# The Human factor and its impact on Protection dog training.



## Reinier Geel (Apr 4, 2006)

:?: 
Lets forget the types of training available for a second and concentrate on the Human aspect. The selection of a suitable dog is a sport philosophy  with protection dog training this is not always possible as the owner bring any breed and expect you the trainer to train it. 

Is the owner a Suitable handler? - This has mostly been an academically driven argument; very few trainers actually take cognisance of this and just see dollars, and not the real world factors. Real world, in your face, experience will teach you that the dog will draw from the handler, his best and his worst behaviour and traits.

For example; if the handler is not fit the dog will logically suffer the same fait, and not be fit either, if the handler is sloppy the dog will be neglected, and so on. The dog will also draw from the innate aggression of the handler and the dog will only become as aggressive as what the handler is aggressive or not  this is not the rule but rather the norm, let me explain.

Aggression is broadly described as the drive that sets the dog into motion, or triggers him, into hunt  (tracking), protection, or search  (substance detection) mode it is not necessarily an attack, it is rather how decisive and persistent the handler is, to commit. If the handler has low aggression, low work ethic, blows the training mythology with bad imprinting, looses interest; the dog will fade likewise, or will become uncontrollable.

The other side of this is also true, where the trainer has all the right attributes, and turns out a good dog, just to surrender it to the owner, who undoes all the hard work. The dog becomes a liability  ladled as uncontrollable. 

Therefore it is very important to choose the right character, or frame of mind, I call it a Predatorily frame of mind, training peoples dogs for protection work is the same as training people to use guns and rifles, as first criteria the added benefit brings along added responsibility and care. The handler dog combo must be compatible - both in terms of size and temperament, only then we should look at attributes. The handler / owners skills and experience.

No handler should be trained in protection work before they have successfully passed the basic and advanced obedience course, where they were the handlers under instruction of the trainer, any other method could spell out disaster. 

The type of person that makes a good handler is someone that is spontaneous and that loves the outdoors, nature- the green and brown stuff, and who has built in drive, a person that can stick with routine, and follow instruction and apply it, and a person that can laugh at him self.

The bond between handler and dog is very important, there needs to be rapport, if the handler cannot relate or respond to the animals needs and has the belief that the dog is just another dog and not an extension of his or her personality, he will never be able to perform up to par.

The handler must be prone to a certain degree of violence, if the handler is afraid of the dog, or the dog off the handler - the dog becomes uncontrollable and serious and even disastrous complications could emanate from attack training, where the dog is taught that it is okay to attack people  we take the safety off  IMO.

Remember not every citizen is a villain, but within every citizen resides one, and it only takes so much to make any good man loose his senses, circumstances dictate. None of us can prepare our selves for every eventuality, but by training a dog for protection work we elevate our concerns around safety to higher standards  this belief in the dogs ability to stand the test  and face the music  could be a do or die situation, therefore one needs to know for sure, if the dogs ready to be tested, many are not, I assure you. Cosmetic training provides for great excitement  however will it translate to action when prompted under real world conditions  this is the final test  for it will be. Be sure you train the dogs like wise.

Just my personal opinion...
:wink:


----------



## Andres Martin (May 19, 2006)

AHA! You're alive!!! I had heard a pack of wild Boerboels had eaten you.


----------



## Woody Taylor (Mar 28, 2006)

Andres Martin said:


> AHA! You're alive!!! I had heard a pack of wild Boerboels had eaten you.


Hah.

Welcome back, Reinier.


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

Good to see you Reinier!
Your comments are dead on for the reason many fail at training. Poor combination of dog/handler/trainer. 
Any one of the three missing and success is a crap shoot.


----------



## Reinier Geel (Apr 4, 2006)

No the boerboels were not the problem, Ha ha - i am working on a new book...thanks all for the welcome... :wink:


----------



## Greg Long (Mar 27, 2006)

Reinier,

Really great points you brought up.Everyone wants a super tough protection dog but hardly anyone wants to take a long hard look at themselves.How you look at the dog plays a very important role in how much the dog will grant you access to his natural ability.


----------



## Andres Martin (May 19, 2006)

God made us different. If you drop 100 people in the middle of the Sahara, very few will make it out...if any. Few people wake up early in the morning; few people stay fit; few people read; few people listen; few people help; few people succeed in family, business, society; few people make the tough decisions in a timely manner; few people dominate. VERY few do all of the above. This is a fact of humanity.

Out of 100 people - those few people must be a very small percentage.

Out of 100 people more than a few want the things the real few have, but don't want to make the drop-dead effort the real few make.

I think from here spring the large majority of society's problems. PPDs being amongst the smallest ones.


----------



## Bree McQuilty (Feb 10, 2007)

How does this apply for people who lack the experience but make up for it in enthusiasm?

