# one part of detection dog selection test



## mike suttle

We look for many things from a dog, this is only one part of it, but if a dog wont do this, then we dont test any further. I dont like to tease the dog much at all, if any, over the object (in this case a copper pipe) I want the dog to have enough drive without me having to load him up any to bring him in drive to retrieve it.
After the dog does this part of the test then I will continue to test him. 
I will try to get short video clips of what I look for in each area of our detection dog selection test.
The first two videos are of puppies about 6 - 8 months old.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FkNYbPTnOYE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=twUQ-HE8IIM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DYxg1mLGaIk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r31jr5Qo4VU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BHby0CsdNrk


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

Choking a dog off an object "builds" the desire to keep it. Your training is showing ! ! ! HA HA


----------



## Bart Karmich

I think you're superstitious Mike.


----------



## Bob Scott

"For me" I like the Ivo dog.
Strong desire for the pipe but also seemed to want interaction with you after he got it. Easier to train! JMHO of course. :-D :wink:


----------



## Kelly Johnson

Are any of these pups out of Ivo? I like the first one!


----------



## mike suttle

Bob Scott said:


> "For me" I like the Ivo dog.
> Strong desire for the pipe but also seemed to want interaction with you after he got it. Easier to train! JMHO of course. :-D :wink:


Ivo was the only dog in the video that was not 100% green. He was trained to bring the toy back and play with handler.


----------



## mike suttle

Kelly Johnson said:


> Are any of these pups out of Ivo? I like the first one!


Yes, the first little female is an Ivo daughter.


----------



## mike suttle

Jeff Oehlsen said:


> Choking a dog off an object "builds" the desire to keep it. Your training is showing ! ! ! HA HA


OK, you caught me. But the first two puppies in the videos are babies and have simply not been worked much at all. My point is that you can not train something that is not there. 
We will just have to agree to disagree about this being training vs natural drive I guess. 
Either way though, make them like ths ones in this video and I will buy them from you.


----------



## Pete Stevens

Good looking dogs Mike....love a dog that keeps both rewards in their mouth.


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

It for sure has to be there, I was just busting your balls. I would train it with those dogs, why not ?

For that kind of money, I would for sure do everything I could to encourage it. I have a couple that grab the concrete rake, does that count ?? LOL


----------



## Jennifer Coulter

mike suttle said:


> Ivo was the only dog in the video that was not 100% green. He was trained to bring the toy back and play with handler.


Are you saying that those other pups/dogs had never seen a metal pipe before?


----------



## mike suttle

Jennifer Coulter said:


> Are you saying that those other pups/dogs had never seen a metal pipe before?


The first two pups had a metal pipe thrown for them in January in my training room just for me to see if they would do it, they have had almost nothing done with them since then except for some socialization and agility work, and a couple bites on a sleeve. Beth is here now taking some pictures and video, so we brought them out twice this week, once to do bitework, and then last night to video the metal retrieve work. So in total in their lives they have seen a pipe maybe 3 times.
The others have seen a pipe several times before, but no real training at all, only hunt and retrieve games. My point is that it is the intensity I am looking for, not the technique. If the dog has the intensity and drive to retrieve metal with the possesiveness shown in these video clips, they will always be much stronger as the toy gets more enjoyable (tug, ball, rolled towel, etc)
Tonight I will take a puppy up to school to do some environmental testing and test hunt drive inside for the first time. I will get some raw video of that if I can as well as some more of what I look for in a detector dog.


----------



## Jennifer Coulter

mike suttle said:


> The first two pups had a metal pipe thrown for them in January in my training room just for me to see if they would do it, they have had almost nothing done with them since then except for some socialization and agility work, and a couple bites on a sleeve. Beth is here now taking some pictures and video, so we brought them out twice this week, once to do bitework, and then last night to video the metal retrieve work. So in total in their lives they have seen a pipe maybe 3 times.
> The others have seen a pipe several times before, but no real training at all, only hunt and retrieve games. My point is that it is the intensity I am looking for, not the technique. If the dog has the intensity and drive to retrieve metal with the possesiveness shown in these video clips, they will always be much stronger as the toy gets more enjoyable (tug, ball, rolled towel, etc)
> Tonight I will take a puppy up to school to do some environmental testing and test hunt drive inside for the first time. I will get some raw video of that if I can as well as some more of what I look for in a detector dog.


Thanks for that. The videos definately make clear the intensity you are looking for.


----------



## Brian Batchelder

Just so we're clear, Mr. Suttle is probably referring to a common correlation found in the limited gene pool he deals with. It's not surprising he sees it as cause and effect. It's not.

If you want to get really fancy, we're talking about dopamine vs. seratonin systems regarding the respective seeking and satiation events. No great reason to get into that, but it does agree with those who might be inclined to say that keeping it simple is a better idea. No great reason to engage in metal idolotry. Sounds like Mr. Suttle is maybe a little naive about what his mentors are telling him.


----------



## Jennifer Coulter

Brian Batchelder said:


> Just so we're clear, Mr. Suttle is probably referring to a common correlation found in the limited gene pool he deals with. It's not surprising he sees it as cause and effect. It's not.
> 
> If you want to get really fancy, we're talking about dopamine vs. seratonin systems regarding the respective seeking and satiation events. No great reason to get into that, but it does agree with those who might be inclined to say that keeping it simple is a better idea. No great reason to engage in metal idolotry. Sounds like Mr. Suttle is maybe a little naive about what his mentors are telling him.


You remind me of someone.


----------



## Jim Nash

Jennifer Coulter said:


> You remind me of someone.


This was part of Brian's introduction . 


" I've never even owned a dog, but I have been e-mailing a lot of people a lot of dumb questions about them. I'm sure I haven't run out, though. "


----------



## Nancy Jocoy

Well, in a rude sort of way, he did ask a question that I would which is

What is special about metal retrieving? 
I know people are all impressed by it, but what does it tell you?

Sincerly - since I will be evaluating next year and have decided that I will only take a dog that I see firsthand and I am most concerned about a dog that will hunt independantly .........[and I cannot afford one of Mike's dogs  ]

Hey, maybe I can sell my 8 year old dysplastic female! She dismanted a downspout and was running around the backyard with it!


----------



## todd pavlus

It's the intensity that the dog has to hunt and posess the metal not the actual retrieve. What I want to know is who came up with these tests...was it a paper pushing government bureaucrat or someone that has actually worked with these types of dogs. First it was just metal, now it has to be copper retrieve


----------



## Brian Batchelder

Next: lava rock. HOT lava rock.


----------



## Charles Guyer

Brian Batchelder said:


> Just so we're clear, Mr. Suttle is probably referring to a common correlation found in the limited gene pool he deals with. It's not surprising he sees it as cause and effect. It's not.
> 
> If you want to get really fancy, we're talking about dopamine vs. seratonin systems regarding the respective seeking and satiation events. No great reason to get into that, but it does agree with those who might be inclined to say that keeping it simple is a better idea. No great reason to engage in metal idolotry. Sounds like Mr. Suttle is maybe a little naive about what his mentors are telling him.


Seems like someone here is satiating. I would imagine that those "mentors" wear overalls, not lab coats and don't feel the need to satisfy their own obsessive desires by attempting to talk down to folks on the internet. Behaviorism, in practice is not dependent on an in depth knowledge of physiology.


----------



## mike suttle

I will say this one more time..........the metal retrieve test is nothing special, it is only a very easy way for me to determine how driven a dog really is to retrieve. If he will retrieve things like copper pipes, stainless steel pipes, weedeaters, chainsaws, bicycles, etc. then I know the dog has the desire to retrieve. Then I can move on to the other parts of my test and see how it goes from there. 
I will say this about the metal retrieve test, dogs that display the intensity over the pipe like the videos I posted here have a much higher % passing rate in the rest of the tests than the dogs who do not display this type of behavior on the metal pipe.
I dont have be a rocket scientist to recognize this simple fact. 
I would also like to point out that the metal retrieve test is not something new, it is actually a very old test and I did not come up with the test. But my income relies on my ability to find these types of dogs for our clients so that is what I must do.


----------



## mike suttle

Brian Batchelder said:


> Just so we're clear, Mr. Suttle is probably referring to a common correlation found in the limited gene pool he deals with. It's not surprising he sees it as cause and effect. It's not.
> 
> If you want to get really fancy, we're talking about dopamine vs. seratonin systems regarding the respective seeking and satiation events. No great reason to get into that, but it does agree with those who might be inclined to say that keeping it simple is a better idea. No great reason to engage in metal idolotry. Sounds like Mr. Suttle is maybe a little naive about what his mentors are telling him.


Luckily I am not smart enough to know what you said, otherwise I may be offended. But if you have better quality dogs available I would sure love to talk to you about buying them, maybe we could find a translator so that you and I could communicate because Im not sure I even speak your language.
I would love to discuss with you futher the "limited gene pool" that I deal with. Since we only see a few thousand dogs per year in Holland, France, Belgium, Germany, Slovak, Finland, Hungary, Denmark, Mexico, the United States, Canada, and even a few in Israel, I am sure you could teach me a lot about bloodlines and where to find the best dogs.
I would also like for you to tell me who you think my "Mentors" were? I have trained with a lot of great trainers in the last 20 years thats for sure, but would be curious to know who you were referring to exactly.


