# The "home invader" scenerio



## Hunter Allred (Jan 28, 2010)

You know... someone breaks in and the dog either engages or doesn't... but you have a better idea of what the dog will actually do, and what you potentially need to work on (if its a training error), or what to look for down the road (if its a character/genetic issue). Have someone experienced willing to potentially test my dogs in this way. Good idea or no? Why?

I'll add that while I train for IPO and PSA presently for fun, personal/estate protection has always been the primary goal... I'd like to be aware of, but am not overly concerned about, how this could influence sport work.


----------



## Tiago Fontes (Apr 17, 2011)

Hunter Allred said:


> You know... someone breaks in and the dog either engages or doesn't... but you have a better idea of what the dog will actually do, and what you potentially need to work on (if its a training error), or what to look for down the road (if its a character/genetic issue). Have someone experienced willing to potentially test my dogs in this way. Good idea or no? Why?


 
I've done something that may help you:


Handler keeps the dog on a long line...a guy walks by the property and handler alerts the dog...guy runs away. 

Next time, guy approaches the fence...dog is still on a long line... handler sends the dog...guy teases the dog and runs away.

Last, dog on a long line...handler alerts the dog, guy comes in the property (wearing a bitesuit) and dog is sent to a bite. 

Repeat the procedure and then make a surprise scenario. A good dog will have no issues. 


Regards


----------



## Hunter Allred (Jan 28, 2010)

Tiago Fontes said:


> I've done something that may help you:
> 
> 
> Handler keeps the dog on a long line...a guy walks by the property and handler alerts the dog...guy runs away.
> ...


I'm certain both will bite if I tell them to. What I'm not certain of, is what would happen if I am not in the home... If a stranger came in the house aggressively I'm 90% certain they would, if they came in passively or "showing outwardly friendly demeanor" I don't think my bitch would bite, and I'll go with 50/50 on my male.


----------



## Tiago Fontes (Apr 17, 2011)

That's a matter of training...show them what's expected in certain situations.


----------



## rick smith (Dec 31, 2010)

experienced in home break ins ... interesting 

- how many has he done with dogs and how many tests has he done that you can watch to confirm his testing experience ?
- would you be able to evaluate the test or would you also have to rely on him for that too ? 
- how does this test fit in to your current PP training plan, how do you plan to set it up, (or will that be left up to the tester also) ? ... hundreds of ways to do it

if the helper has done this a lot, go for it after you see him do it with another dog and are satisfied he knows what he is doing and can deal with any negatives that might pop up without screwing your dogs up
- but if he is just "experienced", and wants to work your dogs in your house, i'd pass and consider the idea premature, especially if any answers to my above Q's require a lot of thought 

sorry i can't give you a clear answer ... just trying to provide some food for thought since if you want to do it you will


----------



## rick smith (Dec 31, 2010)

i like Tiago's suggestions, training wise, but don't consider this a test


----------



## rick smith (Dec 31, 2010)

i'd like to know how you arrived at those percentages and the logic behind them, especially about what the dogs would/wouldn't do when you aren't with them


----------



## Hunter Allred (Jan 28, 2010)

I haven't seen him work, but will shortly. He is joining our club so ill see him on the field a good bit in the near future I assume. He is a decoy. He was talking about his experience and it was my idea not his. he was talking about testing a few dogs in this way before and that most dogs piss all over the house that would otherwise title on a field. it was a part of a larger discussion. His critique of some other members handling was spot on so he seems pretty knowledgable

I'd record everything. I'd be open to his thoughts but know what I want to see, and would determine the best course of action. I'm the "gather all opinions and facts and logically arrive at my own conclusions" type of person.

Not yet sure how I'd set it up... Part of the motive of this thread, to gather others experiences.


----------



## rick smith (Dec 31, 2010)

hundreds of ways to test this and DOZENS of different aspects/temperaments of the dogs that can be tested
...sounds like you have a bit of tunnel vision of "will it bite or not"

please spell out what you want to do and exactly what you want to test

btw, do you live : alone/family/kids/other dogs etc etc ?? 
* if this is prying into your personal life, sorry in advance, but i think it should be taken into account when testing and/or training for home invasions that you want a dog to resolve and react to


----------



## Khoi Pham (Apr 17, 2006)

This is ONE way I tested my dog, https://vimeo.com/channels/176851/31343192 he was totally out of drive, I left the house for about 15 minutes, I did it because I want to know what he would do if I'm not there, he is with my wife and kids, they never ever train him except once in a while feed him while I'm gone, I told my wife "fuss" is the recall command but I don't know what she was saying but it still sounds like fuss and so he recalled., but I think you should train for everything, out of drive surprise aggression like this, passive entrance...


----------



## Tiago Fontes (Apr 17, 2011)

Khoi Pham said:


> This is ONE way I tested my dog, https://vimeo.com/channels/176851/31343192 he was totally out of drive, I left the house for about 15 minutes, I did it because I want to know what he would do if I'm not there, he is with my wife and kids, they never ever train him except once in a while feed him while I'm gone, I told my wife "fuss" is the recall command but I don't know what she was saying but it still sounds like fuss and so he recalled., but I think you should train for everything, out of drive surprise aggression like this, passive entrance...


 
Nice!


----------



## Matt Vandart (Nov 28, 2012)

You gotta be careful with this shit dude, it can open you up for serious liability problem.
Having said that, it's easy enough to train it, just train a variation of the object guard, where the property is 'the object' I would seriously think about it carefully, after all PP is PERSONAL protection not property protection.


----------



## rick smith (Dec 31, 2010)

Koi
pretty nice drill,
- but i doubt a perp with a gun will not empty it on the dog and i really doubt they will present a sleeve to the dog and give them an arm to bite 
- more likely to try and kick the dog so maybe a leg bite would be more realistic ??

- if you are going for realism you might need to have multiple shots fired, and i know this adds to the difficulty of setting it up ... just sayin
- if the dog does not do bite work with the wife i would caution her against reaching down to pet it when it is still focused after a bite. i realize it would be a natural thing for her to do, but nothing to gain there, but something to lose ... it would probably happen too fast for her to get her hand out of the way


----------



## Khoi Pham (Apr 17, 2006)

Yes I know I can't do it as real as possible but the guy only have a hidden sleeve on, he would get bit somewhere else if he doesn't present the arm and I didn't want to fire to many shots because it might freak out my neighbors and yes I know sending a dog to a guy with a gun will result in a dead dog, but it was a test, I want to see if it could snap in drive quickly and engage without hesitation without commands when he see threat.


----------



## rick smith (Dec 31, 2010)

i know this is even farther off course BUT
if i was going to train my dog ro stop a home intruder i would NEVER do it in a way that resemble training bites on a field

- i would do it all in a muzzle and have the dog trained to target center mass and try and knock the decoy down, and this would be built up incrementally until the dog knew his job wasn't finished until it was standing over a flattened decoy who had clearly lost all will to resist the dog ... so i wouldn't consider the behavior trained until the dog would go at the decoy again and again

- maybe this isn't what others think a PPD is, but to me home protection is a last ditch measure where the dog HAS to defeat a bad guy, not just get a good grip on one, and has nothing to do with sport field work


----------



## Hunter Allred (Jan 28, 2010)

rick smith said:


> i'd like to know how you arrived at those percentages and the logic behind them, especially about what the dogs would/wouldn't do when you aren't with them


Just knowing how my dogs are in the normal work. Obviously I cannot know how they will act without my presence unless I run that scenario. 

My male is sharp and aloof so is less likely to be swayed by a stranger be they friendly or not. My female is generally not aloof or sharp.


----------



## Sarah Platts (Jan 12, 2010)

I know everyone is talking "home" here but does anyone ever take their dog out in public? I'm just wondering how the 'dangerous dog' laws may be applied against the dog in the event of an 'accident' or mispreceived threat.


----------



## Hunter Allred (Jan 28, 2010)

rick smith said:


> hundreds of ways to test this and DOZENS of different aspects/temperaments of the dogs that can be tested
> ...sounds like you have a bit of tunnel vision of "will it bite or not"
> 
> please spell out what you want to do and exactly what you want to test
> ...


3 dogs, just this human.


----------



## Hunter Allred (Jan 28, 2010)

Sarah Platts said:


> I know everyone is talking "home" here but does anyone ever take their dog out in public? I'm just wondering how the 'dangerous dog' laws may be applied against the dog in the event of an 'accident' or misperceived threat.


My dogs are out in public many times a week. 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cPGbFPusyDk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N_YJ4tB3Z1I
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-hRQ08TxAGA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qdzMl1vxrKY

They are very different out on the town than they are at home. They know whats their territory and what is not.