I will freely admit that as a dog handler, I am a very good cook :? . My dogs could be better in more capable hands but I consider myself to be enthusiatstic and open to trying new things to further my dog and myself.

I completely agree with the point made... A dog will only be as good as it's handler. But everyone has to start somewhere right? A friend of mine bought a fully trained PPD and couldn't work out why it wouldn't work for him... In exasperation he handed the dog to me and I had the dog just about doing mickey flips for me by the end of 3 days. The dog lacked confidence because his owner did. This could have gone in another direction because my friend also didn't know how to control the dog, he could have ended up being quite dangerous.

[The type of person that makes a good handler is someone that is spontaneous and that loves the outdoors, nature- the green and brown stuff, and who has built in drive, a person that can stick with routine, and follow instruction and apply it, and a person that can laugh at him self. 
]


I definetely fall into that category but I'm trying to establish if you are meaning those who aren't capable shouldn't handle PPD's even if they are willing to learn? Unfortunately, my aforementioned friend didn't have the desire to learn and the dog was rehomed, but had he taken the necessary interest, would it have been terrible that a beginner had a PPD?[/quote]


----------



## Andres Martin (May 19, 2006)

I don't think it's about knowledge, Bree...it's about balance, attitude and character.


----------



## Phil Dodson (Apr 4, 2006)

Glad to hear from you again!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## Bree McQuilty (Feb 10, 2007)

More in reference to who you are as a person and how you relate to your dog and the knowledge will come with time sort of thing?


----------



## Andres Martin (May 19, 2006)

double post


----------



## Andres Martin (May 19, 2006)

'zackly.

Let me add...a good PP dog handler must have patience, perception, awareness, persistence; must be able to delay gratification; must be able to think clearly and incrementally, and put together plans accordingly; must be open minded and intelligently experimental; must be observant, creative, flexible, disciplined and responsible; must be physically well coordinated...perhaps also a bit masochistic.

People like that also learn VERY quickly.

Hey, Bree? Do you have any pictures of your dogs?


----------



## Greg Long (Mar 27, 2006)

IMO some people have the natural ability and some dont.I know from training horses for a living for many years that no matter how much a person wants to be a good trainer,they never will be if they dont have some natural ability.Intelligence doesnt matter or how much money you have.Some people just have a natural ability for working with animals.Also, even if you have all the natural ability in the world it doesnt mean youll be a good trainer.You still have to work as hard as you can and dedicate your life to it.
To me,becoming a good handler is different.If you are a handler and not a trainer then you usually have a trainer who is helping you get the results you want or need.Most people can become an decent handler with the proper guidence from a trainer or training director.

A genetically correct dog that is truly in tune with a capable handler is an amazing and powerful thing.


----------



## Bree McQuilty (Feb 10, 2007)

Thanks Andre. I know where Renier is coming from now. And yes Greg, I agree with you - a handler having a trainer's guidance. I had an exceptional trainer that I constantly hounded with ceaseless questions for the last year. I would have given up ages ago if it weren't for him. Hey Greg, you wouldn't want to come and live with me for a while would you? I have a horse too :lol: .


----------



## Bree McQuilty (Feb 10, 2007)

P.S. Andes, I have loads of pics of my dogs. I will post a link to my website in members bio shortly if you promise not to laugh  .


----------



## Jose Alberto Reanto (Apr 6, 2006)

Simply put, the measure of a good dog is by its handler....

Welcome back, Reinier.


----------



## Reinier Geel (Apr 4, 2006)

Jose Alberto Reanto said:


> Simply put, the measure of a good dog is by its handler....
> 
> Yes this pretty much nails it :wink:


----------



## Andres Martin (May 19, 2006)

Reiner...I guess Al Reanto just shot down your page count! :lol:


----------



## Reinier Geel (Apr 4, 2006)

Ha ha  yes Andres considerable   have you noticed as well -  JOKE


----------



## Reinier Geel (Apr 4, 2006)

The fact of the matter is that the handler is not all that important in the initiation phase, on second thought, as long as he or she can follow the instructor and pass on the imprinting. I have had some brain dead handlers  oops - that were successful at training the dog the commands. 

However, they just could not get the dog to progress beyond their own limitations and fears. So in all fairness, I think enthusiasm has a great deal to do with it as well, any one willing can be trained / taught. Nevertheless, commitment to task and realisation that the task is almost never ending due to the repetitive nature of it spins the dice  for and against the dog handler combo.

Only once the dog has reached the Plato in training, does the handler become more apparent, the instructor now only guides the handler; as too good and bad training habits, and no longer as to where, when and how to do what. When all the training has been completed the handler has to experiment, and strike the balance, push the envelop and see how much more of the dog he or she can tap into.


----------