----------



## Jennifer Coulter

mike suttle said:


> I will say this one more time..........the metal retrieve test is nothing special, it is only a very easy way for me to determine how driven a dog really is to retrieve. If he will retrieve things like copper pipes, stainless steel pipes, weedeaters, chainsaws, bicycles, etc. then I know the dog has the desire to retrieve. Then I can move on to the other parts of my test and see how it goes from there.
> I will say this about the metal retrieve test, dogs that display the intensity over the pipe like the videos I posted here have a much higher % passing rate in the rest of the tests than the dogs who do not display this type of behavior on the metal pipe.
> I dont have be a rocket scientist to recognize this simple fact.
> I would also like to point out that the metal retrieve test is not something new, it is actually a very old test and I did not come up with the test. But my income relies on my ability to find these types of dogs for our clients so that is what I must do.


I think that most people get what *you* are looking for now that you have posted the vids. Even if they don't like the test, or find a need for it themselves.

I still think they shouldn't call it a metal *retrieve* test, because in fact the dog scores more points if it doesn't retrieve it, you in fact covet posessiveness over objects.

I know you have explained to me before that you don't mind if they retrieve it (as Ivo did) as long as they are not dropping it. But a dog that just grabs the metal with intensity is what you are looking for, you don't actually care at all about anything related to "retrieving". Am I still correct there?


----------



## mike suttle

Jennifer Coulter said:


> I think that most people get what *you* are looking for now that you have posted the vids. Even if they don't like the test, or find a need for it themselves.
> 
> I still think they shouldn't call it a metal *retrieve* test, because in fact the dog scores more points if it doesn't retrieve it, you in fact covet posessiveness over objects.
> 
> I know you have explained to me before that you don't mind if they retrieve it (as Ivo did) as long as they are not dropping it. But a dog that just grabs the metal with intensity is what you are looking for, you don't actually care at all about anything related to "retrieving". Am I still correct there?


Yes, the term RETRIEVE is misleading. I understand that by definition the word retrieve implies the dog will bring it back to the handler. Weather the dog brings the toy back or not doesnt matter to me (or my clients) at all. That is a behavior that is very easily trained later if anyone cares about it. The thing that matters is if he stays with the metal pipe and never leaves it, he can run with it, carry it, or lay down and try to eat it, but if he ever drops it and walks away from it the test is done.


----------



## Bart Karmich

Because everyone knows that the dog's detection force comes from his Ch'i that flows from the pipe's energy field as determined by the principles of Feng Shui.


----------



## Nancy Jocoy

Sooo Bart, what area of detection work are you expert at? Just curious.


----------



## Nancy Jocoy

And, LOL I missed the whole discussion about that on the other thread....I was out on searches for two days ......


----------



## catherine hardigan

mike suttle said:


> Yes, the term RETRIEVE is misleading. I understand that by definition the word retrieve implies the dog will bring it back to the handler. Weather the dog brings the toy back or not doesnt matter to me (or my clients) at all. That is a behavior that is very easily trained later if anyone cares about it. The thing that matters is if he stays with the metal pipe and never leaves it, he can run with it, carry it, or lay down and try to eat it, but if he ever drops it and walks away from it the test is done.


It's good to see video of what you mean. I think my own dog is the inverse of what you look for: she is probably what most people would think of as a "metal retriever." She has zero interest in chewing on, playing with, or carrying around metal, but she loves to retrieve it. It really doesn't matter what the object is made of, if you throw it she is totally gung-ho about bringing it back to you.

She's not what you're looking for, but it's pretty funny to see her get all excited about retrieving weird stuff.


----------



## Brian Batchelder

Charles Guyer said:


> Seems like someone here is satiating. I would imagine that those "mentors" wear overalls, not lab coats and don't feel the need to satisfy their own obsessive desires by attempting to talk down to folks on the internet. Behaviorism, in practice is not dependent on an in depth knowledge of physiology.


If you disagree with me, I'm sure you can do better than attributing a statement to me which I didn't make, just for the purpose of refuting it.

What I was trying to say was that a lot more people in "overalls" are just as amused that:

#1. Sometimes Mr. Suttle says: "The metal thing is what customs want. I just give them what they want. "

#2. Sometimes Mr. Suttle says: "I truly believe in the metal thing, and it's not my problem that people more experienced than me in detection training just refuse to get it."

#3. Sometimes Mr. Suttle says: "The important thing is genetic drive, in green dogs, so intense they even go for metal." Except, there's also that puppy imprinting onto metal crap he does. 

Is it a coinky-dink that puppies from his place might have better odds of mouthing metal compared to, hypothetically, a dog of equal genetics who has never seen metal in that context? I wonder if customs would think that's kind of disengenuous and missing the point of their requirement. Because I certainly do.


----------



## Bart Karmich

Here's some Customs beagles: http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/unleashed/2008/11/the-khat-dog-sn.html

I have to admit they're far from 90 pounds but the agent in the center could clearly lose more than the difference.


----------



## Bart Karmich

Here's another Customs dog eating her retirement cake. It looks like her handler has retired quite a few times.

http://www.examiner.com/dogs-in-nat...Tc3OmNvcnByYWRpdXNzc286a9J/q6NNN3b5R1laKAARbw==


----------



## Bart Karmich

"I can tell you for 100% sure that US Customs does not use food reward dogs. ATF and USDA however do use food reward dogs. I can also tell you that the worst dog US Customs has will usually work circles around..."

So the cake eating beagle and golden retriever will work circles around any ATF dog because at some point it apparently must have gone for a pipe?


----------



## Jennifer Michelson

I dont know--maybe it has been said before and I missed it....Isnt the 'retrieving' metal really about the fact that the dog has such drive to go after/possess/retrieve something that it will retrieve something unpleasant-like metal? I have had 3 dogs with high drive for the typical toys, and some not so typical--but only one would voluntarily grab and carry around metal. Without training I managed to have him pull a keg out of a pond (I dont like litter!!). I told him 'get it' and 'bring' and with several tries, he pulled it out of the pond. Same pond with my 2nd dog (same dirt bags partying at said pond) a few years later, I asked 2nd dog to get the keg--he happily went after it, bit it and decided he didnt like it in his mouth. Wouldnt pull at it. I assumed he didnt like the feel (he picks up water bottles, sticks, balls, tugs, cell phone, keys etc, but not hard metal). 

I havent tried metal with my newewst dog--he looks somewhat like Mike's dogs but with his ball-might try to find some copper......


----------



## Brian Batchelder

That is correct.


----------



## Guest

wheres that pic of Michael Jackson eating popcorn?


----------



## Gerry Grimwood

Jody Butler said:


> wheres that pic of Michael Jackson eating popcorn?


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


----------



## Brian Batchelder

Jennifer Michelson said:


> I dont know--maybe it has been said before and I missed it....Isnt the 'retrieving' metal really about the fact that the dog has such drive to go after/possess/retrieve something that it will retrieve something unpleasant-like metal?


That's all well and good, but the "drives" associated with finding aren't neccesarily related to whatever Mr. Suttle thinks is so critical after the fact (possessing etc).

Like I already said, he's dealing with certain dogs from a certain region, and it very well may be the case that he'll most often see these traits clumped together. So it's not surprising he thinks one may cause the other.

But it's just not the case. People with more experience know this.


----------



## Tyree Johnson

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oHg5SJYRHA0


----------



## Brian Batchelder

Tyree,

You deserve to be a forum administrator for that.

I bow to you.


----------



## Dave Colborn

Brian Batchelder said:


> That's all well and good, but the "drives" associated with finding aren't neccesarily related to whatever Mr. Suttle thinks is so critical after the fact (possessing etc).
> 
> Like I already said, he's dealing with certain dogs from a certain region, and it very well may be the case that he'll most often see these traits clumped together. So it's not surprising he thinks one may cause the other.
> 
> But it's just not the case. People with more experience know this.



You don't get it. Mike isn't buying dogs to fill his house. He is selling them to clients. They want the dogs to pass a test to get into their training. It's their idea. Do you get it?


----------



## Charles Guyer

Brian Batchelder said:


> If you disagree with me, I'm sure you can do better than attributing a statement to me which I didn't make, just for the purpose of refuting it.
> 
> What I was trying to say was that a lot more people in "overalls" are just as amused that:
> 
> #1. Sometimes Mr. Suttle says: "The metal thing is what customs want. I just give them what they want. "
> 
> #2. Sometimes Mr. Suttle says: "I truly believe in the metal thing, and it's not my problem that people more experienced than me in detection training just refuse to get it."
> 
> #3. Sometimes Mr. Suttle says: "The important thing is genetic drive, in green dogs, so intense they even go for metal." Except, there's also that puppy imprinting onto metal crap he does.
> 
> Is it a coinky-dink that puppies from his place might have better odds of mouthing metal compared to, hypothetically, a dog of equal genetics who has never seen metal in that context? I wonder if customs would think that's kind of disengenuous and missing the point of their requirement. Because I certainly do.


It's not that I disagree with you, it's not that I agree with you. It's that I find it unnecessary, and irritating when people spew intellectual B.S. in order to win an argument. BTW, if I had a limited amount of time to select a potential sniffer dog I would take the one that "retrieved" copper.


----------



## Brian Batchelder

Dave Colborn said:


> You don't get it. Mike isn't buying dogs to fill his house. He is selling them to clients. They want the dogs to pass a test to get into their training. It's their idea. Do you get it?


You've got to be kidding me.

I'm saying the implication is that there's a POINT to the test. We're talking about the spirit of the law, so to speak. I thought that was everything. Isn't Mr. Suttle the one who gets slightly sheepish when people point out the puppy imprinting on metal toys? "Err...yeah...well, customs wants 'em to retrieve metal, so....I gotta do this." That's knowing full well the point of the requirement is to have a dog who doesn't need to be desensitized. Again...the POINT of the requirement.

