# question



## Michael Murphy

'Mike Suttle, while explaining the aggression that Chip is discussing, mentioned these dogs are lousy perimeter dogs. That won't be an issue to some, perhaps it's not needed in LE. For my personal use, that would be a big issue. My point being that what works for some doesn't work for all. Not sure why so much discussion trying to pitch one as better than the other.'
from http://www.alpinek9forums.com/puppies-bred-to-be-sport-or-le-pp-t2185-220.html

now i believe what is being suggested here is that Suttle said knpv dogs are "lousy perimeter dogs" . now my question is , are knpv dogs in general lousy as perimeter guards or the lines that Mike bases his breedings on. if so are there lines known for carrying the "perimeter guard" trait?


----------



## Tiago Fontes

Michael Murphy said:


> 'Mike Suttle, while explaining the aggression that Chip is discussing, mentioned these dogs are lousy perimeter dogs. That won't be an issue to some, perhaps it's not needed in LE. For my personal use, that would be a big issue. My point being that what works for some doesn't work for all. Not sure why so much discussion trying to pitch one as better than the other.'
> from http://www.alpinek9forums.com/puppies-bred-to-be-sport-or-le-pp-t2185-220.html
> 
> now i believe what is being suggested here is that Suttle said knpv dogs are "lousy perimeter dogs" . now my question is , are knpv dogs in general lousy as perimeter guards or the lines that Mike bases his breedings on. if so are there lines known for carrying the "perimeter guard" trait?



No, that's not true. I've seen several dogs from KNPV lines that are territorial (Malis, Dutchies, GSDs), especially in the car... 

I dont think they would have an issue becoming perimeter guards, if given an opportunity. From my understanding, most (including mine) live in a kennel and dont really care if the dogs become perimeter guards... 

Sometimes, the noise is too much to deal with, considering Holland is a small country and people live in close proximity. 

Regards


----------



## Michael Murphy

thanks tiago


----------



## Gillian Schuler

Tiago Fontes said:


> territorial (Malis, Dutchies, GSDs), especially in the car...
> 
> 
> Regards


 I've even seen a Golden Retriever that was territorial in the car.


----------



## Gillian Schuler

Tiago Fontes said:


> No, that's not true. I've seen several dogs from KNPV lines that are territorial (Malis, Dutchies, GSDs), especially in the car...
> 
> I dont think they would have an issue becoming perimeter guards, if given an opportunity. From my understanding, most (including mine) live in a kennel and dont really care if the dogs become perimeter guards...
> 
> Sometimes, the noise is too much to deal with, considering Holland is a small country and people live in close proximity.
> 
> Regards


I'm not sure I understand the "perimeter guards" would welcome an Explanation, even though as opposed to "territorial", I think I understand it.

BTW, Switzerland is also a small country and people (and dogs) live on top of each other.


----------



## Christopher Smith

He didn't say KNPV are bad perimeter guard dogs. What he said was that the dogs he likes tend to be bad perimeter guard dogs. One of the things that leads me to believe that Mike knows what he is doing is that I don't see him making sweeping generalizations. 

Sent from Petguide.com Free App


----------



## Tiago Fontes

Gillian Schuler said:


> I'm not sure I understand the "perimeter guards" would welcome an Explanation, even though as opposed to "territorial", I think I understand it.
> 
> BTW, Switzerland is also a small country and people (and dogs) live on top of each other.


I think "perimeter" guards, in this situation, means dogs that guard their territory. 
Thats my understanding of his question.


----------



## Gillian Schuler

Tiago Fontes said:


> I think "perimeter" guards, in this situation, means dogs that guard their territory.
> Thats my understanding of his question.


I understood that "Perimeter" was the opposite of territorial. Perimeter is the outlying ground??

Totally confused.


----------



## Alice Bezemer

Territorial means the dog guards the area he is located IN as opposed to the perimeter being the OUTLINE of the territory and the dog guards the perimeter only. Or atleast that is my understanding of what either means. A dog that guards the yard is territorial. A dog that per example walks the fence at a jail or fenced off area is guarding the perimeter.


----------



## Gillian Schuler

Perimeter vs Territorial??

What if the dog is located in an area of 400 quadrat meter?

Is it not so, that the dog in the car feels more sure than the dog that has a few hundred 

quadrat meter to guard?


----------



## Tiago Fontes

Alice Bezemer said:


> Territorial means the dog guards the area he is located IN as opposed to the perimeter being the OUTLINE of the territory and the dog guards the perimeter only. Or atleast that is my understanding of what either means. A dog that guards the yard is territorial. A dog that per example walks the fence at a jail or fenced off area is guarding the perimeter.



I stand corrected.


----------



## Alice Bezemer

Tiago Fontes said:


> I stand corrected.


Darn! Didn't even get to use the spank threat! You're taking the fun out of it like this Tiago! :lol:


----------



## Tiago Fontes

Alice Bezemer said:


> Darn! Didn't even get to use the spank threat! You're taking the fun out of it like this Tiago! :lol:


Your spanking threats have taken all the drive out of me... Soft like that! ;-)

I may start getting vocal...


----------



## Chip Blasiole

I think the original point was that this particular line of dogs were very social and confident, so that any type of defensive aggression would not be displayed if a stranger came onto someone's property. In other words, they would not mark a good guard dog.


----------



## Tiago Fontes

Chip Blasiole said:


> I think the original point was that this particular line of dogs were very social and confident, so that any type of defensive aggression would not be displayed if a stranger came onto someone's property. In other words, they would not mark a good guard dog.


All concepts aside, that's how I understood the question.


----------



## Tony Hahn

I believe that what folks are referring to as “Perimeter” Dogs is the type of dog that used to be referred to as an “Estate” Dog.

Many dogs of many breeds are territorial. That is a common canine trait. Just being territorial doesn’t make a good Estate/Perimeter dog. 

If I’m correct about folks attributing the same qualities to a Perimeter dog as an Estate dog would have, then the type of dog being referred to is one who easily adopts a large area as his personal or pack territory (example- a couple acres of estate property). AND this type of dog views pretty much anyone who enters as an adversary. 

Regardless of what drives or temperament traits you believe causes a dog to be like this, an Estate dog has a certain amount of natural desire to engage someone just because they have trespassed. No threatening moves or body language is needed on the part of the trespasser. The simple fact of his presence pisses off the dog. Even back in the day, these dogs were carefully managed and a potential liability. 

Dogs are not wolves, but a limited comparison can be drawn between the way wolves will attack or drive off any intruder from another pack that ventures into even the far edges of their territory. 

A dog who isn’t very concerned about ‘Normal’, non-threatening people in his territory would not be considered a good Estate dog.


----------



## Gillian Schuler

Chip Blasiole said:


> In other words, they would not mark a good guard dog.


 I've lost you.


----------



## Chip Blasiole

I'm right here. A guard dog is used to guard an area to keep people from coming in and stealing or doing other harm. The dog is often left in the area alone to guard, so this is different than a personal protection dog. This type of dog needs to have a degree of either mistrust, social aggression, or a lower threshold for defensive aggression. Therefore a dog that is very social and trusting, with an extremely high threshold for defense, will not show aggression to strangers, and will not make a good guard dog or property protection dog.


----------



## Alice Bezemer

Tiago Fontes said:


> Your spanking threats have taken all the drive out of me... Soft like that! ;-)
> 
> I may start getting vocal...



Vocal huh... thats not good according to some.... I might have to back off and give you room to get more mature before trying again.... Defo no fun in that! :lol:


----------



## Tiago Fontes

Alice Bezemer said:


> Vocal huh... thats not good according to some.... I might have to back off and give you room to get more mature before trying again.... Defo no fun in that! :lol:


Yes, indeed...give me more time...be patient and wait!


----------



## Gillian Schuler

Chip Blasiole said:


> I'm right here. A guard dog is used to guard an area to keep people from coming in and stealing or doing other harm. The dog is often left in the area alone to guard, so this is different than a personal protection dog. This type of dog needs to have a degree of either mistrust, social aggression, or a lower threshold for defensive aggression. Therefore a dog that is very social and trusting, with an extremely high threshold for defense, will not show aggression to strangers, and will not make a good guard dog or property protection dog.


I agree with you but somewhere at the beginning of the thread someone posed the territorial (in the car dog) versus the Perimeter (wierd word for a guard dog).

A dog guarding his own "Garage", i.e. car does not necessarily need to be fierce against strangers. He's secured in the back of the car. However, the Golden Retriever I mentioned would have bitten anyone who reached into her area.

I am in agreement with you regarding a guard dog that is used to guard an area to keep pepople coming in. *Coming in* and stealing or doing other harm would require a very good guard dog in my mind.


----------



## Paul Cipparone

I have trained many dogs to work security alone , to patrol fence lines in compounds, to understand what a ladder is , to understand entry to the compound by way of a ladder,to stay back from the fence line 5 meters , to avoid the garrotte, items thrown, food refusal (training of , must be maintained on a regular basis.Have trained dogs to work a building perimeter , & stop & sit at all corners , then proceed.
The dog needs good predator instincts to chase & hold (bite ).


----------



## Joby Becker

I think almost any of these good dogs can be raised and trained in a fashion to do whatever you need them to do for you.

I think that almost any of these dogs can be raised and worked in a fashion that will bring out forms of defense, such as defense of prey, defense of handler, defense of home/territory, even though they are not "defensive" dogs, and may not exhibit outward signs of feeling personally "defensive", like they personally feel really threatened in self defense, if that makes any sense.

I think that most people that own those dogs, especially for detection and patrol dog purposes, simply do not have much use for many of those things, and most of those dogs are raised, housed, handled and trained in a fashion that instead of promoting most of these behaviors, goes in the opposite direction. 

I also think that most breeders would not want to see their dogs end up being perimeter guard dogs, especially the really good dogs, as they have the potential to be so much more. And none want to "promote" their dogs as "guard dogs".

This does not mean (I think) that many of these dogs could not make excellent guard dogs, or home protection dogs, if one actually chose that for a goal, even if the dogs were not aggressive or anti-social or extremely territorial by nature. A good puppy becomes what you make of it... 

Although I would say that there are many other dogs that would fit the bill, with a lot less emphasis put towards bringing out those traits. more "natural" if you will.


----------



## Christopher Jones

Even these stable dogs Mike is talking about, while they might not be great natural yard dogs, all you have to do is tease them behind the fence a few times and tell them they get to bite people who come to them from the fence and they will be nut bags in the yard when people come towards them. 
But why on Gods earth would you put such a valuable animal in a junk yard when you can get some free giveaways that you could use. And while we all would love our dogs to bite a burglar, I get annoyed with my dogs going off all the time when people come over. I have three female Dutchies who are extremely territorial (female thing) and go off their heads I certainly dont need my male doing it as well.


----------



## Paul Cipparone

If anyone is concerned with would be thieves studying patrol dogs routines , then you can spray urine (any urine) at different intervals on the patrol site , & the dogs natural instinct to mark will interrupt the routine .
Normally you would stake out in a safe location, at one end of the compound to alert to the attractive intruder , while the other dog can work the area of intrusion, a most effective method.


----------



## Tiago Fontes

Paul Cipparone said:


> If anyone is concerned with would be thieves studying patrol dogs routines , then you can spray urine (any urine) at different intervals on the patrol site , & the dogs natural instinct to mark will interrupt the routine .
> Normally you would stake out in a safe location, at one end of the compound to alert to the attractive intruder , while the other dog can work the area of intrusion, a most effective method.


You never stop surprising me with your tricks, my friend...lol

Thanks for the information.


