Rex

My GSD is "extremely" effective in a non protection trained dog and useful in a threatening situation as he is instictively a stranger aggressive dog. However, I would be less confident in non aggressive friendly dog's reaction in the same circumstances.

By the way she already owns a GSD, how many more 'protection breeds' does she need? The point is if you are going to rely on the fact the dog is an X breed alone to protect you then you are simply deluding yourself. This is the bit I don't understand with the expectation that another breed could be more effective than a GSD for what the OP requires in a dog. From a visual deterrent perspective, a GSD given it's reputation in protection especially in handler deployed attack training is to a large extent the top of the tree. Perhaps a Rottweiler or Doberman may provide a similar visual effect to deter a potential attacker in a well known guardian breed. Understanding that the OP's GSD failed her at a time of need, wouldn't it fair to say that her individual dog failed her, not the breed??? Perhaps the GSD she has trained accordingly could result in what she needs???.

Don't they hate bodyless heads poking over the fence, it's true that most dogs will go ape!!!. These type of incidents like in my mothers case is what I believe some determine as their dog "stepping up to the plate" in protection.

I have some experience with dogs who are bred for this line of work. They need training, lots of it. All of them need to be trained to be completely sociable and civil (if that is possible), and then to either never bite (proofed) or to bite when cued (also proofed). Anything less is a liability. It would be a terrible mistake to purchase a dog from working lines then just hope that one day it will do it's job, for it probably will - whether you want it to or not. If we are talking about dogs not from working lines, then I'm wasting my time. The probabilities are reduced further, as the OP has already found out the hard way. At last a realistic post that tells it how it is, well done I have a hard line GSD who's lines have been successfully used in security/police work and in fact from breeders who actually advertise their litters capable of this work, not the usual "unsuitable for guard/security purposes" common in many GSD sales advertisements. These lines are "NOT" lovely sociable friendly animals as many who knew a police dog etc etc try to maintain, they are high drive instinctively nasty disposition dogs who want to bite everyone and the training required to make them sociable and civil is extensive and on going and an "absolute" liability untrained and in the wrong hands as they "WILL" chase and bite no question.

Are you comfortable that your dog will always make the right split second decision? It's not just my dog, poodlefan, it's potentially many, many dogs who are currently co-existing in suitable dynamic with their owners who have not yet had the question asked of them. I'm MORE than comfortable, poodlefan, I'm ALIVE. And what are you suggesting I should do with my dog because he did this? One of the most tragic stories I ever heard was told to me by the owner themselves. One day they were carjacked at knifepoint by a known criminal with serious prior offences. The usually friendly and stable family dog reacted by jumping from the back seat and taking the criminal down, then holding it until the police arrived. On the strength of the kind of crap you're dispensing the owner chose to put the dog down for fear it would attack the family. Is that what I should do with my dog? Whoa there Nelly... quantum leap of logic there!! How on earth did we get from me asking if you were confident a dog would always (emphasis there) make the right decision about threats to you deciding I advocated that any dog that did protect its owner should be put down??? What I'm saying is this. People who confidently assert that their untested dog will instinctively know when a person means harm (and as importantly when they don't) and will take the leadership role to engage are asking more of their pets than a the handler of a trained security/protection dog does. I hope people think about that. I said that whether a pet would protect you was a matter of luck not certainty. How you conclude from that I think a dog that protects its owner should be PTS escapes me. I agree with that statement Poodlefan. I beleive it's a huge call in the confidence of an untested and untrained dog that it instinctively will determine a threatening situation and act accordingly to protect.

I am yet to see a Maremma however in pictures they resemble a Golden Retriever in appearance. Are they larger than a GR or in the flesh look nothing like them???.

Not in all types of protection work. My GSD for example as suggested to me by a police K9 trainer has the right disposition for a security officers patrol dog perhaps school security, shopping centres, factories at night, places where people shouldn't be other than for the wrong reasons. A dog high in prey drive and alert to movement with social aggression where they fire straight out of the blocks without cue provides a safer environment for the security officer in that work. Someone hiding around a corner waiting to plonk the security officer with a dog that accepts strangers and works on que only, may be too late to remove the threat, dog too slow to react and protect.