So, if the customer can't tell the difference between a dog who's been exhaustively imprinted on metal since induction into super-dog school, and a young green kennel dog who is genetically inclined to "retrieve" anything, then... buyer beware?

It strikes me as very dishonest. Slick and shady is possibly a better description.


----------



## Brian Batchelder

Charles Guyer said:


> It's not that I disagree with you, it's not that I agree with you. It's that I find it unnecessary, and irritating when people spew intellectual B.S. in order to win an argument. BTW, if I had a limited amount of time to select a potential sniffer dog I would take the one that "retrieved" copper.


What's going on here is not an argument, and what I'm spewing is not B.S. I can go into as much detail as you want, as simply as you need it.


----------



## Dave Colborn

Brian Batchelder said:


> You've got to be kidding me.
> 
> I'm saying the implication is that there's a POINT to the test. We're talking about the spirit of the law, so to speak. I thought that was everything. Isn't Mr. Suttle the one who gets slightly sheepish when people point out the puppy imprinting on metal toys?
> 
> So, if the customer can't tell the difference between a dog who's been exhaustively imprinted on metal since induction into super-dog school, and a young green kennel dog who is genetically inclined to "retrieve" anything, then... buyer beware?



You would have to ask the people supplying the test if there is a point. 

I haven't ever known Mike to be sheepish. Could you define that or point it out?

The thing is, the people doing the test, test for what they want. They do a number of tests on the dogs, they don't just see if they'll retrieve copper or aluminum. Have you ever watched them test? The thing is, the dog has the ability to do it, or they won't do it when you try to bring that out in them. Force them and it shows. 

Why is it an issue to you how someone wants to test a dog? if they find it easier to train a dog after testing for certain things, more power to them. How would you do it?


----------



## Chad Sloan

I'm far from an expert so take the following with a grain of salt. I don't think copper dogs are the end all be all for detection work, but I would hope anyone testing a dog on it can tell the difference between one that is naturally out for it compared to one which has been carefully molded to have a taste for it.


----------



## Brian Batchelder

I'd fully respect the explanation that customs is simply going to get what it asks for, regardless of the logic behind it. Fine. Government can be rigid and arbitrary.

The explanations from Mike, however, have been more scattered than that. It seems to have encompassed a range of personal feelings. When those feelings land on the side of being a personal advocate, he can't seem to really break it down to a degree which explains the seemingly bona-fide contrary experiences of other people in the field.

Again, it could chalked up as simply as saying: "Listen, this is the requirement my customer has. Don't ask me!"

But people do ask him, and he tries to give an explanation as to why it is, in fact, objectively true and right. Not just that it's the odd-ball request of one customer which he has nothing to do with.

It seems to me that it's something he does for the sake of selling dogs (fine), it works out reasonably well for all involved (fine), but he really can't be bothered to find answers to satisfy the inquiries from other seemingly knowledgable and more experienced people in the scent detection field.

So what the hell is MY point?

My point is that one might get the impression, from a great salesman, that if this isn't some universal superlative sign of a good detection dog, that it neccesarily should be.

That does not seem to be the case.

And as far as I can tell, this isn't Loganhaus Forum.


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

Damn Mike, it got this crazy in three pages.


----------



## charles Turner

mike suttle said:


> luckily i am not smart enough to know what you said, otherwise i may be offended. But if you have better quality dogs available i would sure love to talk to you about buying them, maybe we could find a translator so that you and i could communicate because im not sure i even speak your language.
> I would love to discuss with you futher the "limited gene pool" that i deal with. Since we only see a few thousand dogs per year in holland, france, belgium, germany, slovak, finland, hungary, denmark, mexico, the united states, canada, and even a few in israel, i am sure you could teach me a lot about bloodlines and where to find the best dogs.
> I would also like for you to tell me who you think my "mentors" were? I have trained with a lot of great trainers in the last 20 years thats for sure, but would be curious to know who you were referring to exactly.


wtf is that guy talking about, lol.


----------



## Guest

Brian Batchelder said:


> I'd fully respect the explanation that customs is simply going to get what it asks for, regardless of the logic behind it. Fine. Government can be rigid and arbitrary.
> 
> The explanations from Mike, however, have been more scattered than that. It seems to have encompassed a range of personal feelings. When those feelings land on the side of being a personal advocate, he can't seem to really break it down to a degree which explains the seemingly bona-fide contrary experiences of other people in the field.
> 
> Again, it could chalked up as simply as saying: "Listen, this is the requirement my customer has. Don't ask me!"
> 
> But people do ask him, and he tries to give an explanation as to why it is, in fact, objectively true and right. Not just that it's the odd-ball request of one customer which he has nothing to do with.
> 
> It seems to me that it's something he does for the sake of selling dogs (fine), it works out reasonably well for all involved (fine), but he really can't be bothered to find answers to satisfy the inquiries from other seemingly knowledgable and more experienced people in the scent detection field.
> 
> So what the hell is MY point?
> 
> My point is that one might get the impression, from a great salesman, that if this isn't some universal superlative sign of a good detection dog, that it neccesarily should be.
> 
> That does not seem to be the case.
> 
> And as far as I can tell, this isn't Loganhaus Forum.


Defintion of a GOOD detection dog could be another 15 pages....regardless of reward or anything else for that matter.....


----------



## Gerry Grimwood

Brian Batchelder said:


> So what the hell is MY point?
> 
> My point is that one might get the impression, from a great salesman, that if this isn't some universal superlative sign of a good detection dog, that it neccesarily should be.
> 
> That does not seem to be the case.
> 
> And as far as I can tell, this isn't Loganhaus Forum.


It's not the Batchelder forum either, make your point..shut up and see where it goes.


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

Suttle said he has worked with "great" trainers for 20 years ?? Oh boy. Stop lying. ](*,) ](*,) ](*,) ](*,)


----------



## charles Turner

Brian Batchelder said:


> You've got to be kidding me.
> 
> I'm saying the implication is that there's a POINT to the test. We're talking about the spirit of the law, so to speak. I thought that was everything. Isn't Mr. Suttle the one who gets slightly sheepish when people point out the puppy imprinting on metal toys? "Err...yeah...well, customs wants 'em to retrieve metal, so....I gotta do this." That's knowing full well the point of the requirement is to have a dog who doesn't need to be desensitized. Again...the POINT of the requirement.
> 
> So, if the customer can't tell the difference between a dog who's been exhaustively imprinted on metal since induction into super-dog school, and a young green kennel dog who is genetically inclined to "retrieve" anything, then... buyer beware?
> 
> It strikes me as very dishonest. Slick and shady is possibly a better description.


 You can train/imprint your super star until the cows come home, it won't pick up metal unless he has the will to do so, well maybe he will pick ip up, but to want and desire the object, is a whole other ballgame.
I can tell you that I have taken dogs to Mike to test, that I thought, MIGHT make the cut, one, a zidane son, that is very successful at his current state poice detachment, Mike failed the dog, not because he wanted to, its pretty simple, agencies require certain traits, wether we agree or not, those are the facts, I'm sure Mike would not complain, if the dog just had to shake hands and speak.
I think your pointing the finger in the wrong direction, Mike does not fabricate these traits desired by GOV. Agencies, he also washes out his own green dogs that don't have these traits, even though he goes above and beyond to reach these goals. I know I don't have to defend Mike here, I just thought I would share a personal expierence I had, taking what I thought to be a pretty nice dog, that did not make his cut.


----------



## Charles Lerner

Mike,
I wanted to thank you for posting these videos you made of some of your dogs! You didn't have to do this for the people who had questions, but a video is an easier way to help others than just a written description, so that was a very helpful thing you did. 
As for the self-aggrandizing fellow who is attempting to "call you out", well....he needs a hug from someone who cares about him.
I, for one, "get it". 
Looking forward to your next series of video clips, if you're wondering if anyone actually appreciated these!
Chuck


----------



## Kelly Johnson

I also greatly appreciate the videos you post! Looking foward to the next! Thanks...


----------



## Charles Guyer

Brian Batchelder said:


> What's going on here is not an argument, and what I'm spewing is not B.S. I can go into as much detail as you want, as simply as you need it.


Well, please. As simply as you can explain it. What is your objective? I see validity in the test. Tell me why you do not. What would you do to supplant this test?


----------



## mike suttle

Jeff Oehlsen said:


> Suttle said he has worked with "great" trainers for 20 years ?? Oh boy. Stop lying. ](*,) ](*,) ](*,) ](*,)


OK, so maybe 20 years ago when I started the trainers I worked with then were not "great" by true definition, but they were not bad either. I should have said that in the past 20 years I have had the chance to work with some great trainers.


----------



## Chris McDonald

Jennifer Michelson said:


> Without training I managed to have him pull a keg out of a pond (I dont like litter!!). I told him 'get it' and 'bring' and with several tries, he pulled it out of the pond. Same pond with my 2nd dog (same dirt bags partying at said pond) a few years later, I asked 2nd dog to get the keg--he happily went after it, bit it and decided he didnt like it in his mouth. Wouldnt pull at it. I assumed he didnt like the feel (he picks up water bottles, sticks, balls, tugs, cell phone, keys etc, but not hard metal).
> 
> Ah, I’d like my keg back?


----------



## Timothy Stacy

Brian B. has a point. I just took some video of Vitor's first day with copper straight out the truck. I could easily make him more "possessive" of it by choking him and letting him go blah blah blah and then go into high electric until his mouth touches it and if he drops it more electric, so he will possess it. Bring him to customs and say see the dog just loves this copper shit and he won't let go. Uploading video now.


----------



## Charles Guyer

"So, if the customer can't tell the difference between a dog who's been exhaustively imprinted on metal since induction into super-dog school, and a young green kennel dog who is genetically inclined to "retrieve" anything, then... buyer beware?"