----------



## mike suttle

Wow.....im late to another thread. I havent been on here for a while. I was taling to Greg Doud very late last night and he said he was about to post on another thread, so I stopped by here to read what he had said. (Any time I get the chance to learn something from Greg I take advantage of it!)
Anyway, about this thread. I NEVER said that KNPV dogs make lousy guard dogs! WHat I was talking about was that the type of dog that I select is very social, very confident, very stable with High defense thresholds and therefor that type of dog is not great at being a guard dog (without his handler to make descisions for him) I have 30 dogs in my kennel here today, and anyone can walk up to any of those dogs, take them out of the kennel, play with them, walk them, feed them, steal them if you wanted. Disclamer.......I will shoot you if you try to steal my dogs!
My point is that the type of dog that I prefer is not defensive, or suspicious of people by nature.
When I test dogs very hard in bitework time after time the dogs that show a lot of nasty, civil aggression behind a fence normally fail way before the social / stable / confident dog fails.
Also, all of my clients who truely uunderstand dogs will only accept this type of dog. All the the SOCOM dogs they buy from me are very social, all of the SWAT dogs that come from me are very social, even the personal protection dogs that come from me are very social. 
There is a BIG difference between a "guard dog", and a police/SF/ govt agency dog. 
I'm not saying that our dogs couldn't be conditioned for this type of work, but for me to do it wold be silly. I'll stick with the type of dogs that work best for me and our clients. If you go to our youtube channel and look at the bitework videos that we have posted there over the last few years EVERY dog in those videos is super social with people and not one of those dogs would bite someone just for being on the property. But when they are stimulated to bite, they are devistating.....to me that is the difference.


----------



## Logan Payton

mike suttle said:


> Disclamer.......I will shoot you if you try to steal my dogs!


Nice. :-o:lol:


----------



## Gus Pineda

I was the person posting the comment on the Alpinek9 forum. I never said KNPV dogs where lousy perimeter dogs. I said the type of dogs Mike liked where not good perimeter dogs. The text itself is still there, I'm surprised the comment got twisted around so much. I don't think I even mentioned KNPV at any time, how the heck did it get associated with my comment?


----------



## Gus Pineda

Michael Murphy said:


> 'Mike Suttle, while explaining the aggression that Chip is discussing, mentioned these dogs are lousy perimeter dogs. That won't be an issue to some, perhaps it's not needed in LE. For my personal use, that would be a big issue. My point being that what works for some doesn't work for all. Not sure why so much discussion trying to pitch one as better than the other.'
> from http://www.alpinek9forums.com/puppies-bred-to-be-sport-or-le-pp-t2185-220.html
> 
> now i believe what is being suggested here is that Suttle said knpv dogs are "lousy perimeter dogs" . now my question is , are knpv dogs in general lousy as perimeter guards or the lines that Mike bases his breedings on. if so are there lines known for carrying the "perimeter guard" trait?


What I suggested is that the type of dog that works out for Mike would not necessarily work out for everyone else, in the context that folks where debating what type of aggression was better. No hidden messages on my posts.


----------



## Christopher Jones

mike suttle said:


> Wow.....im late to another thread. I havent been on here for a while. I was taling to Greg Doud very late last night and he said he was about to post on another thread, so I stopped by here to read what he had said. (Any time I get the chance to learn something from Greg I take advantage of it!)
> Anyway, about this thread. I NEVER said that KNPV dogs make lousy guard dogs! WHat I was talking about was that the type of dog that I select is very social, very confident, very stable with High defense thresholds and therefor that type of dog is not great at being a guard dog (without his handler to make descisions for him) I have 30 dogs in my kennel here today, and anyone can walk up to any of those dogs, take them out of the kennel, play with them, walk them, feed them, steal them if you wanted. Disclamer.......I will shoot you if you try to steal my dogs!
> My point is that the type of dog that I prefer is not defensive, or suspicious of people by nature.
> When I test dogs very hard in bitework time after time the dogs that show a lot of nasty, civil aggression behind a fence normally fail way before the social / stable / confident dog fails.
> Also, all of my clients who truely uunderstand dogs will only accept this type of dog. All the the SOCOM dogs they buy from me are very social, all of the SWAT dogs that come from me are very social, even the personal protection dogs that come from me are very social.
> There is a BIG difference between a "guard dog", and a police/SF/ govt agency dog.
> I'm not saying that our dogs couldn't be conditioned for this type of work, but for me to do it wold be silly. I'll stick with the type of dogs that work best for me and our clients. If you go to our youtube channel and look at the bitework videos that we have posted there over the last few years EVERY dog in those videos is super social with people and not one of those dogs would bite someone just for being on the property. But when they are stimulated to bite, they are devistating.....to me that is the difference.


You just dont get it Mike. All your dogs work in prey drive and therefore will not bite in a serious or threatning situation. Only a defensive dog will be able to do this. You are just a sport person trying to peddle sport dogs off as police dogs....... :smile:


----------



## leslie cassian

Christopher Jones said:


> You just dont get it Mike. All your dogs work in prey drive and therefore will not bite in a serious or threatning situation. Only a defensive dog will be able to do this. You are just a sport person trying to peddle sport dogs off as police dogs....... :smile:


If only the people who keep buying his dogs were smart enough to know this...


----------



## Christopher Jones

leslie cassian said:


> If only the people who keep buying his dogs were smart enough to know this...


They are fools I tell you, fools.


----------



## Sarah Platts

Actually, it's all that creative marketing and the slick web site that sucks 'em in.


----------



## Gregory Doud

mike suttle said:


> Wow.....im late to another thread. I havent been on here for a while. I was taling to Greg Doud very late last night and he said he was about to post on another thread, so I stopped by here to read what he had said. (Any time I get the chance to learn something from Greg I take advantage of it!)
> 
> Wow. Thank you for the kind words Mike. Respect goes both ways. Have to get together soon.


----------



## Gillian Schuler

Gregory,

I respect your opinion and, as you say, respect works both ways.

Are the negative posts about Mike Suttle a joke? If they are not, then they are in very bad taste and I wonder that no one else find this so.

Gill


----------



## Joby Becker

Gillian Schuler said:


> Gregory,
> 
> I respect your opinion and, as you say, respect works both ways.
> 
> Are the negative posts about Mike Suttle a joke? If they are not, then they are in very bad taste and I wonder that no one else find this so.
> 
> Gill


I took them to be a joke personally.


----------



## Gillian Schuler

How come, please enlighten me?

You mean I can call anyone on here a sham and then say, "hi, it's just a joke"? 

My Dad used to do this but then "shoved" into the corner, he'd say " it's just a joke"!!

We don't all owe our origins to the USA and are not always aware of the undercurrents, jokingly or not.

It brings back memories for me when Jeff Olson ridiculed Mike Suttle's puppy playground and I remember too well that I flew into a rage and attacked him (Jeff, I mean).

I know Mike Suter is big enough to stick up for himself. Later on, Stephan Schaub "attacked" Herbert Born's Kennel in Germany, although Herbert Born was not able to defend himself. I have been in touch with him (Herbert Born).

Where I grew up, we called a "spade" a "spade" and no one had to "work out what we meant".


----------



## leslie cassian

Gillian Schuler said:


> Gregory,
> 
> I respect your opinion and, as you say, respect works both ways.
> 
> Are the negative posts about Mike Suttle a joke? If they are not, then they are in very bad taste and I wonder that no one else find this so.
> 
> Gill


The winky smiley means it's a joke. 

And for the record, I am one of those "fools" who fell for the slick website and fancy marketing. I have a nice little Dutchie who is the dog I asked for and was promised.


----------



## Gillian Schuler

Thank you for the explanation - it wasn't very easy for a an Anglo-Swiss handler to suss it out.


----------



## Christopher Jones

leslie cassian said:


> The winky smiley means it's a joke.
> 
> And for the record, I am one of those "fools" who fell for the slick website and fancy marketing. I have a nice little Dutchie who is the dog I asked for and was promised.


Shit, I forgot to add a smiley face after my "fools" joke.


----------



## leslie cassian

I took it as a joke. Love my sporty, prey monster.


----------



## Michael Murphy

Do the van leeuwen dogs produce territorial dogs?


----------



## jack van strien

Michael Michael Michael,you never cease to amaze me.
Let me ask you a question,do you think before you post?
What do you really think the answer will be?
a=Yes
b=No
c=Does it really matter?
d= All of the above.


----------



## Marcel Winter

"


Michael Murphy said:


> Do the van leeuwen dogs produce territorial dogs?



Is this a serious question

:-\"


----------



## leslie cassian

Michael Murphy said:


> now i believe what is being suggested here is that Suttle said knpv dogs are "lousy perimeter dogs" . now my question is , are knpv dogs in general lousy as perimeter guards or the lines that Mike bases his breedings on. if so are there lines known for carrying the "perimeter guard" trait?
> 
> Do the van leeuwen dogs produce territorial dogs?


Why - why do you want to know this? Is there a point to your question? 

Or are you just looking for the toughest, meanest most badass dog you can find? What you seem to be describing is a junkyard dog and if that's what you want, why bother with paying big bucks to a breeder? Just go to a shelter and pick the biggest, ugliest dog there that is trying to kill you from behind his cage door. If you want a dog for a specific purpose - ie you actually want to put in a serious investment in time and effort to train the dog to a high level in a specific discipline, then go to a breeder that has dogs that do what you want.


----------



## Michael Murphy

Marcel Winter said:


> "
> 
> 
> Is this a serious question
> 
> :-\"


yes, from what i have read the dog is very dominant and extreme in fight drive, is a dog like that also terratorial at home? 
can anyone walk in and play with the dog and steel it?


----------



## Matt Vandart

lol, u thinking of stealing it? bwahhahahaha!


----------



## mike suttle

Michael Murphy said:


> yes, from what i have read the dog is very dominant and extreme in fight drive, is a dog like that also terratorial at home?
> can anyone walk in and play with the dog and steel it?


I have had many very dominant dogs with extreme drive and guess what..........anyone could walk in and thake them too. WHy?........because they are stable and confident and do not feel the need to just randomly attack someone for no reason. almost always those types of dogs are very cheap to buy if that is what you want......I see them a lot in Holland on buy trips for very little money. They are cheap because no one wants them, and becasue they fail a real test miserably usually. I have had a few dogs from Van Leeuwen bloodlines, including two littermates to their current stud (Carlos and Sara) both dogs would happily go with anyone who went into their kennel. 
I have seen a few dogs in the local shelter that would not let anyone NEAR their kennel, if you'd like I can get you one of those for $60 , the cost of the adoption fees.


----------



## Lee H Sternberg

mike suttle said:


> I have had many very dominant dogs with extreme drive and guess what..........anyone could walk in and thake them too. WHy?........because they are stable and confident and do not feel the need to just randomly attack someone for no reason. almost always those types of dogs are very cheap to buy if that is what you want......I see them a lot in Holland on buy trips for very little money. They are cheap because no one wants them, and becasue they fail a real test miserably usually. I have had a few dogs from Van Leeuwen bloodlines, including two littermates to their current stud (Carlos and Sara) both dogs would happily go with anyone who went into their kennel.
> I have seen a few dogs in the local shelter that would not let anyone NEAR their kennel, if you'd like I can get you one of those for $60 , the cost of the adoption fees.


Hey Mike, I didn't realize they legalized pot in W.V. Are you toking up tonight?

You got dogs that lick fukers that stroll into their kennel and then happily hop into beat up ******* pickups, tails wagging, w/o a murmur?


----------



## mike suttle

Lee H Sternberg said:


> Hey Mike, I didn't realize they legalized pot in W.V. Are you toking up tonight?
> 
> You got dogs that lick fukers that stroll into their kennel and then happily hop into beat up ******* pickups, tails wagging, w/o a murmur?


