# What is "active aggression" to you?



## Joby Becker

i think most people view it as social aggression, or the active form of defense response, which is technically a reactive form of aggression in my book...but what say you?

I also think social aggression is the true form of active aggression personally.


----------



## Kevin Cyr

Joby Becker said:


> i think most people view it as social aggression, or the active form of defense response, which is technically a reactive form of aggression in my book...but what say you?
> 
> I also think social aggression is the true form of active aggression personally.


 
REALLY? REALLY?? :roll:


----------



## Joby Becker

Kevin Cyr said:


> REALLY? REALLY?? :roll:


sorry..disregard..if not worthy of any type of discussion..discussing basic dog terminology...

was reaching here..lol


----------



## Thomas Barriano

For me active aggression is a dog that likes to fight.
My first SchH III Doberman Dubheasa Germania(my avatar) was actively aggressive. I first heard the term from Hans Juergen Frietag at a seminar years ago. It fit her to a tee


----------



## Nicole Stark

Joby Becker said:


> was reaching here..lol


ha ha, yeah well Joby the key to that is to reach out, not down or behind you.


----------



## Bob Scott

Joby Becker said:


> i think most people view it as social aggression, or the active form of defense response, which is technically a reactive form of aggression in my book...but what say you?
> 
> I also think social aggression is the true form of active aggression personally.




All the above!


----------



## Faisal Khan

Way I understand it = instant fight response without thinking about fleeing first (higher the pressure/stimulus, harder the response).


----------



## Geoff Empey

Faisal Khan said:


> Way I understand it = instant fight response without thinking about fleeing first (higher the pressure/stimulus, harder the response).


Sounds like me back in my 20's back in the small town hotels. It was like a Batman rerun .. "Boink, Biff and Kapowie! My deformed hands from the boxer breaks bouncing them off drunkard's heads reminds me of my 'instant fight response without thinking' LOL!


----------



## jack van strien

How about a dog who is trying to make eye contact and is then coming for you?Seen it a few times and it is pretty impressive and downright scary.It is a dog wanting to hurt you for no reason,other than being there.


----------



## Daniel Lybbert

what about a dog that gives you a cheap shot in the blind or the gaurd? that could be active maybe?


----------



## Lee H Sternberg

Her name is Carly. My female fits those descriptions. Always ready to rumble!


----------



## Thomas Barriano

Daniel Lybbert said:


> what about a dog that gives you a cheap shot in the blind or the gaurd? that could be active maybe?


I don't think so. Cheap shots are usually done by fearful dogs IMO
AA dogs like to fight but they fight fair.


----------



## Brett Bowen

Hate to answer a question with a question, BUT is there such a thing as inactive aggression? 

or maybe that's me trying to be a smart alec.


----------



## Faisal Khan

Brett Bowen said:


> Hate to answer a question with a question, BUT is there such a thing as inactive aggression?
> 
> or maybe that's me trying to be a smart alec.


Good question. Inactive aggression for me would be when the dog has no way out, cannot run and reverts to fight for his/her life when the threat keeps coming/hurting them. 

Are there proper definitions for active and inactive aggression or is it as one believes?


----------



## Thomas Barriano

Faisal Khan said:


> Good question. Inactive aggression for me would be when the dog has no way out, cannot run and reverts to fight for his/her life when the threat keeps coming/hurting them.
> 
> Are there proper definitions for active and inactive aggression or is it as one believes?


That sounds more like defense ? Active Aggression is a drive, like prey or defense, not IMO a behavior.


----------



## Faisal Khan

Thomas Barriano said:


> That sounds more like defense ? Active Aggression is a drive, like prey or defense, not IMO a behavior.


Care to define it? All I know about drives is that there are 3,

1. Prey
2. Defense
3. Social

Everything else is just a combination of these 3 key elements. Always eager to learn.


----------



## Thomas Barriano

Faisal Khan said:


> Care to define it? All I know about drives is that there are 3,
> 
> 1. Prey
> 2. Defense
> 3. Social
> 
> Everything else is just a combination of these 3 key elements. Always eager to learn.



I don't know who told you that? I've never heard of "social" drive. I think everyone agrees on Prey and Defense. Then I've heard pack drive, fight drive, combat drive and of course "active aggression"


----------



## Faisal Khan

Someone more knowledgeable than you hehe.


----------



## Daryl Ehret

Social drive, is that like pack drive? Let's not forget _solipsis drive_ then, for the self centered dog ;-)


----------



## Faisal Khan

From our TD. Social drive = Desire to stay with and obey orders from members of the pack.