So, what are you implying? Where I come from you might as well call him a thief and a liar. Now that's an insult.


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

All Marines fall under the catagory of thief and lier.

All Marines must be well versed pussy thieves. 

All Marines must be great liers, as no one wants to hear the real version of what happened. Lies make the story better. No one wants to hear about the plain chubby bitch you got drunk enough to ****, we want to hear the lie about how hot she was with all the proper details in place.


----------



## Timothy Stacy

I think you are missing the point. It is not some super genetic trait, a dog that is imprinted on metal at an early age has a much better chance of satisfying the test requirements. If a dog has all the other qualities but won't pick up copper do you think forcing it would be bad?


----------



## Joby Becker

Timothy Stacy said:


> Brian B. has a point. I just took some video of Vitor's first day with copper straight out the truck. I could easily make him more "possessive" of it by choking him and letting him go blah blah blah and then go into high electric until his mouth touches it and if he drops it more electric, so he will possess it. Bring him to customs and say see the dog just loves this copper shit and he won't let go. Uploading video now.


I doubt you would have to choke and put electric on Vitor to make him want to possess some specific item, I imagine some teasing with it, and tossing it, would most likely do the trick...forgive me if I am wrong.


----------



## Guest

Charles Guyer said:


> "So, if the customer can't tell the difference between a dog who's been exhaustively imprinted on metal since induction into super-dog school, and a young green kennel dog who is genetically inclined to "retrieve" anything, then... buyer beware?"
> 
> So, what are you implying? Where I come from you might as well call him a thief and a liar. Now that's an insult.


 
but the end result, regardless of how the dog got there, built or natural, that really doesn't matter now does it? If you are selecting the dog for your line of work and it passes, does it matter if he was a natural or imprinted/trained?


----------



## Timothy Stacy

Joby Becker said:


> I doubt you would have to choke and put electric on Vitor to make him want to possess some specific item, I imagine some teasing with it, and tossing it, would most likely do the trick...forgive me if I am wrong.


He did drop it once but never left it but i was playing 2 pipes with him to get him back. When you see the video you'll see that if I played with him for a couple weeks with it how I could make him "crazy for it". I did not spin him up for it at all and he did see copper at about 12 weeks old but that was a year ago and I really had no use for it.i


----------



## Timothy Stacy

Jody Butler said:


> but the end result, regardless of how the dog got there, built or natural, that really doesn't matter now does it? If you are selecting the dog for your line of work and it passes, does it matter if he was a natural or imprinted/trained?


But there is no gene for this metal retrieving, I did the study in my tool shed.


----------



## Gerry Grimwood

I don't think it's hard to make a dog crazy for something or anything, you just limit the dog to that one thing you're targetting to get the picture you need.

I'm probably wrong, but I would like to see a totally green dog in a vid given the choice between a peice of pipe or a rubber ball or a tug..all laying on the ground and the choice left up to the dog.


----------



## Joby Becker

All this ties nicely into the thread about the stake out testing...

If someone is going to present dogs for testing, whether it be presenting to a vendor or an end user, I would imagine they would want to have the genetically best dogs possible for passing those tests, and would also work with those dogs to get them ready to present for testing, if they wanted to increase their chances of success...

I do not really get the point of all these posts, unless they are just to give Mike some shit, then I understand them..

If I was going to take a dog somewhere to be evaluated for purchase, you could be damn sure I would try make sure it would be presentable for testing...otherwise why waste yours and everyone else's time and money?

If someone tells me they are looking for a specific type of dog, I do not refer them to everyone I know under the sun, that has an available dog, and have their time wasted away looking at unsuitable dogs..

look at a range of testing objects from Metal Pipe to Ball. Different people use a different object for testing, that is the bottom line.

I would imagine that any dog that can pass this type of testing with a metal pipe, could also pass with PVC, or wood, or a tug, or a rag, or a ball if if exposed to them.

I would also imagine that most dogs that would pass this testing with a ball, could not pass if tested on metal pipe, even if they were exposed to them.

If it is that easy, instead of complaining about the selection process and claiming that Mike is dishonest and shady, why not sell some dogs to him.

It is an easy $6000.00 per dog. $6000.00 for a 12 month old dog that does not have any obedience, and has no training put into bitework, that sounds like a good price to me.. 

The biggest vendor in my area just bought 2 "green" dogs from a friend for the price Mike is paying for 1 dog. 

It is obviously not that easy....unless you have the right dogs for it.


----------



## Joby Becker

Timothy Stacy said:


> He did drop it once but never left it but i was playing 2 pipes with him to get him back. When you see the video you'll see that if I played with him for a couple weeks with it how I could make him "crazy for it". I did not spin him up for it at all and he did see copper at about 12 weeks old but that was a year ago and I really had no use for it.i


would you say that vitor is an average (run of the mill quality) dog?


----------



## Gerry Grimwood

Actually Joby it's fairly easy to offer any amount of money for a dog "if" it passes an individuals requirements.

The actual requirements have never been posted so it's all subjective.


----------



## Timothy Stacy

Gerry Grimwood said:


> I don't think it's hard to make a dog crazy for something or anything, you just limit the dog to that one thing you're targetting to get the picture you need.
> 
> I'm probably wrong, but I would like to see a totally green dog in a vid given the choice between a peice of pipe or a rubber ball or a tug..all laying on the ground and the choice left up to the dog.


No. I think you are right Gerry. The metal thing to me is just a high drive dog that his owner imprints on metal instead of a toy, hell it is there "toy". Just like Mike said the dogs in his video have seen it 3 times but like the bench press in high school rule in reverse. If someone says they can do 260 in conversation you should always subtract 10 or 15. In turn if someone says the dog has only seen something once or twice you can add a few more to that. Some people put keys in with the litter and play with the litter mates with it, does that count?

Pups at the age in that video look good but they should if that is their toy and have only came out a few times to that stuff. Excitement gets enhanced through solitary confinement, no obedience, and a few times to play copper.


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

Oh that crafty Suttle, offering money for dogs. LOOK OUT ! ! ! He is gonna GET YOU ! ! ! ! 

Ok, that is my part of the 30 page nightmare.


----------



## Timothy Stacy

Joby Becker said:


> I do not really get the point of all these posts, unless they are just to give Mike some shit, then I understand them..


It is fun  and Mike takes it well.


----------



## Timothy Stacy

Jeff Oehlsen said:


> Oh that crafty Suttle, offering money for dogs. LOOK OUT ! ! ! He is gonna GET YOU ! ! ! !
> 
> Ok, that is my part of the 30 page nightmare.


I have images of so many test that once you get there he will find something to say the dog isn't good enough and offer you 2500 for the dog for your troubles going out there.


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

That is the going rate down here. LOL


----------



## Timothy Stacy

Jeff Oehlsen said:


> That is the going rate down here. LOL


Not at the air force base.


----------



## Gerry Grimwood

Timothy Stacy said:


> I have images of so many test that once you get there he will find something to say the dog isn't good enough and offer you 2500 for the dog for your troubles going out there.


Or :lol:, he may suggest you send the dog at your expense and he will decide if he will pay anything for it.

After watching vids of Ivo being bounced off the walls and slammed into bookcases while appearing to be in a coma I think I may have shot a $6,000 dog.


----------



## Timothy Stacy

Vitor seen copper "once" before
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G73F4Y-4tN0


----------



## Joby Becker

Gerry Grimwood said:


> Actually Joby it's fairly easy to offer any amount of money for a dog "if" it passes an individuals requirements.
> 
> The actual requirements have never been posted so it's all subjective.


I know that Mike is seriously looking for dogs to buy. I doubt he is posting about wanting dogs, for any other reason, than to buy dogs. 

I do think that he was attempting to actually show the actual requirements, and he only made it through the first portion, and look at all the shit that is flying over that...



mike suttle said:


> *....After the dog does this part of the test then I will continue to test him.
> I will try to get short video clips of what I look for in each area of our detection dog selection test....*


I know Mike to be a very humble and honest guy, what do you think the reason for his posting is?

I would like to see the vids of all the testing portions, I hope that he will still post them, even with all the shit he is gonna get for it...


----------



## Ang Cangiano

Gerry Grimwood said:


> I don't think it's hard to make a dog crazy for something or anything, you just limit the dog to that one thing you're targetting to get the picture you need.
> 
> I'm probably wrong, but I would like to see a totally green dog in a vid given the choice between a piece of pipe or a rubber ball or a tug..all laying on the ground and the choice left up to the dog.


Gerry, not exactly what you're asking for, as the toys aren't stationary, but this is a female (Ex daughter) and this was the first time she's played with anything metal (that's why it was recorded). You can see on a couple of occasions she goes for the metal pipe over another toy. Just saying.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LScpevD99vM

Ang


----------



## Joby Becker

Timothy Stacy said:


> Vitor seen copper "once" before
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G73F4Y-4tN0


That is good stuff right there, Thanks for posting...


----------



## Timothy Stacy

Joby Becker said:


> That is good stuff right there, Thanks for posting...


You think so? or are you pulling my leg? I did some ball searches at 4 to 5 months old and that is it.


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

Did you really just write this ??

Quote: Vitor seen copper "once" before

SEEN ?? WTF ? Spelling, sure, but C'MON.











30 pages is going to be a stretch.


----------



## Timothy Stacy

ok sawz











30 pages is going to be a stretch.[/QUOTE]


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

Maybe you go with seens ??


----------



## Kelly Johnson

Nice dog Timothy!


----------



## Timothy Stacy

Jeff Oehlsen said:


> Maybe you go with seens ??


