactive prey drive and walk/train them separately. I take the Mal out first, have a walk and do some training routines and think we made some progress, then I take out my big guy and think geez........my little fireball has some big shoes to fill...........are we ever going to get to the level where my GSD's at People often look up to me thinking I am hot trainer with the control and things I can do with my main man, then they see me with my Mali baby yipping and yapping on the end of leash who won't do a damn thing he's told The Mal is predictably prey drive reactive to other dogs wanting to chase and capture them, but he will bite them when caught so I have to be careful in that regard to calm him down. I carry his ball and fortunately, his ball seems to override most distractions to refocus on me which I used as the foundation to ignor other dogs initially. Along with mild leash corrections, I virtually give him a little leash pop with a NO if he eyeballs other dogs and keep walking briskly and he's pretty good now if we stay on the move. He can still get silly if we stop and talk to someone with a dog, but we are working on that

That's interesting to know Greg People have said that the other state bodies offiliated with the ANKC had no knowledge of the situation other than Dogsvic.........Hmmmmm, I could take a guess at what club is involved, but I guess without conclusive evidence it would be unfair to speculate. I can however imagine which club would benefit dramatically from the removal of working titles though

Hi Tapferhund, Is that 100% accurate the ANKC is not an FCI member???, did they used to be, or what happened there???. They are listed as members as you have said

As far as we have established looking into this situation, the ANKC under their obligation to comply with the FCI requirements as an associate member, do not have the power to alter or make policies in regard to anything of FCI recognition. It seems to me that the ANKC think that providing their membership counterparts raise a topic and vote upon it, they can do as they please without reference to their FCI obligations???. It wouldn't surprise me to know that the ANKC administration have little knowledge of the FCI requirements and would make a more substantial complaint to inform them of an FCI membership breach if that is the case???. I also don't know of anyone involved with working line Malinios as someone suggested in this thread, that are not concerned with working titles being removed from their pedigrees Malinios titles are often more difficult to search for and confirm than GSD titles under the WUSV and I would think it of greater importance that Malinios titles are retained in their pedigrees.