----------



## Charles Lerner

Below is an excerpt that Armin Winkler wrote about "drives" based on Helmut Raiser's Der Schutzhund. The link to the entire article is here:
http://www.schutzhundvillage.com/drives.html
A productive discussion gets difficult when no one uses the same terminology! 

Aggression Drive

Aggression behaviour contains reactive aggression (defense) as well as active aggression (social aggression).* With all the different theories that exist about aggression, there still is no conclusive proof available as to whether or not genuine spontaneous aggression exists.* The three theories about where aggression comes from are:

Aggression is learned.
Aggression is created by negative experiences.
Aggression is inborn.
The truth is probably that aggression results from all three processes.* Research is available to support all three theories.* For our purposes however, we should concern ourselves less with where aggression comes from and more with what triggers it, what its goal is, and what its biological significance is.* The triggers for reactive aggression (defense) was covered under the previous heading.* So, lets deal with active aggression.* It is always intraspecific, meaning social aggression, and is the result of competition over things (territory, food, mates, etc.).* Intraspecific aggression is activated by rivals, and by anti-social behaviour.* The goal of the drive is to cause avoidance, submission, or worse of the rival.* Biological significance is the even distribution of a species over available land to reduce the possibility of food shortages and epidemics as well as survival of a species and a pack by selecting the fittest animals for reproduction and as leaders.* In species with a social hierarchy behaviours developed from the aggressive drive, which limit the negative results and guarantee the positive results of social aggression such as threatening, dominance, submission, and rituals of non-physical combat.

Aggression increases through maturation and practise.* It can also be increased or decreased through training and through external influences, for example pain can be aggression stimulating.* Other factors which affect aggressive behaviour are location and hormone levels.* Two factors which affect aggression that a protection helper needs to be aware of are: personal acquaintance blocks aggression; and passive acceptance of a dog's aggression impresses a dog deeply and causes unsureness.

A negative side effect of aggression in dog training is that it greatly reduces the dog's learning ability.

Author's note: We all want to see our dogs work aggressively against the "bad guy," but we need to keep in mind that that is the final picture we want to see.* Too often high quality dogs don't reach their potential because their owners want to see them aggressive right from the start, forgetting about the fact that the dog has to learn many intricate exercises before he can walk onto the competition field.* So if possible teach the dog an exercise first, then make him perform it aggressively.


----------



## Thomas Barriano

Faisal Khan said:


> From our TD. Social drive = Desire to stay with and obey orders from members of the pack.



I'd say that Helmut Raiser (the author of Der Schutzhund book that Armin translated) is a lot more knowledgeable then your TD
who ever the hell he/she is.

Thanks for posting the definition Charles


----------



## Faisal Khan

So it's Raiser, then TD followed by you at the end of the line. I aggree


----------



## Daryl Ehret

I figured I trumped all that, by adding the self-serving interest drive, the opposite of pack/social drive, just like flight is the opposite of fight. Some dogs have a drive to please their handlers, while others immensely enjoy pissing them off!


----------



## Thomas Barriano

Faisal Khan said:


> So it's Raiser, then TD followed by you at the end of the line. I aggree



It's Raiser a BUNCH of other trainers, then your TD then me....then you ;-)


----------



## Howard Gaines III

Daniel Lybbert said:


> what about a dog that gives you a cheap shot in the blind or the gaurd? that could be active maybe?


 TRAINING or the lack of good stuff...


----------



## Daryl Ehret

What kind of aggression ISN'T active? And if it isn't, then can it REALLY be called aggression? Sure it's not defense? Fair warning, before the sh:+ gets real?


----------



## Faisal Khan

Thomas Barriano said:


> It's Raiser a BUNCH of other trainers, then your TD then me....then you ;-)


LOL whatever makes you happy.


----------



## Nicole Stark

Daryl Ehret said:


> What kind of aggression ISN'T active? And if it isn't, then can it REALLY be called aggression? Sure it's not defense? Fair warning, before the sh:+ gets real?


That's what I thought. Then I had nothing else to say.


----------



## Tracey Hughes

To me:

Active Aggression is where the dog will initiate the fight.


Reactive aggression is where the helper/decoy initiates it.


----------



## Daryl Ehret

That's an interesting view. But I don't think the dog could come up with it entirely of it's own initiative. There must have been some cue from the feedback continuum that would lead to aggression, (doesn't like men with hats, sticks in their hands, the cautious approaching manner, the helper's body odor, whatever). At what point could it be considered that the helper is initiating the aggression?