Yeah that's "gooder":grin:


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

Goodun ! ! ! ! !


----------



## Brian Batchelder

Charles Guyer said:


> Well, please. As simply as you can explain it. What is your objective? I see validity in the test. Tell me why you do not. What would you do to supplant this test?


Good questions.

My objective is to not to dispute what customs requires. If that's the standard, that's the standard. 

If otherwise sound hunters are imprinted onto mouthing metal for the sake of one technicality in a selection test, I certainly don't have an issue with that either. At the moment of truth, no matter what the training is, the quality of the hunting is the point of contention. There's no faking that.

What I do have an issue with is the insistance on the objective truth and validity of how important the end-game is. What specifically the dog does with copper. The "possessiveness" and hard biting etc. It's neither here nor there. It's a completely seperate state of mind which has nothing to do with the affective state a dog is in (or any animal) while it's hunting, searching, foraging, whatever. 

He gets certain dogs from a certian place with a pedigree based on certain common selection pressures (which has more than just detection at stake). I'm not surprised certain things come as a package-deal, so to speak. 

But for the sake of understanding the meat-and-potatos of why ANY given dog could or couldn't be an effective scent-detection prospect, it's important to get past the bullshit of how important being possessive of metal is!

It would appear that customs also has retrievers. I daresay possessiveness and hard-biting is the polar opposite of what retrievers are supposed to do! Am I wrong on that? A retriever. 

And here's Suttle implying this specific manipulation of a specific substance is so critical to search dogs IN GENERAL. 

Not that it's just an odd-ball standard of a big customer whom he tries to accomodate (fine)...but that it is THE GOLD STANDARD for which all others are posers and wanna-bes.

To summarize:
It's not my business to change what customs wants. I don't care.
It's not my business to change how Mike gets dogs to pass their tests. I don't care.
It is my business when supersitious habits are then being passed off as universal truths. Especially when the messenger just happens to be for-profit.


----------



## Jim Nash

Brian Batchelder said:


> Good questions.
> 
> My objective is to not to dispute what customs requires. If that's the standard, that's the standard.
> 
> If otherwise sound hunters are imprinted onto mouthing metal for the sake of one technicality in a selection test, I certainly don't have an issue with that either. At the moment of truth, no matter what the training is, the quality of the hunting is the point of contention. There's no faking that.
> 
> What I do have an issue with is the insistance on the objective truth and validity of how important the end-game is. What specifically the dog does with copper. The "possessiveness" and hard biting etc. It's neither here nor there. It's a completely seperate state of mind which has nothing to do with the affective state a dog is in (or any animal) while it's hunting, searching, foraging, whatever.
> 
> He gets certain dogs from a certian place with a pedigree based on certain common selection pressures (which has more than just detection at stake). I'm not surprised certain things come as a package-deal, so to speak.
> 
> But for the sake of understanding the meat-and-potatos of why ANY given dog could or couldn't be an effective scent-detection prospect, it's important to get past the bullshit of how important being possessive of metal is!
> 
> It would appear that customs also has retrievers. I daresay possessiveness and hard-biting is the polar opposite of what retrievers are supposed to do! Am I wrong on that? A retriever.
> 
> And here's Suttle implying this specific manipulation of a specific substance is so critical to search dogs IN GENERAL.
> 
> Not that it's just an odd-ball standard of a big customer whom he tries to accomodate (fine)...but that it is THE GOLD STANDARD for which all others are posers and wanna-bes.
> 
> To summarize:
> It's not my business to change what customs wants. I don't care.
> It's not my business to change how Mike gets dogs to pass their tests. I don't care.
> It is my business when supersitious habits are then being passed off as universal truths. Especially when the messenger just happens to be for-profit.


Brian have you trained any detector dogs . 

What I see Mike doing in the 3 phases he has shown is alot like what most detector trainers test for except he uses cooper . Most look for a dog that wants to retrieve , searches for the object of the retrieve for a good duration of time and from my experiance I have found a certain amount of possessiveness in prospects have made better detector dogs but certainly isn't entirely necessary . 

Huntng is the most important thing , if it don't hunt it isn't going to find anything . I don't think Mike is saying or testing otherwise . The desire to retrieve and posses metal is just part of it . 


In regards to Retrievers . I have seen a big change in the quality of retrievers as detector prospects at least in my area of the country . When I first started 14 years ago they too had (along with a high desire to retrieve) a certain amount of possessiveness . Even the hunting Labs I trained had that . It took a little work to get them to retrieve with a sft mouth and give it up readily . Nowadays many just don't want the bird that much . Very soft mouths .

Nowadays it's tougher getting good retreiver prospects and IMO it's because of the more focus breeders are putting into breeding a retriever for competition in field trials . They now breed for a dog with a soft mouth . Very little to no possesiveness . 

These dogs suck for detector training . I never thought I would see the number of retrievers wash in detector work that I do today . Generally speaking I have seen VERY few retrievers with a low degree of possesiveness make it as a detector dog . They usually fold in training . The desire to work for the reward just usually isn't there because of it . 

Now when I was a trainer I had slightly different things I looked for then Mike but most of us do . I don't like the degree of possesiveness Mike and his customers like but certainly wouldn't pass on a dog like that . There is a certain degree of possesiveness that just becomes a pain in training . I also like some others think the requirement to retrieve metal is a bit silly . But it doesn't make that dog Mike picks a bad prospect as a detector dog . Mike still looks for the same traits most do in detector dogs and tests for those traits in a simliar manner , just wants it with metal . I personally think he is passing on great prospects that don't but that just leaves more out prospects out there for us if we need it . 

I for the life of me don't know why what Mike is doing is such a big deal . Even the metal thing isn't that big a deal , just a bit silly IMO .


----------



## Dave Martin

Timothy Stacy said:


> Vitor seen copper "once" before
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G73F4Y-4tN0


 
All bullshit aside.. Hell of a dog, Tim. I'd be very interested in seeing more work with him in the future - definitely a keeper.


----------



## Brian Batchelder

> I for the life of me don't know why what Mike is doing is such a big deal .


I couldn't have put it better myself.


----------



## Jim Nash

Dave Martin said:


> All bullshit aside.. Hell of a dog, Tim. I'd be very interested in seeing more work with him in the future - definitely a keeper.


Ditto . He's a fun dog to watch .


----------



## Charles Guyer

Brian Batchelder said:


> Good questions.
> 
> My objective is to not to dispute what customs requires. If that's the standard, that's the standard.
> 
> If otherwise sound hunters are imprinted onto mouthing metal for the sake of one technicality in a selection test, I certainly don't have an issue with that either. At the moment of truth, no matter what the training is, the quality of the hunting is the point of contention. There's no faking that.
> 
> What I do have an issue with is the insistance on the objective truth and validity of how important the end-game is. What specifically the dog does with copper. The "possessiveness" and hard biting etc. It's neither here nor there. It's a completely seperate state of mind which has nothing to do with the affective state a dog is in (or any animal) while it's hunting, searching, foraging, whatever.
> 
> He gets certain dogs from a certian place with a pedigree based on certain common selection pressures (which has more than just detection at stake). I'm not surprised certain things come as a package-deal, so to speak.
> 
> But for the sake of understanding the meat-and-potatos of why ANY given dog could or couldn't be an effective scent-detection prospect, it's important to get past the bullshit of how important being possessive of metal is!
> 
> It would appear that customs also has retrievers. I daresay possessiveness and hard-biting is the polar opposite of what retrievers are supposed to do! Am I wrong on that? A retriever.
> 
> And here's Suttle implying this specific manipulation of a specific substance is so critical to search dogs IN GENERAL.
> 
> Not that it's just an odd-ball standard of a big customer whom he tries to accomodate (fine)...but that it is THE GOLD STANDARD for which all others are posers and wanna-bes.
> 
> To summarize:
> It's not my business to change what customs wants. I don't care.
> It's not my business to change how Mike gets dogs to pass their tests. I don't care.
> It is my business when supersitious habits are then being passed off as universal truths. Especially when the messenger just happens to be for-profit.


Duly noted.


----------



## Pete Stevens

Jim could not be more right about the quality of retriever out there. Most are pet quality and the traits needed for detection work, or any work for that matter, have been bred out to make pets that don't destroy mama's flower beds. My current dog is a retriever. She is a good dog and toys are her thing. But she is out of the norm as of late. I'm even seeing it in the Malinios community and Lord knows the GSD has been plagued by pet quality breeding. Its about money making breeders who pass on crappy genes. Please God, keep them away from my Dutchies!


----------



## Christopher Jones

Mike didnt invent metal retrieving as a selection test for detection dogs, nor did US Customs. The German and Dutch Police have used this for testing for over a decade that I know of. 
I was told the switch to copper was used as it was a softer yellow metal that didnt damage the dogs teeth like harder metals like mild steel or stainless did.
But its pretty simple I guess. If you have a dog that meets Mike's, or his clients, requirements he will buy it from you. If you dont them maybe some other vendor will buy it off you that has a different set of criteria.


----------



## Chris McDonald

I got two questions 
1. what came first metal or the detector dog? 
2. if we can train our wives to retrieve copper will you give us $6,000 to take them off our hands?


----------



## Christopher Jones

Chris McDonald said:


> I got two questions
> if we can train our wives to retrieve copper will you give us $6,000 to take them off our hands?


 Best quote of the thread there....


----------



## Gerry Grimwood

Chris McDonald said:


> 2. if we can train our wives to retrieve copper will you give us $6,000 to take them off our hands?


I don't think that price can be guaranteed but, come on down..bring the wife and we'll dicker.