 Yep thats tight Lee.....Endor, Ivo, Carlos, Arko Roosen, Rudy, they would all happily go with anyone who walked into the kennel and took them out. They would bite the shit out of anyone I told the too, but they were so confident and stable that they had no reason to mistrust anyone without me telling the to.


----------



## jack van strien

Yes,Mike it is an absolute pleasure to own a dog that is friendly to anyone and you know he is going to be there when you need him.
No need for an idiot in the back of a truck defending nothing but stroking the ego of the owner.
Very few people can see the difference between a real dog behind a fence or a fearbiter,they will both hurt you.
Yes there are very aggressive dogs who are the real thing but that is not the kind of dog i need or want and i respect people who can handle these dogs and respect the dogs for what they are.
Sometimes you think people who have trained dogs know what it is all about but then they make a comment that makes you wonder.
I guess maybe it is the beer that is not just for breakfast anymore.
The dogs you(and i)Mike like only need one or two sessions too make them into a raving liability,unfortenately there will always be people who want to see this behaviour in a dog.
Here in Thailand i can have any kind of dog i want running loose in the yard and if someone gets bitten there will be no legal hassles.The dog will probably be poisened but that is another story.
My dog is very friendly but lets us know if there is anyone at the gate,it is all we need.
I gave up the sport when i moved here,i miss it sometimes but now i have other things to do.


----------



## Michael Murphy

mike suttle said:


> Yep thats tight Lee.....Endor, Ivo, Carlos, Arko Roosen, Rudy, they would all happily go with anyone who walked into the kennel and took them out. They would bite the shit out of anyone I told the too, but they were so confident and stable that they had no reason to mistrust anyone without me telling the to.


thanks for that , very interesting, i have just never seen or have experience with dogs like carlos etc, so was asking the question out of curiosity. my current jary daughter is my favourite dog ever and she is also very social and friendly, but she is only six months and was thinking if that would change. 
my question does not necessarily mean i want a highly unsocial aggressive dog, i have people come over all the time and a highly terratorial dog would be very annoying, although i wouldnt mind a dog that barks and lets me know if someone is at the gate.

im sure you have experience with other breeds as well, would you say that in your experience this type of character applies to other working breeds such as german shepherds and rottweilers etc as well?
im curious whether a Drago v patriot or pike would be terratorial, or what the turnleberg rottweilers are like


----------



## Michael Murphy

chris on your website you say Danko is terratorial?


----------



## Gillian Schuler

I am of the opinion that you cannot *teach* a dog to guard the property.

There are dogs that are friendly, confident, but are very conscious of regarding what they regard to be "their" property and they will guard it without training.


----------



## Marcel Winter

Well I have 2 KNPV Dutchies line Rambo van Rossum, Rudo van Vulpen
Tommie Luyken,Rocky van Leeuwen,Duco II

Strangers don,t come into my house
and you can,t steal them out of my car kennel they will bite you.
And they are very stable .

I met 2 weeks a go the father is a retired policedog in Holland
he don,t let you be with him or touch him he easy will bite you and you can,t
steal him out of the police car. I have seen many of this dogs in KNPV
who are serious.

Also I met very social dogs like Mike have , personally I don,t like
the dogs who people can steal out of their kennel.


----------



## Lee H Sternberg

mike suttle said:


> Yep thats tight Lee.....Endor, Ivo, Carlos, Arko Roosen, Rudy, they would all happily go with anyone who walked into the kennel and took them out. They would bite the shit out of anyone I told the too, but they were so confident and stable that they had no reason to mistrust anyone without me telling the to.


Not my kind of dog, Mike. I don't want the type dog that would just trot off with a total stranger. I have 2 Dutchies that ain't going off with a stranger without that dude getting his ass chewed up.


----------



## Joby Becker

keep in mind that any good dog can be taught to bite strangers for approaching them,or entering their home or property, if that is a desire of the owner.


----------



## Matt Vandart

It's just a variation of an object guard I spose


----------



## Lee H Sternberg

Joby Becker said:


> keep in mind that any good dog can be taught to bite strangers for approaching them,or entering their home or property, if that is a desire of the owner.


Mine were trained to bite strangers entering the home or car uninvited because home and car theft in a national pastime in Costa Rica. I've worked hard at deprogramming them a bit now that I'm back here.

But not to the point of walking off with a stranger.


----------



## Lee H Sternberg

jack van strien said:


> Yes,Mike it is an absolute pleasure to own a dog that is friendly to anyone and you know he is going to be there when you need him.
> No need for an idiot in the back of a truck defending nothing but stroking the ego of the owner.
> Very few people can see the difference between a real dog behind a fence or a fearbiter,they will both hurt you.
> Yes there are very aggressive dogs who are the real thing but that is not the kind of dog i need or want and i respect people who can handle these dogs and respect the dogs for what they are.
> Sometimes you think people who have trained dogs know what it is all about but then they make a comment that makes you wonder.
> I guess maybe it is the beer that is not just for breakfast anymore.
> The dogs you(and i)Mike like only need one or two sessions too make them into a raving liability,unfortenately there will always be people who want to see this behaviour in a dog.
> Here in Thailand i can have any kind of dog i want running loose in the yard and if someone gets bitten there will be no legal hassles.The dog will probably be poisened but that is another story.
> My dog is very friendly but lets us know if there is anyone at the gate,it is all we need.
> I gave up the sport when i moved here,i miss it sometimes but now i have other things to do.


Nothing to do with beer, Jack. Just call me a doubter whose been around the block a few times..


----------



## mike suttle

I could certainly have trained any of those dogs to mistrust people and try to kill every one who came on the property, but why in the world would I do that? NONE of my clients will buy dogs that lash out at strangers without provocation, NONE of my clients will buy dogs that are not social with people, NONE of my clients will buy dogs that show aggression when it is unwarranted. In fact, one of the basic parts of the selection test for the tier 1 groups is that the dog can be picked up and carried by a stranger.
I have seen enough dogs in my life to know that the display of aggression they portray is in no way linked to the power of the actual response once they are stimulated to actually fight a man.
The dogs that show high aggression at merely the sight of a stranger have far too low of thresholds for the type of work that our clients do. 
I will not tolerate a dog that shows aggression to someone without a reason. Experience has shown me that when the fight gets real and tough those dogs are usually not gonna hang in there anyway. 
I guess we all have our preference as to what we want, need, and have to have. 
The toughest dogs I have ever seen when it comes to taking pressure from a man (Arko Roosen, Endor, Ducas, etc) were super social dogs that anyone could take out of the kennel with no problems.


----------



## Christopher Jones

I agree totally with you Mike.


----------



## Bob Scott

Christopher Jones said:


> I agree totally with you Mike.



Ditto here also!


----------



## Matt Vandart

I agree also,pitty they are so hard to find


----------



## catherine hardigan

I think some of the responses to Mike's posts are interesting. It's like people really want to disagree with him, but they realize that anybody who has had so much success importing, breeding, and selling dogs to police and military customers probably isn't completely talking out of his ass.

It's all supply and demand. Mike isn't dictating which type of dogs he breeds or imports or sells. His customers do.


----------



## jamie lind

mike suttle said:


> I could certainly have trained any of those dogs to mistrust people and try to kill every one who came on the property, but why in the world would I do that? NONE of my clients will buy dogs that lash out at strangers without provocation, NONE of my clients will buy dogs that are not social with people, NONE of my clients will buy dogs that show aggression when it is unwarranted. In fact, one of the basic parts of the selection test for the tier 1 groups is that the dog can be picked up and carried by a stranger.
> I have seen enough dogs in my life to know that the display of aggression they portray is in no way linked to the power of the actual response once they are stimulated to actually fight a man.
> The dogs that show high aggression at merely the sight of a stranger have far too low of thresholds for the type of work that our clients do.
> I will not tolerate a dog that shows aggression to someone without a reason. Experience has shown me that when the fight gets real and tough those dogs are usually not gonna hang in there anyway.
> I guess we all have our preference as to what we want, need, and have to have.
> The toughest dogs I have ever seen when it comes to taking pressure from a man (Arko Roosen, Endor, Ducas, etc) were super social dogs that anyone could take out of the kennel with no problems.


So are you still having to seperate pups at 4 to 5 weeks so they don't kill each other?
How about mothers and pups?


----------



## Gus Pineda

everyone is different, different dogs for different folks.....


----------



## Lee H Sternberg

Mike, in the past you've discussed on threads here shipping crate aggressive dogs. You stated you ship dogs that are very crate aggressive. In fact you classified them as IDIOTS in a crate!

Are these the same dogs that will just walk off with a stranger taking them from their kennel?

Or were those the $60 throwaways you mentioned?


----------



## mike suttle

catherine hardigan....... Mike isn't dictating which type of dogs he breeds or imports or sells. His customers do.[/QUOTE said:


> To a certain extent you're right Catherine. But honestly I also prefer to own the same type of dog for myself that our high end Govt clients prefer as well.
> I personally like a very social, safe, stable dog. One with super nerves, high defense thresholds, lots of prey drive, super grips, super hunt / retrieve drive. A dog that will jump and climb on anything in the room on his own and a dog that is fearless of any enviroment and any man, a dog that has the courage to stay in a fight with a man until the end, even when things are going very bad for him.
> Call me crazy.....but this is what I like, and also luckily for me what my clients like too. SO, it works out well I guess!


----------



## mike suttle

jamie lind said:


> So are you still having to seperate pups at 4 to 5 weeks so they don't kill each other?
> How about mothers and pups?


I normally wean my pups about 6 weeks or so and seperate them by 7 weeks yes. I have some litters that fight so bad with littermates that I have to seperate them earlier than 6 weeks from each other. I have had puppies killed by littermates at 5 weeks old in the past. 
I had one female that got violent with her puppies about 6 weeks or so, but she is no longer here in our breeding program.


----------



## mike suttle

Lee H Sternberg said:


> Mike, in the past you've discussed on threads here shipping crate aggressive dogs. You stated you ship dogs that are very crate aggressive. In fact you classified them as IDIOTS in a crate!
> 
> Are these the same dogs that will just walk off with a stranger taking them from their kennel?
> 
> Or were those the $60 throwaways you mentioned?


 In the past I have had dogs that were idiots in the crates for sure, but they were never as strong in a fight with a man as the dogs that never even barked at a man from inside his crate. Also, about 90% of time even the dogs that bark at a man in the crate or kennel will still happily come out and go with that man they were barking at. Barking in a crate is in no way related to the power of a response when the dog is stimulated to bite a man. 
I wont wash a dog out if he barks behind a fence, but I will test him very thoroughly because often times it's thin nerves that cause that behavior and it will usually show up in other testing.


----------



## Catherine Gervin

mike suttle said:


> I could certainly have trained any of those dogs to mistrust people and try to kill every one who came on the property, but why in the world would I do that? NONE of my clients will buy dogs that lash out at strangers without provocation, NONE of my clients will buy dogs that are not social with people, NONE of my clients will buy dogs that show aggression when it is unwarranted. In fact, one of the basic parts of the selection test for the tier 1 groups is that the dog can be picked up and carried by a stranger.
> I have seen enough dogs in my life to know that the display of aggression they portray is in no way linked to the power of the actual response once they are stimulated to actually fight a man.
> The dogs that show high aggression at merely the sight of a stranger have far too low of thresholds for the type of work that our clients do.
> I will not tolerate a dog that shows aggression to someone without a reason. Experience has shown me that when the fight gets real and tough those dogs are usually not gonna hang in there anyway.
> I guess we all have our preference as to what we want, need, and have to have.
> The toughest dogs I have ever seen when it comes to taking pressure from a man (Arko Roosen, Endor, Ducas, etc) were super social dogs that anyone could take out of the kennel with no problems.


hey, your kennel was on a segment from "60 Minutes" regarding dogs trained for combat and it had some footage of pups sitting together in a nest setting with a recording of gunfire playing in the background...they looked like totally happy, well adjusted puppies. i was all excited to make the association and point it out to my husband and whatnot. anyways, i apologize for the random distraction from the subject at hand but hey, it's very impressive what you're doing at your kennel.