----------



## Thomas Barriano

deleted post


----------



## Steve Estrada

Tracey Hughes said:


> To me:
> 
> Active Aggression is where the dog will initiate the fight.
> 
> 
> Reactive aggression is where the helper/decoy initiates it.


Isn't that just active & reactive but doesn't necessarily include aggression. Barking & lunging doesn't always equate with aggression....JMHO


----------



## Joe Agustin

I believe active aggression is when a dog sees the aggression from decoy/suspect, he raises his. An actively aggressive dog comes in hard, hits hard, and will bring it harder the harder the decoy/suspect brings it. He brings it harder out of confidence and in some cases, getting off on winning. My last patrol dog was what I would call full of active aggression. He had bad intentions....when the decoy would play that he was hurt or loosing, the dog just came harder. When the suspect would scream....he dropped hammers.


----------



## Thomas Barriano

Joe,

I agree with everything except the first sentence 
My first female Dobermann Dubheasa Germania (avatar) would come into the blind looking for a fight from the neutral decoy.
The more he reacted the better she liked it. It was the same in
mondio ring. If she got the decoy to flinch or move. game over ;-)




Joe Agustin said:


> I believe active aggression is when a dog sees the aggression from decoy/suspect, he raises his. An actively aggressive dog comes in hard, hits hard, and will bring it harder the harder the decoy/suspect brings it. He brings it harder out of confidence and in some cases, getting off on winning. My last patrol dog was what I would call full of active aggression. He had bad intentions....when the decoy would play that he was hurt or loosing, the dog just came harder. When the suspect would scream....he dropped hammers.


----------



## Sally Crunkleton

I have my own thoughts and experiences, but to Joby's original question...are you asking about active aggression while the dog is working or training, or aggression in general during everyday situations?


----------



## Gillian Schuler

Nicole Stark said:


> ha ha, yeah well Joby the key to that is to reach out, not down or behind you.


Regardless of ones fingers?


----------



## Joby Becker

just in general. to see what others think.


----------



## Gillian Schuler

Sally Crunkleton said:


> I have my own thoughts and experiences, but to Joby's original question...are you asking about active aggression while the dog is working or training, or aggression in general during everyday situations?


Thank you for asking that, I was wondering it too.


----------



## Gillian Schuler

Active aggression?

Is there inactive aggression?

For me "active aggression" is when the dog shows aggression towards the helper which is positive or when it shows active aggression in walking out with its handler - negative.


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie

This is one of those--do you really care?? kinda things. You have dogs in front of you that bite. The new buzz word seems to be aggression and the desire for it. How are you telling from the dog's outward display/behavior that he is acting with "aggression?"


T


----------



## Marcelo Villanueva

Daryl Ehret said:


> That's an interesting view. But I don't think the dog could come up with it entirely of it's own initiative. There must have been some cue from the, feedback continuum that would lead to aggression, (doesn't like men with hats, sticks in their hands, the cautious approaching manner, the helper's body odor, whatever). At what point could it be considered that the helper is initiating the aggression?


A dog is ordered to search, and when found, then bark & hold (the "cues" are the Handler's commands) on a emotionless, motionless, inactive Helper/Decoy....the dog should demand through the barking, and physical demeanor, for the Helper/Decoy to engage. 

The dog should expect and show vocally and physically (confrontational) readiness to engage, on command. 

Reactive aggression is when a Helper/Decoy has to entice via: vocally, physically (movement of any kind) to illicit an aggressive response, even though the Handler has given the command. 

Both arguably are reactive however in terms of protection dog programs, this is the meaning expressed to me.

Cheers,
Chello...


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie

*ag·gres·sion*

/əˈgrɛʃ ən/ http://dictionary.reference.com/help/luna/IPA_pron_key.htmlShow Spelled [_uh_-*gresh*-_uh_ n] http://dictionary.reference.com/help/luna/Spell_pron_key.htmlShow IPA 
noun 1. the action of a state in violating by force the rights of another state, particularly its territorial rights; an unprovoked offensive, attack, invasion, or the like: _The army is prepared to stop any foreign aggression. _

2. any offensive action, attack, or procedure; an inroad or encroachment: _an aggression upon one's rights. _

3. the practice of making assaults or attacks; offensive action in general. 

4. _Psychiatry. _overt or suppressed hostility, either innate or resulting from continued frustration and directed outward or against oneself.