----------



## LEE SCOTESE

Jeff Oehlsen said:


> Choking a dog off an object "builds" the desire to keep it. Your training is showing ! ! ! HA HA


Is this true, or is it sarcasm? I don't do security stuff, so I usually try to avoid agitating my dog. Just curious if it would be a way to build some kind of toy drive...


----------



## todd pavlus

LEE SCOTESE said:


> Is this true, or is it sarcasm? I don't do security stuff, so I usually try to avoid agitating my dog. Just curious if it would be a way to build some kind of toy drive...


This is true


----------



## Brian Batchelder

It builds frustration to hang onto the object in question. What people forget is that you can't always assume much more than that.

The series of assumptions go like this:

-Choke a dog off, and he becomes immediately frustrated that he's losing an item representing prey. You let him go in the midst of the frustration and he charges at it even harder, graps it more vigorously, and is resolved to hold onto it tighter next time. Very useful in Schutzhund (particularly) where you want a grip super-glued to something. Or just bitework in general.

-However, think long and hard about how well a conditioned compulsion to simply hold something translates into epic searching ability. Why, Schutzhund *should *be the go-to venue for search dogs. Look how long they hold that darn sleeve. All you gotta do is put in the same work for an item which lends itself to assocating with a useful scent. In actuality, it just doesn't work like that. The act of seeking and satisfaction derived from the _completion of seeking_ are seperate events in an animals mind.

I mean, have you ever noticed how some dogs search like mad and then when they reach their goal they just gradually fizzle out and lose interest? A hound on human. He doesn't get to bite the person. He doesn't get to eat the person. The hound has the proclivity for the hunt. You follow him to the quarry. You don't need to condition a variety of alerts. 

So why wouldn't a hound be suited for, say, dope work?

Well, you do need an affective state wherein the dog can be rewarded for a vigorous alert. It's not enough to enjoy looking for, he does need to want it. However, it's not terribly important what "it" is, as long as it's practical.

Suttle says: "Imagine how much better a dog will search for a toy, if he can search for something distasteful like metal."

Point officially missed. I gaurantee you his dogs search just as well for tennis balls as they do for pipes. And by that I mean, about the same. Gauranteed. The vigor of the final alert? _Maybe_ a different story. I gaurantee it has no bearing on the duration of a hunt. Same state of mind. They aren't at the goal yet, so it doesn't matter. They'll deal with it when they get there. That may differ.

Back to choke-offs. So, I'm interested in selling you a dog. I maintain that a critical part of the evaluation process is this damned possessiveness. Look at Schutzhund. That's probably the easiest part of the process to manipulate. Oh, by the way, I got it in spades. I can even even downplay how much of those choke-offs I've engaged in and tell you it's all natural.

Suttle would counter: "Well, mine ARE natural."

Ok, so never do a choke-off ever again. You're just clouding things. For God's sake, he's a breeder and supplier of _green _dogs.


----------



## Brian Batchelder

So enough with the gimmick. Show just the hunting. Leave the metal stuff to the agency who actually cares about that final step of limited utility.

I'd really love for you, Mr. Suttle, to tame your raging boner over this.

By the way, your dogs hunt fantastically. I don't think I mentioned that yet. :grin:

Just stop patting yourself on the back over the stupidest part of the process.


----------



## Brian Batchelder

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=twUQ-HE8IIM

"You build no drive. He just walks up to it and picks it up off the ground. Once he's got it, how much does he want to keep it..."

*AS* HE'S BEING CHOKED OFF and teased a little.

Love it.


----------



## Brian Batchelder

Maybe Mike is so new to this, and he has such good help with the importing niche (enough to satisfy his customrs), he honestly doesn't even know what constitutes "drive building", and therefore thinks nothing of telling the public one thing while clearly doing another. He might as well have said the grass underfoot is a trippy shade of purple. Sure enough, some people would probably say: "Well, now that you mention it with such authority..."

Feats of focus and grip tenacity are usually performed by lifting the tail. Just as a future reference.


----------



## kendell jones

you realize you're the only one who's still posting about this, right?


----------



## Brian Batchelder

I did until you did.

Wait...

Are you a Jedi too??


----------



## todd pavlus

Brian Batchelder said:


> I did until you did.
> 
> Wait...
> 
> Are you a Jedi too??


:lol::lol::lol:

*"Call me slow,* but I just got my own internet connection several years ago, my head is kind of spinning regarding...everything.I guess I'm still trying to narrow down what a lot these basic words mean before I get started myself in one of these sports.*I have very little to add. Just a lurker.*Thanks.Brian"


My how things have changed for you in less than a month. You will learn alot more when you actually start working a dog. Do you even have a dog yet??

Is this guy another fellatio imposter???


----------



## Timothy Stacy

I'm still here, reading and posting. I'm enjoying this


----------



## Brian Batchelder

I am a fast reader, but I don't have a dog. The strangest part of this is how infrequently people are telling me I'm wrong. 

Believe me, I'm as confused as anyone.


----------



## Timothy Stacy

Brian Batchelder said:


> I am a fast reader, but I don't have a dog. The strangest part of this is how infrequently people are telling me I'm wrong.
> 
> Believe me, I'm as confused as anyone.


Hang in there you got some valid points. Best being that it's about the search not the possessiveness


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

Brian, have you read any of Jerry Bradshaw's work ?? 

By the way, don't stop posting because someones dreams are being shattered and they feel the need to control what you say.

You say things way better than I do, that is what was in my head when I posted, but I cannot write like that, or verbalize it that well. Very good !

I like Suttle, and he is a brother Marine. But I love busting his balls here and there. It is not like his dogs suck, so he BETTER not be taking it seriously.

And neither should anyone else. If you have a dog that after seeing this that you are pretty sure can do this work, then take a look at this : http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/lab/for...ct2008/standards/2008_10_standards03_app3.htm

Then if you feel that the dog will still do it, go and get your 6000 and get another pup to raise. Especially those that have no sport clubs, or just dabble in sport. 

Think of it as your patriotic duty. No, I am not joking. I have a couple dogs that search as well or better than the dog you see, but I would have to train the copper shit. Pretty sure I don't want a dog that nuts. LOL


----------



## Brian Batchelder

In the spirit of complete transparency, frankly, I don't even _like_ dogs.


----------



## Howard Knauf

Timothy Stacy said:


> Hang in there you got some valid points. Best being that it's about the search not the possessiveness



Unlike the chicken/egg argument, you CAN have one without the other.

Insane possesiveness is a pita to deal with but, working a bomb dog I'd want the insane hunt drive and the desire for the dog to stay at the target (an opportunity to possess the item in the dogs mind) instead of just having them go "OK, found it, close enough, time to move on". 

Whereas the actual "Hunt" may appease some dogs entirely, the hunt has a purpose. The end result is the reward. Varying degrees of satisfaction are obtained depending on the individual dog.


----------



## Jennifer Coulter

kendell jones said:


> you realize you're the only one who's still posting about this, right?


Anytime someone is into talking about detection/search dog stuff...I am totally stoked. 

I am thankful for these non bitework threads now and again, and pleased that they provoke heated discussions that make me do some thinking and learning.


----------



## Jennifer Coulter

Howard Knauf said:


> Unlike the chicken/egg argument, you CAN have one without the other.
> 
> Insane possesiveness is a pita to deal with but, working a bomb dog I'd want the insane hunt drive and the desire for the dog to stay at the target (an opportunity to possess the item in the dogs mind) instead of just having them go "OK, found it, close enough, time to move on".
> 
> Whereas the actual "Hunt" may appease some dogs entirely, the hunt has a purpose. The end result is the reward. Varying degrees of satisfaction are obtained depending on the individual dog.


Agreed that I want a dog that really WANTS the reward...I do NOT want the "close enough move on" kind thing at all. MUST MUST stay at the target, and for us must actually actively pursue the target by digging towards the source.

That said, I also don't encourage a dog to work for simple posession. Posession must be part of it, and the dog must have it, but I like to turn that into interaction/fight with the quarry or handler. This is ideal in my profile anyways. My rewards are "out there" not on me. There are some logistical reasons this works well too that are tough to get into here.

Like Ivo seems to do, when the dog earns the reward, I want it to retrieve it and play with it with the handler or play with quarry. This is very reinforcing too, it is kind of like getting a bite/mini fight at the end of a search.

I train towards that from the time I have a pup. I don't encourage, eff off, run away posessivness, I encourage/teach the dog to bring stuff to me to play. I teach an out early too. That said, I still want the dog to want to play, tug, fight...not just drop the toy or get bored.

If teaching an out early (as oppose to choking the dog off), or not encouraging eff off possession means that the dog drops rewards or is not that into finding them.....I think they didn't have the drive I personally wanted in the first place.

I am not at all saying that others should do this or that it would work for other profiles, just thought I would share how rewards and posession work best for me in my particular profile.

Of course I am still new in the search dog world and I reserve the right to be change my mind many times over my careerO And none of this has anything to do with copper pipes, so I am sorry.


----------



## Jennifer Coulter

Howard Knauf said:


> Unlike the chicken/egg argument, you CAN have one without the other.


True dat. I have seen it. I mean usually they do go together, but not always. I worked once with a mal that had amazing prey drive and LOVED to fill its mouth and hold on. In trying to teach the dog to out by waiting it out it was a marathon.

More posession for the reward than any other dog there. But...as soon as you got past runaway kind of stages, put in any kind of delay, and the dog just thought "ah, must of vanished into thin air"..."I will smell this flower". Crazy. Do some kind of pop up and "BAM" dog was a freight train. But for what ever reason...no hunty.... I mean you could take it out for a walk and it would find stuff, it wasn't really passing up odor, but really wasn't searching independently either, just comming accross it if you know what I mean.