----------



## Lee H Sternberg

mike suttle said:


> In the past I have had dogs that were idiots in the crates for sure, but they were never as strong in a fight with a man as the dogs that never even barked at a man from inside his crate. Also, about 90% of time even the dogs that bark at a man in the crate or kennel will still happily come out and go with that man they were barking at. Barking in a crate is in no way related to the power of a response when the dog is stimulated to bite a man.
> I wont wash a dog out if he barks behind a fence, but I will test him very thoroughly because often times it's thin nerves that cause that behavior and it will usually show up in other testing.


I agree with this post, Mike.


----------



## Bob Scott

Mike said
"Barking in a crate is in no way related to the power of a response when the dog is stimulated to bite a man."



What is often the case is nothing more then barrier aggression. Without that fence/car/crate that same dog quite often can be very social.


----------



## Matt Vandart

Often linked to lead reactivity in my experience, major PIA. 
I think the dogs Mike is describing are just dogs that everyone wants tbh, good stable effective working candidates. It's no rocket science.


----------



## Tony Hahn

Matt Vandart said:


> Often linked to lead reactivity in my experience, major PIA.
> I think the dogs Mike is describing are just dogs that everyone wants tbh, good stable effective working candidates. It's no rocket science.


Well..... the stable, social dog is easy to manage around the public and may be the type of dog that has what it takes to stay in a protracted fight, but I'm not entirely sure that is the most useful dog for many of us.

Training for actual fight and bite is appropriate (and fun of course). In reality though, outside of government owned dogs, it's uncommon to actually deploy a dog for a bite. 

My dogs have never bitten for real in defense of my family. On the other hand, I'm reasonably convinced that barking, snarling and giving the appearance of being willing to bite has contributed towards keeping them safe on a few occasions. 

A nervy dog with a hair trigger is a nuisance and liability. I don't want or need a dog that sees the boogie man in lurking in every shadow. On the other hand, I'm not SpecOps and will (hopefully) never need to deploy a dog into a protracted fight. As much as I admire dogs who are social yet willing to fight anyone on command, average Joe like myself is probably better served having a dog with a slight edge, even if it means he will bail out of a serious fight. A dog who's alert and will harass a bad guy long enough for me to get my sh!t together; or a dog who gets a concerned over someone closing in on my daughter; is far more useful for Joe average than a dog who just doesn't feel threatened by much of anything.

There is a wide range of acceptable temperament between the far extremes. We can learn a lot from the SpecOps community but their needs and wants are not necessarily the same as mine whether it's body armor, personal physical fitness, communication or dogs. 

It's easy to fall into the mental trap of thinking that if the Tier1 guys are using XYZ then it's got to be the best, so if we want the best we need the same thing. XYZ may be the best thing for their needs, but not necessarily ours.......


----------



## Ben Thompson

Tony Hahn said:


> Well..... the stable, social dog is easy to manage around the public and may be the type of dog that has what it takes to stay in a protracted fight, but I'm not entirely sure that is the most useful dog for many of us.
> 
> Training for actual fight and bite is appropriate (and fun of course). In reality though, outside of government owned dogs, it's uncommon to actually deploy a dog for a bite.
> 
> My dogs have never bitten for real in defense of my family. On the other hand, I'm reasonably convinced that barking, snarling and giving the appearance of being willing to bite has contributed towards keeping them safe on a few occasions.
> 
> A nervy dog with a hair trigger is a nuisance and liability. I don't want or need a dog that sees the boogie man in lurking in every shadow. On the other hand, I'm not SpecOps and will (hopefully) never need to deploy a dog into a protracted fight. As much as I admire dogs who are social yet willing to fight anyone on command, average Joe like myself is probably better served having a dog with a slight edge, even if it means he will bail out of a serious fight. A dog who's alert and will harass a bad guy long enough for me to get my sh!t together; or a dog who gets a concerned over someone closing in on my daughter; is far more useful for Joe average than a dog who just doesn't feel threatened by much of anything.
> 
> There is a wide range of acceptable temperament between the far extremes. We can learn a lot from the SpecOps community but their needs and wants are not necessarily the same as mine whether it's body armor, personal physical fitness, communication or dogs.
> 
> It's easy to fall into the mental trap of thinking that if the Tier1 guys are using XYZ then it's got to be the best, so if we want the best we need the same thing. XYZ may be the best thing for their needs, but not necessarily ours.......


 I agree 100%.


----------



## Matt Vandart

Tony Hahn said:


> Well..... the stable, social dog is easy to manage around the public and may be the type of dog that has what it takes to stay in a protracted fight, but I'm not entirely sure that is the most useful dog for many of us.
> 
> Training for actual fight and bite is appropriate (and fun of course). In reality though, outside of government owned dogs, it's uncommon to actually deploy a dog for a bite.
> 
> My dogs have never bitten for real in defense of my family. On the other hand, I'm reasonably convinced that barking, snarling and giving the appearance of being willing to bite has contributed towards keeping them safe on a few occasions.
> 
> A nervy dog with a hair trigger is a nuisance and liability. I don't want or need a dog that sees the boogie man in lurking in every shadow. On the other hand, I'm not SpecOps and will (hopefully) never need to deploy a dog into a protracted fight. As much as I admire dogs who are social yet willing to fight anyone on command, average Joe like myself is probably better served having a dog with a slight edge, even if it means he will bail out of a serious fight. A dog who's alert and will harass a bad guy long enough for me to get my sh!t together; or a dog who gets a concerned over someone closing in on my daughter; is far more useful for Joe average than a dog who just doesn't feel threatened by much of anything.
> 
> There is a wide range of acceptable temperament between the far extremes. We can learn a lot from the SpecOps community but their needs and wants are not necessarily the same as mine whether it's body armor, personal physical fitness, communication or dogs.
> 
> It's easy to fall into the mental trap of thinking that if the Tier1 guys are using XYZ then it's got to be the best, so if we want the best we need the same thing. XYZ may be the best thing for their needs, but not necessarily ours.......


good point dude, hadn't thought of that


----------



## Lee H Sternberg

Tony Hahn said:


> Well..... the stable, social dog is easy to manage around the public and may be the type of dog that has what it takes to stay in a protracted fight, but I'm not entirely sure that is the most useful dog for many of us.
> 
> Training for actual fight and bite is appropriate (and fun of course). In reality though, outside of government owned dogs, it's uncommon to actually deploy a dog for a bite.
> 
> My dogs have never bitten for real in defense of my family. On the other hand, I'm reasonably convinced that barking, snarling and giving the appearance of being willing to bite has contributed towards keeping them safe on a few occasions.
> 
> A nervy dog with a hair trigger is a nuisance and liability. I don't want or need a dog that sees the boogie man in lurking in every shadow. On the other hand, I'm not SpecOps and will (hopefully) never need to deploy a dog into a protracted fight. As much as I admire dogs who are social yet willing to fight anyone on command, average Joe like myself is probably better served having a dog with a slight edge, even if it means he will bail out of a serious fight. A dog who's alert and will harass a bad guy long enough for me to get my sh!t together; or a dog who gets a concerned over someone closing in on my daughter; is far more useful for Joe average than a dog who just doesn't feel threatened by much of anything.
> 
> There is a wide range of acceptable temperament between the far extremes. We can learn a lot from the SpecOps community but their needs and wants are not necessarily the same as mine whether it's body armor, personal physical fitness, communication or dogs.
> 
> It's easy to fall into the mental trap of thinking that if the Tier1 guys are using XYZ then it's got to be the best, so if we want the best we need the same thing. XYZ may be the best thing for their needs, but not necessarily ours.......


I'm not real sure the dog with a "edge" will bail. I agree that most will but there's some antisocial that will hang in there with the best of them.


----------



## Michael Murphy

Matt Vandart said:


> good point dude, hadn't thought of that


really cause i thought of it years ago


----------



## Michael Murphy

Lee H Sternberg said:


> I'm not real sure the dog with a "edge" will bail. I agree that most will but there's some antisocial that will hang in there with the best of them.


agreed and the trick is to find these dogs, even if the edge means the dogs stays in the fight a tiny bit less. for the person who is looking for personal/property protection i think the edge is very useful.

i personally like the "suttle" type dog, but i also like the "edge" type dog.


----------



## Michael Murphy

Tony Hahn said:


> Well..... the stable, social dog is easy to manage around the public and may be the type of dog that has what it takes to stay in a protracted fight, but I'm not entirely sure that is the most useful dog for many of us.
> 
> Training for actual fight and bite is appropriate (and fun of course). In reality though, outside of government owned dogs, it's uncommon to actually deploy a dog for a bite.
> 
> My dogs have never bitten for real in defense of my family. On the other hand, I'm reasonably convinced that barking, snarling and giving the appearance of being willing to bite has contributed towards keeping them safe on a few occasions.
> 
> A nervy dog with a hair trigger is a nuisance and liability. I don't want or need a dog that sees the boogie man in lurking in every shadow. On the other hand, I'm not SpecOps and will (hopefully) never need to deploy a dog into a protracted fight. As much as I admire dogs who are social yet willing to fight anyone on command, average Joe like myself is probably better served having a dog with a slight edge, even if it means he will bail out of a serious fight. A dog who's alert and will harass a bad guy long enough for me to get my sh!t together; or a dog who gets a concerned over someone closing in on my daughter; is far more useful for Joe average than a dog who just doesn't feel threatened by much of anything.
> 
> There is a wide range of acceptable temperament between the far extremes. We can learn a lot from the SpecOps community but their needs and wants are not necessarily the same as mine whether it's body armor, personal physical fitness, communication or dogs.
> 
> It's easy to fall into the mental trap of thinking that if the Tier1 guys are using XYZ then it's got to be the best, so if we want the best we need the same thing. XYZ may be the best thing for their needs, but not necessarily ours.......


is this why a lot of people looking for personal/property protection look for dogs such as the czech gsd or rottweiler dogs, because they have the edge and lower thresholds.


----------



## Marcel Winter

Have seen some Mike,s videos like the extreme dogs and decoy work with preasure

Mike said it,s not easy find dogs like this withe extereme fight , imo 
it,s not natural dogs fighting such extreme because Mike is wearing
a suit I like to see videos Mike fighting without a suit and look what
happen in the fight why you need such extreme dogs ??I don,t think in a
real civil situation people can fight with this dogs without a suit I give
them 5 or maybe 10 seconds and its over not 1 or 2 minuts.

Its never honest fighing with a dog and wearing a suit.


----------



## Michael Murphy

Marcel Winter said:


> Have seen some Mike,s videos like the extreme dogs and decoy work with preasure
> 
> Mike said it,s not easy find dogs like this withe extereme fight , imo
> it,s not natural dogs fighting such extreme because Mike is wearing
> a suit I like to see videos Mike fighting without a suit and look what
> happen in the fight why you need such extreme dogs ??I don,t think in a
> real civil situation people can fight with this dogs without a suit I give
> them 5 or maybe 10 seconds and its over not 1 or 2 minuts.
> 
> Its never honest fighing with a dog and wearing a suit.


Marcel what dogs(bloodlines) do you currently have?
how would you describe there character at home?


----------



## Marcel Winter

Michael Murphy said:


> Marcel what dogs(bloodlines) do you currently have?
> how would you describe there character at home?




Dog 1 KNPV bloodlines Rambo,Rudo,Duco II, van Leeuwen,
Arras Derks.