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie

Marcelo Villanueva said:


> A dog is ordered to search, and when found, then bark & hold (the "cues" are the Handler's commands) on a emotionless, motionless, inactive Helper/Decoy....the dog should demand through the barking, and physical demeanor, for the Helper/Decoy to engage.
> 
> The dog should expect and show vocally and physically (confrontational) readiness to engage, on command.
> 
> Reactive aggression is when a Helper/Decoy has to entice via: vocally, physically (movement of any kind) to illicit an aggressive response, even though the Handler has given the command.
> 
> Both arguably are reactive however in terms of protection dog programs, this is the meaning expressed to me.
> 
> Cheers,
> Chello...


Is this someone's sport definition? Has anyone ever seen an untrained dog hold someone? Its more like "I dare ya" and "Move and I'll bite you a**" I've seen it both ways--rhythmic deep bark and pouncing the feet [looked more like frustration since the dog really couldn't get to the person] and cold fixated stare [dogs could get to the person]. Vocal doesn't necessarily mean readiness to engage. All you're stating above is whether a dog will bite a passive decoy or target and whether or not he'll engage on command. 

T


----------



## Marcelo Villanueva

Terrasita Cuffie said:


> *ag·gres·sion*
> 
> /əˈgrɛʃ ən/ http://dictionary.reference.com/help/luna/IPA_pron_key.htmlShow Spelled [_uh_-*gresh*-_uh_ n] http://dictionary.reference.com/help/luna/Spell_pron_key.htmlShow IPA
> noun 1. the action of a state in violating by force the rights of another state, particularly its territorial rights; an unprovoked offensive, attack, invasion, or the like: _The army is prepared to stop any foreign aggression. _
> 
> 2. any offensive action, attack, or procedure; an inroad or encroachment: _an aggression upon one's rights. _
> 
> 3. the practice of making assaults or attacks; offensive action in general.
> 
> 4. _Psychiatry. _overt or suppressed hostility, either innate or resulting from continued frustration and directed outward or against oneself.


"Webster" never trained a dog. 

I agree aggression is aggression; however in dog protection training what we really want to see is controlled aggression which covers "webster" and dog people's vocabularies (I hope) 

Cheers, 
Chello...


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie

Marcelo Villanueva said:


> "Webster" never trained a dog.
> 
> I agree aggression is aggression; however in dog protection training what we really want to see is controlled aggression which covers "webster" and dog people's vocabularies (I hope)
> 
> Cheers,
> Chello...


Yeah, well, training aggression is back to the look. In nature most if not all aggression is somewhat reactionary; i.e. territorial; defense of pack; defense of self; etc. You just don't strut around spoiling for fights--part of social order and survival and all. Bottom line, does the dog bite or otherwise interact to control or obtain submission from the target. You can have all sorts of looks and/or displays but what is the animal's intent. Animals are pretty good at judging intent in their interactions with one another and will disregard the look or show if there is no intent behind it. So in the art of reading dogs, how do you determine the ones that have the intent vs. the trained look. Of course some will venture to say that you can train "intent." We debate that in the stock world all the time. 

T


----------



## jamie lind

Terrasita Cuffie said:


> So in the art of reading dogs, how do you determine the ones that have the intent vs. the trained look.
> 
> T


look at them off the training/trialing field. or watch the training from the begining.


----------



## Thomas Barriano

Marcelo Villanueva said:


> "Webster" never trained a dog.
> 
> I agree aggression is aggression; however in dog protection training what we really want to see is controlled aggression which covers "webster" and dog people's vocabularies (I hope)
> 
> Cheers,
> Chello...


Chello

Aggression is aggression and you can train aggression and you can control aggression BUT "active aggression" is more then simple aggression. Active aggression is what a dog brings to the decoy with no agitation or stimulus.


----------



## Marcelo Villanueva

Terrasita Cuffie said:


> Yeah, well, training aggression is back to the look. In nature most if not all aggression is somewhat reactionary; i.e. territorial; defense of pack; defense of self; etc. You just don't strut around spoiling for fights--part of social order and survival and all. Bottom line, does the dog bite or otherwise interact to control or obtain submission from the target. You can have all sorts of looks and/or displays but what is the animal's intent. Animals are pretty good at judging intent in their interactions with one another and will disregard the look or show if there is no intent behind it. So in the art of reading dogs, how do you determine the ones that have the intent vs. the trained look. Of course some will venture to say that you can train "intent." We debate that in the stock world all the time.
> 
> T


It would seem I have again entered into a very complicated subject & in my efforts to answer a very complicated subject with inadequate simple answers I have muddied the meaning of aggression as it pertains to protection dog programs.