I would love to hear from guys like Mike if they ever see that kind of thing? Dog's that are great at the "copper test", but not good hunters when you move on? I mean it must happen sometimes. Otherwise you would only have to do the copper test and presto magico..you would know they would pass the next ones.


----------



## Brian Batchelder

Wh-wha-whaaaat? You didn't test for metal, you didn't do the ritual choking, and you taught your dog an early out?

Some might call that insane.

The implications are dangerous. Careful, lady.


----------



## mike suttle

Hey folks, sorry I have been away from the computer for the past 24 hours...........looks like I missed a lot! LOL
I did not go back and read all of the posts, but I would like to point out a few things here.

1) this possesiveness test is only one part of the test, it by itself means nothing to me, but when coupled with the rest of the tests it lets me see just how much the dog really wants to have the chance to have the toy.

2) nowhere, EVER did I say that possesiveness is more important than hunt drive. NEVER, EVER did I say that...........EVER!

3) If a dog is driven to posses and covet something very uncomfortable in their mouth without any human interaction, it is safe to bet that if he gets something softer and more comfortable in his mouth, and he gets to interact with the handler and play/tug/fight over that toy then he will become even more driven to find it and start that game with the handler.

4)all of these dogs in this video except Ivo are totally green dogs, never trained to bring anything back to the handler for a game. That behavior (like you see with Ivo, and almost any other trained dog) can easily be trained later if the end user requires it. My biggest customer does not care about it so I dont worry about that.

5) I DID NOT WRITE THIS TEST..........I have only been given the task to find dogs that have these drive and character traits. (although I will say that the dogs that pass these tests have proven to be very sucessful in the training programs they go into, so I'd have to say that these tests do result in finding very good detectiion dogs) Not to imply that dogs who fail these tests will not also make good detector dogs, but they will not pass the criteria of my customers, so I do not buy them.

My intentions were to make a 6 or 7 part series showing everything that I look for in a detection dog, because I have been asked by several people to do that.
However I dont have the time to make those videos, wait literally 4 hours for the videos to upload (even longer if the videos are more than a minute or so) and then have to waiste too much time trying to explain to the idiots why I need this type of dog when clearly they dont even want to understand it. LOL
If you dont like my dogs or my selection tests I have no problem with that.


----------



## Nancy Jocoy

The FBI test looks like basically everything contained in both the CGC and Brownell Marsolais test with the dog ignoring food and water in the presence of its toy.

The other thing is a biddable dog (directability - I am assuming this is for an untrained dog) - isnt that related to the pack drive we were talking about?

I did not have a coneyer belt but did have the slick floors, sheet aluminim, rubble and brush piles, open stairs, under vehicles, in tunnels - basically no matter where you throw it he goes witout delay and the hunt test is like our kudzu test (only we have a delay like the FEMA test)


----------



## mike suttle

Hey folks, sorry I have been away from the computer for the past 24 hours...........looks like I missed a lot! LOL
I did not go back and read all of the posts, but I would like to point out a few things here.

1) this possesiveness test is only one part of the test, it by itself means nothing to me, but when coupled with the rest of the tests it lets me see just how much the dog really wants to have the chance to have the toy.

2) nowhere, EVER did I say that possesiveness is more important than hunt drive. NEVER, EVER did I say that...........EVER!

3) If a dog is driven to posses and covet something very uncomfortable in their mouth without any human interaction, it is safe to bet that if he gets something softer and more comfortable in his mouth, and he gets to interact with the handler and play/tug/fight over that toy then he will become even more driven to find it and start that game with the handler.

4)all of these dogs in this video except Ivo are totally green dogs, never trained to bring anything back to the handler for a game. That behavior (like you see with Ivo, and almost any other trained dog) can easily be trained later if the end user requires it. My biggest customer does not care about it so I dont worry about that.

5) I DID NOT WRITE THIS TEST..........I have only been given the task to find dogs that have these drive and character traits. (although I will say that the dogs that pass these tests have proven to be very sucessful in the training programs they go into, so I'd have to say that these tests do result in finding very good detectiion dogs) Not to imply that dogs who fail these tests will not also make good detector dogs, but they will not pass the criteria of my customers, so I do not buy them.
Keep in mind I only got to show a few of the things we look for before I got too frustrated to waiste any more time doing it, but i will say that much of the selection test is based 100% on the dogs desire and drive to hunt both inside and out, off leash and totally independant of his handler.

If you dont like my dogs or my selection tests I have no problem with that.


----------



## Chris McDonald

Jennifer Coulter said:


> Anytime someone is into talking about detection/search dog stuff...I am totally stoked.
> 
> I am thankful for these non bitework threads now and again, and pleased that they provoke heated discussions that make me do some thinking and learning.


I think you might be in denial that your dog wants to take a bite more than it wants to search


----------



## Chris McDonald

Did any of you people have any form of a selection test for your wife or husband or did you just wake up next to them one morning? And if so what were the tests and requirements? 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cqr40SoyNaU


----------



## Jennifer Coulter

mike suttle said:


> Hey folks, sorry I have been away from the computer for the past 24 hours...........looks like I missed a lot! LOL
> I did not go back and read all of the posts, but I would like to point out a few things here.
> 
> 1) this possesiveness test is only one part of the test, it by itself means nothing to me, but when coupled with the rest of the tests it lets me see just how much the dog really wants to have the chance to have the toy.
> 
> 2) nowhere, EVER did I say that possesiveness is more important than hunt drive. NEVER, EVER did I say that...........EVER!
> 
> 3) If a dog is driven to posses and covet something very uncomfortable in their mouth without any human interaction, it is safe to bet that if he gets something softer and more comfortable in his mouth, and he gets to interact with the handler and play/tug/fight over that toy then he will become even more driven to find it and start that game with the handler.
> 
> 4)all of these dogs in this video except Ivo are totally green dogs, never trained to bring anything back to the handler for a game. That behavior (like you see with Ivo, and almost any other trained dog) can easily be trained later if the end user requires it. My biggest customer does not care about it so I dont worry about that.
> 
> 5) I DID NOT WRITE THIS TEST..........I have only been given the task to find dogs that have these drive and character traits. (although I will say that the dogs that pass these tests have proven to be very sucessful in the training programs they go into, so I'd have to say that these tests do result in finding very good detectiion dogs) Not to imply that dogs who fail these tests will not also make good detector dogs, but they will not pass the criteria of my customers, so I do not buy them.
> 
> My intentions were to make a 6 or 7 part series showing everything that I look for in a detection dog, because I have been asked by several people to do that.
> However I dont have the time to make those videos, wait literally 4 hours for the videos to upload (even longer if the videos are more than a minute or so) and then have to waiste too much time trying to explain to the idiots why I need this type of dog when clearly they dont even want to understand it. LOL
> If you dont like my dogs or my selection tests I have no problem with that.


I was just wondering since you see more dogs in a week than I will see in a life time.....what kind of percentages of dogs of dogs that pass the copper test, would not pass the next two stages you have shown us. I realise there are more stages after that.

I am not saying your test is stupid, I know it is not "your test", but you do beleive in it. I am trying to learn from your experience. I have also posted video on this site (even of hunting) and know what it is like to have people giving you a hard time. You are going to get it worse because you are SOMEBODY. Me...not so much LOL.

The comments about possesion and hunt drive arose organically, as an aside from you showing your process (thanks for that). But it IS interesting discussion, no? Perhaps it doesn't belong in your thread though.

I also understand that any dog can be taught to bring something back and play with the handler...that was not a shot at you or your test. Some people do have their dog's reward as simple posession of a toy though. I never said you were one of them, I was kinda musing out loud because of Howard's post, just happened to be on your thread. I think I even appologised for that in the thread.

Like I said...I am STOKED people are talking about searching, hunt drives and so on. We have you to thank. I also don't remember anyone saying anything bad about your dogs. From the clips you have shown, I think Ivo looks awesome, I even like his size!


----------



## julie allen

Ha ha! I didn't use a selection test for my ex but the next one will go through vigorous testing! The metal pipe may come in handy after all...


----------



## Nancy Jocoy

I really like the discussion, snide comments aside since I am stuying what all I will do to test my next dog. I would like to see the *rest* of the test or have it and the critiera described. I am intrugued at the least. 

Honestly, my dog would pass the FBI test - that is basically what we did and more. But the metal test no,,,,he would pick it up and drop it on the way....My other dog (The dysplastic female) carries around metal all the time but has far more food drive than anything and forget the neutral k9 part.


----------



## mike suttle

Jennifer Coulter said:


> I was just wondering since you see more dogs in a week than I will see in a life time.....what kind of percentages of dogs of dogs that pass the copper test, would not pass the next two stages you have shown us. I realise there are more stages after that.


I'm not sure what the % of dogs is that pass the first test, but fail the second part, but for sure their are dogs that do pass the first part and fail the next part, or fail the hunt part.
But I will also say the % of dogs that fail the first part and also fail the other parts is higher still. Many times in Europe I test the entire test just so the brokers there can see everything that I do.


----------



## milder batmusen

it looks very good :smile:
alot of drive and intensity for prey looks very good.

nice to see what your looking for

but the dogs on the videos are not small puppies so how do you test the smaller puppies from your litters:?:

what are you looking in maybe 6-12 week old puppies


----------



## Nicole Stark

Nancy Jocoy said:


> I would like to see the *rest* of the test or have it and the critiera described. I am intrugued at the least.


I would as well.