At home this dog is calm good nerves and relax not for strangers
this dog is very watchful they don,t come into my house if the dog is alone. This dog can switch very fast if its necessary

Dog 2

Duco II,Django, Rocky van Dijk,Crespo . Ronnie Verbeek
This dog is also calm good nerves not social for stangers not as
watchfull as dog 1 with loud barking. outside this dog is very sharp
and civil have to be careful in the dark and people don,t come close
to him he will bite he is very alert.

Strangers can,t steal this dogs has been tested


----------



## Michael Murphy

Marcel Winter said:


> Dog 1 KNPV bloodlines Rambo,Rudo,Duco II, van Leeuwen,
> Arras Derks.
> 
> At home this dog is calm good nerves and relax not for strangers
> this dog is very watchful they don,t come into my house if the dog is alone. This dog can switch very fast if its necessary
> 
> Dog 2
> 
> Duco II,Django, Rocky van Dijk,Crespo . Ronnie Verbeek
> This dog is also calm good nerves not social for stangers not as
> watchfull as dog 1 with loud barking. outside this dog is very sharp
> and civil have to be careful in the dark and people don,t come close
> to him he will bite he is very alert.
> 
> Strangers can,t steal this dogs has been tested


so is dog two a django son?
who is the farther of dog one?


----------



## Tiago Fontes

Marcel Winter said:


> Dog 1 KNPV bloodlines Rambo,Rudo,Duco II, van Leeuwen,
> Arras Derks.
> 
> At home this dog is calm good nerves and relax not for strangers
> this dog is very watchful they don,t come into my house if the dog is alone. This dog can switch very fast if its necessary
> 
> Dog 2
> 
> Duco II,Django, Rocky van Dijk,Crespo . Ronnie Verbeek
> This dog is also calm good nerves not social for stangers not as
> watchfull as dog 1 with loud barking. outside this dog is very sharp
> and civil have to be careful in the dark and people don,t come close
> to him he will bite he is very alert.
> 
> Strangers can,t steal this dogs has been tested



I keep saying: 

A dog with sharpness (strong nerves are a must) and high prey drive...will stay in there. Being social, just makes it easier to handle around the public. 


Regards


----------



## Michael Murphy

Tiago Fontes said:


> I keep saying:
> 
> A dog with sharpness (strong nerves are a must) and high prey drive...will stay in there. Being social, just makes it easier to handle around the public.
> 
> 
> Regards



your line breeding on pike producing that for you?


----------



## mike suttle

Marcel Winter said:


> Dog 1 KNPV bloodlines Rambo,Rudo,Duco II, van Leeuwen,
> Arras Derks.
> 
> At home this dog is calm good nerves and relax not for strangers
> this dog is very watchful they don,t come into my house if the dog is alone. This dog can switch very fast if its necessary
> 
> Dog 2
> 
> Duco II,Django, Rocky van Dijk,Crespo . Ronnie Verbeek
> This dog is also calm good nerves not social for stangers not as
> watchfull as dog 1 with loud barking. outside this dog is very sharp
> and civil have to be careful in the dark and people don,t come close
> to him he will bite he is very alert.
> 
> Strangers can,t steal this dogs has been tested


I also have dogs with these same bloodlines. I could easily make my dogs act like this with strangers, but I do not want them to be like that. In fact, with some dogs I have to work hard to keep them social and safe with new people. We are just talking about learned behaviors in many of these discussions, and I learn mine the behavior of being social.


----------



## Tiago Fontes

Michael Murphy said:


> your line breeding on pike producing that for you?


Dont know. Time will tell.


----------



## Marcel Winter

mike suttle said:


> I also have dogs with these same bloodlines. I could easily make my dogs act like this with strangers, but I do not want them to be like that. In fact, with some dogs I have to work hard to keep them social and safe with new people. We are just talking about learned behaviors in many of these discussions, and I learn mine the behavior of being social.


 I don,t teach dogs to be agressive or not social some dogs are 
different , example I can,t teach to be sharp its a natural and genetic
behavior.

@ Tiago linebreeding on Pike do you noticed more sharpness than
normal?

@ Michael the father from this dog is a policedog in Holland linebreeding on Rudo /Rambo/Eik
oldschool KNPV lines,


----------



## Lee H Sternberg

Hey Dick VL - Care to weigh in on this subject?](*,):roll:


----------



## Joby Becker

it is very easy to teach a dog to be "sharp", I think.

I have done it many many times.


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie

mike suttle said:


> I also have dogs with these same bloodlines. I could easily make my dogs act like this with strangers, but I do not want them to be like that. In fact, with some dogs I have to work hard to keep them social and safe with new people. We are just talking about learned behaviors in many of these discussions, and *I learn mine the behavior of being social*.


How?

T


----------



## Marcel Winter

Joby Becker said:


> it is very easy to teach a dog to be "sharp", I think.
> 
> I have done it many many times.



No you can,t teach natural sharpness .


----------



## Matt Vandart

Michael Murphy said:


> really cause i thought of it years ago


Mostly because I have years of experience with biting dogs and I have had both types mentioned in this thread. Having had the unsocial type I can tell you I have no idea why anyone would wan't one because life can become a pain in the ass. So yes, really, it hadn't occurred to me that some people will not only put up with a dog they gotta watch 24/7 and put away and shit but that they actively like and look for such a dog.
Each to their own, I am not saying either is better, because the best dog is the one YOU want.
You learn something new every day eh.


----------



## Tiago Fontes

Marcel Winter said:


> I don,t teach dogs to be agressive or not social some dogs are
> different , example I can,t teach to be sharp its a natural and genetic
> behavior.
> 
> @ Tiago linebreeding on Pike do you noticed more sharpness than
> normal?


Marcel, 

You know these lines very well, because of the dog you previously owned. 

To answer your question, I do not notice more sharpness than normal in these lines... The drive is VERY good and nerve is solid as it comes. 

You've watched videos of Aiko at 10 months old... I think it will be a very interesting breeding to follow. 


Regards


----------



## leslie cassian

Matt Vandart said:


> Mostly because I have years of experience with biting dogs and I have had both types mentioned in this thread. Having had the unsocial type I can tell you I have no idea why anyone would wan't one because life can become a pain in the ass. So yes, really, it hadn't occurred to me that some people will not only put up with a dog they gotta watch 24/7 and put away and shit but that they actively like and look for such a dog.
> Each to their own, I am not saying either is better, because the best dog is the one YOU want.
> You learn something new every day eh.


+1


----------



## Timothy Saunders

Joby Becker said:


> it is very easy to teach a dog to be "sharp", I think.
> 
> I have done it many many times.


Hey Joby , do you think it is sharpness or civil aggression?


----------



## Gillian Schuler

Can someone explain the term "sharpness" in canines.

I bent to stroke a small dog when I was a small child, - it bit me.

For me, this is "sharpness", maybe provoked by a small dog who feels threatend by anyone who bends over it - even a small 7-xear old.

However, faced with a 6 foot plus male, might not have acted so viciously.


----------



## mike suttle

Terrasita Cuffie said:


> How?
> 
> T


Are you asking how I teach my puppies to be social? 
Very easy.....I start with a social breeding female who happily meets everyone in the whelping room with an open and easy attitude. She walks to the fence wagging her tail and trying to get strangers to pet her, the puppies see this and they can see that mom is relaxed and so the puppies are also relaxed and they also come forward to the fence. I always have strangers kneel down and pet the puppies, feed them pieces of hot dogs, etc. After the puppies are about 6 weeks old and weaned from the mother everyone who comes to the kennel (5-10 visitors per week is not uncommon) gets to meet and play with the puppies, feed them small treats, etc.
When the puppies are 7 weeks old they are used in our month K-9 trainers courses where they are handled and trained by 10 different people for five days. By the time our puppies are 8 weeks old it is not at all uncommon for them to have met 30 or 40 people, with each of them having something positive and pleasant for the puppies to enjoy, and therefore they learn from the very beginning to look forward to meeting new people. This exposure continues with our puppies for as long as they are here, meaning they are encouraged to be social with new people, and all people that meet them are always instructed to be social and friendly with the puppies.
We do our best to ensure the puppies are very confident and safe with new people here.


----------



## Gus Pineda

mike suttle said:


> Very easy.....I start with a social breeding female who happily meets everyone in the whelping room with an open and easy attitude. She walks to the fence wagging her tail and trying to get strangers to pet her, the puppies see this and they can see that mom is relaxed and so the puppies are also relaxed and they also come forward to the fence.


Hey Mike, you just touched on an important point, the importance of great dams.

I think perhaps the direction of more social vs less social is impacted by country of residence, and how neighborhoods and laws are set-up. I can see why in the US a dog that bites more might be seen as a bad thing. In other countries probably the other way around. 

As I've said, different dogs for different people.


----------



## Matt Vandart

Sounds great to me


----------



## Erik Berg

Gillian Schuler said:


> Can someone explain the term "sharpness" in canines.
> 
> I bent to stroke a small dog when I was a small child, - it bit me.
> 
> For me, this is "sharpness", maybe provoked by a small dog who feels threatend by anyone who bends over it - even a small 7-xear old.
> 
> However, faced with a 6 foot plus male, might not have acted so viciously.


Sharpness is the ability/tendency to get angry, the emotional display of aggresion when the dog feels a treath, like barking,showing teeth and so on. We can say it´s the passive part of a dogs defencedrive, the aggresive attitude as a warning that either leads to flight or fight if the person ignores the treath and countinue to advance towards the dog.


----------



## Joby Becker

I think we need a definition of sharp now lol.

I am not sure if I am talking about the same thing.

I realize that some dogs are naturally "sharp" (if I am thinking correctly)

I also realize I can take a social dog and make him sharp, if desired, by my definition.


----------



## Bob Scott

I think the term "sharp" covers a wide range of dogs ready and willing to bite be it defense or aggression to a dog that will bite out of fear if it doesn't have the option to flee. 
That covers everything a good PPD, Police K9, to a crapper nerve bag.
JMHO of course.


----------



## Tony Hahn

I’m not aware of a clear and agreed upon definition for ‘Sharp”. The way I use the term is similar to how Bob describes it. 

Personally, I use the term to convey a general personality trait. I tend to call a dog that has a low threshold for taking forwardly aggressive action “Sharp”. I’m sure there are folks who break down the drives behind the forward action, but to me with regard to how I use the term itself; it really doesn’t matter if the dog is fearful, dominant or just a grumpy asshole. To me if a dog is quick to act in a proactively “aggressive” manner, be it growling, barking, biting or whatever then I tend to refer to it as sharp. WHY the dog has a low threshold is a separate issue from being sharp in and of itself. 



Like Matt pointed out, an excessively sharp dog can be a hassle to live with.


----------



## Christopher Jones

Marcel Winter said:


> No you can,t teach natural sharpness .


You can teach a dog that anyone that comes to his house or kennel is a bad guy he gets to bite. Then you have a crazy dog in your kennel and house.


----------



## Matt Vandart

I saw an awesome definition of 'sharpness' somewhere recently, I will try and find it, it may have been on here.


----------



## Marcel Winter

Christopher Jones said:


> You can teach a dog that anyone that comes to his house or kennel is a bad guy he gets to bite. Then you have a crazy dog in your kennel and house.


No that it not the same .

Natural sharpness is gentetic /inborn reflex that compels the dog to a 
small stimulus to response with fierce reaction.