----------



## rick smith (Dec 31, 2010)

re : "I know everyone is talking "home" here but does anyone ever take their dog out in public? I'm just wondering how the 'dangerous dog' laws may be applied against the dog in the event of an 'accident' or mispreceived threat."

good point, and i would add i have NEVER seen or read how "threat recognition" is taught to a PPD, and that is one of my primary reasons why i'm skeptical of PPD training in general, since i consider that one of the main differences between training a sport dog and a PPD dog


----------



## Hunter Allred (Jan 28, 2010)

rick smith said:


> re : "I know everyone is talking "home" here but does anyone ever take their dog out in public? I'm just wondering how the 'dangerous dog' laws may be applied against the dog in the event of an 'accident' or mispreceived threat."
> 
> good point, and i would add i have NEVER seen or read how "threat recognition" is taught to a PPD, and that is one of my primary reasons why i'm skeptical of PPD training in general, since i consider that one of the main differences between training a sport dog and a PPD dog


I think properly seeing and perceiving a threat is largely a genetic/individual dog thing... that can be enhanced through training, but not created


----------



## Matt Vandart (Nov 28, 2012)

rick smith said:


> re : "I know everyone is talking "home" here but does anyone ever take their dog out in public? I'm just wondering how the 'dangerous dog' laws may be applied against the dog in the event of an 'accident' or mispreceived threat."
> 
> good point, and i would add i have NEVER seen or read how "threat recognition" is taught to a PPD, and that is one of my primary reasons why i'm skeptical of PPD training in general, since i consider that one of the main differences between training a sport dog and a PPD dog


It's not rocket science dude:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iY7IubOrgwE


----------



## Tim Lynam (Jun 12, 2009)

Home protection, like enclosure (estate) protection is a specific type of training in and of itself. "Testing" an untrained dog just for s*#ts and giggles is useless. Take the time to train for it THEN test it. My 2 cents.


----------



## Hunter Allred (Jan 28, 2010)

Tim Lynam said:


> Home protection, like enclosure (estate) protection is a specific type of training in and of itself. "Testing" an untrained dog just for s*#ts and giggles is useless. Take the time to train for it THEN test it. My 2 cents.


So, what are the pros and cons of training for it? How ones one train or it? First and foremost, I want my dogs able to buy me enough time to chamber a round. Secondly, I want my maid to be able to enter my house when I'm not home. To much to ask?


----------



## Tim Lynam (Jun 12, 2009)

Hunter Allred said:


> So, what are the pros and cons of training for it? How ones one train or it? First and foremost, I want my dogs able to buy me enough time to chamber a round. Secondly, I want my maid to be able to enter my house when I'm not home. To much to ask?


Many Pros, not any cons I know of. The main objective is buying you time, limiting liability and increasing the chances of survival of the dog.

Training includes bark at the threat location to give you a "where" and also alerting the bad guy of the dogs presence, then going silent in a position out of sight of the bad guy. Only attacking from concealment after the bad guy has fully entered the dwelling. That should get you started.

As for the maid, if she can already enter with you home, it shouldn't be hard to train for her entry when you're not. I personally consider that a bad thing to do! She may some day change from your Maid into a disgruntled former employee...


----------



## Sarah Platts (Jan 12, 2010)

Hunter Allred said:


> My dogs are out in public many times a week.
> 
> 
> They are very different out on the town than they are at home. They know whats their territory and what is not.


So have you ever been in one of these bar scene locations and have some super drunk friend come up from behind, speaking loudly "Hey, Hunter my best pal.....", grab you in a bear hug and try to have a huggy-drunk wrestling match. Or do that drunk shove and push thing, hanging all over you, while you struggle to get the drunk friend off?


----------



## Joby Becker (Dec 13, 2009)

there are 2 or more kinds of bad guys...some kick the door in..others might just walk in...

I personally would not expect a bad guy to necessarily act aggressively physically or even be loud once he is in. especially if he has a weapon.

.....

if it was me I would put dog in muzzle. have bad guy in short sleeve shirt or wife beater, have him be very passive, and then allow dog to engage.

if dog does not engage, there are ways to work on it obviously.

too many "tests" WILL cause some dogs to really look for engagement in the doorways and/or house.


----------



## Tim Lynam (Jun 12, 2009)

rick smith said:


> re : "I know everyone is talking "home" here but does anyone ever take their dog out in public? I'm just wondering how the 'dangerous dog' laws may be applied against the dog in the event of an 'accident' or mispreceived threat."
> 
> good point, and i would add i have NEVER seen or read how "threat recognition" is taught to a PPD, and that is one of my primary reasons why i'm skeptical of PPD training in general, since i consider that one of the main differences between training a sport dog and a PPD dog


IMO you hit the nail on the head Rick. I have seen PPD dogs that could do and have done well at sport work but few sport dogs that would be good PPD dogs. You're smart to be skeptical. PPD training is all about nuance and scenarios within scenarios. The dog has to be taught to observe and recognize normal human behavior. The dog is taught to alert the handler to a perceived threat first and then take the appropriate action depending on the level and immediacy of the threat and your reaction to it. ie a surprise physical attack on you as opposed to a verbal argument with a drunk on the street. "Most" sport dogs are just wound too tight for PPD work. "Pattern" sport training isn't PPD training... Sport dogs EXPECT to get bite when face with a threat. PPDs have to wait and see what happens before taking any action. Both take 1 a percent(er) dog, just of different mentalities. IMO it's more difficult to train a PPD and it's a never ending endeavor. In the end it takes a community. Hard to find decoys with the dedication too...


----------



## Joby Becker (Dec 13, 2009)

I differ.

A pp dog has to be what it has to be...it is quite ok to tailor a dog to your own specific wants and needs. 

If I want a dog that will attack a stranger that walks in my door when I am not home, I will have one. 

If I have a dog that wants to attack a stranger walking into my home while I am home, I will answer the door personally, or have verbal control over the dog, and keep doors locked.

If I want a social accepting dog that likes people entering the home on thier own, I will train it to attack on my command.

I have never had an "open door" policy at any place I have lived.


----------



## Tim Lynam (Jun 12, 2009)

Sarah Platts said:


> So have you ever been in one of these bar scene locations and have some super drunk friend come up from behind, speaking loudly "Hey, Hunter my best pal.....", grab you in a bear hug and try to have a huggy-drunk wrestling match.
> 
> *With all due respect Sarah, unless you have a Service dog, your dog won't be with you in the bar. Sounds like a sport scenario...*
> 
> "Or do that drunk shove and push thing, hanging all over you, while you struggle to get the drunk friend off?


First, let's be fair. Putting anything but well trained PPDs in that situation is foolish. Why take the chance of getting your drunk friends bit. You're supposed to be the brains of the outfit... put the dog up. It can be trained for and I have seen dogs proofed to this kind of scenario but they always had a good "I got this, no need to take action" command, or a good "stop attack" command just in case. It's all in the context of the "attack."


----------



## Joby Becker (Dec 13, 2009)

Sarah Platts said:


> So have you ever been in one of these bar scene locations and have some super drunk friend come up from behind, speaking loudly "Hey, Hunter my best pal.....", grab you in a bear hug and try to have a huggy-drunk wrestling match. Or do that drunk shove and push thing, hanging all over you, while you struggle to get the drunk friend off?


if you have dogs that will seriously attack someone, you do not get sloppy drunk with your pals and wrestle around with them..LOL. that would be moronic and irresponsible ..there are some house rules to follow with biting dogs, and drunk bearhugging is on the list of DONTS...if you want to wrestle with your buddies, you put the dog up..


----------



## Hunter Allred (Jan 28, 2010)

Sarah Platts said:


> So have you ever been in one of these bar scene locations and have some super drunk friend come up from behind, speaking loudly "Hey, Hunter my best pal.....", grab you in a bear hug and try to have a huggy-drunk wrestling match. Or do that drunk shove and push thing, hanging all over you, while you struggle to get the drunk friend off?


Yeah. If I had a concern my dogs would bite that easily, they'd never be in public. Coincidently, we just got home from a bar in a similar circumstance 

That being said, I am not personally the "rough housing" type. Not too tolerate of the type either


----------



## Hunter Allred (Jan 28, 2010)

Joby Becker said:


> if you have dogs that will seriously attack someone, you do not get sloppy drunk with your pals and wrestle around with them..LOL. that would be moronic and irresponsible ..there are some house rules to follow with biting dogs, and drunk bearhugging is on the list of DONTS...if you want to wrestle with your buddies, you put the dog up..


A good point. I booze while my dogs are with, all the time. My limit is defined by the dogs. If I feel I the place is too crowded, too loud, or too full of drunks for me to proactively control the situation, then it's time for us to leave, post haste.