----------



## Jennifer Coulter

mike suttle said:


> I'm not sure what the % of dogs is that pass the first test, but fail the second part, but for sure their are dogs that do pass the first part and fail the next part, or fail the hunt part.
> But I will also say the % of dogs that fail the first part and also fail the other parts is higher still. Many times in Europe I test the entire test just so the brokers there can see everything that I do.


Thanks Mike!


----------



## Gerry Grimwood

My dog probably wouldn't pass those tests but, he has better acceleration 8)

http://vimeo.com/22759952


----------



## Timothy Stacy

Gerry Grimwood said:


> My dog probably wouldn't pass those tests but, he has better acceleration 8)
> 
> http://vimeo.com/22759952


Love it! That fukers got it, and to smell the trace amounts of penny (which he did) is truly amazing and a testament to his abilities. Nice work! 

He's good looking! That wide screen makes your legs look 2 feet long!


----------



## mike suttle

Gerry Grimwood said:


> My dog probably wouldn't pass those tests but, he has better acceleration 8)
> 
> http://vimeo.com/22759952


Damn Gerry, that is turning into big handsome dog man!


----------



## Gerry Grimwood

Timothy Stacy said:


> Love it! That fukers got it, and to smell the trace amounts of penny (which he did) is truly amazing and a testament to his abilities. Nice work!
> 
> He's good looking! That wide screen makes your legs look 2 feet long!





mike suttle said:


> Damn Gerry, that is turning into big handsome dog man!


Thanks guys, since I really haven't gotten into sport or crime fighting :lol: he will have to be satisfied with being my bud with some sporadic bitework thrown in the mix.

There must be a spot between hard core and hardly breathing right


----------



## Harry Keely

BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH who gives a flying ****, ](*,)](*,)](*,)

Heres 14 pages broke down for you, either you have a dog that will or not period.=;, this reminds me of the other guy that does flying superfly body slam kung fu tae chi dog sport and gets hundreds of pages of responses. over the same discussions over and over and over again. 

Mike nothing against ya, but Jeff called it from the get go ( NIGHTMARE ).


----------



## Brian Batchelder

> 3) If a dog is driven to posses and covet something very uncomfortable in their mouth without any human interaction, it is safe to bet that if he gets something softer and more comfortable in his mouth, and he gets to interact with the handler and play/tug/fight over that toy then he will become even more driven to find it and start that game with the handler.


The safe bet is that behaviors indicating that the dog really wants to get/ manipulate/ possess something suggests he can be powerfully reinforced...for _something_. To say it'll incirease his desire to find it isn't the most accurate description.

What's that _something_? A behavior contingent on reinforcment....because the dog is showing he has the capacity to be highly reinforced. Right, sounds obvious. Except which behaviors are reinforcable? And what does one count as a "behavior"?

When we're talking about a _sustained hunt_, we're not talking about some singular moment. We're talking about a rather undefined _duration_ of behavior (for lack of a better word) which is not all that contingent on reinforcement. We're really talking about is an affective state. In other words, the way a brain is wired. Just the plain old latent personality which nobody can do anything about.

The choke-offs, the teasing, the drive building (which you claim you don't do, but let's get real...) serves what primary purpose then? It's not going to rearrange biology. It's not going to alter the metabolism of brain structures. So we wouldn't expect it to seriously alter the sustained "behavior" of hunting once the focus of the hunt is sufficiently imprinted. However, we would expect it to have bearing on those singular behaviors we CAN reinforce...i.e. a dog's alert. 

This also explains why you can take an otherwise highly reinforcable dog, and do essentially nothing to increase his basic desire to hunt.

But it's nice to understand the difference so one can say why with greater precision why a given dog won't work out, and maybe why another one could still be put to use if the only defecit is that which can be manipulated.

You know, there's a point to being nit-picky. It's so it can become understandable down to the smallest possible denominator and be passed on in small digestable increments. It's so proper selection, testing and training can procede with the least amount of useless tradition because a culture has simply been rotely imitated without complete understanding.

And by the way, I did specifically say I liked your dogs. No need to call me or anyone else an idiot. I've seen you use gentler words for people who abuse your puppies. Put a tampon in your ass. We're just talking.


----------



## Kara Fitzpatrick

nice videos mike, i myself enjoyed them.


----------



## Christopher Jones

I got to say, Mike does take these threads pretty well. He has alot of shit thrown at him and he keeps his cool. But Mike does have good dogs, and people I am mutal friends with have a high opinion of him as a dogman, and as an honest man, so I imagine he sleeps pretty well at night. I have only spoken to Mike once, and I asked him for some information about Carlos as I have semen from him, and Mike gave me every bit of information, even the stuff that might make the dog seem a bit weird (not poor character related).


----------



## sabanis george

nice dogs!!!!


----------



## Wayne Dodge

It is irritating at best to sit hear and read post after post that revolves around some peoples incredible simple mindedness. I am trying to read a thread that is intended to demonstrate the way that Mike tests dogs for his program, dogs that he sells to his customer base. In turn you criticize the methods and knowledge base of both the vendor and consumer who both do this professionally. 

I for one would not be ignorant enough to step into a new realm of knowledge and immediately start voicing my uneducated and inexperienced opinions to the community as a whole as this only shows my lack of understanding and quite honestly would make me look like a tool. 

It would be best if you tried training a handful of canines in various disciplines, developed a working knowledge base from which to draw an educated and experienced opinion from before giving your take on the short comings of others that have actually repeatedly proven their own ability to either select or select and train canines that succeed in these type of environments. 

The ability to look on-line for some cool sounding words like Dopamine and Serotonin systems is funny at best, neither are actual systems, they simply influence positive and negative reactions associated with learning behaviors and this is only part of their actions within the body. In turn the idea behind this thread has nothing to do with some high faulting words and the appearance of some cool terminology that in the grand scheme of things means nothing in this conversation. 

You would find that many more people would weigh your opinions with more open mindedness if you had some experience and less opinions. If you took the thread for its intended purpose of demonstrating how Mike tests a dog for his program.

Loganhaus Kennels has a exceptional reputation in the canine world, Mike himself is one of the most honest and straight forward men that I have had the pleasure of meeting. He is a dedicated dogman that always tries to do right by his customers. You try to belittle and disrespect something you know nothing about, it is a shame really.

In stead of sitting here taking apart other peoples work, try doing some work yourself, instead of talking shit…. show me what you can do…. or just shut up.


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

Quote : 
In stead of sitting here taking apart other peoples work, try doing some work yourself, instead of talking shit…. show me what you can do…. or just shut up.


I WILL sit here, and I will keep writing and you cannot make me stop. NA NA BOO BOO mother****er ! ! ! ! HA HA

There really wasn't anything to say, so how boring would that be ? The dogs look good to me, and that for me would be the end of the deal. However, knowing that it was going to be a 30 page nightmare, why not bust his balls ?? =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D>


----------



## Daniel Lybbert

Wayne I do agree.But all the bs does make Mike explain himself better for some of our betterment. I for one have started my dog retrieving and hunting more and harder for pipes(just plastic im a puss). So have a few others (i am sure). Bare minumum my dogs have got excersise. I think they have gained more than that though.
Mike I have been very interested in your videos. They have given me some new insight into a few things. I hope you still post more videos.


----------



## Nancy Jocoy

LOL, maybe the doggie dentists are slipping Mike money on the side with all this metal.


----------



## Jennifer Michelson

Ok, all this copper talk made me curious about what my guys would do with copper. I had a glass of sangria and I found a length of pipe in my basement (a lot longer than I've seen in the videos, but copper nonetheless). This is the first time either dog has seen a pipe. I dont even really tug with Remus--he is a ball freak and that works fine for me. Griffin (6yrs old) liked the idea of playing with the pipe, but wouldnt grip it at all or pick it up by himself. Remus got all spun up and very vocal with the strange new toy. My 9yr old son was the impromptu camera man, so dont expect much, but it does show Remus and the pipe. 

Would he pass the first test??


----------



## Brian Batchelder

Wayne,

No.


----------



## Wayne Dodge

Jeff…. Come now, all I have to do is ninja into your house and disconnect the wiring system to your computer and it would take you weeks to put it back together again.


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

Weeks ?? Are you kidding ?? How about NEVER. I would have to pay someone to do it, and that money is going for a FR line bitch.............. once the damn euro quits kicking the shit out of the dollar.


----------



## mike suttle

Jeff Oehlsen said:


> .............. once the damn euro quits kicking the shit out of the dollar.


 Dude, by the time that happens we will all be old to even remeber this conversation!


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

Stupid borrowing politicians.

I really really need to go over there and fix my dilemma with this lack of bitches problem.


----------



## mike suttle

Jeff Oehlsen said:


> Stupid borrowing politicians.
> 
> I really really need to go over there and fix my dilemma with this lack of bitches problem.


We'll just have to wait it out and see how it goes. I really need to make another buy trip too, but I keep hoping the Dollar will get a little stronger first.


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

I really see it just getting worse, so I am trying to weigh if I wait, and risk it going nuts, or if EU has it just as bad as we do.


----------



## mike suttle

Jeff Oehlsen said:


> I really see it just getting worse, so I am trying to weigh if I wait, and risk it going nuts, or if EU has it just as bad as we do.


 Let them keep bailing out all the finacially ****ed up countries in the EU, and sooner or later the Euro will go to shit. How long that takes it the big question.


----------



## Drew Peirce

we are all gonna learn together that socialism doesnt work, never has, never will, Trump/West 2012 baby


----------



## Christopher Jones

When I first bought my Czech GSD's around 10-11 years ago the Aussie Dollar = .49c US. Now the other day it was like 1.08 US.


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

I would take just being even with the dang dollar.


----------