I,m not talking about dogs with bad nerves but dogs react from courage

Learned sharpness

The dog react only through *recognizabl*e actions what the dog knows only from *training*

Sorry for my bad english hope you understand


----------



## Erik Berg

Tony Hahn said:


> I’m not aware of a clear and agreed upon definition for ‘Sharp”. The way I use the term is similar to how Bob describes it.
> 
> Personally, I use the term to convey a general personality trait. I tend to call a dog that has a low threshold for taking forwardly aggressive action “Sharp”. I’m sure there are folks who break down the drives behind the forward action, but to me with regard to how I use the term itself; it really doesn’t matter if the dog is fearful, dominant or just a grumpy asshole. To me if a dog is quick to act in a proactively “aggressive” manner, be it growling, barking, biting or whatever then I tend to refer to it as sharp. WHY the dog has a low threshold is a separate issue from being sharp in and of itself.
> 
> Like Matt pointed out, an excessively sharp dog can be a hassle to live with.


The defintion I used is however the defintion used in scandinavia when testing dogs for different type of "real" work, has been around for very long, originally comes from germany I believe. Seems similar to yours and others also I suppose. A dog that acts aggresively when it feels a treath is said to have more sharpness the less stimulation needed to get him aggresive, a dog that needs more stimulation has lower sharpness. I guess this is only natural, a very confident courageous dog doesn´t feel intimated as easy and hence take more to get aggressive. Howevere there are also dog who are quite sharp but also confident and courageous, but it´s more common with the opposite, the less courage the more easily to get angry.

Sharpness/aggresion and defencedrive is hence related, but because dogs who show an aggresive display often takes to flight and not fight we evaluate these two traits seperate. Just as we can differ between defencedrive and some prey/fightdriven dogs, defencedrive includes a more serious mindset while a dog can have much prey but is hard to get into a more serious mode, just like a dog can lack intresset for play and pray but defend himself with confidence when treathened thru his defencedrive. Most dogs for policework will have a mix of both prey/fight and defence/sharpness of course, no need for a dog with much sharpness and strong defencedrive if it lacks the drive for nosework and working on a distance from the handler.


----------



## Kevin Cyr

I don't like the term sharp at all, to me sharpness is lack of confidence and a tad nervy reacting to stimuli in a negative or not confident way, thus usually reacting in a bite of which most think is confidence.....I dont think its all fear but really lack of confidence.


----------



## Tony Hahn

Erik Berg said:


> ................... said to have more sharpness the less stimulation needed to get him aggresive, a dog that needs more stimulation has lower sharpness.........


 Yes, we are in agreement in the way we use the term sharp.




Erik Berg said:


> ............................. a very confident courageous dog doesn´t feel intimated as easy and hence take more to get aggressive. Howevere there are also dog who are quite sharp but also confident and courageous, but it´s more common with the opposite, the less courage the more easily to get angry.
> 
> Sharpness/aggresion and defencedrive is hence related, but because dogs who show an aggresive display often takes to flight and not fight....................................


 I agree and this links into the discussion about social dogs. Anti-social behavior *may* be an indicator of insecurity. 



Kevin Cyr said:


> I don't like the term sharp at all, to me sharpness is lack of confidence and a tad nervy reacting to stimuli in a negative or not confident way, thus usually reacting in a bite of which most think is confidence.....I dont think its all fear but really lack of confidence.


I'm not sure if you really don't like the term sharp, or if you meant to say that you don't like sharp dogs. The term as I've used it applies no matter what causes a dog to be that way. I suspect in some cases it is a lack of confidence or poor nerves. An excessively sharp dog is annoying and a nuisance for me to deal with. Some sharpness may be useful depending on what you need/want a dog for. 

I suppose that unless you have the perfect dog there are compromises. If you need or want a suspicious dog that alerts you to real (or imagined) threats then you may have to accept that the dog might not have the best nerves. If you need a dog with strong nerves who will fight through enormous pressure, you may have to accept the dog might not be at all concerned about a stranger hanging around or talking to your kid.


----------



## Joby Becker

it is very easy to get a dog to mistrust strangers or want to bite strangers, or to be "sharp". If that is what you want, even if the dog is social by nature with good nerves.


----------



## Gillian Schuler

Joby, aren't you mixing "mistrust of strangers" with "guarding instincts", maybe.


----------



## Gillian Schuler

The "best" way to make a dog mistrust strangers is to keep it away from human beings from its birth.


----------



## Joby Becker

thats not the best way in my opinion, that just makes the dog scared of the unknown.


----------



## Christopher Jones

Marcel Winter said:


> No that it not the same .
> 
> Natural sharpness is gentetic /inborn reflex that compels the dog to a
> small stimulus to response with fierce reaction.
> 
> I,m not talking about dogs with bad nerves but dogs react from courage
> 
> Learned sharpness
> 
> The dog react only through *recognizabl*e actions what the dog knows only from *training*
> 
> Sorry for my bad english hope you understand


I understand your english, no worries. Its far better than my Dutch 
While we are talking a difference between a naturally sharp dog and one created, the result is the same. A crazy dog in your house and kennel who wants to bite everyone he sees.


----------



## jamie lind

Christopher Jones said:


> I understand your english, no worries. Its far better than my Dutch
> While we are talking a difference between a naturally sharp dog and one created, the result is the same. A crazy dog in your house and kennel who wants to bite everyone he sees.


Is natural confidence different than a dog that has had his confidence built up? Or natural prey? Or natural search? Or natural bite?


----------



## Marcel Winter

Christopher Jones said:


> I understand your english, no worries. Its far better than my Dutch
> While we are talking a difference between a naturally sharp dog and one created, the result is the same. A crazy dog in your house and kennel who wants to bite everyone he sees.


Sorry but I don,t wanna trust a dog who don,t have the genetics, inborn
natural sharpness, in not trained or not recognised sutuations some day
the dog will lacks you can,t train every situation.

If you you only make a dog crazy have nothing to do with sharpness such dog is useless for me
in civil situation some day such a dog leave you alone..


----------



## Timothy Saunders

Christopher Jones said:


> I understand your english, no worries. Its far better than my Dutch
> While we are talking a difference between a naturally sharp dog and one created, the result is the same. A crazy dog in your house and kennel who wants to bite everyone he sees.


I don't think that the result is the same. A good dog u teach to be civil with everyone is not necessarily working on the fight or flight instinct. The genetically sharp one is. Jmho


----------



## jamie lind

Marcel Winter said:


> I,m not talking about dogs with bad nerves but dogs react from courage
> 
> d





Timothy Saunders said:


> I don't think that the result is the same. A good dog u teach to be civil with everyone is not necessarily working on the fight or flight instinct. The genetically sharp one is. Jmho


----------



## Christopher Jones

Timothy Saunders said:


> I don't think that the result is the same. A good dog u teach to be civil with everyone is not necessarily working on the fight or flight instinct. The genetically sharp one is. Jmho


We are talking about a dog that guards his house and yard as per the OP? We are not talking about changing genetics, but teaching a dog that anyone who enters their property is free bite time. And we are talking about dogs that have extreme drive and want to fight when ever they are allowed.


----------



## Marcel Winter

Some people don,t understand the essence of inborn/genetic sharpness in civil
and real live situations. what said I don,t wanna trust a dog guarding a house without natural sharpness
there comes a time the dog will lacks.

Back on topic


----------



## Marcel Winter

double post.


----------



## Tony Hahn

Like many threads, this one is wandering all over the place. Someone asked about the term Sharp or Sharpness, which describes a genetic temperament trait. 

IMO, you can train a dog to react quickly to low stimulation but you will not change the level of sharpness the dog was born with. You can also do the opposite and train a sharp dog to restrain himself. In other words if you teach a sharp dog that he is not allowed to lash out just because someone stares at him; you did not make him less sharp; all you did is make him obey you. He will only follow this leadership to the extend he is able to generalize it into other situations. For example if you teach him he cannot try to bite someone who rides past on a bicycle he may or may not understand that he cannot try to bite a jogger also. Depending on the dog you may have to train him for every situation or he may be able to put it together himself. Either way you did not change his level of genetic sharpness, you just made him obedient.

Same with training a dog to be suspicious, act quickly, etc. You are not changing the dog’s genetics; all you are doing is training the dog to react a certain way under specific circumstances. The dog may or may not generalize. You might have to show him every kind of situation you want him to be suspicious of or depending on the dog maybe showing him only one situation he might learn to be suspicious in lots of similar situations. 

If the dog is naturally nervous/suspicious you won’t have to work so hard or worry that maybe you didn’t train him in enough different situations, etc, etc. 

The OP question was about Perimeter dogs, which I equate to what used to be called an Estate dog. That kind of dog doesn’t need to be sharp. Genetically, the temperament trait you want for that in a dog is the inborn desire to drive all trespassers from his territory. 

You can debate WHY the dog has no tolerance for anyone encroaching into his territory but why doesn’t change whether the dog has that trait in him. 

A dog that has been taught to guard an area isn’t the same as a dog born that way.


----------



## Gillian Schuler

Christopher Jones said:


> We are talking about a dog that guards his house and yard as per the OP? We are not talking about changing genetics, but teaching a dog that anyone who enters their property is free bite time. And we are talking about dogs that have extreme drive and want to fight when ever they are allowed.


You are pitting a dog's brain against a human's. This way he may nab anyone who enters the yard, including the mother-in-law......

Anyone wanting to enter the yard with intent to enter the house unlawfully will have sussed out the property and made intelligent precautions, i.e. brought a bitch in heat with him, tasty liver, etc. 

A "trained" dog who doesn't have very strong guarding instincts will either bite anyone or succomb to bribes.

As far as I know, it is difficult to train a dog to guard efficiently that doesn't have guarding instincts in its genetics.

It's hard enough to teach kids of up to say 12 to recognize a would be predator.


----------



## Erik Berg

Kevin Cyr said:


> I don't like the term sharp at all, to me sharpness is lack of confidence and a tad nervy reacting to stimuli in a negative or not confident way, thus usually reacting in a bite of which most think is confidence.....I dont think its all fear but really lack of confidence.


When people say a "sharp" dog I guess they usually mean a type of dog who for different reasons is quick to use his aggresive side. The term sharpness is just another term for aggression, and when talking about dogs used for protection it´s the aggresion used when the dog feels a treath because that is the most relevant, aggresion due to domiance between dogs or other reasons is for example less intressting when testing a policedog/protectiondog.

Sharpness is not a negative trait, a moderate and balanced sharpness is rated as ideal when testing dogs for police/military(the tests performed in scandinava for such dogs). Even large sharpness is more desired than very low. Much sharpness who remain also after the treath is gone is however the least desireable, a dog who have a hard time to switch from aggresion to a more neutral mind.Possible such dogs was used for guarding a territory when the military used such dogs in former times.

But sharpness is only one trait, everything should fit together and molded by training, a dog that lacks to much natural aggresion I doubt would be selected for guarduties in former times however. Then I´don´t know which dog is best in real life as a PP/policedog, the one who are very good overall and also has a level of aggresion not too hard to stimulate, or a dog who have a higher treshold for aggression because it´s so confident/dominant and therefore hard to get aggressive and not letting dangerous people comming to close without feeling much of a treath. Both types are what I would consider strong dogs, the latter may need a little more training to fit for the role, most dogs will be a step below these two types of dogs anyway in drives and strong character.


----------



## Joby Becker

actually the thread OP was asking about perimeter guard, not sharpness.