Been in places I'm comfortable catching a buzz... And been places I realize I need to remove my dogs when I'm not even drinking.


----------



## Sarah Platts (Jan 12, 2010)

My question was posed due to the videos that Hunter posted. I don't know all the context of the situatins they were filmed in and some were mere seconds but I came away with the impression that events were occuring in some kind of a crowd get-together or somewhat staged. In crowds, as we know, lots of things happen. Not everyone's friends are the 100w lightbulb. And guys seem to be prone to acting on impulse and behaving in a macho fashion. 
My original question was the context of the dangerous dog laws and how this could affect the dog that mis-preceives an event and reacts accordingly. And this is not an idle question. You are programming triggers into the dog and I wonder how you will handle it when the dog reacts to a preceived trigger. Yes, I may be assuming alot to think such an event will happen but better to plan ahead. Or so I've been told.

I have nothing against PP-trained dogs but wonder how the reactions of these dogs (or the irresponsibilty of the owners) will impact with the dangerous dog laws or other legislation. And it doesn't have to be drunk buddies. I've had perfectly sober folks come up and grab me from behind to get my attention or pay a joke. What happens next?


----------



## Lars Vallin (Jan 17, 2009)

Good point about "Threat recognition" sounds like a fancy term that's not based on reality. It's a dog not a Apple computer. His job is to preform based on quality scenario based training that are as realistic as can be made safe. Trying to analyze, reason, comprehend a real life situation then make a ideal decision in a spilt second is not fair to expect of a dog. We as humans have a hard enough time making ideal split second decisions under extreme stress how can a dog do better? You can't train for all situations. Real life will always throw a curve ball that you could not have trained for.


----------



## Tim Lynam (Jun 12, 2009)

Lars Vallin said:


> Good point about "Threat recognition" sounds like a fancy term that's not based on reality. It's a dog not a Apple computer. His job is to preform based on quality scenario based training that are as realistic as can be made safe. Trying to analyze, reason, comprehend a real life situation then make a ideal decision in a spilt second is not fair to expect of a dog. We as humans have a hard enough time making ideal split second decisions under extreme stress how can a dog do better? You can't train for all situations. Real life will always throw a curve ball that you could not have trained for.


Well Jeez Lars, with such low expectations I'm sure you'll always enjoy mediocre results. Good luck with that.


----------



## Ben Thompson (May 2, 2009)

??I don't know why home protection dogs would be in the house when you have like 10 people over? Thats why we spend thousands on kennels and crates. These dogs don't usually like strange people anyway mine doesn't.


----------



## Khoi Pham (Apr 17, 2006)

Ben Thompson said:


> ??I don't know why home protection dogs would be in the house when you have like 10 people over? Thats why we spend thousands on kennels and crates. These dogs don't usually like strange people anyway mine doesn't.


How is a "home protections dogs" would do his job if he is in a kennels or crate?


----------



## levi robinson (Jul 24, 2013)

Khoi Pham said:


> How is a "home protections dogs" would do his job if he is in a kennels or crate?


I wouldn't want my dogs mixing and mengling in crowds either.what if somebody jumps up like ( this is my song ) and my dog sees them as treat.


----------



## Matt Vandart (Nov 28, 2012)

Khoi Pham said:


> How is a "home protections dogs" would do his job if he is in a kennels or crate?



One has to be realistic about this. If for instance you have ten people over, it's hardly likely that all are going to start kicking off at you at the same time, or if they are you have already made some dodgy life decisions. 
Usually it would be one maybe two, in which case usually a few of the others step in to break it up/calm it down/ or start chanting 'fight, fight, fight', 
So dog stays in the kennel.
PPD's are for home alone house invasion or out in the street events.

Point is even if everyone started kicking off, what use is a PPD anyway?
Dogs have limitations as tools, including guns and high numbers of assailants.

I have seen a PSA vid of a very good dog in the center of a staged argument/punch up and the dog is in a down and doesn't move from the spot. It was very impressive and shows it can be trained. 
If I can find it I will post it. 

Sarah has brought up a very good point with dangerous dog laws, I for one wonder how it will effect professional security dogs also.

I also like the comment on PPD training being harder than sport, it is and it isn't, I certainly think the protection side of IPO is less complex but the accuracy is maybe more involved for sport.
At the end of the day in a sport like IPO it's a series of basically 'set' exercises, essentially pattern training.

TBH I am fairly sick of hearing sport people saying PPD training is a bunch of 'voodoo' and lower than sport training, (not that anyone has said this in this thread I don't think) just hear it regularly. PP dogs are out there actually working 24/7 in real life situations, they are as much a working dog as a Patrol dog, just less opportunity to prove their training, still more than the average sport dog.

In a way they are tested every day, when they don't bite people.


----------



## Hunter Allred (Jan 28, 2010)

Lars Vallin; said:


> Trying to analyze, reason, comprehend a real life situation then make a ideal decision in a spilt second is not fair to expect of a dog. We as humans have a hard enough time making ideal split second decisions under extreme stress how can a dog do better?


That's been the driving theme of evolution since life began. And as a computer scientist by education with a focus on artificial intelligence techniques, I can tell you the speed with which even the crudest of primitive brains (think, a house fly) can interpret and react appropriately still vastly out paces our most capable computers. 

Recognizing a face as someone you know takes about half a second. For a course to do the same it takes trillions upon trillions of computational instructions and still are orders of magnitude less successful. The human brain needs stimulation to traverse about 10 massively parallel neural layers.


----------



## Hunter Allred (Jan 28, 2010)

levi robinson said:


> I wouldn't want my dogs mixing and mengling in crowds either.what if somebody jumps up like ( this is my song ) and my dog sees them as treat.


I think that would be a nervy reactive dog that shouldn't be doing bitework


----------



## Hunter Allred (Jan 28, 2010)

Sarah Platts said:


> My question was posed due to the videos that Hunter posted. I don't know all the context of the situatins they were filmed in and some were mere seconds but I came away with the impression that events were occuring in some kind of a crowd get-together or somewhat staged. In crowds, as we know, lots of things happen. Not everyone's friends are the 100w lightbulb. And guys seem to be prone to acting on impulse and behaving in a macho fashion.
> My original question was the context of the dangerous dog laws and how this could affect the dog that mis-preceives an event and reacts accordingly. And this is not an idle question. You are programming triggers into the dog and I wonder how you will handle it when the dog reacts to a preceived trigger. Yes, I may be assuming alot to think such an event will happen but better to plan ahead. Or so I've been told.
> 
> I have nothing against PP-trained dogs but wonder how the reactions of these dogs (or the irresponsibilty of the owners) will impact with the dangerous dog laws or other legislation. And it doesn't have to be drunk buddies. I've had perfectly sober folks come up and grab me from behind to get my attention or pay a joke. What happens next?


Several were at a local restaurant & bar. Not staged. When I have a stranger or little kid want to play with him in public I frequently take pics or video to show folks a protection trained dog doesn't mean a dangerous dog. 

At the same place a few months ago a big fight broke out (I wasn't involved). I downed my dogs and we let other people break it up. My dogs didn't even have any interest in getting involved beyond intently watching what went down. I don't think it's the case that someone can easily draw the dogs into action.


----------



## Joby Becker (Dec 13, 2009)

levi robinson said:


> I wouldn't want my dogs mixing and mengling in crowds either.what if somebody jumps up like ( this is my song ) and my dog sees them as treat.


that is what control and obedience training is for


----------



## Joby Becker (Dec 13, 2009)

> I have nothing against PP-trained dogs but wonder how the reactions of these dogs (or the irresponsibilty of the owners) will impact with the dangerous dog laws or other legislation. And it doesn't have to be drunk buddies. I've had perfectly sober folks come up and grab me from behind to get my attention or pay a joke. What happens next?


you have had people sneak up behinds you out in public while you have had your dog next to you and grab you from behind?

here is how it works with me.
every that I know, is informed that the dogs are very capable and willing to bite someone. 

you get to know your own dog, and in what situations he may be inclined to do certain things, and you train the dog, and be more aware of your immediate surroundings as well.

the dogs and people that are having incidents to drive dog laws ARE NOT trained protection dogs, it is pet dog owners that dont have mugh training on the dog, and sketchy dogs morso...

the average PP dog person has much more control and training into their dogs, and also how to handle them properly.

they know things like they tell their friends not to sneak up on them, and grab them to scare them as a joke, or grab them and wrestle with them.

these things are kind of ridiculuos, lots of dogs wont like that kind of thing, PP dog or not...

of course once you have a certain types of dogs or do certain types of training, that will impact how you have to go about your daily life..that is a given.