So a dog that is never allowed to exercise leadership over a person is expected to take the lead in defensive situation? Dogs that have been socialised from puppyhood never to put teeth on a human are expected to "naturally" take a person on? Unlike past times, we generally socialise our dogs to greet strangers positively, not tear strips off them. We've had plenty of discussion on alpha wolf theory on this forum. Most of those discussions note that the original research that developed the theory was conducted on captive wolves and was fundamentally flawed. None of that theory has ever been tested in an inter species context. Dogs know we ain't dogs. If they do protect us, are we a resource to them? Professional protection dog trainers have said time and again on this forum that people are deluding themselves if they genuinely expect an untrained dog, even of a guarding/protection breed, to step up when required. Those views have been poo pooed by many owners. I'd say this thread proves the pros right. You may get lucky.. but then again.. why put your safety down to luck? :D My mother tells a story which happened about 10 years ago where a spate of break in's were occurring in the area where she lived. One day she heard the door bell ring whilst in the backyard with her trusty old Golden Retriever and just as she was about to walk inside to answer the door a rough looking teenage kid poked his head over the side fence. Her old Goldie saw the kid, rushed at the fence barking furiously and the kid pulled his head back over. My mother asked the kid what he wanted and asked if John lived there???. Mum swears on a stack of bibles that old Sammy was about to tear the kid's head off in full protection mode, he did the job, too big a dog with a big bark for the kid to be brave enough to case her house again, but ultimately old Sammy I know for a fact would have done "nothing" if the kid had jumped the fence and would have hid behind mum for protection in the crunch or run away. The result was good, mum felt safe and the kid was wary of the dog never to return. The moral of this story is an incident where as my mother does, believed her dog had stepped up to the plate to protect at all costs which many do. This type of occurrence although removed the threat does not indicate that the dog was fired to fight for life and death.

I wouldn't call that a cleaver practice to believe that you can dominate every cranky dog and remain uninjured. Try out a police K9 GSD next time you see the squad. Ask the officer if you can give his dog a yell and run to see if it backs down. Most dog handlers would be glad to oblige and let us know what happens.

Furthermore to protection dogs, are they "really" protecting something or someone, or are they being deployed to react in a certian way to a particular situation as a defence mechanism or tool of the trade. I don't believe that my GSD is protecting me personally, I believe he is more dominating strangers but the result of that is a big set of bared teeth and big bark between me and a possible threat which makes the threat retreat. Either way it achieves the same effect.

Your GSD Brooke sounds like the temperament that we were hoping for lol!!!. Our's is completely different where he will reliably fire up at any strangers people and dogs unless we command him not to which has been the focus of his training to date. With this thread in mind, I tested him today on our walk and watched his reactions. Walking along at ease when spotting a stranger he is alert to them and watches intently, neck stretched, tail out straight. On a "leave it" command, he looks at me and the tail drops, keeps looking at the stranger but doesn't react. Without a "leave it" command, he will gather speed to the end of the leash when the stranger is about 10 meters in front of us approaching and bark furiously pulling on the leash up on his back legs bearing his teeth. An "out" command now trained, he drops back into a heel position and behaves. In a "leave it sit command", he will sit quietly where a stranger can approach and talk. If I command "up", he will fire up bark and lunge at them. His instinct is to "get em", his training is to behave. He won't fire up on command or bark on command, he behaves on command. A great natural defender, but a handful of dog to control.

What is the purpose of testing breeds that are essentially not used in protection work. Wouldn't the testing of these breeds have been done before, evaluated as unsuitable and be the reason they are not used???. Because, as Jeff said, numerous breeds like Labs/Blue heelers/kelpies have been mentioned in this thread as capable of acting in protection of their owner. So, he wants to find one of these breeds to assess to see if that really is the case. Jeff should already know given his experience what breeds work and what don't. I am thinking out loud here, but we don't need silly results from this test for example testing a weak nerved Rottweiler against a feisty Cattle Dog then claiming a Cattle Dog to be a better protector when we all know in reality that a hard line Rotty would eat the most feirce of Cattle Dogs for breakfast?? Same applies with some small breeds, totally driven by aggression massive protection instinct except that a 6 year old kid could nail one with a pair of Adidas runners. Hardly a useful protection dog but has the correct drives???

Brooke just out of interest, how does your GSD act in the presence of strangers generally, does he fire up at them, allow strangers to pat him, is he generally cranky with stangers or friendly. Off lead if a stanger appeared in a park, would he chase them and bail them up barking given the opportunity and does he fire up at strange dogs???.