This is a very complex subject. 

I will collect my thoughts and put it down best I can when I have more time to do so.

I will say this for now...

You cannot view aggression as a simple dictionary definition because; indeed there are many faces to aggression. 

No different then there are many levels and faces of the term pain, cold, hot, sad, happy, excited, fast, slow, etc.

You must take into account intention, training, genetic disposition, environment, and the overall presentation (is it forwardly, controlled and convincing), when discussing any type of aggression pertaining to protection dog training.

Cheers,
Chello...


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie

jamie lind said:


> look at them off the training/trialing field. or watch the training from the begining.


I agree. However, you don't often have that opportunity. 

T


----------



## Joe Agustin

Thomas Barriano said:


> Joe,
> 
> I agree with everything except the first sentence
> My first female Dobermann Dubheasa Germania (avatar) would come into the blind looking for a fight from the neutral decoy.
> The more he reacted the better she liked it. It was the same in
> mondio ring. If she got the decoy to flinch or move. game over ;-)


Maybe i should say.....See, im speaking from only PD backround. Im not deploying my dog unless i have all criteria for an apprehension. Does it make sense now. My dog kodi was never trained in bark and hold, nor will i ever train it for a street dog. So, when my dog is on the decoy or a suspect, and either suspect or decoy raise the level.....get ready, cause an actively aggressive dog is gonna try and raise the steaks and stay one level above. I had a dog that would run one speed towards a decoy...if the decoy yelled and charged the dog, the dog would speed up and bring it harder.


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie

Marcelo Villanueva said:


> It would seem I have again entered into a very complicated subject & in my efforts to answer a very complicated subject with inadequate simple answers I have muddied the meaning of aggression as it pertains to protection dog programs.
> 
> This is a very complex subject.
> 
> I will collect my thoughts and put it down best I can when I have more time to do so.
> 
> I will say this for now...
> 
> You cannot view aggression as a simple dictionary definition because; indeed there are many faces to aggression.
> 
> No different then there are many levels and faces of the term pain, cold, hot, sad, happy, excited, fast, slow, etc.
> 
> You must take into account intention, training, genetic disposition, environment, and the overall presentation (is it forwardly, controlled and convincing), when discussing any type of aggression pertaining to protection dog training.
> 
> Cheers,
> Chello...


I agree. Dogs guage aggression in terms of the situation presented--or the good ones do. I have a hard time relating to simulated aggression. I'm in the middle of writing out five sessions of training in my training log and in thinking of trained intent to control/submit, I'd have to say that with my work it is taking what the dog has innately and putting a command/cue on it and gaining stimulus control of it. First I have to capture it--animal displays it independently of command and perhaps in reaction to a stimulus. It seems to me from what you have stated about your training, you are using reactive to train active and have stimulus control of it--perhaps much in the same way that I do.

T


----------



## Sally Crunkleton

I personally just want aggression when it comes to protection - of course with control and all that good stuff.

Aside from patrol and/or protection training; I think in general, aggression is a learned behavior. I don't think there is a such thing as "inactive" aggression as mentioned earlier, but there is passive aggression. For example- the dog that will avoid eye contact, bare teeth, and growl 10 times before actually biting. That dog, IMO would just rather not unless it has to.

From my general everyday experiences, I consider "active" aggression to be the dog is fully willing to "get you before you get him". This, I also believe is a learned behavior, at least with my own dog. I have never known a dog that was just born looking to jack something up, I have always found more behind the behavior.

Whether aggression is based on fear, training, dominance, etc...it is still 
aggression. I just think if it is "active", the dog won't let the stimulus have a chance- they would rather get it over with than wait and see if its necessary.

Again, my two cents is coming from everyday life- not necessarily from the training field.


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie

Sally Crunkleton said:


> I personally just want aggression when it comes to protection - of course with control and all that good stuff.
> 
> Aside from patrol and/or protection training; I think in general, aggression is a learned behavior. I don't think there is a such thing as "inactive" aggression as mentioned earlier, but there is passive aggression. For example- the dog that will avoid eye contact, bare teeth, and growl 10 times before actually biting. That dog, IMO would just rather not unless it has to.
> 
> From my general everyday experiences, I consider "active" aggression to be the dog is fully willing to "get you before you get him". This, I also believe is a learned behavior, at least with my own dog. I have never known a dog that was just born looking to jack something up, I have always found more behind the behavior.
> 
> Whether aggression is based on fear, training, dominance, etc...it is still
> aggression. I just think if it is "active", the dog won't let the stimulus have a chance- they would rather get it over with than wait and see if its necessary.
> 
> Again, my two cents is coming from everyday life- not necessarily from the training field.