----------



## Brian Smith (May 26, 2013)

Tim Lynam said:


> Well Jeez Lars, with such low expectations I'm sure you'll always enjoy mediocre results. Good luck with that.


I think Lars is dead on. We try to make training as real as possible and let the dog experience as many different scenarios as we can. In the end, I think the dog knows the difference between training and real world no matter how much we try to prevent it. Training scenarios are preplanned and put the handler under much less stress than real world. Further, the decoy knows it's training and, while maybe not perceivable to us, to dog can tell the difference. Especially when equipment is involved, whether it be a sleeve or muzzle.
I read a book a few years back that basically said if you can imagine the worst possible scenario, someone out there has actually done it. I take that to the training field with me. If I (or someone else) can imagine it, I train for it. 
The video of the "intruder" who enters and fires on round was good. I would caution against recalling the dog until the threat is at least down (in training). It is a good start, now we can move on. In the real world the dog fights allowing your loved ones to escape. At that point, he's on his own and is serving his purpose. Make sure your family understands this if they are participating in the training.


----------



## Joby Becker (Dec 13, 2009)

engagement is the key..
of course you want to do some scenario work to see how the dog reacts, make sure he is committed.

that video was good, but in real life that guy would have shot the dog most likely, since he was already firing.

commitment is the key, to try to argue effectiveness in situations is silly, that is the unknown factor unless the dog, that is why I feel many of the PP type arguments are silly...people always say you should do xyz or have to do xyz, or xyz will happen. who knows what will happen.

for me it is best to have a dog that wants to mess someone up, if that person decides to give them a reason to, not dogs that have to solely be trained to bite. I want a dog that has to be trained NOT to bite, not TO bite.

too much training and equipment can I think confuse some dogs, blur the lines some, but I agree that most dogs probably know the difference, between training and real for sure, most of the time anyhow. That is why I try to have the dog do in training what I would like it to do in real life if needed, the rest boils down to character not training. dogs with NO trianing with the right character will give an intruder something to be very concerned about, the training is just the icing on the cake.

to expect that a PP dog has to have the type of training that a PSA3 dog does under distractions is kinda silly too, I think. sure if you want and need that, but if you dont...then you dont...


----------



## rick smith (Dec 31, 2010)

in my stoopid opinion
- that clip of the black gsd looks more like foundation work for MR or PSA than foundation work for a "home protection" "PPD"
- and i know nothing about that outfit and haven't seen any of their vids


----------



## Ben Thompson (May 2, 2009)

Khoi Pham said:


> How is a "home protections dogs" would do his job if he is in a kennels or crate?


Why would he need to do a job protecting anyone if I and 10 of my guests are in the house. You think its like the movie "Die Hard" where 20 guys with machine guns are going to come in an hold us hostage and the dog is going to save the day.


----------



## Guy Williams (Jun 26, 2012)

Hunter Allred said:


> My dogs are out in public many times a week.
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cPGbFPusyDk
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N_YJ4tB3Z1I
> ...


 I liked the dog showing his teeth on burger night. Was he doing that on command?


----------



## Khoi Pham (Apr 17, 2006)

Ben Thompson said:


> Why would he need to do a job protecting anyone if I and 10 of my guests are in the house. You think its like the movie "Die Hard" where 20 guys with machine guns are going to come in an hold us hostage and the dog is going to save the day.


No I don't think like a movie man come on, dog needs to be social and can be around people so you can take them anywhere anytime or with people at my house without me all stress out about if he is going to bite somebody accidentally, that is why I took the time to socialized, to trained him so he can be like that, that is how I like my dog to be, a part of my family and can be around people, if you want to put your dog in a kennel when people are coming over, more power to you, everybody is different.


----------



## Guy Williams (Jun 26, 2012)

Hunter Allred said:


> You know... someone breaks in and the dog either engages or doesn't... but you have a better idea of what the dog will actually do, and what you potentially need to work on (if its a training error), or what to look for down the road (if its a character/genetic issue). Have someone experienced willing to potentially test my dogs in this way. Good idea or no? Why?
> 
> I'll add that while I train for IPO and PSA presently for fun, personal/estate protection has always been the primary goal... I'd like to be aware of, but am not overly concerned about, how this could influence sport work.


I think you have to be very clear about what you want your dog to do in any given situation and then train it to do it. Are your dogs currently trained to bite intruders on your property when you aren't there? If they aren't then I wouldn't be at all suprised if they didn't. I would be suprised if they didn't bark and warn him off. I guess it depends what the intruder does, his proximity to the dogs etc.

I don't see what harm setting up a scenario to satisfy your curiosity would do. But what scenario do you want to test? Will the dogs be locked in the house and see an intruder at the window. Will they be loose in the garden and see a stranger walking towards them? If you start to put shouting and stick waving into the scenario I think you are moving away from a realistic intruder scenario.

If the dogs are used to working in muzzle then that is how I would set it up and have the intruder equipment free. If not then you will need a covert bite suit or run the risk he will get mullered. In a strange (untrained for) sceanario you can't assume they will act as if it's training and go for arms etc.

I got a glimpse of what my boy would be like today. Strangers come to my house all the time and the dog doesn't react at all. I wondered what he would be like if i wasn't there. Well, today I let the drain guy into the garden through the side entrance but didn't go with him. My boy went absolutely mental. So much so that when I joined him I couldn't switch him off which is unusual. He scared me let alone the poor old drain guy. Luckily he was in his run.

Let us know what you end up doing.


----------



## Sarah Platts (Jan 12, 2010)

yes, I have had people spook me. They think it's funny. 

And Yes, I know that *most* of the problems are caused by people who don't really know what a PPD is but as we all know (or I like to delude myself that we all do) it's the stupid ones that cause rules that the rest of us have to play by.


----------



## Mark Herzog (Aug 22, 2013)

There are a lot of interesting points made in this thread, but one thing that is very apparent (BOTH in this THREAD and in my day to day experience), is that different people have very different definitions of what "Protection" is and should be.

Some consider it protection of the home and property... others protection of the individual handler... others protection of home AND articles AND persons. Some want protection only on their personal property... others are looking for dogs that work in public, in amongst crowds, etc.. Each of these situations have their own unique challenges... and liabilities.

Some believe that a protection dog should only engage when commanded to do so... others believe that sometimes a protection dog should engage without direct command. All (I hope) would agree that any protection dog must "out" when commanded to do so.

One person brought up the topic of "threat recognition" and this is (I believe) one of the hardest things to teach a dog. Another person suggested that "threat recognition" was easy and linked a video... but the video actually showed a dog trained ONLY to engage on command... the handler was responsible for threat recognition in that video clip, not the dog. At no time in that particular video was the dog allowed to decide when to engage. 

From my experience threat recognition is not an exact science... it's hard enough to teach it to people, let alone dogs. People make mistakes... so do dogs. If you can't accept that as a reality, then having a dog trained to engage on its' own would be an unacceptable liability and one you should not choose. But for some people it is an acceptable liability... because the threat to their person is high enough that they need that type of protection.

Having said that, I would hope that people who need that type of protection also modify their day to day behaviours so as to reduce their exposure. I would never want to intentionally put myself in a situation surrounded by drunks... it's a risk to me as well as to my dogs. I wouldn't want to intentionally put the dog in a position that requires it to make needless decisions... but even when you try to avoid those situations they can occur. I've had it happen... with one of my own dogs... thankfully the dog performed flawlessly, but it could easily have gone bad... there was no way to know until it was over and it was over in a heartbeat. 

You have to protect the dog and to a degree you also have to protect the stupid people out there from their own stupid actions... because it is the dog that will ultimately pay for the mistakes of others, including our own.


----------



## Joby Becker (Dec 13, 2009)

Sarah Platts said:


> yes, I have had people spook me. They think it's funny.


while you had a dog right next to you?


----------



## Sarah Platts (Jan 12, 2010)

Joby Becker said:


> while you had a dog right next to you?


After the first occasion, they waited till the dog was further away, The first time, I had to drag the dog back to the truck and lock into the cab. Even then he tried to come through the glass. Scared the crap out of me because this dog had zero protection/bite training. But he preceived a threat to me and acted on it. And this by a dog that I considered to be non-aggressive.


----------



## Joby Becker (Dec 13, 2009)

Sarah Platts said:


> After the first occasion, they waited till the dog was further away, The first time, I had to drag the dog back to the truck and lock into the cab. Even then he tried to come through the glass. Scared the crap out of me because this dog had zero protection/bite training. But he preceived a threat to me and acted on it. And this by a dog that I considered to be non-aggressive.


and this is different from a PP dog how? aside from the fact that you were not able to control your dog essentially? since you seem to be implying that it is PP dogs that may have more weight in regards to legislation.


