# Personal Protection titles



## Michael Joubert (Jul 17, 2012)

http://www.continentalkennelclub.com/rules_NovicePP_1105.aspx


----------



## Michael Joubert (Jul 17, 2012)

Hmm, how respected would titling with CKC be? There doesn't seem to be a lot of respect for the registry.


----------



## James Downey (Oct 27, 2008)

For anyone sucking at other bite sports....heres your chance at glory....3 bites to fame!!!! GAY!


----------



## Michael Joubert (Jul 17, 2012)

Don't shoot the messenger  

Just bringing the info up for discussion.


----------



## Derek Milliken (Apr 19, 2009)

I think James is about right.
Any 1/2 assed trainer, with any 1/2 assed dog could probably get through the novice level, I mean in the one attack you're allowed to choke your dog off the bite, no control needed.
So I went and read the advanced rules, they're more interesting. More in line with a level 1 in a recognized sport.
The real problem is that it does allow you to "title" a dog that is the result of the lowest quality of the training you see in the PPD world. The asshat who just wants a "tough" dog, bites like crap, won't out, with virtually no control, now gets to brag that his dog is a certified PPD.
But like you said Michael, it's the Continental Kennel Club, so it'll never really go anywhere.
It's only when I hear of these ridiculous half way titles that I miss Jeff O.


----------



## Dave Colborn (Mar 25, 2009)

How many bites in IPO III? PSA has three in the PDC. I agree it sounds easy, but it isnt the volume of bites that makes it questionable.



James Downey said:


> For anyone sucking at other bite sports....heres your chance at glory....3 bites to fame!!!! GAY!


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

That particular CKC as opposed to the Canadian KC is one where you can find a dog on the street and have it registered with them for the asking...and a price. 
I don't see a future in their protection titles. JMHO of course! :wink:


----------



## James Downey (Oct 27, 2008)

Dave Colborn said:


> How many bites in IPO III? PSA has three in the PDC. I agree it sounds easy, but it isnt the volume of bites that makes it questionable.


 You can really kill a part Dave.


----------



## Michael Joubert (Jul 17, 2012)

Bob Scott said:


> That particular CKC as opposed to the Canadian KC is one where you can find a dog on the street and have it registered with them for the asking...and a price.
> I don't see a future in their protection titles. JMHO of course! :wink:


That would be the one and the same with the open single dog registration


----------



## Dave Colborn (Mar 25, 2009)

Did you mean post? Autocorrect?


----------



## Joby Becker (Dec 13, 2009)

Dave Colborn said:


> Did you mean post? Autocorrect?


kill a party I think he meant.

personally I think it is fine that the CKC has this stuff, if it gets more people interested in training, then that is great to me. could be a nice stepping stone into other venues as well for a % of people..

I would say that at least 50% of the people that were competing solely in the local PP events in our region, are now also involved in organized dogsports, and do think without shows like those, that many of those people may have never gained an interest in it.

i would liek to see the more advanced levels on paper, it does state to earn those titles they have to be passed 3 different times, that in my mind does lend a little something to it.

for everyone bashing it, what do you care really? I have no clue how it would be run, but looks like someone is making a small attempt to somehow have some standards on something labeled personal protection, and it is still bashed LOL...(although it is probably comparable to being a different sport in itself, since I think it is hard to quanify or standardize what PP acutally means.


----------



## Thomas Barriano (Mar 27, 2006)

James Downey said:


> For anyone sucking at other bite sports....heres your chance at glory....3 bites to fame!!!! GAY!


It could be bad news for K9 Pro Sports the current paper PPD title kings


----------



## Michael Joubert (Jul 17, 2012)

I was told titling, by title alone no thought or consideration to actual temperament, in this would be the start to a PP line of dog.


----------



## Joby Becker (Dec 13, 2009)

Michael Joubert said:


> I was told titling, by title alone no thought or consideration to actual temperament, in this would be the start to a PP line of dog.