What is the purpose of testing breeds that are essentially not used in protection work. Wouldn't the testing of these breeds have been done before, evaluated as unsuitable and be the reason they are not used???.

This is what I'm questioning, Huski. If my dog and other dogs (Jed's dogs for example) can do it with no problems, so can other dogs. What Huski is saying is absolutely correct from my experiences. My GSD could only interpret that "strangers" were a threat be it a knife weilding bandit or a 4 year old child, no difference, he wanted to "get em" regardless which was the problem. Training is the "only" way I believe that a dog can interpret situations. A generally friendly dog that barks and perhaps snaps at situation dangerous to it's owner pushed harder untrained will flee not fight at the crunch. I know my GSD will fight a stranger and protect untrained, but I wouldn't guarantee he would protect me for real if a mutual friend of mine and the dog's ended up in a scrap together as his instincts to protect are focused upon strangers.

But, as you discovered Rex, without a fair amount of training dogs like yours can become dangerous and out of control. How can a dog running purely on instinct interpret each 'dangerous' situation appropriately? Don't you understand the danger in letting the dog decide for itself when is the appropriate time to aggress and when isn't? Huski, are you saying any dog with a guarding instinct is a dangerous dog unless trained in protection? No, I'm saying that without a fair amount of training they can become dangerous and out of control - just like Rex's dog did. Most high drive working line dogs aren't ideal for the average pet owner, and anyone who wants to own one needs to be prepared to put in a lot more training and work into the dog than you would a breed from "weaker" lines, or the dog can become bored, out of control, and yes - dangerous. Hey, I will be absolutely honest to say that my GSD by the time he was 14 months old was an absolute bugger of a thing giving the impression that he wanted to chase and bite everyone. My wife refused to walk him after pulling her off her feet twice trying to bail up other dog walkers, he was a total nightmare. If it wasn't for the fact with us, he was the most gentle, affectionate and loving dog we have owned in 30 years, Rainbow Bridge would have been another option. He was becoming dangerous and a legal liability and no pleasure to be with him in a public place. We had no idea how to handle and train a dog like that, not a clue after 30 years of Golden Retrievers made matters far worse. I am confident now that raising another hard line GSD, administering the correct training required would make things a whole lot easier a second time around from what we have learned and experienced.

I too believe Brooke's GSD is workable at the level of protection she needs, but I am not convinced in untrained protection that you will attain a nice easily handled dog that cranks up on command. My GSD is a great visual protector, a perceived nasty defender in those circumstances, but was a handful of dog to control prior to extensive training. My GSD just doesn't like strangers full stop, doesn't need them in his life or personal space and seems to enjoy getting rid of them, scaring them away which looks to him as a victory. If you could read his mind, the impression he gives me, is like he is proud of the way he barked and bellowed and made someone go away, almost game like???. His training was all about teaching him not to react to strangers and behave nicely, not training to make him fire up which is what he does instinctively.

There is a bit too much "rocket science" in dog behaviour etc etc being thrashed around in this thread. Having a re-read of the OP question, she has a GSD that did a runner when she needed his presence to assist her from what could have been a voilent assault causing her bodily injury. She has a guardian breed dog that didn't do his job, fair question. Forget full blown personal protection dogs which she made clear that she didn't want, what she wanted was a dog that would fire up, look the business and stay by her side during the ordeal, not turn tail and run. My GSD in the same situation by natural instinct based purely upon his disposition towards strangers would have stopped the guy in his tracks simply due to him getting up on his back legs at the end of the leash barking furiously with his teeth hanging out. The guy wouldn't have the anatomy to proceed with an attack, especially if telling the guy to back off as the dog is attack trained and you will release him if necessary. It would take a "very brave" person not to retreat in those circumstances. All I see that is required is an individual dog with a bit of drive and wariness of strangers to satisfy the OP's requirements.