----------



## Matt Vandart (Nov 28, 2012)

Mark Herzog said:


> There are a lot of interesting points made in this thread, but one thing that is very apparent (BOTH in this THREAD and in my day to day experience), is that different people have very different definitions of what "Protection" is and should be.
> 
> Some consider it protection of the home and property... others protection of the individual handler... others protection of home AND articles AND persons. Some want protection only on their personal property... others are looking for dogs that work in public, in amongst crowds, etc.. Each of these situations have their own unique challenges... and liabilities.
> 
> ...


That was exactly my point.......


----------



## Hunter Allred (Jan 28, 2010)

Guy Williams said:


> I liked the dog showing his teeth on burger night. Was he doing that on command?


No.. thats a younger male that used to be my roommate and spent his first few months of life with my dogs. He's getting hold enough he thinks about making a go of testing my male, so my male is always proactively reminding him who's who.


----------



## Joby Becker (Dec 13, 2009)

dogs are all very different, threat discretion in dogs in my experience is very dicey, dogs are all different. 

look at it this way, are we talking actual threat? perceived threat? or maybe even "potential for threat"..what about a "challenge" to the dog, an "opportunity" for the dog?

and then what do we expect the dog to do?

sometime the more training you do, the dicier it gets. depending on the training and the dog.

coming into the house, at the gate, opening car door, or going in car, touching the person, hitting the person, these are some areas that you can work with in regards to dogs, to train for some more reliable responses, sure there are others..but I am not so sure you can teach actual "threat discretion" in the terms of the dog .


----------



## Hunter Allred (Jan 28, 2010)

Joby Becker said:


> dogs are all very different, threat discretion in dogs in my experience is very dicey, dogs are all different.
> 
> look at it this way, are we talking actual threat? perceived threat? or maybe even "potential for threat"..what about a "challenge" to the dog, an "opportunity" for the dog?
> 
> ...


To truly do that topic justice, you can't just discuss threat... as a great deal of my career has been in information assurance/computer security, I think its much better to describe the subject in a more expressive way (just as a dog's instincts aren't boiled down to simply "he's in prey" or "he's in defense". I think something along the lines of this way:










The more vulnerable the dog feels, the greater the threat will be (which is why a table works). The greater motivation for an actor to interact the greater the threat will be (which is why possession of a resource is relevant). Obviously, the nature of the actors involved influence the threat.

I don't like the terms "perceived threat" or "actual threat"... a threat is simply "a person or thing likely to cause damage or danger". Because of the above what is a threat to me may not be a threat to you... it doesn't mean one of us is wrong, just that the threat is unique to the individual & scenario. A threat, by definition, does not include any actual harm... so saying "actual" threat makes no sense... you cannot know what is actual and what is perceived... to use those words you'd be forced to call any threat executed by the actor to be an actual threat (b/c it was followed through on) and any unexecuted threat to be perceived (as it never resulted in harm)


----------



## David Winners (Apr 4, 2012)

Though I have no idea how you would train in this way, there were instances (2) where my working dog alerted me to a human threat, and I believe it was the odor of the person because she could not see them.

Once was a person hiding behind a door with a big knife (no explosives odor), and once was a person approaching from our rear in a crowd who was armed with a pistol. I was carrying a lot of ammunition at the time, so I don't believe it was the smell of the weapon that alerted her.

Chemical changes happen in a person when they enter the hyper charged state before a fight. Any dog could smell this. Reproducing it in training could be challenging however.

I suppose you could capture the scent, as you would when training for blood sugar alert, and then utilize that scent in training. It would be pretty hard to proof without having a friend pay some unwitting dude to attack you while your dog was in muzzle.

That's the only way I feel you could effectively train threat detection. JMHO

David Winners


----------



## Hunter Allred (Jan 28, 2010)

David Winners said:


> Though I have no idea how you would train in this way, there were instances (2) where my working dog alerted me to a human threat, and I believe it was the odor of the person because she could not see them.
> 
> Once was a person hiding behind a door with a big knife (no explosives odor), and once was a person approaching from our rear in a crowd who was armed with a pistol. I was carrying a lot of ammunition at the time, so I don't believe it was the smell of the weapon that alerted her.
> 
> ...


Exactly... increases in anxiety release pheromones, sweat, etc, and are easily detected by an animal. My male's "acceptance" of a stranger is strongly correlated to their "acceptance" of him. I think you could employ people who are genuinely scared and will naturally release these markers (albeit, no bites involved). As per the above graphic, you can also manipulate other factors to increase the threat if you can't replicate the true threat actor's physiology.


----------



## Matt Vandart (Nov 28, 2012)

Chances are they are the same chemical signatures as fear, not a good plan I think....

I think I may have been being too cryptic, to solve the problem of 'threat discrimination' don't train for it. Just train a command as per the vid I posted and leave it at that, it is then fool proof. Someone else hit the nail on the head earlier, the human is the brains of the operation.


----------



## catherine hardigan (Oct 12, 2009)

Meh. I think it depends. Most dogs, even trained ones, won't really engage an invader without their owner present to back them up (even then there can be a lot of unknowns). They may make a show - which is really what sends most people running - and they may nip an ankle or whatever, but that's about it. I doubt you can train it into them.


----------



## Sarah Platts (Jan 12, 2010)

Joby Becker said:


> and this is different from a PP dog how? aside from the fact that you were not able to control your dog essentially? since you seem to be implying that it is PP dogs that may have more weight in regards to legislation.


I guess I consider him different because this dog received no training for that areana and neither had I at that point. The only training this particular dog received was detection work and up until that time zero indication of any PP inclinations but then the dog had never been placed in that situation before. So, yes, it was a surprise to all parties when it occurred. For me it re-enforced the lesson the farm dogs taught me about being a smart-ass and doing stupid games because you might not like the results. 
As far as control? When you get something you never expected, everyone plays catch-up. 

Not sure what you mean by PP dogs have more weight. What I originally wrote what that these dogs are being taught triggering mechanisms. And sometimes innocent or every day events happen that can trip one of these triggers. What I do think is that if you are training your dog as a PPD then you have an increased responsibility and liability burden. I also wrote that rules orginate due to people not knowing what they are doing. Rules that affect all, no matter if you are doing it right... or wrong.


----------



## Ben Thompson (May 2, 2009)

Khoi Pham said:


> No I don't think like a movie man come on, dog needs to be social and can be around people so you can take them anywhere anytime or with people at my house without me all stress out about if he is going to bite somebody accidentally, that is why I took the time to socialized, to trained him so he can be like that, that is how I like my dog to be, a part of my family and can be around people, if you want to put your dog in a kennel when people are coming over, more power to you, everybody is different.


 Your dog has a much better social foundation then mine.


----------



## David Winners (Apr 4, 2012)

Matt Vandart said:


> Chances are they are the same chemical signatures as fear, not a good plan I think....


In my experience, this is not the case. We walked by many people that were very obviously scared of the dog without having this reaction. YMMV


This type of reaction was pretty common to the dog.

http://www.gettyimages.dk/detail/news-photo/afghan-villagers-look-on-as-sgt-david-winners-with-ssg-fama-news-photo/127648642


----------



## Hunter Allred (Jan 28, 2010)

Matt Vandart said:


> Chances are they are the same chemical signatures as fear, not a good plan I think....
> 
> I think I may have been being too cryptic, to solve the problem of 'threat discrimination' don't train for it. Just train a command as per the vid I posted and leave it at that, it is then fool proof. Someone else hit the nail on the head earlier, the human is the brains of the operation.


Humans give themselves way too much credit lol.


----------



## David Winners (Apr 4, 2012)

Hunter Allred said:


> Humans give themselves way too much credit lol.


My first rule in detection is to trust the dog. Humans always have this idea that they know more than the dog, and they screw it up 

David Winners


----------



## Hunter Allred (Jan 28, 2010)

David Winners said:


> My first rule in detection is to trust the dog. Humans always have this idea that they know more than the dog, and they screw it up
> 
> David Winners


Without fail, every time I've second guessed the dog, I've been wrong.


----------



## Joby Becker (Dec 13, 2009)

Hunter Allred said:


> To truly do that topic justice, you can't just discuss threat... as a great deal of my career has been in information assurance/computer security, I think its much better to describe the subject in a more expressive way (just as a dog's instincts aren't boiled down to simply "he's in prey" or "he's in defense". I think something along the lines of this way:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I can get behind this .. not sure if dogs are thinking in those terms though. 

as far as the usage of the terms in my view...

concerning a dog ( in my mind) a perceived threat by the dog is something I do not consider a threat, that I dont think the dog needs to be concerned with, but the dog is anyhow.

an actual threat in my mind would be something that I consider to be a threat, or something to be concerned about, which a dog may or may not be concerned about.

