If you follow any discussions on-line regarding protection dog training or bite work, we are sure you came across video of the Dakota Access Pipeline protests. This past week, video posted all over the internet showed protestors being met with ill-trained guard dogs and handlers. This incident sheds light on many of the problems that can be created by poor training practices. Here’s Brian’s take on the incident:
You can view some of the video Brian references here: http://www.democracynow.org/2016/9/6/canine_expert_decries_egregious_horrific_dog
What do you think?
A PR nightmare for one. Just my beginner opinion is that this will do harm to the idea of protection and police dogs. Not understanding what was the objective of the handlers, they seemed to just want the dogs to bite some people. Terrible lack of coordination and timing. If doing crowd control I would envision a line of security with shield and baton with the dogs behind to prevent anyone breaking threw to the rear. What I saw here was just a amateurish screw up..
I’m going to comment purely from the perspective of the dogs and dog handling. From the clips that I saw online here:
https://youtu.be/kuZcx2zEo4k
These dogs and handler teams are not suited to do security work. I’m sure this is a private contractor that is supplying the dog/handler security teams.
I think these dogs lack what they need to be effective in this security scenario. It might be from lacking the correct characteristics genetically or it might be a lack of preparation of the dogs in the training area or more likely a combination of the two.
In terms of genetics of the dogs that I see, I would prefer to see a much more defensive/aggressive type of dog working this scenario. These dogs should not be prey or play type dogs. I saw a lot of prey type behaviors from these dogs. I saw a lot of dogs that were very confused about what their job was. I saw some extremely bad handlers and extremely poor coordination and a complete lack of continuity between handler teams.
To the point that Brian speaks about the differences between the sport dogs and the utility/police/security/military dogs: There is virtually a complete disconnect between the sport people and the “real life” people. Schutzhund has gotten so far away from reality that it has a very limited application or use as a breeding selection tool as schutzhund was originally designed to be. It seems that schutzhund has become more about style and precision than it is about the dog itself. It has become a dog trainer’s sport instead of about useful and important genetics in dogs. There are many reasons I’m sure why this is true.
I feel sorry for the dogs. They seem to be decent dogs that are confused from poor handling and stupid deployment. Considering the quality of their training, it would take some quality sessions on the field to see what they are really made of. Sad to think of how this looks to the public.
Maybe we should consider re-inventing the Police Dog Trial? One that can be used by K9 teams and individuals that either want those skills or are considering a dog for preparation for K9 use? Just throwing that out there as we try to find some way to bring the two sides back together without fighting with IPO and their vision of it.
Hey Tony, not a bad idea at all. I’ve thought about something like this as well. The problems that I face today with my dogs and training are many.
My main problem is that lack of quality training available. The quality training helper is the main problem within the training problem itself. There is such a large disparity between what is available in USA compared to Western Europe from what I’ve personally experienced. Pronounced K9 has done an awesome job of bringing 30 plus years of knowledge and experience to people through technology available. It is not as ideal as bringing your dog to Brian, John or Wayne but it’s the next best thing.
I feel that IPO has gone too far away from pragmatic uses. If IPO is going to continue to be a sport where points determine the winner, then I understand the need for ways to separate 1st place from second and so on. But when we are teaching the dogs “tricks” instead of actually teaching the dogs how to use their drives, then we are doing an injustice to the dogs and likely to dog breeding as we look for the characteristics that make training easier and breed better “points dogs” as opposed to breeding some of the qualities that are being left behind such as hardness, toughness, and aggression through dominance or aggression through defense/territorial aggression. Granted, these traits are probably not suitable for most of the people that want to buy a “power breed” or working breed/police dog breed. There are too many breeders IMO that are trying to fill a niche where people want a dog that looks like a certain power breed but acts like another breed entirely in order to profit from that desire of those people that want a tough looking dog but are not fit to care for one or handle one.
In my opinion, all three phases of IPO and the way dogs are judged are a big reason for the problems we are seeing in this video. Too much emphasis is being placed on points and way too little attention is being paid to the qualities and characteristics of the dog itself.
I wonder if it would be really valuable for a judge to make more comments about what they see in the drives after the IPO critique. For example, give the score and that information but really start to place a lot of importance on what kind of dog the judge is seeing such as:
hardness/courage
drive type (prey, defensive, aggressive, etc.)
dominance toward helper
power
speed
energy
I understand the TSB rating but I’ve personally seen way too many TSB “A” ausgepragt or pronounced ratings for drive/self assuredness/hardness. There are dogs rated TSB”a” that only see the sleeve and trained to never see a threat and so never have to handle and deal with the stress of that situation.
Just some random thoughts about the video Brian posted. Good to be a part of such a worthy discussion.