Told by who? 

a trainer? a breeder? a CKC employee? an idiot?


----------



## Michael Joubert (Jul 17, 2012)

Joby Becker said:


> Told by who?
> 
> a trainer? a breeder? a CKC employee? an idiot?


An idiot and a trainer, that are one and the same.


----------



## rick smith (Dec 31, 2010)

i'm with Joby here ... anything that is a move in the direction of setting PPstandards is all good imo
- and if they branch out and get more interested in bite sports, that is also much better

my problem is always on the "personal" side of PP
.... the people who need the protection 
which in a vast majority of situations will be family members in family environments

for obvious safety reasons, it will always be hard to approximate a family protection training scenario
...but until that can be figured out and set up, i see this type of cert as being much closer to a PSA type title than personal protection

i realize there are many single people or couples who want a personal protection dog rather than a rigidly trained sport (IPO/MR/PSA, etc) dog, and they don't want to spend the time and money required ... this is fine too for me

but i don't see this cert as being able to qualify a dog for protection in a home environment without a LOT of stability testing. and i don't think it's impossible to work this type of testing into the PP certs. i just think it is either ignored or taken for granted that the dog will be just fine at home in a family and away from the testing field

it's one thing to train a dog to grip and out on hidden equip in simulated threat situations
- but i think it is a whole other ball game to get a dog stable enuff and with enuff control to perform this in close proximity to family members and family settings, and be able to do it anytime and under any condition

of course i may be seeing this all wrong, but i just feel there are people who believe a dog trained to respond well in this type of training can than be simply "taken home" as a "certified" family protection dog

fortunately or unfortunately, these types of PPD's rarely get tested for "real"

a home PPD must perform when needed. no time to take it out to a field and warm it up. it must have a very fast on/off switch yet still be safe. it must be capable of being a stable pet 99.99% of the time but never lose its aggression training. to me that takes a helluva dog and a helluva lot of focused training

since i seem to be in the minority, it's probably just me setting the bar too high //lol//


----------



## Joby Becker (Dec 13, 2009)

rick smith said:


> i'm with Joby here ... anything that is a move in the direction of setting PPstandards is all good imo
> - and if they branch out and get more interested in bite sports, that is also much better
> 
> my problem is always on the "personal" side of PP
> ...



Rick YOU are NOT with me on this, I am not for trying to force or promote some kind of standards for PP dogs or training.

I think we do agree on the point about something like this may induce more and better training, and education, and also may be a stepping stone to to sports in general.

Any attempt to standardize what a PP dog shuold be, is one more nail in the coffin towards more regulations and laws, which I am against when it comes to dogs and training.

There was a movement in my state a few years back that was being pushed hard, it is also still around but it did not take off and get implemented into law as the proponents wished it would have.

I was approached by one of the instigators of this project about 7 years ago or so. The idea was to have the state pass laws on a dog training certification program. This would apply to people selling or training dogs for protection. Bascially how it was presented to me was that I could BUY in at the ground level, for $3000 to $5000. It was said that THIS would become law, and that by getting in on the ground level it would be much cheaper for me..I forget all the details, but the gist of it was that there would be a list of approved trainers that could do PP training, and/or sell trained dogs. at that time I could pay the fee and be "IN".

I met the guy at a show I went to, and talked with him about it, that particular person trained biting dogs with towels, and had almost zero experience training PP dogs, sport dogs or anything other than pet OB stuff mostly...but he is very good at working the public, and has several successful training buisinesses in Chicago, although at the time he had sent his own personal dogs to be trained with a freind of mine, to do the OB AND the protection work with, I actually put in work as a training decoy to train HIS personal DOGS, while they were boarded somewhere else to be trained. He had no clue, but needed demo dogs to demonstrate what "a PPD should be", according to him and his cronies. 