There are also instances where I think a dog does not feel vulnerable at all, the dog may just want to fight someone that gives them a reason to do so, in their mind, a more predatory type thing...


----------



## Hunter Allred (Jan 28, 2010)

Joby Becker said:


> I can get behind this .. not sure if dogs are thinking in those terms though.
> 
> as far as the usage of the terms in my view...
> 
> ...


Any words we use are merely human attempts to pigeon hole vague things into neat boxes


----------



## Joby Becker (Dec 13, 2009)

catherine hardigan said:


> Meh. I think it depends. Most dogs, even trained ones, won't really engage an invader without their owner present to back them up (even then there can be a lot of unknowns). They may make a show - which is really what sends most people running - and they may nip an ankle or whatever, but that's about it. I doubt you can train it into them.


you can train it into them if the character traits are there.
some dogs have deep inhibitions in engaging a person, once taught it is ok, they can fight a person as is they were another animal. this is not going to be done by going to a bitework club and having a helper just work the dog in a sleeve or even suit though either, if that is the training, dog has to be in the right mindset. meaning he KNOWS a person can and will hurt him usually. but I do agree it is not something that you can just train into any old dog.


----------



## Joby Becker (Dec 13, 2009)

Hunter Allred said:


> Any words we use are merely human attempts to pigeon hole vague things into neat boxes


I was speaking in generalities, I agree.
that is why I am not behind the whole threat recognition much unless it is under certain parameters.


----------



## Christopher Smith (Jun 20, 2008)

Tim Lynam said:


> As for the maid, if she can already enter with you home, it shouldn't be hard to train for her entry when you're not. I personally consider that a bad thing to do! She may some day change from your Maid into a disgruntled former employee...


Yeah right...tell that to my client who's maid was held in the kitchen pantry for 11 hours.


----------



## David Winners (Apr 4, 2012)

At least she had food 

David Winners


----------



## Tim Lynam (Jun 12, 2009)

Christopher Smith said:


> Yeah right...tell that to my client who's maid was held in the kitchen pantry for 11 hours.


Who was responsible for the failure? You or your client?


----------



## Matt Vandart (Nov 28, 2012)

David Winners said:


> In my experience, this is not the case. We walked by many people that were very obviously scared of the dog without having this reaction. YMMV
> 
> 
> *This type of reaction was pretty common to the dog.
> ...



Cool


----------



## rick smith (Dec 31, 2010)

lots of people don't know if a dog is using it's nose or teeth when they see it coming at them //lol//


----------



## Guy Williams (Jun 26, 2012)

Hunter Allred said:


> Exactly... increases in anxiety release pheromones, sweat, etc, and are easily detected by an animal. My male's "acceptance" of a stranger is strongly correlated to their "acceptance" of him. I think you could employ people who are genuinely scared and will naturally release these markers (albeit, no bites involved). As per the above graphic, you can also manipulate other factors to increase the threat if you can't replicate the true threat actor's physiology.


I agree it is is hard to replicate the scents involved in 'real life' scenarios but there are also people who could pose a threat who aren't full of adrenaline etc. people with mental health issues, drink, drugs, physical illness etc.

They may have their own scent signature which the dog may or may not react to but either way they pose a training issue. If the dog doesn't react to them and they are a threat then the dog is unlikely to do his job. If he does react to them then there is a risk he will do his job even though the person poses no risk.

There are just too many parameters to safely rely on the dog for any kind of judgement call. I think you need to train for the scenarios most likely to affect you and then managed the dog to protect against the risks of that training.

I do think there is a place to differentiate between actual risk and percieved risk as that is how we as trainers will measure whether the things we are training for are the things the dog is picking up.

If I decide my dog can bite to defend himself from a threat then I need to decide what constitutes a threat and train him to deal with it. 

But no matter what I consider to be an actual threat, my dog will react when he percieves a threat (actual or not). The difference between what I consider to be an actual threat and have trained the dog to do and the things he percieves as threats and react to are the danger areas. There is no real way of ever knowing how big this danger zone is and that is where managing the risk comes in.

Lets say the actual threat i've decided upon is hitting the dog on the head. If someone hits the dog on the head he can bite. Great, I can train that. But what if someone reaching for the ketchup at a bbq reaches towards the dog. They are not an actual threat but the dog may percieve a threat and react.
It would then be down to me to ensure the dog doesn't find himself in that situation.

I know that is avery simlistic example but the issues only get more complicated as the rules get more complicated. 
:-k


----------



## Mark Herzog (Aug 22, 2013)

David Winners said:


> In my experience, this is not the case. We walked by many people that were very obviously scared of the dog without having this reaction. YMMV
> 
> 
> This type of reaction was pretty common to the dog.
> ...


David... just curious, what was that dog trained as? Patrol work, Munitions, Explosives, ???


----------



## David Winners (Apr 4, 2012)

Mark Herzog said:


> David... just curious, what was that dog trained as? Patrol work, Munitions, Explosives, ???



Single purpose explosives detection.


----------



## Matt Vandart (Nov 28, 2012)

He wasn't protection trained?
What a clever dog! Is he any good at connect four?

Nah just ribbing yah!

Seriously though that sounds like the kind of dog I would want around me in a warzone!

Edit: interesting that he's a nose dog though.


----------



## Mark Herzog (Aug 22, 2013)

Hunter Allred said:


> You know... someone breaks in and the dog either engages or doesn't... but you have a better idea of what the dog will actually do, and what you potentially need to work on (if its a training error), or what to look for down the road (if its a character/genetic issue). Have someone experienced willing to potentially test my dogs in this way. Good idea or no? Why?
> 
> I'll add that while I train for IPO and PSA presently for fun, personal/estate protection has always been the primary goal... I'd like to be aware of, but am not overly concerned about, how this could influence sport work.


The THREAD has moved away from the OP a bit. I think a lot of really great points have been made and they have brought up a number of questions in my mind that I'd love to ask, but I don't want to move us further away from that original post by Hunter. So let me go back to that first post...

I think before you "test" your dogs in the scenario you suggest, you want to analyze how your past training of the dogs will affect their response to any "Home Invader scenario" you might throw at them... knowing what they've done in past and been trained to do, should give you a pretty good idea of how they will react to a new/unknown/previously untrained situation. Play the what-if game and think through all the possible outcomes beforehand.

My two personal dogs are periodically "tested" for various "home invader" scenarios and have been since they were about 9 months old... but before that the ground-work was laid to insure they would react as I wanted them to. The dogs were raised from the start (5 weeks) to do protection work.

The dogs are NOT social... they have been raised and trained to be suspicious of everyone... they are NOT friendly to strangers... outside of immediate family no-one is allowed to pet them... they are not accepting of touch from anyone but family and even then physical touch is minimized except as part of work... they do not accept food from anyone but my wife and myself. If the dogs are alone in the house then no-one is allowed to enter the home... ever... and the dogs know that. The dogs are suspicious of anyone entering the home (even regular visitors) and only accept it when specifically commanded to do so. When we come home the dogs search the house for any indication of strangers or odors, etc..




Test scenarios have included:

Decoy comes to front door... dogs alerts to knock on door and waits beside handler while door opens and conversation takes place. Dog remains obedient during heated conversation, but moment the decoy attempts to push-in or in any way becomes physical or moves to become physical the dog will react to that with or without handlers instruction... but if handler calls off the attack dog will obey the command and stand-down;
Decoy enters house unannounced through unlocked front door while handler and dog are watching TV in living room. Dog will inevitably alert to intruder BEFORE handler notices and will either alert handler or begin to move toward intruder (which itself alerts handler). Handler can then either call off dog... hold dog in position... or allow dog to find intruder and react. Since there is no reason for anyone to be in the house uninvited there is no reason not to allow the dog to close on the intruder. I want the dog to engage in this situation... generally I do this "test" with two dogs (my normal situation at night) and allow 1 dog to respond to the threat and hold the other dog back with a wait command, keeping him close and ready as required. Having said that we also train this where both dogs are told to wait (to test obedience under stress) and we have trained where both get released and fight as a team. Variations of this scenario include multiple decoys, etc..
Decoy takes wife hostage and dog is sent to wife's aid (lots of variations on that one ).
One of my favorites is that I come home and a decoy is inside the house waiting for us... we never know where and if done correctly you don't even know when so it's a real surprise for the dogs and the handlers... keeps dogs sharp on day to day basis by doing this once every few months.
One of my other favorites because it really keeps the dogs sharp is being "jumped" while going from the house to the car. This can be setup so that handler actually has no idea it's coming or exactly where it's coming from. It can happen the moment you open the front door or as you are entering the vehicle or anywhere in between. Dog needs to be always vigilant and ready to react in a heartbeat. Since handler will not see it coming the dog must react BEFORE the handler even understands what's happening... long before any take command is given.
One thing we try hard to do is to set these up so they are as close to "real" as we can get them... but remembering that it's NOT real and the dogs know it. They know the decoy is wearing a bite suit the moment they contact the suit (hidden or not)... they know they can't hurt the suit and so they fight different than when it's real. The more of a surprise for the dog and the handler the closer to realistic you get and the better the stress response and testing... but there is no substitute for "real".