Brilliant. Then been possibly put down for being a dangerous dog. Nice going Rex.... Ever stopped to think that if your big tough attack dog actually did bite someone then its good bye dog? Before you add your comments about how he is "trained" and "if its on your property, its not the dogs fault if it attacks" Take a long hard look at some of the recent dog stories in the news. If some small child wanders near your dog or sticks its hands through a fence to reach your dog and it "defends its territory" I doubt people will say "oh leave the dog be, tis defending its territory" Odds on your dog would be destroyed. thank you Mr Burns. "Smithers, release the hounds!" Rubbish, this is where people need to learn and understand the laws that govern dogs. Sad as it may be, if people don't "train" their children how to behave around dogs and to understand that dogs have teeth that can cause them harm is not my problem. Kids can't stick their hands through my fence in the first place, no gaps in the fences large enough, not an issue. In the instance where my dog is leashed as it is in public and someone wishes to get within it's 2 metres of personal space permitted under the laws of SA and wishes to interfere with me or my dog and gets bitten, bad luck, the dog will not be destroyed at all. Dogs are not fair game for all and sundry to have the right to mess with. My dog, my property leave it alone and if you want a dog to pat and cuddle, buy your own is my stand on the matter. My dog behaves perfectly within the boudaries of it's leash in public, but rush at me aggressively with my choice not to command the dog to "leave it", watch out, he will fire up, that's how it is.

The beauty of a GSD is that a would be offender can never be totally confident that the dog hasn't been protection trained given their reputation and success in that line of work. If the dog was trained to bark on command with some leash agitation to razz him up a bit, a threat will back away especially if you theaten to release the dog if they fail to move on will generally prevent the situation you experienced.

The laws vary in each state. Provocation when the dog reacts to it's owner being attacked is generally acceptable.

Strangely only last night in another thread, I was having this very discussion about weak nerved GSD's bred for show/pet purposes and the "exact" discussion that I mounted was "when it comes to the crunch, the weak nerve GSD's will run away, they won't protect you" and everyone wanted to argue about it telling me I was wrong???. It's not the breed Brooke, it's the breeding of your dog to produce weak nerved, soft temperament more socially acceptable animals free of civil aggression. My GSD would have taken the guy's arm off before he raised it, infact the guy wouldn't have been game enough to approach us once he was switched into defence drive. With a hard temperament and strong nerve dog, the training is preventing them from barking,chasing, attacking, not teaching them to react which is the difference. A GSD from a breeder perhaps a working line or a strong showline that do produce dogs capable of protection/security work would suit your requirements, but such breedings are difficult dogs to control and require training practices by professional people with experience in handling them correctly.

They are not a prohibited breed either, did you know that???.

The GSD is one breed that has been toned down from conscious breeding practices to better suit pet homes. Our GSD is an original temperament hard bloodline dog with high civil aggression of type selected for use in Police/security work. It's to the point with GSD's that our necessity to muzzle our boy at the Vets nowdays is an unusual practice where the Vet mentioned not having seen an aggressive GSD for years. The breeders in many show line GSD's have eliminated in many cases, the hard temperament dogs from their breeding stock to result in a more easily handled softer more friendly dog. The breeders who continue to breed the hard line GSD's and working line dogs are a minority and very selective as to whom these dogs are sold to. Although there are some GSD breeders maintaining the hard line dogs, many are producing a more docile version of the breed for pet/suburban applications.

What happens in a situation without a clicker and treat say for instance the dog slipped past you at the gate whilst focusing on a dog walking past on the street when the dog has learned to obey a click and reward???. I will say honestly that it would be a bad thing if my dog slipped past me at the gate while focussing on a dog walking past. Too late to do much but try to grab her somehow by that stage. I certainly hope this would never happen. Since my front yard is fenced and she can't see out, and she does not go out the front door (into front fenced area) without a lead on she would not get the opportunity. The Police K9 trainer who assisted us with our GSD, explained in his opinion that clicker/treat training methods were unreliable that the dog "must" obey voice commands at all times. He said that complete positive reinforcement methods although can and do work for family pet situations to reach a reasonable level of obedience, they don't work in Police dog training were a dog must work in real time life and death situations that occur in the job. He demonstrated this with our dog fired up at the fence and offering him a piece of chicken. He wasn't interested in the treat until the dog he was barking at on the street had passed by, then he came back looking for the piece of chicken???. He then told us that all is needed, is a leash and your voice, no treats whatsoever whilst training???. He believed that the clicker/treat method taught the dog to respond to the clicker for a treat which although a distraction away from what it was doing, it didn't teach the dog what you wanted it to do in any particular circumstances.