It was laughable to me. The money that people invested went towards lobbying the state to pass thier bill for them, which did not pass YET. I beleive they are still trying. The gist of it was in my eyes to get on the APPROVED list to make a lot of money, which was how it was presented to me as an active trainer at the time. Basically by forcing trainers to become part of the organization and network...by getiing in early I was told I would get preferential treatment and referals. How it worked was only approved trainers would be able to actively train dogs for protection, and all dogs would have to be assessed by I think 3 different trainers in the org, each one recieveing a hefty fee for doing the evals. 

That guy was just on the local news on some story as a "Canine Expert", like I said he is good at massaging the public and has a couple fairly successful businesses. His prices are through the roof for training. He paid for advertisements in a local pet magazine, and became trainer of the year, through his association and support of the magazine. He also does Reiki, and dog Yoga.. 

I am not bashing the guy for being successful, or for doing what he does with dogs, I just am not behind his efforts to try to monopolize and force standarization on training dogs, or selling dogs, when I myself was part of working on training his personal dogs, through another party, because he could not do it himself..

People like that guy are out to make money, to monopolize, and force things upon others, that is the goal. It was said to me that if I did not join early, that the fees to become approved would be much higher later on, once it was implemented, somewhere in the 10-12 thousand dollar range to join, with a high burden of proof of training background, schooling etc. etc attached to the application process, and of coure yearly fees as well, but that I could avoid all of that by jumping in at the ground level. They were formualting a list of everyone that trains dogs in any kind of bitework/ protection work, so that they could drop the hammer on those that did not join, and get the authorities after them, after the policies were implemented. I have no doubt that this if implemnted would then also be broadened to include people training dogs for sport as well. It was not going to be a voluntary process, it was a join or get crushed type thing, spearheaded by a few people, a main one, being a guy that could not even train his own dogs at the time, so he paid a friend of mine 1000's of dollars to train his dogs for him.

My point about the standardization was that here is the CKC settting up some PP titles, attempting to set some sort of standards with the words Personal Protection associated with it, but it was still bashed by dogsport people, who are always claiming there are no standards, which I found amusing. 

The situation with the overreaching government on all levels is pretty dire in my opinion, I for one would like them to leave dog training alone. Policies like that have nothing to do with getting people quality dogs or training, it will however line the pockets of some people, and stamp out other's abilities to train dogs, based on factors that have very little to do with training dogs, or being a quality trainer.

I admit it was pretty funny meeting the guy, talking dogs with him, finding out he trained PP dogs for people, but did not use sleeves, suits, muzzles or hidden equipment, he used rags, and towels at the time, and was charging at least 5 times as much as I was charging to train a dog. and then having him approach me a month or so later about getting in on his plans to standardize PP training and PPD...

The sad part is that quite a few people jumped into it, and are probably still working towards it, one place is a very large training center that is a few miles from me, that has bigtime connections politically and works with most of the police dogs in a fairly large area here. This particaular place already recently got a law passed that makes them 1 of only 2 places that are able to hold training programs for police K9 in the state of IL.. I am not sure how that works, but basically departments have to go through them or one other place, it was backdoored through some legistlation that was on the table, and really hurt some peoples livelyhoods in my state.

FOr instance, I have much different views on what a PP dog SHOULD BE, or HAS TO BE, compared to you. I certainly would not want you setting any standards about what MY dogs should be able to do, unless those came in the form of some sort of voluntary process.

This CKC thing, looks to me as an attempt to make another type of dogsport, to earn titles that will be recognized by the CKC, and to obviously also attempt to generate more revenue which is fine with me, if it has a positive impact on people and the training of dogs, for the reasons I have stated already.

PPD is very hard to quanitfy, as it is pretty much a very customzied thing in my mind as to peoples requirements and expectations. Same as anything else, including some dogsports. This is very evident to me, by the huge variance in the judging and performance standards of some sports. I see it all the time, and hear about it quite often, about how the "pencils were sharper or duller", or that "help was given", and also read about it everyday here and elsewhere, the difference in training goals and standards. 