For me, there is a type of "make my day" type of dog. They get off on fight and WINNING--i.e. gaining control/submission. A challenge to them is a glorious opportunity and they revel in it. You see the glean in their eye. Once this is triggered, they won't give it up for love or money. I don't really care about the term aggression and what form of it motivates the dog's bite. But fight drive and that desire to win has meaning for me.

T


----------



## Joby Becker

I was asking in regards active and reactive...not active and inactive LOL...

I see the term bandied about a lot, just was wondering what it meant to others...


----------



## James Downey

Joby Becker said:


> I was asking in regards active and reactive...not active and inactive LOL...
> 
> I see the term bandied about a lot, just was wondering what it meant to others...


I think that was worth clearing up. I was thinking as opposed to passive aggression...whatever the hell that would be. --and Sally, I read your post after wrote this. I would agree with that being passive aggression. But, I was thinking about dogs capable of protection work. So that was not directed at you.

But all aggression at it's core is rooted in a reaction to some stimulus. There has to be some external stimulus for the dog to react to. So all aggression is reactive, at least upon initial contact with a stimulus. I think what most trainers wish to see is the lowest level of initial stimulus to create a reaction in the dog. Say, just the visual stimulation of seeing a motionless decoy. The dog at it's core is still just reacting to the sight of a decoy. Where I think we may go wrong is that we view this different from a decoy who needs to crack a whip or some more evident form of stimulation to get the dog to react. We call the dog who just by the mere presence of a decoy, "active" and one who needs more cheerleading "reactive"...when truly both dogs are reactive. One just needs more stimulation to make a reaction. Then after the initial contact... You can create more aggression by having the decoy be the reactive one to the dogs aggression. This may be closer to "active" aggression. But a lack of artificial stimulation from the helper is still a cue for the dog to show more power. So, I guess you could call the lack of reaction from a decoy a stimulus for the dog show more behavior. I know it's splitting hairs here. The other thing that comes to mind is outs. lately I have forgone all slipping the sleeve for my dog....for one I think it may cause out problems. When thinking of what I want my dog to find rewarding.... I really don't care for them to think that the object is to "win" the sleeve. I want them to want think biting and fighting is the reward. But if I put the picture of the slip as a reward in their brain....Now I may get a dog that may not out, in hopes that they will get a slip. Also Slipping seems to me, the opposite of why a protection should be engaging a helper. I do not want them to think that the idea of the protection is simply to get their reward and go somewhere less stressful. I want them to view the out as way to get back to the reward of biting and fighting. Not as way to trot off with the sleeve. And this leads into active aggression. So biting and fighting is the rewarding behavior...provided the decoy is smart enough to read the dog and allow the dog to overpower them, and then systematically increasing pressure overtime so the dog has to fight more to overpower the decoy. The only thing that I want my dog to see as the goal is to over power the decoy. And if fighting does not work, fighting more will. And I am assume for a moment we are talking about dogs who have all the required character traits to do protection. I just get the sneaking suspicion someone will point out how that not slipping sleeve for some dogs will make them worse.


----------



## Joby Becker

jack van strien said:


> How about a dog who is trying to make eye contact and is then coming for you?Seen it a few times and it is pretty impressive and downright scary.It is a dog wanting to hurt you for no reason,other than being there.


This I believe is active aggression..the social aggression. the urge to be aggressive towards strangers. Does not need an action to react to, merely being there is enough.


----------



## Daryl Ehret

Joby Becker said:


> I was asking in regards active and reactive...not active and inactive LOL...
> 
> I see the term bandied about a lot, just was wondering what it meant to others...