----------



## Timothy Saunders

I think that we didn't give line that are better perimeter guards dogs or if knpv dog are or are not good perimeter dogs . we are trying to give the traits that would make one. So I think we are still in the ball park


----------



## Joby Becker

Timothy Saunders said:


> I think that we didn't give line that are better perimeter guards dogs or if knpv dog are or are not good perimeter dogs . we are trying to give the traits that would make one. So I think we are still in the ball park


true


----------



## Michael Murphy

so would we say there are some lines from the knpv that a more suited to guard work?
or are we saying it depends on the individual dog or upbringing


----------



## Christopher Jones

Gillian Schuler said:


> You are pitting a dog's brain against a human's. This way he may nab anyone who enters the yard, including the mother-in-law......
> 
> Anyone wanting to enter the yard with intent to enter the house unlawfully will have sussed out the property and made intelligent precautions, i.e. brought a bitch in heat with him, tasty liver, etc.
> 
> A "trained" dog who doesn't have very strong guarding instincts will either bite anyone or succomb to bribes.
> 
> As far as I know, it is difficult to train a dog to guard efficiently that doesn't have guarding instincts in its genetics.
> 
> It's hard enough to teach kids of up to say 12 to recognize a would be predator.


Which is exactly the point. No dog, wether naturally sharp and territorial or through learnt behavours, should be allowed to decide for himself who should be bitten and who shouldn't. I'm kinda surprised to see people saying they think a dog should.


----------



## Ben Thompson

I had 2 break ins in two of the 6 different homes I've lived in the past 10 years or so. Thats why I like dogs that bite when I am not there to put it frankly. I used to live in a rural area where we didn't lock our doors and I had no idea where the key to the door even was. Thats how I grew up...but you can't do that in big cities.


----------



## Timothy Saunders

A perimeter dog is supposed to bite anyone that comes into his area that he doesn't know. If we are all talking about the same thing, the dog is usually alone.


----------



## Gillian Schuler

Now we're getting somewhere.

As I *now* understand, a "perimeter dog" is a dog left in charge of any area that is safely enclosed and that is not guarded by security personnel. I assume it would have a "Warning Guard Dogs" displayed.

If anyone ignores this, then at their own risk?

Here in Switzerland, most sites are guarded by security personnel and/or handlers with dogs for prison outside areas, etc.

If someone got into our garden and our dog bit him /her, then we would be liable, I am sure.

A police colleague told us that they had found a plan of our village on a burglar they had arrested with the houses marked X where a dog could be heard. It's not foolproof but if any of our dogs barks aggressively in the night, I switch on the lights.

Off topic, I know, but the police force in our town is usually out in the evening delivering false parking tickets, thereby allowing the burglars free range 

This is a joke of course but it's very near the bone:

Telephone to police station:

Officer, I've just spotted someone creeping around the garden."

"OK, we'll come and have a look."

Twenty minutes later, "Don't bother to come - I've shot him."

2 minutes later the whole police force turns up!!!!


----------



## Tony Hahn

A perimeter dog wouldn’t necessarily be a biter. He primarily needs to have the personality or temperament trait where he wants to drive trespassers from his territory. If you want a dog that will attack/bite then of course you need to make sure that is part of his temperament also.

A dog can have the temperament to be a perimeter/estate dog without the courage/drive/whatever needed to actually bite/fight a man. He can be the kind of dog who tries to drive off a trespassing man the same way he would drive off a bear or lion. Or the dog could summon the rest of the pack (you) to come do the actual fighting.

With regard to the original question- a confident, social dog that’s cool with anyone and everyone doesn’t have the tendency to freak out just because someone is hanging around.


----------



## Tiago Fontes

Michael Murphy said:


> so would we say there are some lines from the knpv that a more suited to guard work?
> or are we saying it depends on the individual dog or upbringing


Dude, 

Anyone with high quality dogs could care less for "guard" work. It's a waste...

If you come to me asking for a dog suitable to "guard" work, I'll tell you to contact someone else... I am looking to have owners/handlers which will use my dogs in challenging tasks...police work, high end sport (preferably ringsports and KNPV). 

If you're looking for a "guard dog", look into a good fila brasileiro, for they have high defense. Not very ballsy in one on one situations...but if you run a pack of 3 or 4, they are something scary to deal with. I've taken bites on the sleeve and suit from Fila Brasileiro dogs.


----------



## Matt Vandart

I'm just gonna say it, do you think your pup is lacking in sharpness for what you want Michael?


----------



## Michael Murphy

Matt Vandart said:


> I'm just gonna say it, do you think your pup is lacking in sharpness for what you want Michael?


i like my bitch just the way it is. She is abou 6 months old so i have no idea how she is going to turn out.

however i am old fashion ( for a young guy) in that i like a dog to do it's job of protecting its property. do i need actual protection? No. but i do like the character trait.


----------



## Matt Vandart

Cool, it can be a useful trait.


----------



## Tim Lynam

Christopher Jones said:


> Which is exactly the point. No dog, wether naturally sharp and territorial or through learnt behavours, should be allowed to decide for himself who should be bitten and who shouldn't. I'm kinda surprised to see people saying they think a dog should.


Bullsh*t. There are jobs dogs do every day in which they are expected to bite any Human that climbs the fence. Period.


----------



## Gus Pineda

Where I live, which has a fair amount of crime, common sense dictates that if an intruder breaks into your home and gets bitten by dog, it is entirely the intruders fault. People accept it, police accept it, and thieves accept it (they do not sue, and if they do they just make an ass out of themselves and expose themselves as thieves). Hence having a dog that will bite intruders no-questions-asked is a valuable asset. A dog that will welcome intruders, will get stolen. Along with much else of what the dog was meant to protect. Guaranteed.


----------



## Tim Lynam

Tiago Fontes said:


> Dude,
> 
> Anyone with high quality dogs could care less for "guard" work. It's a waste...
> 
> If you come to me asking for a dog suitable to "guard" work, I'll tell you to contact someone else... I am looking to have owners/handlers which will use my dogs in challenging tasks...police work, high end sport (preferably ringsports and KNPV).
> 
> If you're looking for a "guard dog", look into a good fila brasileiro, for they have high defense. Not very ballsy in one on one situations...but if you run a pack of 3 or 4, they are something scary to deal with. I've taken bites on the sleeve and suit from Fila Brasileiro dogs.


Be careful here Tiago... There are people that make their living off of their high quality guard dogs. Of course they wouldn't come to you for a dog... Guard dogs from these folks , commonly known as "Junk Yard" dogs are just as highly trained and bred for as your high quality dogs. They just don't come on this board and brag about the fact their dogs work every day in some of the most dangerous places on the planet, and survive. It's not glamorous work and attitudes like yours are disparaging. Your ( and Mike's) line isn't bred for it and wouldn't last a week. Nothing wrong with that, they are just bred for different tasks. Sport/police lines lack the cunning for the work.


----------



## Hunter Allred

Tim Lynam said:


> Be careful here Tiago... There are people that make their living off of their high quality guard dogs. Of course they wouldn't come to you for a dog... Guard dogs from these folks , commonly known as "Junk Yard" dogs are just as highly trained and bred for as your high quality dogs. They just don't come on this board and brag about the fact their dogs work every day in some of the most dangerous places on the planet, and survive. It's not glamorous work and attitudes like yours are disparaging. Your ( and Mike's) line isn't bred for it and wouldn't last a week. Nothing wrong with that, they are just bred for different tasks. Sport/police lines lack the cunning for the work.


This is a serious question, not being a smart ass, actually would like an answer. Could you elaborate on the last sentence. Specifically the "lack of cunning". What did you mean exactly?


----------



## Matt Vandart

Maybe he meant lack of cuntishness?


----------



## Tiago Fontes

Tim Lynam said:


> Be careful here Tiago... There are people that make their living off of their high quality guard dogs. Of course they wouldn't come to you for a dog... Guard dogs from these folks , commonly known as "Junk Yard" dogs are just as highly trained and bred for as your high quality dogs. They just don't come on this board and brag about the fact their dogs work every day in some of the most dangerous places on the planet, and survive. It's not glamorous work and attitudes like yours are disparaging. Your ( and Mike's) line isn't bred for it and wouldn't last a week. Nothing wrong with that, they are just bred for different tasks. Sport/police lines lack the cunning for the work.



Not doubting you, but I would like to see the dogs you described. At the same time, I would welcome you to see some of mine... 


Regards


----------



## Lee H Sternberg

Gus Pineda said:


> Where I live, which has a fair amount of crime, common sense dictates that if an intruder breaks into your home and gets bitten by dog, it is entirely the intruders fault. People accept it, police accept it, and thieves accept it (they do not sue, and if they do they just make an ass out of themselves and expose themselves as thieves). Hence having a dog that will bite intruders no-questions-asked is a valuable asset. A dog that will welcome intruders, will get stolen. Along with much else of what the dog was meant to protect. Guaranteed.


Exactly the same in in Costa Rica where I lived twice. 

Both my Dutchies were taught the rules of engagement if someone entered the property---BITE--and I will ask questions latter.

Thieves sue, LOL! They would be laughed out of town!

I have to include it's been a bitch deprogramming them a bit now that I'm back stateside.


----------



## Hunter Allred

Gus Pineda said:


> Where I live, which has a fair amount of crime, common sense dictates that if an intruder breaks into your home and gets bitten by dog, it is entirely the intruders fault. People accept it, police accept it, and thieves accept it (they do not sue, and if they do they just make an ass out of themselves and expose themselves as thieves). Hence having a dog that will bite intruders no-questions-asked is a valuable asset. A dog that will welcome intruders, will get stolen. Along with much else of what the dog was meant to protect. Guaranteed.


I *wish* the concept of a thief suing was not possible here


----------



## Lee H Sternberg

Hunter Allred said:


> I *wish* the concept of a thief suing was not possible here


After my male's live bite which started in the back of my pickup and ended on the street in downtown Nicoya, Costa Rica the police showed up. 

They couldn't have been happier when the gathered crown told them a thief tried to steel a coil of wire from the back of my truck.

They were just sorry they missed all the FUN!\\/


----------



## Hunter Allred

Lee H Sternberg said:


> After my male's live bite which started in the back of my pickup and ended on the street in downtown Nicoya, Costa Rica the police showed up.
> 
> They couldn't have been happier when the gathered crown told them a thief tried to steel a coil of wire from the back of my truck.
> 
> They were just sorry they missed all the FUN!\\/


The only saving grace here is the current laws are such that if an unknown intruder crosses the threshold of your house and dies upon entry there are no questions asked. SO, I interpret that as if you intrude in my house I need to make damn sure you leave in a bag or else you might sue for what went down lol


----------



## Lee H Sternberg

Hunter Allred said:


> The only saving grace here is the current laws are such that if an unknown intruder crosses the threshold of your house and dies upon entry there are no questions asked. SO, I interpret that as if you intrude in my house I need to make damn sure you leave in a bag or else you might sue for what went down lol


Too many laws here to confuse everyone and then you have to defend yourself from the onslaught of mega dollar lawsuits.

I yearn for JUNGLE LAW sometimes. 

I could tell so many stories that aren't even dog related. 

The one that sticks most in my mind is when the village men visited a child molesters house in the middle of the night. That was when I lived so far back in The Jungle there were no roads, phones, electricity or police presence.


----------



## Tim Lynam

Hunter Allred said:


> This is a serious question, not being a smart ass, actually would like an answer. Could you elaborate on the last sentence. Specifically the "lack of cunning". What did you mean exactly?


cunning:
adjective,
a cunning scheme: crafty, wily, artful, guileful, devious, sly, scheming, designing, calculating, Machiavellian; shrewd, astute, clever, canny; deceitful, deceptive, duplicitous, foxy; archaic subtle.

Sport and police training removes any hope of a dog using whatever cunning it has. All biting, searching and life in general is done at the say so of the handler. The Guard dogs I am describing work alone or in pairs and can't rely on human backup.


----------



## Tim Lynam

Matt Vandart said:


> Maybe he meant lack of cuntishness?


No Matt, more like "Cunninglingist."


----------



## Gus Pineda

Lee H Sternberg said:


> After my male's live bite which started in the back of my pickup and ended on the street in downtown Nicoya, Costa Rica the police showed up.
> 
> They couldn't have been happier when the gathered crown told them a thief tried to steel a coil of wire from the back of my truck.
> 
> They were just sorry they missed all the FUN!\\/


LOL, I can picture it.