----------



## Joby Becker (Dec 13, 2009)

Mark Herzog said:


> They know the decoy is wearing a bite suit the moment they contact the suit (hidden or not)... *they know they can't hurt the suit and* so they fight different than when it's real. The more of a surprise for the dog and the handler the closer to realistic you get and the better the stress response and testing... but there is no substitute for "real".


I disagree with this statement somewhat, my dog KNOW that they CAN hurt the guy in the suit, and they usually do, people taking bites are always better actors when they can feel the bites.


----------



## Mark Herzog (Aug 22, 2013)

Joby Becker said:


> I disagree with this statement somewhat, my dog KNOW that they CAN hurt the guy in the suit, and they usually do, people taking bites are always better actors when they can feel the bites.


I guess we differ in our interpretation of "hurt". Pressure and bruising is not what I had in mind when I made that statement. I'm referring to the drawing of blood and tearing of flesh. I'm talking about the dog putting someone in the hospital or worse... because that is my concept of a protection dog. The dog is not sent for show... it is not trained to bite and hold... the goal is not to "apprehend the bad guy"... it is sent because there is a real and serious threat to the handler and the dog's job is to protect the life of the handler at all costs. It's no different than employing a firearm to protect your life... you do not brandish your weapon... you do not shoot to wound... you fire center mass and you keep firing until the threat is neutralized. 

Police often use a training device called Simunition to train with... it's very close to real ammunition but it's designed to "hurt" yet not do permanent damage... sort of like super paintball. Leaves bruises and stings like crazy... even numbs in the impact area. It definitely elevates stress levels but it's still not real and the officers know it's not real. You will still take actions that you might not otherwise take and the body doesn't react the same (auditory reduction, tunnel vision, adrenalin dump, loss of fine motor skills, etc.) as would be the case with live rounds and an actual shooting engagement.

Whether he feels discomfort or not, a guy in a bite suit is "acting" and the dog knows it (in my opinion)... The interaction will never be "real"... it's a training exercise. When the dog opens wounds... creates blood flow and tastes that blood... the dog's reaction is very different. I have seen how the dog changes gears... it's a whole different level. Just like the reaction of the "target" when it's gets real.


----------



## Tim Lynam (Jun 12, 2009)

Joby Becker said:


> I disagree with this statement somewhat, my dog KNOW that they CAN hurt the guy in the suit, and they usually do, people taking bites are always better actors when they can feel the bites.


You have a point Joby. In my day, the suits were thin and at the end of a training session my arms and legs look liked a bruise fest. One bitch drew blood on me twice, a bite to the face and one through the only hole in the suit in the back of the knee. After the knee bite I worked 7 more dogs until blood was squishing out of my shoe just to turn on those dogs. Pain was just a normal part of being a decoy. Adrenaline was flowing and the suit was saturated with its scent. It was MY JOB to show the dogs they could hurt me even though I was wearing a suit and it wasn't hard to be real about it. :-o

Reciprocally, before a trial I had my suit laundered and when I walked on the field I owned it. I robbed the dogs of the adrenaline cloud and became a true adversary. My job became to make both the handler and dog afraid, stressed and befuddled. Between the foundation training and the trial, the dog saw it all. From the reports and feedback the head trainer got back from PSD handlers, when the dogs went up against a person without a suit, IT WAS ON! 

Nowadays, the suits are like the Stay Puff man and most decoys aren't trained any better than the dogs... My 2 cents.


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie (Jun 8, 2008)

Matt Vandart said:


> He wasn't protection trained?
> What a clever dog! Is he any good at connect four?
> 
> Nah just ribbing yah!
> ...


Protection instinct. Interesting how it used to be a selection criteria for breeding and is now something disregarded and even frowned upon. 



T


----------



## David Winners (Apr 4, 2012)

Matt Vandart said:


> He wasn't protection trained?
> What a clever dog! Is he any good at connect four?
> 
> Nah just ribbing yah!
> ...


She is protection trained now, and it didn't take much work. Her new handler is more than happy.

Probably the smartest dog I've ever trained, definitely smarter than me about a lot of things, especially body language.

I agree with you T, but don't know enough to really talk about natural guarding. I do know that she always had my back.

David Winners


----------



## David Winners (Apr 4, 2012)

Thanks for sharing that Tim. Interesting indeed. 

David Winners


----------



## Matt Vandart (Nov 28, 2012)

Terrasita Cuffie said:


> Protection instinct. Interesting how it used to be a selection criteria for breeding and is now something disregarded and even frowned upon.
> 
> 
> T


Indeed, I think it is important myself. There are many cases of untrained dogs reacting in a desirable manner due to this, dare I say it with real and apparent threat decision making........



David Winners said:


> She is protection trained now, and it didn't take much work. Her new handler is more than happy.
> 
> Probably the smartest dog I've ever trained, definitely smarter than me about a lot of things, especially body language.
> 
> ...


Cool.


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie (Jun 8, 2008)

David Winners said:


> I do know that she always had my back.
> 
> David Winners


That's it in a nutshell. 

T


----------



## Joby Becker (Dec 13, 2009)

Mark Herzog said:


> I guess we differ in our interpretation of "hurt". Pressure and bruising is not what I had in mind when I made that statement. I'm referring to the drawing of blood and tearing of flesh. I'm talking about the dog putting someone in the hospital or worse... because that is my concept of a protection dog. The dog is not sent for show... it is not trained to bite and hold... the goal is not to "apprehend the bad guy"... it is sent because there is a real and serious threat to the handler and the dog's job is to protect the life of the handler at all costs. It's no different than employing a firearm to protect your life... you do not brandish your weapon... you do not shoot to wound... you fire center mass and you keep firing until the threat is neutralized.
> 
> Police often use a training device called Simunition to train with... it's very close to real ammunition but it's designed to "hurt" yet not do permanent damage... sort of like super paintball. Leaves bruises and stings like crazy... even numbs in the impact area. It definitely elevates stress levels but it's still not real and the officers know it's not real. You will still take actions that you might not otherwise take and the body doesn't react the same (auditory reduction, tunnel vision, adrenalin dump, loss of fine motor skills, etc.) as would be the case with live rounds and an actual shooting engagement.
> 
> Whether he feels discomfort or not, a guy in a bite suit is "acting" and the dog knows it (in my opinion)... The interaction will never be "real"... it's a training exercise. When the dog opens wounds... creates blood flow and tastes that blood... the dog's reaction is very different. I have seen how the dog changes gears... it's a whole different level. Just like the reaction of the "target" when it's gets real.


Mark, of course a real live bite is different to a dog, you just made a statement that I disagreed with, you said that the dogs know they cant hurt the suit. I can only speak for myself here, and the people I have worked with, and for the most part, for PP dogs, we do not train the dogs to bite the suit, we train them to bite the guy inside the suit, who DOES get hurt. Seriously? like he had no equipment on? no of course not, even though teeth getting through stuff happens 

The reason I disagreed with that is PP dogs rarely if ever get to the point of real bites, only a small % are ever used to engage, so the "acting" and use of inadequate protection (using equipment that gets you "hurt, but not too badly) I think is important as it does lend a more realism to it, than just acting while fully protected and comfy in the security of superior protection, a protection level that rewards dogs and keeps the agitator honest is what I like. If people want to keep training as real as possible, then I think this is doing the dog a good service, even if it sucks to be the bad guy..

Of course they learn the stuff is there after a while, especially if training is too repetitive, or one uses the same agitators too much that cant act.

Most Protection trained dogs will never know what it is to actually bite someone that is unprotected, so this is what we are left with, aside from occasional training accidents, which of course are still training as well...

All I can say is I am not a great actor, but most of the good dogs I have trained knew they were hurting me, because they are to some varying degree most of the time.

If the dog has live bites under his belt then sure they have a different awareness of what is what...but overall you are right, dogs cant hurt a suit...I just think it is not as cut and dry to most dogs, if worked certain ways, like it may be with a dog that gets live bites in real protection situations. 