I didn't mean to muddy the conversation, was lightheartedly kidding in my comments. Here is Armin Winkler's viewpoint active aggression, and more on re-active forms of aggression can be followed through this link. Dog Terms, part II



> *Social aggression*
> 
> Social aggression is the only type of aggression that can be categorized as active aggression. Even though the term active aggression is used frequently, it really only applies here. The reason social aggression is called active aggression is because it really does not require any specific action as a trigger stimulus. Social aggression serves two purposes of biological significance. One is ensuring the even distribution of a species across a given territory by repelling equally strong individuals. And the other is to establish and maintain order in social units such as a pack. Social aggression is always directed at the individual's own kind. In the breeds that were created for police and military service, selection took place that expanded the direction of social aggression to also included the dog's adopted kind, humans. As an example of contrast, in the dog fighting breeds, selection took place to ensure that the social aggression would not include humans.
> 
> Let me give you a couple of other reasons why I hold this view. In virtually all older texts describing the police service dog breeds a few points were always made. They were that the dogs show mistrust and aggression against strangers and that they are very devoted and loyal with the family and very loving with children. To me this combination of qualities stem from a very strong closed pack oriented social behavior. That means loyalty and devotion to members in the pack and aggression against all outsiders, even those belonging to the same species.
> 
> This form of aggression is not very common in our dogs anymore, because many people find it to be socially unacceptable. Dogs today are supposed to be social and to a certain degree friendly. And while I see nothing wrong with a social dog, I personally also see nothing wrong with a socially aggressive dog. These dogs are not unpredictable menaces to society or vicious animals. They simply have inborn motivations that include this form of aggression. Social aggression is a trainable trait, meaning it can be directed and controlled. Naturally that requires the right handler so that accidents are prevented.
> 
> Socially aggressive dogs have an urge to be aggressive towards strangers. This can be controlled and the dog can be taught to tolerate strangers. However, the dog will not become a social or friendly dog with strangers, no matter what type of behavior modification is attempted. The only way this urge to confront a stranger aggressively when not under control would go away is if the stranger meets the confrontation and social order is established. This happens either if the person can subdue the dog and subordinate him or if the person unequivocally submits to the dog. (At that point the person is no longer a stranger but an integrated pack member).
> 
> The trend in breeding has been to breed dogs who do not have social aggression. And that may be what many people want. The point I would like to make is that social aggression is nothing that should be made out to be something evil. It is a valuable trait in dogs that are in the right hands. Such dogs do demand a high degree of responsibility and vigilance on the part of the handler. Socially aggressive dogs who are also dominant are difficult to handle and to train and should be in the hands of experts.


What I'd like to know from Joby, who I know has and prefers this type of dog, are YOU comfortable with your level of control in the breed you have? I don't have a problem having unsociable dogs, but I don't want them trying to kill everybody they encounter unprovoked. From Armin's view, it seems this level of social aggression is the only "kind" of active aggression.


----------



## Charles Wrenn

The "Winkler aggression model"- drives and aggression

http://www.k9trainingexperts.com/index.php?p=1_22_The-Winkler-aggression-model-drives-and-aggression


----------



## Christopher Smith

Marcelo Villanueva said:


> "Webster" never trained a dog.


:thumbup:


----------



## Gillian Schuler

Daryl Ehret said:


> I didn't mean to muddy the conversation, was lightheartedly kidding in my comments. Here is Armin Winkler's viewpoint active aggression, and more on re-active forms of aggression can be followed through this link. Dog Terms, part II
> 
> 
> 
> What I'd like to know from Joby, who I know has and prefers this type of dog, are YOU comfortable with your level of control in the breed you have? I don't have a problem having unsociable dogs, but I don't want them trying to kill everybody they encounter unprovoked. From Armin's view, it seems this level of social aggression is the only "kind" of active aggression.


How do you determine anti-social dogs if you have them from pups?

Are they anti-social as pups or are they wary pups which could make them anti-social as dogs?


----------



## Steve Estrada

Gillian Schuler said:


> How do you determine anti-social dogs if you have them from pups?
> 
> Are they anti-social as pups or are they wary pups which could make them anti-social as dogs?


Not to answer for Daryl but I think what we may discussing is sharpness in a dog which is something I desire in my dogs. Not necessarily friendly, social but as stated "not killing" everything. My dogs will bark at a stranger, warning, then behaving properly but not necessarily friendly.
I read Armin's article & was surprised at some terminology "semantics" I guess that spoke of dogs as having emotions. I think that is confusing for some?


----------



## Steve Estrada

Gillian Schuler said:


> How do you determine anti-social dogs if you have them from pups?
> 
> Are they anti-social as pups or are they wary pups which could make them anti-social as dogs?


Not to answer for Daryl but I think what we may discussing is sharpness in a dog which is something I desire in my dogs. Not necessarily friendly, social but as stated "not killing" everything. My dogs will bark at a stranger, warning, then behaving properly but not necessarily friendly.
I read Armin's article & was surprised at some terminology "semantics" I guess that spoke of dogs as having emotions. I think that is confusing for some?JMHO


----------



## Gillian Schuler

Steve, what me disturbs is a "sharpness in pups".