I still cannot really see what the difference is between a local club trial, half full of show line dogs, and the nationals or worlds are, as far as judging goes. The rules are the rules, the juding in my mind should be the same standard throughout ideally. I get it, but realistically, what is so great, what does it say about a dog, that can title around here locally, but would melt, fall apart, or fail, that has no chance of titling under the stronger helper work and the sharp pencil of a judge at a national event?

I think that every sport dog person pushing for standardization in a PPD, should take a good hard look at their own sports, and recognize the inconsitencies, and fix those first, before continuing to try to talk about PP training and dogs.

Even though I think this CKC thing looks fine, in reality, I doubt it will do much to really determine if a dog will be an effective PP dog or not, as that is a highly variable thing, by neccessity. My perfect PP dog might be far different than someone elses, my needs and expectations might be much different than someone elses.

Personally I pretty much stopped using the term Personal Protection, and now just say "protection" like all the dogsport people do. 

IS my dog a PPD in my mind, not really, as that is not her sole function, not why I own the dog (for protection) 

Do I think the dog is capable of protecting me, I do beleive that she is, and that if called upon to do so, I think she would probably be fairly effective depending on my usage of the dog, comparatively to many other "protection" trained dogs, regardless of achievements, standards or "proof".

I think that most qualities that will make an effective PP dog are inborn, and actually do not require a whole lot of training, depending on the dog, and that in fact too much training, or incorrect training, can possibly even hurt the dogs abilities, depending on the dog.

I also think that a huge chunk of "PP" training is really just sport training, without the sport organization behind it, and that most of the events related to PP are also a "kind" of sport event, which is also fine with me. As it is all good stuff, training dogs, having fun, testing your training etc. etc.

but there is no real test I dont think, that is going to guarantee that a dog will perform the way it should in a real life situation, that is determined when that situation arises, and the dog is put to use, and I truly believe that the performance will come as much or more from the dog itself, than the training put into it.


----------



## Joby Becker (Dec 13, 2009)

I hosted several PP events or "shows".

We had pretty good turnouts and participation, I got to see lots of dogs and met lots of people that were involved in dog training, for themselves and for others.

I think my shows were basically very similar to some aspects of various dogsports, I put them on for fun and to meet people, and to hopefully turn a small profit.

I tried, as people do, to make them portray some sort of "realism", but also realized that realism is very hard to quantify, as it varies drastically, what happens in real life.

I made scenarios, score sheets, and had judges, and made judging standards on what I wanted to see. The events gave people an opportunity to network to find people to train with, gave trainers an avenue to show their stuff and get more business, gave people a platform to perform on in front of a pretty large group of people and test their training, and learn about their dogs, their strengths and weaknesses, the holes in the training, how thier dog reacted to certain things...and I think promoted interest in all aspects of training and even organized sports.

I saw lots of dogs, all kinds, many breeds, many temperaments, various training styles, and performances, got all kinds of dogs, even quite a few sport dogs, had interest from some DOC and even K9 handlers, which I dissuaded from reallly participating for various reasons, one being how were they going to feel if they failed miserably or lost bigtime to some "streetdog" trainer with a pitbull, which was a high probibility, and of course the liabilties associated with participating, so I let them do Demos instead...
sport titled dogs varied, a couple events were won by them, some failed miserably...

the interesting thing I found out was my impression of what I like, and that I saw lots of dogs doing really well, that I personally would not depend on using for real life protection for various reasons.

I also so dogs do poorly that I really liked.

Several of those dogs that I came accross over those few years I found out were actually used in real life encounters..the accounts were fairly interesting to hear...a couple dogs that did well, that I thought were good dogs, failed miserably in real life.. and a couple dogs that failed miserably at my events, that looked real crappy at the event, dogs I did not ever think would, DID perfrom really well in real life.

This cemented my belief that reality does not really happen on a training or competition field, or faciltiy, or at a certification, it happens in real life.


----------



## dewon fields (Apr 5, 2009)

I like it, however when u add points towards a title it becomes a sport. Good luck with CKC titlers, hopefully it will grow.


----------