I am not so sure if the taste of blood has much to do with anything personally, but certainly the sinking in of the teeth and ability to tear things up some and the reality of real situations can and does.


----------



## Joby Becker (Dec 13, 2009)

Tim Lynam said:


> You have a point Joby. In my day, the suits were thin and at the end of a training session my arms and legs look liked a bruise fest. One bitch drew blood on me twice, a bite to the face and one through the only hole in the suit in the back of the knee. After the knee bite I worked 7 more dogs until blood was squishing out of my shoe just to turn on those dogs. Pain was just a normal part of being a decoy. Adrenaline was flowing and the suit was saturated with its scent. It was MY JOB to show the dogs they could hurt me even though I was wearing a suit and it wasn't hard to be real about it. :-o
> 
> Reciprocally, before a trial I had my suit laundered and when I walked on the field I owned it. I robbed the dogs of the adrenaline cloud and became a true adversary. My job became to make both the handler and dog afraid, stressed and befuddled. Between the foundation training and the trial, the dog saw it all. From the reports and feedback the head trainer got back from PSD handlers, when the dogs went up against a person without a suit, IT WAS ON!
> 
> Nowadays, the suits are like the Stay Puff man and most decoys aren't trained any better than the dogs... My 2 cents.


Amen Tim, a man after my own heart. Sometimes I wonder why I am training the dogs to hurt me, when I really dont have to, certainly would be easier and less painful, but I think it is doing the dogs a service for sure.

Problem is that dogs that are serious in their intent are easier for decoys to steal points, and harder to get the type of precise control on, the other problem is that fewer and fewer guys are up to taking a beating for the team.


----------



## Mark Herzog (Aug 22, 2013)

Tim Lynam said:


> You have a point Joby. In my day, the suits were thin and at the end of a training session my arms and legs look liked a bruise fest. One bitch drew blood on me twice, a bite to the face and one through the only hole in the suit in the back of the knee. After the knee bite I worked 7 more dogs until blood was squishing out of my shoe just to turn on those dogs. Pain was just a normal part of being a decoy. Adrenaline was flowing and the suit was saturated with its scent. It was MY JOB to show the dogs they could hurt me even though I was wearing a suit and it wasn't hard to be real about it. :-o
> 
> Reciprocally, before a trial I had my suit laundered and when I walked on the field I owned it. I robbed the dogs of the adrenaline cloud and became a true adversary. My job became to make both the handler and dog afraid, stressed and befuddled. Between the foundation training and the trial, the dog saw it all. From the reports and feedback the head trainer got back from PSD handlers, when the dogs went up against a person without a suit, IT WAS ON!
> 
> Nowadays, the suits are like the Stay Puff man and most decoys aren't trained any better than the dogs... My 2 cents.


Agreed... I don't see that type of decoy much these days... wish I did . We have our own suits made... fairly thin and minimal protection... but it takes a toll on the guy in the suit.


----------



## Tim Lynam (Jun 12, 2009)

Just as a side note, I lived in Michigan at the time. When it dipped to below zero, everybody was wearing what appeared to be a bite suit...\\/

When I started decoying the only "game" around was Sch. The first Ring seminar had just happened. The main focus was all on PPD and PSD work almost exclusively and had been raised to an almost fine art. The dogs were bred for stability and brains. The foundation work was to teach the dog context of when to protect and the nuances of human behavior. That is one reason French Ring resonated so well with people. It was how the French (back then...) used their dogs and what was expected of them.

The op asked about home and estate protection. The people in our club used to lay awake at night thinking about the best ways to do that. Done right, it's not a simple endeavor but the result can be a dog that can have a beer thrown in its face at a party without exploding. It's all in the context and nuance. Quite a few people on this forum have NO IDEA what a dog is capable of understanding and doing.


----------



## Paul Cipparone (Feb 13, 2011)

Why do the French train in this manner for the military , police etc. Because ' IT WORKS "


----------



## Ben Thompson (May 2, 2009)

I like a dog that has the genetics to do the job...and just want basic training to keep the dog under control in situations. I just don't think about the precision in say FR or schutzhund...which is why I really don't fit in there.


----------



## Lars Vallin (Jan 17, 2009)

Mark Herzog said:


> I guess we differ in our interpretation of "hurt". Pressure and bruising is not what I had in mind when I made that statement. I'm referring to the drawing of blood and tearing of flesh. I'm talking about the dog putting someone in the hospital or worse... because that is my concept of a protection dog. The dog is not sent for show... it is not trained to bite and hold... the goal is not to "apprehend the bad guy"... it is sent because there is a real and serious threat to the handler and the dog's job is to protect the life of the handler at all costs. It's no different than employing a firearm to protect your life... you do not brandish your weapon... you do not shoot to wound... you fire center mass and you keep firing until the threat is neutralized.
> 
> Police often use a training device called Simunition to train with... it's very close to real ammunition but it's designed to "hurt" yet not do permanent damage... sort of like super paintball. Leaves bruises and stings like crazy... even numbs in the impact area. It definitely elevates stress levels but it's still not real and the officers know it's not real. You will still take actions that you might not otherwise take and the body doesn't react the same (auditory reduction, tunnel vision, adrenalin dump, loss of fine motor skills, etc.) as would be the case with live rounds and an actual shooting engagement.
> 
> Whether he feels discomfort or not, a guy in a bite suit is "acting" and the dog knows it (in my opinion)... The interaction will never be "real"... it's a training exercise. When the dog opens wounds... creates blood flow and tastes that blood... the dog's reaction is very different. I have seen how the dog changes gears... it's a whole different level. Just like the reaction of the "target" when it's gets real.


Excellent point Mark. People forget what the whole point of a real protection dog is. It's not a game, looks pretty, about scores or points. There is no playing fair on the part of the dog. You summed it up. Put the adversary in the hospital or die trying. Do not deploy the a dog if you are not committed. No warning nips or half added biting. That IS what gets PPD and PSDs killed! Ditto with a gun. Don't get one unless you are ok with having to take a person's life.Guns and dogs are not for "scaring" people. They are serious tools for serious purpose.


----------



## Ricky Mav (Jul 28, 2011)

Matt Vandart said:


> You gotta be careful with this shit dude, it can open you up for serious liability problem.
> Having said that, it's easy enough to train it, just train a variation of the object guard, where the property is 'the object' I would seriously think about it carefully, *after all PP is PERSONAL protection not property protection*.


What about the people on that property they are protecting? I would also think that if a dog is willing to protect the house when the owner is not home, the dog will be even more confident in his work when his pack is there.


----------



## Ricky Mav (Jul 28, 2011)

Khoi Pham said:


> Yes I know I can't do it as real as possible but the guy only have a hidden sleeve on, he would get bit somewhere else if he doesn't present the arm and I didn't want to fire to many shots because it might freak out my neighbors and *yes I know sending a dog to a guy with a gun will result in a dead dog, but it was a test, I want to see if it could snap in drive quickly and engage without hesitation without commands when he see threat.*


I agree, but at least it will give you a little more time to get your firearm so you can deal with the home invader". I love my dogs, but if someone was trying to break in or broke into my home, I want them to bark and engage first, so it gives me time to follow them and support them with my firearm. That's one reason why I think leg bites can be somewhat effective because the dogs are down low and you have the ability to aim up for the target in contrast to the dog biting in a target above the waist and possibly getting in the way for your answer to the attack. Even if the dog or dogs "bay" at the intruder it gives the people of the household to get to a safe place to call the authorities and/or protect themselves.


----------



## Ricky Mav (Jul 28, 2011)

Khoi Pham said:


> *Yes I know I can't do it as real as possible but the guy only have a hidden sleeve on*, he would get bit somewhere else if he doesn't present the arm and I didn't want to fire to many shots because it might freak out my neighbors and yes I know sending a dog to a guy with a gun will result in a dead dog, but it was a test, I want to see if it could snap in drive quickly and engage without hesitation without commands when he see threat.


Have you considered doing it with your dog muzzled and the person has no equipment on?


----------



## Catherine Gervin (Mar 12, 2012)

Khoi Pham said:


> This is ONE way I tested my dog, https://vimeo.com/channels/176851/31343192 he was totally out of drive, I left the house for about 15 minutes, I did it because I want to know what he would do if I'm not there, he is with my wife and kids, they never ever train him except once in a while feed him while I'm gone, I told my wife "fuss" is the recall command but I don't know what she was saying but it still sounds like fuss and so he recalled., but I think you should train for everything, out of drive surprise aggression like this, passive entrance...


i'm sure you are, but i hope your wife is proud of your dog, too! he sits right beside her barking at the driven off foe like "yeah, and you're LUCKY she called me off buddy!! you want some more? huh?!"


----------