An "anti-social pup/dog" I see as a dog that is not interested in passers-by, other dogs, etc., also not aggressive.


----------



## Steve Estrada

I agree Gillian you can have too sharp of a dog, which I don't want. Too strong of sharpness to me indicates some insecurity. Their is different levels I believe. I want a strong level of dominance & with it a medium to high sharpness.......


----------



## Joe Agustin

Charles Wrenn said:


> The "Winkler aggression model"- drives and aggression
> 
> http://www.k9trainingexperts.com/index.php?p=1_22_The-Winkler-aggression-model-drives-and-aggression


Thats funny you bring up armin. Thats where i picked up my understanding of it. I actually had a 5yo mally named Rico that was trained by him. That dog was extremely sharp and full of active aggression. Armin has been to a few of our police work dog seminars in our state. Very knowledgable man.


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie

Steve Estrada said:


> I agree Gillian you can have too sharp of a dog, which I don't want. Too strong of sharpness to me indicates some insecurity. Their is different levels I believe. I want a strong level of dominance & with it a medium to high sharpness.......


The puppies of guard/protection heritage that I have picked and *liked*: Ideally at 7 weeks they have perfect environmental nerves--sound, change of environment, different floor surfaces, strange items that suddenly appear in the environment and absolutely no hesitation about people. As I take them out and about week-to-week, they will without hesitation, meet and greet everyone, friendly and tail wagging. Somewhere between 6-9 months, they start to demonstrate that they have no interest in *seeking* attention from others. People can walk up to them, pet them, etc. They don't acknowledge it. They don't shrink, back up, move away, etc. Tails don't wag. Ears don't relax. They ignore it. There is no sign of fear or that the stranger represents pressure in any way, shape or form. I typically characterize it as the stage where they are satisfied that they get their love at home. Usually around this time I start to see territoriality in terms of the house, yard, car and ultimately their instinct regarding protecting me also. These are dogs that can go anywhere and they are reliable and they are 100% confident. I always say just don't do anything stupid where I am concerned.

T


----------



## Steve Estrada

Just for clarification, I'm not speaking of a young pup 6mos. Or under as being sharpe. I'm pretty much as you are T, my dogs don't have to be social but not allowed to be anti-social. I'd never have a dog that is a danger to a child! Just my personal expectation. 
True aggression & territorial doesn't usually until about nine months, that's a developmental fact, of course their is always exceptions. I take my dogs everywhere everyday & they are very attuned to surroundings but focus on me. That's what I want & expect. Maybe not for everyone but I'm not concerned what everyone thinks! JMHO


----------



## Charles Wrenn

Joe Agustin said:


> Thats funny you bring up armin. Thats where i picked up my understanding of it. I actually had a 5yo mally named Rico that was trained by him. That dog was extremely sharp and full of active aggression. Armin has been to a few of our police work dog seminars in our state. Very knowledgable man.


Ive trained off an on with Armin for several years now...I remember Rico and him referencing him as a really good dog.....

Charles


----------



## Thomas Barriano

Not to take anything from Armin, he's a great trainer and decoy but Der Schutzhund was written by Helmut Raiser. Armin only translated it.


----------



## Gillian Schuler

Thomas, that is true but I respect and admire Armin Winkler as his own man, and am grateful that he has put so much information on the Internet in English and German plus translating other works, such as Raiser's. Maybe Helmut could employ him to translate all that is on the RSV 2000 site??

Helmut Reiser is undoubtedly a great figure, not only in Schutzhund but in breeding and testing.

When telling my training instructor years ago that I had bought Helmut Raiser's Schutzhund book in German he said "be careful, it's very technical.” I guess this sums Helmut Raiser up a little. But, if one is not illiterate, it is no problem. Some people speak in different languages, not just German, English, French, Swahili or whatever.

The same instructor, although practiacally very good, went to a seminar three times with the explanation that one always heard something that one had missed. OK for me but surely if one is listening and soaking it up, this shouldn't be necessary.

However, I still find that the instructors / trainers who stand out in all weathers for the talented and not so talented handlers, easier to communicate with. Probably because we can discuss what is happening before us.

Maybe if I stood out with Helmut Raiser and discussed the dog he was currently working, it would be the same.


----------



## Thomas Barriano

Gillian 
+1

Armin used to do a lot of work with my first two Dobermanns before he moved to Virginia. Raiser just deserves credit for Der Schutzhund book


----------