----------



## Tim Lynam

Tiago Fontes said:


> Not doubting you, but I would like to see the dogs you described. At the same time, I would welcome you to see some of mine...
> 
> 
> Regards


This type of dog is in most places in the USA where there are valuable things to be protected but kept outside in large enclosures.

If I needed a dog for this purpose there would be no need to see your dogs. You don't train or breed for it and you already stated you wouldn't sell one to use for this.


----------



## Gus Pineda

Tim Lynam said:


> This type of dog is in most places in the USA where there are valuable things to be protected but kept outside in large enclosures.
> 
> If I needed a dog for this purpose there would be no need to see your dogs. You don't train or breed for it and you already stated you wouldn't sell one to use for this.


Not only the USA but around the world. These are dogs working for their food and their keeping.


----------



## rick smith

normally i wouldn't post on a typical MM thread, but....

in the 60's my Uncle was a GM of a big dealership in San Diego and they had a problem with lot theft. 
**note, this was way before there were "Hispanics" in Calif. only Mexicans and they didn't cause much trouble, and they weren't the problem 

anyway he knew i was a big dog nut and was talking about the lot's new "guard dogs". he said they were trained by a company to allow anyone in but not let them out, and i didn't believe him. the dogs weren't there during working hours, so he took me to the lot in the evening after the dogs were brought in and turned loose (2 dobes). no handler stayed there at night. then he had a lot boy climb the fence. not a peep or a rush from the dogs. lot boy went to a car and fiddled around and then went back to the fence and the dogs came outa nowhere and went beserk. lots of noise and posturing but no bites. looked more like what a herder might do, but they stayed between him and the fenceline and it was clear the guy shouldn't make any moves to the fence and the fuy certainly felt like the dogs would have bit him. all they had to do was call the cops and the dog company when they opened up the next day, and it solved the theft problem
- 'course in those days, stealing a VW emblem off the hood was a common crime 

impressed the heck out of me at the time and i can still remember it clearly 50 years later //lol//
- over the years i've come to assume guard dogs are supposed to be a deterrent to keep people out rather than what these dogs were trained for.
- don't know what you call that kinda dog or if guard dogs are trained like that nowadays....not my training area, but it seemed cool and this thread reminded me of it


----------



## rick smith

typo...."guy"....not "fuy"


----------



## Matt Vandart

Tim Lynam said:


> No Matt, more like "Cunninglingist."


HAHAHAHAHA! 

@Rick- that is indeed cool


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie

rick smith said:


> normally i wouldn't post on a typical MM thread, but....
> 
> in the 60's my Uncle was a GM of a big dealership in San Diego and they had a problem with lot theft.
> **note, this was way before there were "Hispanics" in Calif. only Mexicans and they didn't cause much trouble, and they weren't the problem
> 
> anyway he knew i was a big dog nut and was talking about the lot's new "guard dogs". he said they were trained by a company to allow anyone in but not let them out, and i didn't believe him. the dogs weren't there during working hours, so he took me to the lot in the evening after the dogs were brought in and turned loose (2 dobes). no handler stayed there at night. then he had a lot boy climb the fence. not a peep or a rush from the dogs. lot boy went to a car and fiddled around and then went back to the fence and the dogs came outa nowhere and went beserk. lots of noise and posturing but no bites. looked more like what a herder might do, but they stayed between him and the fenceline and it was clear the guy shouldn't make any moves to the fence and the fuy certainly felt like the dogs would have bit him. all they had to do was call the cops and the dog company when they opened up the next day, and it solved the theft problem
> - 'course in those days, stealing a VW emblem off the hood was a common crime
> 
> impressed the heck out of me at the time and i can still remember it clearly 50 years later //lol//
> - over the years i've come to assume guard dogs are supposed to be a deterrent to keep people out rather than what these dogs were trained for.
> - don't know what you call that kinda dog or if guard dogs are trained like that nowadays....not my training area, but it seemed cool and this thread reminded me of it


and the relevance of the hispanic/Mexican reference was????

T


----------



## Christopher Jones

Tim Lynam said:


> Bullsh*t. There are jobs dogs do every day in which they are expected to bite any Human that climbs the fence. Period.


The OP isnt military and is talking about home situation. I guess you think the dog should decide for himself that the.kid jumping the fence to get his ball deserves a mauling. Or the meter reader does as well.
That kind of bullshit attitude will get both your arse and wallet burnt big time. Good luck explaining how that 7 year old was trespassing and deserves it.


----------



## Gus Pineda

Christopher Jones said:


> The OP isnt military and is talking about home situation. I guess you think the dog should decide for himself that the.kid jumping the fence to get his ball deserves a mauling. Or the meter reader does as well.
> That kind of bullshit attitude will get both your arse and wallet burnt big time. Good luck explaining how that 7 year old was trespassing and deserves it.


Again, depends on where you live. Certain walls are high for a reason. Jumping walls is not common everywhere. I don't know if it's common in the US, but it's not common everywhere. In some places you need to ring the doorbell and ask your neighbors to fetch it for you. If you know they have dogs, YOU SIMPLY DO NOT JUMP THE FENCE. My neighbors had rottweilers, the house on the other side had akitas. I jumped neither fence to get the ball. Never.


----------



## rick smith

T asked : "and the relevance of the hispanic/Mexican reference was?????

so T,
- after reading why entire post why did ask about that one part ?
i don't pick phrases out of your posts and ask what the "relevance" was :-^)

fwiw, that part, as well as the VW emblem thefts were more for historical perspective than racial profiling since i doubt many readers here have much experience of what San Diego, Calif was like in the 60's, and that's why i didn't state the exact place .... El Cajon //lol//

i would have thought you would have been more interested in a guard dog trained to let people in rather than keep them out, but i'm thru caring or trying to figure out what peaks someone's interest on this forum


----------



## Christopher Smith

rick smith said:


> so T,
> - after reading why entire post why did ask about that one part ?


Probably because it sounds very racist and she was giving you the benefit of the doubt. 



Sent from Petguide.com Free App


----------



## susan tuck

Christopher Smith said:


> Probably because it sounds very racist and she was giving you the benefit of the doubt.
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from Petguide.com Free App


Agreed! 

If T hadn't asked, I would have asked.


----------



## Gillian Schuler

Christopher Jones said:


> The OP isnt military and is talking about home situation. I guess you think the dog should decide for himself that the.kid jumping the fence to get his ball deserves a mauling. Or the meter reader does as well.
> That kind of bullshit attitude will get both your arse and wallet burnt big time. Good luck explaining how that 7 year old was trespassing and deserves it.


Tim, 

What are the dogs you describe actually guarding. I notice that the expression "Perimeter Dogs" was mentioned. I also noticed that you don't like the word "guard dogs" but perimeter dogs must be guarding the boundaries of property i.e. the Perimeters.

To issue a statement that the perimeter dogs will bite anyone who enters the property means that the property is encompassing "very valuable" mineral, vegetable or human products.

I assume the dogs are left unattended as you say that dogs with handlers (Police, Military, etc.) only bite when told to. (BS) A lot of dogs, privately held, Military, Police, etc. very often have to be contained from biting.

I don't know where you live, but here in Western Europe, I think such dogs would not be allowed to guard unattended properties.

It is good in my mind that dogs only bite on command of their handlers. I am in particular thinking of the Bavarian Terrorist unit in Germany.

I am interested to hear about how your dogs were trained to bite any intruder. I wonder how they remain impervious to poisoned food thrown over the high walls, gun shots from outside, etc.


----------



## Tim Lynam

Christopher Jones said:


> The OP isnt military and is talking about home situation. I guess you think the dog should decide for himself that the.kid jumping the fence to get his ball deserves a mauling. Or the meter reader does as well.
> That kind of bullshit attitude will get both your arse and wallet burnt big time. Good luck explaining how that 7 year old was trespassing and deserves it.


Let's get something straight. If as you say it's a home situation and you let the dog loose out in a fenced yard, with you present or not, then you better assume it will bite anything that comes over the fence. Trained to bite only when told or not, it is and always will be the dogs decision when and in what situation it will bite. You may believe you have complete control. You're wrong.

You have the bullshit attitude and will be explaining yourself to the Judge.

You have over 2000 posts on this board and haven't learned Rule #1:

Dogs can and will bite when least expected.


----------



## Lee H Sternberg

Gus Pineda said:


> Again, depends on where you live. Certain walls are high for a reason. Jumping walls is not common everywhere. I don't know if it's common in the US, but it's not common everywhere. In some places you need to ring the doorbell and ask your neighbors to fetch it for you. If you know they have dogs, YOU SIMPLY DO NOT JUMP THE FENCE. My neighbors had rottweilers, the house on the other side had akitas. I jumped neither fence to get the ball. Never.[/QUOTE
> 
> It's not common here either when there is a barking pissed off dog on the other side of the fence! #-o:lol:


----------



## Tim Lynam

Gillian Schuler said:


> Tim,
> 
> What are the dogs you describe actually guarding. I notice that the expression "Perimeter Dogs" was mentioned. I also noticed that you don't like the word "guard dogs" but perimeter dogs must be guarding the boundaries of property i.e. the Perimeters.
> 
> *I don't care what you call them.*
> 
> To issue a statement that the perimeter dogs will bite anyone who enters the property means that the property is encompassing "very valuable" mineral, vegetable or human products.
> 
> *What ever the owner of the property deems valuable enough to protect with dogs.*
> 
> I assume the dogs are left unattended as you say that dogs with handlers (Police, Military, etc.) only bite when told to. (BS)
> 
> *I said they are left unattended. No need to assume. As for the Sport/Police dogs I was talking about cunning.*
> 
> A lot of dogs, privately held, Military, Police, etc. very often have to be contained from biting.
> 
> *I don't have a clue what your trying to say here. Lost in the translation maybe?*
> 
> I don't know where you live, but here in Western Europe, I think such dogs would not be allowed to guard unattended properties.
> 
> *Sucks to live in Western Europe, eh?*
> 
> It is good in my mind that dogs only bite on command of their handlers. I am in particular thinking of the Bavarian Terrorist unit in Germany.
> 
> *See my reply to C. Jones. I think I saw some videos of that unit. I particularly remember one of the handlers getting nailed by his dog, although judging by his reaction, I don't think he commanded the dog to do so...*
> 
> I am interested to hear about how your dogs were trained to bite any intruder. I wonder how they remain impervious to poisoned food thrown over the high walls, gun shots from outside, etc.
> 
> *They weren't my dogs. Seriously Gillian, those things are best not shared with someone who is "Just curious" or "Interested" as you put it. After all, "bad guys" can read this board too. Besides, it can't be explained in a "Post" anyway.*


----------



## Christopher Jones

Tim Lynam said:


> Let's get something straight. If as you say it's a home situation and you let the dog loose out in a fenced yard, with you present or not, then you better assume it will bite anything that comes over the fence. Trained to bite only when told or not, it is and always will be the dogs decision when and in what situation it will bite. You may believe you have complete control. You're wrong.
> 
> You have the bullshit attitude and will be explaining yourself to the Judge.
> 
> You have over 2000 posts on this board and haven't learned Rule #1:
> 
> Dogs can and will bite when least expected.


Lol, that post had everything from backpeddle, back flip, stupidity mixed with a dash of muppet. 
Carry on.


----------



## Gillian Schuler

A lot of dogs, privately held, Military, Police, etc. very often have to be contained from biting.

*I don't have a clue what your trying to say here. Lost in the translation maybe?*

No, definitely not, unless you are assuming that the English need educating in American English.

I think I stated it quite clearly.


----------

